Bankruptcy

Tight Margins, Tough Choices: How Row Crop Farmers Can Weather Today’s Financial Squeeze

Tue, 10 Feb 2026 20:16:39 GMT

Row crop farmers across the U.S. are facing a financial environment that leaves little room for error. Rising production costs, persistently high interest rates and commodity prices that have failed to keep pace are combining to pressure margins at nearly every level of the operation.

From the ag lending perspective, Alan Hoskins, president and national sales director at American Farm Mortgage and Financial Services, says the current cycle is forcing producers to rethink not just their numbers, but how they approach decision-making altogether.

During the 2026 Top Producer Summit, Hoskins says both farmers and ag lenders need to remember there’s a clear differentiation between profit and cash flow. And he says when it comes to cash flow, that’s something farmers should be looking at on a monthly basis.

“There are definitely a fair number of challenges out there,” Hoskins says. “When you look at 2026, the numbers don’t have the appearance of being better than what we saw in 2025.”

Input Costs Lead the Pain

Among the many pressures facing producers, Hoskins says higher input costs remain the most immediate and widespread challenge.

“Over the past few months, the increase in input costs is a significant driver in what we’re seeing across agriculture,” he says. “Commodity prices being where they are certainly contributes to that as well.”

Hoskins notes that while producers are keenly aware of rising costs, marketing decisions can sometimes compound the problem. In volatile markets, hesitation to price grain can leave margins exposed.

“There are times where there’s a little bit of inertia on the part of producers to take advantage of sales opportunities when they present themselves,” he says. “There’s always the hope that the margin will improve, but that’s exactly where a written marketing plan becomes extremely valuable.”

A marketing plan, Hoskins says, helps remove emotion from pricing decisions and provides structure during uncertain times.

Where Farmers Still Have Levers to Pull

Despite the headwinds, Hoskins believes producers still have meaningful opportunities to manage costs — particularly by scrutinizing inputs more closely.

“Looking at fertility levels across different farms and making sure you’re applying the proper amounts of fertilizer is one place to start,” he says. “Every field doesn’t necessarily need the same approach.”

He also encourages producers to evaluate field operations carefully, weighing whether a tillage pass truly adds value compared to alternative chemical applications.

“These are the kinds of decisions that, taken individually, may not seem significant. But collectively, they can have a real impact on the bottom line,” Hoskins says.

Insurance is another area he believes deserves renewed attention.

“With the increases we’ve seen in equipment values and real estate values, it makes sense to revisit property and casualty insurance,” he says. “There may be opportunities to adjust coverage levels and capture some savings without increasing risk.”

Financial Stress Is Real, And It’s Growing

From a lender’s vantage point, Hoskins says the financial strain facing row-crop producers is increasingly visible. While not every farmer lost money in 2025, many operations ended the year with thinner working capital and less flexibility.

“Were there producers who made it through 2025 without losing money? Yes, but they were more the exception than the rule,” Hoskins says.

Looking ahead, he doesn’t expect conditions to ease quickly. That makes proactive planning and communication critical.

“When challenges exist, don’t try to solve them on your own,” Hoskins says. “Use the resources available to you: your lender, your accountant, your advisers.”

He cautions against reacting too aggressively in ways that could harm long-term viability.

“The goal is to weather this cycle,” he says. “It’s not to cut the meat completely off the bone and compromise your ability to operate when conditions do improve.”

Adjustment to Higher Interest Rates

Higher interest rates remain a sticking point for many producers, particularly those accustomed to historically low borrowing costs. Hoskins says perspective is important.

“While rates are much higher than what we’ve been used to over the last 25 years, if you look historically, they’re not that far out of line with the last 40 or 50 years,” he says.

The bigger challenge, he adds, may be mental rather than mathematical.

“We were in a very low-rate environment for a long time,” Hoskins says. “Adjusting to today’s rates requires a shift in expectations.”

To adapt, he advises producers to closely examine their borrowing structure across operating loans, equipment financing and real estate debt.

“If you’ve got debt that’s been out there for 12 or 18 months, there may be opportunities to restructure,” he says.

He also encourages producers to take advantage of low- or zero-percent financing options on inputs when available and to maintain open communication with lenders.

“Your interest rate is a product of your risk profile,” Hoskins says. “Having honest conversations with your lender helps you understand where you stand and what options you have.”

