Putting Research to Work: Helping People Help the Land

Remarks prepared for delivery by Arlen L. Lancaster, Chief, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, at the “Mitigating Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations” conference at Iowa State University.
Des Moines, Iowa
May 19, 2008


INTRODUCTION
Thank you, Dr. [Robert] Burns.

I truly appreciate being asked to participate in this very timely and very important conference.

Assisting livestock producers with their environmental stewardship efforts is a priority for USDA. As you are well aware, it is also quickly becoming a higher priority for our fellow citizens and consumers, who are increasingly vocal about the need for clean air and water and a safe supply of livestock and poultry products.

At the recent Ag Outlook Forum, Larry Pope, the CEO of Smithfield, described how his visits with customers are changing. They used to ask about price, quality, service and delivery, he said. “But now the conversation is, ‘Let’s talk about your animal welfare policy; how do you handle those animals on the farm? Let’s talk about your antibiotic usage policy. Let’s talk about your environmental stewardship.’ ”

As you know, Smithfield isn’t the only operator experiencing this. Many farmers and ranchers are under pressure. As development continues to push into rural areas, public concern continues to mount regarding odors and emissions from agriculture. Recent headline-grabbing reports on animal feeding operations, by groups ranging from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. to the Pew Commission, are further accelerating debate about the optimal balance between abundant agricultural production and environmental quality.

WHY THIS CONFERENCE MATTERS

That is why I said earlier this conference is both very timely and very important. And let me add a third adjective, too: practical. We expect to leave here with great ideas and new tools in hand, ready to assist farmers and ranchers in addressing challenges relating to air quality. These ideas and tools are based on sound science—the result of research and demonstrations conducted here in Iowa and at myriad partnering institutions.

The successful integration of research, education and Extension is one of the hallmarks of our American agricultural system, and one NRCS takes full advantage of. Our close relationship with the research community is essential to our ability to fulfill our Agency’s mission of helping people help the land.

Our employees, partners and customers have confidence in our recommended conservation practices and standards because they know that each one has sound science behind it. On their behalf, let me express my appreciation to all the researchers, scientists and practitioners whose work on animal agriculture and air quality has yielded the practical, common-sense solutions we will be hearing about this week. I also thank the conference organizers, who brought us together around such a rigorous and meaningful agenda.

NRCS AND CONSERVATION ON PRIVATE LANDS

I was asked to speak to you this afternoon about air quality programming at the Natural Resources Conservation Service. First, I want to take just a minute to tell you about our broader mission and activities.

Since 1935, NRCS has provided leadership in a partnership effort to help America's private land owners and managers conserve their soil, water, and other natural resources. Because two-thirds of land in the U.S. is in private hands, landowners’ voluntary participation in conservation programs is critical to achieving our vision of productive lands and a healthy environment.

We promote conservation planning over a range of spatial and temporal scales and, in cooperation with nearly 3,000 soil and water conservation districts nationwide, deliver both technical and financial assistance to agricultural producers in all 50 states and U.S. territories. We provide technical assistance to about a million customers a year, which has enabled farmers and ranchers to treat over 47 million acres of working lands to more effectively manage natural resources.

While these actions take place on private lands, they yield public benefits we all enjoy, in the form of cleaner and more abundant water, enhanced air quality, improved soils and increased wildlife habitat. They also typically yield improvements in producers’ bottom lines. We know that good conservation must also equal good economics, and we are always careful to consider the economic impacts of recommended practices.

NRCS AND AG AIR QUALITY

Air quality is a basic natural resource concern, since it affects every component of the natural system: soil, water, plants, animals and people. We recognize that and have established air quality as a venture goal in our Agency strategic plan. It is also a central theme of our National Animal Agriculture Conservation Framework. As concerns about air quality and atmospheric change increase, we anticipate expanding our focus on them and have committed significant personnel resources to that end.

For instance, we have designated NRCS Air Quality Technical Contacts in every state and territory, and have assigned a National Air Quality Specialist, along with a National Atmospheric Resource Specialist, to our headquarters staff in D.C. Our Atmospheric Resource Specialist, Michele Laur, was recently named to the new Farm, Ranch and Rural Communities Advisory Committee established by the Environmental Protection Agency, to help EPA understand the practical implications of their actions on agriculture. James Moseley, a former USDA Deputy Secretary, is chairing that group.

Our National Technology Support Center in Portland, Oregon, is home to our Air Quality and Atmospheric Change Technology Development Team; Greg Zwicke, who is an air quality engineer, is representing them here this week. The Technology Development Team does just what its name implies: that is, the members work closely with other NRCS technical specialists and policy makers, as well as representatives from other federal, state, university and private organizations, to provide agricultural air quality technology and information to NRCS personnel nationwide, along with our partners and the general public. In other words, he is a force multiplier: the information and tools he gathers here, from presentations and networking, will ultimately be diffused throughout our organization.

