Archives for the 'Conservation / Land Stewardship' Category
EPA Releases Clean Water Act Strategy
Tuesday, August 24th, 2010
On Friday, August 20, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a draft strategy for improving clean water goals. The new draft strategy is open for public comment until September 17. A final strategy is expected before year’s end.
Comments may be read and made here.
According to the draft, “Despite our best efforts and many local successes, our aquatic ecosystems are declining nationwide. The rate at which new waters are being listed for water quality impairments exceeds the pace at which restored waters are removed from the list.”
The document sites clean water inventories that name the main sources of water degradation as agriculture, stormwater runoff, habitat, hydrology and landscape modifications, municipal wastewater, and air deposition.
For agriculture, attention in the strategy focuses on using the “total maximum daily load” (TMDL) program to address agricultural “nonpoint” sources, targeting pollution from livestock operations, and coordinating USDA farm bill conservation funding with EPA funding available through the 319 Program and the Clean Water State Revolving Fund to foster improved nutrient management.
Scattered within the nine page document are broadly-worded suggestions that the Administration will pursue legislative and regulatory changes. For instance:
“We will support legislation and consider adminstration action to restore the WCA protections to wetlands and headwater streams…”
“Propose changes to the federal water quality standard regulations that would clarify and strenghten antidegredation regulations to protect high-quality waters.”
“Implement current regulations for concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and propose new regulations to more effectively achieve pollutant reductions necessary to meet the Chesapeake Bay TMDL.”
“Propose a national rule which will streamline the regulatory authority to designate an animal feeding operation (AFO) as a concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO).”
“Develop NPDES permit requirements to reduce pesticide discharges to waters of the U.S.”
The strategy does not get into specifics about when or how such regulatory changes would be forthcoming.
No specific mention is made about strengthening the weak and loophole-laden existing CAFO regulations other than the Chesapeake Bay-related recommendation.
The strategy closes with some thoughts on linking clean water action with sustainable communities, an Administration priority.
For instance, it suggests EPA would “implement policies and help direct national attention toward more sustainable water management practices that better integrate traditionally siloed areas such as: water quantity, quality, energy requirements, carbon emissions, development and land use at the watershed/aquifer level. Building on synergies within the water sector, integrated approached can allow communities to more sustainable manage water infrastructure and supply costs and investments and adapt to climate change, as well as potentially reduce overall energy consumption…”
USDA Interim Rule for the Conservation Reserve Program
Friday, July 30th, 2010
On Wednesday, July 28, USDA issued an interim rule to implement provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) which were not implemented under two previously issued CRP interim rules. The interim rule is effective immediately. USDA is taking public comments on the interim rule, due by September 27, 2010, that will be considered when the agency develops a final rule for the CRP.
The interim rule makes the following changes:
- Provides a definition for pollinator to mean “ . . . an insect or other animal that carries pollen from one flower to another” and authorizes the development of habitat for native and managed pollinators and the use of conservation practices that benefit native and managed pollinators on CRP land. The Farm Service Agency will work with the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the State Technical Committees to develop conservation practices standards and habitat characteristics for pollinator habitat and beneficial conservation practices. The 2008 Farm Bill included a measure, championed by NSAC, that encourages USDA to provide for pollinator habitat and conservation practices that benefit pollinators in the USDA conservation programs.
- Makes eligible for CRP enrollment land on which alfalfa and other multi-year legumes have been grown in an approved rotation practice. This land is now included as land on which an agricultural commodity has been grown, an eligibility test for the CRP.
- Adds incentives for Indian tribes and for limited resource farmer and ranchers.
- Adds a preference for accepting CRP bids from owners of land who are also residents of the country where the land is located or residents of a contiguous county.
- Allows for a waiver of land in the continuous CRP, the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, the Farmable Wetlands Program or the State Acreage for Wildlife Enhancement Program from the statutory cap that limits combined CRP and Wetlands Reserve Program acreage to 25 percent of total land in the county, if the county government agrees.
- Clarifies the limited harvesting and grazing activities that may be allowed on CRP land.
NSAC supports most of these provisions, particularly those for pollinator habitat, incentives for Indian Tribes and limited resource farmers and ranchers, and the eligibility of land with alfalfa and legumes in rotation. We will request some additional clarification on the limited harvesting and grazing activities to ensure that the various activities provide for adequate protection of natural resources and promote use of haying and grazing activities that can enhance the protection of natural resources.
