Category: Agriculture

  • MIL-OSI Global: Colonialism, starvation and resistance: How food is weaponized, from Gaza to Canada

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Charles Z. Levkoe, Canada Research Chair in Equitable and Sustainable Food Systems, Lakehead University

    For more than a year, the Israeli state has been engaged in a massive incursion into Gaza following the October 2023 Hamas attack against Israel.

    In March 2024, Francesca Albanese, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, announced: “There are reasonable grounds to believe that the threshold indicating the commission of the crime of genocide…has been met.”

    A core element of this apparent genocide includes food militarization and weaponization, a tactic that has also been used by Canada to exterminate, dispossess and control Indigenous populations.

    We have come together as a group of critical food systems scholars to examine the parallels between the weaponization of food in Gaza and Canada to bring about the systematic destruction of Indigenous Peoples. But we’ve also observed that food has been a powerful tool of resistance and resurgence.




    Read more:
    Israeli siege has placed Gazans at risk of starvation − prewar policies made them vulnerable in the first place


    Food as a weapon

    Throughout modern history, food has been deployed as a weapon by colonial regimes to control and displace Indigenous populations. The current crisis in Gaza has brought this into sharp focus as the Israeli state has engaged in the systematic destruction of Palestinian food systems, with devastating consequences.

    Israel’s blockade of Gaza, in place since 2007, has cut off access to essential agricultural areas and restricted fishing activities. Gaza farmers are often unable to access their land, while fishers are constantly barred from accessing the coast, harassed, intimidated and even killed by Israeli forces.

    This blockade, combined with military operations that destroy farmland, trees and infrastructure, has resulted in more than 95 per cent of people in Gaza facing severe food insecurity and a famine declared by the United Nations experts in the summer of 2024.




    Read more:
    Starvation is a weapon of war: Gazans are paying the price


    Canada’s use of food weaponization

    Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the Canadian government employed similar tactics to restrict Indigenous Peoples’ access to land, food and water. Colonial policies like the Indian Act, the Homesteading Act and the Pass System confined Indigenous Peoples to reserves, prohibited hunting and fishing and forced reliance on inadequate government food rations.

    This led to malnutrition and starvation, particularly in response to Indigenous resistance to settler expansion. The use of food as a weapon was part of a broader project to eliminate or otherwise undermine Indigenous identity and self-determination, a process that continues today.

    From ongoing boil-water advisories to environmental degradation caused by mining, oil and gas extraction, forestry, agriculture and chemical production, settler governments and industries continue to dispossess Indigenous Peoples from their lands and undermine their livelihood.

    These practices have severely and disproportionately impacted Indigenous health and well-being, as well as their food systems.




    Read more:
    Colonialists used starvation as a tool of oppression


    The Scream, by Kent Monkman (2016), was part of a travelling exhibition in 2017 on colonized Canada entitled ‘Shame And Prejudice: A Story Of Resilience.’
    (Courtesy of Kent Monkman)

    Israel targets food infrastructure

    In the occupied Palestinian territories, Israeli control over land and resources reflects a similar colonial dynamic. Laws like the Absentee Property Law of 1950 facilitated the expropriation of Palestinian land.

    Meanwhile, the Israeli military has systematically targeted Gaza’s food infrastructure and used starvation as a weapon of war, according to Human Rights Watch. Satellite imagery shows that 70 per cent of Gaza’s tree cover has been eliminated or damaged, and about one-third of greenhouses have been demolished.

    Tanks and trucks have decimated orchards, field crops and olive groves.

    An estimated 800,000 tonnes of asbestos among the debris of destroyed buildings will result in asbestos-related diseases for generations to come. Under the Geneva Conventions, destruction of civilians’ means of survival and starvation as a tool of warfare is strictly prohibited.

    Food as resistance

    Food has also long been mobilized as a powerful tool of resistance. Among Palestinians, struggles for food sovereignty have played a critical role in self-determination.

    Palestinians continue to cultivate their land under the rubble, grow olive trees despite ongoing violence and maintain food practices that connect them to their lands and their cultural heritage.

    Similarly, Indigenous nations and communities across Canada have used food as a form of resurgence. Alongside land back movements, efforts to revitalize Indigenous food systems — such as hunting, fishing, growing and gathering — are central to movements for Indigenous sovereignty.

    Learning about and enacting traditional food practices are important acts of resistance, as these practices sustain communities, strengthen connections to land and assert rights over the unceded territories Indigenous Peoples are fighting to reclaim. By reclaiming and rebuilding their land and food systems on their own terms, they continue to challenge colonial structures.

    Food, colonialism and resistance

    The destruction of food systems in Gaza and Canada is part of a larger effort of land dispossession and capitalist accumulation. By severing Indigenous Peoples’ connection to their food systems, settlers and colonial regimes have sought to control not only the land but also the people who depend on it.

    Yet, through food sovereignty movements, these same populations are reclaiming their right to self-determination and building global networks of solidarity.




    Read more:
    Indigenous food sovereignty requires better and more accurate data collection


    The struggle for food sovereignty is inseparable from broader struggles for land, justice and self-determination.

    Connecting the dots between the Palestinian territories and Canada provides powerful examples of global colonial relations and struggles for justice and self-determination. It challenges us to critically examine the role of food in these struggles and demand government accountability.


    We wish to acknowledge Mustafa Koç, professor emeritus at Toronto Metropolitan University, as a co-author and to thank Max Ajl, Yafa Al Masri and Justin Podur for contributions to this article.

    Charles Z. Levkoe receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the the Government of Ontario.

    Sarah Rotz receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

    Tammara Soma receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

    Martha Stiegman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Colonialism, starvation and resistance: How food is weaponized, from Gaza to Canada – https://theconversation.com/colonialism-starvation-and-resistance-how-food-is-weaponized-from-gaza-to-canada-241525

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General James Leads Multistate Coalition Backing National Ban on Price Gouging

    Source: US State of New York

    NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a coalition of 15 attorneys general urging Congressional leaders to support a ban on price gouging at the national level. While over 40 states ban price gouging, there is no federal law preventing businesses from raising prices to increase their profits on essential goods during an emergency. In a letter to Congressional leaders, Attorney General James and the coalition argued that a national ban on price gouging would give the federal government the power to crack down on price gouging that cannot be stopped by a single state, and allow states and the federal government to work together to stop illegal price gouging in national supply chains. 

    “Businesses should never be able to hike prices during an emergency just to increase their profits,” said Attorney General James. “When companies take advantage of major disruptions and raise prices of food and supplies that New Yorkers rely on, my office holds them accountable, getting people their money back and protecting their wallets. Our federal government should have the same power to protect Americans when disaster strikes and stop price gouging at the national level that threatens both hardworking families and small businesses.” 

    Bans on price gouging let businesses raise prices to cover costs but prevent them from raising prices further solely to increase their profits during an emergency. Attorney General James and the coalition argue in their letter that prohibiting price gouging benefits both consumers and businesses. First, it encourages much-needed production at critical times by only allowing businesses to make more money by selling more products, instead of by raising prices. Second, it prevents businesses from risking long-term harm and reputational damage by overreacting in an emergency and setting prices too high. Third, it discourages hoarding in an emergency, since rising prices can prompt customers to over-buy. Fourth, price gouging bans protect consumers from monopolists who can raise prices without worrying about consumers’ reactions or being undercut by a competitor. 

    The COVID-19 pandemic and the onset of war in Ukraine disrupted supply chains at the national level, creating opportunities for price gouging that were sometimes out of reach from individual states. Attorney General James and the coalition argue in their letter that a federal ban would complement states’ anti-price gouging measures to help stop price gouging at the national level. 

    As Attorney General James and the coalition note, attorneys general have successfully stopped price gouging at the state level, demonstrating a clear need for national enforcement to complement these efforts. In New York, Attorney General James has secured decisive settlements with companies for illegally raising prices during emergencies, including the COVID-19 pandemic. In March and April 2024, Attorney General James distributed over 9,500 cans of baby formula in Buffalo and New York City as part of a settlement with Walgreens for illegally raising prices of baby formula during the 2022 shortage. In May 2023, Attorney General James recovered $100,000 from Quality King for price gouging Lysol products at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. In April 2021, Attorney General James secured 1.2 million eggs for New Yorkers from Hillandale Farms Corporation as part of a settlement resolving a lawsuit brought by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) in August 2020 for illegally gouging egg prices in the early months of the pandemic. 

    In March 2023, Attorney General James proposed new rules to protect consumers and small businesses by making it easier for OAG to investigate and combat price gouging. Throughout the pandemic, during major disruptions, and ahead of recent declared disasters, Attorney General James has issued consumer warnings against price gouging on essential supplies.

    Joining Attorney General James in sending the letter to Congress are the attorneys general of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and the District of Columbia.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Nick Bosa’s MAGA hat vs. Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling: Will the NFL reveal a double standard?

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Noah Eliot Vanderhoeven, PhD Candidate, Political Science, Western University

    After the San Francisco 49ers won its Oct. 27 National Football League game against the Dallas Cowboys, their star defensive lineman Nick Bosa, appeared in a post-game media segment wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat in violation of the league’s uniform rules.

    The NFL has avoided overt political messages since former 49er Colin Kaepernick’s anthem protests against police brutality against Black Americans. But what are the implications of a white player displaying an overt political message right before the United States presidential election?

    Kaepernick received heavy media scrutiny and was very quickly exiled from the NFL for his protest and the apparent “distraction” it created. The power of the backlash Kaepernick faced was surprising, given that Democrats and Republicans are just as likely to be avid sports fans, with no meaningful differences in the strength of their fandom.

    However, Republican sports fans tend to be more vocal about what causes should receive representation in sport spaces and make these judgments based on greater support for individualism and the military. That means there’s little evidence to support the argument that Americans want sports and politics to remain separate.

    Nevertheless, support for conservative causes in sports spaces are generally accepted while progressive causes face strong resistance.




    Read more:
    How professional sports leagues that embrace social justice causes could influence politics


    Limits on social justice stances

    For example, the NFL was slow to adopt anti-racism messaging following the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May 2020 by a police officer ultimately convicted of murder.

    Players initially felt they were being silenced by proposed league rules preventing players from kneeling during the national anthem. Eventually, the NFL agreed to allow players to feature social justice statements on the backs of their helmets. But this only came about after pushback from Black players, and they were limited to one of six pre-approved statements.

    Generally, the NFL has preferred to support non-partisan political messaging. One example is “get out the vote” initiatives. That has not changed in the lead-up to the 2024 election, as teams have been holding voter registration sessions and featuring the word “vote” prominently in their end zones.

    Bosa’s actions, however, were certainly partisan and constitute athlete activism, regardless of whether he wants to discuss his views any further.

    Previous acts of protest

    Donald Trump’s second candidacy to become president, and the re-emergence of a vocal white ethno-nationalist voice in American politics, has seemingly motivated the demand for agency and fuelled new activism by predominantly Black athletes. Bosa, in the meantime, has used his platform via the NFL to support Trump.

    The literature covering the intersection of sport and politics has mainly focused on individual acts of protest and nationalism. One prominent example are the protests by American sprinters John Carlos and Tommie Smith during the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City.




    Read more:
    The Olympics are ‘on the wrong side of history’ when it comes to free speech


    U.S. athletes Tommie Smith, centre, and John Carlos extend gloved hands skyward in racial protest during the playing of national anthem at the 1968 Olympics.
    (AP Photo)

    Their raised fists while on the medal podium were met with resistance and disapproval, with some commentators at the time arguing their protest was unnecessary and petty. Still today, many believe sport is an improper venue for political messaging.

    In turn, Kaepernick’s protest against police brutality and historic inequalities was seen as unpatriotic, and faced significant criticism.

    Will Bosa face a similar backlash? It seems highly unlikely, especially since Bosa’s support for Trump will probably be framed as patriotic due to the former president’s populist rhetoric about returning America to greatness.

    Double standard?

    The severe backlash against Kaepernick’s protest was driven by conservatives and centred on perceived disrespect for the military and the American flag. Those same conservatives are likely to defend Bosa’s actions, and will probably argue his hat was an expression of his First Amendment rights if the NFL takes serious action against him.

    Former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick (7) and outside linebacker Eli Harold (58) kneel during the playing of the national anthem before an NFL football game against the Atlanta Falcons in Atlanta.
    (AP Photo/John Bazemore)

    But when Bosa donned a piece of campaign merchandise on national television a little over a week out from a contentious presidential election, it was overtly political — arguably just as overtly political as taking a knee during the national anthem.

    At the moment, given the NFL’s lack of action against him, Bosa seems to be benefitting from a double standard when it comes to the intersection of sports and politics.

    It doesn’t appear Bosa is going to be suspended or miss any games for his actions. The NFL has until Saturday to announce any consequences for him, and it’s likely he’ll be fined up to US$11,000 for violating the NFL’s uniform rules by wearing unauthorized logos or branding.

    But that fine is probably the full extent of the repercussions Bosa will face, and $11,000 is a bargain for a national television advertisement when the Trump campaign is already spending tens of millions of dollars on advertising.

    ‘Stick to sports’

    Furthermore, Bosa is unlikely to face the kind of dehumanization faced by progressive activist athletes that misappropriates their cause and fuels hostility towards them. When athletes protest in support of social causes, they often see their job market and marketing profile take a hit.

    This is another example that shows when conservatives say athletes should “stick to sports” or “shut up and dribble,” they don’t actually want politics out of sports entirely.

    Rather, they don’t want to see political views they oppose being platformed in professional sports spaces.

    If they agree with the politics, sporting events are seemingly just another stop on the campaign trail.

    Noah Eliot Vanderhoeven does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Nick Bosa’s MAGA hat vs. Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling: Will the NFL reveal a double standard? – https://theconversation.com/nick-bosas-maga-hat-vs-colin-kaepernicks-kneeling-will-the-nfl-reveal-a-double-standard-242468

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Disastrous budget for farming families

    Source: Traditional Unionist Voice – Northern Ireland

    Statement by TUV vice chairman and East Londonderry representative Councillor Allister Kyle:

    “Every agricultural business with assets, in buildings and land, over £1m will be hit further with 20% inheritance tax. Livestock and equipment were already taken into account for inheritance tax.

    “£1m sounds like a lot of money, which it is, but with the Northern Ireland average farm size being 41 hectares (101 acres), if ground was valued at £12k per acre and a farmyard and house valued at £400k, this would leave a tax bill of around £100k, on top of the livestock and equipment values.

    “One needs to remember that land is not tax deductible when being purchased. Therefore, if a farmer purchases land he pays tax. When his son or daughter inherits the farm, tax will be paid on the same land again. That is perverse.

    “Many farmers will be forced to sell ground to clear this new tax bill which will then also trigger possible capital gains tax to be paid on the level that ground may have increased in value since the time it was bought.

    “Currently 36% of farmers in Northern Ireland are 65 or over.

    “When will the nation and its politicians start to respect those who put food on our tables?

    “The agricultural sector isn’t generally a cash rich business, most profits are usually re-invested in ground, farmyards or equipment to have a lasting legacy for future generations to keep on stewarding the land, caring for livestock and keeping us fed.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Empowered Committee for Animal Health Reviews Advancements Made in India’s Animal Health Sector

    Source: Government of India

    Empowered Committee for Animal Health Reviews Advancements Made in India’s Animal Health Sector

    Mock Drill Planned to Enhance Operational Readiness for Animal Disease Responses in the Country

    Posted On: 30 OCT 2024 9:41PM by PIB Delhi

    The 8th meeting of the Empowered Committee for Animal Health (ECAH) of the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying (DAHD) was held on October 28, 2024, under the chairmanship of Prof. Ajay Kumar Sood, Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India, and vice-chaired by Mrs. Alka Upadhyaya, Secretary, DAHD, at Vigyan Bhawan.

    The representatives of Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Department of Biotechnology (DBT) etc. were present as a member to discuss advancements in India’s animal health sector.

    During the meeting, the department highlighted the efforts and the achievements made so far in regulatory streamlining of animal drugs, vaccines, biologicals, and feed additives. The department also reported significant progress made in various on-going vaccination programs for livestock diseases such as Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD), Brucellosis, Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR), and Classical Swine Fever (CSF) that is receiving 100% central funding under the Livestock Health & Disease Control Program (LH&DCP). Notably, all these vaccines are developed indigenously and manufactured domestically, demonstrating India’s commitment to self-sufficiency and global cooperation in animal health. Furthermore, the Principal Scientific Advisor was also briefed about the progress made on the National Digital Livestock Mission (NDLM), that aims to digitally identify and register all livestock and animal husbandry activities, including vaccination, breeding, and treatment in the country. The digital platform is currently handling over 16 transactions every second, showcasing the program’s extensive reach and efficiency.

    Under the One Health Mission, the department will soon conduct a mock drill focused on animal disease response to improve operational readiness for disease management. Prof. Ajay Kumar Sood also lauded the launch of the $25 million G -20 Pandemic Fund Project recently along with The Standard Veterinary Treatment Guidelines (SVTG) and the Crisis Management Plan (CMP) for Animal Diseases. The Pandemic Fund Project aims to fortify laboratory capacities, enhanced disease surveillance and strengthen human resource to bolster resilience in animal health systems in the country.

     The ECAH also deliberated upon the recently released Poultry Disease Action Plan that lays emphasis on proactive disease management through biosecurity measures, enhanced surveillance, and vaccination protocols, thereby safeguarding both poultry population and public health in India. In response to the High Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) outbreaks in Kerala in the past, the department has developed a comprehensive strategy to control and contain the disease spread, preventing significant public health hazards. It was informed, during the meeting that Compensation rates for forced culling of poultry  were revised and communicated to all states and UTs during the month of September by the department.

    It was also highlighted that World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) has recently recognized ICAR-NIVEDI, Bangalore for PPR and Leptospirosis as WOAH Reference Laboratories in India. Previously, ICAR-NIHSAD, Bhopal (for Avian Influenza) and KVFSU, Bangalore (for Rabies) have already been given this recognition highlighting DAHD’s continued commitment to enhancing animal health.

    Empowered Committee on Animal Health

    Established in 2021, ECAH serves as DAHD’s think tank, providing evidence-based insights and policy recommendations on national health programs, emerging disease threats, One Health initiatives, and regulatory frameworks for veterinary vaccines, drugs, and biological.

    ****

    AA

    (Release ID: 2069742) Visitor Counter : 32

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Some reports published in media mentioning shortage of DAP in Punjab to affect prospects of Rabi crop are misleading, misplaced and devoid of factual position

    Source: Government of India

    Some reports published in media mentioning shortage of DAP in Punjab to affect prospects of Rabi crop are misleading, misplaced and devoid of factual position

    In Oct-2024 (upto 29.10.24), 92,000 MT of DAP, 18,000 MT of NPKs and 9,000 MT of SSP have been supplied to Punjab by the Centre

     About 90,000 MT of DAP, 49,000 MT of NPK and 76,000 MT of SSP are available in the state for farmers at present

    Government of India to dispatch about 50,000 MT of DAP in first week of Nov-2024

    Domestic production of DAP and NPK is at an optimum level

    Government of India has maintained stable fertilizer prices (₹1350 for a 50 kg bag) through two back-to-back cabinet decisions, ensuring affordability for farmers

    Posted On: 30 OCT 2024 8:31PM by PIB Delhi

    Some reports published in the media recently claiming shortage of Di-ammonium Phosphate (DAP) in Punjab and its resultant effect on prospects of Rabi crop are misleading, misplaced and devoid of factual position.

    It is clarified that the Government has already provided sufficient quantities of the DAP and Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium (NPK) Fertilizers to the state of Punjab to ensure the adequate availability of the Phosphorus & Potassium (P&K) fertilizers.

    It may be noted that at the beginning of October-2024, 99,000 Metric tonnes (MTs) of DAP, 59,000 MTs of NPKs and 78,000 MT of Single Superphosphate (SSP) fertilizer was available in the stock of the state. Further, in Oct-2024 (upto 29.10.24), 92,000 MT of DAP, 18,000 MT of NPKs and 9,000 MT of SSP have been supplied to the state by the Department of Fertilizers, Government of India. Thus, in Oct-24 (upto 29.10.24), Department has ensured total availability of 1,91,000 MT of DAP, 77,000 MT of NPKs and 87,000 MT of SSP.

    As per data in Oct-2024 (upto 29.10.2024), 1,00,000 MT of DAP, 28,000 MT of NPKs and 12,000 MT of SSP have been consumed in the state for Rabi-2024-25 cropping season. Thus, at present about 90,000 MT of DAP, 49,000 MT of NPK and 76,000 MT of SSP are available in the state for farmers and the Department of Fertilizers is dispatching about 50,000 MT of DAP in the first week of Nov-2024.

    It may be noted that the department of fertilizers, Government of India in coordination with the State Agriculture Department has ensured comfortable availability of fertilizers in the country during the Kharif 2024 Season.

    Recently, the import of DAP got affected due to the Red Sea crisis, ongoing since January, which has resulted in fertilizer ships to reroute an additional distance of 6500 km via the Cape of Good Hope. Despite these challenges, the Government of India has maintained stable fertilizer prices (₹1350 for a 50 kg bag) through two back-to-back cabinet decisions, ensuring affordability for farmers.

    Further it is clarified that the domestic production of DAP and NPK is running at optimum level. The department is continuously monitoring state requirements and import flows to manage the situation effectively. Situation is being monitored very closely through effective coordination with M/o Railways, State Government, Port Authorities & Fertilizer Companies.

    *****

    MV/AKS

    (Release ID: 2069712) Visitor Counter : 19

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Paddy Procurement in full swing in the Food bowl of India

    Source: Government of India (2)

    Paddy Procurement in full swing in the Food bowl of India

    Center committed to achieve procurement targets and not a single grain will be left unprocured

    Posted On: 30 OCT 2024 6:52PM by PIB Delhi

    Punjab/ Haryana Procurement Estimates- KMS 2024-25

    Punjab and Haryana are the food bowls of our country and like every year 185 LMT and 60 LMT of paddy is estimated to be procured from these two states respectivelyduring KMS 2024-25. These two States account for almost 40 percent of Central Pool procurement. The procurement operations are ongoing in full swing in both the States. Though the procurement of paddy commenced on October 1, 2024 in Punjab and on September 27, 2024 in Haryana, due to heavy rainfall in September and the resultant higher moisture content in paddy, the harvesting and procurement were delayed.However, despite a late start, both the states are well on track to achieve the estimates of paddy procurement by stipulated datesi.e November 30th2024 for Punjab and November 15th for Haryana.

    Procurement operations

    Till date 10 lakh farmers in Punjab and 4.06 lakh farmers in Haryana have registered to sell their produce in KMS 2024-25. In Haryana 45 LMT of Paddy has been procured till 29th October, 2024 which is 87 % of 52 LMT procured till 29th October, 2023. In Punjab 67 LMT of Paddy has been procured till 29th October, 2024 which is 80% of the quantity of 84 LMT procured last year on the same date. Compared to the previous year, the procurement of paddy in Haryana and Punjab is similar compared to the pan-India procurement in percentage terms, by 29th Oct 2024.

    Facilitation of Rice Millers

    Like every year, rice millers are on boarded by the State government for the milling operations. Out of 4400 millers who applied for delivery of Custom Milled Rice (CMR), work has been allotted to 3850 millers by the state government of Punjab by Oct 29th, 2024. Further, in Haryana, 1452 millers applied for delivery of CMR and work has been allotted to 1319 millers by the state government. Every day on an average, around 4 LMT of Paddy is being lifted from the Punjab Mand is which indicates that the remaining estimate of 118 LMT of paddy will be smoothly achieved by November 30th, 2024.Similarly,in case of Haryana, the remaining estimate of 15 LMT shall be easily achievedby 15th Nov, 2024 keeping in view the average lifting of paddy of appx 1.5 LMT per day.Procurement of Paddy in Kaithal and Kurukshetra districts, including mandis at Dhand and Pundri, is in full swing and almost at the level of last year’s procurement figures.

    With the specific aim of facilitating Rice millers, an app based FCI Grievance Redressal System (FCI GRS) for Rice Millers has been launched on 28th October 2024 by the Union Minister of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution. This will facilitate rice millers in getting their grievances addressed by the FCI in an efficient, transparent and time bound manner.

    MSP Regime Strengthened

    Union Government is committed to ensure that the benefit of MSP regime is smoothly realized by all the farmers. The MSP of paddy has increased from Rs 1310/Qtl in 2013-14 to Rs 2300/Qtl in 2023-24. Since 2018-19, MSP has been assured with a return of at least 50% over all-India weighted average cost of production. As on 29th Oct, 2024, an amount of Rs 13211 crore has been released to350961 farmers in Punjab and an amount of Rs 10529crore has been released to 275261 farmers in Haryana for KMS 2024-25. The amount is being credited to the bank accounts of the farmers through DBT within 48 hours of procurement. The entire procurement operations have been digitized to improve efficiency, transparency and accountability which reflects the commitment of the Union Government to further strengthen the MSP regime.

    Record Budgetary Allocation

    The budgetary allocation and release for food subsidy has increased to more than four times in the last ten years than the preceding ten years. Around 21.56 lakh Crores has been spent on food subsidy during 2014-15 to 2023-24 as compared to around 5.15 lakh Crores during 2004-05 to 2013-14. During the COVID period, the fund allocation towards food subsidy was increased substantially due to 5Kg of additional food grains made available to each NFSA beneficiary free of cost, which continued till December 2022.  Since 1.1.2023, the Central Issue Price (CIP) has been made zero keeping in view welfare of the poor and vulnerable sections of the society and ensuring uniformity in the entire country. AAY households and PHH beneficiaries are being provided foodgrains free of cost under PMGKAY from 01.01.2023.

    The Union Government is committed to procure the estimated target of 185 LMT and 60 LMT of Paddy in Punjab and Haryana respectively, and not a single grain shall be left unprocured.

    *******

     

    AD/AM

    (Release ID: 2069653) Visitor Counter : 85

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI USA: The Marshall Star for October 30, 2024

    Source: NASA

    Editor’s Note: Starting Nov. 4, the Office of Communications at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center will no longer publish the Marshall Star on nasa.gov. The last public issue will be Oct. 30. To continue reading Marshall news, visit nasa.gov/marshall.

    Blake Stewart, lead of the Thrust Vector Control Test Laboratory inside Building 4205 at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, explains how his team tests the mechanisms that steer engine and booster nozzles of NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket to a group of Marshall team members Oct. 24. The employees were some of the more than 500 team members who viewed progress toward future Artemis flights on bus tours offered by the SLS Program. Building 4205 is also home to the Propulsion Research and Development Laboratory that includes 26 world-class labs and support areas that help the agency’s ambitious goals for space exploration. The Software Integration Lab and the Software Integration Test Facility are among the labs inside supporting SLS that employees visited on the tour. (NASA/Sam Lott)

    A group of Marshall team members gather below the development test article for the universal stage adapter that will be used on the second variant of SLS, called Block 1B. The universal stage adapter is located inside one of the high bays in building 4619. The universal stage adapter will connect the Orion spacecraft to the SLS exploration upper stage. With the exploration upper stage, which will be powered by four RL10-C3 engines, SLS will be capable of lifting more than 105 metric tons (231,000 pounds) from Earth’s surface. This extra mass capability enables SLS to send multiple large payloads to the Moon on the same launch. (NASA/Sam Lott)

    Marshall team members view the Orion Stage Adapters for the Artemis II and Artemis III test flights inside Building 4708. The Orion Stage Adapter, built at Marshall, connects the rocket’s interim cryogenic propulsion stage to the Orion spacecraft. The Orion Stage Adapter for Artemis II is complete and ready to be shipped to Kennedy Space Center. The Oct. 24 tours featured four stops that also included opportunities to see the Artemis III launch vehicle stage adapter, and the development test article for the SLS Block 1B universal stage adapter that will begin flying on Artemis IV. Additionally, programs and offices such as the Human Landing Systems Development Office and the Science and Technology Office hosted exhibits in the lobby of Building 4220, where employees gathered for the tours. (NASA/Jonathan Deal)
    › Back to Top

    By Serena Whitfield
    In conjunction with National Disability Employment Awareness Month, NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center held anagencywide virtual event hosted by the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity on Oct. 24.
    Marshall team members watched the Webex event in Building 4221.

    In alignment with the month’s national theme, “Access to Good Jobs for All,” the program highlighted the perspectives of people with disabilities in the workplace as they navigate the work lifecycle – from applying, to onboarding, career growth and advancement, and day-to-day engagements.
    The event began with Marshall Associate Director Roger Baird welcoming NASA team members.
    “NASA is dedicated to inclusive hiring practices and providing pathways for good jobs and career success for all employees, including workers with disabilities,” Baird said. “Some ways we do this is through targeted recruitment of qualified individuals with disabilities through accessible vacancy announcements, outreach to students with disabilities, and community partnerships.”
    NASA also utilizes Schedule A Authority, a non-competitive Direct Hiring Authority to hire people with disabilities without competition.
    Baird introduced event moderator Joyce Meier, logistics manager at Marshall, who welcomed panelists Casey Denham, Kathy Clark, Paul Spann, and Paul Sullivan, all NASA team members. The panelists from the disability community discussed their work lifecycles, lessons learned in the workplace, and shared a demonstration on colorblindness and its impact.
    Denham discussed some of the best practices for onboarding employees with neurodiversity, a term used to describe people whose brains develop or work differently than the typical brain.

