On May 23, the House Agriculture Committee Subcommittee on Conservation, Research, and Biotechnology held a hearing for the purpose of receiving testimony from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Farm Service Agency (FSA). The witnesses in the hearing were:
- Terry Cosby, Chief, NRCS, USDA
- Zach Ducheneaux, Administrator, FSA, USDA
Below is a summary of the hearing prepared by Delta Strategy Group. It includes several high-level takeaways from both panels, followed by summaries of opening statements and witness testimonies and a summary of the Q&A portion of the hearing.
Key Takeaways
The following is a summary of some of the topics explored in yesterday’s hearing. Each is discussed in further detail in the Discussion section below.
- Committee Chairman GT Thompson (R-PA)
- We need to remove climate practice restrictions from conservation programs. We should not use a one-size-fits-all approach, and we need to keep conservation programs voluntary, incentive-based, and locally led.
- Subcommittee Chairman Jim Baird (R-IA)
- We should not shift all of the focus for Title II programs to a single natural resource concern like carbon. Especially since we already dedicated so much investment for climate practices coming in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and we need to ensure these programs are addressing any local resource needs.
- Subcommittee Ranking Member Abigail Spanberger (D-VA)
- We have made historic investments in conservation programs, but they are hugely oversubscribed and need further investment.
SUMMARY
Opening Statements and Testimony
Subcommittee Chairman Jim Baird (R-IA)
Our farm bill conservation programs and their delivery systems are a proven model critical to addressing natural resource concerns. Farm bill conservation programs are voluntary and incentive-based providing benefits to the farmer and the environment. It is also important that these programs remain locally led. We cannot totally shift Title II programs to any one natural resource concern. The IRA Act provided significant investment in climate-specific conservation programs.
Subcommittee Ranking Member Abigail Spanberger (D-VA)
Programs like EQIP are vastly oversubscribed resulting in massive wait times for farmers’ applications to be approved. We have made historic investments to ensure these programs meet farmer needs, but we need to continue to strengthen them. We need to increase the number of technical service providers available as farmers consider how to use these programs.
Committee Chairman GT Thompson (R-PA)
Conservation programs are vitally important. We must examine what is working and what should be improved. I look forward to hearing from witnesses on this concept. Some conservation program funding is unrealistic and would be better used by bringing it into the baseline and spreading it out over a longer time frame. We must remove climate restrictions and let the locally led model continue without any new restrictions. We should not prioritize one solution over all others. These programs work because they are locally led, voluntary, and incentive-based.
Terry Cosby, Chief, NRCS, USDA
The 2018 farm bill made it clear that voluntary conservation programs are critical to the continued viability of production agriculture. The practices and systems supported through voluntary farm programs provide critical benefits to climate and conservation concerns to make farmer operations more resilient. We are excited about the opportunities from the IRA to increase the number of producers participating in NRCS programs. NRCS is standing up new teams to make these programs more efficient and simple for farmers.
Zach Ducheneaux, Administrator, FSA, USDA
This administration has focused on increasing access to the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and strengthening the climate benefits of the program through several changes which have put the program on an upward trajectory and helped bring participation into closer alignment with the caps established by Congress.
Agricultural producers are the original conservationists, and conservation is an integral part of the work we do at FSA. We are focused on weaving conservation values into all our programs, old and new, so that as our agricultural communities face more frequent and intense climate-induced disasters, we are better prepared to provide both relief and economic opportunity for continued conservation.
Discussion
Baird (R-IN): What would be helpful to increase access to technical service providers (TSP)? Why is this important? Cosby: We are working hard to strengthen TSP protocols. This used to be an exhausted, state-driven process, and we are working to make this streamlined. One part of that is having a full-time staff dedicated to these programs.
Spanberger (D-VA): What are the barriers to hiring the appropriate staff? Cosby: We are working hard to bring in as many employees and interns as possible. We use every authority we have to fill these positions. Some positions, like soil conservation positions, are hard to fill because colleges are not teaching the necessary information anymore.
Thompson (R-PA): The Sustains Act created new authorities for USDA to fund additional conservation. How is USDA using this new authority? Does the administration have a plan to reduce red tape and bureaucracy in the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP)? Cosby: We are looking at how to best use this authority across all of our conservation programs. We are excited about the opportunities provided by RCPP. We have a number of teams working to make RCPP more accessible and improve technical assistance. The portal was also an issue, and we are working to simplify that process. We have also worked to make sure our employees are well educated on how to use this program.
Lucas (R-OK): What is the importance of the watershed program? What are the barriers to enrollment in carbon sequestration programs? Cosby: The bipartisan infrastructure law provided vital for this program. Some of this went to helping communities with floods, and some went to improving aging infrastructure. The issue is that the programs are oversubscribed; Ducheneaux: One of the biggest barriers is just ensuring that we are using the right types of data. It is important to look at conservation in a broader perspective than just considering carbon sequestration.
Miller (R-IL): Is it NRCS’s policy that solar panels should be placed on prime farm ground? Cosby: We have not taken a position on this. Our job is just to deliver conservation practices. When it comes to solar panels, it is happening at an alarming rate, but hopefully our conservation practices prevent erosion on that land.
Duarte: How committed is the administration to ensure access to biofuels if it is being floated as a legitimate replacement for diesel on farms? How can we set aside enough land to maintain these biofuel production goals? Ducheneaux: Biofuels can be a powerful tool to help producers on the farm. Our tools are designed to ensure that producers have access to whatever coverage they need regardless of the end purpose of their production. We are increasingly looking at how we can benefit from working land, not just set aside conservation land.