And as Chief, I chair the USDA Agricultural Air Quality Task Force. Michele Laur, whom I mentioned earlier, is the Designated Federal Official for the Task Force. It was created by Congress in 1996 to advise the Secretary on agricultural air quality issues, data quality, and interagency air quality research efforts. The members are national leaders from the farming, industry, health, regulatory, legal and science sectors. The group met in Salt Lake City last week, and some of its distinguished members are here with us today.

From the process side, NRCS currently incorporates air quality considerations into conservation planning with producers, but we are revising, modifying and adapting existing conservation standards and specifications to better address air issues.

Of particular interest to this audience, we are developing training materials regarding mitigation strategies for use in animal production, including manure management, feed management, nutrient management, and management of emissions directly from livestock. We are also part of a stakeholders’ group collaborating on the overall development of ag air quality training, as part of a National Research Initiative project led by the University of Nebraska—Lincoln.

We have initiated an informational program to increase landowner and community awareness of air quality issues and opportunities for improvement, in addition to facilitating discussions between agricultural and non-agricultural segments of the community. Our efforts are focused on four aspects of air quality: particulate matter, odors, ozone precursors and greenhouse gases. The Cooperative Extension Service is also providing leadership in bringing people together on these issues.

We are closely tracking EPA’s National Air Emissions Monitoring Study. Data from NAEMS, forthcoming over the next few years, will enable us to determine where we get the biggest bang for the conservation buck, which will reassure Congress, taxpayers, program participants and their neighbors. In addition, other studies will be used to develop new conservation systems, as well as to adapt current ones, to best manage animal feeding operations.

Along these same lines, Michigan State received one of our Conservation Innovation Grants and is working with about a dozen other universities to create a tool to better target conservation efforts in livestock operations.

PROGRESS UNDER EQIP

Of course, much progress has already been made with respect to animal feeding operations under the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, which was authorized in 1996 and expanded under the 2002 Farm Bill. EQIP has multiple objectives, including assisting producers in complying with regulatory requirements and to make beneficial, cost-effective changes to practices on agricultural land. It is also designed to promote voluntary protection of resources, to avoid the need for additional regulatory programs.

At the end of fiscal year 2007, nearly 150 million acres were under EQIP contracts. And, NRCS and its partners helped producers develop over 5,100 Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans for livestock manure management.

The diversity in operators and operations, as well as natural resource challenges, means that a “one-size-fits-all” approach won’t get the job done. That is why practices funded by EQIP range from the simple—such as installing fencing to keep livestock out of streams—to the complex, such as installing anaerobic digesters.

At this juncture, I would be remiss not to point out that the recently released report on CAFOs from the Union of Concerned Scientists really mischaracterizes the nature of these projects. The report suggests that the selection process for EQIP funding favors large, confined operations, thereby contributing to the growth of CAFOs.

In fact, the average EQIP contract between 1997 and 2007 was for $15,000. Ninety-three percent of EQIP contracts during the same period were associated with contracts of $50,000 or less, even though the revised cap allows for contracts of up to $450,000.

Further, based on frequency of occurrence, six of the top 10 conservation practices funded through EQIP between 1997 and 2007 were directly related to grazing land improvements, rather than to support confined operations.

These key distinctions are not made in the UCS report, but I wanted you to be aware of them.

Regardless of contract size, our goal for EQIP and our technical assistance program is to help farmers and ranchers achieve their conservation goals: something that would not be possible without the research you are helping us to put to work this week.

FARMERS AND RANCHERS CONTRIBUTE TO OUR ENVIRONMENTAL WELL-BEING

The longer I am Chief, the more convinced I become that if we give landowners information and options that are timely, site-specific and based on sound science, they will do the right thing for the environment, their families and their communities. I know you believe that, too.

As EPA Administrator Steve Johnson said recently, “farmers have always been great stewards of our nation’s air, water and land.” It’s great to get that acknowledgement. But, we still have a lot to do to help the American people understand how farmers and ranchers contribute to our environmental well-being, by keeping agricultural lands working and by putting conservation on the ground.

The increased public scrutiny of animal agriculture—and its potential impacts on the environment—has not been accompanied by parallel efforts to clarify the benefits provided by this sector. Investments in research and other activities, such as field days, that allow us to quantify and showcase the positive effects of conservation on private lands will pay dividends well into the future.

IN SUMMARY

As I said, this is an exciting week, full of opportunities to help people help the land. Thank you again for your continued efforts to make conservation easier and to help clear the air.

I’m happy to take any questions….

[END]