96 



So after what in reality has been decades of study, discussion, and debate, we 

 have come to a decision point in 1994. You have before you several proposals seeking 

 to reauthorize the Clean Water Act and addressing a number of related issues, including 

 wetland protection and comprehensive site-specific planning. A variety of new policy 

 and program approaches are proposed, and nonpoint sources of pollution from 

 agriculture clearly are among the problems targeted. Consensus most assuredly exists to 

 do something about the problem, so we urge the Congress to act. In so doing, our hope 

 is that the Congress will encourage the nation's farmers to adopt more sustainable 

 agricultural production systems-systems that are not only practical and profitable, but 

 more in harmony with our natural environment as well. 



Our nation needs an effective nonpoint-source pollution control program that (a) 

 looks at and deals with pollution control on a watershed basis; (b) uses incentive-based 

 programs to the extent possible to gain voluntary compliance; and (c) then, after a time, 

 mandates pollution control as a means of dealing with those land owners and operators 

 who fail to respond to the voluntary, incentive-based measures. Improved water quality 

 monitoring is also essential to measure progress. 



Tough questions v/ill have to be answered by you and your colleagues as you 

 progress through your decision-making: What watersheds should be targeted and how? 

 What performance standards should be applied? Who should bear the costs of 

 compliance? What time horizon is appropriate to allow for voluntary compliance before 

 action is mandated? 



In recent months, SWCS has adopted three official policy positions that bear 

 significantly on the nonpoint-source water pollution control issue in general and on 

 several of the aforementioned questions more specifically. One is a statement on 

 wetlands protection. Another sets forth some guiding principles for dealing with 

 nonpoint-source pollution specifically. The third relates to what uses might be made of 

 the 36.5 million acres of environmentally fragile cropland now enrolled in the 

 Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The possible conversion of those CRP acres 

 back to crop production from their present soil- and water-conserving cover of grass and 

 trees could have important negative consequences for water quality and wetland 

 protection in many regions of the country. Some of the acres can be adequately treated 

 to ensure their protection while in crop production, but many other acres in the CRP 

 should never be farmed intensively again because of their environmental sensitivity or 

 because of their strategic location as buffers on the landscape. 



With your permission, we are offering copies of the three policy statements as 

 part of our testimony. 



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, then, we would commend to your attention the 

 recently published report from the National Academy of Science, Soil and Water 

 Ouality: An Agenda for Agriculture . This report represents a significant point of 

 departure for this and future discussion and debate over how to restore the integrity of 

 the land and water resources on which we and our economic system depend. 



SWCS stands ready to assist you and your work in any way that you may deem 

 appropriate. 



Thank you! 



