Actors Forming Farm Bill Conservation Programs

Main Page

History of the Farm Bill            Farm Bill Policy Process            Farm Bill Issues

Introduction

The farm bill is a recent development in our nation’s policy history and specifically establishing conservation programs under the farm bill is even newer.  Until the 1985 farm bill there were few conservation programs outside of soil loss prevention programs implemented by the Soil Conservation Service.  Much like the farm bill, the agencies that participate in forming the conservation programs have also evolved over time.  When most people think of the players active in the creation of farm bill conservation programs, they almost always think of the intergovernmental organizations such as the USDA, NRCS, FSA, and maybe the USFS or the USFWS. 

Generally intergovernmental organizations are responsible for the implementation and regulation of the programs that Congress approves of.  Many forget about the well-funded, influential nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs, that are often vocal about what policies need to be changed or added.  There are usually two distinct camps of NGOs including those that are concerned for the farmers’ well-being, and those that are concerned for wildlife and wildlife habitat.  The NGOs discussed below will represent these different camps and include analysis of their different values, lobbying strategies, and outcomes desired for the next farm bill.

American Farmland Trust

One NGO representing the farmer’s camp is a nonprofit organization founded by farmers in 1980 called American Farmland Trust, or AFT.  “The mission of American Farmland Trust is to stop the loss of productive farmland and to promote farming practices that lead to a healthy environment” (“ Mission ”).  In order to attain the goals stated in their mission they have four plans of action that are all interconnected to support their cause.  First they want to develop plans making sure farming and community growth are in stride with each other.  Accomplishing this will include transforming farm policy to ensure that American agriculture will be sustainable in the future.  Relating to the transformation of farm policy is the protection of the most productive land that America possesses and supporting initiatives which do so.  While protecting the most productive land they also want to keep it healthy through conservation programs and private landowner stewardship.

The goals of this well-funded nonprofit organization based out of Washington D.C. are quite lofty, but they are very active in working with landowners such as farmers and ranchers and lobbyists such as political leaders and community activists (“About”).  By working with these people, especially the landowners, they can see what is wrong with the current farm bill conservation programs in order to suggest amendment options.  They can then compile the grievances and report them in official documents, like the one described below, that get submitted to Congress and agencies such as the USDA and their subsidiaries.  In their most recent document entitled Agenda 2007: A New Framework and Direction for U.S. Farm Policy, there is a special section containing recommendations for changes to current conservation programs like CRP and WRP such as the need for more funding to remain successful in the future.

The AFT’s first conservation concern is the need to “establish a cooperative conservation partnership initiative.”  In order to accomplish this they recommend that new and more competitive grant programs be established which will result in more cooperative efforts by landowners, IGOs, and NGOs to address and correct the most important natural resource issues.  They believe that by establishing these grant programs they will be “getting the right practices in the right places at the right time.”  The aim of this recommendation is to ensure that larger continuous blocks of critical habitat will be enhanced or restored together rather than in the current patchwork fashion (American 18).

Secondly, the AFT report emphasizes the need to “increase and stabilize funding for conservation.”  Their recommendations for this issue is to double the federal funding for conservation programs and ensure that all states have a guaranteed minimum amount of funding available each year.  The programs under the current Farm Bill affected by this would include CSP, WHIP, and EQIP.  They affirm that more funding will result in healthier environments in each state if minimum funding is available to address each state’s particular areas of concern.

The final issue in the AFT’s report concentrates on the need to “simplify [the] application process and coordinate programs.”  More landowners would be willing to participate if the application process was simplified down to a single document that would determine program eligibility and the most efficient programs for each landowners’ needs.  As of now, many are discouraged due to strict guidelines for eligibility and the mountains of paper work for admittance (American 19).  The AFT suggests that current programs be complied into one unified program covering all previous programs’ features.  This would reduce the paperwork and confusion associated with program eligibility, which may result in greater landowner participation (American 20).

  Ducks Unlimited

The NGO representing the wildlife conservation community is Ducks Unlimited, or DU.  Their purpose statement suggests that “Ducks Unlimited conserves, restores and manages wetlands and associated habitats for North America 's waterfowl. These habitats also benefit other wildlife and people.”  In order to uphold their purpose, DU retains values dedicated to conserving wetlands and waterfowl while still retaining and promoting North America ’s rich waterfowl hunting heritage.  They accomplish this through cooperating with other organizations, spending money in the most efficient manner, and by making decisions on scientific grounds (“About Ducks”).  DU also works with IGOs like the USDA and USFWS as well as senators, representatives, White House officials, and other conservation organizations.  DU is so active in Washington D.C. they maintain a permanent office that strives to create, promote, and enhance wildlife oriented legislation (“Ducks Unlimited Governmental”).

