Resource Conservation Title of the 2002 Farm Bill: A Comparison of New Law with Bills Passed by the House and Senate, and Prior Law

Report for Congress
Resource Conservation Title of the 2002 Farm Bill:
A Comparison of New Law with Bills
Passed by the House and Senate, and Prior Law
Updated June 25, 2002
Jeffrey A. Zinn
Senior Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Resource Conservation Title of the 2002 Farm Bill:
A Comparison of New Law with Bills Passed by the
House and Senate, and Prior Law
President Bush signed the new farm bill, titled the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002, on May 13, 2002 (P.L. 107-171). Most of the agricultural
conservation programs are in Title II. This report compares the Title II provisions of
P.L. 107-171 with the conservation titles in the bills that passed both Chambers, and
with prior law (primarily the 1996 Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform
Act), in two tables. The first table presents the major provisions. The second table
compares funding levels for each program, by year. The tables only include the
programs and provisions that were enacted in Title II; conservation provisions in
other farm bill titles, or those that were in the conservation title of one of the bills but
either were dropped in conference or moved elsewhere in the bill are listed in the
The conservation title reauthorizes many major conservation programs and
authorizes new programs, mostly through FY2007. For existing programs, the
provisions make many policy adjustments, and increase funding or raise enrollment
ceilings. The new programs enacted in the Title provide additional conservation
assistance for purposes or in locations that policy makers believe were not being
adequately served. The largest of the new programs is the Conservation Security
The new law greatly increases total conservation budget authority above current
levels, and funds more of the conservation effort as mandatory spending through the
Commodity Credit Corporation. Funding for most programs will increase from year-
to-year, and will increase several-fold for some programs, such as the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program and the Farmland Protection Program. The
Congressional Budget Office issued a baseline (for mandatory spending only) in
April 2001 that was used by policy makers to calculate future spending patterns in
this legislation. It determined that the baseline (that is, reauthorization of all
programs with no changes in policy, and no new programs) for conservation
programs was $11.6 billion over the next 6 years. The new law will increase
mandatory spending for conservation programs by $9.2 billion over the next 6 years
to a total of $20.8 billion, according to the CBO.
Farm bill conferees had to resolve many differences between the conservation
titles of the two bills. The House bill primarily reauthorized existing programs,
usually at smaller funding increases than the Senate bill, and included fewer new
programs and less change to current conservation policy. By contrast, the Senate bill
made more numerous and significant changes to existing programs and to
conservation policies that generally expanded the conservation effort. It also created
many more new programs, such as the Conservation Security Program. Among the
most hotly debated issues over the farm bill was how much of the new funding
should go to conservation programs (rather than commodity programs, for example),
and how that funding should be divided among the programs.

In troduction ......................................................1
Table 1. Comparison of Current Resource Conservation Law with Provisions in
Title II of Farm Bills Passed by House and Senate....................6
A. Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program (ECARP).....6
B. Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)...........................7
C. Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP)............................10
D. Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)................11
E. Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP).....................15
F. Farmland Protection Program (FPP)............................16
G. Other Programs (Including Technical Assistance)................17
H. New Programs.............................................20
Table 2. Comparison of Resource Conservation Title Funding in 2002 Farm Bill
with Proposed Funding in Farm Bills Passed by
House and Senate, and Prior Law................................29

Resource Conservation Title of the 2002 Farm
Bill: Comparison of New Law with Bills Passed by
the House and Senate, and Prior Law
Resource conservation programs were first enacted in the 1930s to reduce the
effects of soil erosion on crop production. They then were expanded in the 1940s
and 1950s to help landowners manage water resources and control floods. The
approach to conservation that developed with these earliest programs, based on
voluntary participation, changed little until 1985. Participants were attracted by the
availability of a combination of financial, technical and educational assistance, and
results from related research.
Starting with the 1985 farm bill, Congress rapidly expanded conservation
programs beyond erosion control and water management, and beyond the goal of
improving crop production. Programs enacted in the 1985, 1990, and 1996 farm bills
protect and restore wetlands and wildlife habitat, and recognize the need to improve
air and water quality, for example. The 1985 provisions also increased producer
interest by requiring that crop producers who wish to receive federal farm program
subsidies meet certain erosion control and wetland protection requirements.
Since the 1996 law was enacted, new issues have emerged, including: the role
that agriculture might play in producing energy from biomass and in sequestering
carbon; protection and restoration of grasslands; reduction of non point water
pollution caused by large confined animal feeding operations; and additional
attention to other “off-farm” impacts. The new farm bill addresses some of these
issues as it expands the breadth and the magnitude of the resource conservation
effort, and as new conservation tools are added, such as multi-year agreements to
maintain conservation on lands in production through the Conservation Security
The expanded conservation effort is reflected in increasing funding. In 1985,
all conservation activities at USDA received a total of just over $1 billion (and all
funding was discretionary, and dependent on the annual appropriations process). The
1996 farm bill moved five conservation programs to mandatory funding through
USDA’s Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC). (Mandatory funding is provided
through the borrowing authority of the CCC, while discretionary funding requires an
annual appropriation.) Conservation programs now receive more than $3 billion
annually (about $1.25 billion in discretionary spending and slightly over $2 billion
in mandatory spending). Most of the spending growth since 1985 has been for land
retirement and easements (e.g., the Conservation Reserve and Wetlands Reserve
Programs), while the other activities have grown very slowly, if at all, in real terms.

The new farm bill will increase mandatory spending by a total of $9.2 billion over 6
years, to a total of $20.8 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office
(CBO). This averages out to an additional $1.5 billion each year, but the increases
will gradually grow, and the amounts spent will be largest for most programs in the
last year.
Under the 1996 farm bill, numerous programs were scheduled to expire at the
end of FY2002. During several days of hearings in 2001, both agriculture
committees gathered ideas for a new farm bill as they considered how to extend
existing programs beyond FY2002. Farm groups generally suggested increasing
funding for existing programs and increasing compatibility between conservation
activities and farm operations. Other interest groups, while supporting some of the
farmer proposals, recommended more substantial changes, including new programs
and major shifts in policy that would increase environmental benefits. Demand to
participate in most programs has greatly exceeded available financial and technical
resources in recent years, creating a major challenge that conservation supporters said
justified higher authorization levels.
The remainder of this report is two tables. Table 1 lists resource conservation
provisions enacted in Title II of the 2002 farm bill in the first column, and includes
the section number of the legislation. The second and third columns summarize the
comparable provisions in the farm bills that passed each Chamber. The final column
presents prior law or policy, and includes the section in law where it was placed.
Table entries note where 2002 farm bill provisions move a program to a different
section of law. Funding information in this table is scattered throughout; Table 2
pulls all the funding information together in one place.
Table 1 does not include any of the provisions that were dropped in conference,
or moved to another title in the finally-enacted farm bill. (For more information on
the provisions that were dropped, see CRS Report, RL31255, titled Resource
Conservation Title: Comparison of Current Law with Farm Bills Passed by the
House and Senate, and issued February 28, 2002.) Some of the provisions passed
by the Senate may have disappeared as free-standing programs, only to reappear as
activities within other programs. Dropped provisions from the House-passed bill
!a new Farmland Stewardship Program “to more precisely tailor and target”
conservation programs, on a watershed basis where possible; and
!repeal of numerous programs (none of which are currently being
implemented), including the Environmental Easement Program, the
Conservation Farm Option, and the National Natural Resources Conservation
Dropped provisions from the Senate-passed bill include:
!a new Wetland Reserve Enhancement Program as a component of the Wetland
Reserve Program, modeled on the Conservation Reserve Enhancement
!new programs, each spending small portions of funding for the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program for a Groundwater Conservation Program in the
Southern High Plains, a pilot program for drinking water suppliers, and a
nutrient management program for the Chesapeake Bay watershed;

