Excerpt
FUTURE achievements in land and water conservation rest in large part within the undeveloped performance of conservation districts. Given their authorities, their opportunities for obtaining additional public and private assistance, and their potential for serving the needs of both agricultural and urban publics, districts need only to persevere within the political arena. There are obstacles to be sure. But the public looks to conservation districts to provide durable conservation tailored to local needs.
One might ask why some districts and states assume a much larger responsibility in meeting their land and water conservation obligations. A few simple questions, answered impartially, provide at least some of the answer:
▸ Was the district and its services presented as free to the public?
▸ Were elected district supervisors thoroughly informed of their authorities or just responsibilities?
▸ Was the state conservation agency structured to give district needs top priority?
▸ Was there dissension among federal, state, and local agencies and organizations toward districts?
▸ Did the state conservation agency pursue with districts the legislative and financial needs of districts?
▸ Were district supervisors chosen because of their conservation performance or leadership ability?
▸ Were elected officials and concerned organizations involved in decisions about …
Footnotes
Floyd Heft, president of SCSA, 4319 Brookie Court, Columbus, Ohio 43214, is the retired chief of the Division of Soil and Water Districts, Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Gordon Postle is executive secretary of the Licking Conservation District
- Copyright 1984 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.