Decreased funding for conservation programs doesn't meet the demand

"Long-term viability of farms and ranches depends on the sustained health of soil and water resources," Anna Johnson, policy manager at the Center for Rural Affairs says. "However, most conservation practices require a front-end investment from farmers and ranchers, which can serve as a barrier for implementation."

Johnson recently released a report that tracks the funding of the Conservation Stewardship Program from the USDA. CSP is one of the working lands programs available to help farmers with the financial investments to pursue soil health and other conservation practices.

CSP serves farmers and ranchers who demonstrate they are already invested in conservation and intend to maintain and expand their current practices.

CSP can be used for initiatives implemented across entire operations and for conservation enhancements.

The 2014 farm bill decreased the number of acres that USDA could enroll in CSP and the 2018 farm bill changed the funding structure of the program from acres-based to dollars-based.

Since the 2008 farm bill, CSP funding has been cut in half. In 2008, $2 billion was allocated to CSP. In 2014, between $1.1 - $1.9 billion was allocated and in 2018, it was less than $1 billion.

Johnson reports, "Every year, USDA receives far more CSP applications than it has the ability to fund. For example, in 2020, only 25% of CSP applications were funded."

While the USDA does not publish criteria for how CSP funds are allocated across the 50 states and five territories, it has released the number of acres treated per state.

The top five states for CSP general enrollment (number of acres) in 2020 were:

1. New Mexico: 933,753
2. Utah: 563,636
3. Oregon: 469,438
4. California: 369,556
5. Nebraska: 319,400

The top five states for CSP renewals (number of acres) in 2020 were:

1. South Dakota: 409,975
2. Illinois: 199,902
3. Montana: 192,783
4. Nebraska: 179,053
5. Oregon: 122,211

Johnson, an advocate for soil health, says investing in conservation is an investment in the future of the land and its productivity.

"We see a lot of attention to soil health right now. The more funds available, the more people will be able to participate in working lands programs, taking advantage of the benefits they provide," she says.

• Read More: Perennials with purpose

Johnson's is one of two reports released in the past three months that detail the decrease of available funds for CSP over the past two Farm Bills.

Michael Happ, climate and rural communities policy associate with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, published another that outlines the allocation of funds and the growing percentage of rejected applications.

"In my role, I focus on USDA conservation programs because they are helpful and effective for farmers to deal with extreme weather and be part of the climate solution," Happ says.

As big solutions to the climate crisis continue to be discussed, Happ's message is that funding should be put where it works. EQIP and CSP provide real benefits to farmers and the environment and they are programs that already exist.

• Read More: How the Conservation Reserve Program can address climate change

But the data shows the strain on those programs.

A Call for Increased Funding

"We're based out of Minnesota, and for a long time, Minnesota has been a leader in conservation agriculture," Happ says. "Over the course of the program, Minnesota has given out more CSP contracts than any other state, but in the last year, they're in the bottom five or six states in connecting farmers with CSP contracts. There is so much demand for these programs but in the states where, frankly it's needed most, more farmers are being turned away."

According to Happ's report, "In 2020 Minnesota only awarded contracts to 14% of those who applied, landing it 47th out of 52 states and territories."

In 2020, Minnesota awarded EQIP contracts to only 17% of the total applicant pool, placing the state 50th out of 52 states and territories in successful applicants.

"It's essential to get more funding for technical assistance in our county offices, more boots on the ground at the local level to give farmers what they need for the application process," says Happ.

• Listen: Precision conservation

He adds, "These programs also need to be working for farmers of color who have great ideas for conserving their land via sustainable practices. They need to be connected to technical support and resources they want and need."

In CSP, 5% of contracts are set aside each year for "socially disadvantaged farmers," the USDA term that includes farmers of color.

In the report, Happ clarifies that the 5% is a pool where the applications for farmers of color are only ranked against each other rather than in the general pool with all other farmers.

"The data that exists on farmers of color at USDA can be confusing or misleading. Part of the reason is that data is not broken down by race at the state level (with the exception of Hispanic producers), only by whether or not a farmer is classified as 'socially disadvantaged.'"

• Read More: Black farmers in America face difficult odds

"Just looking at the data of how many farmers apply, you can tell these have been successful programs," Happ says. "It shows that farmers believe in them, that they're willing to invest their precious time and resources into trying to receive support from CSP and EQIP. The demand is clear and we need to answer it."