!a new Watershed Risk Reduction Program to purchase floodplain easements;
!a new Water Conservation Program to permit eligible states to purchase or
lease water rights as part of a Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program,
and to provide cost-sharing assistance in the same eligible states to increase
irrigation efficiency, convert production to less water-intensive crops, and
acquire water rights;
!new organic agriculture provisions that would establish a new research trust
fund and a National Organic Research Endowment Institute to develop and
implement a plan for research on organic products using the trust fund; and
!new provisions on mediation services when an adverse decision on a
conservation program is made.
Both tables identify only provisions that are in Title II of the 2002 farm bill.
Some provisions in other titles, including commodities, forestry, energy, rural
development, and miscellaneous that may be considered to be conservation topics,
are not included in this comparison. They include:
!requiring producers who receive direct or counter-cyclical payments to be
meet conservation and wetland compliance requirements (§1105(a) in the
Commodity Title);
!requiring producers who receive nonrecourse marketing loans to meet
conservation and wetland compliance provisions (§1201, in the commodity
!prohibiting making conservation and commodity payments to individuals or
entitles with annual adjusted gross incomes greater than $2.5 million in
FY2003 through FY2007 (§1604, in the Commodity Title);
!providing relief in commodity and conservation programs for producers who
act in good faith (§1613, in the Commodity Title; the conservation portion had
been in the conservation title of the Senate-passed version)
!replacing the Forestry Incentive Program, administered by NRCS, which
provided cost-sharing assistance on small private nonindustrial forest lands,
with a new Forest Land Enhancement Program, to be administered by the U.S.
Forest Service (§8001 and §8002, in the Forestry Title);
!establishing a Cranberry Acreage Conservation Reserve to protect wetlands
associated with cranberry production (§10608 of the Miscellaneous Title; it
had been in the conservation title of the Senate-passed farm bill);
!granting authority to the Secretary to provide financial and technical assistance
to the Chino Dairy Preserve Project (§10803 of the Miscellaneous Title); and
!requiring a review of natural resource (and other) programs operating on tribal
and trust lands, with a report to Congress within 1 year of enactment (§10910
of the Miscellaneous Title).
This report does not analyze or comment on the probable effects of the enacted
conservation program changes on resource conditions or program management and
delivery. Many of these changes are likely have significant effects because of: their
scope or scale, and the places and natural resources that they could affect.
Additionally, the effects will be determined, in part, by the approaches that
implementing agencies choose to follow in undertaking changed or new
responsibilities. Some of these provisions went through a lengthy gestation period,
such as the Conservation Security and Grasslands Reserve Programs, developed by
Senator Harkin’s staff and the Nature Conservancy, respectively. (Development of

the Conservation Security Program included test implementation by the Department
of Agriculture staff and by others.)
Less analysis and information is available about many of the other provisions.
These provisions include: small or limited programs, such as the Grassroots Source
Water Protection Program; programs of limited geographic scope, such as the
Conservation Corridor Demonstration Program (available only on the Delmarva
Peninsula); and proposals that appeared as the farm bill process was drawing to a
close to address an issue that emerged recently, such as the Klamath Basin provisions
which were introduced as a free-standing proposal with many elements and
incorporated into the Senate bill, and then were greatly altered, becoming limited to
an earmarking of funds from the new Ground and Surface Water Conservation
Program component of the Environmental Quality Incentives Program by the
conference committee.
Table 2 lists annual funding/enrollment levels authorized under the new current
law through FY2007 in the first column, and compares these with proposed
funding/enrollment levels in both bills, and under earlier law. The House bill would
have authorized programs through FY2011, while the Senate bill would have
authorized them through FY2006, unless noted. Most programs are first funded in
the current fiscal year, FY2002, although a few will not be eligible for funding until
FY2003, and one program is funded through FY2008. The conservation title also
contains numerous proposed changes in policy that do not involve
funding/enrollment levels; these changes, which in some instances include how the
funds are to be allocated, are not identified in table 2.
The entry for each program notes whether the proposal would require mandatory
or discretionary funding. A large majority of conservation funding (although not
necessarily a majority of all active conservation programs) already is mandatory, and
the portion of all funding using CCC resources will increase. Entries also indicate
new smaller programs that would be funded using a portion of funds authorized for
a larger program, and identify the relationship between the recipient and the source
Funding levels for many of the programs would increase gradually from year to
year, rather than jump to the highest authorized level in a single year and then remain
at that level through FY2007. Higher funding levels in out-years will allow the
administering agencies to “ramp up” their efforts. Given the large magnitude of
increases from current levels and the large number of programs where increases will
simultaneously occur, “ramping up” is widely viewed as having the potential to result
in more efficient and effective implementation.
Table 2 also provides the official estimates in budget authority prepared by the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO). These CBO estimates are only for the
mandatory programs. They show projected increases above the baseline which was
prepared in April, 2001, by year. This baseline is used because although a revised
baseline was issued in March 2002 and projected higher costs as the farm bill
legislative debate was concluding, the congressional debate was based largely on the

2001 baseline.

To summarize these CBO 2001 baseline estimates, total conservation funding
for mandatory programs will amount to $20.8 billion over the next 6 years, an
increase of $9.2 billion. This increase over baseline is somewhat closer to the
estimate of the additional cost of the House-passed bill of $6.788 billion through
FY2006 and $15.787 billion through FY2011, then for the Senate-passed bill, which
would have raised spending by $11.776 billion through FY2006. The conservation
program increases are a significant portion of the $73.5 billion increase in budget
authority allowed by the FY2001 budget agreement for all spending in programs
under the jurisdiction of the agriculture committees. While using the more recent
March, 2002 baseline would have had a major effect on estimates of overall
agriculture spending, increasing the total from $73.5 billion to $82.8 billion, total
conservation spending was forecast to be only $500 million higher, or $21.3 billion.
For several programs, participation is limited by acres permitted to be enrolled,
rather than a cap on funding levels. For these programs, CBO must estimate both the
average cost per acre and the rate at which land would be enrolled. CBO has
developed the following factors for making cost estimates for these acreage-based
!For the CRP, $50 per acre annually for regular enrollment, and $100 per acre
for the continuous enrollment option and the Conservation Reserve
Enhancement Program (CREP);
!For the proposed Grasslands Reserve Program, $15 to $20 per acre annually;
!For the WRP, $1000 per acre.

Table 1. Comparison of Current Resource Conservation Law with Provisions in Title II of Farm Bills
Passed by House and Senate
2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
ronmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program (ECARP)
urpose and Programs. RenamesNo provisions.Renames ECARP the Authorizes ECARP through long
prehensiveComprehensive Conservationterm contacts and acquisition of
ation Enhancement ProgramEnhancement Program (CCEP), andeasements, to be implemented
§2006(a) ] places new name throughout §1230. through the Conservation Reserve
name throughout §1230; [§207(a)]Program, Wetlands Reserve
§2006(b)] [Note: NewAmends §1230(a) to reflect changedProgram, and Environmental
isions for bothplacement of conservation programsQuality Incentive Program.
modity and conservation programsin 1985 FSA. CCEP includes:[§1230(a) of the 1985 FSA as
modityConservation Reserve Program; amended by §331 of the 1996 FAIR]
iki/CRS-RL31486Wetlands Reserve Program;Environmental Quality IncentivesGood Faith protection provisionsadded as §1230A of the 1985 FSA
g/wProgram; Wildlife Habitatin §755 of the FY2001 Agriculture
leakIncentives Program; a newAppropriations. [§1230A]
Grasslands Reserve Program; and an
://wikiamended Conservation of Private
httpGrazing Lands Program.[§211(a)]
Repeals §1230A. [§207(c)] [Note:
§1230A is replaced with new good
faith provisions in §1244(a) of the
1985 FSA, discussed below in
subsection H and found in §204 of
this bill.]
riority Areas. Repeals §1230(c),Repeals §1230(c). [§201(2)]Adds a new subsection givingPermits the Sec. to designate
ich allows the Sec. to designatepriority to areas where projectswatershed, multistate areas, or areas
areas for enhancedcould be completed most rapidly. of special environmental sensitivity
ation assistance. [§2006(b)] [§211(b)] for enhanced conservation
areas areassistance through the CRP, WRP,
ed, but only for the CRP, inand EQIP. [§ 1230(c) of the 1985
FSA as amended by §331 of the

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law

1996 FAIR]

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)
eriod of Authorization andReauthorizes CRP through FY2011.Reauthorizes CRP through FY2006. Authorizes program through
rposes. Reauthorizes CRP through[§211(a)][§212(a)]FY2002, and states the purposes are
Adds wildlife resources to theto conserve and improve soil and
ram. [§2101(a)]purposes of the program. [§211(b)]water resources. [§1231 (a) of the

