CHICAGO — The U.S. Department of Agriculture rejected four women farmers chosen by their peers for United Soybean Board seats and named men instead in appointments announced Feb. 2, according to official records and reporting by Reuters, May 2. The move drew concern because farmer leaders said USDA gave no public explanation for overruling nominees in a program traditionally viewed as farmer-led.
The rejected women included Virginia farmer Susan Watkins, Michigan farmer Carla Schultz, South Dakota farmer Dawn Scheier and Wisconsin farmer Sara Stelter. Reuters reported that USDA rejected at least five candidates overall, including the four women, while the agency and the United Soybean Board said only that the agriculture secretary selects members from state-submitted candidates.
Soybean Board appointments put transparency under pressure
USDA’s Feb. 2 appointment notice listed 42 members and four alternates to serve three-year terms on the United Soybean Board. The notice named male appointees in states where the rejected women had been expected to serve, including Virginia, Michigan, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
Watkins, who had served on the board for six years, had been selected in December to serve as treasurer for 2026 before she was rejected. “We should be judged on our merit,” Watkins told Reuters. “It’s very disheartening.”
In a separate report, DTN/The Progressive Farmer reported that none of the rejected farmers who spoke with the outlet said USDA contacted them before or after the decision to explain why their nominations were denied. Schultz told DTN, “So it saddens me because we were voted in by our fellow farmers.”
Why the Soybean Board shake-up matters to farmers
The United Soybean Board oversees national soy checkoff investments funded by mandatory assessments on soybean sales. USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service says the board has 77 members representing 29 states and two regions, and that members must be nominated by qualified state soybean boards before the secretary of agriculture appoints them to the board.
The Agricultural Marketing Service describes the soybean program as a research and promotion program designed to maintain and expand domestic and foreign markets for soybeans and soybean products. Under federal regulations, the board is composed of soybean producers appointed by the secretary from submitted nominations, and if a nomination is rejected, the secretary may request additional nominations when there are not enough names to fill appointments.
That process is laid out in 7 CFR Part 1220, which governs the Soybean Promotion, Research and Consumer Information Order. The rules also require first purchasers to collect a checkoff assessment of 0.5% of the net market price of soybeans purchased, underscoring why farmers who pay into the program are watching the appointment process closely.
Older Soybean Board records show the shift
The rejected nominations landed against a recent history of women holding visible leadership roles in the soy checkoff. In 2022, the board announced that Meagan Kaiser had been elected chair, with other women also serving on the executive committee. In 2024, the board listed Watkins as secretary and Schultz as an executive committee member. In December 2025, the board listed Watkins as treasurer and Schultz again on the executive committee.
The broader agricultural context also adds weight to the dispute. USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service reported in its 2022 Census of Agriculture female producer highlights that the United States had 1.2 million female producers, accounting for 36% of the country’s producers, and that more than half of farms had at least one female producer.
What comes next for the Soybean Board
The controversy now centers on whether USDA will explain its reasoning or clarify whether political review played a role in the rejected nominations. Reuters reported that the Virginia Soybean Board appealed USDA’s decision, but an Agricultural Marketing Service official said the rejection of Watkins was final, according to meeting notes reviewed by the news agency.
For soybean farmers, the immediate issue is representation. The board decides how checkoff dollars are spent on research, promotion, export demand, infrastructure, food, feed, fuel and industrial uses. For critics of the decision, the unanswered question is why experienced women who had already earned backing from farmer peers were removed from the pipeline without a public explanation.
USDA has not publicly said the rejected nominations were tied to gender. But the absence of a stated reason, combined with the all-male appointment outcome for the new slate, has turned a normally low-profile checkoff process into a test of transparency for one of agriculture’s most important farmer-funded boards.