    Clark talked about what can be done to continue raising awareness and advocating for disability rights. She said NASA empowers its workforce with knowledge so they can be informed allies to team members with disabilities and foster a safe and inclusive working environment. 
    Spann gave insight into practical steps employers can take to accommodate candidates with deafness, and Sullivan spoke about some key considerations NASA managers should keep in mind to make the job application process more accessible to candidates with low vision.
    Guest speaker Chip Dobbs, supply management specialist at Marshall, talked about his personal experiences with being deaf. Dobbs has worked at NASA for 29 years and said he has never let his disability hold him back, but instead uses it as a gateway to inspire and connect with others.
    The event ended with closing remarks from Tora Henry, director of the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity at Marshall. The virtual event placed importance on planning for NASA’s future by promoting equality and addressing the barriers people with disabilities face in the workplace. 
    “As we celebrate National Disability Employment Awareness Month, keep in mind that NASA’s mission of exploring the unknown and pushing the boundaries of human potential requires the contributions of every mind, skill set, and perspective,” Baird said. “Our commitment to inclusivity ensures that no talent goes untapped, and no idea goes unheard because together, we’re not just reaching for the stars, we’re showing the world what’s possible when everyone has a seat at the table.”
    A recording of the event is available here. Learn more about NASA’s agencywide resources for individuals with disabilities as well as the agency’s Disability Employment Program.
    Whitfield is an intern supporting the Marshall Office of Communications.
    › Back to Top

    By Wayne Smith
    Farley Davis, manager of the Environmental Engineering and Occupational Health Office at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, has received a 2024 Blue Marble Award from the agency.
    NASA’s Office of Strategic Infrastructure, Environmental Management Division presented the 2024 Blue Marble Awards on Oct. 8 at the agency’s Johnson Space Center. The Blue Marble Awards Program recognizes teams and individuals demonstrating exceptional environmental leadership in support of NASA’s missions and goals. In 2024, the awards included five categories: the Director’s Award, Environmental Quality, Excellence in Energy and Water Management, Excellence in Resilience or Climate Change Adaptation, and new this year: Excellence in Site Remediation. 

    Davis was recognized for “exceptional leadership and outstanding commitment above and beyond individual job responsibilities, to assist Marshall and the agency in enabling environmentally sound mission success.”
    “The award was unexpected, and I am very thankful to receive the Environmental Management Director’s Blue Marble Award,” said Davis, who has been at Marshall for 33 years. “Collectively, Marshall’s environmental engineering team has made this award possible with their diligent support for many years keeping the center’s environmental compliance at the forefront. I will cherish the award for the rest of my life.”
    June Malone, director of the Office of Center Operations at Marshall, credited Davis for his environmental leadership and mentoring team members.
    “Farley’s attitude of professionalism and personal responsibility for the development and implementation of well-grounded environmental programs has increased Marshall’s sustainability and prevented pollution,” Malone said. “His tireless leadership has resulted in compliance with federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations, and his creative solution-oriented approaches to environmental stewardship have restored contaminated areas.”
    Charlotte Bertrand, director of the Environmental Management Division at NASA Headquarters, said it was an honor to select Davis for the 2024 Blue Marble Director’s Award.
    “Farley’s incredibly distinguished career with NASA reflects the award’s intention to recognize exceptional leadership by an individual in assisting the agency in enabling environmentally sound mission success,” Bertrand said.
    Please see the awards program for additional information.
    Smith, a Media Fusion employee and the Marshall Star editor, supports the Marshall Office of Communications.
    › Back to Top

    By Wayne Smith
    When human exploration of Mars becomes a reality and more than just the stuff of science fiction, Brooke Rhodes will be eager to investigate what astronauts discover on the Red Planet.
    From listening to her talk about her work as an engineer at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, it’s easy to grasp her excitement about the future of human space exploration and NASA’s Moon to Mars architecture.

    “I can’t wait for the Mars rovers to have some human company,” said Rhodes, who recently began a detail as the chief of Marshall’s Avionics and Software Ground Systems Test Branch. “I need to know if we can grow Mark Watney (of The Martian movie fame) quantities of potatoes up there. Everything we do to prepare to return humans to the Moon and establish a presence in deep space is building toward putting boots on Mars. It’s an honor and a privilege to be even a small part of it.”
    Rhodes also appreciates the responsibility she takes on in any form in NASA’s exploration missions to benefit humanity. After all, she has worked on hardware for the International Space Station and has had supporting roles for the Mars Ascent Vehicle and Artemis missions.
    “We at Marshall hold an incredible amount of responsibility: responsibility for the welfare of the crew on the space station, responsibility for the welfare of the crew on the Artemis missions, and even the welfare of humanity through the responsibility we have for science on the station and elsewhere,” said Rhodes, who is from Petal, Mississippi, and has worked at Marshall for seven years. “When your missions are as critical as ours, it’s nearly impossible to not be motivated.”
    Now, on to Mars.
    Question: What is your position and what are your primary responsibilities?
    Rhodes: I recently began the detail as the branch chief of the Avionics and Software Ground Systems Test Branch, ES53. Our branch is primarily responsible for the development of hardware-in-the-loop and software development facilities for the Artemis and MAV (Mars Ascent Vehicle) missions. My home organization is ES61, the Instrument Development, Integration and Test Branch, where I’ve been responsible for the integration and testing of International Space Station payloads for the past several years.

    Question: What has been the proudest moment of your career and why?
    Rhodes: One really cool moment that sticks out was the first time I saw hardware I had been responsible for being used in space. I spent several years as the integration and test lead of the Materials Science Research Rack (MSRR) Sample Cartridge Assemblies (SCAs) and we shipped our first batch of SCAs to the space station in 2018. That shipment was the culmination of years of intense effort and teamwork, so to see them onboard and about to enable materials science was an incredible feeling. There was a moment in particular that felt a bit surreal: prior to our SCA shipment the crew discovered they were missing a couple of fasteners from the onboard furnace, so we had those shipped to us from Europe and I packed them into the SCA flight foam before they shipped to the launch site. The next time I saw those fasteners they were being held up to a camera by one of the crew members, asking if those were the ones they needed for the furnace. Putting fasteners into foam didn’t take much effort, but what it represented was much bigger: being a small part of an international effort to enable science off the Earth, for the Earth, was an incredible moment I’ll carry with me for the rest of my career.
    Question: Who or what inspired you to pursue an education/career that led you to NASA and Marshall?
    Rhodes: I had a couple of lightbulb moments my junior year of high school that eventually set me on my current career path. I very specifically recall sitting in my physics I class and learning how to calculate the planetary motion of Jupiter and thinking I had never learned about anything cooler. Even then, though, NASA didn’t really enter my thoughts. Growing up, working for NASA didn’t even occur to me as something people could actually do – being a “rocket scientist” was just an abstract concept people threw around to indicate something was difficult.
    That changed later when the same teacher who had been teaching us planetary motion took us on a field trip to Kennedy Space Center. The tour guide showing us around the Vehicle Assembly Building was a young employee who said he had majored in aerospace engineering at the University of Tennessee. That was the second lightbulb moment: here was a young person from the Southeast, just like me, who had done something tangible in order to work for NASA. That seemed easy enough, so I decided to major in aerospace engineering at Mississippi State and one day work for NASA. That turned out to not be easy, but definitely doable.
    While at Mississippi State, I was able to complete three NASA internships, one at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and two at Marshall. Eventually, I was hired on full-time at NASA’s Johnson Space Center, but wound up making my way back to Marshall, where I’ve been ever since. There’s no place on the planet better for enthusiasts of both aerospace engineering and football.

    Interestingly, my physics I teacher’s name was Mrs. Rhodes, and I used to joke with my classmates that I wanted to be Mrs. Rhodes when I grew up. I didn’t actually mean that literally, but then I married Matthew Rhodes and did, indeed, become Mrs. Rhodes.
    Question: What advice do you have for employees early in their NASA career or those in new leadership roles?
    Rhodes: Scary is good. If you aren’t stepping out of your comfort zone you probably aren’t growing, and if you’re experiencing imposter syndrome, you’re probably the right person for the job.
    Question: What do you enjoy doing with your time while away from work?
    Rhodes: While away from work I tend to invest too much of my mental wellbeing into football. To recover from the stresses of work and my football teams being terrible, I like to explore National Parks. The U.S. has some of the most diverse scenery anywhere in the world, and I love getting outside and exploring it.
    Smith, a Media Fusion employee and the Marshall Star editor, supports the Marshall Office of Communications.
    › Back to Top

    Most stars form in collections, called clusters or associations, that include very massive stars. These giant stars send out large amounts of high-energy radiation, which can disrupt relatively fragile disks of dust and gas that are in the process of coalescing to form new planets.
    A team of astronomers used NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, in combination with ultraviolet, optical, and infrared data, to show where some of the most treacherous places in a star cluster may be, where planets’ chances to form are diminished.

    The target of the observations was Cygnus OB2, which is the nearest large cluster of stars to our Sun – at a distance of about 4,600 light-years. The cluster contains hundreds of massive stars as well as thousands of lower-mass stars. The team used long Chandra observations pointing at different regions of Cygnus OB2, and the resulting set of images were then stitched together into one large image.
    The deep Chandra observations mapped out the diffuse X-ray glow in between the stars, and they also provided an inventory of the young stars in the cluster. This inventory was combined with others using optical and infrared data to create the best census of young stars in the cluster.
    In a new composite image, the Chandra data (purple) shows the diffuse X-ray emission and young stars in Cygnus OB2, and infrared data from NASA’s now-retired Spitzer Space Telescope (red, green, blue, and cyan) reveals young stars and the cooler dust and gas throughout the region.
    In these crowded stellar environments, copious amounts of high-energy radiation produced by stars and planets are present. Together, X-rays and intense ultraviolet light can have a devastating impact on planetary disks and systems in the process of forming.
    Planet-forming disks around stars naturally fade away over time. Some of the disk falls onto the star and some is heated up by X-ray and ultraviolet radiation from the star and evaporates in a wind. The latter process, known as “photoevaporation,” usually takes between five and 10 million years with average-sized stars before the disk disappears. If massive stars, which produce the most X-ray and ultraviolet radiation, are nearby, this process can be accelerated.
    The researchers using this data found clear evidence that planet-forming disks around stars indeed disappear much faster when they are close to massive stars producing a lot of high-energy radiation. The disks also disappear more quickly in regions where the stars are more closely packed together.
    For regions of Cygnus OB2 with less high-energy radiation and lower numbers of stars, the fraction of young stars with disks is about 40%. For regions with more high-energy radiation and higher numbers of stars, the fraction is about 18%. The strongest effect – meaning the worst place to be for a would-be planetary system – is within about 1.6 light-years of the most massive stars in the cluster.
    A separate study by the same team examined the properties of the diffuse X-ray emission in the cluster. They found that the higher-energy diffuse emission comes from areas where winds of gas blowing away from massive stars have collided with each other. This causes the gas to become hotter and produce X-rays. The less energetic emission probably comes from gas in the cluster colliding with gas surrounding the cluster.
    Two separate papers describing the Chandra data of Cygnus OB2 are available. The paper about the planetary danger zones, led by Mario Giuseppe Guarcello (National Institute for Astrophysics in Palermo, Italy), appeared in the November 2023 issue of the Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, and is available here. The paper about the diffuse emission, led by Juan Facundo Albacete-Colombo (University of Rio Negro in Argentina) was published in the same issue of Astrophysical Journal Supplement, and is available here.
    NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center manages the Chandra program. The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory’s Chandra X-ray Center controls science operations from Cambridge, Massachusetts, and flight operations from Burlington, Massachusetts.
    NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) managed the Spitzer Space Telescope mission for the agency’s Science Mission Directorate until the mission was retired in January 2020. Science operations were conducted at the Spitzer Science Center at Caltech. Spacecraft operations were based at Lockheed Martin Space in Littleton, Colorado. Data are archived at the Infrared Science Archive operated by IPAC at Caltech. Caltech manages JPL for NASA.
    › Back to Top

    NASA recently evaluated initial flight data and imagery from Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator-4 (PTD-4), confirming proper checkout of the spacecraft’s systems including its on-board electronics as well as the payload’s support systems such as the small onboard camera. Shown is a test image of Earth taken by the payload camera, shortly after PTD-4 reached orbit. This camera will continue photographing the technology demonstration during the mission. 

    Payload operations are now underway for the primary objective of the PTD-4 mission – the demonstration of a new power and communications technology for future spacecraft. The payload, a deployable solar array with an integrated antenna called the Lightweight Integrated Solar Array and anTenna, or LISA-T, has initiated deployment of its central boom structure. The boom supports four solar power and communication arrays, also called petals. Releasing the central boom pushes the still-stowed petals nearly three feet away from the spacecraft bus. The mission team currently is working through an initial challenge to get LISA-T’s central boom to fully extend before unfolding the petals and beginning its power generation and communication operations.
    Small spacecraft on deep space missions require more electrical power than what is currently offered by existing technology. The four-petal solar array of LISA-T is a thin-film solar array that offers lower mass, lower stowed volume, and three times more power per mass and volume allocation than current solar arrays. The in-orbit technology demonstration includes deployment, operation, and environmental survivability of the thin-film solar array.  
    “The LISA-T experiment is an opportunity for NASA and the small spacecraft community to advance the packaging, deployment, and operation of thin-film, fully flexible solar and antenna arrays in space. The thin-film arrays will vastly improve power generation and communication capabilities throughout many different mission applications,” said John Carr, deputy center chief technologist at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. “These capabilities are critical for achieving higher value science alongside the exploration of deep space with small spacecraft.”

    [embedded content]
    NASA teams are testing a key technology demonstration known as LISA-T, short for the Lightweight Integrated Solar Array and anTenna. It’s a super compact, stowable, thin-film solar array that when fully deployed in space, offers both a power generation and communication capability for small spacecraft. LISA-T’s orbital flight test is part of the Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator series of missions. (NASA)

    The Pathfinder Technology Demonstration series of missions leverages a commercial platform which serves to test innovative technologies to increase the capability of small spacecraft. Deploying LISA-T’s thin solar array in the harsh environment of space presents inherent challenges such as deploying large highly flexible non-metallic structures with high area to mass ratios. Performing experiments such as LISA-T on a smaller, lower-cost spacecraft allows NASA the opportunity to take manageable risk with high probability of great return. The LISA-T experiment aims to enable future deep space missions with the ability to acquire and communicate data through improved power generation and communication capabilities on the same integrated array.
    The PTD-4 small spacecraft is hosting the in-orbit technology demonstration called LISA-T. The PTD-4 spacecraft deployed into low Earth orbit from SpaceX’s Transporter-11 rocket, which launched from Space Launch Complex 4E at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California on Aug. 16. Marshall designed and built the LISA-T technology as well as LISA-T’s supporting avionics system. NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology program, based at NASA’s Ames Research Center and led by the agency’s Space Technology Mission Directorate, funds and manages the PTD-4 mission as well as the overall Pathfinder Technology Demonstration mission series. Terran Orbital Corporation of Irvine, California, developed and built the PTD-4 spacecraft bus, named Triumph.
    › Back to Top

    By Paola Pinto
    For more than two decades, the NASA Short-term Prediction Research and Transition Center (SPoRT) within the NASA Earth Science Office at Marshall Space Flight Center has been at the forefront of developing and maintaining decision-making tools for meteorological predictions.

    Jonathan Brazzell, a service hydrologist at the National Weather Service (NWS) office in Lake Charles, Louisiana, highlighted a recent example of SPoRT’s impact while he was doing forecasting for Texas streams.
    Brazzell, who manages the South Texas and South Louisiana regions, emphasized the practical applications and significant impacts of the Machine Learning model developed by NASA SPoRT to predict future stream heights, known as the SPoRT Streamflow A.I. During a heavy rainfall event this past spring, he noted the challenge of forecasting flooding beyond 48 hours. SPoRT has worked closely with the NWS offices to develop a machine learning tool capable of predicting river flooding beyond two days and powered by the SPoRT Land Information System.
    “Previously, we relied on actual gauge information and risk assessments based on predicted precipitation,” Brazzell said. “Now, with this machine learning, we have a modeling tool that provides a much-needed predictive capability.”
    During forecasted periods of heavy precipitation from early to mid-May, Brazzell monitored potential flooding events and their magnitude using NASA SPoRT’s Streamflow-AI, which provided essential support to the Pine Island Bayou and Big Cow Creek communities in south Texas.
    Streamflow A.I. enabled local authorities to provide advance notice, allowing residents to prepare adequately for the event. Due to the benefit of three to seven-day flood stage predictions, the accurate forecasts helped county officials decide on road closures and evacuation advisories; community officials advised residents to gather a seven-day supply of necessities and relocate their vehicles, minimizing disruption and potential damage.
    Brazzell highlighted specific instances where the machine learning outputs were critical. For example, during the event that peaked around May 6, Streamflow A.I. accurately predicted the rise in stream height, allowing for timely road closures and advisories. These predictions were shared with county officials and were pivotal in their decision-making process.

    Brazzell shared that integrating SPoRT’s machine learning capabilities with their existing tools, such as flood risk mapping, proved invaluable. Although the machine learning outputs had been operational for almost two years after Hurricane Harvey, this season has provided their first significant applications in real-time scenarios due to persistent conditions of below-normal precipitation and ongoing drought.
    He also mentioned the broader applications of Streamflow A.I., including its potential use in other sites beyond those currently being monitored. He expressed interest in expanding the use of machine learning stream height outputs to additional locations, citing the successful application in current sites as a compelling reason for broader implementation.
    NASA SPoRT users’ experiences emphasize how crucial advanced prediction technologies are in hydrometeorology and emergency management operations. Based on Brazzell’s example, it is reasonable to say that the product’s ability to provide accurate, timely data greatly improves decision-making processes and ensures public safety. The partnership between NASA SPoRT and operational agencies like NOAA/NWS and county response teams demonstrates how research and operations can be seamlessly integrated into everyday practices, making a tangible difference in communities vulnerable to high-impact events.
    As the Streamflow A.I. product continues to evolve and expand its applications, it holds significant promise for improving disaster preparedness and response efforts across various regions that experience different types of flooding events.
    The Streamflow-AI product provides a 7-day river height or stage forecasts at select gauges across the south/eastern U.S. You can find the SPoRT training item on Streamflow-AI here.
    Pinto is a research associate at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, specializing in communications and user engagement for NASA SPoRT.
    › Back to Top

    NASA has selected All Native Synergies Company of Winnebego, Nebraska, to provide custodial and refuse collection services at the agency’s Marshall Space Flight Center.

    The Custodial and Refuse Collection Services III contract is a firm-fixed-price contract with an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity provision. Its maximum potential value is approximately $33.5 million. The performance period began Oct. 23 and will extend four and a half years, with a one-year base period, four one-year options, and a six-month extension.
    This critical service contract provides custodial and refuse collection services for all Marshall facilities. Work under the contract includes floor maintenance, including elevators; trash removal; cleaning drinking fountains and restrooms; sweeping, mopping, and cleaning building entrances and stairways.
    › Back to Top

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Hurricane Unpreparedness in the Caribbean, Disaster by Imperial Design

    Source: Council on Hemispheric Affairs –

    St. Lucia during and post Hurricane Beryl

    by Tamanisha J. John

    Toronto, Ontario

    Whenever a hurricane hits in the Caribbean, people rush to point out that it is an indicator of “disaster capitalism” and/or that “disaster capitalism” will surely come. While I agree that non-governmental organizations (NGO) and other organizations profit from disasters in the Caribbean region, and have a long history of doing so, I am less inclined to believe that “disaster capitalism” exists there unless one takes an ahistorical view. Disaster capitalism in the Caribbean can only exist in those states whose revolutions have been defeated and/or undermined, but overall, there has been no massive structural changes in these states. The region is already, and historically has been, ultra-accommodating to capitalism. Disaster capitalism refers to “the use of the shock of disastrous situations to dismantle state participation in the economy and to implant structural changes in the form of laissez-faire capitalism” (Schwartz, 2015, p. 311). To claim that disaster capitalism will come to the Caribbean region would thus indicate a marked period of state participation in the Caribbean that provided for the peoples living there.

    Instead, all states’ independence was marked by US interventions given the ideological and economic struggle of the Cold War and the neoliberal turn, which attacked state input and intervention in the market. Caribbean states’ independence was marked by debt and lack of access to capital. It occurred alongside financial institutions’ proliferation of structural adjustment policies whose implementation was necessitated for states in the region to acquire access to loaned capital (John, 2023). Though struggles for nationalizations did occur – in industries like mining, banking, insurance, and others – harsh retaliations from the US and Canada made them unsustainable (John, 2023, p. 134) – with no real reductions in foreign ownership “despite the changes in legal forms of ownership” (Thomas, 1984, p. 168-9). Thus, large foreign ownership of resource extractive industries and financial institutions remained a feature of Caribbean societies when they became independent – just as it also marked the colonial landscape in these spaces. The foreign players that controlled corporations, land, and industries in these countries did change somewhat, but this was also typical with imperial rivalries (Caribbean states themselves having been subject to multiple phases of European colonization throughout their histories).

    It was Walter Rodney, who in his 1972 text How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, put forward a critique of the thesis that capitalism had to develop prior to ushering in socialism – which was Marx’s estimation – given that this thesis went against the trajectory of capitalist development in both the Caribbean and in Africa, where the capitalist logics of extraction with disregard for these societies left them in almost permanent states of underdevelopment, that only physical and ideological anti-imperialism could rectify. One of the consequences of this underdevelopment, I argue, is the lack of hurricane preparedness. The logic of “getting people back to work” and “security” in these colonized spaces have always trumped wellbeing for the people and environment – precisely because the people in them have always been categorized as disposable, while the natural resources have been reduced to instruments for the generation of profit. This ideology was true under European empires, and now true under US hegemony in the region – where foreign imposing actors continue to have more say on preparedness, wealth distribution, land ownership, security, economic development, and entrepreneurship (innovation).

    In a Region Prone to Hurricanes, Unpreparedness is an Ideological Policy Choice

    “Hurricanes are not random phenomena. Atmospheric conditions and physics limit their movement” (Schwartz, 2015, p. xvi). In the Caribbean, the Yucatán Peninsula, the Gulf of Mexico, and the South-Eastern United States, we have come to expect a lack of preparedness whenever hurricanes strike. Though Hurricane Beryl’s strength and early formation in June was unprecedented for the Caribbean’s hurricane season, what is precedent is the lack of regional preparedness for hurricanes in a region prone to have them – no matter when these hurricanes form. Forming around June 25th it was clear that Beryl would break the record for earliest formed Category 5 hurricane by the time that it made way into the Caribbean. This was due to the unusually warm temperatures registered in both the Atlantic Ocean and the Caribbean Sea as early as March, various heatwave advisories and warnings were placed on the region acknowledging that the summer 2024 would be “hotter than usual” (Loop News 2024). When news of Beryl’s formation first spread, people expected the worst given unusually hot increases in temperatures (+4°c) for the region so early in the year.

    Making landfall as a Category 4 hurricane in one of the smaller islands of Grenada, Carriacou, on July 1st Beryl would destroy 95% of the infrastructure there before strengthening to a Category 5 hurricane. It would bring even worse devastation to a smaller island of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Mayreu, where reports proclaim that island to have nearly been “erased from the map” (AP News 2024). In its Caribbean path, Beryl brought devastation as a Category 5 and 4 storm to Grenada, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Dominica, Tobago and northern Venezuela, Barbados, and the southern portion of Jamaica. In its North American path, Beryl brought devastation as a Category 2 and 1 storm to Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula, before making landfall in Texas and Louisiana. Thereafter the storm was experienced elsewhere in the form of a tropical cyclone and massive downpours of rain. Beryl eventually tapered off in Canada on July 11th where it left heavy rain that caused massive flooding (due to Canada’s neglected flood systems). Beryl’s death toll currently stands at 33, with the storm causing 6 deaths “in Venezuela, 1 in Grenada, 2 in Carriacou, 6 in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 4 in Jamaica […] at least 11 in the Greater Houston area, 1 in Louisiana, and 2 in Vermont.” (TT Weather Center 2024)”

    Now that the storm has passed, people in impacted areas must contend with the loss of life, destruction of physical infrastructure – including homes and businesses, the lack of food and other basic products, as well as the lack of power and electricity. While contending with loss, victims of this severe weather will start to question the inability of their governments – rich or poor – to adequately address the post hurricane scenarios that they find themselves in repeatedly. This discontent with unpreparedness is now prevalent even before the hurricane season itself has ended.

    A Note on Cuba’s Hurricane Preparedness, The Importance of Ideology

    One of the most infuriating elements of hurricanes in this region is the “disaster” narratives that come after them, which falsely assert the “naturalness” of unpreparedness given the chaos of the disaster itself – when unpreparedness is, in fact, an ideological policy choice. Poorer states in this region are shackled by an unwillingness of the state to drastically deviate from “larger institutional constraints from which the logic of colonial administration derived its central purpose” and are inherited (Pérez Jr., 2001, p. 133-4).  On the other hand, richer states are shackled by their individualist ideologies which offer “vigorous critiques of government expenditure” which leave preparedness up to “market-driven, neoliberal economic policies,” that turn state and local responsibilities over “to charitable institutions, to churches, or to the victims themselves and their communities” (Schwartz, 2015, p. 300).

    When looking at states in the Western Hemisphere which frequently experience hurricanes, Cuba stands out as a state which tends to fare better in the post hurricane environment given that state’s policies of shared responsibility towards its people. This even as Cuba has been subjected to a draining embargo and sanctions which places a burden on economic growth there. Yet still, Washington maintains that Cuba’s successful hurricane response and disaster mitigation strategies amount to “the exchange of liberty for effectiveness” (Schwartz, 2015, p. 293-4). Though couched in this language of ‘liberty,’ mitigating the loss of life ensures one’s longtime enjoyment of liberty – as opposed to dying for ‘liberty’s’ sake during a hurricane (or other disasters like the COVID-19 pandemic). For example, Cuba’s hurricane preparedness in relation to the US stands out. Cuba’s disaster response compares a bit more favorably to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). FEMA “oversaw 15 times more deaths from hurricanes than Cuba from 2005 — the year that Katrina struck New Orleans — to 2015” (Wolfe, 2021).

    This is because Cuba’s disaster preparedness is proactive, prioritizing human life and well-being given the ideological foundations of its revolution that transformed political, social, economic, and environmental relations in the country. US disaster preparedness on the other hand prioritizes profit at the expense of people – it is reactionary and reactive, often blaming victims of hurricane disasters for the lack of state preparedness.

    The Caribbean Hurricane as Natural Phenomena, the Disaster as Colonial Inheritance

    Hurricanes are not experienced equally amongst states in the Western Hemisphere. People living on Caribbean islands tend to experience the worst effects of hurricanes when they do strike, and it is also people on these same islands which tend to have less resources to recover from the impacts of a hurricane. Though Cuba’s hurricane preparedness is commendable, infrastructure and livelihoods there are still devastated by hurricanes. Many of the Caribbean islands are geographically located “in the Atlantic Hurricane Alley, [and] the region is sensitive to large-scale fluctuation of ocean patterns that are disrupted by warming seas” (Zodgekar, et. al 2023, p. 321). Additionally, populations and infrastructure on these islands tend to be concentrated on the coast – a colonial holdover – given that European “settlements were established directly in the path of oncoming hurricanes (Pérez Jr., 2001, p. 8). Initially due to lack of knowledge, this trend remained unchanged amongst Europeans given the need to export what was being extracted from these islands using the ports developed on the coasts.

    Historically, environmental disasters (hurricanes, earthquakes, and droughts) throughout the 1600s-1900s would consolidate land amongst the wealthiest European settlers on different islands and would foil settler attempts to diversify agriculture on islands. This was because wealthy settlers could more easily recover and rebuild what was lost in the aftermath of a hurricane, due to their ability to access credit from Europe and resort to using their own fortunes (wealth and networks). On the other hand, smaller settlers unable to rebuild and recover from hurricane losses had a harder time accessing credit – and creditors within Europe viewed loaning to smaller settlers as a financial burden. If these smaller settlers were already in debt, the passing of a hurricane meant that they would either have to work off debt by giving all that they had to a creditor in Europe, or one on the island, by entering into a credit arrangement with a wealthier plantation owner (Mulcahy, 2006, p. 86-8). These losses were quite frequent, as it is known that these phenomena made it so that some European creditors in Europe would amass plantation wealth, even if they themselves had never visited a Caribbean island or formally engaged in plantation life (Mulcahy, 2006, p. 87-8).

    These dynamics, in part, explain the predominance of the cultivation of sugar (and rice in what would become the South-Eastern United States) within the region, and even then, “plantership […] necessitated deep pockets (or strong credit) to survive its constant and rapid fluctuations” (Mulcahy, 2006, p. 66). “Without access to credit, smaller farmers were forced to sell their lands to wealthier and more secure planters, who thereby expanded their landholdings and production capabilities” (Mulcahy, 2006, p. 86). This consolidation of larger and wealthier plantations also made other concerns arise, namely the depopulation of settlers from the islands, as debtors opted to leave in the aftermath of storms, and later the transfers of estates to owners outside of the colonies (Mulcahy, 2006, p. 86-7). In essence, settlers’ decision to flee in the wake of, or after, a hurricane shaped population dynamics and demographics in colonies. They also shaped the lack of hurricane preparedness in colonies. Wealthier planters on the islands, and Europeans in Europe, who could suffer from hurricane losses (hurricanes themselves not being guaranteed every season), rebuild afterwards, and recover previous losses given the profit from plantation trade goods – had less incentives to plan ahead if they were not as risk of losing everything they had amassed in their life after a hurricane.

    In smaller island states’, where plantation systems were heavily disrupted or stunted in growth due to geography of the land (especially in the Lesser Antilles), even fewer attempts were made to develop any infrastructure which could protect against storms (Mulcahy, 2006). To be clear, this does not mean that these landscapes were spared from destruction which made the impacts of hurricanes worse: deforestation, overgrazing, and over-cultivation of Caribbean islands during centuries of European colonialism that included dispossession of indigenous groups and the enslavement of Africans, also impacted how hurricanes came to be experienced. While planter consolidation, rebuilding, and profits have so far been underscored here – the elephant in the room is that all of this occurred alongside the massive death toll of enslaved Africans who suffered the most both during and after the passage of a hurricane. Outside of the high death tolls for enslaved Africans on the islands, once a hurricane passed, the ultimate goal in the colonies became the reestablishment of ‘law-and-order’ given fears of slave revolt in the wake of destruction (Mulcahy, 2006; Schwartz, 2015). Although slave-revolts post hurricane remained a consistent fear of settlers, slave revolts did not occur after a hurricane due to its disproportionate toll on enslaved populations who were “often the most debilitated by the shortage of food and the diseases that followed the hurricane” (Schwartz, 2015, p. 49).