1985 FSA as amended by §322(a)(1)

of the 1996 FAIR]
ligibility. Repeals the limit onRepeals the limit on enrollingMakes eligible land that has aMakes certain highly erodible land,
marginal pastureland to lessmarginal pastureland to less thancropping history for 3 of the 6 yearsmarginal pastureland, and other

10% of the total enrolled acres,preceding enactment (and landcropland eligible. [Section 1231(b)

ibleexpands the definition of otherenrolled in the CRP on that date), of the 1985 FSA]
iki/CRS-RL31486eligible cropland to include threatsand adds a new subsection that
g/w, and makes eligible land that hasto soil and air quality, and makesmakes land enrolled under the
s.or history or was considered toeligible land in production for atcontinuous signup and the buffer
leakearsleast 4 years that would contributeinitiative eligible for the regular
enactment, and that wouldto conservation of ground andprogram. [§212(b)]
://wikie ground or surface water. surface water. [§212(a)]
http) that requires anAdds a new §231(i) that requires
balance between soil erosion, water
ter quality, and wildlife habitat whenquality, and wildlife habitat when
iewing bids. [§2101(a)]reviewing bids, with implementing
regulations to be issued within 180
days of enactment. [§212(d)]
nrollment Ceiling. Raises ceilingRaises ceiling to 39.2 million acres.Raises ceiling to 41.1 million acres.Authorizes enrollment ceiling at
illion acres. [§2101(a)] [§212(b)] [§212(c)] [Note: §215(a), water36.4 million acres. [§1231(d) of the
conservation, lowers the CRP1985 FSA as amended by §332(b) of
enrollment ceiling from 41.1 millionthe 1996 FAIR.]

acres to 40.0 million acres, then
adds 500,000 acres for a new pilot
program, bringing the total to 40.5
million acres.]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
Contract. AllowsNo provisions. Allows the Sec. to extend contractsAllows CRP contracts for some land
on hardwood forests for up to 15devoted to hardwood trees, shelter
years, and limits annual payments tobelts, wind breaks, or wildlife
s, or wildlife corridors for up to a50% of the original contract amount. corridors to be longer than the 10 to
ears, allows the Sec. toNew contracts can be from 10 to 3015 years allowed for other contracts.
years in length. [§212(d)][§1231(e)(2) of the 1985 FSA]
length for up to 5 additional years,
in 2002 for 1 additional year.
riority Areas. Allows land enrolled under thisGives priority to areas whereRequires the Sec. to establish, at the
tains prior law in §1231(f).subchapter to be eligible to reenrolldesignation would lead to the mostrequest of a state, priority
iki/CRS-RL31486in the CRP. [§212(c)]rapid completion of projects.[§212(b)]watersheds in specified and otherareas where enrollment would
g/w“maximize water quality and habitat
s.orbenefits.” Areas must be
leakredesignated at least once every 5
://wikiyears. [§1231(f) of the 1985 FSA]
httplment Subcategories. Expands the pilot program to allDeletes “pilot”, reauthorizes theAuthorizes a 500,000 acre pilot
ram to allstates and limits enrollment in anyprogram through FY2006, andprogram, with enrollment limited to
e exceptions (wetlandsstate to 150,000 acres. [§215]increases the maximum size of150,000 acres in any state for small
acent to larger perennial streams areeligible sites from 5 acres to 10wetlands(less than 5 acres) and
ible), and limits enrollment to 1acres (but only up to 5 acres areassociated buffers in 6 specified
illion acres of wetlands and associatedeligible for payments). [§212(e)]upper Midwestern states. [A new
§1231(h), enacted in Title XI of the
state. Eligible areas must have beenFY2001 Agriculture Appropriations

10 years. (P.L. 106-387]

ust be smaller
ments. These acres are not to
ainst the 39.2 million acres
. [§2101]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
Owners and Operators. Allows certain economic uses ofAdds a subsection allowing irrigatedLists requirements for participation
ision forgiving producers whoenrolled lands if consistent with soil,land to be enrolled through theand penalties for violators. Sets
olate their contracts by not installingwater, and wildlife conservation. buffer initiative or a CREP at thelimits on commercial agricultural
ed conservation practices becauseThese uses include managed grazingirrigated land rate. [Section 212(f)] uses of lands in the CRP, but allows
and haying (with reducedAllows participants to plant nativethe Sec. to permit harvesting or
stances to permit managedpayments), siting of wind turbines,prairie grasses on enrolled marginalgrazing under very limited
esting and grazing when there is noand harvesting biomass to producepastureland, to permit harvesting orcircumstances, and to undertake up
ergency. Replaces provisions thatenergy (with reduced payments). grazing for maintenance purposesto 6 biomass production projects.
it up to 6 biomass projects withDeletes subsections (c) and (d). on lands enrolled through the buffer[§1232(a) of the 1985 FSA as
uage permitting the installation of[§213] initiative or a CREP, and adds a newamended by the 1990 FACTA]
ect tosubsection that makes cropSets a goal of planting 1/8 of the
eletesproduction on other highly erodibleland enrolled each year to trees or
land a violation of a CRP contracthabitat. [§1232(c) of the 1985 FSA]
iki/CRS-RL31486its the Sec. tounless it has a cropping history orAllows alley-cropping. [§1232(d) of
g/wit repayments from producers subjectwas a building site when it wasthe 1985 FSA]
s.orspurchased. [§212(g)]
leakAdds a new subsection that permits
://wikies control of the land. wind turbines on CRP land (exceptland enrolled in the continuous
httpenrollment), with payments reduced
based on the diminished value for
CRP. [§212(h)]
unding and Administration.Reauthorizes mandatory fundingReauthorizes funding from the CCCProvides mandatory funding through
es mandatory funding fromthrough FY2011. [§241]through FY2006, and includesthe CCC. [§1241(a) of the 1985 FSA
e CCC, including funding for technicalfunding for technical assistance inas amended by §341 of the 1996
h FY2007. [§2701]support of this program. [§211(c)]FACT]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
Economic Effects. No provisions.Requires the Sec. to report to bothNo provisions.
Agriculture Committees on the
riculture Committees on theeconomic and social effects of the
ic and social effects of the CRPCRP on rural communities within
munities within 18 months270 days of enactment. Specifies 3
ent. Specifies 4 componentscomponents of the analysis.
sis. [§2101(b)][§212(l)]
rogram (WRP)
Authorizes WRPAllows enrollment of up to 150,000Authorizes WRP enrollment through The 1990 FACTA adds a new
ent through calendar year 2007. acres per calendar year starting incalendar year 2006. [§214(c)] Sets a§1237 to the 1985 FSA establishing
] 2002, with any acres up to themaximum enrollment ceiling ofthe WRP and capping enrollment at
ts a maximum enrollment ceiling ofannual limit that are not enrolled can2,225,000 acres, and an annual975,000 acres. [Section 1237 of the
iki/CRS-RL31486be enrolled in succeeding years,enrollment goal of 250,000 acres, of1985 FSA, as amended] Enrollment
g/went goal of 250,000 acres. through FY2011. [§221(a)] which up to 25,000 acres can beallowed through calendar year 2002.
s.or]Authorizes enrollment throughenrolled in the new Wetland[§333(b)(1) of the 1996FAIR]
leakFY2011. [§221(c)}Reserve Enhancement Program. Enrollment ceiling increased from
[§214(b)]975,000 acres to 1,075,000 acres.
://wiki[§808 of the FY2001 Agriculture
httpAppropriations (P.L. 106-387)]
Allows landDeletes the 1/3 requirement, and theCreates a new Wetland Reserve Requires 1/3 enrollment each using
permanent and 30distinction between permanent andEnhancement Program that allowspermanent easements, 30 year
ents, and restoration costtemporary easements. [§221(b]agreements with state and localeasements, and long-term
agreements in any combination. government, and non-governmentalagreements. [§1237(b) of the 1985
organizations to restore wetlands onFSA as amended by §333(a) of the
land in or eligible to be enrolled in1996 FAIR]
the WRP. [§214(d)]
asements and Agreements.Replaces the 4 specific prohibitionsNo provisions. Describes the general terms of
§2203]with a general statement to alloweasements and agreements. Prohibits
only changes permitted in the plan. altering habitat, spraying chemicals
Deletes subsection (e), whichand mowing, any activity that
distinguishes 3 lengths ofdegrades the land, and any other
easements, and subsection (h). activity that counters the purpose of

