NRCS Planning Process and Support Structure

Remarks by Lawrence E. Clark, Deputy Chief for Science and Technology, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
at the
World Summit on Sustainable Agriculture,
Loskop Aventura, South Africa, September 12, 2002

The United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and its predecessor, the Soil Conservation Service, has been developing conservation plans for farmers and ranchers for almost 70 years. In 1933, the U.S. Congress created the Soil Erosion Service, predecessor to the Soil Conservation Service. Its employees began working in demonstration projects on selected watersheds. They worked directly with farmers. Ever since that time, the basic planning method has been individual soil conservationists working with individual landowners.
 
Eventually, staff of the Soil Conservation Service—SCS—and now the Natural Resources Conservation Service—NRCS—were stationed in local offices to reach practically all of the private landowners in the nation’s nearly 3,000 counties. In 1937, states began enacting laws that created local soil conservation districts and local groups began organizing these districts. In 1935, the U.S. Congress passed the Soil Conservation Act and the agency began to receive additional personnel—nonetheless, the creation of more districts called for more staffing.

Even in the early days, trained soil conservationists wrote conservation plans covering various aspects of conservation. A major effort of the service, probably the primary effort, has been to develop the tools and methods to assist local soil conservationists in his or her work with individual farmers and ranchers. The agency also began developing soil surveys that display each unique soil type on aerial photos with text explaining the limitations of each soil. This became one of our primary planning tools. Specialists in a host of disciplines agronomy, engineering, forestry, biology, range management, and others have developed handbooks and other tools to help the individual soil conservationist assist farmers.

The next step in the alteration of the planning came in 1951 with the initiation of what became known as progressive farm planning. Progressive planning had three steps. The first step was to establish an agreement between each farmer and the local conservation district. The second was to address immediate soil erosion and water quality needs of the farmer. And the third was to eventually develop a complete conservation plan on the entire farm.

Under this system, the soil conservationists did not have to write a complete farm plan initially. Rather, the farmers signed up as a cooperator with the conservation district and the landowner and the soil conservationist then worked on conservation aspects that the farmer preferred to address. The conservationist was to review work annually, and keep working with the landowner toward the development of a complete plan. For those who preferred this system, it represented a recognition that conservationists spend a great deal of time on a complete farm plan when only a portion of it was actually used. Also its proponents, believed it focused the efforts of the agency more on the objective of getting conservation, rather than getting farm plans written. Those who preferred the complete farm plan method could still contend that it was better for the farm to be considered in its entirety when planning conservation.

In the late 1940s, SCS tried to accelerate planning by finding the leaders in rural communities who could lead group planning efforts. Ultimately, the conservationists had to work on each property, but some found the method useful to accelerate group planning.

In conservation district offices, Federal employees work directly with the locally elected conservation district board to develop a plan of operation and priorities for the entire district. The board was and still is local people setting conservation priorities to meet local needs. Simultaneously, with the effort to help districts write plans for districts to solve their problems, the Soil Conservation Service found itself involved in another, related planning effort. The Flood Control Act of 1936 authorized the Soil Conservation Service to address flood control in small watersheds. This is because flood control also helped reduce the movement of sediment into streams and rivers, helped reduce damage to cropland and urban areas and provided water for irrigation. The conservationist had to work with individuals and communities and the benefits of the projects had to outweigh the costs.

In 1954, another Act of Congress authorized the Soil Conservation Service to become involved in interagency and intergovernmental river basin planning. The river basin studies were conducted at several different levels of scope and objectives and they included agricultural, economics, flooding, erosion, water development, and other economic and resource issues.

SCS has also had need of information on the conditions of resources information that could be used in overall planning for the activities of the agency. The agency has carried out various inventories of conservation needs and natural resources to help not only plan the agency’s activities, but also to communicate with Congress and community leaders and all citizens.

So with this, we developed the reputation that we are trained professionals who had the skills and technologies to help farmers with their land and other natural resource problems. It has taken almost 70 years to get where we are today. We learned how to work in partnership with farmers, gleaning what they know and spreading their knowledge through demonstration and common-sense application. Isn’t this the beginning of any technology?

