The Farm Bill is an omnibus bill enacted approximately every five years that authorizes and funds most programs administered by the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”). While agricultural policies can be created and changed by legislation at any time, the Farm Bill provides a regular opportunity for lawmakers to address agricultural and food issues. In the past, the Farm Bill focused primarily on commodity programs to support a variety of staple crops, including corn, soybeans, wheat, rice, and sugar. However, since the mid-twentieth century, the Farm Bill has expanded in scope to include titles related to nutrition, forestry, horticulture, rural development, and conservation.
The most recent Farm Bill was passed in 2018 and covered a five-year period through 2023. In November 2023, Congress passed a one-year extension to cover crop year 2024. The extended bill will begin expiring at the end of 2024, and without reauthorization some Farm Bill programs will begin to expire. As of July 2024, members of Congress have released three different proposals for the next Farm Bill – one from the House of Representatives and two from the Senate. This article is the sixth in a series examining the themes of these three proposals. This article will focus on the Conservation Title.
Background: Conservation Title
The Conservation Title of the Farm Bill, also known as Title II, authorizes various voluntary programs that help farmers and ranchers address environmental resource concerns on private lands. Conservation programs are administered by USDA and focus on providing both financial and technical assistance to participants. Programs like the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (“EQIP”), the Conservation Reserve Program (“CRP”), and the Conservation Stewardship Program (“CSP”) are all implemented through the Conservation Title.
The 2018 Farm Bill reauthorized and amended most existing conservation programs, and made up 7% of the bill’s total projected spending over 10 years, amounting to around $60 billion. In 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act (“IRA”) which provided around $17 billion in additional funding for several conservation programs and extended authorization of those programs through 2031. More information conservation funding in the IRA is available here. The additional funding was specifically directed at climate change-related conservation practices such as improving soil carbon, reducing nitrogen emissions, and capturing or sequestering greenhouse gas emissions. Questions over how to best incorporate IRA funding into the Conservation Title has been central to debate over the upcoming Farm Bill.
House Proposal
In May 2024, House Committee on Agriculture Chair C.T. Thompson (R-PA) released the “Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024.” The bill passed out of the committee with bipartisan support, becoming the only Farm Bill proposal to make it out of committee. While it has yet to be brought to the floor for a vote, Chairman Thompson has expressed an intent to have the House vote on it in September. A detailed breakdown of the bill is available here.
Under the House proposal, EQIP would be modified to incorporate precision agriculture technologies into water conservation and irrigation efficiency practices, incentive contracts, and conservation innovation grants. According to the proposal, “precision agriculture” refers to “managing, tracking, or reducing livestock production inputs, including seed, feed, fertilizer, chemicals, water, and time, at a heightened level of spatial and temporal granularity to improve efficiencies, reduce waste, and maintain environmental quality.” EQIP would also be expanded to include the Southern Border Initiative, which would provide funding to farmers and ranchers near the southern border with Texas to repair damage to agricultural land and farming infrastructure. Along with boosting precision agriculture technologies through EQIP, the House proposal would make precision agriculture eligible for CSP payments, and it would increase CSP payments to $2500 a month.
The House proposal would target other conservation programs as well, including the CRP, the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (“ACEP”), and the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (“RCPP”). For the CRP, the House proposal would work to incentivize the enrollment of marginal lands by basing rental rates on the land capability classification so that acres with a capability classification of III to VII would receive a higher rental rate than other classes of land. The House proposal would also increase the CRP payment limitation from $50,000 to $125,000 per year, maintain an acreage cap for the program, clarify activities eligible for cost-share payments, and combine the State Acres for Wildlife Enhancement Initiative with the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program to create a new enrollment option called the State Partnership Initiative. For the ACEP, the House proposal would make adjustments to both the Agricultural Land Easement Program (“ALE”), and to Wetland Reserve Easements (“WRE”), both critical aspects of the ACEP. The House proposal would increase the federal cost-share of the ALE from 50% to 65%, clarify the process by which experienced entities may participate in the program, and allow a 90% cost-share for social disadvantaged farmers and ranches who have a 50% or more ownership. The WRE would be modified to create a separate section for stewardship actions under the program, and clarify that parties may enter into contracts to carry out restoration, enhancement, or maintenance of a wetland reserve easement. Finally, with regard to the RCPP, the House proposal would require USDA to streamline RCPP partnership agreements and set specific timelines by which to complete administrative actions such as payments and agreement approvals. The House proposal would also amend the RCPP to better address the impacts of flooding, and allow up to 10% of RCPP partnership funds to be used for reimbursement of administrative expenses.
Along with making program-specific changes, the House proposal would also amend the Conservation Title to update watershed programs and provide additional resources to meet watershed-related needs. Specifically, the proposal would grant additional financial and technical assistance for the Emergency Watershed Program, increase federal cost-share for Dam Rehab from 65% to 90%, and establish a national agriculture flood vulnerability study to analyze flood risk on agricultural lands. The House bill would also incorporate H.R. 6877, which requires USDA to establish a process for public participation in updating conservation practices and make updates every five years, into the Conservation Title.
Finally, with respect to conservation funding from the IRA, the House proposal would remove the climate-related limitations to allow greater flexibility in how the funding is used. Additionally, the House bill would “rescind and reallocate” all unobligated IRA conservation funding and use at least some of those funds to either bolster relatively recent programs or create entirely new programs including the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Program, the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Inventive Program, and the Forest Conservation Easement Program.
