High grain prices caused by burgeoning world demand forced lawmakers to make a major change in farm legislation. Using adjustments in the conservation provisions, the 2008 bill encourages farmers to produce more crops and keep fewer acres idle.
The farm bill reflects a shift to spend more money directly on working lands. And, it places less emphasis on set-aside programs such as the farm bill's traditional conservation anchor program, the Conservation Reserve Program. "This will be one of the signatures of this farm bill—a renewed emphasis on conservation working lands," says Ralph Grossi, outgoing president of the American Farmland Trust.
A change in priorities. A large part of the push for stewardship payments comes from philosophy and trade. Europe, for instance, pays farmers much more than the U.S., but doesn't draw as much criticism because the European Union's farm program is based on stewardship and conservation practices on the land.
Trading partners view most U.S. commodity programs as trade-distorting, but those arguments can't be made with conservation payments.
Throughout the farm bill debate, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) constantly commented that farm payments should not be based on what farmers grow, but how they grow.
Under the new law, annual contract payments under the Conservation Security Program (CSP) and the cost-share aspects of the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) dovetail to provide more incentives to farmers and ranchers to use the best environmental practices on their working land. "They will use EQIP for one-time structures, more or less, and CSP is continuous," Harkin says.
CSP revisions. Criticized for being too complicated, the CSP was retooled and renamed the Conservation Stewardship Program. It expanded to help more farmers who are conscious stewards of their working lands. Over the life of the new farm bill, the CSP will become USDA's largest conservation program on a per-acre basis. The program, which had roughly 15.5 million acres entering this summer, will grow by more than 60 million acres through 2013.
Francis Thicke is a former USDA soil scientist who owns a grass-based dairy outside Fairfield, Iowa. He says he's glad to see language in the bill stating that CSP should promote the production of off-season cover crops such as winter rye or perennial legumes. Too often, CSP decisions have weighted heavily in support of no-till practices.
"To me, that was the original intent of CSP way back when it was first conceived, and it sort of got off onto a different track with no-till," Thicke says. "If there is a cover crop in the winter or early spring, or more perennials like hay crops dispersed into the rotation, then we could greatly reduce that leeching (of nutrients), as well as help erosion control. So you are getting much more benefit from it."
(More on next page.)
[PAGEBREAK]
Thicke has never been able to apply for the CSP because USDA never chose his watershed. Despite his emphasis on grass production for the dairy, Thicke says he thinks his operation still will be competitive getting accepted into the program, and he sees it as a conduit to the future.
"Somewhere down the line we need to convert from commodity payments to stewardship payments," he says. "If we are going to have farm programs in the future, I think this is the model we need to switch the whole thing to."
More money. EQIP got a funding boost to $12.5 billion over five years. To make funds go farther, lawmakers capped maximum producer payments at $300,000 over six years unless a project receives a waiver from the U.S. secretary of agriculture to go up to as much as $450,000 for projects of "environmental significance."
Still, increased spending for EQIP should greatly expand the number of farmers and ranchers receiving funding every year. NRCS offices are still required to balance the payments, with 60% going to livestock operations.
Lawmakers and staff who drafted the farm bill also have stressed to USDA officials that CSP and EQIP need to be compatible. There shouldn't be different payment rates on cost-share projects based on whether a producer enrolls in either one.
Instead, both programs work hand in hand. Farmers and livestock producers will apply for cost-share assistance through EQIP to pay for putting in measures such as fences, grazing paddocks, crop buffer strips or water access for livestock. That will improve scoring eligibility for CSP contract payments.
"Over time, people will use EQIP to get up to snuff for CSP," says Ferd Hoefner, policy director for the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.
The new farm bill stresses the CSP will be open to any farmer nationally. Even though USDA may only announce actual enrollment periods during certain times of the year, a farmer or rancher can go to his local NRCS office at any time and file paperwork for the next enrollment period.
That's to avoid complications stemming from short sign-up periods that often seem to coincide with planting season or harvest.
Payment tiers, one of the most confusing aspects of the old CSP, also go away. The 2002 farm bill set three payment tiers based upon the farm or rancher's level of stewardship. Many people did not understand how they qualified for one tier but not another.
USDA is now creating a formula to pay producers on new or existing practices, based on the cost of implementing each conservation practice and the benefit those efforts provide.
In the coming months, USDA's rule-making process will define the payment structure and how conservation practices are scored.
Environmental priorities for CSP still will be done at the state level and will be applied locally when applications are scored.
Conservationists and hunting groups criticized lawmakers for gutting the so-called sod-saver provision. But sportsmen lauded the Open Fields provision in the bill. It provides $50 million to help spark state-run incentives that encourage private landowners to allow more public hunting and fishing access on their land.
Working together. Nongovernmental groups ranging from the American Farmland Trust to Pheasants Forever also see opportunities to play bigger direct roles in conservation programs.
The "cooperative conservation" provision in the bill sets aside 6% of funds for a handful of major programs to move away from à la carte conservation in watersheds. That's so groups of farmers or landowners can join together to enroll larger acreage chunks. Such cooperative efforts could get multi-year grant funds that would bring more bang for the buck in a watershed or area.
A similar approach is being added to the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program. State, local and nongovernmental farm protection programs will find it easier to access money through the USDA. The Farm and Ranchland Protection Program also got a revenue boost that will go from $97 million to an average of $150 million a year throughout the life of the bill.
"With the intensifying competition for land, the interest and concern about keeping good land in production is coming back to the front burner," American Farmland Trust's Ralph Grossi says. "So increasing this program and making it more user-friendly is very timely."