November 9, 2026
Idaho’s Farmland and Public Lands Are not Industrial Wastelands
Before sacrificing productive farmland or public lands, developers should be required to demonstrate that they have seriously considered suitable industrial sites
By: Jeff Pierson
There are better places to put massive data centers and renewable energy projects (hyperscale infrastructure) than productive farmland, locations within a few miles of residential neighborhoods, public lands, or over regional aquifers.
Look for alternatives
Before sacrificing productive farmland or public lands, developers should be required to demonstrate that they have seriously considered suitable industrial sites, such as brownfields, military bases, or abandoned industrial zones.
Not every alternative will work, but protecting valuable land should be a priority, not an afterthought. Developers should also be required to clarify the purpose of the project and whom it serves. There are important uses for AI and data centers, but there are also a lot of uses that do more harm than good.
The harm is know and can be irreversible
Once thousands of acres are covered with concrete, roads, power infrastructure, server buildings, steel, solar panels, or wind turbines, restoring that land is neither easy nor inexpensive.
Experts have said that it could take 30 to 70 years or more for public lands to recover AFTER a project is properly removed. Sagebrush, plants, animals, and soil require decades to fully recover, and some may never return.
Farmland occupied by industrial-scale solar installations, wind turbines, or data centers may not return to its original agricultural productivity after those facilities are removed.
Construction and demolition can damage soil structure, increase compaction, disrupt drainage, and alter or destroy productive topsoil. Scientific research documents persistent agricultural impairment following wind farm construction, while USDA and university agricultural guidance identify significant restoration challenges associated with solar facilities.
Complete recovery is possible in some circumstances, but it is not guaranteed, and available research does not establish how frequently heavily disturbed sites recover their original productivity.
The science behind recovery
Southern Idaho soils are considered some of the best in the nation.
Dedicating hundreds or thousands of acres of farmland to industrial and hyperscale projects is simply irresponsible, shortsighted, and so grossly outside existing zoning laws that this practice should be banned under any circumstances. It creates environmental damage, and the impact is so large that it can affect the lives of an entire rural community.
Local governments need to work with their citizens to determine what is acceptable and establish clear zoning restrictions, including the consideration of complete bans on farm land.
The danger of developer influence over local government is well documented.
Federal corruption prosecutions have exposed cases in which developers purchased favorable zoning and permitting decisions, while academic research demonstrates that developer campaign contributions can influence municipal land-use outcomes.
These findings reinforce the importance of transparent proceedings, independent technical review, conflict-of-interest disclosures, and consistent zoning standards established before individual development proposals are considered.
Examples of Corruption in Hyperscale Development
Our farmland feeds people. Our public lands belong to all of us. Neither should be treated as disposable.
I personally advocate Ban Hyperscale Data and Energy Projects on Farmland and Near Residences. Protect Public Lands.
1. Arivmed, O., Lauenroth, W. K., Burke, I. C., & Mobley, M. L. (2015). Sagebrush steppe recovery on 30–90-year-old abandoned oil and gas wells. Ecosphere, 6(7).
https://doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00175.1
2. Belnap, J., & Gillette, D. A. (1998). Vulnerability of desert biological soil crusts to wind erosion: The influences of crust development, soil texture, and disturbance. Journal of Arid Environments, 39(2), 133–142.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jare.1998.0388
3. Belnap, J., Kaltenecker, J. H., Rosentreter, R., Williams, J., Leonard, S., & Eldridge, D. (2001). Biological soil crusts: Ecology and management (Technical Reference 1730-2). Bureau of Land Management.
https://www.ntc.blm.gov/krc/system/files/legacy/uploads/2939/CrustManual.pdf
4. Coates, P. S., O’Neil, S. T., Munoz, D. A., Dwight, I., & Tull, J. C. (2021). Sage-grouse population dynamics are adversely impacted by overabundant feral horses. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 85(6), 1132–1149.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22089
5. Cross, T. B., Tack, J. D., Naugle, D. E., Schwartz, M. K., Doherty, K. E., Oyler-McCance, S. J., Pritchert, R. D., & Fedy, B. C. (2023). The ties that bind the sagebrush biome: Integrating genetic connectivity into range-wide conservation of greater sage-grouse. Royal Society Open Science, 10(2), Article 220437.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220437
6. Jahner, J. P., Gibson, D., Weitzman, C. L., Blomberg, E. J., Sedinger, J. S., & Parchman, T. L. (2016). Fine-scale genetic structure among greater sage-grouse leks in central Nevada. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 16, Article 127.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-016-0702-4
7. Lan, S., Elliott, D. R., Chamizo, S., Felde, V. J. M. N. L., & Thomas, A. D. (2024). Editorial: Biological soil crusts: Spatio-temporal development and ecological functions of soil surface microbial communities across different scales. Frontiers in Microbiology, 15, Article 1447058.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1447058
8. Maxwell, L. M., Rutherford, T. K., Kleist, N. J., Teige, E. C., Lehrter, R. J., Gilbert, M. A., Wood, D. J. A., Johnston, A. N., Tull, J. C., Haby, T. S., & Carter, S. K. (2024). Effects of noise from oil and gas development on raptors and songbirds: A science synthesis to inform National Environmental Policy Act analyses (Scientific Investigations Report 2024-5087). U.S. Geological Survey.
https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245087
9. Ngo-Cong, D., Antille, D. L., van Genuchten, M. Th., Nguyen, H. Q., Tekeste, M. Z., Baillie, C. P., & Godwin, R. J. (2021). A modeling framework to quantify the effects of compaction on soil water retention and infiltration. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 85, 1931–1945.
