102 



• The return of any CRP land to agricultural production must be subject to an appropri- 

 ate conservation compliance plan that minimizes the future negative environmental 

 impacts of farming. This assumes, of course, that the farmer is a federal farm program 

 participant. 



• Production-base acres now associated with each individual parcel of land should be 

 transferable from the hijihly erodible or otherwise environmentally sensitive acres in the 

 CRP to other acreages, allowing production to occur on a farm's "better" acres and 

 encouraging the more fragile acres to be set aside. CRP acres should be allowed to 

 satisfy set-aside acreage requirements. Provisions of this nature could lower the annual 

 cost of the CRP and encourage the more environmentally fragile acres to remain or be 

 enrolled in the CRR 



• Faced in the short term with a declining need for additional cropland beyond what is 

 now available, it appears reasonable to consider using long-term or permanent ease- 

 ments, similar to those being developed under the WRP. to protect specific parcels of 

 land that are identified as critical to solving major environmental probleins. Ownership 

 and restricted use of the acres would remain with the landowner, as determined by the 

 easement plan of operation. 



• Some economic use of less environmentally sensitive land now enrolled in the CRP, 

 haying and grazing, as an example, should be allowed in return for reduced rental 

 payments. The savings to the federal treasury therefrom should be directed to new 

 enrollments of high-priority acreage. Any partial uses of CRP tracts that are allowed 

 must be in accordance with an appropriate conservation plan in order to protect society's 

 investment in conservation. 



• State interagency corrmiittees, provided for in the Food. Agriculture, Conservation and 

 Trade Act of 1990, should be assembled and used to help guide decision-making on the 

 CRP and other farm conservation initiatives. One important responsibility for these 

 committees to assume is that of setting priorities for CRP enrollments in the different 

 states, or in regions within a state, to ensure that the multiple goals of the program are 

 being achieved. The conunittees could exercise oversight authority as well, over con- 

 straints on the management of CRP acres (weed control, mowing, etc.), for example, 

 and choice of cover crops planted. These technical committees must reach out beyond 

 governmental agencies to involve representatives from other public- and private-sector 

 interest groups that have a stake in the CRP. 



• Historically, plant and animal communities evolved under the influence of such 

 natural impacts as grazing, occasional haying, fire, and climatic fluctuations. Grazing 

 and fire are important for the long-term health and stability of many ecosystems, 

 whether natural or reconstnjcted (CRP). In order for reconstructed ecosystems to reach 

 their potential and become "more natural." a combination of the aforementioned 

 treatments should be applied at appropriate times. The treatments should be part of a 

 prescribed management plan, conducted without penalty to the CRP contract-holder. 



• Research and demonstration projects that allow for local input are needed to test the 

 feasibility of new and innovative farming technologies and management strategies that 

 will minimize undesirable or destructive impacts on fragile land. Projects might include, 

 for example, pilot programs to trade grazing rights between public and private land. 

 Information gained from such programs will help form the basis for sustainable agricul- 

 tural enterprises that adequately protect the environment. 



• In the Great Plains and perhaps elsewhere, the possibility of forming grazing and 

 wildlife cooperatives needs to be pursued. The grazing associations formed after 

 enactment of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 represent potential working models. Such 

 associations now operate on both private and public land in the West. They do so 

 successfully by developing large blocks of land with intenningled ownerships as 

 management units. The management units are controlled by the permittees, all of whom 



