Solar Grazing: Can Sheep Replace Mowers on Solar Farms?

The Solar Coaster Podcast | Transcript

Featuring: Anna Covert and Alex Herrera

This episode uses AI-generated voices representing Anna Covert and Alex Herrera.

Episode Transcript

Anna Covert: Solar grazing sounds almost too charming to be taken seriously: sheep moving under rows of solar panels, trimming grass while electrons flow overhead. But the charm is exactly why I think people underestimate it. This is not just a postcard version of clean energy. It is becoming a practical business model tied to land stewardship, vegetation management, operations, and local agriculture. The numbers already suggest more than a novelty. A national census for 2024 found more than 113,000 sheep grazing among solar panels across 129,000 acres. That is not a few experimental paddocks. That is a sector forming in real time, and it is doing so because solar developers have a real problem: they need to manage vegetation safely, reliably, and cost-effectively across growing fleets of sites.

Alex Herrera: I agree it is visually compelling, but that can be a trap. The image of sheep under panels makes everyone feel good, and suddenly a complex operations question becomes a branding story. I am not dismissing the numbers, but 129,000 acres still has to be understood against the scale of U.S. solar growth. The key question is not whether solar grazing can work somewhere. Clearly, it can. The question is whether it can become a dependable, scalable, standardized service across different regions, different project designs, different ownership structures, and different animals. Once you get past the pleasant image, you have contracts, insurance concerns, fence maintenance, animal welfare, weather, forage quality, and communication between two cultures that often do not speak the same language.

Anna Covert: That cultural gap is real, but it is also part of the value. Solar companies usually know power generation, construction schedules, asset management, and compliance. Graziers know land, forage, weeds, soil health, animals, and local agricultural communities. Stacie Peterson of the American Solar Grazing Association has described that expertise as central to what graziers bring to a site. That is not decorative. If a solar project sits on land for decades, then land management is not a side issue. A mowing crew can cut vegetation, but a grazier has an incentive to keep pasture productive because that pasture feeds the flock. The grazier is not just passing through with a machine; they are invested in the biological performance of the land.

Alex Herrera: But that is exactly where my skepticism begins. Solar projects are not farms first; they are energy infrastructure. The land may have agricultural value, but the asset owner's priority is safe, predictable energy production. A healthy pasture matters only if it does not create operational risk. You mention graziers being invested in the land, but that can cut both ways. They may care deeply about forage, flock rotation, and soil conditions, while the asset manager cares about uptime, safety protocols, and avoiding damage. The partnership can work, but it is not automatic. Matt Kovarik from Black Earth Grazing described the solar corporate world and the farmer or rancher world as quite a dichotomy. That is a polite way of saying there can be friction.

Anna Covert: Friction does not mean failure. It means the model needs deliberate relationship-building. In fact, the same people involved in these programs emphasize communication again and again. Rebekah Pierce of J&R Pierce Family Farms has stressed the need to connect with the right person inside the company, especially because solar projects can be acquired and new people can take over. That is a practical insight, not a slogan. And consider the operational upside she points to: her team is physically on site every other day. If they see a loose wire or a hole in a fence, they can report it. That kind of recurring human presence is hard to quantify, but for operations and maintenance teams it can be meaningful.

Alex Herrera: Recurring site presence is useful, but let us be careful. Seeing a problem and reporting it is not the same as being trained to inspect electrical systems or resolve technical faults. It is an extra set of eyes, not a replacement for professional operations and maintenance. And if we are making the case that solar grazing is cost-effective, we need to separate measurable services from nice-to-have benefits. Vegetation control is measurable. Reduced use of fossil fuels compared with mechanical mowing may be plausible and has been identified as a benefit, but the details matter. Human presence is helpful, local connection is helpful, community goodwill is helpful. Still, developers will eventually ask: what does this cost, what risk does it add, and does it perform consistently?

Anna Covert: That is fair, and the most serious advocates are not saying sheep replace engineers. They are saying grazing can replace or reduce mechanical vegetation management in many contexts while adding co-benefits. Developers already pay for vegetation management. If sheep can provide that service while reducing reliance on equipment that burns fuel, throws rocks, or creates other site concerns, then the comparison is practical. Pierce has argued that livestock are often less risky than mechanical mowers and other farm equipment, pushing back against misconceptions that sheep chew wires, damage equipment, kick up rocks, or create fire risk. You may say that is her perspective, but it matters because she is operating in the field, not theorizing from a conference panel.

