{"title":"The Conservation Reserve Program","authors":"D. Jelinski, P. Kulakow","doi":"10.3368/er.14.2.137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"restoration ecology. The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) provisions of the 1985 Food Security Act set aside 16 million hectares of highly erodible cropland for a period of ten years. The enrolled land was planted with perennial vegetation to reduce the supply of surplus commodities, improve farm income, conserve soil, and provide improved habitat for wildlife. Since the program has been put into effect, it is estimated that soil erosion has been reduced, on average, by 17 metric tons per hectare on CRP lands (Clark et al., 1993). In addition, CRP lands have gained an average of 1 metric ton of carbon per hectare per year (Gebhart et al., 1994). Indeed, it is estimated that the land enrolled in CRP may be able to sequester about 45 percent of the 35 million metric tons of atmospheric carbon originating from U. S. agriculture annually (Gebhart eta!., 1994). Current CRP contracts began expiring in October, 1995, and more than 40 percent of these contracts will have ended by October, 1996. Congress recently reauthorized the CRP program, capping it at the current level of 14.7 million hectares for the seven-year life of the bill. While Congress’s commitment to enhancing the environment is to be applauded, under the reauthorization selected lands will still be withdrawn from the program because some rental payments will be reduced and because of an early-out provision for all or part of a farmer’s enrolled acreage. Thus among the many options available, farmers may return land to crop production, develop it for grazing or haying, or maintain it in the new Conservation Reserve Program. In any case, continuation of the program is important to conservationists, not only because it offers obvious ecological benefits, but also because CRP lands offer virtually unmatched opportunities for restoration-related research on a landscape scale.","PeriodicalId":105419,"journal":{"name":"Restoration & Management Notes","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"65","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restoration & Management Notes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3368/er.14.2.137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 65
Abstract
restoration ecology. The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) provisions of the 1985 Food Security Act set aside 16 million hectares of highly erodible cropland for a period of ten years. The enrolled land was planted with perennial vegetation to reduce the supply of surplus commodities, improve farm income, conserve soil, and provide improved habitat for wildlife. Since the program has been put into effect, it is estimated that soil erosion has been reduced, on average, by 17 metric tons per hectare on CRP lands (Clark et al., 1993). In addition, CRP lands have gained an average of 1 metric ton of carbon per hectare per year (Gebhart et al., 1994). Indeed, it is estimated that the land enrolled in CRP may be able to sequester about 45 percent of the 35 million metric tons of atmospheric carbon originating from U. S. agriculture annually (Gebhart eta!., 1994). Current CRP contracts began expiring in October, 1995, and more than 40 percent of these contracts will have ended by October, 1996. Congress recently reauthorized the CRP program, capping it at the current level of 14.7 million hectares for the seven-year life of the bill. While Congress’s commitment to enhancing the environment is to be applauded, under the reauthorization selected lands will still be withdrawn from the program because some rental payments will be reduced and because of an early-out provision for all or part of a farmer’s enrolled acreage. Thus among the many options available, farmers may return land to crop production, develop it for grazing or haying, or maintain it in the new Conservation Reserve Program. In any case, continuation of the program is important to conservationists, not only because it offers obvious ecological benefits, but also because CRP lands offer virtually unmatched opportunities for restoration-related research on a landscape scale.