This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: Working w/other groups

The posting below was forwarded to me from a USDA conservation program 
listserve.   Prairies are specifically discussed in Question 2.   The new 
Conservation Easement Program could be of special interest to us, since 
presumably it could be used to protect prairies.   It's also clear from the 
posting below that there are some differences of opinion among national 
conservation organizations working on the Farm Bill.

For those who aren't familiar with the alphabet soup, CRP is the Conservation 
Reserve Program;  WRP is the Wetland Reserve Program;  WHIP and EQIP are 
other USDA conservation programs;  NRCS is the Natural Resource and 
Conservation Service (part of the USDA):  and NGO is non-government 
organization.   

Cindy Hildebrand
Ames, Iowa


>Folks:
>
>In recent months I have had the opportunity to talk to many people interested
>in the 2002 farm bill.  During these conversations I have heard several
>common themes that I believe most of us can support.  These include, raising
>the acreage cap on CRP, removing the overall acreage cap on WRP, enrolling
>250,000 acres per year in the WRP, increasing the annual allocation for WHIP
>to $100 million, increasing the annual allocation for EQIP to $200 million,
>increasing technical assistance funds for NRCS (including $$s for state
>agencies and NGOs), and initiating a new Conservation Easement Program.
>There are several others that interest most of us, but there are those issues
>that are near and dear to the hearts of a smaller segment of the conservation
>community.  These issues may become a problem for all of the overall goals of
>the group if they are not effectively addressed.
>
>One of these issues that seems to generate a variety of levels of concern is
>the cross compliance issue.  My conversations tell me there are three
>different levels of concern related to this issue.
>
>The first is from those who believe the only way to make farmers do what is
>"right" with respect to conservation is to force them to do so through
>legislation, rules and regulations.  While many of us would like to have that
>level of control over the private landowners across the country, we must
>realize that it is not and probably never will be a reality.  This group
>appears to be willing to fight a long and hard battle to get the legislation
>needed to force the private landowners to do the right thing for
>conservation.  In some instances, they may not be willing to join forces with
>those who believe differently.  Congress and USDA appears to be leaning away
>from this approach and it appears programs like Swampbuster and Sodbuster are
>not working on the ground as we had hoped they would.  Congress even removed
>the Fish and Wildlife Service's regulatory role over wetlands in the 1996
>Farm Bill.
>
>The second group appears to believe that the only way to get farmers to do
>the "right" thing for conservation is to pay them with taxpayer dollars.
>This sounds good and we have had some successes in this area, however, we
>know that tax dollars are not limitless.  We cannot continue to solve all of
>the problems by attempting to create another or a better federal or state
>program.  The public likes programs like CRP and WRP because they appear to
>do good things for the environment and because the farmers like the stability
>of income (among other reasons).  This group is working hard to improve and
>expand these voluntary programs and to attempt to develop new programs.
>However, they are so busy that they may not be willing or able to join forces
>with the first group (in favor of regulatory controls), to recognize that
>they share some common goals.
>
>The third group is somewhat of a mixture of the first two, but the mix varies
>considerably.  The support for voluntary programs like CRP and WRP varies
>from one region of the country to the next, and the support for regulatory
>programs varies from one segment of the conservation community to the next.
>CRP has not solve many problems in certain regions of our country like it has
>in the Midwest and Northern Great Plains, and Swampbuster enforcement appears
>to be the only tool that can stem the tide of wetland losses in some states
>and within certain organizations and agencies.  While Congress has shown
>support for some regulatory programs, they have been reluctant to back those
>programs.  The FWS is unable to provide the necessary enforcement they once
>had, and USDA appears to be looking for ways around regulatory controls like
>Swampbuster and Sodbuster to help the farmer with their operation.  I won't
>try to second guess the goals of Commodity, ag. chemical and ag. equipment
>communities, but I am positive their goals are legitimate.
>
>In an attempt to get a dialog going on this issue, I would like to pose a
>series of question to those of you who are on the farm bill network LISTSERV.
>  The dialog that follows (or not) may help us work effectively toward a more
>comprehensive 2002 Farm Bill.
>
>Questions:
>
>1.  How do we get farmers to stop farming wetlands?  This includes issues
>related to Swampbuster, USDA enforcement and interpretation of wetland
>issues, FWS's regulatory role, education, wetlands protection as part of CRP.
>
>2.  How do we prevent farmers from farming the remaining native prairies?
>This includes the Tallgrass prairie, but many hundreds of thousands of acre
>of mixed-grass prairie has been lost to agriculture in recent years.
>Sodbuster enforcement is failing.  Where do we go from here?  What programs
>will work?  Is it impossible to stop?
>
>3.  Do we need to develop more voluntary programs to resolve these issues or
>should be work on stronger regulations?  Will USDA enforce them if they are
>legislated?  Can we afford any more voluntary programs that pay farmers for
>millions of acres of something?
>
>4.  How do we get all of the groups working together on at least of few
>common issues (programs), while, at the same time, not tearing down other
>programs?
>
>Take the time to think this over and let many of us respond to this issue
>collectively.
>
  Terry Z. Riley
>Director of Conservation
>Wildlife Management Institute
>1101 Fourteenth Street, NW, Suite 801
>Washington, DC 20005
>(202) 371-1808
>FAX:  (202) 408-5059
>E-mail:  WMITZR@AOL.COM
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PRAIRIE
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index