| |
Expanding Our Conservation Toolbox to Help People Help the Land
Talking points used by Arlen L. Lancaster,
Chief, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, at a meeting of the NRCS
National Leadership Team (NLT).
Tucson, Arizona
July 31, 2008
1. The Introduction
Good Morning.
Monday, as part of the plenary session for the Soil and Water Conservation
Society conference, I mentioned how pleased I was to be in a room with so many
who are integral to the science and the art of conservation. That is even truer
today; but you know that, because you are not only the group responsible for the
mechanics of getting conservation on the ground, you are often the ones who see
first-hand the results of that applied conservation.
At NRCS we know that conservation occurs not just through discussion and
science, but through the commitment of landowners and land-managers who often
take a leap of faith in trusting the people who are relating the science and the
practices. This trust is hard earned, but the result is worth it.
I did not join NRCS because I wanted to manage thousands of people or hand out
billions of dollars. I don’t think any of us in this room did. We joined because
we believe that through voluntary, incentive-based conservation we can make a
difference. We can feed and clothe the world and reduce our footprint at the
same time. We do it because we are confident we can make the land more
productive, we can improve the environment, and we can create the type of world
we want our children and grandchildren to inherit.
When I had the privilege of becoming the 13th chief of the agency, I thought a
lot about my personal interests: water conservation and wildlife habitat. Some
of you know that I considered pushing that personal agenda. Instead, I decided
that each individual resource concern or priority that I had—that we all
have—can be best addressed if we improve the overall system.
As you know, I focused on three priorities: making conservation easier, making
sure as an agency we are prepared to meet new challenges, and improving
accountability.
In making conservation easier, I meant making it easier and more accessible for
our customers, our partners, and ourselves.
In making sure we were prepared to meet new challenges, I meant making sure that
we are structured properly and have the right tools to address challenges in all
their forms: tighter budgets, different market conditions, a retiring workforce
and new resource concerns.
And, by accountability, I meant upholding our fiduciary responsibilities and
providing quantitative and qualitative assessments of the effectiveness of our
efforts.
Over the past two years, I am even more committed to those priorities. As we
engaged with Congress on the farm bill, I was mindful of these priorities; and
as we move forward in implementing the farm bill, I think about these
priorities. But I hope you have understood that my goal has been the long-term
condition of the agency, thinking beyond just today, and trying to understand
these decisions in the context of sustainability and success for the agency over
the long haul.
We have made progress on each of these priorities, and with them I believe we
can ensure our relevance and recognition in the future.
Before I get too much further into my remarks, I need to begin with a “thank
you.”
Thank you to the many, many employees who were involved in supporting the
development of the farm bill. To those who sacrificed by being away from their
families and jobs into the wee hours of the morning and who worked for over a
year on weekends and late into the night to develop the administration’s
proposals and respond to the Congress: thank you all.
I also want to thank all of our colleagues who have retired this year for their
dedicated and tremendous service. While I suppose it happens every year, this
was a particularly tough year for me as I had built many relationships with
people like Larry Clark, Ron Marlowe, Carole Jett, and so many more. I also want
to thank someone who has recently announced his retirement—Bob Graham. We all
have those people we call for a reality check and who give us an unvarnished
perspective. Bob Graham is one of those people for me. I wish you weren’t
leaving, but I appreciate that you’re doing it in a way that will help with
succession management.
And for all my talk of making things easier, I know that this past year has been
anything but easy. The uncertainty of appropriations and the “stop and go” of
farm bills made your jobs incredibly difficult. You have my sincere admiration.
Please pass along to your staffs how incredibly proud our leadership is of them.
They did a tremendous job this year, just as they have done a great job in
implementing the 2002 Farm Bill over the course of its life.
We are also grateful to you for managing this process with such professionalism
and patience.
NRCS’ effective implementation of the 2002 Farm Bill was a big influence in the
increase in working lands programs that you see in the 2008 Farm Bill. You will
get more information on the changes in the farm bill later today, and while you
focus on the new “Farm Bill” and the implementation journey, I hope you will
keep in mind a bigger picture….