Senate Majority Proposal
Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) released a framework proposal for the upcoming Farm Bill on May 1, 2024. Titled the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act, the proposal does not include bill text, but instead provides a section-by-section framework of what will be included in the finished text. While the Senate Majority proposal for the Conservation Title shares some similarities with the House proposal, there are many differences between the two.
Like the House proposal, the Senate Majority proposal would make specific changes to individual conservation programs such as EQIP, the CSP, the ACEP, and the RCPP. The Senate Majority proposal would expand the purposes of EQIP to include: the promotion of environmental quality and climate change adaptation as goals that are compatible with agricultural production; assisting producers in complying with climate change adaptation and mitigation requirements; and providing flexible assistance to producers to carry out conservation practices that sustain agricultural production while also sequestering carbon, increasing drought resilience, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and conserving energy. EQIP would also be updated to, among other things, require producers with confined livestock feeding operations to submit a greenhouse gas emissions reduction plan in order to be eligible for EQIP payments; continue the current $450,000 five-year payment limitation for all EQIP contracts; require USDA to provide Conservation Innovation Grants for the development of new innovative conservation approaches; and authorize USDA to give greater significance to practices that promote greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
In relation to the CSP, the Senate Majority proposal would expand the definition of “conservation activities” to include activities that mitigation greenhouse gas emissions, including methane emissions. It would also clarify which types of covered land are eligible for annual payments, and establish a minimum CSP payment of $4,000. For the ACEP, the Senate Majority proposal would increase levels of cost-share assistance to 60% in general, and to 80% for easements on grasslands. The proposal would also update the WRE program under the ACEP to provide additional technical and financial assistance to owners of WRE-eligible land, and authorize USDA to pay up to 100% of eligible costs for stewardship activities conducted on wetland reserve easements. For the RCPP, the Senate Majority proposal would expand the purpose of the program to include: encouraging the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to climate change; engaging products in innovative methods of conservation; implementing soil health plans established by State or Tribal governments; and facilitating the conversion of concentrated animal feeding operations to “climate-friendly” agricultural production systems such as regenerative grating, or diversified crop and livestock production systems. Changes to the RCPP would also include updates to when and how partnership agreements may be renewed; authorizing USDA to provide producers with advance payments for purchasing materials or other implementation costs; and amending the definition of “priority resource concern” to include the restoration and enhancement of wildlife habitat connectivity and wildlife migration corridors.
Along with making changes to EQIP, the CSP, and other larger conservation programs, the Senate Majority proposal would also permanently authorize or continue funding for smaller programs such as the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative, the Grassroots Source Water Protection Program, the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program, and the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Program.
Finally, the Senate Majority proposal would permanently extend USDA’s authority to use the Commodity Credit Corporation to funder conservation programs, including EQIP, the CSP, the ACEP, and the RCPP. This, along with making no changes to the IRA conservation funding, may be the sharpest divide between the Senate Majority’s proposal and the House’s proposal.
Senate Minority Proposal
The third proposal for the upcoming Farm Bill was released by Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee Ranking Member, John Boozman (R-AR) on June 11, 2024. Known simply as the Republican Framework, the Senate Minority’s proposal, much like the Senate Majority’s proposal, provides a section-by-section framework instead of bill text. According to the statement put out alongside the proposal, the Senate Minority’s framework is intended to reflect aspects of both the House and Senate Majority proposals.
The primary focus of the Senate Minority’s proposal for the Conservation Title is on reinvesting IRA conservation funding into Farm Bill programs and establishing a new, permanent baseline. According to the proposal, reinvesting the IRA conservation funding would allow for the creation of new conservation initiatives and would lead to increased practices addressing drought, water quality, wildlife habitat, soil erosion, and climate resiliency. Additionally, the climate priorities targeted by the IRA conservation funding would remain accessible to producers seeking assistance for carbon sequestering and greenhouse gas reducing practices.
Specifically, the Senate Minority’s proposal would increase funding for conservation programs such as EQIP, the CSP, the ACEP, and RCPP by 25%. It would also create new initiatives, including the Forest Conservation Easement Program and the State Soil Health Grant Program, and provide permanent baseline funding for existing programs such as the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program and the Feral Swine Eradication Program. The proposal also calls for creating a “transparent process for the establishment of new, innovative conservation practice standards[.]” Finally, the proposal includes a general focus on addressing long-term drought across various conservation programs.
Conclusion
While three separate proposals have been released for the upcoming Farm Bill, it is currently unclear when a final version will pass Congress and become law. Currently, only the House proposal has bill language and has gone through committee mark-up. No proposal has been put before either the full House or Senate. However, from looking at all three proposals, it appears that while each one advocates for at least some increased funding and improving conservation practices to better address issues like drought and a changing climate, the biggest hurdle is where that funding will come from. Both the House and Senate Minority proposals would remove the climate-specific goals of the conservation funding authorized by the IRA and incorporate that funding into the Conservation Title’s baseline. However, the House Majority’s proposal would maintain the status quo and reserve conservation funding from the IRA for its original climate-related purpose.
For more National Agricultural Law Center resources on the Farm Bill, click here.
For more National Agricultural Law Center resources on conservation programs, click here.
To read other articles in the Farm Bill 2024 series, click here.