    Caribbean Indigenous Peoples Blamed European Imperial Settlement for Increased Hurricane Devastation

    From historical accounts, we know that the Spaniards were the first Europeans to experience a hurricane within the Western Hemisphere during Columbus’s second voyage in 1494/5 (Pérez Jr., 2001; Mulcahy, 2006; Schwartz, 2015). The hurricane experience was unlike anything that Europeans had observed in Europe, and it was from this experience that they sought out intel from the indigenous peoples in the Caribbean. For Caribbean indigenous peoples, “the great storms were part of the annual cycle of life. They respected their power and often deified it, but they also sought practical ways to adjust their lives to the storms. Examples were many: The Calusas of southwest Florida planted rows of trees to serve as windbreaks to protect their villages from hurricanes. On the islands of the Greater Antilles—Cuba, Jamaica, Hispaniola, and Puerto Rico—the Taino people preferred root crops like yucca, malanga, and yautia because of their resistance to windstorm damage. The Maya of Yucatan generally avoided building their cities on the coast because they understood that such locations were vulnerable to the winds and to ocean surges that accompanied the storms” (Schwartz, 2015, p. 5). Further, Indigenous representations of hurricanes were overall accurate and are similar to modern meteorological mapping of these storms. Europeans also learned from Caribbean Indigenous groups that you could “track” when a hurricane would strike. These developments meant that Indigenous Caribbean knowledge of the hurricane was not only limited to the occurrence of storm, but also meant that Indigenous Caribbean societies factored in preparedness for hurricanes within their worldviews.

    Given Caribbean Indigenous knowledge of hurricanes, it is these same people who also recognized that the changes to the landscape by European colonialism contributed to the increased devastation caused by hurricanes between the 1600s-1900s. As such, English colonists who would also come to experience the hurricanes report that “several elderly Caribs stated that hurricanes had become more frequent in recent years, which they viewed as a punishment for their interactions with Europeans” and the main “alteration that our people attribute the more frequent happenings of Hurricanes” (Mulcahy, 2006, p. 35). What these settler accounts reveal about Indigenous Caribbean peoples is what Schwartz notes in his 2015 book, Sea of Storms: A History of Hurricanes in the Greater Caribbean from Columbus to Katrina, that although “hurricanes were a natural phenomenon; what made them disasters was the patterns of settlement, economic activity, and other human action” (p. 74). Nonetheless, colonial ecological and environmental destruction in the Caribbean – which increased the felt impact of hurricanes – remained worthwhile for Europeans given the high profits to be made from export crops, which kept people there to rebuild after hurricanes. Mulcahy in his 2006 book, Hurricanes and Society in the British Greater Caribbean, 1624 – 1783, writes “European settlers and colonists were engaged in a never-ending struggle against nature in their quest for wealth” (p. 93)

    Additionally, the European empire’s responses to hurricanes also influenced decisions to stay. Because colonial societies in the Caribbean were stratified along racial and other social hierarchies – hurricanes presented opportunities for large scale consolidation of plantation property on islands which privileged wealthy plantation owners. Additionally, smaller merchants and plantations which could not recover post hurricane were sometimes forced to transfer ownership to merchants in Europe – who never had to visit these properties while amassing wealth from them thereafter (Mulcahy 2006, p. 88). Disaster relief to the colonies thus came to be historically designed as a way for further economic integration, and “assistance to the colonies in times of disaster would bring wealth and affluence to the empire” (Mulcahy 2006, p. 162). Disaster assistance – while increasing inequalities between all peoples in the colonies – did overall benefit imperial capitalism and patriotism within the empire, amongst loyal subjects, especially amongst elite classes, who received the majority of aid based on their losses.

    Banking on Hurricanes and Absolving Empire of Responsibility: Debates in Europe

    While debates in Europe raged regarding enriching the already wealthy within the colonies with disaster relief – these debates did not change the post-hurricane reality of which those most needing of aid (Indigenous groups, enslaved Africans, indentured workers, small merchants, and small planters) were the least likely to receive it, which was true across all of the different European colonies (Pérez Jr., 2001; Mulcahy, 2006; Schwartz, 2015). “Vulnerability to the hurricane itself was a function of the material determinants” around which colonial social hierarchies were arranged (Pérez Jr., 2001, p. 111). In Europe, debates focused primarily on creditors, so it was argued that the wealthy were more primed to repay creditors when/if they received disaster relief after a hurricane. On the other hand, the proliferation of print news meant that individuals and organizations (e.g., the Church) could send aid to the colonies after disaster struck. Previously, when disaster struck it would take months for news to reach those in Europe, even as the disruptions in trade were more readily felt. Moreover, it was hard for the public in Europe to understand the scale of destruction caused by hurricanes in the Americas, given that this kind of natural disaster did not occur in Europe.

    With the establishment of print media, the destruction caused by hurricanes and the damages that they did to plantation systems – which would require a lot of assistance to recover – was made much more readily available to people who could empathize and assist in recovery efforts. Within the British empire, some newspapers even published who would send what amount and type of post disaster relief to the colonies, which undoubtedly contributed to the charitable giving of some wealthy individuals (Mulcahy 2006; Schwartz 2015). Given that the voyage from Europe to the various colonies was long, there was illegal trading between different colonies to provide relief to one another faster – including with the United States, even after the American Revolution.

    It is this colonial history which still shapes the lack of hurricane preparedness in a region prone to have them. Thus, most scholars on hurricanes in the region continue to highlight the colonial and slave legacies which have shaped regional unpreparedness to hurricanes. Though the United States is a wealthier country today with the capabilities to develop hurricane preparedness – even if only within its own borders – it is elite US security interests and ideological leanings which have prevented it from doing so. Additionally, historians like Schwartz (2015) make a compelling argument that “the United States, by its military and political expansion into the Caribbean after 1898, its foreign policy objectives in the Cold War, and through its advocacy of certain forms of capitalism joined with its ability to impose its preferences on international institutions, has also influenced the way in which the whole region has faced hurricanes and other disasters” (Schwartz, 2015, p. xviii-xix). This implies that the United States – like the European empire’s past – also has a stake, or interest, in regional hurricane unpreparedness for both political, economic, and security objectives.

    US Imperial Extensions in the Caribbean, Impact on Hurricane Preparedness

    From this overview of the history of hurricanes in the Caribbean, the Yucatán Peninsula, the Gulf of Mexico, and the South-Eastern United States a few things become clear: hurricane preparedness has never been a concern for colonial capitalist development. Hurricane disasters came to be recognized as extremely ruinous to those occupying the lowest rungs of colonial societies, aid was given to the wealthy people who were understood as being able to put aid to better usage, and disaster situations consolidated preferred modes of accumulation in otherwise “chaotic” and uncivilized landscapes. Thus, outside of patriotic tales and misremembering of the storm events, historically “hopes of communal solidarity” in the wake and aftermath of hurricanes “were either naïve or disingenuous [… with] social divisions ha[ving] always shaped the responses to hurricanes (Schwartz, 2015, p. 68-9). Given strict colonial hierarchies, the maintenance of order – to dissuade slave revolts and looting – were always preeminent concerns of empires and those with wealth and power. This is important to plainly state, given that little has changed in today’s experience with hurricanes in the region.

    Today’s granting of conditioned relief and temporary debt removals still serve to subordinate Caribbean states to the Western capitalist system and the US security apparatus. Those areas hardest hit by storms and less likely to receive aid, continue to be occupied by the poor populations that are largely non-white/Euro peoples. Settlements on islands continue to be concentrated on coasts, where the tourist industry quickly rebuilds its infrastructure post-hurricane and are the first to receive aid. This at once dispels the myths that recovery is impossible, as it happens in the large coastal areas owned and controlled by foreign hotel chains and entities which quickly beckon tourists back to their “lovely beaches” less than a day after a hurricane. Preparedness for hurricanes in the Caribbean islands are “subordinated to political, military, or what today would be called ‘security’ concerns” (Schwartz, 2015, p. 276). I would include economic and ideological concerns as well. These latter concerns are maintained by the wealthiest states in the hemisphere – the United States and Canada.

    Hurricane Flora in the 1960s claimed the lives of over 5,000 Haitians under the Duvalier dictatorship – which failed to even warn Haitians about the arrival of the hurricane so that disorder against Duvalier would not take over the country. The lack of preparedness was accepted by both the United States and Canadian governments given their fear of communism in the Caribbean region. Thus “unlike Haiti’s U.S.-backed right-wing president, François Duvalier, Castro’s Communist government ordered residents living in the hurricane’s projected path to evacuate their homes, and if they were unable, to stay and prepare appropriately for the storm.” This preparation and the establishment of Cuba’s defense system in 1966 accounted for significantly less deaths (1,157) in Cuba (Wolfe, 2021). Today, unpreparedness remains a feature in most Caribbean countries that put corporate interests and the interests of the US (and its allies) security objectives above the prioritization of human life and livelihoods in the Caribbean.

    As further illustration of this point, even though the 2004 Hurricane Jeanne hit Cuba a lot harder than Haiti – killing 3,000 Haitians – no Cuban lives were lost due to the hurricane (Wolfe, 2021). The historical and present-day case of Haiti is both informative and a cause for worry as we expect future hurricane seasons to be quite bad. Not only is Haiti a fully privatized economy (Wilentz, 2008); but it is also one that has been under the tutelage of the CORE group – a group composed primarily of foreign ambassadors from the US, France, Canada, Spain, Brazil, Germany, and a few representatives from the European Union (EU), the United Nations (UN), and the Organization of American States (OAS) – for over two decades. The CORE group’s tutelage of Haiti has been exceptionally negative, as these states and their ambassadors secure their own corporate and labor interests in the country at the expense of that state’s democracy and national sovereignty (Edmonds, 2024). Thus, disaster preparedness in Haiti has never been an agenda item – and has only gotten worse as those governing the country continue to benefit from political, economic, and environmental disasters there. Present day armed intervention and occupation in Haiti, further makes it unlikely that Haiti will be able to weather the next hurricane season.

    Hurricane Unpreparedness, A Note on Canada

    It is important to remind here that although much is said about US imperialism and security concerns trumping human rights and pro-people development in the region – Canada is not exempt from this critique. For instance, although Canada touts that its military base (OSH-LAC) in the Caribbean is a “support hub” – that also seeks to assist states experiencing disasters, of which hurricanes are included – in 2017 when Category 5 Hurricane’s Irma and Maria wreaked havoc on Dominica, OSH-LAC warships monitored the situation but provided no on the ground help to Caribbean peoples there (John, 2024, p. 12-3). The Canadian government also enacted restrictive migration policies towards those fleeing from the hurricane and its damages. This practice would be repeated by Canada again in 2019 during the aftermath of Hurricane Dorian in The Bahamas (John, 2024, p. 12-3). Given that I am currently living in Canada, it is important to point out that Canada is a state that frequently touts progressive rhetoric on climate change, resiliency, and disaster preparedness in the Caribbean region. However, Canada’s actions continue to render the Caribbean region unprepared alongside the actions of the US.

    In the 2023 Canada-CARICOM summit hosted by Canada, Caribbean prime ministers sought to place climate issues and climate infrastructure at the top of the agenda – however, Canada was mainly concerned with getting support for an armed intervention in Haiti (Thurton, 2023). Haiti remains the most unprepared country in the Caribbean when disasters hit, which made Canada’s insistence on armed intervention and occupation even more tone deaf. Haiti’s unpreparedness is directly tied to US, Canada, France, and CORE group members tutelage and rejection of Haitian democracy ever since that country’s integration into the Western capitalist system via US occupation. These examples illuminate the fact that the wealthier states in the Western Hemisphere, namely the US and Canada, actively disregard the lives of those impacted by hurricanes and other natural disasters to their south – while first and foremost safeguarding their own economic, ideological, and security priorities. In my analysis of ‘south,’ the Caribbean, the Yucatán Peninsula, the Gulf of Mexico, and the South-Eastern United States are included.

    Conclusion

    Ideologically, the promotion of capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism in the Caribbean (of which the South-Eastern United States, the Gulf of Mexico and Yucatán Peninsula is included) continues to pose an obstacle to disaster preparedness in a region prone to hurricanes.  More importantly, the promotion of these harmful ideologies often comes at the expense of human life. Nothing makes this clearer than the fact that it is the revolutionary state – which is also the most heavily economically sanctioned state in the region – Cuba, that continues to be the most prepared state in times of disaster. This stands in stark contrast to other Caribbean states and to wealthier states, like the US, which mandate regional unpreparedness. Today, while we await (but hope that it is not so) a bad hurricane season, the Caribbean region is more militarized than it has been since the end of the 20th century and beginning of the 21st century. Militarization is directly due to US security objectives that aim to keep China’s investments (thus competition) out of the region. This policy is backed by Canada, which seeks to advance its own corporate interests in the region.

    The US and Canada continue to militarize the Caribbean region, exacerbating climate change and neglecting the urgency of developing resiliency infrastructure. In fact, militarization in the Caribbean region today (and in Africa and Asia) occurs alongside the tightening of both the US and Canadian borders given hostile narratives towards immigrants and immigration within them. This even with the region’s long history (as has been pointed out) of people fleeing the region both during and after a hurricane. All of which indicates that while these states are undoubtedly deepening the climate crisis with their global “security” endeavors, they view the people harmed and negatively impacted by their actions as disposable.

    Postscript

    Three months after the writing of this document, 5 hurricanes – Debby, Ernesto, Francine, Helene, and Milton – have impacted peoples and infrastructure in the south. The 2024 Atlantic Hurricane season thus far (October 11th, 2024) has taken almost 400 lives – with the actual figure being uncertain, given that the damage from Milton is still being assessed. Each storm is estimated to have cost between $80 – $250 billion (USD) in damages across the region. While governments talk about costs and recovery efforts to get economies “back on track” and provide people with temporary and conditional aid – which is the post disaster norm – we are presented with an uncomfortable, yet undeniable fact: states in the region, whether by colonial inheritance or commitment to capitalism, are banking on unpreparedness continuing well into the future. We must be proactive in defeating this dangerous ideology that places people’s lives, livelihoods and the physical environment at stake; while perpetuating, in its aftermath, conditions that make it so.

    References

    Clark, John I, and Léon Tabah, eds. 1995. Population and Environment Population – Environment – Development Interactions. Paris, France: Comité International de Coopération dans les Recherches Nationales en Démographie (CICRED). http://www.cicred.org/Eng/Publications/pdf/c-a1.pdf.

    Direct Relief. 2024. “Direct Relief Responds as Hurricane Beryl Impacts the Caribbean. The Region, Watchful and Ready, Will Weather the Storm Today.” Direct Relief. https://www.directrelief.org/2024/07/direct-relief-responds-as-hurricane-beryl-impacts-the-caribbean-the-region-watchful-and-ready-will-weather-the-storm-today/.

    Edmonds, Kevin. 2024. “CARICOM, Regional Arm of the Core Group, Sells Out Haiti Again.” Black Agenda Report. https://www.blackagendareport.com/caricom-regional-arm-core-group-sells-out-haiti-again.

    Forecast Centre. 2024. “Atlantic Canada Next in Line for a Soaking, Flood Risk from Beryl Remnants.” The Weather Network.https://www.theweathernetwork.com/en/news/weather/forecasts/atlantic-canada-next-in-line-for-a-soaking-flood-risk-from-beryl-remnants.

    IFRC. 2024. “Humanitarian Needs Ramp up in the Aftermath of ‘unprecedented’ Hurricane Beryl, Signaling New Reality for Caribbean.” The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). https://www.ifrc.org/press-release/humanitarian-needs-ramp-aftermath-unprecedented-hurricane-beryl-signaling-new-reality.

    Jobson, Ryan C. 2024. “Hurricane Beryl at the Gates: The Grenadines and Caribbean Autonomy.” Medium. https://medium.com/clash-voices-for-a-caribbean-federation-from-below/hurricane-beryl-at-the-gates-the-grenadines-and-caribbean-autonomy-86834fb43bcd.

    John, Tamanisha J. 2023. “Canadian Imperialism in Caribbean Structural Adjustment, 1980-2000.” In Class Power and Capitalism, Brill Publishers, 136–79.

    John, Tamanisha J. 2024. “Capitalism, Global Militarism, and Canada’s Investment in the Caribbean.” Class, Race and Corporate Power 12(1): 25.

    Loop News. 2024. “Caribbean 2024 Heat Season Could Climb to Near-Record Heat.” Caribbean Loop News. https://caribbean.loopnews.com/content/caribbean-2024-heat-season-could-climb-near-record-heat.

    McGrath, Gareth. 2024. “Hurricane Beryl Was the Earliest Category 5 Storm. What Could That Mean for NC?” Star News Online. https://www.starnewsonline.com/story/news/local/2024/07/11/what-hurricane-beryl-the-earliest-category-5-storm-could-mean-for-nc/74288495007/.

    Mulcahy, Matthew. 2006. Hurricanes and Society in the British Greater Caribbean, 1624 – 1783. Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    NACLA. 2024. “This Week: Hurricane Beryl Slams the Caribbean, a Victory for Midwives in Mexico, Venezuelan Elections, and More.” https://nacla.salsalabs.org/july_12_24?wvpId=37c1b636-52b7-44b5-af75-9a38617519d5.

    NASA. 2024. “Carriacou After Beryl.” NASA Earth Observatory. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/153039/carriacou-after-beryl.

    Pérez Jr., Louis A. 2001. Winds of Change: Hurricanes & The Transformation of Nineteenth-Century Cuba. Chapel Hill & London: The University of North Carolina Press.

    Rodney, Walter. 2018. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Verso Books.

    Schwartz, Stuart B. 2015. Sea of Storms: A History of Hurricanes in the Greater Caribbean from Columbus to Katrina. Princeton University Press.

    Thomas, Clive Y. 1984. Plantations, Peasants and State: A Study of the Mode of Sugar Production in Guyana. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Afro-American Studies.

    Thurton, David. 2023. “Caribbean Looks to Trudeau to Put Quest for Climate Change Funding on the World’s Agenda.” CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/caricom-trudeau-caribbean-1.6999106.

    TT Weather Center. 2024. “Hurricane Beryl Death Toll Now At 33.” Trinidad and Tobago Weather Center. https://ttweathercenter.com/2024/07/11/hurricane-beryl-death-toll-now-at-33/.

    VOA News. 2024. “Remnants of Beryl Flood Northeast US.” VOA News. https://www.voanews.com/a/remnants-of-beryl-flood-northeast-us/7694063.html#.

    Wagner, Bryce, and Cristiana Mesquita. 2024. “In St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Beryl Nearly Erased the Smallest Inhabited Island from the Map.” AP News. https://apnews.com/article/hurricane-beryl-mayreau-island-caribbean-bb64fc9b61da76685704b8f42f97736c?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=fffcba4b-3154-47e9-b4ce-e0349f4225db.

    Wilentz, Amy. 2008. “Hurricanes and Haiti.” Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/la-oe-wilentz13-2008sep13-story.html.

    Wolfe, Mikael. 2021. “When It Comes to Hurricanes, the U.S. Can Learn a Lot from Cuba: Cuba Devised a System That Minimizes Death and Destruction from Hurricanes.” The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/01/when-it-comes-hurricanes-us-can-learn-lot-cuba/.

    Zodgekar, Ketaki, Avery Raines, Fayola Jacobs, and Patrick Bigger. 2023. A Dangerous Debt-Climate Nexus. NACLA Report on the Americas. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714839.2023.2247773.

    Photo Credit: InOldNews, by Delia Louis
    Description: Depicts St. Lucia during and post Hurricane Beryl
    License info: Creative Commons taken from Flickr.

    About the author: Tamanisha J. John is an Assistant Professor at York University in the Department of Politics

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI USA: Sen. Russ Goodman Urges USDA Secretary to Extend Indemnity Coverage to Georgia Counties Impacted by Hurricane Helene

    Source: US State of Georgia

    ATLANTA (October 30, 2024) —Sen. Russ Goodman (R–Cogdell), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Consumer Affairs, has formally requested that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) re-evaluate its coverage area for the Hurricane Indemnity Program to include several Georgia counties heavily impacted by Hurricane Helene. In a letter sent to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, Sen. Goodman emphasized the urgent need for support for Georgia’s agricultural community, citing an estimated $6.4 billion in total damage to the state’s agricultural industry, with direct crop losses expected to exceed $3 billion.

    Several counties—Bulloch, Burke, Candler, Effingham, Evans, Jenkins, Lincoln, Long, Pierce, Richmond, Screven, Tattnall and Wayne—were excluded from the USDA Risk Management Agency’s initial coverage, potentially leaving local farmers without access to vital resources for recovery. Sen. Goodman’s letter, co-signed by several of his legislative colleagues, calls for a thorough analysis of the hurricane’s impact on these areas, leveraging all available data from reliable sources such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and IBTrACS.

    “Seeing almost every Senator in our state come together on this issue speaks volumes about the gravity of the situation our farming families are facing,” said Sen. Goodman. “These farmers did their part by investing in Hurricane Indemnity policies. Now, they deserve to see the USDA step up to the plate. The impact of Hurricane Helene is apparent, and our farmers are counting on Secretary Vilsack to act, ensuring they are able to financially recover and rebuild from this devastation. As a legislative body, we’re united in backing our farmers and the belief that they deserve the support they were promised.”

    Sen. Goodman’s letter also highlighted challenges due to Hurricane Helene’s impact on the National Center for Environmental Information, emphasizing that these data limitations should not hinder the assessment of damages in affected regions.

    You can find a copy of the letter to Secretary Vilsack here.

    # # # #
    Sen. Russ Goodman serves as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Consumer Affairs. He represents the 8th Senate District, which includes Atkinson, Clinch, Echols, Lanier, Lowndes and Pierce Counties and a large portion of Ware County. He may be reached at 404.656.7454 or at
    russ.goodman@senate.ga.gov

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Alto Ingredients, Inc. to Release Third Quarter 2024 Financial Results on November 6, 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PEKIN, Ill., Oct. 30, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Alto Ingredients, Inc. (NASDAQ: ALTO), a leading producer and distributor of specialty alcohols, renewable fuels and essential ingredients, announced it will release its third quarter 2024 financial results after the close of market on Wednesday, November 6, 2024.

    Management will host a conference call at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time / 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time and will deliver prepared remarks via webcast followed by a question-and-answer session. How to participate:

    • To listen to the webcast, visit the Alto Ingredients website.
    • To receive a number and unique PIN by email, register here.
    • To dial directly twenty minutes prior to the scheduled call time, dial (833) 630-0017 domestically and (412) 317-1806 internationally. Please ask to join Alto Ingredients.

    The webcast will be archived for replay on the Alto Ingredients website for one year. In addition, a telephonic replay will be available at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 6, 2024, through 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 13, 2024. To access the replay, please dial (877) 344-7529. International callers should dial 00-1 412-317-0088. The pass code will be 8828903.

    About Alto Ingredients, Inc.
    Alto Ingredients, Inc. (NASDAQ: ALTO) is a leading producer and distributor of specialty alcohols, renewable fuels and essential ingredients. Leveraging the unique qualities of its facilities, the company serves customers in a wide range of consumer and commercial products in the Health, Home & Beauty; Food & Beverage; Industry & Agriculture; Essential Ingredients; and Renewable Fuels markets. For more information, please visit www.altoingredients.com.

    Media and Company IR Contact:                 
    Michael Kramer, Alto Ingredients, Inc., 916-403-2755 Investorrelations@altoingredients.com

    IR Agency Contact:
    Kirsten Chapman, LHA Investor Relations, 415-433-3777 Investorrelations@altoingredients.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Rural community urged to speak up

    Source: Auckland Council

    A strategy that will govern the future of Auckland’s southern rural area is open for consultation until 1 December.

    The Southern Rural Strategy is a part of of the Future Development Strategy for the development and growth of Tāmaki Makarau / Auckland.

    Franklin Ward Councillor Andy Baker says its crucial southern voices are heard.

    “Everyone I meet has an opinion on what is happening now, what should happen in the future, housing developments on prime agricultural land, or on how the rural character of our area is changing.

    “If people want to have a say, they are going to have to speak up. It is as simple as this, there’s no use staying silent then railing about how our home is changing, and the ‘good old days’ because nothing stays the same forever.

    “Auckland Council’s Southern Rural Strategy sets out how the area will accommodate a growing population, while enabling farming and food production to continue to thrive,” Baker, who chairs the working group overseeing strategy, says.

    The strategy covers the Franklin ward and includes rural land in the Howick and Papakura local board areas.  

    Franklin Local Board has already submitted a detailed response to the draft strategy, endorsing the development of a plan and noting the significant role rural Auckland plays in the well-being of the city, not only in terms of food security, but also financially.

    Board chair Angela Fulljames says many of the issues addressed in the strategy reflect the board’s own plans.

    “We believe this is a good chance to highlight the issue of deprivation through isolation. Many of our people don’t have access to things urban dwellers take for granted because they live in isolated rural communities where you can’t just pop down the road to a pool or library, and which may not even have internet access.”

    She says urban land costs and restrictions are increasingly impacting rural land use.

    “You need only drive on the motorway to see fertile land now being used to for non-rural commercial activities such as storage for relocated homes or heavy vehicles.”

    “Development in the rural south is leading to a series of private wastewater management systems and that’s a concern in terms of environmental impact and community health.”

    Drury, Opaheke, Pukekohe and Waiuku are all identified as towns where the most growth will occur in future.

    Board deputy chair Alan Cole, himself a farmer, says everyone in the south is aware of the development taking place.

    “There are long-term plans for how Drury and Pukekohe will expand over time – so it’s time for the people who make up those communities to say what they want for their towns.” 

    “Franklin is growing and will be home to another 100,000 people over the next 30 years. We need a strategy to manage that. We often boast that Auckland eats because Pukekohe exists, so it’s critical we strike the right balance.”

    You can have your say on the Southern Rural Strategy until Sunday 1 December.  

    Stay connected

    Sign up for your Local Board E-news and get the latest news and events direct to your inbox each month. Or follow us on Facebook.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI: Landmark Bancorp, Inc. Announces 30.5% Increase in Third Quarter Net Earnings and Earnings Per Share of $0.72. Declares Cash Dividend of $0.21 per Share and 5% Stock Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Manhattan, KS, Oct. 30, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Landmark Bancorp, Inc. (“Landmark”; Nasdaq: LARK) reported diluted earnings per share of $0.72 for the three months ended September 30, 2024, compared to $0.55 per share in the second quarter of 2024 and $0.52 per share in the same quarter last year. Net earnings for the third quarter of 2024 amounted to $3.9 million, compared to $3.0 million in the prior quarter and $2.9 million for the third quarter of 2023. For the three months ended September 30, 2024, the return on average assets was 1.00%, the return on average equity was 11.82%, and the efficiency ratio was 66.5%.

    For the first nine months of 2024, diluted earnings per share totaled $1.77 compared to $1.75 during the same period in 2023. Net earnings for the first nine months of 2024 totaled $9.7 million, compared to $9.6 million in the first nine months of 2023. For the nine months ended September 30, 2024, the return on average assets was 0.84%, the return on average equity was 10.18%, and the efficiency ratio was 68.8%.

    In making this announcement, Abby Wendel, President and Chief Executive Officer of Landmark, said, “The Company delivered strong results in the third quarter 2024. Net earnings grew 30.5 percent over the prior quarter and 36.6 percent over the same period last year. Earnings per share also increased 36.5 percent over the third quarter last year. Growth in loans, margin expansion, and higher non-interest income all contributed to strong revenue growth. This quarter total loans grew $21.3 million, or 8.6 percent annualized, driven mainly by strong growth in residential mortgage, agriculture and commercial real estate loans. Additionally, net interest income grew 5.7 percent, to $11.6 million, as higher interest on loans exceeded interest costs on deposits and our net interest margin expanded by nine basis points and was 3.30 percent for the quarter. Non-interest income also increased $533,000 over the prior quarter mainly due to increases in fees and service charges earned along with a gain on the sale of a former branch. During the third quarter 2024, non-interest expense declined by $536,000, as the prior quarter included a $979,000 valuation adjustment on a former branch facility. Deposit balances increased 8.0 percent annualized during the third quarter mainly due to growth in money market, checking, and certificate of deposit accounts. Stockholders’ equity also increased by $11.4 million as lower rates this quarter reduced our net unrealized securities losses and increased our book value per share.”

    Landmark’s Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.21 per share, to be paid November 27, 2024, to common stockholders of record as of the close of business on November 13, 2024. The Board of Directors also declared a 5% stock dividend payable on December 16, 2024, to common stockholders of record on December 2, 2024. This is the 24th consecutive year that the Board has declared a 5% stock dividend.

    Management will host a conference call to discuss the Company’s financial results at 10:00 a.m. (Central time) on Thursday, October 31, 2024. Investors may participate via telephone by dialing (833) 470-1428 and using access code 242414. A replay of the call will be available through November 30, 2024, by dialing (866) 813-9403 and using access code 908094.

    SUMMARY OF THIRD QUARTER RESULTS

    Net earnings in the third quarter of 2024 increased $919,000, to $3.9 million mainly due to growth in net interest income coupled with higher non-interest income and lower non-interest expense. The current quarter included a gain of $273,000 on the sale of a former branch and we also recorded a provision for credit losses of $500,000.

    Net Interest Income

    Net interest income in the third quarter of 2024 amounted to $11.6 million representing an increase of $630,000, or 5.7%, compared to the previous quarter. The increase in net interest income was due mainly to growth in interest income on loans, but partially offset by higher interest expense on deposits. The net interest margin increased to 3.30% during the third quarter from 3.21% during the prior quarter. Compared to the previous quarter, interest income on loans increased $911,000, or 6.1%, to $15.9 million due to both higher average balances and rates. The average tax-equivalent yield on the loan portfolio increased 10 basis points to 6.43%. Interest expense on deposits increased $157,000, or 2.8%, in the third quarter 2024, compared to the prior quarter, mainly due to higher rates on interest-bearing deposits. The average rate on interest-bearing deposits increased in the third quarter to 2.48% compared to 2.44% in the prior quarter. Interest on borrowed funds increased $55,000 due to slightly higher average balances in the current quarter.