Are More Farmers Exiting?

With margins compressed and financing tighter, Hoskins says some producers are choosing to exit the business, but for different reasons.

“There are producers looking at 2026 and even 2027 and saying, ‘I don’t see things improving materially,’” he says. “They don’t want to see any more working capital erosion or equity erosion, so they’re making that decision on their own.”

At the same time, Hoskins acknowledges others may not have a choice.

“There will be producers who are unable to obtain the funding they need to go another year,” he says. “In those cases, the decision to step away isn’t voluntary.”

Still, he does not expect a widespread collapse.

“I wouldn’t characterize this as something that’s going to be across the board,” Hoskins says. “But with the challenges we’re facing, we will see examples of both.”

Mindset Matters As Much As Math

While financial statements tell part of the story, Hoskins believes mindset plays an equally important role in determining how producers navigate difficult cycles.

“The key truly has nothing to do with numbers,” he says. “It has everything to do with mindset.”

Hoskins encourages producers to define clear goals, not just for the coming year, but over a longer horizon.

“What are your one-year goals? Your three-year goals? Your five-year goals?” he asks. “Having that longer-term perspective changes how you view short-term challenges.”

He believes producers who approach decisions with a clear sense of priorities tend to make more measured, sustainable choices.

“When you understand your priorities as people first and foremost, you start looking at the financials differently,” Hoskins says. “That ultimately leads to better decisions.”

USDA Numbers Confirm the Reality

USDA issued its first net farm income forecast for 2026 just last week, but the bigger surprise was the fact the agency revised its net farm income forecast for 2025, showing sharper declines than earlier estimates. Hoskins says those revisions align with what they are seeing on the lending side.

“It doesn’t surprise me that USDA lowered 2025 farm income,” he says. “As more data becomes available, it gives a clearer picture of where reality really lies.”

While the outlook remains challenging, Hoskins stresses agriculture has endured difficult cycles before.

“We’re not going to lose all of America’s farmers and ranchers,” he says. “But we do have challenges within this industry that need to be addressed.”

For producers willing to plan ahead, stay disciplined and lean on trusted advisers, Hoskins believes there is still a path forward, even in one of the tightest margin environments in recent memory.

Another Sign of Trouble in the Ag Economy: Farm Bankruptcies Are on the Rise

Tue, 22 Apr 2025 18:35:58 GMT

It’s no secret there’s trouble in the ag economy. As AgWeb reported in March , the Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor found 62% of ag economists think the row crop side of agriculture is currently in a recession, and 85% think the situation will accelerate consolidation on farms and among agribusinesses. A new report from Bloomberg Law shows family farm bankruptcies are also on the rise.

Bloomberg Law’s Alex Wolf and Skye Witley recently reported that family farm bankruptcies had already increased by 55% last year compared to 2023. And there’s no sign of that slowing down, as Wolf and Witley report bankruptcies are trending even higher this year. That’s as farmers continue to grapple with depressed agricultural commodity prices and high input costs.

Farm bankruptcies are on the rise in the U.S.

(Bloomberg)

“And while much of the industrywide distress predates his second stint in the White House, (President Donald) Trump has quickly nudged more farmers closer to the brink of going under and created turbulence for producers trying to make ends meet,” Wolf and Witley reported in the Bloomberg Law story. “Unpredictable tariffs, immigration overhauls, federal program cuts and frozen Agriculture Department funding are now part of the discussions farmers are having as they seek financial help.”

The report shows the last time farm bankruptcy filings soared was in 2019, which was the height of the previous trade war with China. The previous Trump administration sent farmers more than $20 billion in Market Facilitation Program payments (MFP) to help cover export losses.

Following that financial aid to farmers, the report shows family farm bankruptcies, filed under Chapter 12 of the U.S. bankruptcy code, declined each year until 2024.

According to court records, the number of new cases in 2024 jumped to 216 from a near 20-year low of 139. The report also shows those filings have continued to speed up this year, with 82 cases filed over the first three months of 2025, which is nearly double the figure for the same period a year ago.

$10 Billion in ECAP Money to Farmers

More help is on the way, if not already on farm. That’s because the American Relief Act of 2025, which was passed by Congress late last year, authorized the $10 billion for ECAP payments to help offset losses growers incurred during the 2024 crop year. Those payments are being dispersed now, and farmers have until August to sign up.

