Picture this: you’re in the grocery store, a few years in the future. The shelves in the produce section are sparse — wilted lettuce, knobby potatoes, and withered corn look like the best options. Apples, oranges, and bananas have disappeared entirely. And your cherished coffee beans? You’d have to take out a second mortgage to afford them.

This bleak scenario will move closer to reality if proposed federal science funding cuts to NSF, USDA, and NIH take effect. As a plant science researcher, I’m concerned. Our food supply relies heavily on federally funded agricultural research. Thousands of years of cultivation have given us today's diverse produce, but threats from pests, pathogens, and extreme weather events mean our work isn't finished. Federal funds support essential genebanks — seed and plant collections critical for crop adaptation. Researchers and farmers depend on these resources to develop resilient crop varieties and manage threats like potato blight and devastating grape and citrus diseases. In Massachusetts, federally funded research projects promote soil health, safeguard maple syrup production, and protect our food from contaminants like PFAS — just a few examples among many vital projects. Programs like UMass Extension, also federally funded, connect researchers with local farmers and communities, directly benefiting our region. Studies show that every dollar invested in agricultural research returns $20 to the economy. Protecting this funding ensures food security, economic stability, and full grocery shelves for communities like ours in the Pioneer Valley.

Charlie Hale

Florence