Statement by Scott Faber, Environmental Defense Farm Policy Campaign Director, on the Farm Bill Conservation Title proposed by the House Committee on Agriculture

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Scott Faber, 202-230-1899, sfaber@environmentaldefense.org

(Washington, DC – May 18, 2007) - “The Farm Bill conservation proposal released by the House Agriculture Committee this week provides a road map to a healthier environment but includes grossly insufficient fuel to reach the destination,” said Environmental Defense Farm Policy Campaign Director Scott Faber.

“This proposal includes promising ideas that have little promise of being implemented without significantly more funding,” Faber noted. “In particular, the House proposal reforms USDA’s two primary working lands incentives programs — the Conservation Security Program (CSP) and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) — to provide more environmental benefits and better reflect local environmental priorities, and the proposal promotes the use of ‘cooperative conservation’ agreements to bring local farmers together to meet local environmental challenges.

“Unfortunately, the proposal provides far too little funding for CSP and no mandatory funding for programs to restore lost wetlands and grasslands,” added Faber. “While we support efforts to expand EQIP and the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, as the Committee has proposed, we urge the Committee to make CSP available to all farmers who meet high environmental standards; to expand the Wetlands and Grasslands reserve programs; to expand the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program; and to provide more resources to improve air quality.

“Farmers and ranchers manage more than half of the American landscape, so agriculture has a dramatic impact on America’s air and water quality, the pace of sprawl, and the fate of our rare species,” concluded Faber. “The next Farm Bill should reward — not reject — farmers, ranchers and forest landowners when they offer to share the cost of clean water, clean air, and wildlife habitat. Today, two out of three farmers who offer to provide a healthier environment are turned away because of our misplaced spending priorities.

“By failing to provide more resources for voluntary USDA conservation programs, this proposal would do little to address the nation’s $3 billion conservation backlog and fall far short of meeting some of the nation’s most pressing environment challenges. Expanding and improving USDA conservation programs will not only help the environment but will help many more farmers and regions receive their share of federal farm spending.”