Alex Herrera: Field experience matters, but we should not treat any one practitioner's confidence as universal proof. Some sites were not designed for grazing at all, especially not for larger animals. Even Pierce, who proposed a cattle-grazing pilot, has said sheep remain the most flexible option for solar sites. That caveat is important. Sheep are small, maneuverable, and comparatively suited to moving among arrays. Cattle are a different question. Larger animals mean different pressure on fencing, different movement patterns, and possibly different design requirements. The cattle pilot in Fort Covington, New York, may have gone well, with five cattle including one bull grazing among modules mounted on trackers and showing no unusual behavior, but two sites do not settle the broader issue.

Anna Covert: No, two sites do not settle it, but pilots are how broader evidence begins. The cattle example is valuable because it expands the imagination of what agrivoltaics can include. Pierce noted that Americans consume far more beef than lamb, so if solar grazing remains sheep-only, it may serve vegetation management well but have a narrower agricultural market connection. Cattle will not fit every site, and perhaps not most sites. Still, asking whether some solar farms can support cattle is a serious question, especially when a developer like Nexamp has already grown its livestock grazing program from one site in 2019 to 89 sites across five states this past season, totaling almost 2,000 acres. That trajectory suggests this is not just a quirky experiment.

Alex Herrera: Nexamp's growth is interesting, but I would still distinguish between program expansion and industry transformation. Eighty-nine sites is notable, yet we do not know from the material how those sites compare in cost, performance, incident rates, or vegetation outcomes against conventional mowing. The developer's communications manager said they value continuing agricultural application on solar farms while receiving a necessary service in a safer and more sustainable way. That is a positive statement, but it is not a detailed operational audit. For a podcast debate, I want to keep the burden of proof clear. Solar grazing is promising. It is expanding. But promising and expanding are not the same as proven at every scale.

Anna Covert: I do not claim every scale. I claim it deserves to be treated as an emerging professional service, not an aesthetic accessory. The American Solar Grazing Association even maintains a map to help solar grazers and site operators or developers connect, and it offers a one-day workshop for operations teams, developers, asset managers, and sustainability teams, with a Level 1 Solar Grazing Management Certification. That indicates institutionalization. The business reportedly became a business around 2018, one year before the U.S. reached two million solar installations. As solar deployment grew, a specialized service emerged to solve a practical land-management problem. That is a normal pattern in maturing infrastructure sectors: new assets create new maintenance needs, and new businesses form around them.

Alex Herrera: Institutionalization helps, but it can also hide uneven quality. A map and a workshop can connect people, but they do not guarantee that every grazier has the right flock size, transport capacity, fencing plan, insurance, emergency protocols, or communication habits. Nor do they guarantee that every developer understands animal needs or pasture management. The best cases involve mutual education. The article's strongest point, to me, is not that sheep are magical mowers. It is that both parties have to educate each other. Without that, the mismatch can be sharp: one side thinks in megawatts, asset transfers, and site performance; the other thinks in forage, breeding cycles, animal health, and land conditions.

Anna Covert: And that mutual education is exactly why the model can strengthen community relationships. Solar development sometimes faces local skepticism because people see land taken out of familiar use. Grazing lets a site continue an agricultural application. That does not answer every land-use concern, but it changes the conversation. The grazier may already have local connections, may sell products in the community, pay taxes, and support local services. Solar companies benefit from that local bridge. A mowing contractor may come and go. A local grazier can make the project feel less like an outside industrial installation and more like a mixed-use landscape. For community solar especially, that symbolic and practical link can be valuable.

Alex Herrera: I like the community argument, but we should avoid romanticizing it. A solar site with sheep is still a solar site. It is fenced, managed, and optimized for energy production. Some neighbors may appreciate the agricultural continuity; others may still object to the visual change or land conversion. Also, local agricultural participation depends on whether there are graziers nearby with enough animals and business capacity. If the solar industry grows faster than the pool of qualified graziers, then either quality drops or the model remains geographically limited. The 2025 census had not been released in the material, though Peterson believed the numbers had greatly increased. That may be true, but until the data are available, we should be cautious about assuming smooth growth.