    Non-Interest Income

    Non-interest income totaled $4.3 million for the third quarter of 2024, an increase of $533,000, or 14.3%, from the previous quarter. The increase in non-interest income compared to the second quarter of 2024 was primarily the result of increases of $282,000 in other non-interest income and $189,000 in fees and service charges. Gain on sales of residential mortgage loans also increased 8.6% compared to the prior quarter. The increase in other non-interest income was primarily due to a $273,000 gain on the sale of a former branch.

    Non-Interest Expense

    During the third quarter of 2024, non-interest expense totaled $10.6 million, a decrease of $536,000, or 4.8%, compared to the prior quarter. As mentioned above, non-interest expense in the prior quarter included a valuation allowance of $979,000 recorded on a former branch facility that was ultimately sold in the third quarter of 2024. Partially offsetting that decline were increases of $299,000 in compensation and benefits and $135,000 in occupancy and equipment.

    Income Tax Expense

    Landmark recorded income tax expense of $867,000 in the third quarter of 2024 compared to $587,000 in the prior quarter. The effective tax rate was 18.1% in the third quarter of 2024 compared to 16.3% in the second quarter of 2024. The increase in the effective tax rate was primarily due to higher earnings before taxes as tax-exempt income was consistent between the periods.

    Balance Sheet Highlights

    As of September 30, 2024, gross loans totaled $1.0 billion, an increase of $21.3 million, or 8.6% annualized since June 30, 2024. During the quarter, loan growth was primarily comprised of one-to-four family residential real estate (growth of $12.3 million), agriculture (growth of $7.5 million) and commercial real estate (growth of $5.2 million) loans. The increase in one-to-four family residential real estate loans reflects continued demand for adjustable-rate mortgage loans which are retained in our portfolio. Investment securities decreased $9.4 million during the third quarter of 2024, while pre-tax unrealized net losses on these investment securities decreased from $24.8 million at June 30, 2024 to $13.3 million at September 30, 2024.

    Period end deposit balances increased $25.0 million to $1.3 billion at September 30, 2024. The increase in deposits was mainly driven by increases in money market and checking (increase of $19.2 million) and certificates of deposit (increase of $11.4 million). Average interest-bearing deposits however were down slightly this quarter compared to the second quarter. Total borrowings decreased $38.5 million during the third quarter 2024. Average borrowings, including FHLB advances and repurchase agreements increased $4.3 million this quarter compared to the second quarter. At September 30, 2024, the loan to deposits ratio was 77.6% compared to 77.5% in the prior quarter.

    Stockholders’ equity increased to $139.7 million (book value of $25.39 per share) as of September 30, 2024, from $128.3 million (book value of $23.45 per share) as of June 30, 2024. The increase in stockholders’ equity was primarily due to a decline in accumulated other comprehensive losses as the unrealized net losses on investments securities declined during the third quarter. The ratio of equity to total assets increased to 8.93% on September 30, 2024, from 8.22% on June 30, 2024.

    The allowance for credit losses totaled $11.5 million, or 1.15% of total gross loans on September 30, 2024, compared to $10.9 million, or 1.11% of total gross loans on June 30, 2024. Net loan charge-offs totaled $9,000 in the third quarter of 2024, compared to net loan recoveries of $52,000 during the second quarter of 2024. A provision for credit losses of $500,000 was recorded in the third quarter of 2024 compared to a no provision for credit losses in the second quarter of 2024.

    Non-performing loans totaled $13.4 million, or 1.34% of gross loans at September 30, 2024 compared to $5.0 million, or 0.51% of gross loans at June 30, 2024. The increase in non-accrual loans was primarily related to one commercial loan which was put on non-accrual status this quarter. Loans 30-89 days delinquent totaled $7.3 million, or 0.73% of gross loans, as of September 30, 2024, compared to $1.9 million, or 0.19% of gross loans, as of June 30, 2024. The increase in delinquent loans was primarily related to two commercial-related loans. Foreclosed real estate owned totaled $428,000 at September 30, 2024.

    About Landmark

    Landmark Bancorp, Inc., the holding company for Landmark National Bank, is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “LARK.” Headquartered in Manhattan, Kansas, Landmark National Bank is a community banking organization dedicated to providing quality financial and banking services. Landmark National Bank has 30 locations in 24 communities across Kansas: Manhattan (2), Auburn, Dodge City (2), Fort Scott (2), Garden City, Great Bend (2), Hoisington, Iola, Junction City, Kincaid, La Crosse, Lawrence (2), Lenexa, Louisburg, Mound City, Osage City, Osawatomie, Overland Park, Paola, Pittsburg, Prairie Village, Topeka (2), Wamego and Wellsville, Kansas. Visit www.banklandmark.com for more information.

    Contact:
    Mark A. Herpich
    Chief Financial Officer
    (785) 565-2000

    Special Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the financial condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance and business of Landmark. Forward-looking statements, which may be based upon beliefs, expectations and assumptions of our management and on information currently available to management, are generally identifiable by the use of words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “intend,” “estimate,” “may,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should” or other similar expressions. Additionally, all statements in this press release, including forward-looking statements, speak only as of the date they are made, and Landmark undertakes no obligation to update any statement in light of new information or future events. A number of factors, many of which are beyond our ability to control or predict, could cause actual results to differ materially from those in our forward-looking statements. These factors include, among others, the following: (i) the strength of the local, national and international economies, including the effects of inflationary pressures and supply chain constraints on such economies; (ii) changes in state and federal laws, regulations and governmental policies concerning banking, securities, consumer protection, insurance, monetary, trade and tax matters, including any changes in response to the recent failures of other banks; (iii) changes in interest rates and prepayment rates of our assets; (iv) increased competition in the financial services sector and the inability to attract new customers, including from non-bank competitors such as credit unions and “fintech” companies; (v) timely development and acceptance of new products and services; (vi) changes in technology and the ability to develop and maintain secure and reliable electronic systems; (vii) our risk management framework; (viii) interruptions in information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party services; (ix) changes and uncertainty in benchmark interest rates, including the timing of rate changes, if any, by the Federal Reserve; (x) the effects of severe weather, natural disasters, widespread disease or pandemics, or other external events; (xi) the loss of key executives or employees; (xii) changes in consumer spending; (xiii) integration of acquired businesses; (xiv) unexpected outcomes of existing or new litigation; (xv) changes in accounting policies and practices, such as the implementation of the current expected credit losses accounting standard; (xvi) the economic impact of past and any future terrorist attacks, acts of war, including the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the conflict in Ukraine, or threats thereof, and the response of the United States to any such threats and attacks; (xvii) the ability to manage credit risk, forecast loan losses and maintain an adequate allowance for loan losses; (xviii) fluctuations in the value of securities held in our securities portfolio; (xix) concentrations within our loan portfolio, large loans to certain borrowers, and large deposits from certain clients; (xx) the concentration of large deposits from certain clients who have balances above current FDIC insurance limits and may withdraw deposits to diversify their exposure; (xxi) the level of non-performing assets on our balance sheets; (xxii) the ability to raise additional capital; (xxiii) cyber-attacks; (xxiv) declines in real estate values; (xxv) the effects of fraud on the part of our employees, customers, vendors or counterparties; and (xxvi) any other risks described in the “Risk Factors” sections of reports filed by Landmark with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating forward-looking statements, and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements. Additional information concerning Landmark and its business, including additional risk factors that could materially affect Landmark’s financial results, is included in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited)

    (Dollars in thousands)   September 30,     June 30,     March 31,     December 31,     September 30,  
        2024     2024     2024     2023     2023  
    Assets                              
    Cash and cash equivalents   $ 21,211     $ 23,889     $ 16,468     $ 27,101     $ 23,821  
    Interest-bearing deposits at other banks     4,363       4,881       4,920       4,918       5,904  
    Investment securities available-for-sale, at fair value:                                        
    U.S. treasury securities     83,753       89,325       93,683       95,667       118,341  
    Municipal obligations, tax exempt     112,126       114,047       118,445       120,623       115,706  
    Municipal obligations, taxable     75,129       74,588       75,371       79,083       73,993  
    Agency mortgage-backed securities     140,004       142,499       149,777       157,396       148,817  
    Total investment securities available-for-sale     411,012       420,459       437,276       452,769       456,857  
    Investment securities held-to-maturity     3,643       3,613       3,584       3,555       3,525  
    Bank stocks, at cost     7,894       9,647       7,850       8,123       8,009  
    Loans:                                        
    One-to-four family residential real estate     344,380       332,090       312,833       302,544       289,571  
    Construction and land     23,454       30,480       24,823       21,090       21,657  
    Commercial real estate     324,016       318,850       323,397       320,962       323,427  
    Commercial     181,652       178,876       181,945       180,942       185,831  
    Agriculture     91,986       84,523       86,808       89,680       84,560  
    Municipal     7,098       6,556       5,690       4,507       3,200  
    Consumer     29,263       29,200       28,544       28,931       29,180  
    Total gross loans     1,001,849       980,575       964,040       948,656       937,426  
    Net deferred loan (fees) costs and loans in process     (63 )     (583 )     (578 )     (429 )     (396 )
    Allowance for credit losses     (11,544 )     (10,903 )     (10,851 )     (10,608 )     (10,970 )
    Loans, net     990,242       969,089       952,611       937,619       926,060  
    Loans held for sale, at fair value     3,250       2,513       2,697       853       1,857  
    Bank owned life insurance     39,176       38,826       38,578       38,333       38,090  
    Premises and equipment, net     20,976       20,986       20,696       19,709       23,911  
    Goodwill     32,377       32,377       32,377       32,377       32,377  
    Other intangible assets, net     2,729       2,900       3,071       3,241       3,414  
    Mortgage servicing rights     3,041       2,997       2,977       3,158       3,368  
    Real estate owned, net     428       428       428       928       934  
    Other assets     23,309       28,149       29,684       28,988       29,459  
    Total assets   $ 1,563,651     $ 1,560,754     $ 1,553,217     $ 1,561,672     $ 1,557,586  
                                             
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                                        
    Liabilities:                                        
    Deposits:                                        
    Non-interest-bearing demand     360,188       360,631       364,386       367,103       395,046  
    Money market and checking     565,629       546,385       583,315       613,613       586,651  
    Savings     145,825       150,996       154,000       152,381       157,112  
    Certificates of deposit     203,860       192,470       191,823       183,154       169,225  
    Total deposits     1,275,502       1,250,482       1,293,524       1,316,251       1,308,034  
    FHLB and other borrowings     92,050       131,330       74,716       64,662       82,569  
    Subordinated debentures     21,651       21,651       21,651       21,651       21,651  
    Repurchase agreements     9,528       8,745       15,895       12,714       12,590  
    Accrued interest and other liabilities     25,229       20,292       20,760       19,480       23,185  
    Total liabilities     1,423,960       1,432,500       1,426,546       1,434,758       1,448,029  
    Stockholders’ equity:                                        
    Common stock     55       55       55       55       52  
    Additional paid-in capital     89,532       89,469       89,364       89,208       84,568  
    Retained earnings     60,549       57,774       55,912       54,282       57,280  
    Treasury stock, at cost     (396 )     (330 )     (249 )     (75 )      
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (10,049 )     (18,714 )     (18,411 )     (16,556 )     (32,343 )
    Total stockholders’ equity     139,691       128,254       126,671       126,914       109,557  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 1,563,651     $ 1,560,754     $ 1,553,217     $ 1,561,672     $ 1,557,586  


    LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

    Consolidated Statements of Earnings (unaudited)

    (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)   Three months ended,     Nine months ended,  
        September 30,     June 30,     September 30,     September 30,     September 30,  
        2024     2024     2023     2024     2023  
    Interest income:                                        
    Loans   $ 15,933     $ 15,022     $ 13,531     $ 45,445     $ 37,530  
    Investment securities:                                        
    Taxable     2,301       2,359       2,445       7,088       7,141  
    Tax-exempt     747       759       772       2,270       2,333  
    Interest-bearing deposits at banks     41       40       46       144       193  
    Total interest income     19,022       18,180       16,794       54,947       47,197  
    Interest expense:                                        
    Deposits     5,830       5,673       4,384       16,960       10,375  
    FHLB and other borrowings     1,100       1,027       1,251       3,149       2,845  
    Subordinated debentures     416       418       417       1,246       1,168  
    Repurchase agreements     72       88       116       267       403  
    Total interest expense     7,418       7,206       6,168       21,622       14,791  
    Net interest income     11,604       10,974       10,626       33,325       32,406  
    Provision for credit losses     500                   800       299  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses     11,104       10,974       10,626       32,525       32,107  
    Non-interest income:                                        
    Fees and service charges     2,880       2,691       2,618       8,032       7,457  
    Gains on sales of loans, net     704       648       491       1,864       2,014  
    Bank owned life insurance     254       248       230       747       671  
    Other     415       133       313       730       834  
    Total non-interest income     4,253       3,720       3,652       11,373       10,976  
    Non-interest expense:                                        
    Compensation and benefits     5,803       5,504       5,811       16,839       16,925  
    Occupancy and equipment     1,429       1,294       1,373       4,113       4,136  
    Data processing     464       492       458       1,437       1,478  
    Amortization of mortgage servicing rights and other intangibles     256       256       474       924       1,407  
    Professional fees     573       649       624       1,869       1,722  
    Valuation allowance on real estate held for sale           979             1,108        
    Other     2,034       1,921       1,989       5,915       5,753  
    Total non-interest expense     10,559       11,095       10,729       32,205       31,421  
    Earnings before income taxes     4,798       3,599       3,549       11,693       11,662  
    Income tax expense     867       587       671       1,972       2,065  
    Net earnings   $ 3,931     $ 3,012     $ 2,878     $ 9,721     $ 9,597  
                                             
    Net earnings per share (1)                                        
    Basic   $ 0.72     $ 0.55     $ 0.53     $ 1.77     $ 1.75  
    Diluted     0.72       0.55       0.52       1.77       1.75  
    Dividends per share (1)     0.21       0.21       0.20       0.63       0.60  
    Shares outstanding at end of period (1)     5,501,221       5,469,566       5,481,805       5,501,221       5,481,805  
    Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic (1)     5,490,808       5,471,724       5,479,909       5,477,453       5,476,703  
    Weighted average common shares outstanding – diluted (1)     5,495,728       5,474,336       5,482,633       5,481,456       5,481,270  
                                             
    Tax equivalent net interest income   $ 11,777     $ 11,167     $ 10,809     $ 33,852     $ 32,974  

    (1) Share and per share values at or for the period ended September 30, 2023 have been adjusted to give effect to the 5% stock dividend paid during December 2023.

    LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Select Ratios and Other Data (unaudited)

    (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)   As of or for the
    three months ended,
        As of or for the
    nine months ended,
     
        September 30,     June 30,     September 30,     September 30,     September 30,  
        2024     2024     2023     2024     2023  
    Performance ratios:                                      
    Return on average assets (1)     1.00 %     0.78 %     0.74 %     0.84 %     0.84 %
    Return on average equity (1)     11.82 %     9.72 %     9.87 %     10.18 %     11.13 %
    Net interest margin (1)(2)     3.30 %     3.21 %     3.06 %     3.21 %     3.19 %
    Effective tax rate     18.1 %     16.3 %     18.9 %     16.9 %     17.7 %
    Efficiency ratio (3)     66.5 %     67.9 %     73.8 %     68.8 %     71.0 %
    Non-interest income to total income (3)     25.5 %     25.4 %     25.6 %     25.0 %     25.3 %
                                             
    Average balances:                                        
    Investment securities   $ 428,301     $ 437,136     $ 486,706     $ 440,744     $ 493,853  
    Loans     985,659       955,104       906,289       962,252       877,048  
    Assets     1,562,482       1,545,816       1,549,724       1,554,682       1,528,938  
    Interest-bearing deposits     936,218       936,237       902,727       935,958       886,227  
    FHLB and other borrowings     77,958       72,875       89,441       74,496       70,774  
    Subordinated debentures     21,651       21,651       21,651       21,651       21,651  
    Repurchase agreements     10,774       11,524       15,387       12,218       19,903  
    Stockholders’ equity   $ 132,271     $ 124,624     $ 115,644     $ 127,597     $ 115,275  
                                             
    Average tax equivalent yield/cost (1):                                        
    Investment securities     2.99 %     3.04 %     2.77 %     2.99 %     2.72 %
    Loans     6.43 %     6.33 %     5.93 %     6.31 %     5.72 %
    Total interest-bearing assets     5.38 %     5.29 %     4.81 %     5.26 %     4.62 %
    Interest-bearing deposits     2.48 %     2.44 %     1.93 %     2.42 %     1.57 %
    FHLB and other borrowings     5.61 %     5.67 %     5.55 %     5.65 %     5.37 %
    Subordinated debentures     7.64 %     7.76 %     7.64 %     7.69 %     7.21 %
    Repurchase agreements     2.66 %     3.07 %     2.99 %     2.92 %     2.71 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     2.82 %     2.78 %     2.38 %     2.77 %     1.98 %
                                             
    Capital ratios:                                        
    Equity to total assets     8.93 %     8.22 %     7.03 %                
    Tangible equity to tangible assets (3)     6.84 %     6.09 %     4.85 %                
    Book value per share   $ 25.39     $ 23.45     $ 19.99                  
    Tangible book value per share (3)   $ 19.01     $ 17.00     $ 13.46                  
                                             
    Rollforward of allowance for credit losses (loans):                                        
    Beginning balance   $ 10,903     $ 10,851     $ 10,449     $ 10,608     $ 8,791  
    Adoption of CECL                             1,523  
    Charge-offs     (153 )     (119 )     (142 )     (413 )     (408 )
    Recoveries     144       171       663       449       814  
    Provision for credit losses for loans     650                   900       250  
    Ending balance   $ 11,544     $ 10,903     $ 10,970     $ 11,544     $ 10,970  
                                             
    Allowance for unfunded loan commitments   $ 150     $ 300     $ 200                  
                                             
    Non-performing assets:                                        
    Non-accrual loans   $ 13,415     $ 5,007     $ 4,440                  
    Accruing loans over 90 days past due                                  
    Real estate owned     428       428       934                  
    Total non-performing assets   $ 13,843     $ 5,435     $ 5,374                  
                                             
    Loans 30-89 days delinquent   $ 7,301     $ 1,872     $ 6,173                  
                                             
    Other ratios:                                        
    Loans to deposits     77.64 %     77.50 %     70.80 %                
    Loans 30-89 days delinquent and still accruing to gross loans outstanding     0.73 %     0.19 %     0.66 %                
    Total non-performing loans to gross loans outstanding     1.34 %     0.51 %     0.47 %                
    Total non-performing assets to total assets     0.89 %     0.35 %     0.35 %                
    Allowance for credit losses to gross loans outstanding     1.15 %     1.11 %     1.17 %                
    Allowance for credit losses to total non-performing loans     86.05 %     217.76 %     247.07 %                
    Net loan charge-offs to average loans (1)     0.00 %     -0.02 %     -0.23 %     0.00 %     -0.06 %
    (1 ) Information is annualized.
    (2 ) Net interest margin is presented on a fully tax equivalent basis, using a 21% federal tax rate.
    (3 ) Non-GAAP financial measures. See the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of this press release for a reconciliation to the most comparable GAAP equivalent.
         

    LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Non-GAAP Finacials Measures (unaudited)

    (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)   As of or for the
    three months ended,
        As of or for the
    nine months ended,
     
        September 30,     June 30,     September 30,     September 30,     September 30,  
        2024     2024     2023     2024     2023  
                                   
    Non-GAAP financial ratio reconciliation:                                        
    Total non-interest expense   $ 10,559     $ 11,095     $ 10,729     $ 32,205     $ 31,421  
    Less: foreclosure and real estate owned expense     (23 )     39       (1 )     (34 )     (21 )
    Less: amortization of other intangibles     (171 )     (171 )     (196 )     (512 )     (591 )
    Less: valuation allowance on real estate held for sale           (979 )           (1,108 )      
    Adjusted non-interest expense (A)     10,365       9,984       10,532       30,551       30,809  
                                             
    Net interest income (B)     11,604       10,974       10,626       33,325       32,406  
                                             
    Non-interest income     4,253       3,720       3,652       11,373       10,976  
    Less: losses (gains) on sales of investment securities, net                              
    Less: gains on sales of premises and equipment and foreclosed assets     (273 )     9             (264 )     (1 )
    Adjusted non-interest income (C)   $ 3,980     $ 3,729     $ 3,652     $ 11,109     $ 10,975  
                                             
    Efficiency ratio (A/(B+C))     66.5 %     67.9 %     73.8 %     68.8 %     71.0 %
    Non-interest income to total income (C/(B+C))     25.5 %     25.4 %     25.6 %     25.0 %     25.3 %
                                             
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 139,691     $ 128,254     $ 109,557                  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets     (35,106 )     (35,277 )     (35,791 )                
    Tangible equity (D)   $ 104,585     $ 92,977     $ 73,766                  
                                             
    Total assets   $ 1,563,651     $ 1,560,754     $ 1,557,586                  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets     (35,106 )     (35,277 )     (35,791 )                
    Tangible assets (E)   $ 1,528,545     $ 1,525,477     $ 1,521,795                  
                                             
    Tangible equity to tangible assets (D/E)     6.84 %     6.09 %     4.85 %                
                                             
    Shares outstanding at end of period (F)     5,501,221       5,469,566       5,481,805                  
                                             
    Tangible book value per share (D/F)   $ 19.01     $ 17.00     $ 13.46                  

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Welch Joins NEK Broadband and USDA Rural Development to Celebrate $20.5 Million in Rural Broadband Funding 

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)

    ISLAND POND, VT — U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Chair of the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Rural Development and Energy, today joined NEK Broadband, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development officials, broadband advocates, customers, workers, and State and local leaders to announce that NEK Broadband was awarded $2.8 million through the USDA’s Community Connect Grant program. The fiber infrastructure project funded by this program will help provide high-speed internet to the residents of Groton. Including this funding, USDA Rural Development has invested more than $20.5 million in connectivity projects throughout Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom through NEK Broadband.  
    Before the press conference, NEK Broadband taught Senator Welch and USDA RD State Director Sarah Waring how to splice broadband fiber. 
    “With the help of the USDA RD and this federal funding from the Biden-Harris Administration, NEK Broadband is meeting the challenge and building out the broadband that every rural community deserves and needs. I am thrilled to celebrate more than $20 million total in USDA grants, including new funding through the Community Connect grant program,” said Senator Peter Welch. “To get this fiber to the barn at the end of the dirt road requires overcoming so many practical challenges—and that takes continuity, that takes confidence, competence, collaboration, and cooperation. Every day brings new problems to solve, and they’re solving them every day to provide their neighbors with high-speed, reliable internet. I’ll keep fighting in the Senate for more broadband funding and will keep advocating for the passage of my bipartisan bill to improve the ReConnect program and speed broadband deployment.” 
    “This Community Connect grant is special because of the way in which residents and town officials in Groton stepped up to find solutions in coordination with regional, state, and federal resources to contribute to NEK Broadband’s mission to build public infrastructure and help bring service to the unserved in over 70 towns in northeastern and central Vermont,” said Christa Shute, Executive Director, NEK Community Broadband. “With the assistance of this grant from USDA, NEK Community Broadband dba NEKCV takes another step forward in our digital equity program by staffing and equipping three community centers in Groton and Ryegate that will help provide opportunities for the residents to access high speed internet during days, evenings, and weekends, while providing training, teaching and resources to build digital literacy.” 
    View photos and B-Roll from the event below:

    “Among the many things we learned over the last few years, is that having reliable online access should be seen as a human right for everyone—especially those living in our remotest rural communities,” said Sarah Waring, USDA Rural Development State Director for Vermont and New Hampshire. “Securing important goods and services, and simply being connected to friends and family, can no longer be a hit-or-miss proposition that depends on your area code. We all know the stories of kids at home who can’t access school assignments, or small businesses who can’t make online sales, or the inadequate delivery of telemedicine where there’s no high-speed internet access. That’s why I am so proud that the Biden-Harris Administration continues to send a clear and resounding message to our neighbors in this remote corner of our state: we’re here, with your local providers, working hard to get you connected.” 
    “The Community Connect Grant will transform the ability of our residents and area organizations to access & leverage the enormous potential of the Internet for jobs, education, healthcare, public safety, and community development,” said Michael Gaiss, Groton’s primary representative on the Governing Board of NEK Broadband. “The impact on our town and region will be felt for years to come. Our grateful thanks and appreciation to the USDA for this opportunity.” 
    Including today’s funding, USDA RD has invested $20,501,567 in Northeast Kingdom connectivity projects through NEK Broadband, a nonprofit organization known as a Communication Union District (CUD). In August, NEK Broadband and CVFiber, a CUD serving towns in Central Vermont, merged to form NEKCV. In May 2023, USDA obligated more than $17 million in broadband funding through the ReConnect Grant Program. The same month, Senator Welch convened a hearing on rural broadband access featuring testimony from Christa Shute. In August 2021, NEK Broadband received a $190,380 Rural Business Development Grant to extend the fiber network into western Concord and the town of Waterford. 
    As Chair of the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Rural Development and Energy, Senator Welch introduced the bipartisan ReConnecting Rural America Act, which would codify and clarify components of USDA’s ReConnect Loan and Grant Program and, in so doing, reduce red tape, and speed broadband deployment. The ReConnect Program plays a central role in expanding access to high-speed broadband in rural America.s. The bipartisan bill was included in the Senate’s draft Farm Bill, the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Wyden, Merkley, Blumenauer, Hoyle: State of Oregon & Four Tribes Earn More Than $12 Million in Federal Funds for Grid Resilience

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)
    October 30, 2024
    Tribes with Oregon presence to receive federal investments are the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, Burns Paiute and Nez Perce
    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley as well as U.S. Reps. Earl Blumenauer and Val Hoyle today announced that Oregon’s Energy Department has secured $10.9 million and four Tribes with members in Oregon have earned a combined $1.16 million in federal investment to modernize the electric grid and reduce the impacts of extreme weather while also ensuring power sector reliability.
    The four Tribes securing the federal funds are the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, Burns Paiute and Nez Perce.
    “Oregon families, small businesses, schools, hospitals and more rely on a dependable energy grid, said Wyden, who also has introduced the Grid Resilience Improvement through Dedicated (GRID) Assistance Act. “These fresh federal investments in grid resilience are incredibly timely after this year’s state record of nearly 2 million acres burned by wildfires. I’m gratified these resources are heading to these Tribes along with the state Energy Department, and will keep battling for similar funds for communities throughout the state.”
    “As devastating wildfires, droughts, and intense winter storms continue to grip Oregon, we must invest in strengthening our power grids to safeguard Oregon families and businesses,” Merkley said. “It is great news that these federal funds from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are heading to the Oregon Department of Energy and Tribes to make these critical improvements that will make all the difference for communities across Oregon when disasters strike.”
    “Our communities need an electric grid that can withstand the increasingly severe impacts of the climate crisis. Thanks to Democrats in Congress, Oregon and Tribal nations are receiving the investments necessary build this reality with a smarter, more resilient power grid,” said Blumenauer.
    “As this season’s record-breaking wildfire season showed, extreme weather, caused by the climate crisis, is becoming increasingly common across Oregon,” Hoyle said. “These funds will help to fortify our energy infrastructure against extreme weather and improve its dependability across the state and in Tribal communities. I’ll continue working with federal and state partners to ensure Oregon’s electric grid is safe and resilient.”
    The federal money for the state Energy Department and four Tribes is part of a combined total of $473.6 million nationally in fiscal year 2024 Grid Resilience State and Tribal Formula Grants from the U.S. Department of Energy. The resources will be distributed as follows:
    ·       Oregon Department of Energy, $10.9 million 
    ·       Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs, $454,958
    ·       Nez Perce Tribe, $290,877
    ·       Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribes of Indians, $268,172
    ·       Burns Paiute Tribe, $148,901
    “The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs is thankful for the federal government’s financial investment in our ability to protect our communities from extreme weather situations,” said Jonathan W. Smith, Sr., Chairman, Tribal Council for the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. “These funds will allow us to develop community resilience centers on our reservation for our tribal members to seek refuge during unbearably hot and cold weather patterns.”
    “The Burns-Paiute tribe has identified energy security and resilience as a key priority,” said Tracy Kennedy, Chair of the Burns-Paiute Tribe. “We appreciate the support from Senator Wyden and Senator Merkley in helping us get funding to achieve our goals.” 
    “For the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, we aim to use these generous funds to improve the reliability of delivering power, water and utility services provided by our own Umpqua Indian Utility Cooperative to the many Cow Creek Umpqua Tribally-owned properties, our Tribal citizens, and our community members in Canyonville,” said Carla Keene, Chairman of the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians. “This grant allows us to exercise our sovereign rights, strengthen the resilience of our system, and put us closer to achieving one of our long-term goals of energy independence.”– 
    “The Nez Perce Tribe is committed to helping the Northwest meet its energy needs in a cleaner and smarter way that will address the impacts of current energy demands on salmon restoration,” said Shannon F. Wheeler, Chairman, Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee. “These funds are an important component of this collaborative work with energy utilities and other stakeholders in the Northwest and we are excited that these funds will allow us to continue to do this work.”  

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: North American Construction Group Ltd. Announces Results for the Third Quarter Ended September 30, 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ACHESON, Alberta, Oct. 30, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — North American Construction Group Ltd. (“NACG”) (TSX:NOA.TO/NYSE:NOA) today announced results for the third quarter ended September 30, 2024. Unless otherwise indicated, financial figures are expressed in Canadian dollars and compared to the prior period ended September 30, 2023.