DU has many goals they want to attain in the 2007 Farm Bill.  Their highest priority region is the Prairie Pothole Region, or PPR, and the programs that directly affect its conservation like CRP and WRP.  Within the PPR, DU is also pushing for additional programs similar to GRP, which would promote native grassland protection by providing landowners with payments on a long-term basis.  DU is also actively focusing efforts on improving CSP and EQIP to be more conducive with modern farm operations, which could greatly increase participation that in turn benefits the grasslands, wetlands, and wildlife that reside on these properties.

The first program DU recommends specific changes for is CRP.  DU wants 7.8 million acres of CRP land to be continually maintained in the PPR under national allotments.  Other recommendations include further support for the sodsaver amendment that withhold subsides or payments to farmers and ranchers that plow native prairies under and convert them into row crop production (DU’s National”).  Another recommendation deals specifically with the CP-23 program under the current CRP program.  DU sees CP-23, more commonly known as wetland restoration practice, as a portion of CRP that needs amending.  As it stands now, wetlands can only be restored under CP-23 practices that are located within the 100-year floodplain.  DU recommends CP-23 also include wetlands outside of the 100-year floodplain, which would encompass more grassland areas on upland habitat important to breeding waterfowl, upland game birds, and other non-game species.  Finally, DU wants to establish a proactive program requiring landowners to maintain their CRP acres while enrolled.  Such a program would increase CRP productivity by performing practices such as timely haying, limited grazing, and rotational burning of land outside of critical periods such as nesting or brood rearing seasons (“The Conservation”).

The other major program DU is most concerned with is WRP.  DU wants to maintain the continual allocation of 250,000 acres of WRP land per year, increase the national allotment to 3,525,000 acres, and retain current policies that prevent wetland drainage and conversion to other uses (“DU’s National”).  A specific addition to WRP recommended by DU includes the full compensation for all planning and restoration work that is completed by non-profit organizations.  By adding this provision to WRP, DU hopes this program will continue to receive maximum funding each year, which will result in private landowners and organizations being able to continue their efforts to conserve the best and most critical habitats (“Conservation Fact”).

Conclusions

It is interesting to note that even though most conservation-minded NGOs represent separate demographic groups such as recreational users relying on the land for entertainment or farmers relying on the land for their livelihood, they all seem to be interested in the overall enhancement of the environment.  They try to accomplish their goals by working with political leaders and lobbyists or by submitting official reports stating the changes to programs they desire to Congress and conservation competent IGOs like the USDA, USFS, and USFWS.  Their individual arguments are often written to be specific to the organization they represent, but in the end they are all working toward similar conservation goals.

References

“About Ducks Unlimited.”  Ducks Unlimited.  2006.  Accessed 9 Oct. 2006.  <http://www.ducks.org/Aboutdu/default.aspx>.

“About Us.”  American Farmland Trust.  2006.  Accessed 10 Oct. 2006.  <http://www.farmland.org/about/default.asp>.

American Farmland Trust.  Agenda 2007:  A New Framework and Direction for U.S. Farm Policy.  Washington D.C. , 8 May 2006. 18 – 20.

“Conservation Fact Sheet, Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP).”  Ducks Unlimited.  2006.  Accessed 9 Oct. 2006.  <http://www.ducks.org/media/Conservation/Land%20Protection/_documents/FactSheetWRP.pdf>.

“Ducks Unlimited Governmental Affairs Office.”  Ducks Unlimited.  2006.  Accessed 9 Oct. 2006.  <http://www.ducks.org/Conservation/GovernmentAffairs/1209/GovernmentalAffairs.html>.

“DU's National Priorities for the 2007 Farm Bill.”  Ducks Unlimited.  2006.  Accessed 9 Oct. 2006.  < http://www.ducks.org/Page2822.aspx>.

" Mission and History." American Farmland Trust.  2006.  Accessed 10 Oct. 2006.  <http://www.farmland.org/about/mission/default.asp>.

“The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).”  Ducks Unlimited.  2006.  Accessed 9 Oct. 2006.  < http://www.ducks.org/Conservation/GovernmentAffairs/1617/ConservationReserveProgram.html#Recommendations>.

Images Courtesy of:

AgNewsWire

Drake Waterfowl Systems