According to Joe Glauber, former USDA chief economist and a current emeritus fellow with the International Food Policy Research Institute, direct payments have helped farmers. But the threat of farm bankruptcies, and the reality of financial pain if markets don’t improve, is still there

“Remember, we are getting a ton of money put into the sector this year from the bill that was passed by Congress in December,” Glauber told “AgriTalk’s” Chip Flory. “So that’s $31 billion coming in with $10 billion of that going out to farmers as direct income support to offset low margins. So, I don’t think we’ll see a lot of farms going out of business. But certainly, if these short, tight margins persist for a long time, then that’s going to affect people.”

Rural Bankers Show Concern

According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, the number of farm loans at risk of defaulting is the highest it’s been since 2020 as demand for non-real-estate farm loans has surged while repayment rates dropped. The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago serves the Seventh Federal Reserve District , which includes Iowa, and most of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Ag lenders are also concerned. The most recent Rural Mainstreet Index (RMI) shows for the 19^th time in the past 20 months, the RMI sank below the 50.0 growth reading in April. This specific index surveys bank CEOs in rural areas of a 10-state region dependent on agriculture and/or energy.

While tariffs and Trump’s focus on trade are causing uncertainty, Ernie Goss, MacAllister chair in regional economics at Creighton University, says ag lenders are actually supportive of Trump’s tough stance on trade.

“The economic outlook for 2025 farm income remains weak, according to bank CEOs. Despite the negative fallout from tariffs, 75% of bankers support the tariffs on China, and 79.2% back the 90-day pause on other tariffs,” Goss told “AgriTalk’s” Chip Flory. “I’m an economist and we economists, we’re not very keen on tariffs and trade restrictions. Nonetheless, the bankers, three out of the four bankers are supportive of what the president’s doing there, and I would argue that the farmers are on the president’s side as well.”

The RMI also found rural bankers remain pessimistic about economic growth for their area over the next six months. The April confidence index increased to a weak 36.0 from March’s 30.4.

“Weak grain prices and negative farm cash flows, combined with downturns in farm equipment sales over the past several months, pushed banker confidence lower,” Goss said.

Cotton Hit Especially Hard

Cotton farmers are especially feeling the pain with younger farmers already having difficulty getting financed for this year. Cheap cotton prices and dwindling demand are just part of the problem. Input costs have climbed, and there’s no safety net to be found from a new farm bill. One Georgia farmer told Farm Journal that the current farm bill is irrelevant and worthless, and if a new one doesn’t get passed this year, the cotton industry is doomed.

“We’re going to plant cotton and don’t even have a clue if we’re going to get our money back,” says Franz Rowland, who grows cotton in Boston, Ga. “There’s no farm bill to support us, and the reference price is so low that it’s not anything that we can depend on. So, we’re going to put several million dollars in the ground and don’t even know if we’re going to get it back.”

As president and CEO of National Cotton Council (NCC), Gary Adams sees and hears the somber situation for U.S. cotton farmers from coast to coast. Adams says the outlook for 2025 is even worse than 2024.

“We’ve gone beyond just losing money now that we’re to the point of losing the farm,” he says. “Unfortunately, where the industry is, that’s what it looks like as we’re going into 2025.”

Darren Hudson is the Larry Combest endowed chair for agricultural competitiveness and director of the International Center for Agricultural Competitiveness at Texas Tech University. Hudson focuses on cotton, and on “AgriTalk” this week, he described why cotton farmers, and the entire cotton industry, is feeling the pinch.

“Cotton is fairly input intensive anyway, and so urea, nitrogen costs, all these chemical costs, they’re facing those just like every other farmer out there, but we’ve had three consecutive really bad moisture years,” Hudson told “AgriTalk.” “So, we have a long way to go to get back to what you think of as normal growing conditions.”

Hudson says three consecutive years of declining production due to drought isn’t just a problem for producers, it’s also the cotton infrastructure that relies on that crop.

“We’ve had three years, you know, that processing infrastructure all that stuff is strained and disappearing, and it’s getting harder and harder to farm as a cotton farmer out here,” says Hudson, who’s based in Lubock, Texas. “We’re not unusual compared to everybody else. We don’t want to sing a sad story, but I think all of ag is in a squeeze at this moment with [commodity] prices versus inputs.”

