Technical Assistance for Farm Bill Conservation Programs

Transcription

1 An Assessment of Sept Technical Assistance for Farm Bill Conservation Programs A Report from the Soil and Water Conservation Society and Environmental Defense

2 Sept An Assessment of Technical Assistance for Farm Bill Conservation Programs A Report from the Soil and Water Conservation Society and Environmental Defense 1 Technical Assistance Assessment Executive Summary 4 Introduction 4 What Is Technical Assistance? 6 Benefits of Technical Assistance 9 Current Status 9 Conservation Technical Assistance Program 9 Technical Assistance for Farm Bill Program Implementation 13 Technical Service Providers 15 Funding for Technical Assistance Programs 17 Technical Network Needs Strengthening 17 Limited Supply of Technical Advisors 17 Growing Demands on CTA Program 19 Growing Demands from Financial Assistance Programs 21 Action Needed 22 Fully Fund Technical Assistance for Program Implementation 22 Build New and Strengthen Existing Partnerships 23 Harmonize Programs 23 Contracts and Agreements for Administrative Services 24 Allocate Technical Assistance Funds Effectively 24 Reauthorize and Update the RCA Act 24 Invest Strategically to Build Network 25 References

3 An Assessment of Technical Assistance for Farm Bill Conservation Programs September by the Soil and Water Conservation Society and Environmental Defense All rights reserved Environmental Defense and the Soil and Water Conservation Society would like to acknowledge the generous support of the Smith Richardson Foundation, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Their contributions underwrote the research, writing, and publication of this report. Soil and Water Conservation Society 945 SW Ankeny Road Ankeny, IA The Soil and Water Conservation Society is a nonprofit scientific and educational organization that serves as an advocate for natural resource professionals and for science-based conservation policy. Our mission is to foster the science and art of soil, water, and environmental management on working land the land used to produce food, fiber, and other services that improve the quality of life people experience in rural and urban communities. Environmental Defense 257 Park Avenue South New York, NY Environmental Defense is dedicated to protecting the environmental rights of all people, including the right to clean air, clean water, healthy food and flourishing ecosystems. Guided by science, we work to create practical solutions that win lasting political, economic, and social support because they are nonpartisan, cost effective, and fair.

4 Technical Assistance Assessment Executive Summary This assessment of the programs that provide technical support and assistance to conservation program participants is one of a set of four assessments of the major USDA conservation programs. The other three assessments review the Conservation Security Program (CSP), the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), and the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The intent of these assessments is to better understand how these programs are working today and how they may be improved. The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is the primary source of technical assistance for the conservation programs they manage and for the CRP, managed by the USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA). Both NRCS and FSA provided us with data and answered questions about the operation of the programs they manage. The conclusions and recommendations, however, are solely the responsibility of the Soil and Water Conservation Society (SWCS) and Environmental Defense. NRCS s and FSA s much appreciated cooperation in completing this assessment must not be interpreted in any way as an endorsement of our conclusions and recommendations. What Is Technical Assistance? Science-based technical assistance is the foundation for resource conservation and environmental management on the nation s working farms and ranches. Technical assistance translates science and professional judgment into action on farms and ranches that conserves resources, enhances the environment, and ensures the commercial viability of agriculture. Technical assistance is also about connecting the dots, bringing the best science and professional judgment to bear to make sure what happens on one farm connects with what happens on neighboring farms so that individual efforts add up to what taxpayers want and producers need real and measurable improvements in natural resources and the environment. Finally, technical assistance is about using scientific and technical understanding to guide decisions that must be made above the farm- or ranch-level. Creating sound eligibility criteria, selecting the most technically sound and cost-effective practices for payment, developing effective systems for ranking and ultimately selecting participants, and other such tasks are critical to delivering a scientifically sound program that produces results. These program-level decisions must be grounded in sound science and technical expertise. Technical assistance multiplies the benefits of financial assistance, and financial assistance multiplies the benefits of technical assistance. Sometimes, technical assistance alone is enough. Sometimes technical assistance needs to be coupled with small and perhaps short-term incentive payments. In other cases, no change can occur without substantial financial assistance. The key is to get the right mix. Action Needed to Strengthen Technical Assistance The list of environmental challenges confronting agriculture and private landowners is large and in some cases growing larger. Addressing agriculture s environmental challenges requires substantial new investment to build the rich and dense technical support and assistance network needed to support environmental management even in the absence of any increase in financial assistance program funding. The welcome expansion of financial assistance programs, which have grown by 500% since 1985, makes strengthening the technical support and assistance network even more imperative. Instead, serious gaps are opening in the nation s technical assistance network. NRCS staff levels, for example, are 11% below their 1985 level, despite the 500% increase in funding for financial assistance programs. FSA staff levels have decreased by 12% since 2004, and similar trends could be illustrated for other agencies and other components of the technical support and assistance network. Technical service providers (TSPs) are helping fill gaps in the technical support and assistance network but with important limitations. The geographic distribution of TSPs is quite uneven, and TSP skill sets are concentrated in a relatively few areas. An essential federal role in US agriculture conservation policy should be to build and maintain a technical support and assistance network suitable to meet the resource conservation and environmental management needs of the 21st century. A stronger technical assistance network built from partnerships with federal, state, and local governments, for-profits businesses,