Conservation Reserve Program General Sign-Up Announced
Tuesday, July 27th, 2010
On Monday, July 26, USDA announced that a Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) general sign-up will be held from August 2-27, 2010. This is the 39th sign-up for the CRP according to the somewhat unusual Farm Service Agency (FSA) sign-up counting system. It will be the first general sign-up since 2006.
Under a CRP general sign-up, FSA collects and ranks offers from farmers to enroll highly erodible and environmentally sensitive land in the Program. The land is taken out of production and long-term, resource conserving cover vegetation is established to control soil erosion, improve water and air quality, and enhance wildlife habitat.
With this sign-up, USDA intends to bring the total enrollment land in the CRP closer to 32 million acres, the maximum acreage authorized by the 2008 Farm Bill. Land currently not enrolled in CRP may be offered in this sign-up provided all eligibility requirements are met. Additionally, current CRP participants with contracts expiring this fall covering about 4.5 million acres may make new contract offers. Contracts awarded under this sign-up are scheduled to become effective Oct. 1, 2010.
There is currently 31.3 million acres in the CRP, including 4.6 million acres in targeted partial field enrollments through the continuous sign-up CRP (CCRP) and 26.7 million acres in whole field enrollments through general sign-ups. With 4.5 million acres expiring at the end of September, the size of the reserve would fall to 26.8 million acres absent new sign-ups.
The next three years will also see large numbers of CRP contracts expiring — 4.4 million acres in 2011, 6.5 million acres in 2012, and 3.3 million acres in 2013.
USDA has posted the Environmental Benefits Index (EBI) for this 39th CRP sign-up, which is used to rank applications for enrollment. The emphasis on this sign-up is the establishment of habitat that will protect wildlife. A new feature of the Index is the inclusion of ranking points for pollinator habitat.
NSAC championed a measure in the 2008 Farm Bill that requires that all USDA conservation programs include provisions to protect pollinators and increase pollinator habitat. In addition, the Index gives the establishment of native plant species a higher priority than the establishment of introduced species.
In addition to the general sign-up, USDA also emphasized that CRP’s continuous sign-up program (CCRP) will be ongoing. Land can be enrolled in the CCRP without going through the EBI-based bidding process; offers are automatically accepted provided they meet the eligibility criteria. Information on the CCRP is available here.
Landowners with expiring contracts who do not plan to try to re-enroll may alternatively sign-up for the CRP-Transition Incentive Program (CRP-TIP) that allows them to rent or sell to beginning or socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers. The FSA CRP-TIP fact sheet is available here.
Specialty Crop and Organic Producers Testify
Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
Specialty crop and organic producers are “classic entrepreneurs” said Subcommittee Chair, Dennis Cardoza (D-CA). Rep. Cardoza spoke on Wednesday, July 21st at the House Subcommittee on Horticulture and Organic Agriculture hearing to review specialty crop and organic programs in preparation for the 2012 Farm Bill.
Cardoza began the hearing with praise for specialty crop producers, noting their entrepreneurial ability to produce half the value of America’s crops. Cardoza also spoke to the importance of this sector for providing the fruits and vegetables that nourish our families.
Block Grants
All seven producers on the panel testified to the crucial role that the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBG) plays for specialty crop production across the U.S. They emphasized the need to extend and expand this program in the 2012 Farm Bill and applauded the flexibility the SCBG program offers to State Agriculture Departments for awarding grants. It was clear from their testimony, however, that some states do a better job than others in including farmers in the state decision-making process. In general, most witnesses also favored moving the application and decision-making process t
o earlier in the year, centered around the off-season.
Dr. Margaret Smith Testifies
NSAC hosted Margaret Smith, from Ash Grove Farm in Iowa and Extension Agent at Iowa State University (ISU), as the sole female and organic producer voice on the panel of witnesses. Click here to view her testimony.
Margaret and her husband Doug farm 950 acres of organic corn, soy, oats, wheat barley and and pasture and run a beef cow herd. They market their crops to various food, feed and seed markets. They began their transition to organic systems in 1994 and reached 100 percent organic production in 2007.
As an extension agent at ISU, Smith works with fruit and vegetable producers in the Value-Added Agriculture Extension Program in addition to co-facilitating the Iowa Fruit and Vegetable Working Group.
