April 26, 2004

The USDA’s proposed rules for the Conservation Security Program, one of the most innovative conservation programs ever passed by Congress, drew 14,000 public comments during a 60-day period this winter. This is far and away the most comments the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has ever received on a proposed conservation rule. That’s an indication of how strong the public opposition is to the Bush Administration’s attempt to severely curtail the program, called CSP for short. Farmers, consumers, and conservationists want this key program implemented in a timely manner and in a way that keeps it true to the original law passed by Congress.

The Land Stewardship Project was very active in informing farmers about the USDA’s highly flawed proposed rules, and what the agency could do to work for positive change. In addition to alerting our own members, we worked closely with groups like Niman Ranch, Organic Valley, Food Alliance, and Pride of the Prairie, as well as the organizers of the 2004 Upper Midwest Organic Farming Conference. We also worked with hundreds of individual farmers who had contacted us in the past about CSP. LSP helped to generate well over 1,000 comments, and delivered a powerful message to Washington. Thanks to everyone who did their part—and stay tuned for further opportunities to take action. Winning CSP—meaning securing adequate funding and proper implementation—is one of the most critical things our organization can do for land stewardship and the future of family farming.

The CSP was enacted by Congress in the 2002 Farm Bill to make payments to farmers based on how well they are protecting and improving the environment through their farming practices—specifically for improving water quality, protecting soil and enhancing wildlife habitat, among other things. This is a dramatic departure from current policy, which often penalizes farmers for utilizing systems that benefit the environment.

For example, let’s say a farmer introduces a third, resource-conserving crop like alfalfa or a small grain like oats into their corn and soybean rotation. Such a rotation is a proven way to protect our soil and water resources. But that conservation-minded farmer is penalized by receiving less money through the commodity program. Why? Simply because he or she is producing fewer bushels of corn and soybeans, which, along with wheat, cotton and rice, receive large subsidies.

The same dynamic occurs when a farmer shifts to rotational grazing for raising livestock, or does anything—adding grassy buffer strips along streams or a perennial crop like orchard fruit for example—that reduces their total yield of corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton or rice. While such a maximum-production policy of these five crops certainly helps Cargill’s and ADM’s international grain trade and processing profits, research shows it has led to the loss of family farms and increased environmental degradation. CSP, on the other hand, is designed to pay farmers—including crop farmers, livestock producers, and fruit and vegetable growers—based on the actual public benefit they produce through conservation farming practices, not just based on the number of bushels of field corn or soybeans that end up in a multinational grain trader’s bins.

When the USDA’s proposed rules were published on Jan. 2 after long delays, farmers and other members of the public began raising serious concerns about the USDA’s plan for CSP. For one thing, USDA proposes to severely restrict CSP access to farmers in a few selected watersheds. It compounds the problem by requiring farmers who live in those watersheds to fall into other, as yet undefined, categories in order to qualify. Bruce Knight, Chief of the NRCS, which is supposed to implement and administer the CSP, announced on April 14 that his plan is to enroll over the next seven years just 90,000 farmers. That’s only 5 percent of eligible farmers.

The second major problem is that USDA’s proposed CSP payments virtually ignore three of the most innovative and important conservation farming systems being used today—managed rotational grazing, resource-conserving crop rotations, and organic production. This is part of an overall failure by USDA to use CSP to reward actual environmental outcomes and recognize existing conservation. For example, the CSP base payments USDA proposes reduce what is written in the law by 90 percent. According to USDA, if local land rental rates average $100 per acre, the CSP base payment would range from 50 cents to $1.50 per acre—a minuscule amount that demonstrates how little USDA values real conservation.

Concerns such as these continued to grow during the 60-day comment period, leading thousands of farmers, consumers and environmentalists to send written comments calling on USDA to make CSP a widely available, nationwide program that would recognize the benefits of sustainable farming systems.

Now that USDA has seen the incredible public support for a fully implemented CSP, and opposition to their attempts to hamstring it, the Administration needs to act on these comments by the end of August and issue a final rule that puts into operation the program passed by Congress. USDA officials are currently saying they will have an interim rule out by the end of June. Let’s see if they make that deadline (remember, the final rule for CSP was by law to be issued by February 2003). What’s more important is that USDA substantially rewrites what it issued in its proposed rules, and we get a final rule that is consistent with the law. That’s what the Executive Branch is supposed to do—administer and enforce the laws of the land. It’s job is not to fundamentally rewrite or gut laws through bureaucratic rulemaking.

Here’s a simple but important step USDA should take immediately: Congress has appropriated $41 million to be spent on CSP this fiscal year, which for the government ends Sept. 30. Starting Oct. 1, Congress has provided uncapped funding for CSP as provided for in the Farm Bill—an estimated $1-2 billion per year. LSP has joined with other members of the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition in calling on Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman to make the $41 million in CSP funds available to farmers this year by distributing it to the NRCS state conservationist in each state. Such an approach would get the money out to farmers now, help conserve vital natural resources, and get the NRCS up and moving on CSP. It will prime the pump for the nationwide, fully implemented program envisioned and enacted by Congress. USDA doesn’t need a final rule to get that amount of funding out—it just needs to get serious about implementing this program.

Mark Schultz is LSP’s Policy Program Director. He can be reached at 612-722-6377 or marks@landstewardshipproject.org.