5 non-profit organizations, universities, and other entities will allow the United States to capture the benefits of rapidly advancing conservation science and technology. Currently, our nation s technical assistance network can t keep up good ideas, new tools, and innovative practices stay on the shelf because USDA and its partners don t have the capacity to more quickly move science into practice. As a result, taxpayers and producers are getting less from their investments in conservation than they could and should. Farm Bill Opportunities The 2007 farm bill presents several opportunities to build a technical support and assistance network suitable for resource conservation and environmental management in the 21st century. CCC Must Fully Fund Technical Assistance The United States Congress must ensure enough funds are provided from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to fully support the technical assistance needed to implement CCC-funded financial assistance programs: Continue to exempt CCC funds used for technical assistance to carry out conservation programs from the Section 11 limitation on expenditure of CCC funds. Authorize incentive payments through USDA conservation programs to help producers acquire the technical support and assistance they need to develop, implement, and carry out at their own expense resource conservation and environmental management plans for their farm and ranch operations. Make the CCC technical assistance funds made available each year no-year funds to ensure technical assistance is available when and where it is needed to implement CCCfunded conservation programs. The Administration, through the Office of Management and Budget, must also ensure the decisions they make regarding apportionment of CCC technical assistance funds fully cover the cost of the technical assistance provided through USDA and/or its partners to implement CCC-funded financial assistance programs. Build New and Strengthen Existing Partnerships No single agency or organization in the public or the private sector has the capacity to build the 21st century technical support and assistance network on its own. Strong, flexible, and effective partnerships will be the only way to create the robust network we need to meet this century s challenges: USDA should rely on procurement and cooperative agreements with organizations, firms, agencies, and other entities to fill gaps in the technical support and assistance network within a particular geographic area and/or for a particular resource concern. Congress should ramp up the Conservation Innovation Grants program to $100 million annually with a new focus on building and strengthening technical assistance networks at the local and state level. Congress should also replace the Partnerships and Cooperation section of the 2002 farm bill with a stronger cooperative conservation provision to facilitate and support place-based, cooperative conservation partnerships that achieve specific environmental goals and stimulate investment in local technical support and assistance networks by other local, state, and federal governmental entities and nonprofit and for-profit entities. 2

6 Harmonize Programs NRCS and FSA have taken important and helpful steps to increase administrative efficiencies and to reduce the administrative burden of financial assistance programs on producers and agency staff. The agencies have made substantial investments in technology and business processes to streamline the administration of conservation programs. We applaud NRCS and FSA for taking on these initiatives and look forward to even greater improvement as the current initiatives are fully implemented. Congress should support the improvements already being made by harmonizing the administrative requirements and conditions across all conservation programs to make possible a single contract instrument that can consolidate contract items and payments from multiple programs into one contract. Contracts and Agreements for Administrative Services Congress should also build on the success of the technical service provider initiative to facilitate the use of cooperative agreements and procurement with local, state, and/or federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and other appropriate entities to take care of basic administrative functions such as data entry, payment processing, contract administration and spot checks and status reviews of implementation of required practices and activities. Reauthorize the RCA Congress should reauthorize and update the Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act (RCA) of 1977 as a means to reinvigorate collaborative efforts to provide the information needed to more effectively coordinate the efforts of USDA and multiple partners at the local, state, and federal level to address the most compelling and most promising opportunities to conserve natural resources and improve environmental quality. Invest Strategically to Build Network The actions recommended above will be very helpful, but it is clear more must be done to build the 21st century technical support and assistance network producers and taxpayers need. We need a coordinated investment plan to build a technical support and assistance network suitable for environmental management a plan that couples the CCC-funding with strategic increases in discretionary funds for research, education, and technical assistance and allocates those resources to federal, state, local government, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector based on ability to deliver. Congress should call for a plan and budget to build such a network by a certain date. Congress and the Administration should make a joint commitment to follow through with the resources and longterm commitment to turn plans into reality. Allocate Technical Assistance Funds Effectively The allocation formulas used to distribute technical assistance and financial assistance funds to states must put the most weight on factors directly related to long-term and enduring resource conservation and environmental management needs and opportunities, while avoiding large, short-term reallocations of NRCS Conservation Technical Assistance Program funds to address the resource concern du jour.

