U.S. Department of Agriculture's

Private Land Conservation Forums

The forums were held in Oregon, Colorado, California, New York and Georgia (with a final wrap-up meeting in Iowa). Each forum, hosted by a senior USDA official, consisted of an open dialogue with seven to eight panelists representing a cross-section of interests in private land conservation. Public comments from the audience followed the panelists.

Nearly 200 public statements were made at the forums. The topics outlined below were raised time and time again.

Because the emphasis of the forums was on CONSERVATION, comments tended to focus on conservation issues. Nevertheless, comments about profits and regulations still figured prominently. These comments provide a useful yardstick to show which issues tend to be regional in nature and which have national significance.

USDA provided a complete copy of the transcripts from all of the forums (2500+ pages) to Florida Stewardship Foundation, the organization that took the lead in Florida in developing the Resource Conservation Agreement (which later became the Farmland Stewardship Program).

All of the comments recorded at the forums were taken into consideration in developing the Farmland Stewardship Program and in drafting the legislation to implement the program (Sec. 256, H.R. 2646 and S. 1673).

The continued struggle to protect natural resources in the new millennium was a concern of many speakers at the Private Land Conservation Forums. Economic strains, including the pressure to sell land for development, were most often cited as the reason for increased fragmentation of forest and farm lands. Uncontrolled growth, wildlife over-population, and public land acquisitions – carried out without consideration for adequate staff resources and ongoing funding for proper management – also were cited as deleterious impacts on land preservation and water quality.

Tax Relief. Panelists and respondents at the forums repeatedly stated the importance of tax relief. While tax law reform was considered necessary to provide relief for private landowners who are practicing good conservation, many saw the need for tax relief in terms of the survival of family farms and small private forests. Examples include: elimination of capital gains and inheritance taxes so that land can be more easily maintained from generation to generation, tax exemptions for conservation payments, and tax credits for applying conservation practices.

Outreach to Landowners. In general, participants believed that incentives should be strengthened to provide more opportunities for limited resource farmers. Some believed USDA's conservation programs should focus on family and small farms. Others feel rapidly changing patterns of land ownership and land use demand implementation of new and innovative programs to reach and address needs and concerns in growing rural communities. It was strongly recommended that the Secretary of Agriculture fully implement recommendations from the Civil Rights Action Team and the Commission on Small Farms to assist the under-served in achieving conservation on their land. Linking conservation with profits also was mentioned.

Conservation Assistance. Participants expressed concern about the lack of funding for existing conservation programs. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Wetland Reserve Program, Forestry Incentives Program, Stewardship Incentives Program, Conservation Reserve Program, and the Farmland Protection Program were specifically mentioned on numerous occasions. In addition, there was strong support for additional funding for technical assistance and research to support these programs and to carry out basic conservation activities at the field level.

Some public comments indicate the direct relationship between conservation and economics. Poor land management, including over-harvest and conversion to non-agricultural lands, results from the pressures of economics. A primary concern for many is providing private landowners with enough financial incentive to ensure some financial security so they can participate in a long term, meaningful way in conservation programs.

Most speakers made it clear that their ideas about conservation implementation are solutions to specific barriers created by current policies. Some speakers note additional barriers, including weak commodity prices, the disconnect in the public and policymaking consciousness between environment-based quality of life concerns and the role of private landowners as stewards, and the possibility that significant change will not occur until a crisis captures the public and political consciousness, as the Cuyahoga River fire did with respect to water pollution in the 1970s.

Stewardship Payments. Profitability was considered key to conservation. It was believed that land stewardship would suffer given the present economic crisis in rural America. Most respondents support conservation. One theme that pervaded comments on private stewardship is that private landowners should not be made to bear the financial burden of conservation practices that the public demands and benefits from. 

The issue is how to make conservation fair and financially viable for private landowners. Support was expressed for use of stewardship payments as a means of providing income assistance to producers for the environmental benefits they produce rather than the traditional price support and disaster payments. Such payments were considered an important part of the "green box" discussions now taking place as a part of the World Trade Organization negations. Strong support was expressed for legislation authorizing payments coupled with "safe harbor" provisions for those that practice good conservation.

Farmland/Forestland Protection. Participants expressed concern about the conversion of farmland and forestland to nonfarm uses, and the associated environmental and social consequences. Weak agricultural markets and ill-conceived federal programs, several participant claimed, have made the small farmer an endangered species, and led to fragmentation and over-development of the rural landscape. Tax law reform was cited as a major part of the solution to reduce such conversion.

Conservation Delivery. There was a consensus that conservation partnerships, coordinated through a locally led conservation process, were critical in achieving conservation on private land. However, there were differences of opinion on the amount of regulation needed relative to voluntary efforts. There was a strong belief by most, however, that increased regulation would lead to extinction of the small family farm.

Resource Protection. Considerable public demand for natural resource protection was expressed. Forum participants emphasized repeatedly water quality and wildlife habitat enhancement. Concern was expressed on numerous occasions that the U.S. Department of Agriculture was not providing adequate assistance on private grazing lands. Forest health on private forestland was raised as a concern.

Urban Conservation. Forum participants were critical of USDA's lack of conservation assistance to urban landowners. USDA was perceived as delivering crop subsidies and food programs with little recognition about its conservation efforts. A few recognized the interconnectedness of rural and urban areas.

Private Property Rights. Concern for the protection of private property rights and the taking of those rights for conservation on private land were expressed. Most participants believed that the private landowner should take responsibility for land stewardship with minimal federal government involvement and regulation.

Collaboration. Both panelists and respondents agree that collaboration is important for conservation of private lands, and needs to occur between all levels of government, tribes, local organizations and landowners. A common theme is lack of consistency, particularly among federal agencies, programs and regulations. Some advocate USDA dialogue with other agencies. One person recommends interagency barriers to collaboration be removed as soon as possible. Some respondents had specific recommendations for collaboration.

For further information on the Farmland Stewardship Program, follow the links below.