Agricultural Conservation: Survey of USDA State Technical
Committee Members (01-MAR-02, GAO-02-371SP).
This report presents the views of members of state technical
committees on (1) the effectiveness of USDA's conservation
efforts in addressing environmental concerns related to
agriculture, (2) any program elements that hinder the achievement
of related environmental objectives, and (3) any program
characteristics that current or new programs might include to
better meet these objectives. GAO summarizes the responses of the
state technical committee members and stratifies them by
geographic region and organization.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-02-371SP
ACCNO: A02791
TITLE: Agricultural Conservation: Survey of USDA State Technical
Committee Members
DATE: 03/01/2002
SUBJECT: Agricultural programs
Conservation
Environmental monitoring
Land management
Natural resources
USDA Environmental Quality Incentives
Program
USDA Farmland Protection Program
USDA Wetlands Reserve Program
USDA Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-02-371SP
United States General Accounting Office
GAO
Report to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, U.S. Senate
February 2002
AGRICULTURAL
CONSERVATION
Survey of USDA State Technical Committee Members
GAO-02-371SP
Contents
Introduction 1
Regional Stratification
Program Needs
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) General Signup
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) Continuous Signup
Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP)
Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP)
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP)
Farmland Protection Program (FPP)
Conservation Plans for USDA Conservation Programs
Land Maintenance and Conservation Practices
Conservation Compliance/Sodbuster/Swampbuster Provisions
Program Assistance
Effect on Economy of Rural Communities
Conservation Program Emphasis
Respondent Information
Comments
4
17
28
36
41
50
61
68
76
78
82
84
93
96 112 113
Organizational Stratification
Program Needs
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) General Signup
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) Continuous Signup
Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP)
Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP)
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP)
Farmland Protection Program (FPP)
Conservation Plans for USDA Conservation Programs
Land Maintenance and Conservation Practices
Conservation Compliance/Sodbuster/Swampbuster Provisions
Program Assistance
Effect on Economy of Rural Communities
Conservation Program Emphasis
Respondent Information
Comments
114 127 138 146 151 160 172 179 187 189 193 195 204 207 222 223
Introduction
Farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners own and manage more than
two-thirds of the continental United States' 1.9 billion acres and thus are
the primary stewards of our soil, water, and wildlife habitat. Because of
this important responsibility, how private land is used is increasingly
being recognized as vital to the protection of the nation's environment and
natural resources. For example, state water quality agencies report that
agricultural production is a leading contributor to impaired water quality;
similarly, habitat loss associated with agriculture has been a factor in the
declining populations of many wildlife species, including many threatened or
endangered native species. In recognition of the critical role played by
private landowners, the Congress directed the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) to implement the numerous programs aimed at improving the stewardship
practices on these lands. USDA currently has over 70 million acres of
privately owned land enrolled in programs that offer landowners financial
incentives to implement conservation practices to protect or improve soil
and water quality and wildlife habitat. USDA's conservation efforts are
intended to address specific environmental concerns, target funding toward
state and local environmental priority areas, and include partnerships with
state or local entities to leverage limited funding. USDA's Conservation
Reserve Program (CRP), the federal government's largest single conservation
program, has an enrollment of almost 34 million acres and makes annual
payments of about $1.5 billion on these acres.
Administered by USDA's Farm Service Agency, CRP compensates landowners for
taking certain highly erodible cropland or environmentally sensitive land
out of agricultural production. Most of CRP's 34 million acres were enrolled
through CRP General Enrollment, which USDA implemented in 1986. Alternative
CRP enrollment options-CRP Continuous Enrollment, implemented in 1997, and
the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), implemented in 1998-are
specifically targeted to high-priority conservation practices that yield
significant environmental benefits. As of October 2001, enrollment in CRP
Continuous and CREP totaled 1.6 million acres. Other USDA programs,
including the Wetlands Reserve Program, the Environmental Quality Incentives
Program, the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, and the Farmland
Protection Program, are administered by USDA's Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). These programs, which NRCS state
conservationists manage, compensate landowners for activities such
Page 1 GAO-02-371SP Agricultural Conservation
as restoring and protecting wetlands, implementing conservation and wildlife
practices on land currently used for agricultural production, and preventing
the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses near urban areas.
