Cases / Introduced and invasive species · United States · 1933–1970
US paid farmers to plant kudzu against erosion; later declared it a weed
Short record: the main facts, with sources. A full case file has not been prepared.
Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
- The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
The US Soil Erosion Service paid southern farmers to plant kudzu in the 1930s to control soil erosion. The Agriculture Department declared the vine a weed in 1970.
What?
A Soil Erosion Service programme paid farmers to plant kudzu; the vine was declared a weed in 1970. Alabama Extension (ACES)
Where?
Southeastern United States Alabama Extension (ACES)
When?
Planting programme in the 1930s; kudzu declared a weed in 1970. Alabama Extension (ACES)
Who?
Gained
- Southern farmers paid to plant kudzu — Payments of up to $8 per acre Alabama Extension (ACES)
Lost
None on recordHarmed
None on recordWhy?
Erosion control, according to the sources. Alabama Extension (ACES)
How?
The Soil Erosion Service distributed seedlings and paid farmers to plant them. Alabama Extension (ACES)
6 of 6 questions answered from the record
What happened
The record, in order.
Alabama Extension reported that the Soil Erosion Service distributed about 85 million kudzu seedlings to southern farmers in the 1930s, paying up to $8 per acre.
About 3 million acres had been planted by 1946, according to the same source.
The Agriculture Department declared kudzu a weed in 1970, according to Alabama Extension.
In court and with insurers
Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.
Lawsuits and rulings
No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.
Insurers
No insurer decision on record.
What we don't know
Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
Nature
- Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.
Record
- None on record The sources give the programme's start as 1933 in one entry and 1935 in another.
- None on record The sources reviewed do not measure the national cost of the kudzu programme or of later removal.
- None on record The sources reviewed do not describe the damage kudzu has done to native plants or soils.
Did the harm stop?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Who paid?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Sources
Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts— Press and investigations— Communities and civil society✓ Researchers
Researchers
- The history and use of kudzu in the southeastern United StatesAlabama Extension (ACES) ·
Connected cases
Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
- Mexico avocado: US inspection suspensions and Michoacán deforestation Mexico · 2001–2026
- US Department of Agriculture (Government) — here: Declared kudzu a weed in 1970; there: US inspection authority
- Tyson and Sanderson Farms 'no antibiotics' label cases United States · 2008–2024
- US Department of Agriculture (Government) — here: Declared kudzu a weed in 1970; there: Regulator; found gentamicin injected into eggs (2008)
- US bird flu indemnity and egg prices United States · 2022–2026
- US Department of Agriculture (Government) — here: Declared kudzu a weed in 1970; there: Pays bird flu indemnity
- Used cooking oil and POME biofuel certification fraud (ISCC, EU/UK) European Union · 2016–2025
- US Department of Agriculture (Government) — here: Declared kudzu a weed in 1970; there: US agricultural agency; report on Neste later withdrawn