Massachusetts, as over a million and a half acres of land 

 in farms have gone out of production in the state since 

 World War II. During the two decades between 1951 and 

 1971 it has been estimated that between 11,000 and 12,000 

 acres of farmland were lost annually in the state because 

 of urban conversion. One has only to drive around the 

 coimtryside to witness new houses going up in fields and 

 orchards that were recently in active agricultural produc- 

 tion. 



The loss of agricultural land in most areas of Mas- 

 sachusetts will probably continue because the economic 

 incentive to sell the farm for non-agricultural uses is often 

 too tempting for a farmer to resist, or the land is simply 

 just too expensive for the farmer's children or neighbor- 

 ing farmers to purchase. It is this disparity in land value 

 for development versus agriculture that makes the 

 Commonwealth's Agricultural Preservation Restriction 

 (APR) Program work. 



Status of Farms Protected 



All of the farms that are currently in the APR program 

 are checked from time to time for compliance with the 

 terms of the Preservation Restriction. At this time, all of 

 the land currently protected remains in agricultural use. 



Approximately 60 percent of the farms are in dairy 

 production, thirty five percent are produce farms includ- 

 ing fruits and vegetables, and approximately five percent 

 are "other," including general Uvestock, flowers, etc. 



Approximately 30 percent of the farms have been sold 

 since the restriction was granted, many of which were 

 conveyed within the family. They all remain in active 

 agricultural production. 



Proceeds from sale of the development rights were 

 used primarily for retirement. The second highest use of 

 the funds was for debt reduction or pay-off, and the 

 remainder was used for improvements to the farm. 



In the past seven years, the APR program has placed 

 development restrictions on a total of 270 farms covering 

 25,272 acres of farmland. These farms range in size from 

 a fifteen- acre highly intensive market garden to 340-plus- 

 acre dairy operations. Included among these farms are 

 apple and peach orchards, specialized vegetable fcU"ms, 

 small fruit operations, general forage crop and livestock 

 farms, farms producing field crops such as potatoes, 

 cucumbers and grain corn, and diversified dairy fcirms. 

 The types of farms in the Massachusetts program are an 

 excellent cross-section of the types of food- producing 

 agricultural enterprises in the State. 



The additional funding provided under the 1988 Open 

 Space Bill will enable APR program staff to respond to 

 a steady and increasing stream of applicants. Numerous 

 APR agreements have already been completed while 

 dozens more have been in various stages of application 



and approval, pending the recent passage of the bill. 

 Nineteen applications involving 3,332 acres were under 

 purchase-and-sale agreement as of Jan 1,1988, but could 

 not be completed before the new infusion of funds. Eighty 

 additional farms on 8,230 acres have been under active 

 appraisal, while 32 applications involving 2,324 acres 

 have been on standby. 



APR staff members predict that as the number of 

 applications continues to increase, program applicants 

 will be more closely scrutinized to assure their com- 

 patibility with program objectives. While awaiting the 

 infusion of new funds, the APR staff has sought to 

 elucidate imd develop those objectives. One of the 

 program's major objectives is to continue to add more 

 restricted land in the vicinity of those farms already 

 protected, in order to secure large areas of land for 

 agricultural production. More and more landowners are 

 becoming familiar with the program, and the assemblage 

 of large blocks of protected farmland is underway in a 

 number of towns, including Westport, Dudley, Hadley, 

 Amherst, and others. Other program objectives include: 

 suitability and productivity of the land for agriculture; the 

 imminence of threat to the farmland; the economic 

 viability of the farm; and the availability of creative 

 financing approaches that will reduce the cost to the 

 Commonwealth. 



Cost saving financing techniques likely to receive 

 even closer consideration by the APR staff and the ALPC 

 in the coming year, include the following: 



(1) Land banking by the owner - The Owner is 



wilUng to hold out substantial acreage which is not essen- 

 tial to the farming unit, for possible liquidation. By doing 

 so, the Owner is "land banking" acreage for family 

 residential use or sale which will reduce the cost of the 

 APR. 



(2) Compatible Development - Where a town or 

 land trust purchases the land outright, it maybe necessary 

 or desirable to remove some of the marginal agricultural 

 land for Umited residential development in order to offset 

 the cost of purchase. 



(3) Substantial Local Contribution - Farms of 

 high value will be expected to have a substantial local 

 contribution. Normally this will come from the town, 

 through town meeting appropriation or from the Conser- 

 vation Fund of the Conservation Commission, or from 

 local non-profit organizations. 



(4) Cooperative Funding - Contributions, made 

 by another state agency that has an interest in the preser- 

 vation of an APR farm can help to reduce the cost of the 

 APR for the DFA. 



(5) Bargain Sale - WTiere the appraised value of 

 the development rights is higher than the Common- 

 wealth is willing to pay, the owner may be willing to sell 



10 