Anna Covert: Caution is reasonable, but the early growth signals are strong. Take ReVision Energy's partnership with Black Earth Grazing in New England. Since 2024, they have worked together on a dual-management solar grazing program. It has apparently been successful enough that the farmers changed their name from Black Earth Forest Farm to Black Earth Grazing. They started with 40 ewes and now manage a flock of several hundred. They are responsible for 11 of ReVision's community solar sites, and the flock keeps growing as more solar sites become available. That is a concrete example of a farm operation scaling because solar sites provided land access and paid vegetation-management work.

Alex Herrera: It is concrete, and it is encouraging. But again, it may also show the model's dependence on particular relationships. ReVision, Black Earth, Nexamp, J&R Pierce: these examples have engaged partners. What happens when ownership changes, when an asset is sold, or when the person who championed grazing leaves the company? Pierce specifically warned that projects are commonly acquired and new people take the helm. That is not a minor footnote. Long-lived infrastructure often changes hands. If the grazing arrangement depends on personal trust and one knowledgeable contact, it can be fragile. The industry needs contracts and procedures strong enough to survive turnover.

Anna Covert: Absolutely, and that is where standard agreements, certification, and professional associations can help. But let us not pretend mechanical vegetation management is frictionless. Machines require labor, fuel, scheduling, maintenance, and site access. They can be noisy, and according to practitioners, they can kick up rocks or bring other risks. Solar grazing is not competing against perfection. It is competing against existing methods that also have costs and complications. The question should be comparative: in which sites, climates, and project designs do sheep deliver equal or better vegetation control with additional benefits? If the answer is even a meaningful subset of sites, then solar grazing can become an important part of the solar operations toolkit.

Alex Herrera: I can accept the toolkit framing. My objection is to the breakthrough narrative that sometimes surrounds agrivoltaics. People want one elegant solution that reconciles clean energy, agriculture, biodiversity, rural economics, and community acceptance. Solar grazing contributes to several of those aims, but unevenly. It provides vegetation management and land access for graziers. It may reduce fossil fuel use compared with mechanical approaches. It may maintain an agricultural use. It may improve local relationships. But each may depends on execution. Poorly managed grazing could underperform. Poor communication could frustrate both sides. A site not designed for animals could limit options. The model's appeal should not shield it from operational discipline.

Anna Covert: Operational discipline is not the enemy of the idea; it is how the idea matures. I also think the fact that the business emerged around 2018 matters. It is young. We are watching the process of professionalization, not evaluating a century-old industry. Early data from the 2024 census gives us a baseline. Peterson's expectation that the numbers have increased suggests momentum, even if we need the unreleased census to confirm the scale. Meanwhile, companies are already expanding programs. Graziers are building flocks. Workshops are training stakeholders. Maps are connecting parties. This is what an emerging market looks like before it becomes routine: messy, relationship-heavy, but increasingly organized.

Alex Herrera: Young industries can mature, but they can also hit constraints. Land availability through solar sites helps graziers expand, yet expansion means more animals, more management, and more responsibility. A flock of several hundred is different from 40 ewes. Moving animals among multiple solar sites is not trivial. There are seasonal patterns, forage limits, and animal care obligations that do not disappear because the site also produces electricity. Developers may want reliable schedules; animals and pastures do not always follow a spreadsheet. I am not saying the constraints are fatal. I am saying they are central. The more solar grazing grows, the more it must look like a serious logistics and land-management business.

Anna Covert: And many graziers would probably agree. They are not asking to be seen as hobbyists. Peterson described solar grazers as bringing agricultural expertise, land stewardship, vegetation management, soil health knowledge, and forage and weed knowledge. That portfolio is professional. What I find compelling is the alignment of incentives: the solar owner needs vegetation controlled; the grazier needs land and income; the animals need forage; the community may benefit from local agricultural activity; and the land may be managed with more attention than a periodic mowing schedule provides. Alignment does not eliminate risk, but it creates a foundation for durable partnerships.

Alex Herrera: The alignment is real when the site conditions match. But let me push on soil health and land stewardship. The material says graziers bring soil health knowledge, but it does not provide measurements showing soil improvement at these sites. So we should not claim proven ecological gains beyond what is documented. We can say graziers have relevant knowledge and an incentive to maintain healthy pasture. We can say vegetation management may use fewer fossil fuels than mechanical methods. But if we start promising broad soil restoration or biodiversity outcomes without data from the material, we overreach. That matters because clean energy discussions are already full of optimistic claims. Credibility requires restraint.

