Precision Ag Overlay to National Broadband Map a Tough Task, But Might Be Worth It 

Last month, seven members of the House of Representatives introduced the “Data Broadband Reporting and Integration for Deployment in Geographically Essential Areas Act” (Data BRIDGE Act). It’s a long title for a seemingly simple task: to update the FCC’s National Broadband Map (NBM) “in a manner that incorporates, as a layer of such map, data on the location of agricultural areas.” It is a short bill with only one section with any instruction for the FCC and leaves much to be defined.  

“This bipartisan bill will bring high-speed broadband to the fields that feed America. Too often, cropland and pastures are left off the FCC’s broadband map, cutting farmers off from the precision ag technology they need to boost yields, cut costs, and stay competitive. This bill makes sure federal broadband dollars reach the acres where the work happens,” said the bill’s author, Representative Erin Houchin (R-IN) in a social media post. 

What is Precision Ag? Why is it important? I’ve had at least some involvement with it since 2006. Precision Ag enables water conversation, higher yields, reduced fuel and energy consumption, reduced fertilizers and pesticides, and a higher quality of life for our farmers. It enables so many good things for those who feed and clothe us. All these results depend on high-speed connections in some of the most rural parts of the United States. 

What could be the benefits? 

• For Policymakers: The map would be a powerful tool for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and Congress to identify “precision ag deserts”—areas of high agricultural importance with poor connectivity. This would allow for strategic targeting of federal funds (like NTIA’s BEAD and USDA’s ReConnect) to close those gaps, boosting economic productivity and food security. It moves the conversation from general “rural broadband” to a targeted, mission-critical objective. 
• For Internet Service Providers (ISPs): A bit of a stretch in some cases, but the map might help ISPs build business cases. Instead of seeing a vaguely defined rural area with low population density, they could see a cluster of high-value agricultural operations that represent a source of potential revenue for enterprise-grade connectivity services.  
• For Smaller Operations: Large farm operations may engage with fiber, fixed wireless, and LEO satellite providers to solve their connectivity needs, but small and medium-sized farms might not have the same resources. For them, a clear map showing available services could be genuinely useful. 

From my perspective as someone with 20 years in rural telecommunications and one who has experience with building many broadband maps, the Data Bridge bill is a well-intentioned piece of legislation that runs into significant practical and definitional challenges. It needs a little more consideration before moving forward. 

The Challenges 

I don’t think we should assume that the FCC can neatly overlay publicly available USDA data onto its NBM. Let’s remember the years and expense it took for the Commission to build the NBM, which some say is still not accurate enough to fulfill its policymaking purposes. NBM’s Location Fabric is a database of addresses and other geo locations where there are broadband serviceable buildings. These are all geo-located points, largely on rooftops. Fields are widely spread and connectivity for example might be needed at irrigation pivots, gates, wells, generators, livestock, and other locations. This is a different level of data. 

USDA collects information, such as data through the National Agricultural Statistics Service, primarily for statistical and economic analysis. It does not match well with the NBM Fabric’s precise geospatial mapping. USDA often aggregates at the county level to protect individual farm privacy and to show trends (e.g., “X county produced Y bushels of corn”). It lacks the structure-level granularity required for a meaningful overlay on the NBM’s Fabric and accurate land use information.  

Data from the Farm Service Agency and other USDA divisions have more precise location data, but USDA considers it sensitive information and does not make it readily available for public mapping projects. Releasing specific farm boundaries and equipment locations would violate individual farmers’ privacy and create a major political and logistical hurdle. Farmers deal with theft and exposing where critical assets are could lead to more. 

Might we find some of the needed data within NBM itself without additional work? No. Locations are classified in the Fabric where feasible by the following codes: 

2–Land  3–Business  4–Unknown  5–Agriculture  6–Community  7–Industrial  8–Recreation  9–Utility

10–Mixed Use  11–Transportation  12–Water  13–Communications  14–ROW  15–Wireless  0–Other

Land Use is not always populated and there are no geo points or codes for some critical inputs for precision ag.

An analyst could attempt to infer this by cross-referencing Fabric locations with land use or zoning data, but this would be highly prone to error: 

• Many farmhouses are also primary residences. 
• Many rural businesses are on land zoned for agriculture. 

Agricultural land is fundamentally different. It’s vast, amorphous, and farmers might change the way they use it seasonally. Mapping internet demand in fields is a different GIS challenge than mapping a farmhouse. The NBM process demonstrated how hard it is to accurately place discrete points on a map; mapping millions of complex polygons tracking agricultural activity and expected internet demand would be an order of magnitude that is more difficult and costly. 

Thinking About Solutions  

In December 2024, the FCC’s Precision Ag Connectivity Task Force adjourned its final meeting. Over five years, the group met and considered many issues, including mapping broadband connectivity for precision agriculture purposes. The group’s final report includes many detailed recommendations. In fact, the first Executive Summary ends on page 20. It is a long report with what I counted as nine executive summaries, and many, many suggestions that cover every dimension of the challenge. 

I respect the hours and dedication the task force put into that report, but I’m afraid its mapping recommendations are getting little traction. Most of the recommendations seem to involve tweaks to the NBM itself and have little to do with the problems of gathering and applying agricultural data to the NBM. 

We also need to recognize that the issue the report seeks to address is a technology / market issue as much as anything else. We have mature capabilities to bring broadband at very high capacity that have evolved to serve the best market opportunities. These are things like commercial and residential internet service, high-capacity links for education and telemedicine, and of course mobile phones and the data they consumer and share. A dollar invested in serving any of those markets will expect a higher return than one serving IOT for agriculture. 

That said, technology marches on and we can see more and more IOT service plans coming online that could work in rural precision ag areas with some professional installation and support services. Additional regulation and data gathering is not the direct approach to solve the underlying issues. 

Should the House Energy and Commerce Committee decide to schedule hearings on precision agriculture and the Data Bridge Act … or should FCC and USDA decide to start an NBM overlay project on their own … I recommend that they look at the issues with a fresh set of eyes and results orientation. 

With a narrower plan in place, FCC and USDA could work on other problems related to the mapping endeavor, such as how to balance farmers’ privacy and security needs against their service needs. A simpler approach would make it easier to work with various agricultural production associations and communications companies to develop optimal better data gathering strategies and facilitate the adoption of existing and emerging technologies to close the gaps I’ve outlined. 

Bailey White is NRTC VP, Product Development, and co-founder of NRTC’s CrowdFiber.