Is the Ag Industry Ripe for Consolidation?

Another reality for U.S. agriculture, while the majority of farms in the U.S. are small family farms, that sector doesn’t represent the majority of farm production today.

USDA ERS data shows while 88% of U.S. farms are considered “small family farms,” those farms only represent18.7% of the total U.S. value of farm production.

(Ben Brown, University of Missouri )

USDA ERS data shows while 88% of U.S. farms are considered “small family farms,” those farms only represent 18.7% of the total U.S. value of farm production.

On the other hand, while 3.4% of U.S. farms are “large-scale family farms,” that sector represents 51.8% of the total value of U.S. farm production.

Ag Lenders: Just Over Half of Farmers Will Be Profitable in 2024

Thu, 14 Nov 2024 21:52:57 GMT

The American Bankers Association (ABA) and the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (Farmer Mac) have released their joint 2024 Ag Lender Survey.

The big takeaway: lenders believe only 58% of farmer borrowers will be profitable in 2024. That’s down from 78% in the previous year’s study.

“The agricultural economy is inherently cyclical, and ag lenders are navigating the changing conditions across the sectors they serve,” said Jackson Takach, chief economist of Farmer Mac.

“While the responses highlight slowing land values and a profitability shift from crops toward animal proteins, ag lenders remain steadfast in leveraging their resources and relationships to guide producers through all parts of the cycle,” Takach says.

Profitability expectations did vary by region and commodity category. Optimism was greater for livestock producers over row crop farmers.

The two top concerns listed by lenders for agricultural producers are liquidity and farm income.

For lending institutions, the respondents said the biggest concern was credit quality along with agricultural loan deterioration in the next 12 months.

“Agricultural credit quality remained robust in 2024, but lenders expect deterioration in the coming year as farmers face a more challenging environment,” said Tyler Mondres, senior director of research at the American Bankers Association. “Lenders are taking prudent steps to manage risk such as tightening underwriting standards, and they remain committed to working with and supporting their borrowers.”

Demand for loans secured by farmland and agricultural production loans increased in 2024, and both categories of loans are expected to rise in the next year as well.

The ABA/Farmer Mac survey has been conducted for nine years, and this year’s responses included more than 450 ag lenders who represent institutions ranging from less than $50 million to more than $1 billion.

You can read the full report here

The 3 Biggest Updates to USDA's Farm Loan Programs You Need to Know

Thu, 08 Aug 2024 18:49:34 GMT

With commodity prices down and farm returns expected to significantly decline , USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) has released three major changes to its farm loan programs in an effort to increase the opportunities farmers and ranchers have to be financially viable.

“The analysis of what has gone into these rule changes is nothing short of tremendous,” says Zach Ducheneaux, FSA administrator. “Our team has poured over hundreds of thousands of loans in our portfolio and really identified some things that FSA can, should, and with this rule, will be doing better to support our producers and their economic viability in the countryside.”

The three most notable policy changes, which will go into effect on Sept. 25, include:

1. A new, low-interest installment set-aside program for financially distressed borrowers
According to Ducheneaux, this program was modeled after the Disaster Set-Aside program, but the difference is a borrower doesn’t have to be affected by a declared natural disaster in order to qualify. However, it’s important to note producers must be in FSA’s portfolio by the time these updates go into effect in order to be eligible.

“Oftentimes, what the producer needs is just a little breathing room,” Ducheneaux says. “We have the ability to do that for producers that are in our portfolio as of Sept. 25.”

The program essentially allows eligible, financially distressed borrowers to defer up to one annual loan installment per qualified loan at a reduced rate.

“When we set that payment aside, instead of accruing interest at the already established rate, it’s going to accrue interest at 1/8 of a percent,” Ducheneaux explains. “We’re really setting aside a payment, and it’s not going to balloon on you in a way it jeopardizes your operation as you’re coming to the end of that term.”

2. Access to flexible repayment terms
Some of these more flexible terms include smaller interest-only payments and longer loan terms. The idea behind this change is to allow producers to increase their working capital and give them the ability to save for education and retirement.

