Excerpt
WITH the recent passage of the 1985 farm bill, this nation witnessed the most fundamental change in soil conservation policy of the past 50 years. Before we conservationists indulge ourselves in euphoric celebration, however, let me raise some nagging concerns that surfaced over the past several months as this historic legislation wended its way through the Congress.
I raise these concerns in a constructive spirit and not because I ever doubted the need for, or purposes of, the conservation programs that the Congress finally gave us. The conservation title was long overdue. Each key provision—sodbuster, swampbuster, conservation reserve, compliance, and conservation easement—complements the other by providing both incentives and penalties to remove highly erodible cropland from production and to discourage bringing additional fragile land into production. If properly implemented, these provisions could substantially reduce soil erosion within the next decade.
System overload and blurred vision
As this new approach to conservation programs came closer to final passage, my thoughts often focused on the implementation process. How well would the programs be administered by the Soil Conservation Service and Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service? Congressional staff and others close to the legislation at times suggested that all …
Footnotes
Robert J. Gray is the director of policy development for the American Farmland Trust, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, N. W., Washington, D.C. 20036.
- Copyright 1986 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.