7 INTRODUCTION This assessment of the programs that provide technical support and assistance to conservation program participants is one of a set of four assessments of the major USDA conservation programs. The other three assessments review the Conservation Security Program (CSP), the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), and the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The intent of these assessments is to better understand how these programs are working today and how they may be improved. This assessment focuses only on the technical assistance required to implement farm bill financial assistance programs. We did not attempt to complete a comprehensive assessment of the essential technical support and assistance provided by USDA and its partners to producers, communities, agencies, organizations, and businesses who are not receiving assistance through farm bill programs. The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is the primary source of technical assistance for the conservation programs they manage and for the CRP, managed by the USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA). Both NRCS and FSA provided us with data and answered questions about the operation of the programs they manage. The conclusions and recommendations, however, are solely the responsibility of the Soil and Water Conservation Society (SWCS) and Environmental Defense. NRCS s and FSA s much appreciated cooperation in completing this assessment must not be interpreted in any way as an endorsement of our conclusions and recommendations. Technical support and assistance are absolutely essential to effective conservation. Prior to 1985, technical assistance was the primary federal tool for getting conservation on the ground on working farms and ranches in the United States. Since 1985, programs that provide direct financial assistance to farmers and ranchers to conserve resources and enhance the environment have grown dramatically. Spending on financial assistance through the programs managed by NRCS and FSA now outstrips spending on technical assistance by a ratio of 3 to 1. Science-based technical assistance, however, remains the foundation for resource conservation and environmental management on the nation s working farms and ranches. The 80% increase in spending on conservation financial assistance programs provided through the 2002 farm bill requires a strong and robust technical foundation. Technical assistance ensures financial assistance programs are headed in the right direction and will produce the results taxpayers want and agriculture needs. Moreover, most of the new money provided in the 2002 farm bill went to programs that help improve the management of working farms and ranches programs that require much higher levels of technical assistance and know-how to get results. The United States Congress recognized the importance of technical assistance in 2002 by mandating that the Secretary of Agriculture use funding provided from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for the farm bill s conservation programs to provide both financial and technical assistance to participants in those programs. Congress also provided for the certification of third-party providers individuals and entities not employed by USDA who have the technical expertise needed to help implement conservation practices funded by conservation programs. Implementation of these two initiatives has sparked controversy and conflicting interpretations of Congressional intent since In the process, the critical importance of technical assistance to the success of conservation on working farms and ranches has become much better and more widely understood. That debate will almost certainly be a central feature of the reauthorization of the 2002 farm bill. This program assessment is intended to help inform that debate. What Is Technical Assistance? Technical assistance is about getting conservation on the ground. Technical assistance means translating science and professional judgment into action on farms and ranches that conserves resources, enhances the environment, and ensures the commercial viability of agriculture. Technical assistance is a bit like healthcare for land. It starts with a science-based assessment a diagnosis of problems and opportunities on farms, ranches, and watersheds. The next step is developing the prescription providing farmers and ranchers with the best options for solving problems and taking advantage of opportunities. Just as a medical doctor requires substantial science-based training to correctly diagnose and treat an illness, conservationists also require substantial science-based training to correctly diagnose natural resource problems and to prescribe the best treatments to address those problems. Doctors must understand the interactions between the drugs they prescribe to treat various illnesses; trained conservationists must understand the interactions among multiple conservation practices and activities in order to

