Transcript Food, Conservation, and Energy (FCE) Act of 2008

Working Lands Programs
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008
Jim Pease
Dept of Agricultural & Applied Economics
Virginia Tech
[email protected]
540/231-4178
From Aillery, M. “Contrasting Working-land and Land Retirement Programs,
Economic Brief No. 4, ERS/USDA, March 2006
2
Principal “Working Lands”
Programs
• Environmental Quality Incentives
Program (EQIP). Funding (“to the
maximum extent practicable”) FY20082012 is $7.325 billion
• Conservation Stewardship Program
(CSP). Funding (“to the maximum
extent practicable”) for 12.769 million
acres enrollment per year over FY20092017 at average contract payment of
$18/acre
3
Environmental Quality
Incentives Program (EQIP)
4
Environmental Quality
Incentives Program (EQIP)
• Voluntary program providing financial and
technical assistance to protect water, air and soil
quality and wildlife habitat by implementation
and management of conservation practices on
livestock and cropping operations
• Conservation practices include:
–
–
–
–
–
Structural
Land management
Vegetative
Forest management
Conservation plan development
• Emphasis on assisting livestock operations to
meet regulatory requirements, available
nationally, no previous conservation practice
required
5
6
EQIP Principal Changes
• Increased funding FY2008-2012 to $7.325 billion
• Allows practices related to:
– livestock air quality concerns
– organic transition or production
– water conservation/irrigation efficiency practices
– comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan
• Agricultural Water Enhancement Program to fund
water quality and water conservation activities
• Payment limit reduced to $300,000
• Modifies evaluation process of contract proposals
7
EQIP Land Eligibility
– Land which agricultural commodities,
livestock, or forest-related products are
grown, including cropland, grassland,
rangeland, and pasture land
– Other private agricultural land, such as
cropped woodland, marshes, or
agricultural land used for livestock
production
– Nonindustrial private forest land
8
Ranking of EQIP Applications
Based on:
•
•
•
•
Cost-effective
Comprehensive and effective
Fulfill EQIP purpose
Improve conservation practices/
systems
(similar crop/livestock operations
grouped for evaluation)
9
EQIP Contracts
• Term 1-10 years
• Payments cover costs of
structures/practices (max 75%) and
income foregone (max 100%)
– For limited resource, beginning, or socially
disadvantaged producers, payments for
costs incurred are lesser of 25% over the
regular rate, or 90%
• Payment limit $300,000/person over 6
years
10
Conservation Stewardship
Program (CSP)
11
Conservation Stewardship
Program (CSP)
• Voluntary program providing payments
for maintenance/adoption of
conservation practices that
– Address a state-defined resource concern
– Are operated beyond a threshold
resource/environmental management level
• Replaces/revamps the 2002
Conservation Security Program
beginning FY2009
– Tiered payment system eliminated
– Watershed-based eligibility eliminated
12
CSP Land Eligibility
– Private agricultural land, including cropland,
grassland, prairie land, improved pasture,
rangeland, and agro-forestry land
– Forested land incidental to agricultural
operation
– Other private agricultural land, such as
cropped woodland, marshes, or agricultural
land used for livestock production
– Tribal agricultural land
– Nonindustrial private forest land
13
CSP Priority Resource Concern
• 3-5 resource concerns identified by
NRCS in consultation with a state
Technical Committee as priority for a
watershed or other area within the
state
14
CSP Funding Allocation
• Allocation by state based on:
– proportion of national eligible acres
– conservation needs in each state
– expected effectiveness of program
implementation
– other regional equity considerations.
• Requirement of 5% funding for
beginning producers and 5% for
socially disadvantaged producers
15
Conservation Stewardship Plan
• Must have met threshold of at least 1
resource concern
• Must propose to meet/exceed
stewardship threshold of at least 1
priority resource concern by
installing/adopting conservation
activities and improving/maintaining
/managing conservation activities
16
Ranking of CSP Applications
Based on:
• Level of conservation treatment
• Effectiveness of proposed
conservation treatment on priority
resource concerns
• Number of priority resource concerns
proposed
• Other resource concerns addressed
• Benefit/cost relative to other
proposals
17
CSP Contracts
• Continuous enrollment
• 5-year term, renewable for another 5
• Annual payments based on costs incurred,
income forgone, and environmental benefits
• Specialty crop and organic producers may
participate
• CSP payments now allowed for:
– organic certification
– on-farm conservation research/demonstration
or pilot testing
• Supplemental CSP payments for resourceconserving crop rotations
• Payment limitation $200,000 total over 5
years
18
Critical Elements of
Working Lands Programs
• Annual Congressional appropriations?
• Program access, benefit/cost affected by
state allocation
• EQIP:Program requests exceed funding 4:1
• CSP:USDA “reliable conservation
measurement tools”?
• Technical assistance availability?
• “Stickiness” of conservation practices after
contract expires?
• Enrollment with current high commodity
prices?
19
Final Notes
• Environmental Services Markets:
Mandate for USDA to develop
technical guidelines for measuring
and reporting environmental services
on farm, ranch, and forest lands; and
guidelines for registry of benefits;
priority for emerging carbon markets
• Chesapeake Bay Program watershed
funding $188m FY2009-2012
20