“Having a retirement fund built into this can help ease that generational transfer and help enable us to recruit young farmers and ranchers back to the farm,” Ducheneaux says. “Because FSA can make adjustments to our terms, it might help them step out of that job they’ve got in the town 40 miles away for health insurance and pay for that for their family on their own terms.”

He adds that the concern this could add more interest to the loan over time is valid, the point is to increase available cash flow for the operation.

3. Reduced additional loan security requirements
This update reduces the collateral requirements for direct loans from requiring available security equal to 150% of the loan amount down to 125%. One of FSA’s main goals with this change is to reduce the frequency borrowers need to use their personal residence as additional collateral for a farm loan.

“If you think back to 40 years ago, some of the most heart-wrenching stories you hear are when you’re losing the family home,” Ducheneaux says. “With this rule, if we do not need it to get to a one-to-one security position, we will not take the primary residence as additional security.”

In addition, FSA will release liens on collateral the borrower initially provided as additional security after establishing a history of on-time payments.

Additional improvements include streamlining and automating the Farm Loan Program process with a loan assistance tool, online loan application, online repayment feature and a simplified direct loan paper application.

“We think these changes to the terms are really transformative,” Ducheneaux says. “Any of these three provisions on their own would be a great transformation, but taken as a collective, this really signals a new day in ag finance, where FSA is going to position itself as the leader and the example for how our friends in the lending community might consider doing this.”

Ducheneaux explains a robust training process on the changes is underway for FSA employees and asks for patience and grace as the team comes to understand the new tools they have.

Vertical farmer Kalera files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy

Wed, 05 Apr 2023 17:26:18 GMT

Kalera, a vertical farming company based in Orlando, Fla., filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy April 4 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas.

The public limited company is known on the Nasdaq stock exchange as “KAL,” according to a news release.

Kalera will continue to operate its business as “debtor-in-possession” under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court and according to the bankruptcy code. The company is requesting customary relief for transitioning into Chapter 11 so that ordinary daily operations won’t be disrupted.

Jim Leighton’s employment as Kalera’s president and CEO has ended, effective March 29. Leighton also resigned from the company’s board of directors.

Related news: The Packer’s Q&A with Kalera’s CEO

The rest of the company’s executive management team will remain with Kalera, including: Chief Operating Officer Austin Martin, Chief Financial Officer Fernando Cornejo, founder and Chief Science Officer Cristian Toma and Senior Vice President of Human Resources Leon Lachance. These members will remain on the board: Chairman Curtis Williams, Robert Arnall, Brent de Jong, Sonny Perdue and Cristian Toma.

Kalera has a global network of hydroponic vertical farms growing greens and culinary herbs, harvested on demand year-round. Farms in Orlando, Houston, Atlanta and Denver are in operation. Farms in Seattle, Columbus, Honolulu and St. Paul, Minn., are under construction, according to Kalera’s website .

Kalera also operates farms in Munich and Kuwait and had a mega-farm opening in Singapore in 2022 .

Kalera PLC, Kalera S.A. and other subsidiaries — including Vindara Inc. and Iveron Materials Inc. — are not part of the Chapter 11 filing. Kalera intends to use the court-supervised process to evaluate strategic alternatives for Kalera, including a potential sale of Kalera or its assets.

To help with process, Kalera PLC has appointed Mark Shapiro, senior managing director at B. Riley Advisory Services, as chief restructuring officer. Shapiro will oversee the business and its restructuring process to further the Kalera’s business strategy and sell it for the maximum value.

“The Chapter 11 process will allow Kalera to continue operations and serve its existing customer base while it evaluates strategic alternatives for its business and assets,” Shapiro said in the release.

To enable Kalera to continue operations during the reorganization process, Kalera’s existing lender has agreed to provide Kalera with $5.1 million of debtor-in-possession financing, as long as Kalera meets some customary conditions, including the approval of the bankruptcy court, which has not been obtained by press time.

Kalera hired the Baker & Hostetler law firm to be its legal adviser and B. Riley Advisory Services to be its financial adviser to assist in the Chapter 11 case filing, its restructuring and review of all available strategic alternatives.

Related: Kalera opens vertical farming facility in Denver

Because of this ongoing review, the company was not able to file its annual report for the preceding year ending Dec. 31, 2022, by March 31, 2022. It’s not clear when that report will be made.