Anna Covert: Restraint accepted. Let us keep the claim grounded: solar grazing offers a cost-effective solution to land stewardship and vegetation management, with additional tangible benefits reported by participants. Those benefits include fewer fossil fuels than mechanical methods, recurring human presence, local connections, continued agricultural use, income for graziers, and access to more land for farm expansion. Those are enough. We do not need to exaggerate. In fact, the grounded version is stronger because it speaks directly to actual needs. Solar sites have grass and weeds. Someone must manage them. If sheep can do that while supporting local farms, why would we not scale it where appropriate?

Alex Herrera: Because where appropriate is doing a lot of work. Scaling responsibly means developers should not simply decide that sheep are greener and hand the keys to the nearest farmer. They need to assess site design, fencing, vegetation, animal access, water, liability, communication protocols, and ownership continuity. Graziers need to understand solar site priorities, safety boundaries, reporting expectations, and the fact that energy infrastructure has different constraints from open pasture. The ASGA workshop and certification sound useful precisely because enthusiasm alone is not enough. If solar grazing is going to grow from charming story to reliable practice, it needs standards, training, and honest screening of unsuitable sites.

Anna Covert: That is a strong point, and I would add that developers should involve graziers earlier when possible. If sites are designed without grazing in mind, sheep may still work, but options become narrower, and cattle may be impractical. Pierce's cattle pilot succeeded on two tracker sites, but she also emphasized that sheep remain the most flexible, especially where sites were not designed for larger animals. Design choices shape future land-use flexibility. If agrivoltaics is part of the vision, then thinking about animals after construction is not ideal. The industry can learn from these early programs and build sites that make responsible grazing easier.

Alex Herrera: Early involvement would help, though it may add complexity to development. Solar developers already deal with interconnection, permitting, procurement, financing, construction, and community engagement. Adding livestock considerations may feel like another burden. But if the long-term operations savings and community benefits are real, then the upfront coordination could be justified. This is where better data would change the debate. I would like to see more transparent comparisons: grazing versus mowing costs, vegetation outcomes, safety incidents, fuel use, and contract durability over time. The 2024 census established scope. The next step is performance evidence that helps asset managers make decisions without relying mainly on anecdotes.

Anna Covert: Performance evidence would be welcome. Still, anecdotes from operators are not meaningless when a field is young. Nexamp began with one site in 2019 and expanded significantly each year. ReVision's partnership helped a farm grow from 40 ewes to several hundred. J&R Pierce is experimenting with cattle while continuing sheep operations. These are operational stories, not marketing fantasies. They show that real companies are finding enough value to continue and expand. If the model were merely cute but inefficient, we would expect pilots to fade. Instead, at least in these examples, the programs are growing.

Alex Herrera: Growth is a positive signal, and I am not arguing for dismissal. My position is that solar grazing should be framed as a promising specialized service, not a universal solution. It deserves investment, training, and measurement. It also deserves scrutiny. The best version of the model respects both sides: the solar company's need for reliable asset management and the grazier's knowledge of land and animals. The worst version would be a developer using sheep as a public relations image while underestimating the work required, or a grazier underestimating the constraints of energy infrastructure. Success depends on avoiding both mistakes.

Anna Covert: Then maybe our disagreement is about emphasis. I see an emerging business with enough proof of concept to move confidently into broader adoption where conditions fit. You see a promising model that must not outrun its standards or evidence. Both can be true. What makes solar grazing fascinating is that it forces clean energy to become more place-based. It is not only panels, inverters, and wires. It is pasture, animals, local knowledge, and long-term stewardship. That does not make it simple, but it makes it richer. As solar expands, the industry will need land management models that are practical and socially grounded. Solar grazing is one of the most compelling candidates.

Alex Herrera: I can end there with a qualified yes. Solar grazing is compelling because it answers a real operational need while opening a door for continued agriculture on solar land. The 2024 census numbers show meaningful activity. The examples from Nexamp, ReVision, Black Earth Grazing, and J&R Pierce show that programs can expand. But the future depends on professional execution: clear agreements, trained partners, suitable sites, steady communication, and better performance data. If those pieces come together, sheep under solar panels will be more than a beautiful image. They will be part of how some solar projects are responsibly managed. If they do not, the image may travel farther than the practice.

Explore More From The Solar Coaster

Visit The Solar Coaster Podcast for more discussions about the future of solar energy.

Watch The Solar Coaster on YouTube

Explore Extended Content

Discover The Solar Coaster Book

Sponsored by Sun Energy Today.