Remarks by NRCS Chief Bruce I. Knight
to NRCS State Conservationists,
Farm Bill Coordinators, and Other NRCS Leaders

NRCS Farm Bill Conference
Washington, DC

August 21, 2002

Good Morning. Thank you all for being here to discuss some important aspects of farm bill implementation. We are going to spend a good deal of time over the next couple of days getting your input and using it to decide on some next steps.

We are also going to hear from Deputy Secretary Moseley and Deputy Under Secretary Gray about the Department’s perspective on farm bill implementation. The fact that both Jim and Mack are here with us today underscores how important it is for all of us to understand the big picture of farm bill implementation, and not just the nuts and bolts of what NRCS has to do to implement the conservation provisions.

I’m sure that many of you have seen some criticism of the farm bill, saying that it increases commodity subsidies. Much of this criticism has come from the agriculture industry overseas. The assertion that the U.S. is increasing crop subsidies is untrue, as Jim will explain. The good news for conservation is that we can strengthen American agriculture by rewarding good conservation practices – and stay within our international trade agreements. Mack will point out how the conservation provisions of the farm bill fit into the big picture.

After we hear from Jim and Mack, we will spend the bulk of our time working on three areas of farm bill implementation: the EQIP application evaluation process, the role of the State Technical Committee, and the use of technical service providers. We’ll be working on these three areas in three different sets of breakout sessions, so, you will have a chance to discuss these topics in smaller groups and bring back your recommendations to the entire group. We will use the input from your groups to write rules in these three areas that will meet your needs in the field and provide the best possible service to operators around the country.

I want to stress with you that my expectations today and tomorrow center on dialog, discussion, and decision. Every week I have a host of groups, entities, partners and other agencies that cross my threshold and want me to tell you how to manage your state decisions. I don’t want to do business that way. My goal is to empower you to make the best, objective, conservation decisions possible.

In that view, there are three priorities I would like you to keep in mind as you participate in the breakout sessions:

First, How will what you propose streamline our operations? There is so much work to do implementing the new farm bill, that we simply have to find ways to work more efficiently and effectively.

Second, How will what you propose contribute to delivering high-quality work? The farm bill represents a greatly increased commitment to conservation on the part of Congress and the Administration. With that commitment comes increased responsibility. We have always been an agency that delivered a quality product, and we must continue to do so. We must find ways to streamline, while at the same time maintaining high quality.

And finally, How will what you propose contribute to our on-the-ground relationship with our customers? You are all familiar with the high customer satisfaction ratings NRCS got recently. Those ratings are based on a high degree of confidence and trust. We must continue to cultivate that confidence and trust, even as we work to meet our increased responsibilities. Streamlining cannot mean leaving our customers to go it alone. We must maintain the close one-on-one working relationships that our customers have come to expect.

So, we have three challenges: streamlining operations, maintaining quality, and maintaining relationships. I know you are already working to meet these challenges in your states and across state boundaries.

We are also working hard to meet these challenges at the national level. Here are some examples:

In streamlining, we are trying to keep administration of conservation programs “Lean and Local.” That means keeping the bureaucracy small and leaving as much of the decision making as possible to the local people. We are minimizing the rulemaking process and making the rules as flexible as possible. We are building our eGovernment infrastructure, including eForms, the farm bill web site, and now the electronic Field Office Technical Guide. We will continue to deploy automated tools such as the Customer Service Toolkit and eContracting to streamline our work. We are also building a smoother functional relationship between FSA and NRCS. This, of course, includes our recent decision to eliminate dual concurrences in EQIP and CRP.

In delivering quality work, we are building a technical service provider infrastructure that will help us deliver increased conservation. There is simply too much work to be done for us to do it ourselves. We must rely on the expertise out there in the technical service provider community to get the job done – and do it well.

As we are writing rules and policies, we are keeping an eye on meeting or exceeding current technical quality performance standards. We are using electronic tools, not just to streamline, but also to provide high-quality service. For the most part, States have brought their Technical Guides up to date. Getting the Guides on the Internet will give our employees and customers access to the latest, high-quality technical information. Also, eForms, eContracting, the Customer Service Toolkit, all are ways of providing higher quality service, as well as more efficient service.

In maintaining relationships, nationally we are working closely with a large number of organizations representing our partners. We are doing everything we can to keep them informed about the farm bill and to enlist their help in the implementation process. But we must also continue to work at the local level to maintain and cultivate on-the ground relationships with farmers and ranchers and local conservation districts. These relationships are really the only way conservation gets done – one farm and ranch at a time.

A good relationship with a local landowner is a reflection of a unified approach to conservation. We don’t view a landowner as an EQIP landowner, a WRP landowner, or some other program’s landowner. Each landowner has a unique set of conservation challenges and goals. The relationship with NRCS is a way for the landowner to identify the conservation challenges and marry them up with conservation solutions. That is why the farm bill offers a whole portfolio of programs: Not to let the programs drive our service to farmers, but to give us a range of appropriate service options.

In short, our service to landowners cannot be driven by programs. Our service has to be driven by the conservation needs -- how we can help the farmer or rancher meet those needs while maintaining profitability.

I have said many times that we are a service organization – one driven by service to the land, service to the landowner, and service to the taxpayer. In every case, this service comes from our conservation ethic. Our programs are the tools we use to get the job done. As long as we keep that relationship firmly in mind, we should be all right.

So, as you go into your breakout sessions, keep conservation first in your minds. Look for ways to streamline our operations, seek ways to deliver quality work, and explore how we can maintain our on-the-ground relationships with customers. I will be interested in seeing how the discussion goes and hearing your recommendations.