In the research lab and on the land, we studied and refined what worked for farmers. We kept records—the proof of what conservation practices and methods worked and what did not work. SCS standardized the planning process for delivering technical assistance to clients to make it an orderly approach to decision making.

In the United States, we currently work with individuals and groups to help conserve and protect natural resources, just like we did more than 60 years ago when this partnership started between farmers and ranchers and Federal and local government.

• The purposes of the Natural Resources Conservation Service planning process are to:

1. Provide a structured system that helps planner and client alike work together to identify and treat resource problems.

2. Help clients recognize and understand resource problems and their causes.

3. Develop and evaluate alternative solutions that lead to decisions to select, implement, and maintain conservation treatments.

4. Provide opportunities for the public to participate in the process in an open manner.

5. Assess effectiveness of planning and systematically record observed results of treatments that have been applied in order to improve future planning assistance.

6. Ensure that all human considerations are fully addressed in solution of resource problems.

7. Incorporate management objectives of local conservation districts in conservation assistance.

Today, we use a nine-step conservation planning process, which you will hear more about later today. It is the way we deliver technical assistance in an organized consistent way. The planning process is site-specific—we work directly with farmers on their land.

The planning process is dynamic and flexible because...

• Every client is unique;
• Every farm or ranch is unique;
• Every planning situation is unique; and
• Conservation planning on the part of the client is voluntary.

As we work with farmers to help them develop conservation plans, the client must be involved throughout the planning process and development of the conservation plan. The farmer does make the final decision, deciding how and when to implement the plan, and the farmer owns the plan.

Conservation planning is the foundation for the conservation work of the agency and our conservation partnership. Our conservation partnership is a partnership among farm organizations, all levels of government—including the local conservation district, and, of course, farmers and ranchers.

Plans that exist at the broader scale are also taken into account, as much as possible, when working with individual clients. Examples of these types of plans include areawide conservation plans, watershed plans, community plans, and conservation district plans.

Supporting Materials:
Over the years, we’ve developed a number of supporting materials that explain the technologies and the processes to plan and apply conservation. We made an investment in mapping the nations soils. Currently, there are soil surveys in 91 percent of our counties. These contain detailed information about the characteristics of each type of soil, maps showing where soils are located, and the limitations of each soil depending on the intended use.

We have a General Manual that contains our agency's policies on all aspects of our work, including how we will conduct our programs and meet our obligations as authorized by the U.S. Congress. The NRCS National Planning Procedures Handbook provides guidance on the "how to" of the planning process as related to the planning policy established in the General Manual.

The General Manual, among other documents, establishes policy for the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide. The local Field Office Technical Guide contains the technical information needed to assist clients in the development and application of conservation plans. It is not a notebook that looks the same in every office, but it contains general resource information about the field office area, including soil and site information and quality criteria to be met in Resource Management Systems. It also contains guidance documents depicting the resource management planning thought process, practice standards for all practices applicable to the local field office area, and examples of the conservation effects of our decision making process.

We have a Conservation Planning Procedures Handbook that explains the nine-step planning process we now use to gather information, help farmers make decisions, and record and implement those decisions.

We have the National Handbook of Conservation Practices with 159 national conservation practices. Each state selects which of these 159 practices they might use and adapts it to local conditions by adding specifications on weather, soils, local regulations, and other criteria. When used, these practices will help farmers correct specific land and water resource problems. These practices and their specifications are revised at least every five years to assure that we are using the latest science and technologies available. Examples of these practices include:

• brush management
• ponds
• contour farming
• pest management,
• nutrient management
• composting facility
• firebreaks
• grazing land mechanical treatment
• irrigation field ditches
• pumping plants for water control, and many others.

Also, to assure that every tool—reference and information—is available to our field conservationists, we have developed technical handbooks, guides and manuals that address specific resources. The National Forestry Manual provides policy and guidelines for forest and agroforestry resource conservation planning. The National Agronomy Manual contains policy and guidelines on crops and soils. A soon-to-be-completed Nutrient Management Manual will contain policy and guidelines and the assistance we must give farmers to help them deal with animal manure as well as commercial fertilizers. The National Soils Survey Handbook contains guides for conducting soil surveys and making soil interpretations used in resources planning and soil information incorporated into the Field Office Technical Guide. The National Range and Pasture Handbook contains policy and procedures for the study, inventory, analysis, treatment, and management of grazing land resources. These Handbooks and manuals are included as a reference in every Field Office Technical Guide.