Smith began her testimony to the Subcommittee with data pointing to the rapid growth in the organic industry, both in terms of number of farms and value of sales. Organics offer a critical marketing niche for small and beginning farmers. In light of the important role of the organic industry, Smith made sure the Subcommittee understood that the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) is under-funded, even with the 2008 Farm Bill funding increase, citing that only about 20% of the applicants receive OREI funding.
Smith also expressed strong support for the National Organic Certification Cost Share Program, the Conservation Stewardship Program and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program’s Organic Initiative.
Smith urged the Subcommittee to improve the crop and revenue insurance policies and rules for specialty crops and for organics. As she explained, “In Iowa, there is no satisfactory crop insurance available for fruit and vegetables. When compared with crop insurance options for corn and soybean growers, this seems a gross oversight and neglect of these important crops and crop producers.”
She went on to explain the risk management struggle confronting diversified, small to mid-sized producers: “Not only is there no safety net in the event of weather, crop disease, or insect yield reductions, but lenders are wary of working with growers of non-traditional commodities if they have no guarantee of some minimum income level.”
Chairman Cordoza applauded Smith’s work and testimony and brought the hearing to a personal level, disclosing his preference grass-fed beef. He also noted the profit opportunities offered by grass-fed beef production, a strategy that raises fewer cattle in a more productive system.
The hearing also ended on a personal note, and a strong note for organics. Ranking Member, Jean Schmidt (R-OH), confessed that her daughter and husband, despite the price differential, buy and eat exclusively organically produced foods.
“The organic voice is small,” she said “Lets raise that voice!”
Other Highlights
Robert Jones, a fruit and vegetable producer from Ohio’s The Chef’s Farm, spoke about the ineffectiveness and inappropriateness of what he described as a “one size fits all” National Leafy Green Marketing Agreement proposal. In response to a question from Chairman Cardoza, Jones also applauded the USDA’s Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food Program for improving consumer awareness and bolstering the local food movement.
Testifying on behalf of the nursery industry, Bernie Kohl, Jr. of Angelica Nurseries on Maryland’s Eastern Shore told the Subcommittee that the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) started by the last farm bill was doing great harm to the nursery crop industry. He explained that trees and shrubs grown in containers are grown in a substance that is primarily bark. He explained that 83 percent of softwood bark and 70 percent of hardwood bark is already used for energy generation and removing more of it through BCAP subsidies to energy uses could devastate the nursery industry. Similar arguments have been made by the forest products industry. Kohl called the BCAP collection, harvest and storage incentive payments “a solution in search of a problem.”
Paul Platz, a farmer from Lafayette, Minnesota, spoke about growing vegetables for processing. He urged the Committee to ease and simplify the rules for the “farm flex” pilot program created in the last farm bill allowing certain counties in certain states to produce vegetables for the processing industry on farm program base acres. Platz noted that he was able to start growing sweet corn and green peas in 1993 because the planting restrictions against growing fruits and vegetables on program acres that started with the 1996 Farm Bill were not in place yet. He urged a movement back in that direction, at least for processed vegetables.
Several witnesses expressed disappointment with the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) for not addressing the most pressing concerns of specialty crop growers. Chairman Cardoza sympathized with the concern and said he would follow-up with the Subcommittee with jurisdiction over USDA research.
Margaret Smith cautioned the Subcommittee to remember that the most important research to help fruit and vegetable producers will be long-term systems research that will take time to conduct. Smith also suggested that the SCRI is too focused on big multi-state, multi-institution projects and needs to be more balanced between local, regional, and national concerns.
NSAC Sends Letter to White House and Congress Opposing Conservation Cuts
Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
On Wednesday, July 21, NSAC, along with over 70 other farm, conservation, and environmental organizations sent a letter to the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and a letter to President Obama expressing strong opposition to any use of farm bill conservation program funding as an offset to pay for improvements to school meal programs.
The letters commenced with strong support for the speedy passage of the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act (H.R. 5504), otherwise known as the child nutrition reauthorization (CNR) act. The bill includes $50 million in mandatory funding over five years for farm to school programs nationwide that NSAC strongly supports. The letter recognizes the critical need to provide additional funding and improved policy for school meal programs. Click here to view NSAC’s most recent blog on this legislation.