2. The Challenge
As we go about implementing the farm bill, we need to remember that it is a
tool. Leveraging 2008 Farm Bill resources can move us toward a
conservation-based landscape and the agency vision of productive lands and a
healthy environment.
And that gives us perspective as we face the series of challenges in moving the
2008 Farm Bill from paper to practice, considering the statutory changes to
every program, the “90 day from enactment” timeline we’re working toward for all
regulations required to implement these new provisions, and numerous
consultation, coordination, and analytical steps that must be completed before
October.
3. The Solution
The Farm Bill expanded the conservation toolbox. Program improvements will:
Remove some barriers (e.g., simplify the WRP easement compensation);
Encourage participation (e.g., 30-year contracts for Tribes, increased cost
share for certain farmers or ranchers);
Focus on agricultural customers (e.g., WHIP and WRP eligibility, beginning
farmers and ranchers), and
Simplify and streamline to make conservation more accessible (e.g., CSP,
streamlined application process).
There is increased funding for NRCS programs, with total funding of $15.1
billion over five years—an increase of $4.2 billion over the 2002 Farm Bill.
Most of that is for conservation on working lands.
New initiatives and authorities–such as the cooperative conservation partnership
initiative, agricultural water enhancement program, and authority to accept
contributions–are provisions that can leverage federal funds, and can target
conservation resources towards achieving watershed/landscape-scale natural
resource objectives.
4. The Business Model
Making conservation more accessible is the business model for conservation
programs, generally, with the intention to:
Reform–bringing consistency and transparency across programs where ever
possible; e.g., adopting common definitions where they work;
Simplify and streamline–a priority in this farm bill. Examples include:
• developing a streamlined application process (which also fits nicely with a
‘program neutral’ application approach);
• allowing for application ranking in the new CSP, making it simpler and more
consistent with other programs;
• longer term agreements with entities in FRPP and ongoing submission of offers
that should bring more certainty for participants.
When we look at implementation, we realize there is more we can do to make the
programs easier and more accessible. Many are things we can do and are doing
today.
We are already making progress in a number of ways, including use of a common
“power of attorney” form with FSA, payment schedules that ease the
administrative workload, and
indexing our payment schedules to inflation, among others.
And there are other things we should be doing.
We can use common payment schedules across programs. We can move to shorter
contracts to focus on implementation rather than on obligation. The funding is
there within the programs to allow “repeat customers,” so we should get them
into a contract for what they’re ready to implement, then help them implement
the rest of their conservation plan in future contracts.
We can do group rankings to prioritize concerns we’ve identified in a watershed
to allow greater focus on fixing the watershed’s problem rather than just a
farm’s problem. Let’s look at identifying the practices we know need to be done
and providing incentives to focus on them. This way we can essentially pre-rank
applications so that they can be approved when the producer walks in.
5. The Underlying Technology (the “Magic”)
This is what will make us successful.
We are building on a strong foundation of technical expertise, local action, and
partnerships–the local relationships are our assets.
We acquire technical tools and expertise–and adopt conservation technologies and
standards—that fit the local need. The farm bill calls for a review of these
building blocks to be sure that they are relevant to the producers and their
production systems at the local level. Not just for those producers we
customarily work with, but also customers who may be new to us, such as
specialty or organic producers, precision farmers, or others.
We needn’t be defensive about our work in these arenas. Many of you will say
we’re already working with these specialty crop producers or forest land owners,
to which I reply: Yes, we are, but they don’t always know it. Congress was not
saying our efforts were inadequate, but they want producers to know that these
programs are available to them—no matter what they grow or how they grow it.
But, we still need to remind them that they are only really competing for 40
percent of the funds.
Local action and relationships–the strong conservation partnership that is our
legacy—will be a critical component of successful implementation. The farm bill
expresses the expectation that producer groups and others may act on behalf of
their members to facilitate program delivery and assist in outreach.
We also now have new flexibilities to bring additional partners into the mix.