8 recommend the best combination to get the desired results. The prescription or conservation plan then turns into treatment as producers and their advisors use the information gleaned from the planning process to make decisions, implement plans, and put practices in place. Ideally, technical assistance doesn t stop with implementation but includes an annual checkup a reassessment of how things are working for the farmer, rancher, and the environment. The checkup could lead to a different diagnosis, a new prescription, or an adjustment to the treatment program. Technical assistance is, or should be, an ongoing process of science-based assessment, action, reassessment, and adjusted action a process sometimes referred to as adaptive management but more commonly known as learning by doing. A process, in other words, that every successful businessman or woman learns to master in order to keep their operation in the black. In its broadest and best sense, science-based technical assistance is about helping producers become better managers, to understand how their operations affect the environment and how they can manage their operations to profit and improve the environment simultaneously. Technical assistance is also about connecting the dots. It means bringing the best science and professional judgment to bear to make sure what happens on one farm connects with what happens on neighboring farms so that individual efforts add up to what taxpayers want and producers need real and measurable improvements in natural resources and the environment. Technical assistance is also about using scientific and technical understanding to guide decisions that must be made above the farm or ranch level. Creating sound eligibility criteria, selecting the most technically sound and cost-effective practices for payment, developing effective systems for ranking and ultimately selecting participants, and other such tasks are critical to delivering a scientifically sound program that produces results. These program-level decisions must be grounded in sound science and technical expertise. Finally, technical assistance is about innovation. It means developing, testing, and transferring new conservation practices and systems that better meet the needs of producers and the environment. NRCS Nine Step Conservation Planning Process The purpose of conservation planning is to help decision makers land owners, land managers, and communities use the best science available to evaluate their options and implement a course of action. Conservation planning begins with an assessment of the current situation and ends with an evaluation of the effects of the action they take to implement the plan. A conservation plan is a science-based decision-making tool. An effective plan is an ongoing process of assessing problems and opportunities, evaluating alternatives, taking action, and evaluating how things are working. NRCS breaks down this planning process into nine steps that describe what happens during the planning process. Phase I. Collection and Analysis Step 1. Identify Problems and Opportunities: Identify resource problems, opportunities, and concerns in the planning area. Step 2. Determine Objectives: Identify and document the client s objectives. Step 3. Inventory Resources Inventory the natural resources and their condition, and the economic and social considerations related to the resources. This includes on-site and related off-site conditions. Step 4. Analyze Resource Data: Analyze the resource information gathered in planning step 3 to clearly define the natural resource conditions, along with economic and social issues related to the resources. This includes problems and opportunities. Phase II. Decision Support Step 5. Formulate Alternatives: Formulate alternatives that will achieve the client s objectives, solve natural resource problems, and take advantage of opportunities to improve or protect resource conditions. Step 6. Evaluate Alternatives: Evaluate the alternatives to determine their effectiveness in addressing the client s objectives and the natural resource problems and opportunities. Evaluate the projected effects on social, economic, and ecological concerns. Special attention must be given to those ecological values protected by law or executive order. Step 7. Make Decisions: The client selects the alternative(s) and works with the planner to schedule conservation system and practice implementation. The planner prepares the necessary documentation. Phase III. Application and Evaluation Step 8. Implement the Plan: The client implements the selected alternative(s). The planner provides encouragement to the client for continued implementation. Step 9. Evaluate the Plan: Evaluate the effectiveness of the plan as it is implemented and make adjustments as needed. Source: USDA NRCS Conservation Planning and Application Handbook.

9 Benefits of Technical Assistance Technical assistance at the farm or ranch level can work alone or in combination with financial assistance to conserve resources and enhance the environment. In many cases, the management-intensive, knowledge-based conservation systems so important to meeting agriculture s environmental challenges may reduce input costs and provide other advantages to producers. In such cases, know-how and risk are bigger barriers than cost. Technical assistance can help producers get through the learning stages much faster and also reduce risk. At its best, technical assistance works by integrating conservation directly into the normal and ongoing farm and ranch operation. The result is cost-effective conservation that tends to stay in place over the long term because it has become part and parcel of the farm or ranch operation. Financial assistance can take the benefits of technical assistance a step further. The right kind and amount of financial assistance can speed up the implementation of the plans, practices, and management systems developed through technical assistance. Incentive payments, for example, can accelerate the adoption of management-intensive conservation systems that, once in place, may increase profitability and efficiency. A few years of incentive payments helps producers get through the transition to the new management system, mitigates risk, and encourages producers who are uncertain about the benefits to give the new system a try. In other cases, financial assistance is essential if substantial capital investment is needed to implement a conservation plan. Ongoing technical assistance, for example, is essential for a producer who wants to move to an intensive rotational grazing system. But even the best technical assistance will not be enough if the cost of fencing or developing alternative water sources is just too high. If the goal is to take land out of production to restore a wetland or wildlife habitat, then financial assistance is absolutely essential to compensate producers for the lost income Producers and Technical Assistance: Profiles A wide variety of producers, managing very different farm and ranch operations across the United States, use technical assistance to deal with a diverse set of natural resource and environmental challenges. Here are a few of their stories. Thaler Land and Livestock, LaGrange, Wyoming From left to right: Kevin Evans (Dennis Thaler s son-inlaw), Brandy Thaler (Dennis Thaler s daughter), Sandy Thaler (Dennis Thaler s wife), and Dennis Thaler. The Thaler ranch and farm began as a homestead claimed by Dennis Thaler s great-great uncle, Joe Matje, a Hungarian immigrant. Today the Thalers combination farm and ranch is a cow/calfyearling operation. The Thalers also raise small grains, wheat, oats, millet, and alfalfa-grass hay. The Thalers have implemented numerous projects and improvement practices with technical assistance from the USDA and state and county agencies. Many of their dryland winter wheat acres have been converted to wheatgrass and alfalfa pasture simultaneously reducing erosion, conserving energy, and improving forage. The Thaler s worked with the Goshen County Weed and Pest Agency and other experts to develop and implement an integrated plan to deal with a leafy spurge weed problem. The integrated plan has worked: We no longer have to use herbicides to control leafy spurge, and crop production has increased, Dennis Thaler reports. NRCS helped the Thalers develop and implement a carefully managed rotational grazing system. NRCS designed livestock pipelines and watering facilities and cross-fencing along with seeding recommendations for the various pastures. NRCS also designed a new cattle feeding facility to protect a nearby stream from any runoff from the confinement area. A tree windbreak was added to the new feedlot with assistance from the South Goshen Conservation District personnel. The shelterbelt provides protection for the livestock, screens the facility from an adjacent highway, helps clean the air, and is providing wildlife cover for deer, turkeys, and pheasants. Our farm and ranch is also following a nutrient management plan developed by NRCS for the application of the manure that the feedlot produces, says Dennis Thaler. NRCS technical assistance providers have been a great help. Jonathon (Jonny) Harris, Greenview Farms, Screven, Georgia The Harris family has farmed the land near Screven, Georgia, since Jonathon (Jonny) Harris is the fifth generation of his family to farm, and his son Paul is the sixth. The Harris s 2,800-acre operation includes cattle, crops, and timber. Harris participates in a number of USDA programs, including the Environmental Quality Incentives Program.