    Third Quarter 2024 Highlights:

    • Combined revenue of $367.2 million compared favorably to $274.8 million in the same period last year, is a third quarter record, and reflected the best operational quarter to date from the Australian fleet of the MacKellar Group which was acquired on October 1, 2023.
    • Reported revenue of $286.9 million, compared to $196.9 million in the same period last year, was primarily driven by strong equipment utilization of 84% in Australia but was also supported by the Canadian heavy equipment fleet which posted an increase from 2024 Q2.
    • Our net share of revenue from equity consolidated joint ventures was $80.3 million in 2024 Q3 and compared to $77.9 million in the same period last year as the increases at the Fargo project in the current quarter were offset by gold mine project scopes in Northern Ontario completed in the prior quarter.
    • Adjusted EBITDA of $106.4 million and margin of 29.0% compared favorably to the prior period operating metrics of $59.4 million and 21.6%, respectively, as revenue increases resulted in higher gross EBITDA with margin improvements driven by effective operations in Australia and Canada.
    • Combined gross profit of $80.4 million and margin of 21.9% compares favorably to the 13.8% posted in the same period last year as both diversification efforts and effective operations during steady and consistent months contributed to improved margins in the quarter.
    • Cash flows generated from operating activities of $48.2 million was higher than the $37.5 million generated in the prior period as higher cash generation from the strong EBITDA was offset by the temporary impact of changes to working capital in the quarter.
    • Free cash flow generated in the quarter was $10.8 million. Free cash flow prior to working capital changes and increases in capital work in progress was over $55 million resulting from strong revenues and margins offset by our routine capital maintenance programs.
    • Net debt was $882.5 million at September 30, 2024, an increase of $159.1 million from December 31, 2023, as year-to-date free cash flow usage and growth asset purchases required debt financing. The cash-related interest rate was 6.5% driven by Bank of Canada posted rates and corresponding equipment financing rates.
    • On October 29, 2024, the Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly dividend of twelve cents which represents a 20% increase from the previous rate of ten cents per quarter.
    • Additional highlights include: i) in August, signed a $375 million five-year contract for fully maintained equipment fleet in Queensland; ii) in September, surpassed the 50% completion mark at the Fargo-Moorhead flood diversion project, iii) in October, completed delivery to site of twenty-five haul trucks from Canada to Australia; iv) commenced go-live activities for the Company’s ERP system in Australia phased integration ongoing through early November and iv) extended the credit facility agreement through to October 2027.

    Joe Lambert, President and CEO, stated, “I would like to thank our operations team for their safe and efficient performance this quarter. The quarterly records set in Australia demonstrate both growth and operational excellence. The recent five-year contract award and the 25 trucks delivered from Fort McMurray have pushed this region to higher than 50% of our overall business and are further indicators of what will be an exciting 2025. In the oil sands region, we are in discussions with producers and expect to secure meaningful contracts in the near term, reaffirming strong client relationships and supporting our targets for next year.”

    Consolidated Financial Highlights

        Three months ended   Nine months ended
        September 30,   September 30,
    (dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)   2024   2023(iv)   2024   2023(iv)
    Revenue   $ 286,857     $ 196,881     $ 860,197     $ 636,398  
    Total combined revenue(i)     367,155       274,757       1,042,591       875,666  
                     
    Gross profit     65,098       26,518       168,057       89,213  
    Gross profit margin(i)     22.7 %     13.5 %     19.5 %     14.0 %
                     
    Combined gross profit(i)     80,415       38,004       205,229       130,181  
    Combined gross profit margin(i)(ii)     21.9 %     13.8 %     19.7 %     14.9 %
                     
    Operating income     53,805       14,344       130,786       50,386  
                     
    Adjusted EBITDA(i)(iii)     106,384       59,371       286,516       195,827  
    Adjusted EBITDA margin(i)(iii)     29.0 %     21.6 %     27.5 %     22.4 %
                     
    Net income     13,901       11,387       39,277       45,495  
    Adjusted net earnings(i)     31,253       14,295       72,961       52,060  
                     
    Cash provided by operating activities     48,184       37,512       119,063       109,521  
    Cash provided by operating activities prior to change in working capital(i)     79,838       41,666       222,641       134,646  
                     
    Free cash flow(i)     10,785       8,940       (32,518 )     (21,817 )
                     
    Purchase of PPE     61,812       39,295       203,772       114,210  
    Sustaining capital additions(i)     21,127       42,290       118,317       127,792  
    Growth capital additions(i)     21,437       1,727       60,987       4,475  
                     
    Basic net income per share   $ 0.52     $ 0.43     $ 1.47     $ 1.72  
    Adjusted EPS(i)   $ 1.17     $ 0.54     $ 2.73     $ 1.96  

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
    (ii)Combined gross profit margin is calculated using combined gross profit over total combined revenue.
    (iii)Adjusted EBITDA margin is calculated using adjusted EBITDA over total combined revenue.
    (iv)The prior year amounts are adjusted to reflect a change in accounting policy. See “Change in significant accounting policy – Basis of presentation”.

        Three months ended   Nine months ended
        September 30,   September 30,
    (dollars in thousands)   2024   2023   2024   2023
    Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows                
    Cash provided by operating activities   $ 48,184     $ 37,512     $ 119,063     $ 109,521  
    Cash used in investing activities     (60,221 )     (26,970 )     (198,919 )     (107,123 )
    Effect of exchange rate on changes in cash     1,385       (1,100 )     508       (1,462 )
    Add back of growth and non-cash items included in the above figures:                
    Growth capital additions(i)(ii)     21,437       1,727       60,987       4,475  
    Capital additions financed by leases(i)           (2,229 )     (14,157 )     (27,228 )
    Free cash flow(i)   $ 10,785     $ 8,940     $ (32,518 )   $ (21,817 )

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
    (ii)Included above in Cash used in investing activities.

    Declaration of Quarterly Dividend

    On October 29, 2024, the NACG Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly dividend (the “Dividend”) of twelve Canadian cents ($0.12) per common share, payable to common shareholders of record at the close of business on November 27, 2024. The Dividend will be paid on January 3, 2025, and is an eligible dividend for Canadian income tax purposes.

    Financial Results for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2024

    Revenue for 2024 Q3 of $286.9 million represented an increase of approximately $90.0 million (or 46%) from 2023 Q3. The increase is primarily due to the inclusion of results from the MacKellar Group (“MacKellar”) following our acquisition on October 1, 2023.

    The Heavy Equipment – Australia segment showed strong performance, driven by MacKellar’s Q3 results generated from stable operating conditions during the quarter. Equipment utilization of the MacKellar fleet for the quarter of 84% was similar to 2024 Q2 but generated higher revenue as growth assets commissioned late in the second quarter in Western Australia and Queensland provided full quarter contributions. The month of July was particularly strong with utilization being above the target of 85% while August and September averaged 82%. DGI Trading Pty Ltd. (“DGI”) posted lower revenue in the quarter due to timing of large component sales but continues to benefit from international demand for low-cost used components and major parts required by heavy equipment fleets in the mining industry.

    The Heavy Equipment – Canada segment posted a decline in revenue compared to the prior year as equipment utilization was 51% for the quarter in comparison to 56% in 2023 Q3. Quarter over quarter, the decrease in revenue represented a 23% decrease and was primarily driven by changes in work scopes at the Fort Hills and Syncrude mines offset by increases in operating hours at the Millennium mine. Additionally, the prior year’s quarter benefited from higher utilization rates from NACG assets being operated at the gold mine in northern Ontario, a project that concluded in 2023 Q3. When comparing to 2024 Q2, top-line revenue achieved in the quarter was 8% higher on consistent operating conditions from July to September as well as increased work scopes at the Millennium mine.

    Combined revenue of $367.2 million represented a $92.4 million (or 34%) increase from 2023 Q3. Our share of revenue generated in 2024 Q3 by joint ventures and affiliates was $80.3 million, compared to $77.9 million in 2023 Q3. The Fargo-Moorhead flood diversion project, which completed another strong operational quarter, posted a 32% increase from scopes completed in the prior quarter and surpassed the 50% completion mark during the quarter. Mostly offsetting this variance was the completion of the gold mine project in northern Ontario which occurred in 2023 Q3.

    Combined gross profit and margin of $80.4 million and 21.9% compares favorably to the $38.0 million and 13.8% posted in the prior quarter and was the compilation of strong operations across all business lines. In particular, consistent weather conditions in Australia resulted in productive operations and a 24.6% gross margin over the three months. In Canada, heavy equipment operations posted a 19.4% margin as operations stabilized from the first half of the year. The joint ventures posted a 19.1% margin, up from 14.7% in the prior quarter, as Nuna returned to profitable operations. The increases in margin were offset slightly within the Fargo joint ventures as additional costs were recognized in the quarter primarily related to project cost escalation.

    Adjusted EBITDA and the associated margin of $106.4 million and 29.0% exceeded our 2023 Q3 results of $59.4 million and 21.6%, respectively. As mentioned above and despite lower revenue in the oil sands region, effective and efficient operation of the heavy equipment fleets in Australia and Canada generated a strong EBITDA margin. EBITDA margin for this quarter was more consistent with the first quarter and is reflective of the underlying consistent business of our heavy equipment fleets.

    Depreciation of our Canadian and Australian heavy equipment fleets was 13.4% of revenue in the quarter. Depreciation as a percentage of revenue was 16.4% for the Heavy Equipment – Canada fleet which is higher than our historical average as increased customer demand for heavy equipment rentals has changed the revenue profile. The Heavy Equipment – Australia fleet, which averaged approximately 11.7% of revenue reflected both productive operations in the quarter as well as the depreciation of fair market values allocated upon purchase. On a combined basis, depreciation averaged 12.1% of combined revenue in the quarter as the lower capital intensity in Fargo and Nuna joint ventures modestly reduced the ratio.

    General and administrative expenses (excluding stock-based compensation) were $9.6 million, or 3.4% of revenue, compared to $6.9 million, or 3.5% of revenue in 2023 Q3. The increase in expenses reflects the acquisition of the MacKellar Group. Cash related interest expense for the quarter was $14.2 million at an average cost of debt of 6.5%, compared to $7.8 million at an average cost of debt of 7.1% in 2023 Q3, as rates posted by the Bank of Canada directly impact our Credit Facility and have a delayed impact on the rates for secured equipment-backed financing. Total interest expense was $15.0 million in the quarter, compared to $8.1 million in 2023 Q3 based on the debt financing incurred upon acquisition of the MacKellar Group on October 1, 2023.

    Adjusted earnings per share (“EPS”) of $1.17 on adjusted net earnings of $31.3 million was up 117% from the prior year figure of $0.54, consistent with the adjusted EBIT performance which was up 144% quarter over quarter. As mentioned above, the step-changes in interest from the MacKellar acquisition offset EBIT performance with the effective income tax rates being comparable for both quarters. Weighted-average common shares for the third quarters of 2024 and 2023 were relatively stable at 26,823,124 and 26,700,303, respectively, net of shares classified as treasury shares.

    For the quarter, free cash flow generation was $10.8 million, driven primarily by adjusted EBITDA of $106.4 million. After accounting for sustaining capital additions of $21.1 million, cash interest expense of $14.2 million, and cash taxes paid of $9.3 million, the positive cash flow generation reached $61.8 million. However, changes in working capital and increases in capital work in progress deferred approximately $45 million of cash flow to future quarters, and the accumulation of distributable profits in our joint ventures negatively impacted cash flow by $10 million. Sustaining capital expenditures were focused on routine maintenance of heavy equipment fleets in Australia and Canada, with Canadian expenditures being lower than previous periods due to reduced operating hours and a disciplined approach in preparation for winter work scopes.

    2024 Strategic Focus Areas

    • Safety – now on an international basis, maintain our uncompromising commitment to health and safety while elevating the standard of excellence in the field;
    • Execution – enhance equipment availability in Canada and Australia through in-house fleet maintenance, reliability programs, technical improvements, and management systems;
    • Operational excellence – with a specific focus on Nuna Group of Companies, put into action practical and experienced-based protocols to ensure predictable high-quality project execution;
    • Integration – implement ERP and best practices at MacKellar, including identification of opportunities to better utilize our capital and equipment in Australia;
    • Diversification – pursue diversification of customers and resources through strategic partnerships, industry expertise and investment in Indigenous joint ventures; and
    • Sustainability – further develop and deliver into our environmental, social, and governance targets as disclosed and committed to in our annual reporting.

    Liquidity

    Our current liquidity positions us well moving forward to fund organic growth and the required correlated working capital investments. Including equipment financing availability and factoring in the amended Credit Facility agreement, total available capital liquidity of $173.1 million includes total liquidity of $135.7 million and $20.0 million of unused finance lease borrowing availability as at September 30, 2024. Liquidity is primarily provided by the terms of our $485.7 million credit facility which allows for funds availability based on a trailing twelve-month EBITDA as defined in the agreement.

        September 30,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
    Cash   $ 77,670     $ 88,614  
    Credit Facility borrowing limit     485,700       478,022  
    Credit Facility drawn     (395,700 )     (317,488 )
    Letters of credit outstanding     (32,011 )     (31,272 )
    Cash liquidity(i)   $ 135,659     $ 217,876  
    Finance lease borrowing limit     350,000       350,000  
    Other debt borrowing limit     20,000       20,000  
    Equipment financing drawn     (267,544 )     (220,466 )
    Guarantees provided to joint ventures     (65,008 )     (74,831 )
    Total capital liquidity(i)   $ 173,107     $ 292,579  

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.


    NACG’s Outlook for 2024

    The following table provides projected key measures for 2024. These measures are predicated on contracts currently in place, including expected renewals, and the heavy equipment fleet that we own and operate.

    Key measures   2024
    Combined revenue(i)   $1.4 – $1.5B
    Adjusted EBITDA(i)   $395 – $415M
    Sustaining capital(i)   $150 – $170M
    Adjusted EPS(i)   $3.95 – $4.15
    Free cash flow(i)   $100 – $120M
         
    Capital allocation    
    Growth spending(i)   $85 – $95M
    Net debt leverage(i)   Targeting 2.1x

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.


    Conference Call and Webcast

    Management will hold a conference call and webcast to discuss our financial results for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, tomorrow, Thursday, October 31, 2024, at 7:00 am Mountain Time (9:00 am Eastern Time).

    The call can be accessed by dialing:
              Toll free: 1-800-717-1738
              Conference ID: 86919

    A replay will be available through November 29, 2024, by dialing:
              Toll Free: 1-888-660-6264
              Conference ID: 86919
              Playback Passcode: 86919

    The 2024 Q3 earnings presentation for the webcast will be available for download on the company’s website at www.nacg.ca/presentations/

    The live presentation and webcast can be accessed at:

    https://onlinexperiences.com/scripts/Server.nxp?LASCmd=AI:4;F:QS!10100&ShowUUID=71BDBAD7-6AC1-4CF9-9CFF-5BBCBBDEF924

    A replay will be available until November 29, 2024, using the link provided.

    Basis of Presentation

    We have prepared our consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“US GAAP”). Unless otherwise specified, all dollar amounts discussed are in Canadian dollars. Please see the Management’s Discussion and Analysis (“MD&A”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, for further detail on the matters discussed in this release. In addition to the MD&A, please reference the dedicated 2024 Q3 Results Presentation for more information on our results and projections which can be found on our website under Investors – Presentations.

    Change in significant accounting policy – Basis of presentation

    During the first quarter of 2024, we changed our accounting policy for the elimination of our proportionate share of profit from downstream sales to affiliates and joint ventures to record through equity earnings in affiliates and joint ventures on the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Prior to this change, we eliminated our proportionate share of profit on downstream sales to affiliates and joint ventures through revenue and cost of sales. The change in accounting policy simplifies the presentation for downstream profit eliminations and has no cumulative impact on retained earnings. We have accounted for the change retrospectively in accordance with the requirements of US GAAP Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 250 by restating the comparative period. For details of retrospective changes, refer to note 16 in the Financial Statements.

    Forward-Looking Information

    The information provided in this release contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include statements preceded by, followed by or that include the words “anticipate”, “believe”, “expect”, “should” or similar expressions and include all information provided under the above heading “NACG’s Outlook”.

    The material factors or assumptions used to develop the above forward-looking statements and the risks and uncertainties to which such forward-looking statements are subject, are highlighted in the MD&A for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2024. Actual results could differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements because of any number of factors and uncertainties, many of which are beyond NACG’s control. Undue reliance should not be placed upon forward-looking statements and NACG undertakes no obligation, other than those required by applicable law, to update or revise those statements. For more complete information about NACG, please read our disclosure documents filed with the SEC and the CSA. These free documents can be obtained by visiting EDGAR on the SEC website at www.sec.gov or on the CSA website at www.sedarplus.com.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    This press release presents certain non-GAAP financial measures because management believes that they may be useful to investors in analyzing our business performance, leverage and liquidity. The non-GAAP financial measures we present include “adjusted EBIT”, “adjusted EBITDA”, “adjusted EBITDA margin”, “adjusted EPS”, “adjusted net earnings”, “capital additions”, “capital work in progress”, “cash provided by operating activities prior to change in working capital”, “combined gross profit”, “combined gross profit margin”, “equity investment EBIT”, “free cash flow”, “general and administrative expenses (excluding stock-based compensation)”, “gross profit margin”, “growth capital”, “margin”, “net debt”, “sustaining capital”, “total capital liquidity”, “total combined revenue”, and “total debt”. A non-GAAP financial measure is defined by relevant regulatory authorities as a numerical measure of an issuer’s historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flow that is not specified, defined or determined under the issuer’s GAAP and that is not presented in an issuer’s financial statements. These non-GAAP measures do not have any standardized meaning and therefore are unlikely to be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. They should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. Each non-GAAP financial measure used in this press release is defined and reconciled to its most directly comparable GAAP measure in the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of our Management’s Discussion and Analysis filed concurrently with this press release.

    Reconciliation of total reported revenue to total combined revenue

        Three months ended   Nine months ended
        September 30,   September 30,
    (dollars in thousands)     2024   2023(ii)     2024   2023(ii)
    Revenue from wholly-owned entities per financial statements   $ 286,857     $ 196,881     $ 860,197     $ 636,398  
    Share of revenue from investments in affiliates and joint ventures     144,574       168,667       382,789       516,637  
    Elimination of joint venture subcontract revenue     (64,276 )     (90,791 )     (200,395 )     (277,369 )
    Total combined revenue(i)   $ 367,155     $ 274,757     $ 1,042,591     $ 875,666  

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
    (ii)The prior year amounts are adjusted to reflect a change in accounting policy. See “Change in significant accounting policy – Basis of presentation”.


    Reconciliation of reported gross profit to combined gross profit

        Three months ended   Nine months ended
        September 30,   September 30,
    (dollars in thousands)     2024
      2023(ii)     2024
      2023(ii)
    Gross profit from wholly-owned entities per financial statements   $ 65,098     $ 26,518     $ 168,057     $ 89,213  
    Share of gross profit from investments in affiliates and joint ventures     15,317       11,486       37,172       40,968  
    Combined gross profit(i)   $ 80,415     $ 38,004     $ 205,229     $ 130,181  

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
    (ii)The prior year amounts are adjusted to reflect a change in accounting policy. See “Change in significant accounting policy – Basis of presentation”.


    Reconciliation of net income to adjusted net earnings, adjusted EBIT, and adjusted EBITDA

        Three months ended   Nine months ended
        September 30,   September 30,
    (dollars in thousands)     2024     2023     2024     2023
    Net income   $ 13,901     $ 11,387     $ 39,277     $ 45,495  
    Adjustments:                
    Loss (gain) on disposal of property, plant and equipment     348       (311 )     641       189  
    Write-down on assets held for sale                 4,181        
    Stock-based compensation (benefit) expense     1,332       5,583       3,081       16,324  
    Change in fair value of contingent obligation from adjustments to estimates     17,727             26,585        
    Restructuring costs                 4,517        
    Acquisition costs           1,161             1,161  
    Loss on equity investment customer bankruptcy claim settlement                       759  
    Loss (gain) on derivative financial instruments     572       (2,618 )     845       (6,979 )
    Net unrealized loss (gain) on derivative financial instruments included in equity earnings in affiliates and joint ventures     1,836       572       2,806       (649 )
    Tax effect of the above items     (4,463 )     (1,479 )     (8,972 )     (4,240 )
    Adjusted net earnings(i)     31,253       14,295       72,961       52,060  
    Adjustments:                
    Tax effect of the above items     4,463       1,479       8,972       4,240  
    Increase in fair value of contingent obligation from interest accretion expense     4,262             12,360        
    Interest expense, net     15,003       8,119       44,939       22,941  
    Income tax expense     6,768       1,733       16,325       11,892  
    Equity earnings in affiliates and joint ventures(iii)     (4,428 )     (4,277 )     (9,545 )     (22,963 )
    Equity investment EBIT(i)(iii)     4,365       3,983       7,152       23,307  
    Adjusted EBIT(i)     61,686       25,332       153,164       91,477  
    Adjustments:                
    Depreciation and amortization     38,662       28,884       122,844       90,239  
    Write-down on assets held for sale                 (4,181 )      
    Equity investment depreciation and amortization(i)     6,036       5,155       14,689       14,111  
    Adjusted EBITDA(i)   $ 106,384     $ 59,371     $ 286,516     $ 195,827  
    Adjusted EBITDA margin(i)(ii)     29.0 %     21.6 %     27.5 %     22.4 %

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
    (ii)Adjusted EBITDA margin is calculated using adjusted EBITDA over total combined revenue.
    (iii)The prior year amounts are adjusted to reflect a change in presentation. See “Accounting Estimates, Pronouncements and Measures”.


    Reconciliation of equity earnings in affiliates and joint ventures to equity investment EBIT

        Three months ended   Nine months ended
        September 30,   September 30,
    (dollars in thousands)     2024   2023(ii)     2024   2023(ii)
    Equity earnings in affiliates and joint ventures   $ 4,428     $ 4,277     $ 9,545     $ 22,963  
    Adjustments:                
    Interest (income) expense, net     (618 )     (742 )     (1,337 )     (915 )
    Income tax expense     738       448       (698 )     1,294  
    Loss (gain) on disposal of property, plant and equipment     (183 )           (358 )     (35 )
    Equity investment EBIT(i)   $ 4,365     $ 3,983     $ 7,152     $ 23,307  

    (i)See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
    (ii)The prior year amounts are adjusted to reflect a change in accounting policy. See “Change in significant accounting policy – Basis of presentation”.


    About the Company

    North American Construction Group Ltd. is a premier provider of heavy civil construction and mining services in Canada, the U.S. and Australia. For 70 years, NACG has provided services to the mining, resource and infrastructure construction markets.

    For further information contact:

    Jason Veenstra
    Chief Financial Officer
    North American Construction Group Ltd.
    (780) 960-7171
    IR@nacg.ca
    www.nacg.ca

    Interim Consolidated Balance Sheets

    (Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars)
    (Unaudited) 

        September 30,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
    Assets        
    Current assets        
    Cash   $ 77,670     $ 88,614  
    Accounts receivable     158,179       97,855  
    Contract assets     16,128       35,027  
    Inventories     77,150       64,962  
    Prepaid expenses and deposits     8,477       7,402  
    Assets held for sale     7,355       1,340  
          344,959       295,200  
    Property, plant and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of $474,655 (December 31, 2023 – $423,345)     1,235,447       1,142,946  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets     13,404       12,782  
    Investments in affiliates and joint ventures     85,192       81,435  
    Other assets     5,082       7,144  
    Intangible assets     10,052       6,971  
    Total assets   $ 1,694,136     $ 1,546,478  
    Liabilities and shareholders’ equity        
    Current liabilities        
    Accounts payable   $ 123,110     $ 146,190  
    Accrued liabilities     47,724       72,225  
    Contract liabilities     300       59  
    Current portion of long-term debt     94,485       81,306  
    Current portion of contingent obligations     37,601       22,501  
    Current portion of operating lease liabilities     1,852       1,742  
          305,072       324,023  
    Long-term debt     723,487       611,313  
    Contingent obligations     101,752       93,356  
    Operating lease liabilities     12,010       11,307  
    Other long-term obligations     41,768       41,001  
    Deferred tax liabilities     118,133       108,824  
          1,302,222       1,189,824  
    Shareholders’ equity        
    Common shares (authorized – unlimited number of voting common shares; issued and outstanding – September 30, 2024 – 27,827,282 (December 31, 2023 – 27,827,282))     229,455       229,455  
    Treasury shares (September 30, 2024 – 996,435 (December 31, 2023 – 1,090,187))     (15,809 )     (16,165 )
    Additional paid-in capital     22,524       20,739  
    Retained earnings     154,398       123,032  
    Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)     1,346       (407 )
    Shareholders’ equity     391,914       356,654  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 1,694,136     $ 1,546,478  

    Interim Consolidated Statements of Operations and
    Comprehensive Income

    (Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, except per share amounts)
    (Unaudited) 

        Three months ended   Nine months ended
        September 30,   September 30,
          2024   2023(i)     2024   2023(i)
    Revenue   $ 286,857     $ 196,881     $ 860,197     $ 636,398  
    Cost of sales     183,405       141,771       570,222       457,856  
    Depreciation     38,354       28,592       121,918       89,329  
    Gross profit     65,098       26,518       168,057       89,213  
    General and administrative expenses     10,945       12,485       36,630       38,638  
    Loss (gain) on disposal of property, plant and equipment     348       (311 )     641       189  
    Operating income     53,805       14,344       130,786       50,386  
    Equity earnings in affiliates and joint ventures     (4,428 )     (4,277 )     (9,545 )     (22,963 )
    Interest expense, net     15,003       8,119       44,939       22,941  
    Change in fair value of contingent obligations     21,989             38,945        
    Loss (gain) on derivative financial instruments     572       (2,618 )     845       (6,979 )
    Income before income taxes     20,669       13,120       55,602       57,387  
    Current income tax expense     2,238       1,495       5,003       3,198  
    Deferred income tax expense     4,530       238       11,322       8,694  
    Net income   $ 13,901     $ 11,387     $ 39,277     $ 45,495  
    Other comprehensive income                
    Unrealized foreign currency translation (gain) loss     (1,115 )     1,100       (1,753 )     1,462  
    Comprehensive income   $ 15,016     $ 10,287     $ 41,030     $ 44,033  
    Per share information                
    Basic net income per share   $ 0.52     $ 0.43     $ 1.47     $ 1.72  
    Diluted net income per share   $ 0.47     $ 0.39     $ 1.32     $ 1.51  

    (i)The prior year amounts are adjusted to reflect a change in accounting policy. See “Accounting Estimates, Pronouncements and Measures”.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Larger fines for illegal slaughter, uninspected meat

    Source: Government of Canada regional news

    [embedded content]

    The sale of uninspected meat is illegal in Alberta. Illegal slaughter and food safety non-compliance pose a risk to human and animal health and could harm Alberta’s entire livestock and meat processing industry. If passed, the Meat Inspection Amendment Act would increase fines from a maximum of $10,000 to $100,000 for each offence.

    Alberta’s government is proposing to increase these fines to ensure there is a significant deterrent, so offenders are motivated to comply with the Meat Inspection Act. The proposed changes would support food safety for Albertans without increasing consumer costs for inspected meat or operating costs for industry. The changes propose increased fines for those who commit an offence under the Meat Inspection Act and would bring Alberta in line with other jurisdictions.

    “We are taking action to maintain public confidence in our food system. I strongly encourage all Albertans to buy their meat from licensed operators and retailers, and while buying meat, ask your retailer where the meat comes from and if it’s inspected.”

    RJ Sigurdson, Minister of Agriculture and Irrigation

    In addition to increasing fines, amendments would extend the amount of time to investigate and lay charges for the illegal slaughter and sale of uninspected meat. Currently, the act allows inspectors one year after the offence to investigate allegations of illegal slaughter or sale of uninspected meat. If passed, the investigation timeframe for a complex case would be extended to two years from the date the offence came to the attention of an inspector.

    “Food safety is something that most Albertans take for granted because Alberta has some of the best people in our province and country looking out for our health. Both the federal and provincial regulatory bodies truly have the best interests of all Albertans in mind when they go out each day to do their jobs. That is the reason why changes are needed and made, to improve overall food safety and strengthen our provincial acts and regulations, to protect the health and safety of all Albertans.”

    Mike Bouma, general manager, Family Meats

    “As a meat safety and quality researcher, I applaud the Alberta government for their proposed amendments to the Meat Inspection Act. The substantial increase in penalties for contravention of the Meat Inspection Act will help to ensure that the meat that is available to consumers is safe for consumption.”

    Lynn McMullen, professor emerita, University of Alberta

    Quick facts

    • The sale of uninspected meat is illegal in Alberta.
    • Any meat or meat product that is sold or distributed in Alberta must come from an inspected slaughter facility (abattoir) or processing facility.
    • Alberta government meat inspectors are on site in provincially licensed abattoirs to ensure the meat produced is safe for consumption.
    • When required, Alberta provides additional inspected slaughter days to provincially licensed facilities, including on weekends, to support cultural celebrations.    
    • Alberta licenses 121 abattoirs that produce inspected meat under the supervision of provincial meat inspectors.
    • Alberta has 65 meat inspectors and program specialists who support licensing, inspections and surveillance.

    Related information

    • Meat Inspection Act – rules on the slaughter and sale of inspected meat
    • Directory of licensed slaughter operations – abattoirs, mobile butchers, mobile butcher facilities and on-farm slaughter operations
    • Resources for provincially licensed slaughter operations
    • Bill 28: Meat Inspection Amendment Act

    Multimedia

    • Watch the news conference
    • Listen to the news conference

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: African Development Bank Approves a $75 Million Participation in Export Trading Group’s Sustainability Linked Loan for Core Value Chain Financing…

    Source: African Development Bank Group

    The African Development Bank Group has approved a $75 million financing package to support Export Trading Group (ETG), a Mauritius-based conglomerate with extensive operations across Africa. ETG boasts a diverse portfolio spanning agricultural inputs, logistics, merchandising and processing, supply chain optimization, digital transformation, and energy.