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
[§222]the easement, unless permitted in
the plan. Subsection (h) allows the
Sec. to require landowners using
cost sharing agreements to restore
wetlands if the agreement does not
provide an easement. [§1237A of the

1985 FSA as amended by §333(d)(1)

of the 1996 FAIR]
nership. ReplacesReplaces 1990 acquisition date inNo provisions. Limits program entry if ownership
§1237E(a)(2) with provision tochanges occurred during the
ision to make eligible at anymake eligible at any time landprevious year, and specifies terms
e land acquired through foreclosureacquired through foreclosure whereunder which easements can be
iki/CRS-RL31486ere the previous owner exercised aht of redemption. [§2204] the previous owner exercised a rightof redemption. [§224] modified or terminated. [§1237E of the 1985 FSA]
s.orunding. Reauthorizes mandatoryReauthorizes mandatory fundingReauthorizes mandatory fundingMandatory funding from the CCC is
leakng from the CCC, includingfrom the CCC through FY2011.from the CCC through FY2006, andauthorized to implement the WRP.
for technical assistance, through[§241]includes funding for technical[§1241(a) of the 1985 FSA]
://wiki§2701]assistance in support of this
httpprogram. [§211(c)]
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)
rogram Purposes. Specifies thatDeletes reference to the programsSpecifies that EQIP is to promoteIdentifies 4 programs that EQIP
P is to promote production andthat were replaced; replaces theproduction and environmentalreplaces. Specifies that EQIP
ironmental quality, and to optimizepurpose of responding toquality while maximizingmaximize environmental benefits
ironmental benefits by helpingenvironmental threats with theenvironmental benefits per dollarper dollar spent while meeting 4
eet regulatory requirementspurpose of providing environmentalspent by assisting producers to meetpurposes. [§334 of the 1996 FAIR
ater, and air quality, wildlifebenefits; and expands the benefits to6 specified purposes. [§213(a)]adds §1240 to the 1985 FSA]
roundwaterinclude air quality. [§231]
ation and 4 other specified
initions. Adds definitions ofAdds non-industrial private forestAdds definitions of “beginningDefines “eligible land”, “land
inning farmer” and “practice”;land to “eligible land”, and replacesfarmer or rancher”, “comprehensivemanagement practice”, “livestock”,
the notion of posing annutrient management”, “innovative“producer”, and “structural

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
odifies definition of “eligible land” toenvironmental threat with the notiontechnology”, “managed grazing”,practice”. [§1240A of the 1985 FSA]
ate nonindustrial forest land. of providing environmental benefits“maximum environmental benefits
in that definition; and “producer” isper dollar expended”, “practice”,
expanded to include non-industrialand “program”. [§213(a)]
private forestry. [§232]
rogram Establishment andReauthorizes EQIP throughReauthorizes EQIP throughAuthorizes EQIP through 2002;
ministration. Reauthorizes EQIPFY2011; authorizes contracts of 1 toFY2006; adds comprehensiveeligible practices include structural
h FY2007; adds incentive10 years; repeals requirement thatnutrient management planning to theand land management practices;
ments for comprehensive nutrientstructural practices be selected tolist of eligible practices; allows theauthorizes contracts of 5 to 10 years;
anagement plans; authorizes contractsmaximize environmental benefitsSec. to provide conservationprovides cost-share of not more than
ears; prohibits bidding down;per dollar spent; deletes limitationeducation to producers; authorizes75% for structural practices;
its cost sharing payments to 75% (upon payments to large livestockcontracts of 3 to 10 years; limitsprohibits cost sharing to large
iki/CRS-RL31486ited resource andinning farmers, or to address aoperations to construct animal wastemanagement facilities; and adds aproducers to 1 contract for structuralpractices to manage livestocklivestock operations to constructanimal waste management facilities;
g/wnew provision to make incentivenutrients through FY2006; limitsprovides incentive payments for
s.or payments for the same practice;payments at an amount and rate tolarge confined livestock operators toland management practices;
leakinates (by not including) theencourage multiple land1 contract over authorization periodprovides funding (not to exceed
://wikiitation on cost-sharing with largemanagement practices, with for a waste storage or treatmentprojected costs) for technical
httpestock operations for wasteemphasis on payments for practicesfacility; authorizes application andassistance; and lists types of private
anagement facilities; specifiesthat address “residue, nutrient, pest,evaluation procedures for selectingsources to provide technical
stances for modifying andinvasive species, and air qualityapplicants; prohibits bidding down;assistance. [§1240B of the 1985
inating contracts. [§2301]management.” [§233]limits cost sharing payments to 75%FSA]

(up to 90% for limited resource and
beginning farmers, or to address a
natural disaster); prohibits duplicate
cost sharing payments for the same
practice; eliminates (by not
including) the limitation on cost-
sharing with large confined
livestock operations for waste
management facilities; permits
incentive payments for technical
assistance to certified individuals to
develop comprehensive nutrient

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
management plans; and specifies
circumstances for terminating
contracts. [§213(a)]
Offers. Requires theReplaces these provisions withAdds higher priority also to be given Requires Sec. to give higher
ive higher priority to cost-general language about aidingfor special projects initiated by apriority to assistance in priority
e conservation practices, andfarmers to comply withnew partnership program to addressareas, maximize environmental
environmental laws and encourageenvironmental issues placed inbenefits per dollar spent, or are in
ation priorities. [§2301]conservation, maximizing the§1243(f), and to innovativewatersheds, regions, or conservation
benefits of using manure and othertechnologies for structural or landpriority areas where states or
soil amendments, and encouragingmanagement practices. [§213(a)] localities are active partners.
sustainable grazing systems. [§234] [§1240C of the 1985 FSA]
uties of Producers. AddsNo provisions.Almost identical to current law, Lists 5 duties; one is a prohibition
iki/CRS-RL31486prehensive nutrient managementexcept gives the Sec. greater latitudeagainst practices that counter the
g/win determining the appropriatepurposes of EQIP. [§1240D of the
s.orplemented to be eligible for EQIPpenalty for violations. [§213(a)]1985 FSA]
rogram Plan. Requires producersReplaces mention of managementAlmost identical to current law.Lists the general contents of plans
://wikiing support for a confined livestockand structural practices with[§213(a)]producers are required to submit to
http operation to submit aproviding greater environmentalthe Sec. to participate. [§1240E of
prehensive nutrient managementbenefits. [§235]the 1985 FSA]
uties. Deletes currentDeletes incentive payments fromAlmost identical to current law, Assigns 5 duties to the Sec,
ents to provide an eligibilityimplementing structural and landexcept that it deletes (by notincluding: preparing an eligibility
ent; to provide technicalmanagement practices. [§236]including) the duty of providing anassessment; providing technical
e obtainingeligibility assessment. [§213(a)]assistance in developing and
oney fromimplementing a plan; providing
§2301]technical and financial assistance for
developing and implementing
practices; providing information and
training to implement the program;
and encouraging participants to
obtain assistance from other
sources. [§1240F of the 1985 FSA]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
ayment Limits and Timing. LimitsLimits payments to $50,000Limits total payments under allLimits payments to $10,000
ments to a total of $450,000 for allannually and $200,000 per contract;contracts to $30,000 annually,annually and $50,000 per contract;
ith an individual or entityrepeals language allowing annual$90,000 for 3 year contracts,specifies the annual limit can be
limits to be exceeded to provide$120,000 for 4 year contracts, andexceeded to maximize the
uage allowing annual limits to bemaximum environmental benefit per$150,000 for a contract of 4 years orenvironmental benefits per dollar
ide maximumdollar spent, and provisions to delaymore. The Sec. can waive thespent; and delays federal
ironmental benefit per dollar spent,federal expenditures until the yearannual limit to increaseexpenditures until the year after the
isions to delay federalafter the contract has been signed.environmental benefits. Deletescontract has been signed. [§1240G
ear after the[§237]provisions to delay federalof the 1985 FSA]
ned. [§2301]expenditures until the year after the
contract has been signed. [§213(a)]
rovisions. Replaces currentReplaces current language inReplaces current language inLays out temporary transition
iki/CRS-RL31486uage in §1240H with provision thatP§1240H with provisions that provide$30 million, in FY2002, $45 million§1240H with provisions that provide$100 million annually from EQIPprovisions as EQIP replaces 4repealed programs. [§1240H of the
g/wpetitive innovativein FY2003, and $60 millionfunds, starting in FY2003, for1985 FSA]