10 From left to right: Paul Harris (Jonny Harris s son), Emily Harris (Jonny Harris s mother), Jonny Harris, and Toni Harris (Jonny Harris s wife). I found conservation plans since 1942, said Jonny Harris, so we didn t just start this. Each generation is trying to leave it in better shape. Most of our work is with our local person, [District Conservationist] Rita Barrow, Harris added. She may have us talk to someone else on a certain technical issue. I do call them, and they respond. NRCS District Conservationist Rita Barrow lists some of the many conservation practices Harris has implemented with his cattle operations: He rotates his cattle to maintain soil and water quality and to provide quality forage for his cattle. He has installed concrete pads under hay rings and water troughs to maintain water quality and prevent soil erosion. And he s installed a manure storage facility to help maintain water quality. Harris based his Forest Stewardship Plan on best forest management practices. He regularly thins and prescribe-burns his forest lands to maintain forest health and increase wildlife habitat, Barrow added. In some cases, technical advice has led Harris to do things opposite from how they were done in the past. For example, the Harris family used to allow cattle access to streams. Now we fence cattle out of the streams and give them fresh water, said Harris. It s better for both worlds. Harris noted that We have had quite a few conservation plans. We are trying. There is a lot we wouldn t be doing without the technical assistance, things we were going to do on our own, but we were able to get them done earlier with technical assistance. Harris sees a continued important role for technical service providers to assist producers. There is a lot we want to see done, he said. The to-do list is a lot longer than the done list. John May, Timberville, Virginia John May farms north of Timberville, Virginia. He runs a diverse operation that includes pure-bred Angus cattle and crops raised for cattle feed. He also sells breeding bulls and replacement heifers, embryo work, and produces turkeys. He has been farming his entire life. May says he has been getting technical assistance from NRCS for over 20 years. Bill Patterson, NRCS District Conservationist, is May s primary source for technical assistance. Sometimes May contacts Patterson with questions about new options for technical assistance, and sometimes Patterson contacts May with ideas. My operation has benefited from my cooperation with NRCS and other government programs. It s hard to believe that there would be a next step that I wouldn t be interested in, May said. He also searches the internet for ideas and solutions to specific issues. I am continually seeking ways to improve what I m doing, May said. I think, seen as a marked trend, if you don t take advantage of the program while you can, if you haven t started levels of environmental protection, it will be increasingly difficult to qualify for the newer programs, May said. May has used technical assistance to work on a variety of improvements on his operation. May was one of the first producers in his area to build a dry litter storage unit. The dry litter storage containers protect the manure from the elements, conserve nutrients, and allow May to apply the litter to his fields at the right time. Putting the poultry litter out at the wrong time means nutrients and fecal matter can run off into waterways. May also worked with NRCS to improve his riparian zones. May explains that his cattle like to wallow in water during the heat of the summer but cause a lot of erosion and damage to stream banks when they do. He now participates in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) to create a riparian buffer to filter out nutrients and also uses fence to keep his cattle out of the stream. I have five miles of waterline and ten miles of fence. Money for that can t come from regular operations, May said. May has also worked with technical specialists to develop a comprehensive plan to manage nutrients. There is a tremendous financial/logistical burden on farmers: we are constantly losing nutrients and then buying more back, May said. I think farmers for the most part feel that the environment is their livelihood, May said. Only by protecting it and improving it do we maintain that livelihood. John May. 7