    This package includes a $65 million participation from the Bank’s own resources, along with $10 million in concessional co-financing from the Agri-Food Catalytic Financing Mechanism (ACFM) into ETGs Sustainable Linked Loan facility for financing its core value chain assets. The Agri-Food Catalytic Financing Mechanism is an internally managed Special Fund, capitalized by Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, to build markets and mobilize finance for gender-oriented and underserved agri-SMEs in Africa.

    Through participation in the Sustainable Linked Loan facility, the financing will be deployed to ETG’s core value chains in 14 countries, namely Benin, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and Zambia. This will support ETG’s processing and packaging facilities and warehouses and provide farmers with fertilizers and other agri-inputs. The Bank’s financing may be deployed to up to 28 African countries based on ETG’s emerging needs.

    The Sustainable Linked Loan facility establishes annual sustainability key performance indicators and targets focused on decarbonization, reforestation, zero deforestation, farmer extension services, and gender empowerment with inherent direct financial consequences for non-compliance.

    “The African Development Bank Group is thrilled to expand our work with Export Trade Group and support its commitment to strengthen women’s economic development in Africa. Access to finance and training in agriculture will contribute to food security and economic growth,” said Dr. Beth Dunford, Bank Vice President for Agriculture, Human and Social Development.

    ETG plans to engage 600,000 smallholder farmers by 2027, with a 25 percent target for women farmers. This includes training on sustainable farming and improved access to resources. The project is expected to boost exports from Bank regional member countries and enhance intra-regional trade, particularly within the Economic Community of West African States, Southern African Development Community, and East African Community regional economic blocks.

    The Bank’s investment in ETG capitalizes on the Group’s proven track record and resilience in agriculture, aiming to mobilize private sector financing into a critical yet underserved sector of the economy. ETG will manage the project, with oversight from the company’s Board of Directors and support from specialized departments within the Group.

    The project aligns with the Bank’s ‘High 5’ priorities, specifically “Feed Africa,” “Integrate Africa,” and “Improve the quality of life for the people of Africa,” as well as the Bank’s Ten-Year Strategy 2024-2033. It is expected to contribute to Africa’s agricultural transformation into a business-oriented and commercially viable sector, driving the continent’s food self-sufficiency.

    “By partnering with ETG, the African Development Bank continues to champion strategic enterprises that operate across multiple countries, furthering its mission to support agricultural development and improve the livelihoods of millions across the continent. The decision to continue funding ETG is just not a financial transaction. It is a strategic collaboration with a purpose – a mission to transform African agriculture and a commitment to optimize the influence of their investments, “said Richard Ofori-Mante, Director of the Agricultural Finance and Rural Development Department at the Bank.

    “By tying loan conditions to performance indicators related to sustainability, ETG is more likely to engage in activities that advance the Sustainable Development Goals. This alignment will drive better environmental, social, and governance outcomes. The transaction not only promotes sustainable practices within ETG’s operations but also influences its supply chain and partners, amplifying the impact on sustainable development,” Ofori-Mante added.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Africa Investment Forum welcomes BADEA as new partner ahead of the December Market Days in Rabat

    Source: African Development Bank Group

    The Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa (BADEA) has joined the Africa Investment Forum as a founding partner, marking a new phase in the Forum’s expansion and influence as a catalyst for mega investments into the continent.

    The official announcement came during a breakfast meeting of heads of the Africa Investment Forum Founding Partner institutions, convened by the African Development Bank in Washington, DC on the sidelines of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank’s annual meetings. During the meeting, the partners examined and adopted a new strategic framework to govern the forum. The meeting took place on Friday 25 October.

    In welcoming BADEA as a new partner, African Development Bank President Akinwumi Adesina said: “Since 2018, BADEA has been a steadfast supporter of the Africa Investment Forum, consistently contributing to the growth and success of this platform.”

    The Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa is a multilateral development financial institution owned by 18 Arab countries. Its operations cover the entire Sub-Saharan African region.

    BADEA group president Dr. Sidi Ould Tah said the main shareholders of his bank had been working on a new mechanism to support investment flows to Africa. The group has sovereign funds under management with assets in the trillions of dollars, of which they had pledged to channel a part for Africa’s infrastructure needs.

    “The role of BADEA is to catalyse resources for Africa. BADEA will work with all the member countries of AIF to make this pledge a reality,” Tah said.                                 

    The addition of BADEA brings the AIF’s founding partners to nine:  the African Development Bank, Afreximbank, Africa Finance Corporation, Africa50, Development Bank of Southern Africa, European Investment Bank, Islamic Development Bank, and Trade and Development Bank.

    Meeting of AIF founding partners in Washington, DC October 2024

    Heads and representatives of each of the partners who attended the meeting included included Trade and Development Bank President and CEO Admassu Tadesse, Africa Finance Corporation’s CEO  Samaila Zubairu, Africa50  President Alain Ebobissé, European Investment Bank Vice President Ambroise Fayolle,  Hani Salem Sonbol  Chief Executive Officer of the International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation representing Islamic Development Bank President Dr. Muhammad Sulaiman Al Jasser, and Afreximbank’s Director for Export Development Oluranti Doherty, who represented its president.

    Adesina also commended the founding partners for their energy, drive and momentum which he described as a testament to their confidence in the Forum.

    The AIF’s Market Days events, held annually, have drawn sovereign and non-sovereign investors from around the world, enabling a shift in risk perception and fostering confidence in Africa’s investment landscape.

    The platform has actively supported women-led businesses under its Women as Investment Champions pillar with examples such as Mobihealth International Ltd (Healthcare, Nigeria) which was supported to access grant and loan funding for feasibility studies and pan-African expansion.

    From the African Development Bank, Senior Vice President Marie Laure Akin-Olugbade, Hassatou N’Sele Vice President for Finance and CFO, Beth Dunford, Vice President for Agriculture, Human and Social Development,  Nnenna Nwabufo, Vice President for Regional Development, Integration and Business Delivery and Kevin Urama, Chief Economist and Vice President, Economic Governance and Knowledge Management, also attended the meeting. The Senior Director of Syndications, the Africa Investment Forum and Client Solutions, Max Magor Ndiaye, and the Special Representative of President Adesina, Yacine Fall were also present.

    The 2024 Market Days will take place from 4-6 December 2024 in Rabat, Morocco, under the theme: “Leveraging Innovative Partnerships for Scale.”

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Mozambique: African Development Bank approves $54 million loan for Mozambique’s first wind energy project

    Source: African Development Bank Group

    The Board of Directors of the African Development Bank has approved a loan of $54 million for a 120 MW onshore wind farm that will help position Mozambique as a regional energy hub.

    The Bank’s loan, which includes $12 million from the Sustainable Energy Fund for Africa (SEFA), is in addition to financing expected from International Finance Corporation (IFC), U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), the Emerging Africa and Asia Infrastructure Fund (EAAIF) and the Private Infrastructure Development Group’s Technical Assistance. The total project cost is estimated at $224.5 million.

    Mozambique’s national electricity utility, EDM, will be the sole off-taker from the wind farm, located 50 km west of Maputo, under a 25-year power purchase agreement.

    The wind farm will be Mozambique’s first utility-scale wind power project. It is expected to generate 331.6 GWh annually, supplying affordable, reliable, and clean energy to both local consumers and regional markets, diversifying Mozambique’s energy mix, and improving access to electricity. It will also position the country as a regional energy hub, capitalizing on increased energy trade through the Southern African Power Pool (SAPP).

    With Mozambique’s energy sources currently dominated by hydropower and gas, the Namaacha wind farm project will help reduce annual CO₂ emissions by approximately 71,816 tons, contributing to the country’s commitments under the Paris climate agreement.

    The project will support economic growth, job creation, and improved living standards. During construction it will create 600 jobs, of which its targeting about 120 will be for women, and 300 for youth. Once operational, 20 permanent jobs will be created, with a focus on gender and youth inclusion.

    Commenting on the project, Kevin Kariuki, Vice President for Power, Energy, Climate, and Green Growth at the African Development Bank, said, “This wind project represents a milestone for Mozambique and underscores the Bank’s strong commitment to advancing clean, renewable energy solutions in the region. It will not only enhance energy security but also facilitate regional electricity trade, benefiting Mozambique’s socio-economic development.”

    Wale Shonibare, Director of the Energy Financial Solutions, Policy, and Regulations Department at the African Development Bank stressed the technological impact of this milestone project. “As the first large-scale wind energy initiative in Mozambique, this project showcases the transformative potential of renewable technologies to drive sustainable growth. By leveraging Mozambique’s natural resources, we are creating pathways toward a diversified and resilient energy sector that not only meets current demands but is future-proofed to support an evolving economy,” he said.

    Globeleq is one of the project developers. Its CEO Jonathan Hoffman said: “The Namaacha Wind Farm is a significant milestone in Mozambique’s journey toward a diversified and sustainable energy landscape. We are proud to partner with EDM and Source Energia in contributing to the government’s ambitious ‘Energy for All by 2030’ program, which is rapidly transforming into a reality for countless Mozambicans. This project reflects our commitment to supporting Mozambique’s clean energy goals and bringing reliable power to the communities we serve.”

    Aligned with the Bank’s Ten-Year Strategy, the New Deal on Energy for Africa, and its High 5 objective of “Light Up and Power Africa,” the project underscores Mozambique’s dedication to renewable energy development and supports its goal of achieving universal access to electricity by 2030.

    The project complements the Bank’s earlier energy sector initiatives in Mozambique, including the Songo Matambo transmission line and the Mozambique Energy for All program.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Interview with Warwick Lang, Victorian Country Hour, ABC Radio

    Source: Australian Treasurer

    WARWICK LONG:

    Let’s talk competition in farming in Australia. A member of the federal government has identified farming as an area in dire need of competition reform in Australia. Andrew Leigh is the Assistant Minister for Competition in the Labor government. He says this country’s small‑scale farmers are getting hammered at both ends by concentrated markets and at numerous points along the agricultural supply chain. I had a chat to him about improving the improving the competition playing field for farmers after he made a speech on such a topic to ABARES in Canberra.

    ANDREW LEIGH:

    Well, farmers are the meat in the sandwich when it comes to problems of competition in the Australian economy. We see too many farmers buying seed and fertiliser from concentrated markets and then getting squeezed by having to sell into concentrated markets for processors or in freight. And the effect is that farmers aren’t getting a fair deal. I’m talking about a lot of what we’re doing in the competition space through the lens of farming. Farming is a critical industry to the Australian economy, but it also illustrates some of the big competition problems that the Australian economy faces right now.

    LONG:

    Why is farming such an easy example to grasp about the lack of competition and what it does to markets?

    LEIGH:

    Compared to many industries, small‑scale farming is pretty easy to enter. It is not as easy to set up a tractor manufacturing business or to set up a freight distribution network. The result is that you get a lot of competition in farming across many commodities but not so much upstream and downstream. So if you’re looking at fertiliser, the big 4 fertiliser manufacturers in Australia have 62 per cent of the market between them. And then if you’re looking downstream, fruit and vegie processing, the big 4 have 34 per cent of the market. Meat processing, the big 4 have 44 per cent of the market. So there’s these really concentrated markets, and that’s before we’ve even gotten to the supermarkets where the supermarket duopoly does have the effect of squeezing farmers. Which, of course, is why, Warwick, we’re moving to make the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct a mandatory code.

    LONG:

    What has failed in the past? So the meat industry is one of those that you’re using, particularly you cite its effect on small‑scale beef producers, for example, because there’s such market concentration. Now, I’ve been around for quite a long time, Assistant Minister, and I remember when the ACCC didn’t oppose JBS’s taking over of Primo, for example, because even though it meant a highly concentrated market in areas like New South Wales and Queensland. So what’s gone wrong in the past to lead us down this road of concentration now?

    LEIGH:

    Our merger law system just hasn’t been up to what it needs for a modern economy. Australia’s competition watchdog doesn’t get to see about 3 out of every 4 mergers because there’s no requirement on big firms to notify them. You can’t block what you can’t see. So the merger reforms we’ve got in parliament right now are the biggest merger shake‑up in half a century. We’d hope they’d get support right across the parliament. And they’ll have 2 results, Warwick, one will be that low‑risk mergers get approved quicker, and the other is that high‑risk mergers can have the scrutiny that they deserve applied to them by the competition watchdog.

    LONG:

    What other rules and changes are you proposing?

    LEIGH:

    We’ve got the banning of unfair contract terms. We did that as soon as we came into office. And that’s mattered for areas such as fertiliser contracts and potato processing where those unfair contract terms have been used. For consumers we’ve got the CHOICE quarterly price monitoring to make sure that consumers are seeing where they can get their best deal across the grocery sector. And we’re giving the competition watchdog more resources in order to check up on unit pricing, make sure that the prices on the supermarket shelf really are a fair reflection of what Australians will pay.

    LONG:

    You’ve also cited in your speech today about the right to repair laws affecting the motor vehicle industry. You and I spoke a lot in the past about trying to extend that to tractor and machinery sales. Why hasn’t that happened yet?

    LEIGH:

    Well, we’re encouraging parties to first look at a voluntary agreement here which can often have a more tailored approach. But we recognise that there’s a squeeze on and it can particularly affect farmers where you’re working off short timeframes. You’ve got to get a crop harvested. Your machine breaks down and you just can’t afford to take a week for the authorised dealer to fix it. So we understand the squeeze. We understand that the farm machinery industry is heavily concentrated. This one is not as straightforward as what we did for the motor vehicle scheme –

    LONG:

    Why not?

    LEIGH:

    Well, because in motor vehicles you’ve got a greater diversity of independent repairers. There’s some 20,000 independent repairers across the country. You just don’t have that network of independent repairers in the area of farm machinery. Most of the repair is being done at the moment by the big firms. And what we’re looking at is a discussion where people say we could have a vibrant independent repair industry if only there was a right to repair laws for farm machinery.

    LONG:

    Yeah, so as opposed to what you had to do in the motor vehicle sector where there was already an existing network there effectively you need to look if your law changes for the farm machinery sector would effectively almost create a new category of business?

    LEIGH:

    Yes, that’s right. Whereas independent mechanics, we were seeing them being crushed by a lack of access to data. But data is a big thing. John Deere has got more software development engineers than mechanical design engineers. Farm machines are becoming increasingly computerised, and that means that access to the data is fundamental to allowing a third‑party repairer to fix a fault.

    LONG:

    This is your passion, isn’t it? Competition and how markets work.

    LEIGH:

    I’m glad you detected that passion, Warwick. Absolutely. For economists this goes back to Adam Smith in 1776. There’s really good work about the benefits of competition for consumers, for workers and just for innovation. More competitive markets see higher productivity growth. And so this is one of the key things we need to do if we’re going to kickstart more growth in the Australian economy.

    LONG:

    And obviously more competition, more buyers for products is important. Your government is restricting that in the world of agriculture, particularly for the WA sheep industry right now with the phase out of live sheep exports. Have you looked at what that will do to the market there?

    LEIGH:

    Look, we’re providing support to the industry – over $100 million there – and also encouraging the boxed meat industry. And as you well know, Warwick, the volume of live sheep exports has been steadily declining. We’re very keen to see that local processing industry increasing, the value‑adding, and also working hard to open up new markets. So if you look at the resumption of the rock lobster trade with China, with the trade deal with the United Arab Emirates, all of that opening up of the international markets gives more options to our farmers. It means that they’re not as constrained at just selling to a couple of local processors.

    LONG:

    A sheep farmer can hardly jump into the world of rock lobster farming, though, can they?

    LEIGH:

    No, that’s right. I’m just giving you an illustration of what we’re doing across the markets, recognising the importance of international trade to Australian farmers.

    LONG:

    I suppose you and I are talking about the same thing here, right, aren’t we, Andrew Leigh? We’re talking about how government decisions or actions, whether it be the closure of key international markets or whether it be phase‑outs of industry, that does affect markets and it’s on government to pull the levers to decide the future of these industries, isn’t it?

    LEIGH:

    The government plays a significant role. And what you’re talking about with live sheep really is an issue of animal welfare, which I think is broadly supported across the Australian community. But what we’ve been doing in opening up international markets really is very much in the traditions of the Whitlam, Hawke and Keating governments – that international engagement often led by farmers because we export the vast majority of our agricultural produce in Australia to the benefit of farmers and the broader economy.

    LONG:

    So, this is part of your discussion with ABARES. Do you have a plan to sort of update on whether your levers and work in competition areas will be working in, say, 12 months’ time?

    LEIGH:

    Yeah, it’s a great question, and one of the things we haven’t done very well in government is evaluating what we do. And so we’re now just thinking through the best ways of evaluating the impact of the competition reforms, making sure that as we move to a mandatory code of conduct for food and grocery that we are seeing those better deals coming through for farmers, ensuring that as we go into the new merger regime that we see better competition across Australian industries. So, tracking performance is absolutely the best practice in government. That’s what I want to do more of.

    LONG:

    That’s the Assistant Minister for Competition, Andrew Leigh, speaking there about improving competition rules, the playing field essentially for farmers.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI: Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. Reports 2024 Third-Quarter and Year-to-Date Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ARCHBOLD, Ohio, Oct. 30, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: FMAO) today reported financial results for the 2024 third quarter and year-to-date ended September 30, 2024.

    2024 Third Quarter Financial and Operating Highlights (on a year-over-year basis unless noted):

    • 86 consecutive quarters of profitability
    • Net income increased 36.4% to $6.5 million, or $0.48 per basic and diluted share, from $4.8 million, or $0.35 per basic and diluted share, and net income expanded 14.7% from the 2024 second quarter
    • Net interest margin increased 12 basis points to 2.71%
    • Efficiency ratio improved to 67.98%, compared to 73.07% for the same period a year ago, and 69.03% for the 2024 second quarter
    • Total net loans remain stable at $2.54 billion at September 30, 2024
    • Total assets increased 4.8% to a record $3.39 billion
    • Deposits increased 4.3% to a record $2.68 billion
    • Stockholders’ equity increased 10.6% to a record $335.4 million
    • Asset quality remains at historically strong levels with nonperforming loans of only $2.9 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $22.4 million at September 30, 2023
    • Allowance for credit losses was 879.37% of nonperforming loans
    • F&M ended the quarter with excellent liquidity levels, and over $635 million in contingent funding sources, and a cash-to-assets ratio of 7.2%
    • According to the FDIC, F&M continued to have the third largest share of deposits out of the 58 financial institutions that are also operating within its local markets

    Lars B. Eller, President and Chief Executive Officer, stated, “F&M produced excellent earnings growth on a year-over-year and sequential basis, driven by higher net interest income, historically strong asset quality, and prudent expense management. Most importantly, our third quarter results reflect the talent of our associates, as we continue to work hard to drive operating improvements at F&M, serve our local Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan communities, and position F&M for long-term success. In addition, I am pleased to report that F&M was the third largest bank out of 58 financial institutions within the markets we compete, according to the FDIC, reflecting the leading value we provide to our local communities. In fact, F&M is the number one bank, based on deposits, in almost half of the communities in which we operate.”  

    Income Statement
    Net income for the 2024 third quarter ended September 30, 2024, was $6.5 million, compared to $4.8 million for the same period last year. Net income per basic and diluted share for the 2024 third quarter was $0.48, compared to $0.35 for the same period last year. Net income for the 2024 nine months ended September 30, 2024, was $17.6 million, compared to $17.2 million for the same period last year. Net income per basic and diluted share for the 2024 nine months was $1.28, compared to $1.26 for the same period last year.

    Mr. Eller continued, “Our 2024 third quarter and year-to-date performance demonstrate the success of the near-term strategies we are pursuing to navigate a complex operating environment and improve earnings. Most importantly, while the demand for loans is high across our markets, our approach to risk and pricing remains conservative. This near-term strategy has contributed to excellent asset quality. In addition, we continue to focus on strategies aimed at optimizing our deposit base and growing low-cost checking (DDA) deposits. Since the beginning of 2024, we have added over 5,600 new checking accounts, and benefited from new and expanded relationships at offices that were opened in 2023. As a result, we ended the quarter with a loan-to-deposit ratio of 93.6%, compared to 97.2% at September 30, 2023, and 96.0% at June 30, 2024. Our third quarter of 2024 loan-to-deposit ratio was the lowest quarterly value in two years. The final near-term strategy we are pursuing is focused on controlling expenses, and I am encouraged by the continued year-over-year and sequential improvement in our efficiency ratio. This reflects the opportunities we are pursuing to manage operating costs and expand productivity.”

    Deposits
    At September 30, 2024, total deposits were $2.68 billion, an increase of 4.3% from September 30, 2023. The Company’s cost of interest-bearing liabilities was 3.2% for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to 2.82% for the quarter ended September 30, 2023, and 3.02% for the 2023 fourth quarter ended December 31, 2023.

    Loan Portfolio and Asset Quality
    “F&M’s teams continue to do an excellent job managing our cost of funds, loan pricing, deposit growth and overall net interest margin. Since the quarter ended December 31, 2023, our yield on earning assets has increased by 34 basis points, compared to a 19 basis point increase in our cost of interest bearing liabilities – representing the third consecutive quarter our yield on earning assets has outpaced our cost of interest bearing liabilities. We expect this trend will continue as more of our loan portfolio reprices in 2024,” continued Mr. Eller.

    Total loans, net at September 30, 2024, increased 0.3%, or by $8.7 million to $2.54 billion, compared to $2.53 billion at September 30, 2023. The year-over-year growth was driven by higher consumer real estate, commercial and industrial, and agricultural loans, partially offset by lower commercial real estate, agricultural real estate, and consumer loans.

    F&M continues to closely monitor its loan portfolio with a particular emphasis on higher risk sectors. Nonperforming loans were $2.9 million, or 0.11% of total loans at September 30, 2024, compared to $22.4 million, or 0.89% of total loans at September 30, 2023, and $22.4 million, or 0.87% at December 31, 2023.

    F&M maintains a well-balanced, diverse and high performing CRE portfolio. CRE loans represented 51.3% of the Company’s total loan portfolio at September 30, 2024. In addition, F&M’s commercial real estate office credit exposure represented 5.3% of the Company’s total loan portfolio at September 30, 2024, with a weighted average loan-to-value of approximately 64% and an average loan of approximately $880,000.

    F&M’s CRE portfolio included the following categories at September 30, 2024:

    CRE Category   Dollar
    Balance
      Percent of CRE Portfolio(*)   Percent of Total Loan Portfolio(*)
                 
    Industrial   $ 274,953   21.1 %   10.8 %
    Retail   $ 237,622   18.2 %   9.4 %
    Multi-family   $ 223,926   17.2 %   8.8 %
    Hotels   $ 141,642   10.9 %   5.6 %
    Office   $ 134,973   10.4 %   5.3 %
    Gas Stations   $ 62,028   4.8 %   2.5 %
    Food Service   $ 46,526   3.6 %   1.8 %
    Development   $ 30,999   2.4 %   1.2 %
    Senior Living   $ 29,866   2.3 %   1.2 %
    Auto Dealers   $ 25,068   1.9 %   1.0 %
    Other   $ 93,557   7.2 %   3.7 %
    Total CRE   $ 1,301,160   100.0 %   51.3 %

             * Numbers have been rounded

    At September 30, 2024, the Company’s allowance for credit losses to nonperforming loans was 879.37%, compared to 112.61% at September 30, 2023, and 111.95% at December 31, 2023. The allowance to total loans was 1.01% at September 30, 2024, compared to 1.00% at September 30, 2023. Including accretable yield adjustments, associated with the Company’s recent acquisitions, F&M’s allowance for credit losses to total loans was 1.10% at September 30, 2024, compared to 1.18% at September 30, 2023.

    Mr. Eller concluded, “With two months remaining in 2024, I am encouraged by F&M’s strong financial and operating performance to date. F&M ended the quarter with record stockholders’ equity, historically strong asset quality, record deposits, and excellent liquidity levels with over $635 million in contingent funding sources, and a cash-to-assets ratio of 7.2%. We remain focused on continual improvements, managing the items under our control, and providing our customers and communities with outstanding, and local financial services. As a result, F&M’s financial and operating performance continues to strengthen and I believe the Company is well positioned to create lasting value for our communities, customers, team members, and shareholders.”

    Stockholders’ Equity and Dividends
    Total stockholders’ equity increased 10.6% to $335.4 million, or $24.48 per share at September 30, 2024, from $303.2 million, or $22.19 per share at September 30, 2023. The Company’s Tier 1 leverage ratio of 8.04%, remained stable compared to September 30, 2023.

    Tangible stockholders’ equity increased to $242.8 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $208.8 million at September 30, 2023. On a per share basis, tangible stockholders’ equity at September 30, 2024, was $17.72 per share, compared to $15.28 per share at September 30, 2023.

    For the nine months ended September 30, 2024, the Company has declared cash dividends of $0.66125 per share, which is a 5.0% increase over the same period last year. F&M is committed to returning capital to shareholders and has increased the annual cash dividend for 30 consecutive years. For the nine months ended September 30, 2024, the dividend payout ratio was 50.99% compared to 49.50% for the same period last year.

    About Farmers & Merchants State Bank:
    Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: FMAO) is the holding company of F&M Bank, a local independent community bank that has been serving its communities since 1897. F&M Bank provides commercial banking, retail banking and other financial services. Our locations are in Butler, Champaign, Fulton, Defiance, Hancock, Henry, Lucas, Shelby, Williams, and Wood counties in Ohio. In Northeast Indiana, we have offices located in Adams, Allen, DeKalb, Jay, Steuben and Wells counties. The Michigan footprint includes Oakland County, and we have Loan Production Offices in West Bloomfield, Michigan; Muncie, Indiana; and Perrysburg and Bryan, Ohio.

    Safe Harbor Statement
    Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. (“F&M”) wishes to take advantage of the Safe Harbor provisions included in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements by F&M, including management’s expectations and comments, may not be based on historical facts and are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21B of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Actual results could vary materially depending on risks and uncertainties inherent in general and local banking conditions, competitive factors specific to markets in which F&M and its subsidiaries operate, future interest rate levels, legislative and regulatory decisions, capital market conditions, or the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its impacts on our credit quality and business operations, as well as its impact on general economic and financial market conditions. F&M assumes no responsibility to update this information. For more details, please refer to F&M’s SEC filing, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. Such filings can be viewed at the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov or through F&M’s website www.fm.bank.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    This press release includes disclosure of financial measures not prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP). A non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are required to be disclosed by GAAP. Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. believes that these non-GAAP financial measures provide both management and investors a more complete understanding of the underlying operational results and trends and Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc.’s marketplace performance. The presentation of this additional information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the numbers prepared in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures is included within this press release.