Although advocates united around support for CNR, the letter went on to express fervent opposition to offsets that cut funding to conservation programs. The Senate companion bill to the pending House bill includes $2.8 billion in cuts from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). The House bill does not yet include the funding cuts to other programs or tax loophole closings (“offsets” in congressional budget parlance) that will be needed to pay for the $8 billion nutrition bill.
“Farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners are eager to share the cost of protecting the environment, and indeed demand for participation in conservation programs routinely far outstrips available funding,” the letter noted. “Applied conservation helps provide clean air and water, energy conservation, erosion reduction, carbon sequestration, wildlife and pollinator habitat, wetland protection, pesticide reduction, and other important public benefits that should not be lost.”
Over 70 organizations signed on to these letters with a clear message: swift passage of the CNR is important for nourishing America’s children, but should not sacrifice conservation programs and the environment to pay for it. As the letter stated, sacrificing an improved environment for improved nutrition “is a false choice, one that is neither in the public interest nor in keeping with progressive values.”
Revised Chart on FY 2011 Ag Appropriations
Tuesday, July 20th, 2010
With both the House Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee and the full Senate Appropriations Committee now having taken action on their Fiscal Year 2011 agricultural spending bills, NSAC is posting a revised version of its annual agriculture appropriations chart to our website. The chart provides detailed funding level decisions on a program-by-program basis for about 40 USDA programs that we follow closely each year.
Appropriations bills generally only become public once the full appropriations committees have voted on them. Since that has not yet happened for the House bill yet, the numbers represented in our chart for the House bill are based on the best available information we have been able to obtain. In a few instances there are blanks where information has either been lacking or inconsistent and therefore possibly unreliable. The Senate numbers are all confirmed. The Senate bill and committee report can be found here.
Looking ahead to later this year when a final bill is put together, we will be emphasizing:
- attaining the historic House Subcommittee-approved $30 million funding level for the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program;
- removing the cuts to mandatory farm bill conservation funding contained in the Senate bill for the Wetlands Reserve, Grasslands Reserve, Farm and Ranch Land Protection, and Agricultural Management Assistance program;
- achieving the higher Senate total funding level ($8.35 million) for the Rural Micro-entrepreneurship Assistance Program and farm operating and ownership loans;
- obtaining the higher House funding level ($7 million) for the USDA Office of Advocacy and Outreach that coordinates policy and programs for beginning and minority farmers and farmworkers; and
- inserting into the final bill funding for the groundbreaking Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Account program.
As the process continues, we will update our appropriations chart as information changes.
Climate Change Letter Delivered to Senators
Friday, July 16th, 2010
The passage of climate change and energy legislation in this Congress is still an open question. Proposals range in scope from the American Clean Energy and Security Act – a comprehensive energy and climate bill passed by the House in 2009 but stalled in the Senate – to a narrow bill focused only on the BP oil spill and offshore drilling.
This week a letter addressed to Senate leadership and signed by over 75 organizations with farmer, rancher and rural supporters, was delivered by the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition to Senate offices. The organizations call for the passage in this Congress of comprehensive climate change and energy legislation that includes agriculture.
The letter emphasized that our nation’s farmers and ranchers will be among those most adversely affected by unpredictable weather patterns, increasing storm intensity, shifts in the distribution of pests, and other results of rapid climate change. Climate change legislation should include measures for them to establish sustainable and organic farming systems that will help them cope with the impacts of rapid climate change. These sustainable and organic farming systems have also been demonstrated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sequester soil carbon. In addition, the letter noted the importance of Senate support for USDA conservation programs that provide research, technical assistance and financial incentives that address climate change mitigation and adaptation.
An NSAC press release about the letter is posted here.
Senate Committee Adopts Ag Spending Bill
Thursday, July 15th, 2010
On Thursday, July 15, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved the Fiscal Year 2011 Agricultural Appropriations bill by voice vote. The action on the agriculture bill came after a lengthy partisan debate over the overall discretionary spending levels for the entire government for FY 2011, which concluded with the adoption of Chairman Inouye’s proposed spending allocations.
The agriculture bill proposes to spend $22.838 billion for all discretionary spending (net of a variety of cuts to mandatory programs) for the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, and several smaller government agencies. This is nearly $300 million less than the FY 2010 level and $27 million less than what President Obama requested.