11 and the cost associated with restoring hydrology and planting cover. In some cases, the promise of financial assistance may be the incentive that leads a producer to work with a technical advisor in the first place. The assistance provided by the technical advisor may well reveal opportunities the producer was not aware of opportunities that may be more promising than what initially attracted them to the conservation program. Technical assistance multiplies the benefits of financial assistance, and financial assistance multiplies the benefits of technical assistance. Sometimes, technical assistance alone is enough. Sometimes technical assistance needs to be coupled with small and perhaps short-term incentive payments. In other cases, no change can occur without substantial financial assistance. The key is to get the right mix. Technical assistance is essential to make conservation work for producers. It is absolutely critical to make conservation work for taxpayers. Taxpayers invest in conservation to get cleaner water, cleaner air, healthier streams and rivers, and more wildlife. Environmental benefits like these, however, can best be achieved if a critical mass of producers within a specific watershed work together to install buffers and adopt no-till, for example, to produce measurable and meaningful reductions in the amount of sediments or nutrients in a stream. Conservation programs must get the right practices, in the right places, at the right time, and at the right scale in order to produce the environmental benefits taxpayers are looking for. New scientific understanding, for example, is revealing that 60% to 80% of the sediments, nutrients, pesticides, and other pollutants carried by erosion and surface runoff often come from only 10% to 20% of the cropland (Schnepf and Cox 2007a, 2007b). This is very good news. It means that progress could be much faster and much less costly if conservation efforts were first directed to that 10% to 20% of the watershed that are the critical source areas of pollution. The bad news is that even 80% participation by producers in the watershed might not produce much improvement in water quality if the efforts do not treat the critical source areas of pollution in the watershed. This kind of precision conservation can only be achieved through more comprehensive and science-based assessment of problems and opportunities at farm, ranch, and watershed scales. Precision conservation demands more scientific and technical expertise and more sophisticated technical assistance at farm, ranch, watershed, and other salient geographic scales. But the payoff from precision conservation is immense. Indeed, it is unlikely conservation programs can deliver the environmental gains taxpayers are seeking without a technical support and assistance network capable of implementing precision conservation, particularly at the watershed scale. The environmental challenges agriculture faces make effective technical assistance more important than ever. The environmental goods and services taxpayers want and that farms and ranches can produce are diverse. Clean drinking water, clean air, carbon sequestration, better fishing, and more wildlife are just a few of the objectives the conservation title of the farm bill mentions. The technical know-how needed to address these challenges must be just as diverse. The robustness of our technical support and assistance network (research, technology development, technology transfer, education, and direct technical advice) is one of the most important factors affecting environmental performance of conservation programs. As such, the quality of the technical support and assistance network is critical to determining whether conservation programs will deliver the environmental goods and services taxpayers want and that agriculture needs. Agriculture s environmental challenge demands a dense and rich knowledge base. Environmental management know-how is complex; management-intensive systems are knowledge-based and are keys to meeting agriculture s environmental challenges; structural practices must be carefully designed and constructed to meet technical standards; and precision conservation demands more information and more sophisticated assistance at farm, ranch, and watershed scales. Building a stronger technical support and assistance network must be an essential federal role in agricultural conservation policy. Federal policy should seek to strengthen the unique and essential functions the network must be able to serve at all levels federal, state, and local. Federal policy also should promote investments in all sources of technical assistance government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and for-profit businesses based on their ability to deliver.