     
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME & COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
    (Unaudited) (in thousands of dollars, except per share data)
             
          Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
          September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023   September 30, 2023   September 30, 2024   September 30, 2023
    Interest Income                              
    Loans, including fees     $ 36,873     $ 36,593     $ 35,200     $ 34,493   $ 33,783     $ 108,666     $ 94,851  
    Debt securities:                              
    U.S. Treasury and government agencies       1,467       1,148       1,045       987     1,005       3,660       3,103  
    Municipalities       387       389       394       397     392       1,170       1,201  
    Dividends       334       327       333       365     246       994       517  
    Federal funds sold       7       7       7       8     6       21       36  
    Other       2,833       2,702       1,675       2,020     927       7,210       1,830  
    Total interest income       41,901       41,166       38,654       38,270     36,359       121,721       101,538  
    Interest Expense                              
    Deposits       16,947       16,488       15,279       15,015     13,323       48,714       31,908  
    Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase       277       276       284       293     349       837       1,181  
    Borrowed funds       2,804       2,742       2,689       2,742     2,741       8,235       6,134  
    Subordinated notes       284       285       284       285     284       853       853  
    Total interest expense       20,312       19,791       18,536       18,335     16,697       58,639       40,076  
    Net Interest Income – Before Provision for Credit Losses     21,589       21,375       20,118       19,935     19,662       63,082       61,462  
    Provision for Credit Losses – Loans       282       605       (289 )     278     460       598       1,420  
    Provision for Credit Losses – Off Balance Sheet Credit Exposures   (267 )     (18 )     (266 )     189     (76 )     (551 )     (143 )
    Net Interest Income After Provision for Credit Losses       21,574       20,788       20,673       19,468     19,278       63,035       60,185  
    Noninterest Income                              
    Customer service fees       300       189       598       415     248       1,087       917  
    Other service charges and fees       1,155       1,085       1,057       1,090     1,133       3,297       3,253  
    Interchange income       1,315       1,330       1,429       1,310     1,266       4,074       4,008  
    Loan servicing income       710       513       539       666     502       1,762       3,739  
    Net gain on sale of loans       215       314       107       230     294       636       469  
    Increase in cash surrender value of bank owned life insurance       265       236       216       216     221       717       618  
    Net loss on sale of available-for-sale securities                                         (891 )
    Total noninterest income       3,960       3,667       3,946       3,927     3,664       11,573       12,113  
    Noninterest Expense                              
    Salaries and wages       7,713       7,589       7,846       6,981     6,777       23,148       19,934  
    Employee benefits       2,112       2,112       2,171       1,218     2,066       6,395       6,302  
    Net occupancy expense       1,054       999       1,027       1,187     950       3,080       2,646  
    Furniture and equipment       1,472       1,407       1,353       1,370     1,189       4,232       3,652  
    Data processing       339       448       500       785     840       1,287       2,362  
    Franchise taxes       410       265       555       308     434       1,230       1,179  
    ATM expense       472       397       473       665     640       1,342       1,946  
    Advertising       597       519       530       397     865       1,646       2,209  
    Net (gain) loss on sale of other assets owned             (49 )           86     49       (49 )     49  
    FDIC assessment       516       507       580       594     586       1,603       1,388  
    Servicing rights amortization – net       219       187       168       182     106       574       429  
    Loan expense       244       251       229       246     241       724       809  
    Consulting fees       251       198       186       192     179       635       640  
    Professional fees       453       527       445       331     358       1,425       1,099  
    Intangible asset amortization       445       444       445       446     445       1,334       1,334  
    Other general and administrative       1,128       1,495       1,333       1,532     1,319       3,956       4,841  
    Total noninterest expense       17,425       17,296       17,841       16,520     17,044       52,562       50,819  
    Income Before Income Taxes       8,109       7,159       6,778       6,875     5,898       22,046       21,479  
    Income Taxes       1,593       1,477       1,419       1,332     1,121       4,489       4,235  
    Net Income       6,516       5,682       5,359       5,543     4,777       17,557       17,244  
    Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (Net of Tax):                              
    Net unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale securities     11,664       2,531       (1,995 )     13,261     (4,514 )     12,200       (2,480 )
    Reclassification adjustment for realized loss on sale of available-for-sale securities                                         891  
    Net unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale securities     11,664       2,531       (1,995 )     13,261     (4,514 )     12,200       (1,589 )
    Tax expense (benefit)       2,449       531       (418 )     2,784     (947 )     2,562       (333 )
    Other comprehensive income (loss)       9,215       2,000       (1,577 )     10,477     (3,567 )     9,638       (1,256 )
    Comprehensive Income     $ 15,731     $ 7,682     $ 3,782     $ 16,020   $ 1,210     $ 27,195     $ 15,988  
    Basic Earnings Per Share     $ 0.48     $ 0.42     $ 0.39     $ 0.41   $ 0.35     $ 1.28     $ 1.26  
    Diluted Earnings Per Share     $ 0.48     $ 0.42     $ 0.39     $ 0.41   $ 0.35     $ 1.28     $ 1.26  
    Dividends Declared     $ 0.22125     $ 0.22     $ 0.22     $ 0.22   $ 0.21     $ 0.66125     $ 0.63  
                                   
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (Unaudited) (in thousands of dollars, except per share data)
     
          September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023   September 30, 2023
          (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)   (Unaudited)       (Unaudited)
    Assets                    
    Cash and due from banks   $ 244,572     $ 191,785     $ 186,541     $ 140,917     $ 151,711  
    Federal funds sold     932       1,283       1,241       1,284       1,471  
      Total cash and cash equivalents     245,504       193,068       187,782       142,201       153,182  
                           
    Interest-bearing time deposits     2,727       3,221       2,735       2,740       2,989  
    Securities – available-for-sale     404,881       365,209       347,516       358,478       348,255  
    Other securities, at cost     15,028       14,721       14,744       17,138       16,995  
    Loans held for sale     1,706       1,628       2,410       1,576       1,039  
    Loans, net of allowance for credit losses of $25,484 9/30/24 and $25,024 12/31/23     2,512,852       2,534,468       2,516,687       2,556,167       2,504,329  
    Premises and equipment     33,779       34,507       35,007       35,790       31,723  
    Construction in progress     35       38       9       8       3,044  
    Goodwill     86,358       86,358       86,358       86,358       86,358  
    Loan servicing rights     5,644       5,504       5,555       5,648       5,687  
    Bank owned life insurance     34,624       34,359       34,123       33,907       33,691  
    Other assets     46,047       49,552       54,628       43,218       47,388  
                           
    Total Assets   $ 3,389,185     $ 3,322,633     $ 3,287,554     $ 3,283,229     $ 3,234,680  
                           
      Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                    
    Liabilities                    
    Deposits                    
      Noninterest-bearing   $ 481,444     $ 479,069     $ 510,731     $ 528,465     $ 505,358  
      Interest-bearing                    
      NOW accounts     865,617       821,145       829,236       816,790       778,133  
      Savings     661,565       673,284       635,430       599,191       591,344  
      Time     676,187       667,592       645,985       663,017       700,445  
      Total deposits     2,684,813       2,641,090       2,621,382       2,607,463       2,575,280  
                           
    Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase     27,292       27,218       28,218       28,218       30,527  
    Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances     263,081       266,102       256,628       265,750       266,286  
    Subordinated notes, net of unamortized issuance costs     34,789       34,759       34,731       34,702       34,673  
    Dividend payable     2,998       2,975       2,975       2,974       2,838  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities     40,832       27,825       25,930       27,579       21,892  
      Total liabilities     3,053,805       2,999,969       2,969,864       2,966,686       2,931,496  
                           
    Commitments and Contingencies                    
                           
    Stockholders’ Equity                    
    Common stock – No par value 20,000,000 shares authorized; issued                    
    14,564,425 shares 9/30/24 and 12/31/23; outstanding 13,702,593     135,193       135,829       135,482       135,515       135,171  
    shares 9/30/24 and 13,664,641 shares 12/31/23                    
    Treasury stock – 861,832 shares 9/30/24 and 899,784 shares 12/31/23     (10,904 )     (11,006 )     (10,851 )     (11,040 )     (11,008 )
    Retained earnings     230,465       226,430       223,648       221,080       218,510  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (19,374 )     (28,589 )     (30,589 )     (29,012 )     (39,489 )
      Total stockholders’ equity     335,380       322,664       317,690       316,543       303,184  
                           
    Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity   $ 3,389,185     $ 3,322,633     $ 3,287,554     $ 3,283,229     $ 3,234,680  
                           
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    SELECT FINANCIAL DATA
                                               
        For the Three Months Ended   For the Nine Months Ended
    Selected financial data   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023   September 30, 2023   September 30, 2024   September 30, 2023
    Return on average assets     0.78 %     0.69 %     0.66 %     0.67 %     0.59 %     0.71 %     0.73 %
    Return on average equity     7.93 %     7.13 %     6.76 %     7.27 %     6.26 %     7.28 %     7.52 %
    Yield on earning assets     5.27 %     5.22 %     5.00 %     4.93 %     4.79 %     5.17 %     4.57 %
    Cost of interest bearing liabilities     3.21 %     3.18 %     3.06 %     3.02 %     2.82 %     3.16 %     2.35 %
    Net interest spread     2.06 %     2.04 %     1.94 %     1.91 %     1.97 %     2.01 %     2.22 %
    Net interest margin     2.71 %     2.71 %     2.60 %     2.57 %     2.59 %     2.68 %     2.77 %
    Efficiency     67.98 %     69.03 %     74.08 %     69.23 %     73.07 %     70.36 %     68.24 %
    Dividend payout ratio     45.99 %     52.35 %     55.52 %     54.23 %     60.07 %     50.99 %     49.50 %
    Tangible book value per share   $ 17.72     $ 16.79     $ 16.39     $ 16.29     $ 15.28              
    Tier 1 leverage ratio     8.04 %     8.02 %     8.40 %     8.20 %     8.02 %            
    Average shares outstanding     13,687,119       13,681,501       13,671,166       13,665,773       13,650,823       13,679,955       13,633,101  
                                               
    Loans   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023   September 30, 2023            
    (Dollar amounts in thousands)                                          
    Commercial real estate   $ 1,301,160     $ 1,303,598     $ 1,304,400     $ 1,337,766     $ 1,304,118              
    Agricultural real estate     220,328       222,558       227,455       223,791       225,672              
    Consumer real estate     524,055       525,902       525,178       521,895       512,973              
    Commercial and industrial     260,732       268,426       256,051       254,935       250,891              
    Agricultural     137,252       142,909       127,670       132,560       123,735              
    Consumer     67,394       70,918       74,819       79,591       83,024              
    Other     25,916       26,449       26,776       30,136       31,083              
    Less: Net deferred loan fees, costs and other (1)     1,499       (1,022 )     (982 )     517       (1,890 )            
    Total loans, net   $ 2,538,336     $ 2,559,738     $ 2,541,367     $ 2,581,191     $ 2,529,606              
                                               
                                               
    Asset quality data   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023   September 30, 2023            
    (Dollar amounts in thousands)                                          
    Nonaccrual loans   $ 2,898     $ 2,487     $ 19,391     $ 22,353     $ 22,447              
    90 day past due and accruing   $     $     $     $     $              
    Nonperforming loans   $ 2,898     $ 2,487     $ 19,391     $ 22,353     $ 22,447              
    Other real estate owned   $     $     $     $     $              
    Nonperforming assets   $ 2,898     $ 2,487     $ 19,391     $ 22,353     $ 22,447              
                                               
                                               
    Allowance for credit losses   $ 25,484     $ 25,270     $ 24,680     $ 25,024     $ 25,277              
    Allowance for unfunded     1,661       1,928       1,946       2,212       2,023              
    Total Allowance for Credit Losses   $ 27,145     $ 27,198     $ 26,626     $ 27,236     $ 27,300              
    Allowance for credit losses/total loans     1.01 %     0.99 %     0.97 %     0.97 %     1.00 %            
    Adjusted credit losses with accretable yield/total loans     1.10 %     1.10 %     1.11 %     1.13 %     1.18 %            
    Net charge-offs:                                          
    Quarter-to-date   $ 68     $ 15     $ 55     $ 531     $ 93              
    Year-to-date   $ 138     $ 70     $ 55     $ 551     $ 20              
    Net charge-offs to average loans                                          
    Quarter-to-date     0.00 %     0.00 %     0.00 %     0.02 %     0.00 %            
    Year-to-date     0.01 %     0.00 %     0.00 %     0.02 %     0.00 %            
    Nonperforming loans/total loans     0.11 %     0.10 %     0.76 %     0.87 %     0.89 %            
    Allowance for credit losses/nonperforming loans     879.37 %     1016.08 %     127.28 %     111.95 %     112.61 %            
    NPA coverage ratio     879.37 %     1016.08 %     127.28 %     111.95 %     112.61 %            
                                               
    (1) Includes carrying value adjustments of $3.0 million as of September 30, 2024, $612 thousand as of June 30, 2024, $969 thousand as of March 31, 2024 and $2.7 million as of December 31, 2023 related to interest rate swaps associated with fixed rate loans            
     
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND RELATED YIELDS AND RATES
    (in thousands of dollars, except percentages)
                             
        For the Three Months Ended   For the Three Months Ended
        September 30, 2024   September 30, 2023
    Interest Earning Assets:   Average Balance   Interest/Dividends   Annualized Yield/Rate   Average Balance   Interest/Dividends   Annualized Yield/Rate
    Loans   $ 2,551,899   $ 36,873   5.78 %   $ 2,536,885   $ 33,783   5.33 %
    Taxable investment securities     415,943     2,107   2.03 %     393,910     1,559   1.58 %
    Tax-exempt investment securities     19,661     81   2.09 %     23,986     84   1.77 %
    Fed funds sold & other     197,258     2,840   5.76 %     85,515     933   4.36 %
    Total Interest Earning Assets     3,184,761   $ 41,901   5.27 %     3,040,296   $ 36,359   4.79 %
                             
    Nonearning Assets     168,055             180,193        
                             
    Total Assets   $ 3,352,816           $ 3,220,489        
                             
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                        
    Savings deposits   $ 1,538,387   $ 10,691   2.78 %   $ 1,367,168   $ 7,673   2.24 %
    Other time deposits     667,224     6,256   3.75 %     667,880     5,650   3.38 %
    Other borrowed money     264,539     2,804   4.24 %     266,467     2,741   4.11 %
    Fed funds purchased & securities sold under agreement to repurchase     27,481     277   4.03 %     34,128     349   4.09 %
    Subordinated notes     34,769     284   3.27 %     34,654     284   3.28 %
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities   $ 2,532,400   $ 20,312   3.21 %   $ 2,370,297   $ 16,697   2.82 %
                             
    Noninterest Bearing Liabilities     491,851             544,801        
                             
    Stockholders’ Equity   $ 328,565           $ 305,391        
                             
    Net Interest Income and Interest Rate Spread       $ 21,589   2.06 %       $ 19,662   1.97 %
                             
    Net Interest Margin           2.71 %           2.59 %
                             
    Yields on Tax exempt securities and the portion of the tax-exempt IDB loans included in loans have been tax adjusted based on a 21% tax rate in the charts    
                             
                             
        For the Nine Months Ended   For the Nine Months Ended
        September 30, 2024   September 30, 2023
    Interest Earning Assets:   Average Balance   Interest/Dividends   Annualized Yield/Rate   Average Balance   Interest/Dividends   Annualized Yield/Rate
    Loans   $ 2,561,774   $ 108,666   5.66 %   $ 2,470,770   $ 94,851   5.12 %
    Taxable investment securities     397,466     5,575   1.87 %     396,917     4,544   1.53 %
    Tax-exempt investment securities     20,684     249   2.03 %     24,865     277   1.88 %
    Fed funds sold & other     165,227     7,231   5.84 %     67,869     1,866   3.67 %
    Total Interest Earning Assets     3,145,151   $ 121,721   5.17 %     2,960,421   $ 101,538   4.57 %
                             
    Nonearning Assets     161,113             176,568        
                             
    Total Assets   $ 3,306,264           $ 3,136,989        
                             
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                        
    Savings deposits   $ 1,487,809   $ 30,291   2.71 %   $ 1,373,110   $ 18,854   1.83 %
    Other time deposits     662,129     18,423   3.71 %     620,071     13,054   2.81 %
    Other borrowed money     264,310     8,235   4.15 %     204,927     6,134   3.99 %
    Fed funds purchased & securities sold under agreement to repurchase     27,887     837   4.00 %     37,649     1,181   4.18 %
    Subordinated notes     34,741     853   3.27 %     34,625     853   3.28 %
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities   $ 2,476,876   $ 58,639   3.16 %   $ 2,270,382   $ 40,076   2.35 %
                             
    Noninterest Bearing Liabilities     507,843             561,001        
                             
    Stockholders’ Equity   $ 321,545           $ 305,606        
                             
    Net Interest Income and Interest Rate Spread       $ 63,082   2.01 %       $ 61,462   2.22 %
                             
    Net Interest Margin           2.68 %           2.77 %
                             
    Yields on Tax exempt securities and the portion of the tax-exempt IDB loans included in loans have been tax adjusted based on a 21% tax rate in the charts    
                             
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND RELATED YIELDS AND RATES
    (in thousands of dollars, except percentages)
     
                                         
      For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2024   For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2023  
      As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort Difference   As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort Difference  
      $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield  
    Interest Earning Assets:                                    
    Loans $ 36,873 5.78 %   $ 36,149 5.67 %   $ 724   0.11 %   $ 33,783 5.33 %   $ 32,631 5.15 %   $ 1,152   0.18 %  
    Taxable investment securities   2,107 2.03 %     2,107 2.03 %       0.00 %     1,559 1.58 %     1,559 1.58 %       0.00 %  
    Tax-exempt investment securities   81 2.09 %     81 2.09 %       0.00 %     84 1.77 %     84 1.77 %       0.00 %  
    Fed funds sold & other   2,840 5.76 %     2,840 5.76 %       0.00 %     933 4.36 %     933 4.36 %       0.00 %  
    Total Interest Earning Assets   41,901 5.27 %     41,177 5.17 %     724   0.10 %     36,359 4.79 %     35,207 4.64 %     1,152   0.15 %  
                                         
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                                    
    Savings deposits $ 10,691 2.78 %   $ 10,691 2.78 %   $   0.00 %   $ 7,673 2.24 %   $ 7,673 2.24 %   $   0.00 %  
    Other time deposits   6,256 3.75 %     6,256 3.75 %       0.00 %     5,650 3.38 %     5,500 3.29 %     150   0.09 %  
    Other borrowed money   2,804 4.24 %     2,800 4.23 %     4   0.01 %     2,741 4.11 %     2,759 4.14 %     (18 ) -0.03 %  
    Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreement to repurchase   277 4.03 %     277 4.03 %       0.00 %     349 4.09 %     349 4.09 %       0.00 %  
    Subordinated notes   284 3.27 %     284 3.27 %       0.00 %     284 3.28 %     284 3.28 %       0.00 %  
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities   20,312 3.21 %     20,308 3.21 %     4   0.00 %     16,697 2.82 %     16,565 2.80 %     132   0.02 %  
                                         
    Interest/Dividend income/yield   41,901 5.27 %     41,177 5.17 %     724   0.10 %     36,359 4.79 %     35,207 4.64 %     1,152   0.15 %  
    Interest Expense / yield   20,312 3.21 %     20,308 3.21 %     4   0.00 %     16,697 2.82 %     16,565 2.80 %     132   0.02 %  
    Net Interest Spread   21,589 2.06 %     20,869 1.96 %     720   0.10 %     19,662 1.97 %     18,642 1.84 %     1,020   0.13 %  
    Net Interest Margin   2.71 %     2.62 %     0.09 %     2.59 %     2.46 %     0.13 %  
                                         
                                         
      For the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2024   For the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2023  
      As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort Difference   As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort Difference  
      $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield   $ Yield  
    Interest Earning Assets:                                    
    Loans $ 108,666 5.66 %   $ 106,588 5.55 %   $ 2,078   0.11 %   $ 94,851 5.12 %   $ 92,364 4.99 %   $ 2,487   0.13 %  
    Taxable investment securities   5,575 1.87 %     5,575 1.87 %       0.00 %     4,544 1.53 %     4,544 1.53 %       0.00 %  
    Tax-exempt investment securities   249 2.03 %     249 2.03 %       0.00 %     277 1.88 %     277 1.88 %       0.00 %  
    Fed funds sold & other   7,231 5.84 %     7,231 5.84 %       0.00 %     1,866 3.67 %     1,866 3.67 %       0.00 %  
     Total Interest Earning Assets   121,721 5.17 %     119,643 5.08 %     2,078   0.09 %     101,538 4.57 %     99,051 4.47 %     2,487   0.10 %  
                                         
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                                    
    Savings deposits $ 30,291 2.71 %   $ 30,291 2.71 %   $   0.00 %   $ 18,854 1.83 %   $ 18,854 1.83 %   $   0.00 %  
    Other time deposits   18,423 3.71 %     18,423 3.71 %       0.00 %     13,054 2.81 %     13,458 2.89 %     (404 ) -0.08 %  
    Other borrowed money   8,235 4.15 %     8,254 4.16 %     (19 ) -0.01 %     6,134 3.99 %     6,187 4.03 %     (53 ) -0.04 %  
    Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreement to repurchase   837 4.00 %     837 4.00 %       0.00 %     1,181 4.18 %     1,181 4.18 %       0.00 %  
    Subordinated notes   853 3.27 %     853 3.27 %       0.00 %     853 3.28 %     853 3.28 %       0.00 %  
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities   58,639 3.16 %     58,658 3.16 %     (19 ) 0.00 %     40,076 2.35 %     40,533 2.38 %     (457 ) -0.03 %  
                                         
    Interest/Dividend income/yield   121,721 5.17 %     119,643 5.08 %     2,078   0.09 %     101,538 4.57 %     99,051 4.47 %     2,487   0.10 %  
    Interest Expense / yield   58,639 3.16 %     58,658 3.16 %     (19 ) 0.00 %     40,076 2.35 %     40,533 2.38 %     (457 ) -0.03 %  
    Net Interest Spread   63,082 2.01 %     60,985 1.92 %     2,097   0.09 %     61,462 2.22 %     58,518 2.09 %     2,944   0.13 %  
    Net Interest Margin   2.68 %     2.59 %     0.09 %     2.77 %     2.64 %     0.13 %  
                                         
    Company Contact: Investor and Media Contact:
    Lars B. Eller
    President and Chief Executive Officer Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc.
    (419) 446-2501
    leller@fm.bank
    Andrew M. Berger
    Managing Director
    SM Berger & Company, Inc.
    (216) 464-6400
    andrew@smberger.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: October 29th, 2024 N.M. Delegation Welcomes Over $4 Million From the Infrastructure Law to Enhance Safety, Reduce Delays at Railway Crossings, and Grow Local Economies in Clovis and San Juan County

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), and U.S. Representatives Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), and Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) welcomed a combined $4,570,920 for two projects in New Mexico from the U.S. Department of Transportation to strengthen the nation’s supply chain, reduce costs, and grow New Mexico’s economy. 

    $4,000,000 will help San Juan County and the Navajo Nation complete the planning for a proposed freight rail line connecting Farmington and Gallup. 

    $570,920 will help the City of Clovis enhance safety and reduce traffic delays at two railway crossings.

    “Thanks to our Infrastructure Law, we’re delivering the funds needed to kick-start planning for a freight rail line from Farmington to Gallup and improve railway crossings in Clovis. Combined, these investments will strengthen our nation’s supply chain, grow local economies, lower transportation costs, create high-quality jobs New Mexicans can build their families around, and improve safety for our communities,” said Heinrich. “I’m pleased to welcome these federal investments, and I remain committed to securing more investments to connect rural communities to the abundant opportunities ahead.”

    “Across our state, New Mexicans rely daily on our railways for travel and to keep our economy running,” said Luján. “Thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, this $4.5+ million in federal funding will deliver much-needed railway safety enhancements in Clovis and help construct a new rail line within the Navajo Nation to expand regional rail service in Northwestern New Mexico. I’m proud to welcome these two grants that will both boost railway service and drive economic development for Clovis, the Navajo Nation, and their surrounding communities. I will continue to fight to bring federal dollars home to New Mexico to improve the safety, efficiency, and reliability of passenger and freight rail.”

    “Every time I go to the Four Corners, local leaders emphasize the importance of connecting the region with rail. The Four Corners area is a major economic center of our state, and the funding we’re announcing today is the beginning of our work to make sure our rail infrastructure is ready to meet that potential across San Juan and McKinley Counties,” said Leger Fernández. “I am happy that this funding also includes improvements to safety and efficiency of freight in Clovis. With the support of the CRISI program, we can begin the critical work needed to build stronger connections and drive growth in rural New Mexico.”

    “I am thrilled about the recent allocation of two significant federal grants from the Federal Railroad Administration’s CRISI program, which will greatly enhance rail safety and connectivity in New Mexico,” said Stansbury. “These two grants reflect our commitment to investing in infrastructure prioritizing safety and economic growth. I am grateful for the support from the Federal Railroad Administration and look forward to seeing these projects come to fruition as we work together to build a safer New Mexico!”

    “Federal investments like this bring vital safety and economic benefits to communities across New Mexico. With this funding, we’re improving railway safety, cutting down delays, and connecting New Mexicans to opportunities that drive economic growth and quality jobs,” said Vasquez. “Thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we are building a stronger, safer transportation network. I’m proud to welcome this funding to bring more jobs and opportunities to our rural communities.”

    “The award of grant funding takes a prospective freight rail line study further than any study in the past and is further proof of the importance of collaboration between tribal, local, state, and federal partners to open doors to economic opportunities. We are appreciative of assistance from New Mexico’s federal delegation and excited for future economic growth opportunities in San Juan County and the Four Corners region,” said John T. Beckstead, San Juan County Commission Chairman.

    “The Federal CRISI Grant brings San Juan County and the City of Farmington one step closer to having competitive transportation and economic development. This is an important step in growing our regional economy,” said Tim Gibbs, Four Corner Economic Development CEO.

    The grants are awarded through the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration’s Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program, which provides funding for projects that improve the safety, efficiency, and reliability of intercity passenger and freight rail. The CRISI Program received significant, additional investments from the Infrastructure Law legislation passed by Democrats in the N.M. Congressional Delegation. 

    The N.M. Delegation sent a letter of support to the U.S. Department of Transportation supporting the grant for San Juan County that is being announced today. This grant will prepare the Four Corners Rail Project for final design proposals and planning.

    In May 2020, Heinrich and Luján wrote a letter of support for San Juan County’s application for a Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Grant, which applicants of the CRISI Program are required to be approved for.  

    Members of the N.M. Delegation sent a letter of support to the U.S. Department of Transportation urging the support of the grant for the City of Clovis that is being announced today. This grant will enhance safety and reduce traffic delays at two railway crossings including modifications to the Norris Street railroad crossing and construction of a new grade-separated crossing at MLK Jr. Boulevard.

    Below is a breakdown of the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration funding:  

    Project Name

    Recipient

    Award Amount

    Project Description

    Clovis, N.M. Corridor Improvement Project

    City of Clovis

    $ 570,920

    The proposed project was selected for Project Development and includes activities for one grade crossing separation and improvements to a second at-grade crossing along the BNSF Railway line in Clovis, New Mexico. The project aligns with the selection criteria by enhancing safety and improving system and service performance as the project will reduce blocked crossings. The City of Clovis and BNSF Railway will contribute the 53 percent non-Federal match. This project qualifies for the statutory set-aside for projects in Rural Areas.

    Four Corners Freight Rail Project

    San Juan County

    $ 4,000,000

    The proposed project was selected for Project Development and includes activities to develop a new rail line to connect the Farmington, New Mexico Area to the BNSF Railway corridor near Gallup across San Juan County and McKinley County, New Mexico. The proposed project is a partnership between San Juan County, the Navajo Nation, and the New Mexico Department of Transportation, and most of the project is located within the Navajo Nation. The project aligns with the selection criteria by enhancing resilience and improving system and service performance as the project will provide a viable freight transportation modal alternative to highway trucking, opportunities to simplify the supply chain, and enable new, rail-dependent economic development opportunities thereby imparting benefits to the Navajo Nation and surrounding communities. San Juan County will contribute the 20 percent non-Federal match. This project qualifies for the statutory set-aside for projects in Rural Areas.

    For more information from San Juan County on the proposed Four Corners Rail Project, please click here. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Hello, Lucky: “Active Citizens” Chose a Name for a Baby Dolphin from Moskvarium

    Translation. Region: Russian Federation –

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    Muscovites chose a name for a Black Sea bottlenose dolphin calf in the Active Citizen project. More than 290,000 people took part in the voting.

    According to its results, the baby will be called Lucky, which means “lucky” in English. This option was chosen by 34 percent of participants. In second place was the name Fedya – 24 percent of votes. 14 percent of “active citizens” voted for Kesha. 13 percent of Muscovites would like to name the baby Leon. 12 percent of participants liked the name Lars. Four percent of users trusted their choice to specialists.

    The baby dolphin was born in the Moskvarium oceanography and marine biology center in July. As Moskvarium reported, during the two months of voting, the baby managed to grow a lot and become more independent.

    “The baby is developing quickly, gaining weight well and growing actively. Since birth, its weight has tripled, and it has grown by about 40 centimeters. It has also started teething. We regularly monitor all of its physiological indicators and can confidently say that the baby’s development is within the biological norms for this age,” shared Irina Suvorova, head of the veterinary service at Moskvarium.

    The baby dolphin is also increasingly showing interest in the world around him. Previously, he spent all his time with his mother, but now he often communicates with other inhabitants, especially with the cubs Loki and Izy.

    “The baby is very playful and inquisitive. He loves his toys, especially the fitballs and the big ring. Recently he learned to blow bubbles with his blowhole, his favorite pastime now is blowing them up and popping them. He actively tries to interact with the trainers, comes up to scratch himself, offers his tummy and tail,” said Ilya Siplivy, a marine mammal trainer at Moskvarium.

    With the help of voting in the Active Citizen project, residents of the capital have already chosen names for animals of the Moscow Zoo and the City Farm at VDNKh. Among them are panda Katyusha, tiger Amur, macaques Manya and Dunya, yak Zvezdochka, alpacas Shokoladka and Chernichka, and others.

    The vote is prepared VDNKh and the Active Citizen project. The results can be found on the website or in the project’s mobile application.

    Project “Active Citizen” has been operating since 2014. During this time, more than seven million people have joined it, and over 6.7 thousand votes have been held. Every month, 30–40 decisions made by Muscovites are implemented in the city. The project is being developed Department of Information Technology of the City of Moscow and the State Institution “New Management Technologies”.

    The use of digital technologies and artificial intelligence to improve the quality of life of city residents corresponds to the objectives of the national program “Digital Economy of the Russian Federation” and the regional project of the capital “Digital Public Administration”. More information about this and other national projects implemented in Moscow can be found Here.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    Please note; This information is raw content directly from the information source. It is accurate to what the source is stating and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    https://vvv.mos.ru/nevs/item/145915073/

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI China: Chinese able to receive meteorological alerts up to 8 minutes in advance

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, Oct. 30 — With the improvement of China’s meteorological disaster risk warning capability, meteorological alerts can be delivered to the public within three to eight minutes, covering 98.8 percent of the country’s population, China Science Daily has reported.

    Xiong Shaoyuan, deputy chief of the China Meteorological Administration (CMA), told a press conference on Tuesday that the accuracy of heavy rain warnings has reached 93 percent, and the lead time for severe convective weather warnings has increased to 43 minutes, marking a significant improvement for the country’s disaster control.

    China’s emergency response mechanism, led by meteorological disaster warnings, has been continuously strengthened. A comprehensive national survey of 10 major types of meteorological disaster risks has been completed, and 45 types of meteorological disaster risk products are now released on a daily basis, said Xiong.

    Additionally, the services for warning against risks such as flash floods, geological disasters, and forest and grassland fires have been digitized with high precision, said the official.

    Xiong further said that meteorological services have been extended to more than 70 sectors of the national economy, contributing to smooth transportation, stable energy supply, improved livelihood and the development of new quality productive forces.

    For example, the meteorological service system for agriculture covers the entire chain of grain production, and in collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the CMA issued 12 types of agricultural meteorological disaster risk warnings, said Xiong.