On April 14, 2022, according to the release, Kalera took a loan from Farm Credit of Central Florida, in which Farm Credit agreed to make:

Revolving loans in an aggregate principal amount of up to $10 million.
One or more term loans in an aggregate principal amount up to $20 million.

On March 21, 2023, Farm Credit informed Kalera that as of the close of business on March 17, 2023, Farm Credit had sold its interest under the loan agreement to Sandton Credit Solutions Master Fund V.

Starting this Chapter 11 bankruptcy case constitutes a default on the loan, which accelerates Kalera’s obligations under the loan. The loan agreement provides that, upon a Chapter 11 case filing, the unpaid principal and interest due under the loan agreement are automatically due and payable.

But Chapter 11 bankruptcy protects Kalera from this: Any efforts to enforce these loan payment obligations are automatically stayed as a result of the Chapter 11 case filing, according to the release, and the creditors’ rights of enforcement are subject to the bankruptcy code.

Kalera has more than 200 creditors, according to the petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy .

Some of the creditors with the largest unsecured claims that aren’t insiders include: Orlando-based House of Plastics Unlimited Inc. for $352,053; Orlando-based accountant Grant Thornton for $345,622; Grand Rapids, Mich.-based public relations firm Lambert for $323,822.63; Columbus, Ohio-based freight brokerage firm BBI Logistics for $197,991; and Tavares, Fla.-based Aaron’s Electrical Services for $116,632.35.

More information about the case is available here .

Related news, via the “Tip of the Iceberg Podcast": Where vertical farms (like Bowery) are headed

Ag's Darkest Fraud Hidden in Dirt

Wed, 27 Jan 2021 20:10:55 GMT

Put a shoulder to the door of agriculture’s basement closet and loose a jumble of skeletons: Grain swindles, cattle rustling and snake oil schemes spill forth. Sift through the multi-billion dollar bone pile and find what lies trapped beneath: a forgotten tangle of broken farmers who paid the costs of others ill-gotten gains.

In 2000, southwest Mississippi producer Rodney Burkley heard about a business venture gaining steam in multiple states. Nine months later in July 2001, Burkley rented a vehicle and hit I-20, bound for a fateful meeting in Oklahoma City. After a 550-mile drive, he walked into a tiny restaurant to hand over a big check. Two hours and one meal later, Burkley signed a $100,000 buy-in contract and shook hands with a goateed, unassuming man seated across the table. Appearances are worthless: Greg Bradley pocketed Burkley’s money and went on to bilk approximately 2,400 growers in 40 states for a stunning $25 million in rapid-fire fashion.

Bradley was in the process of crafting one of the most surreal tales in the history of agriculture crime, and his vehicle of choice was a multimillion dollar crop of earthworms.

Essentially, Bradley built a grand pyramid of worm grower contracts. Vermiculture, the breeding of worms for resale, and vermicomposting, the use of castings (worm waste material) as a high quality soil amendment , were a cloak to hide Bradley’s scam. Bradley started B&B Worm Farm in Meeker, Okla., in 1998, and offered growers red worm contracts ranging from $10,000 to more than $100,000. A grower might pay $15,000 for 100,000 breeding worms or $60,000 for 1.5 million worms, all supplied by B&B with a manual, worm harvesting equipment, toll-free help number and a one-year money-back guarantee. B&B then promised to buy all the worms a grower could breed for a contract price between $7 and $10 per pound. The math was simple: As long as grower contracts outpaced worm purchases, B&B would rake in phenomenal profits.

“He made inflated promises and people bought in hook, line and sinker. They were forking over the cash,” says Peter Bogdanov, a renowned authority on vermiculture and the owner of Vermico, a vermiculture business centered on science and research.

B&B needed a heavyweight from the vermiculture industry to provide the company with a stamp of legitimacy. Bradley found the perfect mark in Kelly Slocum.

Passionate about vermiculture and the genuine benefits it held for agriculture, Slocum was a self-educated master of worms, castings and waste management from Washington. A natural-born speaker with a sharp intellect, Slocum was the vermiculture apostle Bradley needed. In January 2001, Bradley flew to Washington and reeled in Slocum with a stack of documentation on worm product buyers, end users and grower contracts.

