That doesn't really make sense, the vast, vast majority of farmland is not close enough to an urban area to be influenced by sprawl and get bid up to development prices.
All the subdivisions in Texas that have “ranch” in the name are that way for a reason
sure, but enough of it is close to urban areas
you never lived in California?
The urban sprawl there ate up all of the orange groves, for example... in Orange County!
Define "enough"? The article in question is about Arkansas and broad acre farming, there is 600+ million acres of farm in the midwest down to the delta 99% of which isn't close to a major population center. There is lots of pressure in areas of California and all up and down the west coast up to Vancouver.. but that is a trivial amount a farm land in the grand scheme of things (and specialized due to climate, water, and market access issues that don't apply to most farm land in the US or really anywhere)
A lot of advocates of building restrictions did it in the name of preserving nature/farmland/greenspace, but in many ways it’s had the opposite effect:
https://youtu.be/-Qn4iZgQY8k?si=LFzuAdWgMxB1BpIG