After winning support from USDA, the White House and then the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee asked for a $30 million funding level for the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program. We regret to say that today the Senate Committee adopted a far lower,, $23 million, SARE funding level. Both bills include $15 million for research and education grants and $5 million for extension and outreach grants, but they differ on funding for the SARE state matching grant program, with the House at $10 million and the Senate at only $3 million. NSAC strongly supports the $30 million funding level and will continue to urge the Senate to come up to that level before finishing work on its bill this year.
As with the House Subcommittee-passed bill, the Senate bill moves forward on two Administration initiatives. The USDA portion of the Healthy Food Financing Initiative would receive $30 million under the Senate bill compared to $40 million in the House bill and $50 million requested by USDA. The Senate bill, like the House bill, also approves a somewhat scaled-back version of the new Regional Rural Innovation Initiative, which includes funding for local and regional food system projects. Both bills also provide $2 million for USDA’s Farm to School “tactical teams” to help school districts source more local food.
Whereas the House Subcommittee-passed bill refrains from cutting any farm bill mandatory conservation programs other than the traditional $270 million cut from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and $165 million cut from the Small Watersheds program, the Senate bill includes some but not all of the additional conservation cuts proposed by President Obama. The Senate Committee-passed bill adopts a $75 million cut to the Wetlands Reserve Program, a $14 million cut to the Grasslands Reserve Program, a $15 million cut to the Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program, and a $5 million cut to the conservation portion of the Agricultural Management Assistance Program. The Administration had also requested cuts to the Conservation Stewardship Program and the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, but those cuts were rejected by the Senate Committee. NSAC appreciates the sparing of those two programs, but continues to oppose the additional raids on farm bill conservation spending, and will continue to urge the Senate to find alternative offsets before bringing their bill to conclusion later this year.
A few other bill highlights follow:
Research — In addition to the SARE news above, the Senate Committee bill includes $5 million for Organic Transitions research, the same level as the House bill and $5 million more than the zero budget requested by the President. For the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), the Senate bill provides $310 million, compared to $312 million in the House bill, $262 million in the current year, and the $429 million Obama requested level.
Rural Development — Like the House bill, the Senate bill would level funding for the Value-Added Producer Grants (VAPG) program at $20.4 million. The total Senate funding level for Rural Business and Industry Guaranteed Loans would provide $49.7 million in loan guarantees for local and regional food enterprises versus $47.1 million in the House bill (the same as the FY 2010 level). The Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP) fares much better in the Senate bill than the House bill. The House bill would allow the $4 million in mandatory farm bill money to move forward, but provides no additional discretionary funds above that level, whereas the Senate bill provides an additional $4.35 million, for a total of $8.35 million. The President had requested an additional $7.7 million. Rural Coop Development Grants would get a modest increase to $12.4 million in the Senate bill. The ATTRA National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service program would receive $2.8 million in both bills, same as the current funding level.
Credit — With additional emergency funding for farm loans still pending in the supplemental appropriations bill slowly making its way through Congress, the Senate regular appropriations bill passed out of Committee today includes higher farm loan amounts than the House bill. Whereas the House bill provides $475 million for Direct Farm Ownership Loans, the Senate bill provides $650 million. For Direct Farm Operating loans, the Senate provides $1.1 billion versus $900 million in the House bill. The Senate bill also includes more for guaranteed operating loans.
Beginning and Minority Farmers — The majority of direct farm ownership and farm operating loans go to beginning and to socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, so the credit numbers above are relevant here as well. Sadly, neither bill has provided funding for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Account (IDA) program. NSAC will continue to push both houses of Congress to find a way to provide $5 million for this important farm bill program. The two bills have a big difference of opinion over the new Office of Advocacy and Outreach, the central USDA coordinating and policy arm for minority farmer, beginning farmer, and small farm issues. The House bill would match the President’s request for $7 million, but the Senate proposes only level funding at $1.7 million. NSAC will continue to press for the full requested amount.
Organic – Both the House and Senate bills adopt the requested level of $10.1 million for the National Organic Program, and as noted above, both adopt $5 million for the Organic Transitions integrated research program. It also appears that the Senate bill has included $1 million for the Organic Data Initiative, though we are still waiting on confirmation.
NSAC will be posting a chart on its website with more complete details on sustainable food and farming programs in the two pending bills in the near future.