s.oratching grants of up to 50% andannually in FY2004-11 from thecompetitive innovative matching
leakples to include marketCCC for cost share payments andgrants and specifies examples to
://wikistems for pollution reduction,low interest loans to encourageinclude market systems for pollution
httpoting carbon sequestration in soil,ground and surface waterreduction, promoting carbon
eraging these funds withconservation. [§238] sequestration in soil and other Best
atching funds from other sources toManagement Practices, and
ote “environmental enhancementprotecting drinking water quality;
unction withpermits funds from other sources;
ricultural production.” Adds newlimits funding to 50% of cost; funds
ram as §1240I for ground andunobligated by April 1 each year
ater conservation to improvecan be spent on other EQIP
ation and water use efficiency andpurposes. Adds new program as
ater use by agriculture;§1240I for groundwater
ailable only if the Sec.conservation in the southern high
ines it will result in a net savingsplains to improve irrigation
§2301]efficiency and reduce water use
using EQIP funds. ($15 million in
FY2003, $25 million in FY2004-5,
$35 million in FY2006, and $0 in

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
FY2007) Adds new pilot programs
for drinking water suppliers, and
provides incentives to reduce
nutrient loads in the Chesapeake
Bay watershed using EQIP funds as
§1240J. ($10 million in FY2003,
$15 million in FY2004, $20 million
in FY2005, $25 million in FY2006,
and $0 in FY2007) [§213(a)]
unding . Allocates 60% ofReauthorizes funding from the CCCProvides: $0.5 billion in FY2002;Provides $200 million annually
each year to practices related tothrough FY2011. [§241] $1.3 billion in FY2003; $1.45through FY2002 from the CCC for
estock production. [§2301]Provides: $0.2 billion in FY2001;billion in FY2004-5; $1.5 billion inEQIP, with 50% of the total going to
iki/CRS-RL31486es mandatory funding frome CCC, including funding for technical$1.025 billion in FY2002-3; $1.2billion in FY2004-6; $1.4 billion inFY2006; and $0.85 billion inFY2007. Provides funding forpractices related to livestockproduction. [§1241 of the 1985 FSA
g/willion in FY2002;FY2007-9; and $1.5 billion intechnical assistance from the amended by several annual
s.orillion in FY2003; $1,000 millionFY2010-11. [§242] [§241(b)] agricultural appropriations laws]
leak2004; $1,200 million in FY2005Reauthorizes the livestock provisionReauthorizes funding from the CCC
://wiki2006; and $1,300 million inthrough FY2011. [§243]through FY2006, and includes
http§2701]funding for technical assistance in
es funding for the Ground andsupport of this program. [§211(c)]
onservation Program at
illion in FY2002, $45 million in
2003, and $60 million annually in
2004-FY2007, with $50 million to be
ath River basin as
out water
ation measures. [§2301]
e Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP)
rogram Administration. MovesNo provisions.Moves WHIP to §1240M of theNo provisions.
P to §1240N of the 1985 FSA1985 FSA. [§217(g)],
eriod of Authorization.Reauthorizes funding from the CCCReauthorizes funding from the CCCProvides a total of $50 million from
es mandatory funding fromat: $25 million in FY2002; $30at: $50 million in FY2002; $225the CCC (from CRP funding) by the

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
e CCC, including funding for technicalmillion in FY2003-4; $35 million inmillion in FY2003; $275 million inend of FY2002. [§387(c) of the 1996
illion in FY2002;FY2005-6; $40 million in FY2007;FY2004; $325 million in FY2005;FAIR]
illion in FY2003; $60 million in$45 million in FY2008-9; and $50$355 million in FY2006; and $50
2004; and $85 million annually inmillion in FY2010-11. [§ 252]million in FY2007. All funding is
h FY2007. [§2701)]to remain available until spent.
Provides funding for technical
assistance from the CCC. [§217(g)]
Effort. RequiresNo provisions.No provisions.No provisions.
ional wildlife issues
ilot Program. Allows the Sec. toNo provisions.Allows the Sec. to use up to 15% ofNo provisions.
idethe funds to enroll land for at least
iki/CRS-RL31486ments to landowners who15 years to protect “essential plant
g/wears toand animal habitat.” [§217(d)]
s.or al
Farmland Protection Program (FPP)
://wikirogram Administration. MovesNo provisions.Moves the FPP to §1238H-J of theNo provisions.
httpe FPP to §1238H-J of the 1985 FSA1985 FSA and requires that the
ram beprogram be administered by NRCS
inistered by NRCS [§2503][§218(a)]
R andRepeals §388 of the 1996 FAIR.
ends §211 of the Agricultural Risk[§218(c)]
unding Level. ReauthorizesProvides up to $50 million annuallyReauthorizes funding from the CCCProvides up to a total of $35 million
andatory funding from the CCC,through FY2011 from the CCC. [§at: $150 million in FY2002; $250from the CCC by FY2002. [§388(c)
funding for technical253(b)]million in FY2003; $400 million inof the 1996 FAIR]

illion in FY2002;FY2004; $450 million in FY2005;
illion in FY2003; $125 million$500 million in FY2006; and $100
2004 and in FY2005; $100 millionmillion in FY2007. Provides
2006; and $97 million in FY2007.funding for technical assistance
] from the CCC; limits the federal

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
its the federal share to 50%, andshare to 50%, and limits the portion
its the portion of the non federalof the non federal share provided by
ided by the landowner tothe landowner or in inkind goods
down. [§2503]and services to 25%; prohibits
bidding down. [§218(b)]
ligible Land. Deletes the maximumDeletes the maximum and minimumSame as §253(a); and also definesMakes between 170,000 acres and
inimum acreage limits, andacreage limits, and makes historiceligible land to include cropland,340,000 acres eligible if the soil is
ible land toand archaeological sites eligible.rangeland, grassland, pasture landprime, unique or productive, and an
eland, grassland,[§253(a)]and forest land that is part of anoffer is pending from a state or local
agricultural operation. [§218(a)]government to limit non agricultural
ical sites.uses. [§388(a) of the 1996 FAIR]
iki/CRS-RL31486ligible Participants. ExpandsExpands eligibility to also includeIdentical to §253(c). [§218(a)]Makes eligible any state or local
g/wibility to also include federallyfederally recognized Indian tribes,agency that has made an offer to
s.ornized Indian tribes, and non profitand non profit organizations thatpurchase a “conservation easement
leakanizations that meet specifiedmeet specified qualifications.or other interests”. [§388(a) of the
§2503] [§253(c)] 1996 FAIR]
://wiki Program Options. AllowsNo provisions.Allows up to $10 million to be spentNo provisions.
httpannually to provide matching grants
” for FY2002 through FY2007for market development, and
out farm viability programs.technical assistance to participants.
. Other Programs (Including Technical Assistance)
Permanently reauthorizes program,Permanently reauthorizes program, Provides assistance to encourage
rogram (RC&D).and makes numerous other, mostlyand makes numerous other, mostlyand improve the capacity of state
anently reauthorizes program, andminor or technical amendments.minor or technical amendments.and local governments and non
akes numerous other, mostly minor or[§254][§216]profits in rural areas to develop and
endments. [§2504][Note: Many of the changes in the[Note: Many of the changes in theimplement conservation programs.
two bills are different from eachtwo bills are different from eachAuthorized through FY2002. [Title
other, but they do not appear to other, but they do not appear toIII of the Bankhead-Jones Farm
change the basic intent or operationchange the basic intent or operationTenant Act as amended by §1528-
of the program.]of the program.]§1538 of the 1981 AFA]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
mall Watershed RehabilitationAuthorizes $15 million annually inNo provisions.Provides financial and technical
ogram. Authorizes mandatory“FY2002 and each succeeding year” assistance to rehabilitate water
from the CCC of: $45 million into fund the Small Watershedstructures that are nearing or past