They include:
The Cooperative Conservation Partnership Initiative (CCPI), which will reserve
up to 6 percent of the funding and acres of certain programs for landscape scale
conservation projects accomplished by working with producers, through partners,
and leveraging additional resources;
The Agricultural Water Enhancement Program (AWEP), which provides a similar
opportunity to leverage the interests of local conservation entities with
conservation program funding to achieve our mutual objectives for conserving
water and improving water quality.
These partnerships will allow us to leverage dollars and investments. For
example, we can select projects where the partner is responsible for monitoring,
to drive more “accountability” into projects.
The MOU we have with the Department of Defense is another example where we can
pool resources, identify concerns, and work together to solve resource concerns
on a watershed basis, rather just a farm-to-farm basis.
We can expand partnerships to improve the delivery of programs and not only
identify those new challenges we face, but help provide the capacity to address
those challenges.
Targeted changes made in “Delivery of Technical Assistance” provisions will give
us the opportunity to improve how we work through and with TSPs, to create a
strong TSP cadre that will augment our staff, and not compete with it.
But, ultimately, it is about our workforce. We must ensure that as an agency we
reflect the diversity in our customer base. And, as we strive to provide more
services to underserved communities, we need to ensure we are taking efforts to
embrace diversity within our organization. It is about retention as much as it
is recruitment.
We will look to the Conservation Innovation Grant authorities to better deliver
solutions to our needs and facilitate technology transfer.
We will use new allocation formulas to guide us in allocating our limited
resources.
We need to ensure that our staff is well trained. In the future, we will require
states to have a floor in their budgets so that at a minimum 1 percent of
personnel costs will go toward training. I think we would all agree that
training should not be a place to get savings when budgets are tough, because
our employees are really the linchpin in delivering the conservation message.
6. Marketing and Sales–Delivering the conservation message
To achieve our vision of productive lands and a healthy environment, the
conservation message must be compelling enough to bring many more agricultural
and forestland acres under conservation treatment.
• We can leverage current concerns to better communicate the value of
conservation. For example, our “3-click” energy tools show how conservation can
be good for natural resources and save on energy input.
• The 2008 Farm Bill directs the department to take steps to facilitate the
participation of farmers and ranchers in emerging environmental services
markets, adding new potential values to their conservation efforts.
• Through investments stimulated by the 2002 Farm Bill, we will have information
on the “environmental benefits” of conservation through our Conservation Effects
Assessment Project. I said once that CEAP is like that product in the
commercial: CEAP isn’t the conservation, but it makes the conservation better.
• The 2008 Farm Bill also reauthorized the Soil and Water Resources Conservation
Act (RCA). With a first appraisal due to Congress in 2011, there is also great
potential to re-energize the conservation movement.
• Public involvement in the farm bill implementation process is another
opportunity to get the conservation message out.
• Our national campaign has focused on delivering the conservation message
through the efforts of our customers.
• Conservation requires the know-how and the money to implement practices. The
farm bill is a tool to help with the economic part of the equation, and we can
use it as a tool to get the “know-how” out.
We also know that delivering the conservation message is about the messenger. We
recognize the retirement bulge and “brain drain” we are facing. We continue to
implement our human capital strategic plan, and as part of that you’ve seen the
focus on leadership development: the National Leadership Development Program,
the mentoring pilot, and smaller efforts like the 30- day detail in the Office
of the Chief.
7. Competition – Many demands compete with conservation uses of the land
The opportunities available to and the pressures on the agricultural sector
create enormous competition for conservation. Just consider:
• Market signals, such as $8 corn, that create incentives for more intensive
production and land being brought out of retirement;
• Development pressures that create incentives to sell, such as farmland going
for $10,000 or more per acre in some areas;
• Food safety concerns, particularly in more integrated sectors, which create
challenges for adoption of generally accepted conservation measures.
