Farm Bureau foundation removes methane lesson after feedback from some producers

Biogenic methane sustains about 20% of warming to date, climate scientist says

The American Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture removed a high school science lesson on cattle methane and climate change after some ranchers disputed the premise that cows contribute to global heating, and the lesson has not returned. The free curriculum, funded by a mandatory levy on cattle sales called the beef checkoff, reaches about 1.2 million students in more than 100 school districts nationwide. A cattle digestion lesson the foundation published in July makes no mention of methane or climate. The Guardian published the report by Zach Boren on 8 Nov 2026.

The foundation and its Food and Agriculture Center for Science Education produce the curriculum, which is funded by the mandatory levy on cattle sales called the beef checkoff. Late last year, the foundation announced a new lesson exploring “how cattle produce methane and its role within the broader environmental and biological systems”. Within months, it had been removed following online criticism from ranchers.

The lesson, titled “Methane & Cattle: A Climate Connection”, was designed to help high school students understand “how the natural digestive processes of cattle contribute to methane emissions and influence atmospheric dynamics”. Using figures from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it showed that methane is a far more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, though it has a short atmospheric life.

A foundation spokesperson said the methane topic “cannot be a 45-minute lesson”. The foundation said it was working on a longer version and reviewing research “related to the biogenic cycle” with help from unnamed researchers and university experts. It said the July digestion lesson was “not a replacement”. Officials behind the curriculum have said it is intended to “eliminate[s] negative perceptions” of the industry for “future consumers”.

Animal agriculture advocates often claim that the biogenic cycle — in which atmospheric methane breaks down within about 12 years into carbon dioxide that is then reabsorbed by grass — means cattle methane contributes little additional global warming. Climate researchers cited in the report dispute that conclusion. They identify biogenic methane, which comes from living sources such as organic waste, rice paddies and livestock, as a leading cause of climate crisis even when emissions are not rising. “About 0.3C [roughly 20%] of global warming to date is maintained by our ongoing biogenic methane emissions,” said Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, a climate scientist at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. “Cutting these emissions is essential to slow global warming and keep peak warming as low as possible.”

Drew Shindell, a climate scientist at Duke University who chaired the UN’s 2021 Global Methane Assessment, said the removed lesson also contained an error: it stated that livestock accounts for about 2% of human-caused methane emissions, when the true figure is a little over 30%. Shindell said it was “a shame the ranchers would block students from learning about the world they will inherit”. He also said, “The role of methane in climate change is not controversial, having been measured in the lab long ago and confirmed in satellite observations of the energy emitted by the Earth.”

Among the critics was Brett Kenzy, a prominent South Dakota farmer who chairs a committee of the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America (R-CAL USA). Kenzy told a trade publication that “it’s not fair claiming that cows are harming the environment because they’re not,” and called the lesson a “slap in the face”.

Jim Mundorf, a rancher, podcaster and longtime critic of the beef checkoff, wrote an analysis on his blog, Lonesome Lands, after seeing a Facebook post promoting the curriculum. Mundorf described the methane lesson as “one of the most infuriating things I have laid eyes on” and attacked it as condescending to farmers. “Blaming cattle for climate change is no different than blaming volcanos, or the oceans, or lightning strikes that cause wildfires,” he wrote. The post was republished by the ranchers coalition of CPAC and amplified across the farming community.

In an interview, Mundorf said, “I put [the blog] out to the world. Hopefully it catches on.” He added: “And it did. I get phone calls and emails from people involved with farm bureau who were also upset about [the lesson].” According to Mundorf, farm bureau contacts later told him “they don’t think it’ll be used anymore”.

Rick Henningfeld, the foundation’s education director, told an audience at CattleCon, the beef industry’s annual convention, in February, according to a recording of the event shared with The Guardian. “We did take it down,” he said. “We heard the feedback, and we are editing it, and our hope is to get it back up quickly.” Responding to an audience question about the “social media heat” around the lesson, Henningfeld said it was removed after “feedback from some farm bureau members and some producers”.

Henningfeld said the foundation would develop a new producer review of everything published by the program, to make sure “the science is represented, the needs of the teachers [are] represented, the needs of our awesome producers shows up”. The foundation said its review process “invites a group of producers to suggest topics and review draft materials”.

Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, questioned how those goals fit together. “What happens when those goals conflict?” he said. “The censorship in the recent episode suggests that the needs of the producers prevail.” Vivayic, a Nebraska-based consultancy that develops the program for the foundation, said the curriculum’s goal is for students to make sense of real scientific data.

In background on the industry’s education history, Boren reported that the beef industry has worked since the 1990s to shape what children learn about its products. An October study by University of Miami researchers Jennifer Jacquet and Loredana Loy, drawing on archival documents, examined how the National Cattlemen’s Association, a precursor of today’s National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, responded to early climate science. The researchers found that in the 1980s and 1990s the group treated global warming as a public relations problem, working to downplay US cattle’s methane emissions rather than trying to cut them.

In 1991, the study found, NCA pressure led Random House to end reprints of a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles children’s book that linked cattle to global warming. “Influencing K-12 education has been part of the National Cattlemen’s strategy for decades,” Jacquet said. NCBA declined to comment.

Separately, in September, the US Department of Agriculture, which oversees all agricultural checkoff programs, ordered the programs to end support for environmental, social and governance (ESG) initiatives as well as net-zero and climate-neutrality targets. The department said it had no role in the decision to remove the methane lesson. “This is compatible with what I see happening,” Jacquet said. “The livestock industry is winning with the Trump administration and does not even need to fake that it cares, let alone that it is doing anything.”