12 Current Status Technical assistance for participants in conservation financial assistance programs is funded from two primary sources: (1) annual, discretionary appropriations for the NRCS Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) Program and (2) a portion of the CCC funds provided for each CCC-funded farm bill conservation program. Congress also created a Technical Service Provider (TSP) initiative in the 2002 farm bill to facilitate using the private sector, state agencies, and nongovernmental organizations to help provide technical assistance to participants in financial assistance programs. Both CTA Program funds and CCC funds are used to pay for the services of TSPs. Conservation Technical Assistance Program NRCS is the USDA s principal agency for providing conservation technical assistance to private landowners, conservation districts, tribes, and other organizations. The CTA Program is the foundation of the NRCS conservation technical support and assistance network. The primary authority for the CTA Program is the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1935 (P.L ) (16 U.S.C. 590a-g and 590q). The purpose of the CTA Program is to provide technical assistance supported by science-based technology and tools to help people conserve, maintain, and improve natural resources and the environment. This assistance is provided to individuals, groups, and communities who make natural resource management decisions on private, tribal, and other nonfederal lands. Currently, the CTA Program emphasizes the following objectives for resource conservation and environmental management: (1) reduce soil loss from erosion, (2) solve soil, water quality, water conservation, air quality, and agricultural waste management problems, (3) reduce potential damage caused by excess water and sedimentation or drought, (4) enhance the quality of fish and wildlife habitat, (5) improve the long-term sustainability of all lands, including cropland, forestland, grazing lands, coastal lands, and developed and/or developing lands, and (6) assist others in facilitating changes in land use as needed for natural resource protection and sustainability. All owners and managers of private land are eligible for help through the CTA Program. NRCS states that the CTA Program is to support sciencebased decision making in eight important ways (USDA NRCS General Manual, Part , Conservation Technical Assistance Program): 1. Provide conservation technical assistance to individuals or groups of decision makers, communities, conservation districts, units of state and local government, tribes, and others to voluntarily conserve, maintain, and improve natural resources. 2. Provide community, watershed, and area-wide technical assistance in collaboration with units of government to develop and implement resource management plans that conserve, maintain, and improve natural resources. 3. Provide conservation technical assistance to agricultural producers to comply with the Highly Erodible Land (HEL) and Wetland (Swampbuster) Conservation Compliance Provisions of the l985 Food Security Act, as amended. 4. Provide conservation technical assistance to decision makers to assist them to comply with federal, state, tribal, and local environmental regulations and related requirements, and to prepare them to become eligible to participate in other federal, state, and local conservation programs. 5. Provide soils information and interpretation to individuals or groups of decision makers, communities, states, and others to aid sound decision making in the wise use and management of soil resources. 6. Collect, analyze, interpret, display, and disseminate information about the status, condition, and trend of soil, water, and related natural resources so that people can make informed decisions for natural resource use and management. 7. Assess the effects of conservation practices and systems on the condition of natural resources. 8. Develop, adapt, and transfer effective science-based technologies and tools for assessment, management, and conservation of natural resources. CTA Program funds are allocated to states using a formula developed by NRCS (see sidebar). Technical Assistance for Farm Bill Program Implementation Congress mandated in the 2002 farm bill that CCC funds provided for each conservation financial assistance program be used to support the technical assistance needed to implement the plans and practices funded through that program. Thus, CCC funding for technical assistance is brought to bear once a program commitment has been made to a producer. CCC funds are used to provide direct assistance to financial assistance program participants to design, layout, and implement the conservation practices and systems called for in the conservation plan and contract specific to the financial assistance program. CCC technical assistance is then used to support the implementation of the conservation