8. “The Team” – A Balanced Conservation Portfolio
A balanced conservation portfolio and a landscape-scale perspective are powerful
tools for achieving our vision. This new farm bill provides new opportunities to
make change. For example:
• Working lands–offers incentives for conservation planning; increases funding
and places emphasis on funding for certain participants; focuses on agricultural
and forest lands; and lays groundwork for landscape scale conservation
approaches;
• Private lands protection–removes barriers posed by valuation processes;
encourages broader participation by tribes; and makes room for eligible entities
to participate and help leverage federal resources;
• Stewardship–simplifies and streamlines, focuses on new conservation,
nationwide access, and ranking to encourage the ‘best’ participation; and
• Land retirement–refocuses WRP on private lands, improves the compensation
process, and encourages tribal participation.
New authorities and initiatives, such as CCPI and AWEP, provide additional
potential to leverage the federal investment for landscape-scale conservation
action.
The new farm bill allows acceptance of nonfederal contributions to expand
program delivery, and also highlights environmental credit trading and
opportunities for program participants to reap further value from their
conservation efforts.
9. Projections and Milestones
The 2002 Farm Bill was historic in the level of funding devoted to conservation
programs, particularly working lands programs.
The 2008 Farm Bill has the potential to become historic for the level of
conservation applied to the land. While funding has been increased, programs
have been streamlined, and new authorities are provided, it is the experience
we’ve gained since 2002 that can help make delivery more effective and
accelerate conservation progress.
We know, however, the increased resources and attention mean greater scrutiny.
We also understand how important our fiduciary responsibilities are. With the
ongoing audit, we will identify important controls and processes that will
ensure we have the guidance and tools to retain the public’s trust in our
financial management.
The importance of this in our organization cannot be understated and is a key
reason that we have elevated our Chief Financial Officer position from a
division within a deputy chief area to where it stands now—as a position under
the office of the chief. Today, I announce that the title of the CFO is no
longer the Director of the Financial Management Division, but is the Deputy
Chief for Financial Management. We must ensure that we are able to meet new
challenges and that we prioritize accountability. I believe this change does
that.
When it comes to accountability, we should embrace it in all its forms. I have
asked the Deputy Chief for Science and Technology to develop a plan for the
National Technology Support Centers to help states with their quality assurance
work. With increased attention to our efforts, we must use every resource
available to us.
With the increased attention, we must also work quickly toward making CEAP data
available and integrating it into our decision making. The need to address
producers on a farm-to-farm basis will not go away. Our success relies on those
relationships. But, we must become more precise with our application of
conservation by recognizing that not all investments in conservation are equal
once you move off the edge of the field.
As we look to implement the 2008 Farm Bill—or more importantly, as we look to
move forward as conservationists—we recognize that better accountability is
required to justify continued investments in conservation.
The legacy of the 2008 Farm Bill can be one where we have more examples of
problems we’ve fixed on a watershed scale, where years from now tours will be
given.
10. Summary and Call to Action
You all did an outstanding job in delivering the 2002 Farm Bill. It is because
of that effort that we see such a strong conservation title in this new farm
bill–with an emphasis on working lands. This is impressive—not just in terms of
funding and new authorities, but because it came about despite an austere budget
and compelling needs in so many other titles.
As far as the new farm bill goes, the timeframe and complexity are challenging.
Ninety days is a very short time for rule writing, environmental and economic
analyses, consultation and coordination, and other required activities.
But, we’re on the right track.
We know that our strategic plan outlines the right approaches to getting the
work done, with watershed-based, collaborative conservation that utilizes
market-based approaches.
The 2008 Farm Bill, when funneled through our strategic plan, is a tool to reach
our goals. If we keep it in perspective as a tool, and not the skilled
mechanic—i.e., the tail, and not the dog—we can be successful.
Our objective is not just to “implement a farm bill’ but to use these farm bill
resources in order to help people help the land. Where the 2002 Farm Bill was
historic in terms of funding, the 2008 Farm Bill can be historic in conservation
accomplishments, in helping people achieve their conservation and operation
objectives, and ultimately ensuring that agriculture is a valued and enduring
component of the landscape
| |
|