As enrollment in the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) tops 50 million acres later this month, more and more producers are conserving soil, water, wildlife habitat, and other critical resources across the country through this stewardship incentive program.
In fiscal year 2011, the value of CSP contracts exceeded the value of Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) contracts in many key agricultural states. See below for a sampling.
Value of Fiscal Year 2011 Contracts
| STATE |
CSP |
EQIP |
| Minnesota |
$82,285,505 |
$23,951,322 |
| Nebraska |
$65,549,620 |
$22,595,124 |
| North Dakota |
$63,308,035 |
$17,683,780 |
| Kansas |
$63,011,915 |
$22,661,425 |
| South Dakota |
$57,168,275 |
$15,934,870 |
| Oklahoma |
$55,576,880 |
$22,434,861 |
| Arkansas |
$53,816,185 |
$26,897,172 |
| Iowa |
$52,696,945 |
$25,062,709 |
| Georgia |
$50,457,460 |
$14,407,739 |
| Montana |
$45,876,300 |
$19,433,932 |
| Colorado |
$38,938,685 |
$26,012,415 |
| Missouri |
$32,705,565 |
$29,452,941 |
| Mississippi |
$28,136,550 |
$26,771,078 |
| Wisconsin |
$21,323,015 |
$15,979,745 |
| Oregon |
$18,818,330 |
$15,731,872 |
| Illinois |
$18,400,030 |
$11,867,903 |
This trend has accelerated for many states in FY 2012; however, we do not yet have final program data to publish in this post. We do, however, have program data through the third quarter of fiscal year 2012 for total CSP obligations since the program’s initiation in the 2008 Farm Bill. These figures below are now actual USDA figures rather than our extrapolations of USDA figures that we posted earlier.
Total Obligations for 2009-2012 CSP Enrollments – States Over $100 Million
|
State |
Total Obligations |
| Minnesota |
$264,057,800 |
| North Dakota |
$224,706,887 |
| Nebraska |
$201,354,391 |
| Kansas |
$195,678,038 |
| Iowa |
$180,785,219 |
| Arkansas |
$173,086,013 |
| Oklahoma |
$171,005,652 |
| South Dakota |
$170,307,276 |
| Montana |
$139,946,214 |
| Georgia |
$129,157,745 |
| Missouri |
$128,513,163 |
| Texas |
$120,862,005 |
| Colorado |
$110,491,210 |
Ironically, as farmer demand for CSP support continues to grow, some members of Congress from the states listed above continue to target the program for major cuts. The Senate-passed farm bill cuts CSP by $2 billion, while the House Agriculture Committee-passed bill takes this further, cutting the program by roughly $3.1 billion, or 17 percent. In contrast, the House bill does not cut EQIP funding, while the Senate bill cuts both by similar percentages.
We saw this type of attack yet again in the stand alone disaster relief bill, H.R. 6233, which the House passed just before August recess. Beyond the primary problem of short changing our long-term investment in conservation and farming system resiliency to pay for short-term drought relief, the bill would disproportionately cut CSP by 26 percent relative to the 20 percent cut to EQIP.
It makes no sense to target CSP with disproportionate cuts. These are real dollars that farmers and ranchers use each year to conserve critical resources and ensure the long-term viability of their land. The truth is that the program is extremely popular and effective and should be treated as such during the ongoing farm bill and appropriations debates.
For more information on the program, consult NSAC’s Farmer’s Guide to the Conservation Stewardship Program. The Guide contains summaries of program details and the application process, as well as enrollment and conservation data from the 2009 and 2010 enrollment years.
You can also read our blog post from last month for a summary of CSP data from the first 4 years of the program.