13 How CTA Program Funds Are Allocated to States The funds provided by Congress for the Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) Program are allocated to states using a formula developed by a team of NRCS state conservationists in The allocation formula was piloted in 2006 and fully implemented beginning in As the formula is being implemented, steps are being taken to limit the amount allocations can change in any one year to ensure an orderly transition to the new fund allocation process. The formula is constructed from four types of factors: (1) resource base factors, (2) resource concern factors, (3) state specific factors, and (4) performance factors. Resource base factors accounted for 49% of the total factor weight in the formula. The individual resource base factors and their individual factor weights (in parentheses) are as follows: Number of farms and ranches (12%) Acres of nonirrigated cropland (12%) Acres of nonirrigated grazing land (5%) Acres of nongrazed forest land (2.5%) Number of animal units: livestock, poultry, aquaculture (2.5%) Number of farms with confined animals (5%) Acres of specialty crops (1.5%) Acres of irrigated land (4%) Acres of wetlands and deep-water habitats (3.5%) Acres of tribal trust land (0.5%) Human population density (0.5%) Resource concern factors accounted for 38% of the total factor weight in the formula. The individual resource concern factors and their individual factor weights (in parentheses) are as follows: Acres with a Soil Condition Index less than or equal to zero (5.55%) Acres of cropland, pastureland, and CRP eroding at rates above the soil loss tolerance level (5.55%) Miles of streams and riparian areas (2.96%) Miles of impaired streams (2.59%) Number of air quality non-attainment areas (0.74%) Acres of rangeland and pastureland needing treatment (1.85%) Number of threatened and endangered, proposed, and candidate species (1.11%) Number of small-acreage farms (2.59%) Acres of agricultural land conversion (2.59%) Number of limited resource producers (2.22%) Acres of hydric soils (1.85%) Number of conservation compliance status reviews (5.55%) Cultural resource needs (1.85%) Operation and maintenance of watershed dams (1%) State specific factors accounted for 10% of the total factor weight in the formula. The individual state specific factors and their individual factor weights (in parentheses) are as follows: Cost of doing business index (5.5%) Travel and fuel costs (2.5%) Complexity factors (2%) Performance factors accounted for 3% of the total factor weight in the formula. The individual performance factors and their individual factor weights (in parentheses) are as follows: Percent of annual performance measures met (0.75%) Declining unit cost of planned and applied performance measures (1.5%) Quality of conservation applied (0.75%) Source: USDA NRCS (2006a). practices and activities called for in the producer s plan and contract. Once the contract is completed defined as one year after the last conservation practice or activity is implemented for programs that do not involve easements CCC funds are no longer available to support ongoing assistance in maintaining the conservation plans, practices, and activities implemented under the financial assistance program. CTA Program funds support all of the technical assistance needs (1) prior to making a program commitment and (2) after the producer s contract has expired. CCC technical assistance funds continue to be used to follow up on easements that create an ongoing obligation for management and monitoring. CCC technical assistance funds are also used by NRCS to support the programspecific tasks that must be completed at state or national levels. Such tasks include development of eligibility criteria and assessment tools, application ranking systems, and other program-specific components that are needed to support program implementation at the field level. The way CCC technical assistance funds are used varies significantly among programs. One way to illustrate this variability is to look at how NRCS employees allocated their time among specific tasks to implement two very different programs, EQIP and the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP). EQIP provides cost-share and incentive payments to implement conservation practices. WRP uses long-term easements to take land out of production to restore wetlands. In fiscal year 2006, for example, 31% of the CCC technical assistance funds for EQIP were used to cover the staff cost for conservation implementation, 23% for contract development, planning, and management, 17% for program management and support, 10% for administrative support and infrastructure, 7% for eligibility determinations and processing applications, 5% for operations management, and the remainder (7%) on other functions (see figure 1). Most or all of the CCC technical assistance funds used to acquire the services of TSPs would have been used to support conservation implementation. 10

14 Figure 1. How EQIP CCC Technical Assistance Was Used in 2006 Figure 1 indicates that about 90% of CCC technical assistance funds for EQIP were used for tasks that require scientific or technical input to complete effectively. Only 10% of CCC technical assistance funds were used to support the essential, but purely administrative functions required to implement a program successfully. Staff time to support WRP implementation was allocated quite differently than for EQIP but with a similar emphasis on tasks that require scientific and technical input to complete. In 2006, 27% of the CCC technical assistance funds were used to cover staff costs for program management and support, 25% for conservation implementation, 12% for contract development, planning, and management, 9% for easement acquisition and management, 9% for administrative support and infrastructure, 5% for eligibility determination and processing applications, 5% on operations management, and the remainder (8%) on other technical and administrative tasks (see figure 2). The amount of CCC funds provided for technical assistance out of the total amount provided for each financial assistance program each fiscal year is at the discretion of the Administration, Other 7% Operations management 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% although in some cases Congress has placed a cap on the amount of a particular program s CCC funding that can be used. The amount of CCC technical assistance provided to support each financial assistance program is determined through negotiations among FSA and NRCS, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB the agency in the Executive Office of the President responsible for overseeing agency budgets makes the final decision. Several steps are involved in determining the total amount of Eligibility determinations & application processing 7% Program management & support 17% Administrative support & infrastructure 10% Contract planning, development, & management 23% Percent of CCC Technical Assistance Funds, 2006 Conservation implementation 31% Source: Derived from data provided by USDA NRCS through the Total Cost and Accounting System. CCC technical assistance funds that will be available and how those funds will be allocated to states (USDA NRCS 2006a). NRCS estimates the technical assistance needs for each financial assistance program they manage using their Cost-of-Programs Model. OMB reviews the estimate and makes the final determination on the amount of CCC funds that can be used to support technical assistance for each financial assistance program. When NRCS receives the determination from OMB, the agency Figure 2. How WRP CCC Technical Assistance Was Used in 2006 Other 8% Operations management 5% Eligibility determinations & application processing 5% Administrative support & infrastructure 9% Easement acquisition and management 9% Contract planning, development, & management 12% Conservation implementation 25% Program management & support 27% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Percent of CCC Technical Assistance Funds Source: Derived from data provided by USDA NRCS through the Total Cost and Accounting System. 11