2003; $50 million in FY2004; $55Rehabilitation Program. [§257] the end of their design life.

illion in FY2005; $60 million inAuthorizes appropriations of: $5
2006; $65 million in FY2007; and $0million in FY2001; $10 million in
esFY2002; $15 million in FY2003;
ain available until$25 million in FY2004; and $35
illion in FY2003; $55million in FY2005. [§313 of the
illion in FY2004; $65 million inGrain Standards and Warehouse

2005; $75 million in FY2006; andImprovement Act of 2000]

illion in FY2007. [§2505] [Note:
is is the only “no year” funding in the
iki/CRS-RL31486ation title.]
g/w Private GrazingAdds encouraging the use ofMoves the program to a new §1240PProvides coordinated technical,
s.or. Moves program from §386 of sustainable grazing systems to theof the 1985 FSA, makes numerouseducational, related assistance to
leakR Act to §1240M of thelist of activities for which assistanceother, mostly minor, changes, andpreserve and enhance privately-
://wikiides coordinatedcan be provided. [§251]authorizes$60 million annuallyowned grazing lands; authorizes 2
httpthrough FY2006. [§217(a)]demonstration districts; authorizes
e and enhance privately-Repeals provisions establishingappropriations of $20 million in
razing lands; to be funded as aprogram in §386 of the 1996 FAIR.FY1996, $40 million in FY1997,
in the NRCS budget;[§217(b)]and $60 million in FY1998 and each
es 2 demonstration districts;subsequent year. [§386 of the 1996
es appropriations of $60 millionFAIR]
for FY2002 through FY2007.
echnical Assistance. Adds a newAllows producers to seek assistanceAdds a new §1244(f) to the 1985 Allows persons who need and apply
thefrom third parties, who have theFSA requiring the Sec. to create aa conservation compliance plan to
ram tospecified expertise, and requires thecertification program for thirdobtain technical assistance from
e third parties to provideSec. to develop a system forparties to provide technicalapproved sources other than NRCS;
s ofapproving qualified third partiesassistance, specifies standards forthe Sec. must document a rejection
ent, specifies standards forwho provide technical assistance tocertification, permits the Sec. toof assistance from those sources
its the Sec. to repayEQIP participants within 6 monthsrepay landowners who use third[§1243(d) of the 1985 FSA]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
of enactment. [§244(b)]parties, and establishes an advisory
isory committee forcommittee for the certification
ram. [§2701]program. [§204]
AddsNo provisions. No provisions.Producers may lose access to
provisions prohibiting the Sec.specified federal farm program
delegating the authority tobenefits if they cultivate highly
ine whether a person is noterodible land without following a
plying with conservationconservation plan or if they alter
pliance or wetland conservationagricultural wetlands to produce
ents to “any private person orcrops. [§1211-1214 and §1221-1224
”. [§2002] of the 1985 FSA]
No provisions.No provisions.Authorizes financial assistance, of
iki/CRS-RL31486 Permanently authorizesup to $50,000 per year, to producers
g/win 10 to 15 states, to be determined
s.orear, to producers in 15 designatedby the Sec., that have been
leakarily in the northeast, thatunderserved by crop insurance, to
e been underserved by cropinstall conservation practices and
://wikiationtake other specified actions that will
httpe other specifiedreduce their “production, price, or
ill reduce their financialrevenue” risk. Permanently
. Permanently authorizes fundingauthorizes mandatory funding at $10
the CCC, capped at $20 millionmillion annually from the CCC.
from FY2003 through FY2007,[§133 of the Agricultural Risk
illion in other years.Management Act of 2000]
Authorized ProgramsRepeals provisions: creating theRepeals numerous conservationNo provisions.

d Activities. Repeals numerousWetlands Mitigation Bankingprograms in current law and
ation programs in current lawProgram [§1222(k) of the 1985reauthorizes them in Subtitle D of
es them in Subtitle D ofFSA], the Environmental Easementthe 1985 Farm Security Act (and
Security Act (and therebyProgram [§1239 of the 1985 FSA],thereby making them subject to
aking them subject to highly erodiblethe Conservation Farm Optionhighly erodible land and wetland
ation[§1240M of the 1985 FSA], and theconservation compliance provisions.
pliance provisions.) Location ofTree Planting Initiative [§1256 ofExact location of each change were

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
e were noted in the entriesthe 1985 FSA]; exempting CRP andnoted in the entries for each
ram, above.WRP payments from any limitsprogram, above.
under the 1985 FSA, the 1990
FACTA, and the 1949 AA
[§1234(f)(3) and §1237D(c)(3),
respectively]; protecting the base
history of land enrolled in the CRP
[§1236 of the 1985 FSA]. [§261]
Repeals the National Natural
Resources Conservation Foundation
[§351-§360 of the 1996 FAIR].
iki/CRS-RL31486 Programs
g/wrogramNo provisions. A. Program Purpose. Authorizes aNo provisions.
s.orSP). CSP in §1238– §1238C of the 1985
leakram Purpose. Authorizes a CSPFSA to enroll land and assist
producers to promote resource
://wikiconservation on lands producing
httpote resource conservation on landsagricultural commodities,
agricultural commodities,sometimes called “working lands”
etimes called “working lands” fromfrom FY2003 through FY2007.
h FY2007. Specifies 19Specifies 11 acceptable conservation
ation practices,practices and allows the Sec. to
ing from nutrient and endangeredapprove other practices. [§201]
anagement to contour farming
, and allows the Sec.
e other practices. [§2001]
s. No provisions.Defines 21 terms. [§201]No provisions.
ht terms are dropped from the Senate
assed bill, and 2 are added; “enhanced
ment” and “non-degradation
Eligibility. Producers must enterNo provisions.C. Eligibility. Producers must enterNo provisions.

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
ation security contract tointo a conservation security contract
plement an approved conservationto implement an approved
plan at 1 of 3 levels, or tiers, ofconservation security plan at 1 of 3
ation on private agricultural landlevels, or tiers, of conservation on
private agricultural land that has
6 years, except forbeen in crop production at least 3 of
the preceding 10 years, except for
e. [§2001]land enrolled in the CRP, WRP. or
new Grasslands Reserve. [§201]
ust haveNo provisionsProducers must have an approvedNo provisions.
ed plan for eligible lands. plan for eligible lands. Producers
e an advancecan receive an advance payment
iki/CRS-RL31486ment when they enroll, basements, and bonus payments forwhen they enroll, base payments,and bonus payments for certain
g/wpractices (that address state and
s.or§2001] local priorities). [§201]
hree tiers ofNo provisions.Three tiers of participation areNo provisions.
://wikiithspecified with acceptable levels of
httpels of practices, andpractices, and minimum
inimum requirements for each will berequirements for each will be
ine at the state level anddetermine at the state level and
ed by the Sec. Tier 1 contractsapproved by the Sec. Tier 1
ears; Tier II and III contractscontracts will be 5 years; Tier II and
ears, and contracts canIII contracts will be 5 to 10 years,
otal annual payments areand contracts can be renewed. Total
ited to $20,000 for Tier I, $35,000annual payments are limited to
ier II, and $45,000 for Tier III.$20,000 for Tier I, $35,000 for Tier
]II, and $50,000 for Tier III. [§201]
ermination and Renewal. No provisions.Participants can terminate contractsNo provisions.

inate contracts andand retain payments if they were in
ments if they were in fullfull compliance when they
pliance when they terminated, andterminated, and the termination
ination would not defeat thewould not defeat the contract

