The Honorable Herbert H. Kohl
330 Hart Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
July 2, 2001
Dear Senator Kohl:
We urge you to increase conservation spending in the next fiscal year budget by $1.65 billion. The increase would be in accordance with the figure endorsed by the Senate during the Senate budget resolution.
The $1.65 billion increase for conservation is badly needed. There were over $5,000,000 worth of EQIP requests from Wisconsin farmers in FY 00. Unfortunately, half of the Wisconsin farmers who sought to participate in EQIP in FY 00 were turned away primarily due to inadequate funding. In FY 98, Wisconsin farmers sought to do over a half million dollars of wildlife habitat improvements through the WHIP program. Unfortunately, WHIP funding was extremely limited, and 82% of these farmers were turned away. In FY'01, Wisconsin farmers offered to sell development rights on 2,658 acres worth almost $2.31 million to keep the land in agriculture and help control sprawling development. Due to insufficient funding levels, however, the federal Farmland Protection Program (FPP) was able to meet only 22% of the need in Wisconsin to protect farmland from the path of sprawl.
Increasing conservation spending in FY '02 would help Wisconsin farmers at a critical juncture in addressing polluted runoff, as the State completes the nonpoint program redesign and the State and USDA enter into a CREP agreement. Increasing conservation spending would provide Wisconsin farmers with assistance addressing polluted runoff and increased economic uses for manure. We believe that the State rules as currently proposed are very good, but the only way they will achieve full implementation is if farmers receive cost share assistance through conservation programs. We believe this is a high priority for Wisconsin.
Increasing conservation spending would also help us retain the vital character of Wisconsin, satisfy the strong public demand for outdoor recreation, and benefit Wisconsin farmers. Through programs like FPP, WHIP, CRP and WRP, farmers are restoring grassland and wetland habitat and benefiting waterfowl, fisheries, pheasants, and game populations as well as some state threatened and endangered species. As you know, these are not just intangible, "feel good" benefits. According to DNR, "Wisconsin's fish and wildlife associated recreation … produced $6.4 billion in economic output, supported 85,700 jobs, and generated $209 million in General Purpose Revenue in 1996" alone.
We also believe that increasing conservation assistance would be fairer to Wisconsin farmers and taxpayers. Because of our diverse agricultural base, we benefit far less than other midwestern states from commodity programs and even emergency programs that mainly boost market transition payments. Overall, Wisconsin farmers receive one-half to one fourth of the support per dollar of agricultural production that other midwestern farmers receive. The Wisconsin dairy farmers who rely heavily on pasture and hay, the potato farmers, the cranberry growers, the cherry growers, the truck farmers and many other farmers in our state benefit little from commodity programs. By contrast, all different kinds of Wisconsin farmers could participate in conservation programs. There is, as the broad environmental and conservation community support for the proposed CREP demonstrates, strong public support for using incentives to obtain these stewardship benefits. Increased funding should help the state's farmers restore wetlands, preserve and enhance grasslands, improve water quality, find economic uses of manure and withstand the pressures of sprawl.
The Congressional budget resolution provides $7 billion in additional spending authority for farm programs next year, so this increase in conservation spending is comparatively modest. We believe that the letter you received from 43 Senators in May, seeking this kind of an increase in conservation spending, suggests broad support for this increase in the Senate.
The House appears likely to zero budget many agricultural conservation programs. Strong conservation funding is critical not only for the upcoming fiscal year but also for the message it sends. We believe the time is now to make a top priority of directing federal funds to the programs that help farmers help the environment and to give Wisconsin a fuller share of farm spending.
Sincerely,
American Farmland Trust, Wisconsin Office
Ed Minihan
David A. Ladd
Member of the Conservation Congress and Vice Chair of Stewardship Committee
Fox-Wolf Basin 2000, Inc.
Linda Stoll
John Muir Chapter Sierra Club
Caryl Terrell
Madison Audubon Society
Karen Etter Hale
Michael Fields Agricultural Institute
Margaret Krome
Pheasants Forever, Wisconsin
Jeff Gaska
Rivers Alliance of Wisconsin
Todd Ambs
Trout Unlimited
Laura Hewitt
Wisconsin Association of Lakes
Roger Swanson
Wisconsin Council of Trout Unlimited
Jon Christiansen
Wisconsin Wildlife Federation
Bill Buckley