APB agenda 061902 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 2 farmland preservation report May 2002 Farmland atop- funded conservation program Continued from page 1 in some states that have no purchase of development rights programs — states such as Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, Hawaii and Kansas. That's right, Kansas, a state not generally thought of in terms of sprawl and farmland loss. But there are about 15 urban - influenced counties in Kansas, those surrounding Kansas City, Topeka, and Wichita. . "Wichita County lost 30,000 acres in the last NRI," said Ron Egbarts, Kansas state conservationist with the NRCS, referring to the National Resources Inventory, performed every five years by the agency. Egbarts said he is putting together a team of stakeholders to explore creating a PDR program for Kansas. "I came up with an action plan to get out to our management team," made up of five area coordinators. Of 105 counties, 10 are designated as urban, Egbarts said. "We don't expect funding in 2002 _-we are just trying to get input and trying to get the information out to people to see if there is potential," Egbarts said. He plans to contact nonprofit organizations such as Ducks Unlimited and Kansas land trusts. And, Egbart said he wouldn't stop there. "We're going to try to do a teleconference for the Northern Plains states." Dramatic gain for farmland protection How did the Farmland Protection Program make such a dramatic gain in funding? According to Russ Shay of the Land Trust Alliance, whose members are eligible to apply for FPP funds, it was the have -nots of traditional farm bill spending that pushed farmland preservation to the forefront of conservation spending boosts — states like New York, Pennsylvania and Vermont, where small farms prevail, and farm subsidies have been traditionally nil. Even California fruit and vegetable growers who have not received commodity subsidies saw their chance for federal dollars through conservation programs. According to Shay, conservation and environmental groups urged legislators from states traditionally disinterested in farm bill negotiations to get their share of the money. "It was pretty complex, but a lot of it was the conservation movement as a whole, including a very diverse group of people, that really made an effort to get senators and House members outside of the Midwest looking at the program and asking `what could you get out of the farm bill ?' Farmland preservation was the most easily understood program, with tangible projects that were popular projects. People woke up and saw that was something valuable they could get out of the farm bill." Farmland preservation in the farm bill Farmland preservation first entered the farm bill arena in 1990 with the Farms for the Future Act, which provided guaranteed loans and subsidized interest payments to assist state farmland preservation programs. But it was the next farm bill, in 1996, that lifted farmland preservation to formal program status, creating the federal Farmland Protection Program in which state and local programs applied for funding, set at $35 million over six years. The money was spent in three years, however, and in 1999 Sen. Patrick Leahy and seven co- sponsors introduced legislation to appropriate $55 million annually to the program, signaling support for increased funding. In the new farm bill, the Farmland Protection Progra -has burst upon the scene as one of the bright spots in a conservation -rich jackpot: of all conservation programs, it received one of the steepest increases in funding. Continued on page 3