State technical committees advise the NRCS state conservationists on the
implementation of NRCS-administered conservation programs in each state.
These committees include representatives from federal, state, local, and
Indian tribal governments, as well as representatives from organizations
knowledgeable about conservation issues, and are chaired by the NRCS state
conservationists. The committees are responsible for such activities as
recommending guidelines for evaluating conservation practices, determining
eligible conservation practices for state priority areas, and making
suggestions on program selection processes.
The future of USDA conservation programs has been the subject of extensive
debate within the environmental and agricultural communities and in the
Congress. This debate has centered on increasing the environmental and
natural resource benefits resulting from the programs by allocating more
funding to them, modifying them, or creating new programs. Pursuant to this
debate, the omnibus farm bill is expected to become law in 2002.
At the request of the chairman and ranking minority member, Senate Committee
on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, GAO obtained the views of members
of state technical committees on (1) the effectiveness of USDA's
conservation efforts in addressing environmental objectives related to
agriculture and (2) any program elements that hinder the achievement of
environmental objectives related to agriculture, as well as program
characteristics that current or new programs might include to better meet
these objectives.
To provide information on the views of members of state technical
committees, we mailed a questionnaire to all NRCS state conservationists and
a sample of 1,470 committee members and received 996 responses. We drew the
sample from the 2,124 state technical committee members in all 50 states and
two territories. The sample was stratified by geographic region and the
organizations the members represent, and the overall survey results are
generalizable to the entire population. All percentage estimates from the
survey have sampling errors of plus or minus 7 percentage points or less,
unless otherwise noted. The survey solicited views on the effectiveness of
CRP General Enrollment, CRP Continuous Enrollment, CREP, Wetlands Reserve
Program, Environmental Quality
Incentives Program, Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, and Farmland
Protection Program. For CREP and the Farmland Protection Program, which are
relatively new programs, our results include only those states where the
programs were implemented at the time of our survey.
This document summarizes the responses of the state technical committee
members stratified by geographic region and organization. A more detailed
discussion of our scope and methodology and the highlights of our analysis
of the survey are contained in our report entitled Agricultural
Conservation: State Advisory Committees' Views on How USDA Programs Could
Better Address Environmental Concerns (GAO-02-295).
GAO Contacts: Larry Dyckman or Linda Libician on (202) 512-3841.
U.S. General Accounting Office
Survey of USDA State Techncal Committee Members by Region
Survey Results and Responses
Notes to Tables: Except when presenting estimated number of cases, all other
numbers are
percentages. Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding.
Program Needs
1. To what degree, if at all, do you believe the following environmental or
natural resource
conditions related to agriculture on private land are concerns in your
state? (Check one for each
row.)
,,ffffffffffffffffff...ffffffffffff...ffffffffffff...ffffffffffff...ffffffffffff...ffffffffffff...ffffffffffff...ffffffffffff...ffffffffffff?
, , , , , , , , Southeast , ,
, ,Corn Belt & , , South and , , , , and , ,
, ,Lake States , Delta ,North Plains, Mountain , Northeast , Pacific
,Appalachian , Total ,
?ffffffffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff?
,1. Air pollution , , , , , , , , ,
,from agricultural , , , , , , , , ,
,field operations , , , , , , , , ,
?ffffffffffffffffff? , , , , , , , ,
,Major concern , 4.1, 16.8, 4.5, 11.7, 1.4, 28.5, 4.2, 11.0,
?ffffffffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff?
,Moderate concern , 13.8, 26.3, 16.8, 29.0, 17.1, 39.1, 19.5, 24.0,
?ffffffffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff?
,Minor concern , 57.3, 38.9, 49.4, 44.9, 55.7, 23.8, 49.8, 44.8,
?ffffffffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff?
,Not a concern , 24.8, 18.0, 29.3, 14.4, 25.9, 8.7, 26.5, 20.2,
?ffffffffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff^ffffffffffff?
,Estimated number , , , , , , , , ,
,of members , 304, 124, 201, 275, 279, 405, 280, 1,868,
Sffffffffffffffffff