https://doi.org/10.1002/saj2.20328
10. Obour, P. B., & Ugarte, C. M. (2021). A meta-analysis of the impact of traffic-induced compaction on soil physical properties and grain yield. Soil and Tillage Research, 211, Article 105019.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2021.105019
11. Pitt, R., Chen, S.-E., Clark, S. E., Swenson, J., & Ong, C. K. (2008). Compaction’s impacts on urban storm-water infiltration. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 134(5), 652–658.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2008)134:5(652)
12. Prose, D. V., & Wilshire, H. G. (2000). The lasting effects of tank maneuvers on desert soils and intershrub flora (Open-File Report 00-512). U.S. Geological Survey.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/0512/
13. Rutherford, T. K., Maxwell, L. M., Kleist, N. J., Teige, E. C., Lehrter, R. J., Gilbert, M. A., Wood, D. J. A., Johnston, A. N., Mengelt, C., Tull, J. C., Haby, T. S., & Carter, S. K. (2023). Effects of noise from oil and gas development on ungulates and small mammals: A science synthesis to inform National Environmental Policy Act analyses (Scientific Investigations Report 2023-5114). U.S. Geological Survey.
https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20235114
14. Sage-grouse National Technical Team. (2011). A report on national greater sage-grouse conservation measures. Bureau of Land Management.
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GOVPUB-A13-PURL-gpo90829
15. Sawyer, H., Middleton, A. D., Hayes, M. M., Kauffman, M. J., & Monteith, K. L. (2016). The extra mile: Ungulate migration distance alters the use of seasonal range and exposure to anthropogenic risk. Ecosphere, 7(10), Article e01534.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1534
16. Teige, E. C., Maxwell, L. M., Jordan, S. E., Rutherford, T. K., Dietrich, E. I., Samuel, E. M., Stoneburner, A. L., Kleist, N. J., Meineke, J. K., Selby, L. B., Foster, A. C., & Carter, S. K. (2023). Annotated bibliography of scientific research on greater sage-grouse published from October 2019 to July 2022 (Open-File Report 2023-1082). U.S. Geological Survey.
https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20231082
17. U.S. Geological Survey. (2023). Annotated bibliography of scientific research relevant to oil and gas reclamation best management practices in the western United States, published from 1969 through 2020 (Open-File Report 2023-1068).
https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/ofr20231068/full
18. Maguire, K., Tanner, S., & Winikoff, J. B. (2024, September 12). Agricultural land near solar and wind projects usually remained in agriculture after development. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2024/september/agricultural-land-near-solar-and-wind-projects-usually-remained-in-agriculture-after-development
19. Maguire, K., Tanner, S., Winikoff, J. B., & Williams, R. (2024). Utility-scale solar and wind development in rural areas: Land cover change (2009–20) (Economic Research Report No. 330). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
https://doi.org/10.32747/2024.8374829.ers
20. Carroll, M. (2021, October 12). Can solar energy production be converted to farmland? North Carolina Cooperative Extension.
https://craven.ces.ncsu.edu/news/can-solar-energy-production-be-converted-to-farmland/
21. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. (2024). Conservation considerations for solar farms.
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/Conservation_Considerations_Solar_Farms.pdf
22. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. (2025). Conservation guidance for utility-scale solar projects.
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2025-04/Conservation-Guidance-for-Utility-Scale-Solar-Projects_2025415.pdf
23. U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.). Wind energy end-of-service guide.
https://www.energy.gov/cmei/systems/windexchange/wind-energy-end-service-guide
24. Gaudette, J., & de Benedictis-Kessner, J. (2025, September 23). Funding the growth machine: The effects of municipal campaign contributions on housing policy outcomes. Harvard Kennedy School.
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/publications/funding-growth-machine-effects-municipal-campaign-contributions-housing-policy
25. Lo, L., & Freemark, Y. (2022, November 15). Influencers, bias, and equity in rezoning cases: An evaluation of developer-initiated zoning changes in Louisville, Kentucky. Urban Institute.
https://www.urban.org/research/publication/influencers-bias-and-equity-rezoning-cases
26. U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. (2024, January 26). Former Los Angeles politician José Huizar sentenced to 13 years in federal prison for racketeering conspiracy and tax evasion.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/former-los-angeles-politician-jose-huizar-sentenced-13-years-federal-prison
27. U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. (2024). Former Los Angeles deputy mayor sentenced to 12 years in prison for racketeering conspiracy that corrupted city real estate projects.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/former-los-angeles-deputy-mayor-sentenced-12-years-prison-racketeering-conspiracy
28. U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. (2023, July 21). Real estate developer sentenced to 6 years in federal prison for paying $500,000 cash bribe to corrupt L.A. politician and official.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/real-estate-developer-sentenced-6-years-federal-prison-paying-500000-cash-bribe
29. Federation of American Scientists. (2026). A guide to better data center policy for local governments.
https://fas.org/publication/before-breaking-ground/
30. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Full environmental assessment form, Part 2: Question 8, impact on agricultural resources.
https://dec.ny.gov/regulatory/permits-licenses/seqr/eaf-workbooks/part-2-feaf/question-8
Author’s Note
I am not against data centers. I use AI and data centers daily, it is the field I work in and around. I am against sacrificing valuable land, public resources, and the right of citizens to control their local government.
© Copyright 2026, Jeff A Pierson JeffAPierson.com. Republished by permission.
Jeff A. Pierson is the owner of Confidential Solutions LLC and a policy researcher. He writes on Idaho energy, land use, and technology policy at jeffapierson.substack.com.
