Excerpt
HUGH Hammond Bennett first enunciated the noble goal of controlling soil erosion and sedimentation more than 50 years ago, but excessive soil erosion persists on valuable agricultural and urban land. Technical procedures for reducing erosion to manageable levels are well known. Many of these procedures have been available for years. In addition, the federal government has an extensive system to transfer technology and cost-share expensive structural conservation measures. Despite these programs, erosion is not being adequately controlled and may in fact be worse today than in the 1930s when that system for delivering soil conservation assistance was created. Why is this so, and what can be done to reduce losses from erosion and sedimentation?
The problem appears to involve two important factors. First, current programs are voluntary; neither incentives nor penalties seem adequate to stimulate the proper actions. Second, faith in public education as a means of improving effectiveness in soil conservation is unjustified.
Under current programs, a farmer is likely to rank soil conservation someplace in priority after high mortgage payments; higher tax bills caused by encroaching urban development, which raises the assessment; and rapidly rising production costs.
The problem of erosion on urban construction sites is similar …
Footnotes
Steve J. Nacht is a geologist with the firm of Dalton, Dalton, Newport, 3605 Warrensville Center Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44122.
- Copyright 1981 by the Soil and Water Conservation Society
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.