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
Violations caused bypurposes. Violations caused by
natural disasters are not considered
olations. Producers can renewviolations. Producers can renew
ears; holders ofcontracts for 5 to 10 years; holders
contracts must agree to applyof tier I contracts must agree to
ation practices in theapply additional conservation
under contract or adopt newpractices in the land already under
contract or adopt new ones on
§2001]another portion of their operation.
ree toNo provisions.Producers agree to implement theNo provisions.
plement the plan, to provide recordsplan, to provide records to the Sec.
iki/CRS-RL31486plementation, and tooid inconsistent actions. The Sec.on implementation, and to avoidinconsistent actions. The Sec.
g/wrees payments that rise with each tier,agrees payments that rise with each
s.orited based on complextier, and are limited based on
leakislation. complex standards spelled out in the
://wikiailable for animal wastelegislation. The Sec. can approved
httpe and treatment facilities, or waste1 state pilot program. [§201]
ices, or for buying and
aintaining equipment that is not
ral to a land-based practice.
ulations. Regulations are to beNo provisions.Regulations and other implementingNo provisions.
s ofactions can start on the date of
ent.[§2001]enactment. [§206]
. Authorizes mandatoryNo provisions.Amends §1241 to authorizeNo provisions.

ng from the CCC, includingmandatory funding from the CCC,
for technical assistance, at anincluding funding for technical
el, from FY2002 throughassistance, at an unspecified level,
§2701] from FY2002 through FY2006.
e amount available for technical[§202]
ited to 15% of the total

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
ear. [§2001]
rasslands Reserve ProgramCreates a 2 million acre grasslandsCreates a 2 million acre grasslandsNo provisions.
RP). reserve, split evenly betweenreserve, of which up to 500,000
Reserve Size. Creates a 2 millionrestored grasslands and virginacres will be native grasslands in
restored or(never cultivated) grasslands intracts of 40 acres or less in §1238N-
proved grassland, rangeland, and§1238 of the 1985 FSA. P of the 1985 FSA. §1238N sets
§1238(b)(1) sets minimum size forminimum size for enrolled parcels atth
um size for enrolled parcels at 40enrolled parcels at 50 contiguousth40 contiguous acres east of the 98
uous acres, but the Sec. Can waiveacres east of the 90 meridian andmeridian and 100 contiguous acresth
ent. [§2401] 100 contiguous acres west of thethwest of the 98 meridian [§219(a)]

90 meridian. [§255(a)]

iki/CRS-RL31486 Eligible Lands. Defines eligible landDefines eligible land to includeSame definition of eligible land asNo provisions.
g/wrass and shrub landnatural grass and shrub land that hasin H.R. 2646, except that it also
s.ore as importanta potential to serve as importantallows incidental additional land
leakal habitat, or has beenplant or animal habitat, or has beenthat is necessary for the
dominated by natural grasshistorically dominated by naturaladministrative efficiency of an
://wiki allows incidentalgrass or shrubland. [§255(a)]easement to be enrolled. [§219(a)]
http for the
inistrative efficiency of an easement
Enrollment Options. AllowsSpends at least 2/3 of funds onAllows permanent easements, 30No provisions.
anent and 30-year easements, andcontracts of 10 to 20 years, and theyear easements, the longest
reements of 10, 15, 20, and 30remainder on 30 year or permanenteasements allowed by state law, and
easements. [§255(a)] 30 year rental agreements. §1238Q
ents and 30 yearallows Sec. to delegate easements to
reements; the remainder will be spentstate agencies, private conservation
reements. The Sec. may toorganizations and land trusts.
ate easements to state agencies and[§219(a)]
ate organizations if certain
et. [§2401]
Permitted and Prohibited Uses ofPermits contract holders to useSimilar to H.R. 2646 for permittedNo provisions.

its contract holderscommon grazing practices, andand prohibited uses of enrolled

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
mon grazing practices, permits haying and mowing outsidelands. [§219(a)]
the bird nesting season, but prohibits
the birdall agricultural production (except
season; and prohibits allhay) and almost all practices that
ricultural production (except hay) anddisturb the land surface. [§255(a)]
ities that disturb the land
ing Criteria for Bids. RequiresRequires the Sec. to develop rankingRequires Sec. to work with StateNo provisions.
ec. to develop ranking criteria forcriteria for reviewing applications,Technical Committees in developing
iewing applications, with emphasiswith emphasis on support for nativeranking criteria, and to give priority
razing operations, plantvegetation, grazing operations, andto grazing operations, maintaining
al diversity, and grasslandsplant and animal diversity, and toor restoring biodiversity, and land
iki/CRS-RL31486ost threatened by conversion. [§2401]set the terms for restoration.[§255(a)]under the greatest threat ofconversion. [§219(a)]
s.orment Levels. Describes howDescribes how payment levels are toDescribes how payment levels are toNo provisions.
leakaximum payment levels are to be setbe set for each form of participation,be set for each form of participation,
of participation, sets costsets cost sharing payments forprovides that rental agreements be
://wiki payments for restoration at 90%restoration at 90% for virginreviewed and adjusted at least once
httpirgin grasslands and 75% forgrasslands and 75% for restoredevery 5 years, limits cost-sharing
rasslands. [§2401] grasslands, and provides technicalpayments to 75% for restoration,
assistance. [§255(a)]and provides technical assistance.
Penalties for Violation. After aNo provisions.Describes the roles of the Sec. andNo provisions.
olation, the agreement or easementthe landowner in implementing
ain in force, and the owner mayrestoration agreements, and lists the
penalties for violations, and allows
ments, with interest. [§2401] periodic site inspections. [§219(a)]
. Authorizes a total of up toAmends §1241 of the 1985 FSA toAmends §1241 of the 1985 FSA toNo provisions.

illion between FY2003 andprovide a total of $254 millionprovide such sums as necessary
rom the CCC (including thethrough the CCC through FY2011tofrom the CCC to implement the
ision of technical assistance).implement the GRP. [§255(b)]GRP. [§219(b)]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
artnerships and Cooperation.No provisions.Adds a new §1242(f) to the 1985No provisions.
FSA to allow special projects as
special projects as recommendedrecommended by a state
a state conservationist, which canconservationist, which can respond
eeting the requirements ofto meeting the requirements of three
ironmentalspecified federal environmental
watersheds or otherlaws or addressing watersheds or
ith significant environmentalother areas with significant
s. Allows the Sec. to provideenvironmental problems.
es. Participants agree to a planParticipants agree to a plan to adjust
ust implementation ofimplementation of conservation
ation programs to increaseprograms to increase environmental
ironmental benefits. Funding usesbenefits. Funding uses 5% of EQIP
iki/CRS-RL31486andatory funding forfunds annually, with any unused
g/wation programs, with any fundsfunds to go to other EQIP activities
s.orated by April 1 to go to otherthat year. [§203]
leakation activities that year. [§2003]
http Great Lakes Basin Soil ErosionNo provisions.Authorizes $5 million annuallyNo provisions.
ment Control Program. through FY2006 to implement a
thorizes appropriations of $5 millionnew soil erosion and sediment
from FY2002 through FY2007control program for the Great Lakes
plement a new soil erosion andbasin in §1240O of the 1985 FSA.
ent control program for the Great[§217(a)]
es basin in §1240P of the 1985 FSA.
rassroots Source WaterNo provisions.Authorizes appropriations of $5No provisions.

otection Program. Authorizesmillion annually through FY2006 to
illion annuallyuse technical assistance capabilities
FY2002 through FY2007 to useof rural water associations that
operate wellhead or groundwater
ter associations that operate wellheadprotection program in §1240Q of the
roundwater protection programs in1985 FSA. [§217(a)]

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
AuthorizesNo provisions.No provisions.No provisions.
illion from the
o the Bureau of Reclamation (in
ent of the Interior) to
ide water to “at-risk natural desert
inal lakes”. The funds can not be
ater rights.
No provisions.No provisions.No provisions.
rogram. Permits one
ore states, with local governments
iki/CRS-RL31486arva Peninsula, to develop
g/wplement over 3 to 5 years a
s.oration corridor plan to improve
leakic viability of agriculture and
ironmental integrity of
httpill be up to 50% of
ed at such sums as may be
each year between FY2002
Requirements forNo provisions.Adds a new §1244(b) whichNo provisions.

rograms. provides necessary funds from the
ited ResourceCCC to assist certain limited
resource, socially disadvantaged,
ides unspecifiedand beginning producers, and
es through conservationIndian tribes to participate in
rams to assist beginning and limitedconservation programs by providing
ndian tribes to“education, outreach, monitoring,
opportunities and toevaluation, and related services.”
ironmentalThe Sec. may contract with other