Many of these resources are available on the Internet to anyone who wants to assess the technology and science they contain. And, of course, the Field Office Technical Guide, contains a broad range of basic information used by that field office employees to help farmers plan and apply conservation to protect and conserve their natural resources.

Conservation planning is both an art and a science. We need to provide assistance that is science based and technically sound. At the same time, we also need to be able to work effectively with a multitude of clients, each with their own unique situation and operation. Training is critical in order for conservation planners to effectively develop, utilize, and maintain their conservation planning skills and keep on the cutting edge of science and technology. As conservation planners, we must consider all of the resources in the planning process. We must consider soil, water, air, plants, and animals, as well as the human element, which are economic and social considerations.

We are always striving to learn and incorporate new science and technologies into our work. For example, we are currently developing a Customer Service Toolkit. The Toolkit is a set of computer-based automated conservation planning tools that are flexible and farmer focused. It provides mapping and Geospatial analysis with desktop Geographic Information Systems capabilities. It uses Microsoft Office products, such as spreadsheets and databases to store decisions made by farmers for conservation planning and application of conservation practices. The toolkit is the designated software for developing Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans. We expect the toolkit to be in use by field offices by October of this year.

How do we continue to develop, support, and maintain these processes and body of knowledge?

As part of our recent evolution as an agency, we established a National Technology Consortium to coordinate the development of new technologies for use by field conservationists and sometimes from field conservationists. The consortium is made up of NRCS Institutes and Centers and cooperating scientists located at universities and colleges. The consortium includes scientists from a wide range of disciplines related to the conservation of our natural resources and is connected with national, state, and local specialists, such as nutrient management specialists, agronomists, soil scientists, agricultural engineers, grazing lands ecologists, foresters, social scientists, natural resources specialists, and many others.

The Agricultural Research Service, a research agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, assists us with special research and technology needs, such as wind erosion prediction models, soil loss erosion prediction models and equations to determine runoff and soil loss, and other conditions and trends.

In conclusion…to ensure our sustainable relationship to the land, we must harmonize with, conserve, and restore the natural ecological processes. To do so, as we provide conservation planning assistance, we must look at the immediate site and its condition and its context within the larger landscape. Everything is connected to everything else. As we work to protect one resource we must consider the effects of our actions on other resources.

A knowledge of soil, water, air, plants, animals, and humans and their interrelationships is the common denominator for successful conservation planning assistance. That knowledge is a tool for responsible resource management that allows conservationists, land users, legislators and others an opportunity to treat the environment as a living system in which we are an integral part.

With this tool, we can analyze and work with complex natural processes in definable and measurable terms. Decisions regarding the capacity of the land are weighed against the effect upon the living system. Dysfunctional agricultural and other systems can be recognized and restored for a sustainable balance between natural functions and human objectives. Conservation planning is a means to establish or maintain living systems that improve rather than degrade over time.

NRCS’s future success in conservation planning for sustainable resource use will depend on how well we utilize available program opportunities, articulate policies, and develop effective partnerships with public, private and academic institutions. Creativity, an interdisciplinary approach, and a commitment to training are equally critical ingredients.

The landscape must be viewed as a complex of interrelated systems. Practices and designs that enhance resource quality must be developed and planned. Innovative, comprehensive, and coordinated conservation planning is the key to meeting environmental, social, and productivity goals.

What are some of the challenges for South Africa?

You must create a system for conserving natural resources that is credible, viable, and accepted by everyone—especially farmers.

You must convince government and community leaders that an investment now in conservation of natural resources will payoff later, and it may payoff in ways that no one can foresee.

You must create a system that taps the existing knowledge of farmers, agribusiness, and local people. Starting with that knowledge as a base, you must identify your conservation needs for each community and for each individual. Then you can ask organizations, government and others to help. It is much more effective to help someone who knows what they need than it is to try to help someone who has not thought about it.

As in every country, your challenges are many, but it is the determination of your people who will make conservation of the natural resources in this great country a reality!