30 



to be practical and profitable and they also need to be more in har- 

 mony with our natural environment. 



Our Nation does need an effective nonpoint source control pro- 

 gram that: One, looks at and deals with pollution reduction on a 

 priority watershed basis; two, that uses incentive-based programs 

 to the extent possible to gain voluntary compliance; and three, 

 then, after a reasonable time, mandates pollution control as a 

 means of dealing with these landowners and operators who if by 

 intent have failed to respond to a voluntary incentive-based ap- 

 proach. Improved water quality monitoring with data that can be 

 defended is also essential to measure progress. 



On April 1, 1993, our society, along with many others, testified 

 about H.R. 1440. We supported that legislation. And as the land 

 users are asked to reduce nonpoint source pollution, they should in 

 turn expect Government to reduce the number of plans that they 

 are expected to implement. Tough questions will have to be an- 

 swered by you and your colleagues as you progress through your 

 decisionmaking process. What watersheds should be targeted and 

 how? What performance standards should be applied? And by 

 whom should these standards be applied? Who should bear the cost 

 of compliance and the maintenance of the measures? What time ho- 

 rizons are appropriate and practical to follow to allow voluntary 

 compliance before action is mandated? 



Recently our society has adopted three official policy positions, 

 and we would like to have these included in the record. One is the 

 statement on wetland conservation; the second deals with the con- 

 servation reserve program as contracts begin to expire on 36.5 mil- 

 lion acres; and the third is a national nonpoint source water pollu- 

 tion control initiative. As with most complex problems, there is 

 usually more than one solution, including doing nothing. In our 

 opinion, we are beyond that point on these issues. The 1995 farm 

 bill will have to address this along with many other issues. 



One final note. Land and water are integral components of our 

 natural world. They cannot be used or managed in isolation of one 

 another. What affects land affects water and vice versa. On that 

 premise, we would commend to your attention the recently pub- 

 lished report from the National Academy of Sciences, "Soil and 

 Water Quality: An Agenda for Agriculture." That study represents 

 a significant point of departure for this and future discussion and 

 debate over how to restore the integrity of the land and water re- 

 sources on which our economic systems depend. 



Thank you for this opportunity to testify. 



[The prepared statement of Mr. Berg appears at the conclusion 

 of the hearing.] 



Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Berg. 



Next, Dr. Leitch. 



STATEMENT OF JAY A. LEITCH, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF 

 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNI- 

 VERSITY, ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURAL 

 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



Mr. Leitch. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here today to ad- 

 dress wetlands and water quality issues. I am Jay Leitch, professor 

 of agricultural economics at North Dakota State University. I have 