    This year, in response to the CMA’s hot and dry wind warnings, the country’s wheat producing regions have taken various measures of disaster control, which have brought an increase in the yield of winter wheat by about 1.5 billion kilograms, he said.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: Key AI Accomplishments in the Year Since the Biden-⁠ Harris Administration’s Landmark Executive  Order

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    One year ago, President Biden issued a landmark Executive Order to ensure that America leads the way in seizing the promise and managing the risks of artificial intelligence (AI). The Executive Order directed sweeping actions to manage AI’s safety and security risks, protect Americans’ privacy, advance equity and civil rights, stand up for consumers and workers, promote innovation and competition, advance American leadership around the world, and more.
    Today, the Biden-Harris Administration is announcing that Federal agencies have completed on schedule each action that the Executive Order tasked for this past year—more than one hundred in all. Below are some of the Administration’s most significant accomplishments on managing AI’s risks and seizing its promise in the year since President Biden signed his Executive Order.
    Managing Risks to Safety and Security:The Executive Order directed the boldest actions ever taken to protect Americans from a broad range of AI’s safety and security risks, including risks related to dangerous biological materials, software vulnerabilities, and foreign actors’ efforts to develop AI for harmful purposes. Over the last year, to protect safety and security, agencies have:
    Used Defense Production Act authorities to require developers of the most powerful AI systems to report vital information, including results of safety and security testing, to the U.S. government. These companies have notified the Department of Commerce about the results of their red-team safety tests, their plans to train powerful models, and large computing clusters they possess capable of such training. Last month, the Department of Commerce proposed a rule to require the reporting of this information on a quarterly basis.
    Led the way on AI safety testing and evaluations to advance the science of AI safety. The U.S. AI Safety Institute (US AISI) at the Department of Commerce has begun pre-deployment testing of major new AI models through recently signed agreements with two leading AI developers. The Department of Energy (DOE) developed and expanded its AI testbeds and evaluation tools, which it has already used to test models’ risk to nuclear security.
    Developed guidance and tools for managing AI risk. The US AISI and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) at the Department of Commerce published frameworks for managing risks related to generative AI and dual-use foundation models, and earlier this month, AISI released a Request for Information on the responsible development and use of AI models for chemical and biological sciences. The Department of Defense (DoD) released its Responsible AI toolkit to align AI projects with the Department’s Ethical Principles.
    Issued a first-ever National Security Memorandum (NSM) on AI. The NSM directs concrete steps by Federal agencies to ensure the United States leads the world’s development of safe, secure, and trustworthy AI; to enable agencies to harness cutting-edge AI for national security objectives, including by protecting human rights and democratic values; and to advance international consensus and governance on AI. This essential document serves as a formal charter for the AI Safety Institute, designating it as the center of the whole-of-government approach to advanced AI model testing, and will guide rapid and responsible AI adoption by the DoD and Intelligence Community. The NSM also directs the creation of a Framework to Advance AI Governance and Risk Management in National Security, which provides agile guidance to implement the NSM in accordance with democratic values, including mechanisms for risk management, evaluations, accountability, and transparency. 
    Finalized a framework for nucleic acid synthesis screening to help prevent the misuse of AI for engineering dangerous biological materials. The framework, developed by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), encourages nucleic acid synthesis providers to identify gene sequences that could be used to pose national security risks, and to implement customer screening to mitigate the risks of misuse. Federal agencies will require that funding recipients obtain synthetic nucleic acids from vendors that adhere to the framework, starting in 2025. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has developed an initial framework with principles for evaluating the effectiveness of screening mechanisms going forward.
    Launched a new Task Force on AI Datacenter Infrastructure. The Task Force provides streamlined coordination on policies to advance datacenter development operations in line with economic, national security, and environmental goals.
    Identified measures—including approaches for labeling content and improving transparency—to reduce the risks posed by AI-generated content. The Department of Commerce submitted to the White House a final report on science-backed standards and techniques for addressing these risks, while NIST has launched a challenge to develop methods for detecting AI-generated content. President Biden has emphasized that the public has a right to know when content is AI-generated, and agencies are working to use these tools to help Americans to know that communications they receive from their government are authentic.
    Combatted AI-generated image-based sexual abuse. Image-based sexual abuse—both non-consensual intimate images of adults and child sexual abuse material—is one of the fastest growing harmful uses of AI to date and disproportionately targets women, children, and LGBTQI+ people. This year, following the Vice President’s leadership in underscoring the urgent need to address deepfake image-based sexual abuse and a White House Call to Action to reduce these risks, leading AI developers and data providers made voluntary commitments to curb the creation of AI-generated image-based sexual abuse material. Additionally, the Department of Justice (DOJ) funded the first-ever helpline to provide 24/7 support and specialized services for victims of the non-consensual distribution of intimate images, including deepfakes. The Department of Education also clarified that school responsibilities under Title IX may extend to conduct that takes place online, including AI-generated abuse.
    Established the AI Safety and Security Board (AISSB) to advise the Secretary of Homeland Security on the safe and secure use of AI in critical infrastructure. The AISSB has met thrice this year to develop a set of recommendations for entities that develop, deploy, and promote accountability for AI systems that assist in delivering essential services to millions of Americans. The work of the AISSB complements DHS’s first-ever AI safety and security guidelines for critical infrastructure owners and operators, which were informed by agencies’ assessments of AI risks across all critical infrastructure sectors. To help protect critical infrastructure further, the Department of Treasury released a report on managing security risks of AI use in the financial sector, and the Department of Energy released an assessment of potential risks to the power grid, as well as ways in which AI could potentially strengthen grid resilience and our ability to respond to threats.
    Piloted AI for protecting vital government software systems. The Department of Defense and DHS conducted AI pilots to address vulnerabilities in government networks used, respectively, for national security purposes and for civilian governmental organizations.
    Standing up for Workers, Consumers, Privacy, and Civil RightsAI is changing the products and services Americans buy, affecting jobs and workplaces, and introducing or exacerbating risks to privacy, equity, and civil rights. President Biden’s Executive Order stands up for Americans in each of these domains, and over the last year, agencies have:
    Developed bedrock principles and practices, along with guidance, to help protect and empower workers as AI is built for and used in the workplace. The Department of Labor (DOL) released AI Principles and Best Practices for employers and developers to build and use AI in ways that center the wellbeing of workers and improve the quality of jobs. DOL also published two guidance documents to assist federal contractors and employers in complying with worker protection laws as they deploy AI in the workplace. In addition, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released resources for job seekers and workers to understand how AI use could violate employment discrimination laws.
    Protected patients’ rights and safety, while encouraging innovation, as AI is developed and deployed for healthcare. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) established an AI Safety Program to track harmful incidents involving AI’s use in healthcare settings and to evaluate mitigations for those harms. HHS has also developed objectives, goals, and high-level principles for the use of AI or AI-enabled tools in drug development processes and AI-enabled devices. Additionally, HHS finalized a rule that established first-of-its-kind transparency requirements for AI and other predictive algorithms that are part of certified health information technology. HHS also finalized a civil rights regulation, implementing Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, that requires covered health care entities to take steps to identify and mitigate discrimination when they use AI and other forms of decision support tools for care.
    Published guidance and resources for the safe, secure, and trustworthy design and use of AI in education. In July, the Department of Education released guidance calling up on educational technology developers to design AI in ways that protect rights, improve transparency, and center teaching and learning. This month, the Department of Education released a toolkit to support schools and educational leaders in responsibly adopting valuable AI use cases.
    Issued guidance on AI’s nondiscriminatory use in the housing sector, which affirms that existing prohibitions against discrimination apply to AI’s use for tenant screening and housing advertisements, while explaining how to comply with these obligations. Additionally, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau approved a rule requiring that algorithms and AI used for home valuations are fair, nondiscriminatory, and free of conflicts of interest.
    Set guardrails on the responsible and equitable use of AI and algorithmic systems in administering public benefits programs. The Department of Agriculture’s guidance provides a framework for how State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments should manage risks for uses of AI and automated systems in critical benefits programs such as SNAP, while HHS released a plan with guidelines on similar topics for benefits programs it oversees.
    Affirmed commitments to prevent and address unlawful discrimination and other harms resulting from AI. DOJ’s Civil Rights Division convenes federal agency civil rights offices and senior government officials to foster AI and civil rights coordination. Five new agencies also joined a 2023 pledge to uphold America’s commitment to fairness, equality, and justice as new technologies like AI become more common in daily life.
    Advanced privacy protections to safeguard Americans from privacy risks that AI creates or exacerbates. In particular, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and DOE established a research network dedicated to advancing the development, deployment, and scaling of privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs), while NSF launched the $23 million initiative Privacy-preserving Data Sharing in Practice program to apply, mature, and scale PETs for specific use cases and establish testbeds to accelerate their adoption. Simultaneously, DOE launched a $68 million effort on AI for Science research, which includes efforts at multiple DOE National Laboratories and other institutions to advance PETs for scientific AI. The Department of Commerce also developed guidelines on evaluating differential privacy guarantees. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a Request for Information (RFI) on issues related to federal agency collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, and disposition of commercially available information containing personally identifiable information. OMB also released an RFI on how federal agencies’ privacy impact assessments may be more effective at mitigating privacy risks, including those that are further exacerbated by AI and other advances in technology and data capabilities.
    Harnessing AI for GoodOver the last year, agencies have worked to seize AI’s enormous promise, including by collaborating with the private sector, promoting development and use of valuable AI use cases, and deepening the U.S. lead in AI innovation. To harness AI for good, agencies have:
    Launched the National AI Research Resource (NAIRR) pilot and awarded over 150 research teams access to computational and other AI resources. The NAIRR pilot—a national infrastructure led by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in partnership with DOE and other governmental and nongovernmental partners—makes available resources to support the nation’s AI research and education community. Supported research teams span 34 states and tackle projects covering deepfake detection, AI safety, next-generation medical diagnoses, environmental protection, and materials engineering.
    Promoted AI education and training across the United States. DOE is leveraging its network of national laboratories to train 500 new researchers by 2025 to meet demand for AI talent, while NSF has invested millions of dollars in programs to train future AI leaders and innovators. These programs include the EducateAI initiative, which helps fund educators creating high-quality, inclusive AI educational opportunities at the K-12 through undergraduate levels that support experiential learning in fields such as AI and build capacity in AI research at minority-serving institutions.
    Expanded the ability of top AI scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to come to the United States, including by clarifying O-1 and H-1B visa rules and working to streamline visa processing.
    Released a report on the potential benefits, risks, and implications of dual-use foundation models for which the model weights are widely available, including related policy recommendations. The Department of Commerce’s report draws on extensive outreach to experts and stakeholders, including hundreds of public comments submitted on this topic.
    Announced a competition for up to $100 million to support the application of AI-enabled autonomous experimentation to accelerate research into—and delivery of—targeted, industry-relevant, sustainable semiconductor materials and processes.
    Established two new National AI Research Institutes for building AI tools to advance progress across economic sectors, science, and engineering. The NSF-led AI Research Institutes launched in September will develop AI tools for astronomical sciences, with broader applications across scientific disciplines. Earlier this year, NSF also funded 10 inaugural Regional Innovation Engines (NSF Engines), seven of which include a focus on advancing AI.
    Announced millions of dollars in further investments to advance responsible AI development and use throughout our society. These include $13 million invested by DOE in the VoltAIc initiative for using AI to streamline permitting and accelerate clean energy deployment, as well as $68M from DOE to fund AI for scientific research to accelerate scientific programming and develop energy efficient AI models and hardware. DOE has also launched the Frontiers in AI for Science, Security, and Technology (FASST) initiative roadmap and request for information to harness AI for scientific discovery, national security, energy and electric grid resilience, and other national challenges, building on AI tools, models, and partnerships. NSF, in partnership with philanthropy, announced an inaugural investment of more than $18 million to 44 multidisciplinary, multi-sector teams across the U.S. to advance the responsible design, development, and deployment of technologies including AI, ensuring ethical, legal, community, and societal considerations are embedded in the lifecycle of technology’s creation.
    Issued a first-ever report analyzing AI’s near-term potential to support the growth of America’s clean energy economy. DOE’s National Laboratories also issued a long-term grand challenges report identifying opportunities in AI for energy over the next decade. 
    Released a vision for how AI can help us achieve our nation’s greatest aspirations. AI Aspirations sets forth goals to create a future of better health and opportunity for all, mitigate climate change and boost resilience, build robust infrastructure and manufacturing, ensure the government works for every American, and more. In furtherance of these goals, HHS launched CATALYST, a research and development program focused on the potential use of AI to better predict drug safety and efficacy before clinical trials start. In complement, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology also authored a report outlining AI’s potential to revolutionize and accelerate scientific discovery.
    Published guidance addressing vital questions at the intersection of AI and intellectual property. To advance innovation the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has released guidance documents addressing the patentability of AI-assisted inventions, on the subject matter eligibility of patent claims involving inventions related to AI technology, and on the use of AI tools in proceedings before USPTO.
    Bringing AI and AI Talent into GovernmentAI can help government deliver better results for the American people, though its use by Federal agencies can also pose risks, such as discrimination and unsafe decisions. Bringing AI and AI-enabling professionals into government, moreover, is vital for managing these risks and opportunities and advancing other critical AI missions. Over the last year, agencies have:
    Issued the first-ever government-wide policy to strengthen governance, mitigate risks, and advance innovation in federal use of AI. OMB’s historic policy, M-24-10, requires agencies to implement concrete safeguards when using AI in a way that could impact Americans’ rights or safety. These safeguards include a series of mandatory risk management practices to reliably assess, test, and monitor AI’s impacts on the public and provide greater transparency into how the government uses AI. OMB’s policy also directs agencies to designate Chief AI Officers to coordinate the use of AI across their agency, while expanding and upskilling their AI workforce and removing barriers to adopting AI for all manner of purposes—from addressing climate change to advancing public health and safety.
    Released a government-wide policy to advance responsible acquisition of AI by Federal agencies. M-24-18, published this month by OMB, helps ensure that when Federal agencies acquire AI, they have the information and tools necessary to manage risks, promote a competitive marketplace, and collaborate on strategic planning. This work directs the Federal government—the largest buyer in the U.S. economy—to advance AI innovation and risk management through responsibly exercising its purchasing power.
    Hired over 250 AI practitioners into the Federal government through the AI Talent Surge. Tech talent programs ramped up hiring for AI talent, with the Presidential Innovation Fellows bringing on their first-ever AI cohort, DHS establishing their AI Corps with over 30 members onboarded to date, and the U.S. Digital Corps providing pathways for early-career technologists to join Federal service. AI talent has been instrumental in delivering on critical AI priorities, from using AI to deliver top-tier government services, to protecting the public’s rights and safety in the use of AI.
    Established the Chief AI Officers Council to harmonize best practices and sharing of resources across the interagency to implement OMB’s guidance and coordinate the development and use of AI in agencies’ programs and operations.
    Introduced expanded reporting instructions for the federal AI use case inventory to include identifying use cases that impact rights or safety and how the agency is addressing the relevant risks in line with OMB’s policies. 
    Bolstered the public interest technology ecosystem. Building on the AI Talent Surge, the White House announced funding across government, academia, and civil society to support education and career pathways that will help ensure government has access to diverse, mission-oriented technology talent.
    Activated new hiring authorities to bring AI and AI-enabling talent into agencies. As part of the AI Talent Surge, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) granted new hiring authorities, including direct hire authorities and excepted service authorities, for agencies to rapidly bring on top-tier AI and AI-enabling talent, and released guidance on skills-based hiring and pay and leave flexibilities to best position agencies to hire and retain AI and AI-enabling talent. Additionally, OPM collaborated with partners to run three National Tech to Gov career fairs to connect the public with AI and tech jobs in government, surfacing roles from over 64 Federal, state, and local government employers to over 3,000 job seekers.
    Advancing U.S. Leadership AbroadPresident Biden’s Executive Order directed work to lead global efforts to capture AI’s promise, mitigate AI’s risks, and ensure AI’s responsible governance. To advance these goals, the Administration has:
    Sponsored and passed a landmark United Nations General Assembly resolution. The unanimously adopted resolution, with more than 100 co-sponsors (including the People’s Republic of China), lays out a common vision for countries around the world to promote the safe and secure use of AI to address global challenges.
    Engaged foreign leaders on strengthening international rules and norms for AI, including at the 2023 UK AI Safety Summit and the AI Seoul Summit in May 2024, where Vice President Harris represented the United States. In the United Kingdom, Vice President Harris unveiled a series of U.S. initiatives to advance the safe and responsible use of AI, including the establishment of AISI at the Department of Commerce.
    Announced a global network of AI Safety Institutes and other government-backed scientific offices to advance AI safety at a technical level. This network, which will formally launch in November at the inaugural network convening in San Francisco, will accelerate critical information exchange and drive toward common or compatible safety evaluations and policies.
    Expanded global support for the U.S.-led Political Declaration on the Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy. Fifty-six nations now endorse the political declaration, which outlines a set of norms for the responsible development, deployment, and use of military AI capabilities. DoD has expanded the scope of its international AI Partnership for Defense to align global Responsible AI practices with the Political Declaration’s norms.
    Developed comprehensive plans for U.S. engagement on global AI standards and AI-related critical infrastructure topics. NIST and DHS, respectively, will report on priority actions taken per these plans in 90 days.
    Signed the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on AI and Human Rights, Democracy, and the Rule of Law. This first multilateral treaty on AI represents a powerful affirmation of the relevance of existing human rights obligations to AI activities and establishes a strong baseline in international law for responsible government use of AI. The United States’ signature reflects its commitment to ensuring that AI technologies are designed, developed, used, and governed in ways that promote respect for human rights and democratic values. 
    Led the development of a Joint Statement on Responsible Government Practices for AI Technologies. The Joint Statement, to which the 41 countries of the Freedom Online Coalition committed, calls on governments to develop, use, and procure AI responsibly, including by respecting international obligations and commitments, assessing impacts of AI systems, conducting ongoing monitoring, ensuring adequate human training and assessment, communicating and responding to the public, and providing effective access to remedy. 
    Launched the Global Partnership for Action on Gender-Based Online Harassment and Abuse.  The 15-country Global Partnership has advanced international policies to address online safety, and spurred new programs to prevent and respond to technology-facilitated gender-based violence, including through AI.
    The Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development published resources to advance global AI research and use of AI for economic development. The AI in Global Development Playbook incorporates principles and practices from NIST’s AI Risk Management Framework to guide AI’s responsible development and deployment across international contexts, while the Global AI Research Agenda outlines priorities for advancing AI’s safe, responsible, and sustainable global development and adoption.
    The table below summarizes many of the activities that federal agencies have completed in response to the Executive Order.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Nokia selected to lead European lighthouse project on 6G sustainability

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Press Release

    Nokia selected to lead European lighthouse project on 6G sustainability

    • SUSTAIN-6G will evaluate and explore sustainable 6G technologies, methods and use cases touching on environmental, economic and societal needs
    • The consortium will work out solutions for three specific areas of sustainable development: energy smart grids, e-health and telemedicine, and agriculture

    30 October 2024
    Espoo, Finland – Nokia today announced that the Smart Networks and Services Joint Undertaking (SNS JU) has selected Nokia to be the coordinator of the SUSTAIN-6G lighthouse project. The SNS-JU is a public-private partnership funded by the European Commission. Nokia will lead a consortium of innovators that will identify how 6G can play a key role in building a sustainable future, addressing not only environmentally sustainable, but also economically and societally sustainable technologies.

    One of the main goals of SUSTAIN-6G is to develop new solutions for meeting sustainability challenges using the toolkit that 6G will offer. The consortium will devote considerable time to working out use cases for three targeted areas, drawn from the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals:

    • Energy smart grid: The consortium will explore how 6G could be used to create microgrids that manage electricity demand. SUSTAIN-6G will also investigate the use of AI technologies for real-time control of distribution networks. This could lead to more efficient and resilient grids that minimize disruptions while providing the flexibility to draw energy from diverse sources as the world transitions to renewables like solar and wind.
    • E-Health and telemedicine: The consortium will generate new ideas on how 6G can make digital health more inclusive. 6G infrastructure could not only provide a far-reaching infrastructure for securely transmitting and analyzing medical data, but it also could be the foundation for new home-based online assessment services. These networks could improve the diagnosis and treatment process in underserved communities. Meanwhile AI could help detect disease outbreaks at early stages.
    • Agriculture: The consortium will investigate how 6G connectivity could be allocated on a temporary basis to enable smart agricultural applications that require high bandwidth, sensing, telemetry, data analytics and automation. For instance, 6G’s edge cloud capabilities could be harnessed to handle high-priority farming-equipment automation tasks during harvests or provide advanced processing capabilities that integrate data from field sensors, climate stations, soil analysis and satellite imagery to provide contextualized information during the growing season.

    As a lighthouse project, SUSTAIN-6G will be one of the SNS JU’s most highly visible initiatives, and it is the third major European 6G research consortium that Nokia has been selected to lead. The others are Hexa-X and Hexa-X-II, which laid the groundwork for 6G pre-standardization and use cases respectively.

    SUSTAIN-6G has broad representation from industry and academia. The consortium includes network equipment and services vendors, communications services providers, industrial equipment manufacturers, European research institutions and universities, and many small-and medium-sized enterprises. SUSTAIN-6G will kick off in January of 2025 and is scheduled to complete its work in 2027.

    Peter Merz, Vice President of Nokia Standards, said: “The UN Paris Agreement committed the world to combatting climate change. Every industry must do its part. SUSTAIN-6G will show how the communications industry will apply the next generation of networking to creating that sustainable future, overcoming not just environmental challenges but societal and economic challenges as well.”

    Resources and additional information
    Webpage: Nokia Sustainability
    Webpage: What is 6G?

    About Nokia
    At Nokia, we create technology that helps the world act together.

    As a B2B technology innovation leader, we are pioneering networks that sense, think and act by leveraging our work across mobile, fixed and cloud networks. In addition, we create value with intellectual property and long-term research, led by the award-winning Nokia Bell Labs.

    With truly open architectures that seamlessly integrate into any ecosystem, our high-performance networks create new opportunities for monetization and scale. Service providers, enterprises and partners worldwide trust Nokia to deliver secure, reliable and sustainable networks today – and work with us to create the digital services and applications of the future.

    Media inquiries
    Nokia Press Office
    Email: Press.Services@nokia.com

    Follow us on social media
    LinkedIn X Instagram Facebook YouTube

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Scottish Fish Farm Production Survey 2023

    Source: Scottish Government

    An Official Statistics Publication for Scotland

    The Scottish Government today published the Scottish Fish Farm Production Survey 2023. The publication details statistics on the employment and production from Scottish fish farms. It is structured to follow industry trends within the farmed Atlantic salmon, rainbow trout and other species sectors.

    Some key figures from this publication are:

    • In 2023, production of Atlantic salmon decreased by 18,245 tonnes (11%) to 150,949 tonnes.
    • The total number of smolts produced in 2023 decreased by 3.6 million (7%) to 51.5 million.
    • Production tonnage of rainbow trout increased by 6% in 2023 to 9,258 tonnes. This is the highest level of rainbow trout production recorded in Scotland.
    • Brown and sea trout production decreased to 16 tonnes in 2023.
    • In 2023, the total number of staff directly employed in salmon production was 1,480 staff, a decrease of 28 staff compared with 2022. The staffing figures refer to production of Atlantic salmon in seawater and do not include staff involved with processing or marketing activities.

    Background

    Scottish Fish Farm Production Survey 2023 – gov.scot (www.gov.scot)

    1. The survey is compiled from data collected directly from authorised fish farming businesses.
    1. Official statistics are produced by professionally independent staff – more information on the standards of official statistics in Scotland can be accessed at: Producing Official Statistics – gov.scot (www.gov.scot)

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Species Survival Fund: New four-legged friends arrive at Shire Brook Valley Rainbow Meadow in Shire Brook Valley is now home to a host of new four-legged friends as we see the arrival of Highland cows and Dexter cows. The introduction of the cows forms part of Sheffield City Council’s Species Survival Fund which aims to protect, enhance and widen areas of heathland, and it will help to manage and create areas of meadow. 30 October 2024

    Source: City of Sheffield

    Rainbow Meadow in Shire Brook Valley is now home to a host of new four-legged friends as we see the arrival of Highland cows and Dexter cows.

    The cows have been brought to the meadow to graze which will help manage the field naturally , creating open spaces for wildflowers to grow and preventing brambles from taking over the meadow.

    As well as grazing, through moving and walking around the field this will create and maintain the open spaces.  Sheffield City Council has welcomed the cows to maintain the land in a great condition, in between woodland and open grassland. 

    Locals are welcome and encouraged to come down and view the cows from the gate but should not climb the gate as there is a risk of injury from livestock. Dogs are not permitted to be in the field.

    The introduction of the cows forms part of Sheffield City Council’s Species Survival Fund which aims to protect, enhance and widen areas of heathland, and it will help to manage and create areas of meadow, benefitting species of flora such as orchids and invertebrates such as dragonflies.

    The Council’s Species Survival Fund was awarded more than £1million from The National Lottery Heritage Fund, as well as being supported by funding from partners and other organisations, totalling almost £400,000.

    These include National Grid, The Environment Agency, South Yorkshire Sustainability Centre, Sheffield Hallam University, Yorkshire Water, Friends of Richmond Park and the South Yorkshire Badger Group.

    The mix of habitats are particularly important conserve in the area for invertebrate, fungi,  birds and wildflowers – the diversity of which will fall if the site is allowed to become dominated by trees.

    Areas the project will cover:

    • Shire Brook Valley Nature Reserve
    • Beighton Marsh
    • Woodhouse Washlands
    • Wickfield Heath & Plantation
    • Richmond Park
    • Silkstone Ravine (part of Birley Spa)

    The project will improve sites covering a total area of 449.5 acres. The project will involve conservation management, woodland works to open sightlines, creation of leaky dams and new areas of wet woodland, removing 1/3 of the silt and Typha from a former mill pond, creating ditches and hedgerows, and removal of invasive species.

    Species the fund will support include mice, bats, reptiles, amphibians (including toads and newts), birds such as swifts, house martins, skylarks, barn owls and kingfishers. 

    Patrick Gray, Grazing Co-ordinator at Wild Sheffield, said:

    “We now have 18 cows on Rainbow Meadow including 17 Dexter Cows and one Highland Cow.

    “The lack of grazing over the past few years has led to the meadow being overrun with brambles and scrub. The objective of the grazing is to maintain the site as a woodland pasture, which consists of a mix of veteran trees, young trees, and open grassland.

    “This is a pilot scheme, and in the future plan to have grazing at Sally Clark Meadow across the lane, and at Linley Bank.”

    The current plan of winter grazing is to remove the build-up of vegetation on the pasture so that ideal conditions are created for spring when all the interesting and colourful wildflowers begin to germinate.

    Wild Sheffield, in partnership with Sheffield City Council, would like to set up a volunteer scheme for members of the public to assist in keeping an eye on the cows, reporting any sick or injured or escaped animals.

    If you want to find out more about how you can get involved, please email Patrick Gray from Wild Sheffield for more details p.gray@wildsheffield.com.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Video: Biodiversity: No country is immune to devastation inflicted by climate change – UN Chief at COP16

    Source: United Nations (Video News)

    Remarks by António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, at the opening of the High-Level Segment of the sixteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 16) in Cali, Colombia.

    “President Petro,

    Thank you for hosting this important session, here in Cali – a microcosm of our planet’s rich biodiversity.

    Excellencies, dear friends,

    Nature is life.

    And yet we are waging a war against it.

    A war where there can be no winner.

    Every year, we see temperatures climbing higher.

    Every day, we lose more species.

    Every minute, we dump a garbage truck of plastic waste into our oceans, rivers and lakes.

    Make no mistake.

    This is what an existential crisis looks like.

    No country, rich or poor, is immune to the devastation inflicted by climate change, biodiversity loss, land degradation and pollution.

    These environmental crises are intertwined. They know no borders.

    And they are devastating ecosystems and livelihoods, threatening human health and undermining sustainable development.

    The drivers of this destruction are embedded in outdated economic models, fueling unsustainable production and consumption patterns.

    They are multiplied by inequalities – in wealth and power.

    And with each passing day, we are edging closer to tipping points that could fuel further hunger, displacement, and armed conflicts.

    We have already altered 75% of the Earth’s land surface and 66% of its ocean environments.

    Dear friends,

    Biodiversity is humanity’s ally.

    We must move from plundering it to preserving it.

    As I have said time and again, making peace with nature is the defining task of the 21st century.

    That is the spirit of today’s Declaration of the World Coalition for Peace with Nature:

    A call for action to enhance national and international efforts towards a balanced and harmonious relationship with nature – protecting nature and conserving, restoring and sustainably using and sharing our global biodiversity.

    A call to recognize the vital knowledge, innovations and practices of Indigenous people, people of African descent, farmers and local communities.

    A call for life.

    Excellencies,

    Last month, UN Member States adopted the Pact for the Future.

    The Pact recognizes the need to accelerate efforts to restore, protect, conserve and sustainably use the environment.

    It emphasizes the importance of halting and reversing deforestation and forest degradation by 2030, and other terrestrial and marine ecosystems that act as sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases.

    This means conserving biodiversity, while ensuring social and environmental safeguards – in line with the Paris Climate Agreement and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

    When the Framework was adopted two years ago in Montreal, the world made bold commitments to living in harmony with nature by mid-century.

    Its goals and targets require robust monitoring, reporting, and review arrangements to track progress, as well as a resource mobilisation package to increase finance for biodiversity from all sources – mobilizing at least USD 200 billion per year by 2030.

    But we must now turn these promises into action in four vital ways.

    First – at the national level, all countries must finally present clear, ambitious and detailed plans to align with the Framework’s targets.

    These national plans should be developed in coordination with Nationally Determined Contributions and National Adaptation Plans – with positive outcomes in the Sustainable Development Goals.

    We must shift to nature-positive business models and production: renewable energies and sustainable supply chains… zero-waste policies and circular economies… regenerative agriculture and sustainable farming practices…

    These must become the default for governments and businesses alike.

    Second – we must agree on a strengthened monitoring and transparency framework.

    This is not only vital for accountability but also about enabling course corrections and driving ambition.

    Third – finance promises must be kept and support to developing countries accelerated.

    We cannot afford to leave Cali without new pledges to adequately capitalize the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund, and without commitments to mobilize other sources of public and private finance to deliver the Framework – in full.

    And we must bring the private sector on board.

    Those profiting from nature cannot treat it like a free, infinite resource.

    They must step up and contribute to its protection and restoration.

    By operationalizing the mechanism on the sharing of benefits from the use of Digital Sequence Information on Genetic Resources, we will give them one clear avenue to do so, bringing more equity and inclusivity…”

    Full remarks: https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2024-10-29/secretary-generals-remarks-the-high-level-segment-of-cop16-biodiversity-trilingual-delivered-scroll-down-for-all-english

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiM2kUkGPOU

    MIL OSI Video