Publicly, Bradley used Slocum’s expertise to help growers produce worms. Privately, he used her name as a key of respect to open doors and make tremendous amounts of money. Slocum had no idea she’d signed a devil’s bargain: When the clock struck midnight, the mild-mannered Bradley would ruin her name and destroy her hard-earned reputation.

By 2001, Bradley had distribution centers in at least 12 states and grower contract sales surging. Ohio grain producer Floyd Weyrick was introduced to Bradley at a B&B presentation in Darke County.

“I met him face to face and I told him I didn’t believe what he was saying about worms. He boldly said, ‘If you don’t believe it then I don’t want you as a customer,’” Weyrick says.

Weyrick bought 300 lb. of worms to start, and turned several old hog barns into worm production buildings. “Bradley bought my worms for $8 a pound,” Weyrick recalls. “I sold him $39,000 in worms and everything looked bright—and then the bottom fell out.”

Where were the worms going that Bradley purchased from growers such as Weyrick? Bradley set up a fictitious roster of end-user companies that were purportedly buying B&B worm products. As the worms came in the B&B door, he sent them back out to fill new grower contracts.

As growers began churning out increasing numbers of worms and castings, payments for worm deliveries began hitting snags. With the incessant expansion of grower contracts, and a business model devoid of end users, Slocum began hammering Bradley demanding accountability.

With grower complaints over non-payment catching the ears of authorities, Bradley heard legal footsteps in Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Department of Securities (ODS) placed a cease-and-desist order on all B&B grower contracts on Aug. 13, 2002. Irving Faught, administrator of the ODS, says his investigators found $23 million in outstanding B&B debts.

With more than 800 contracted growers, Kentucky was hit particularly hard by B&B. “I remember our investigators going out and watching a shipment of worms leaving,” recalls Wanda Delaplane, former assistant attorney general of Kentucky. “The investigators were in shock and couldn’t believe a market existed for such a huge quantity of worms. How could it be? Turns out, Bradley was his own market.”

As with all Ponzi schemes, the end came with a bottom-of-the-barrel realization. When Weyrick delivered 400 lb. of worms to the B&B distribution agency in St. Mary’s, the load was refused. As Weyrick drove away, he faced the single biggest swindle he’d witnessed in a farming career spanning back to 1958.

Mirroring Weyrick, Burkley suddenly found payments were finished when he delivered his final worm load to the B&B distributor in Vicksburg. “It was like combining a crop and carrying it to elevator, but nobody pays you,” he says.

With B&B payments at an end and authorities closing fast in multiple states, the unusual theater surrounding the entire worm fraud hit an uncanny crescendo in January 2003, when Bradley was hospitalized in Shawnee. A few days later on Jan. 26, at age 40, the engineer of one of the oddest scandals ever was dead.

With an ill-timed death as authorities closed in and millions of dollars in question, many growers harbor doubts that still linger. “How could we not think it odd? I first heard he died from a brown recluse spider bite, and then I heard it was pneumonia. It was impossible to dissect the facts and frankly, I don’t believe we know what really happened,” Slocum says.

“I don’t care about death certificates or what anybody thinks,” Weyrick adds. “I said all along Bradley ain’t dead. Cremation? I think he went to Mexico with millions of dollars belonging to farmers.”

B&B slid into Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and the investigations went cold. Kentucky growers lost nearly $5.75 million to B&B.

As B&B fell, it pulled the savings, pensions and mortgages of farmers into a financial abyss. Beyond the financial devastation, reputations were destroyed in B&B’s wake.

Slocum’s good faith investment in Bradley’s veracity cost her dearly.

“It’s painful looking back at the entire ordeal. I was drinking from the fire hose. I learned so much, but the good that came out wasn’t worth the pain I caused or experienced,” she adds. “Even today, sometimes I feel as if I lived a movie.”

On the grower side, Burkley, 60, lost three crops at harvest to the reach of the Mississippi River. Floods are the cruel mistress of farming; con-artists are not. Pushed to the brink of bankruptcy, Burkley lost more than $160,000 to B&B. “I worked my ass off but couldn’t get past Bradley’s dishonesty. Because of him, I did without and my family did without, but God saw us through,” he says. “It hurts too bad to dwell on the loss.”

Worm schemes, half-lies, sleight of hand, a curious death and many more motley ingredients made for a surreal farming chapter.