Child Nutrition with Farm to School Passes House Committee
Thursday, July 15th, 2010
On Thursday, July 15, the House Education and Labor Committee approved the child nutrition reauthorization bill authored by Chairman George Miller (D-CA) (Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act, H.R. 5504) by a vote of 32 -13 with Republicans Todd Platts (PA), Michael Castle (DE), and Vernon Ehlers (MI) joining all of the Democratic members of the committee in supporting the bill.
The bill includes $50 million in mandatory funding over five years for farm to school programs nationwide and incorporates language very similar to Rep. Rush Holt’s (D-NJ) Farm to School Improvements Act that NSAC strongly supports. The companion Senate Agriculture Committee-passed a bill that includes $40 million in mandatory funding for the Farm to School program.
“Farm to school programs support our local farmers and help in the fight against childhood obesity,” Holt said at the markup.
The overall bill is designed to expand access and improve the nutritional quality of the National School Lunch program, offering a six cent per meal reimbursement increase for schools and setting standards for foods sold outside the cafeteria.
An amendment by Representatives Woolsey (D-CA) and Kucinich (D-OH) was accepted to authorize an organic food pilot program that would provide competitively-awarded grants to school authorities to create pilot efforts to buy more organic foods for the school meal program. The measure parallels a similar provision sponsored by Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) included in the companion Senate bill. While included in both the House and Senate pending authorization bills, it would still need to be funded by the Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee in future years to get off the ground.
The House bill passed out of Committee today includes $8 billion in new spending over the next ten years, money that must be offset from cuts to other programs or raised through new revenue. No offsets have been announced yet but must be agreed upon before the bill can go to the floor for a full vote of the House.
The Senate’s child nutrition bill passed out of Committee on March 24 with $4.5 billion in new spending offset, in part, by a $2.8 billion cut to the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). NSAC opposes the inclusion of the cut to conservation and instead supports the repeal of tax loopholes to pay for the child nutrition measure. House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson has said that Farm Bill program cuts should not be used for child nutrition program expansion. Miller and the House Democratic leadership will now try to work out the funding offsets as they attempt to get the bill ready for a vote on the House floor.
The current authorization for the child nutrition programs expires on September 30 so the bills in both chambers must move to floor votes before Congress leaves for recess on August 9 for the bill to become law without the necessity for heroic last minute rescue measures. If passed before the August recess, the differences in the two bills could then be worked out during the recess and there would be enough time for the compromise language to be approved by both houses of Congress after they return to Washington on September 12.
As has been true, then, since the very beginning of work on the measure, it will all come down to finding offsets that can win majority support, a process that has been painfully slow but could potentially move more quickly now that the policy and spending side of the bill has been reported out of the House committee.
USDA Awards Wetland Enhancement Projects
Thursday, July 15th, 2010
On July 12, David White, Chief of the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), announced 5 projects approved to receive funding through the Wetlands Reserve Enhancement Program (WREP).
Under the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), the USDA purchases long-term or permanent easements to restore, protect and enhance wetland values and functions on wetland that has been in agricultural production. The program is competitive, with landowners submitting bids to USDA for enrollment. USDA may also enter into restoration cost-share agreements and provide technical assistance to WRP participants.
The 2008 Farm Bill authorized the Wetlands Reserve Enhancement Program (WREP) as a component of the WRP. Under the WREP, states, non-governmental organizations, or Indian Tribes may partner with USDA on the selection and funding of multi-year WREP contracts. Recipients improve wildlife habitat by creating floodplain corridors from wetlands to non-wetlands. The WREP includes a pilot program under which landowners are allowed to retain grazing rights if the grazing activity is consistent with long-term wetland protection and enhancement goals for which the easement was established.
In the fiscal year 2010, the USDA awarded a total of $9,847,500 dollars through WREP, protecting, restoring and enhancing 2,440 acres of wetlands and wildlife habitat. Recipients vary in scale from individual projects to multi-state watersheds. 2010 WREP projects include:
- Wabash River Floodplain Corridor Project in Indiana/ Illinois;
- Wetland Restoration and Enhancement for Water Quality and Habitat Benefits project in Iowa;
- Sand Creek & Prior Lake/ Spring Lake Watershed in Minnesota; and
- the Rainwater Basin Water Complex in Nebraska.
A special congratulations to the Iowa National Heritage Foundation, an NSAC member organization, awarded $2,000,000 to restore and protect 600 of Iowa’s wetlands.