1 / 26

Food, Conservation & Energy Act of 2008 ( FoConE ?)

Food, Conservation & Energy Act of 2008 ( FoConE ?). Title II: Conservation Andy Seidl, Colorado State University. Title II: Conservation. Working lands, Preservation & Reserve Programs. Preservation & Reserve Programs. Preservation: Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP)

teagan
Download Presentation

Food, Conservation & Energy Act of 2008 ( FoConE ?)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Food, Conservation & Energy Act of 2008 (FoConE?) Title II: Conservation Andy Seidl, Colorado State University

  2. Title II: Conservation Working lands, Preservation & Reserve Programs

  3. Preservation & Reserve Programs • Preservation: • Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP) • Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) • Reserve: • Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) • Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) • Grasslands Reserve Program (GRP) • NRCS programs except CRP (FSA): http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/farmbill/2008/index.html • http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/farmbill/2008/ataglance.html • General eligibility: <$1 million gross nonfarm income OR >2/3 of income from farming.

  4. Producer Policy Priorities

  5. Preservation & Reserve Programs: Context • Do not appeal to ‘environmental ethic’; people react to incentives. • Typically are authorized/appropriated $$, not mandatory. • Preservation Programs: • Stewardship of public goods attributes of agriculture. • More popular when ag prices are low. • Can be at cross-purposes with ‘working lands’ and ‘commodity’ programs. • ‘Green box’ under WTO environmental norms. • Reserve Programs: • Supply management. • Popular when ag prices are low; Not popular currently. • Consistent with preservation program and Title I objectives. • ‘Green box’ under WTO structural adjustment norms. • Are INELIGIBLE for new Cooperative Conservation provisions.

  6. Preservation Programs • Conservation easement driven • Goal is to maintain public goods attributes of private lands stewardship. • Some call for consolidation under “Private Lands Protection” program. • Landowner voluntarily agrees to a deed restriction and/or landscape restoration in exchange for compensation. • Can be permanent or term. • Federal tax deduction for donated easements extended through 2009.

  7. Producer Preferences for Preservation

  8. Farm and Ranch Lands Preservation Program (FRPP) • Where to go: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/frpp/ • Authorized as FPP in 1996. • FRPP as of 2002. • 533 thousand acres enrolled to date. • Currently, $97 million/yr (authorized), $50 million appropriated. • Provides match of up to 50% of fair market easement value to local govt’s or NGOs for easement purchases.

  9. FRPP: New for 2008 • $773 million total authorized budget over bill. • Ramping to $200 million authorized annual budget. • “Protecting topsoil” becomes “protecting agricultural use and related conservation values of the land.” • Allows for longer term agreements with cooperators (5 yrs if certified, 3 yrs if not). • Certification process made easier. • Secretary does not purchase easements, rather facilitates their purchase. • Secretary may require enforcement provisions in the easement that are not subject to Federal land acquisition standards.

  10. Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program • Where to go: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/whip/ • Technical and financial assistance to improve wildlife habitat. • Not as focused on working landscapes, more on supplemental or alternative land management. • Currently $40 million annual program. • 5-10 yr agreements. • Focused in NE and West Coast.

  11. WHIP: New for 2008 • Non-ag, state, county and local public lands now INELIGIBLE. • Private ag, Non-industrial private forest, tribal lands are ELIGIBLE. • Pivot corners and other irregular areas are ELIGIBLE. • 25% of funds (up from 15%) are for long term (>15 yr) agreements. • Priority to state, regional and national conservation objectives. • Authorized at $85 million per year. • Payment cap of $50K per year.

  12. Reserve Programs • Based on long term contracts and cost-share agreements for technical assistance. • Originally a supply control measure. • Take fragile/targeted lands out of production, therefore out of economy. • Targeted lands have significant public good attributes and relatively low private benefits in agricultural production.

  13. Conservation Reserve Program (CRP/CREP) • Where to go: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subject=copr&topic=crp • Established 1985 to prevent soil erosion and control crop supply. • Annual rental payments based on the agricultural rental value of the land. • 10-15 yr rental contracts. • Focused in Great Plains. • ‘Green box’ under WTO structural adjustment criteria. • Now, 37 million acres enrolled, more emphasis on environmental side. • 15 million acres expired in 2007, 12 million re-enrolled through REX program. • 12.5 million additional acres due to expire by 2010.

  14. CRP: New for 2008 • Authorizes 39.2 million acres for 2009 • 32 million acres 2010-2012 • CREP waiver of 25% hot spot limits. • Purpose expanded to include broader scale conservation initiatives • Cropping history requirement 4 of 6 yrs, 2002-2007. • Payment limit of $50K per year. • Allows existing contract adjustments (2 yrs extra payments) if transferring to special status farmers and ranchers. • Exceptions for biofuel production, wind turbines and some grazing (with payment reductions). • Farmable wetland program (FWP) expanded. • Eligible acreage definition loosened. • 1 million acre limit, 100,000 per state.

  15. Producer Preferences for the CRP

  16. Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP/WREP) • Where to go: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/wrp/ • Established 1990 • Goal: Max wetland function, value and wildlife habitat on enrolled acres. • 2002: Reauthorized to max of 2,275 million acres. • 2007: 1,837,671 acres & annual enrollment of 250,000 acres. • Tends to focus in Florida, California and Mississippi River Basin. • 3 enrollment options: • Permanent easement, pays up to 100% of easement value and restoration costs • 30 yr easement, 75% each • Restoration Cost-Share agreement, 75% of restoration costs.

  17. WRP: New for 2008 • Expands to 3.041 million acres (up by 766,200 acres) and $1.3 billion. • Establishes WREP. • Establishes payment schedule based on size of easement value (+/- $500K) • Establishes similar process for determining easement value as other preservation programs. • Land that has changed ownership within past 7 yrs is INELIGIBLE. • $50K annual cap on restoration payments.

  18. Grasslands Reserve Program • New in 2002. • Currently, 250 easements covering 115,000 acres. • Restores and protects grassland, rangeland, pastureland and shrub land. • Emphasizes support for working grazing operations.

  19. GRP: New for 2008 • Adds 1.22 million acres and $300 million in new authorized funding. • Allows for short term contracts, easements and cooperative agreements. • Permanent easements. • 10, 15, 20 yr rental contracts. • 50% cost share restoration agreements • Provides priority for expired CRP acres. • Limit 10% of total enrolled acres per year. • Eligible land expanded to those with historical or archeological resources or that meet state, regional or national conservation priorities. • Requires grazing management plan. • Same easement requirements as FRPP. • $50K annual payment limit.

  20. Preservation and Reserve Programs: Summary • Shorter term agreements are more often allowed. • Some increases in authorized funding. • Some increases in local control, not state block grants. • ‘issues raised by state, regional and national conservation initiatives.’ • 3rd party certification process and appraisal process streamlined. • No revolutionary changes. • Continued trend toward working lands programs and away from preservation programs. • Greater flexibility for farmers & ranchers may increase popularity of programs, but may also decrease long term effectiveness in achieving environmental goals.

More Related