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
§2004(a)] entities to provide these services.
Adds a new §1244(c) allowing the
Sec. to provide incentives to these
producers(except socially-
disadvantaged ones) to participate in
conservation programs. [§204]
acy of Personal InformationNo provisions.Adds a new §1244(g) to prohibit theNo provisions.
onfidentiality). Adds a new §1244(b)Sec. from releasing personal
contractor toinformation about individuals
ec.) from releasing personalrelated to conservation programs,
ation about individuals related toexcept in aggregate. [§204]
ation programs, except in
iki/CRS-RL31486gregate. Exceptions are specified. a)]
g/weatment of data collected using the
s.ornventory to protect
leak of individuals is specified.
httpional Equity of ConservationNo provisions.Requires that each state receive atNo provisions.
. Requires the Sec. to giveleast $12 million annually from
to funding of specifiedFY2002 through FY2006, for
andatory conservation programs inconservation programs. Of the total,
e received less than $12$5 million is to be used for EQIP,
illion by April 1 each fiscal yearand $7 million is to be used for
for the CRP, WRP, and theother conservation programs, with
ation Security Program isany portion not obligated by April
this calculation). [§2701]1of the fiscal year to be reobligated
to other specified programs. [§241]
ConservationNo provisions.Requires the Sec. to develop a planNo provisions.

ograms. Requires the Sec. toto better coordinate and consolidate
elop a plan to better coordinate andthe implementation of conservation
plementation ofprograms to insure funding of

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by SenatePrior Law
ation programs to eliminatehighest priorities while accounting
, streamline programfor regional variation. [§ 205(a)]
ery, and improve services toRequires the Sec. to provide the plan
§ 2005(a)] (and recommendations) to both
ide the planagriculture committees within 180
mendations fordays of enactment. [§205(b)]
plementation ) to both agricultureRequires the Sec. to provide a plan
mittees by December 31, 2005.(with a cost estimate) for updating
b)]the national conservation program
required by the Soil and Water
Resources Conservation Act of 1977
to both agriculture committees
within 180 days of enactment, and
iki/CRS-RL31486to report to them on plan
g/wimplementation by April 30, 2005.
s.or [ §205(c)]
leakRequires the Sec. to revise
://wikiconservation technical standardswithin 180 days of enactment, and
httpto update them every 5 years.
[ §205(d)]

Table 2. Comparison of Resource Conservation Title Funding in 2002 Farm Bill with
Proposed Funding in Farm Bills Passed by House and Senate, and Prior Law
(CBO estimates are from the April, 2001 baseline.)
2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by Senate Prior Law
rogram (CRP). CRP capped at 39.2 million acres;CRP capped at 41.1 million acres (the WaterCRP capped at 36.4 million
illion acres; mandatorymandatory funding authorized throughConservation Program would reduce it toacres; mandatory spending
, including funding for technical2011. (CBO estimates increase in40.0 million acres, and then adds a .5authorized through FY2002.
ed through FY2007. budget authority of $574 millionmillion acre pilot program, making the final(16 U.S.C. 3831-3836, and
ates increase in budgetthrough FY2006, and $1.517 billiontotal 40.5 million acres.) Mandatory3841) (CBO estimates
of $706 million through FY2007.) through FY2011.)funding authorized through FY2006. (CBObaseline spending of $10.2
estimates increase in budget authority ofbillion through FY2007.)
$931 million through FY2006.)
rogram (WRP).WRP capped at 150,000 acres perWRP capped at total enrollment of 2.225WRP capped at 1,075,000
iki/CRS-RL31486ent of 2.275 millioncalender year, and any acres withinmillion acres, with annual (calendar year)acres in total with no annual
g/with annual enrollment ceiling ofthat cap not used in a given year canenrollment limited to 250,000 acres, ofenrollment goal or limit;
s.orandatory funding,be enrolled in subsequent years;which up to 25,000 acres can be enrolled inmandatory spending
leak funding for technical assistance,mandatory funding authorized througha new Wetland Reserve Enhancementauthorized through FY2002.
ed through calendar year 2007. 2011. (CBO estimates increase inProgram; mandatory funding is authorized. (16 U.S.C. 3837-3837f, and
://wikiates increase in budgetbudget authority of $859 million(CBO estimates increase in budget authority3841) (CBO estimates no
http of $1.498 billion throughthrough FY2006, and $1.726 billionof $1.383 billion through FY2006.)additional spending in
through FY2011.)baseline as enrollment cap
has been reached.)
life Habitat Incentives ProgramWHIP mandatory funding authorizedWHIP mandatory funding authorized at:WHIP authorized through
Mandatory funding, includingat: $25 million in FY2002; $50 million in FY2002;FY2002 at a total of $50
for technical assistance, authorized$30 million in FY2003 and 4; $225 million in FY2003million in mandatory
illion in FY2002;$35 million in FY2005 and 6; $275 million in FY2004spending from the funds
illion in FY2003;$40 million in FY2007; $325 million in FY2005;made available to implement
illion in FY2004; and $45 million in FY2008 and 9; and $355 million in FY2006, and the CRP. (16 U.S.C. 3836a)
illion annually in FY2005 through$50 million in FY2010 and 11. $100 million in FY2007.(CBO estimates no additional
ates increase in(CBO estimates increase in budget(CBO estimates increase in budget authorityspending through FY2007 in
et authority of $360 million throughauthority of $155 million throughof $1.23 billion through FY2006.)baseline.)

FY2006, and $385 million through

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by Senate Prior Law
EQIP mandatory funding authorizedEQIP mandatory funding authorized at: EQIP authorized at $130
) Mandatory funding,at: $0.200 billion in FY2001; $0.50 billion in FY2002;million in mandatory
funding for technical assistance,$1.025 billion in FY2002 and 3; $1.30 billion in FY2003;spending in FY 1996, and
ed at: $0.40 billion in FY2002;$1.200 billion in FY2004 through 6; $1.45 billion in FY2004 and 5;$200 million annually in

2003;$1.400 billion in FY2007 through 9;$1.50 billion in FY2006; and FY1997 through FY2002.

2004;and $1.500 billion in FY2010 and 11. $0.85 billion in FY2007.(16 U.S.C. 3839aa-3839aa-

2005 and 6; and Authorizes mandatory funding for aIncludes new programs for Partnerships and8, and 3841) (CBO
2007.Ground and Surface WaterCooperation at 5% of annual EQIP
each year goes to livestockConservation Program at: $30 millionauthorization, Conservation Innovationestimates $1.2 billion in
in FY2002; $45 million in FY2003;Grants at $100 million per year, Southernadditional spending
EQIP funding willand $60 million in FY2004 throughPlains Groundwater Conservation at $15through FY2007 in
ram for conservation11. (CBO estimates increase inmillion in FY2003 and increasing to $35baseline.)
ation grants, and specified portions ofbudget authority of $4.650 billionmillion in FY2006, and a pilot program for
iki/CRS-RL31486illion in FY2002, $45 million inthrough FY2006, and $10.850 billiondrinking water suppliers in the Chesapeake
g/willion annually inthrough FY2011 for EQIP, andBay watershed at $10 million in FY2003 and
s.orh FY2007 will go to a newincrease in budget authority of $255increasing to $25 million in FY2006. (CBO
leakater conservationmillion through FY2006, and $555estimates increase in budget authority of
://wiki (with $50 million of that total tolamath Basin). (CBOmillion through FY2011 for the waterconservation program.) $5.227 billion through FY2006.)
httpates increase in budget authority of
IP and $360 million for
ation through FY2007.)
rogram (GRP)GRP capped at 1million acres ofGRP capped at 2 million acres, with up toNew program – no
illion acres, and mandatory“restored grassland” and 1 million500,000 acres of native grasslands. GRPprovisions.

is capped at a total of $254 millionacres of “virgin grassland”, andmandatory funding authorized at “such sums
h FY2007. (CBO estimates increasemandatory funding is capped at a are necessary.” (CBO estimates
et authority of $83 million throughof $254 million through FY2011. increase in budget authority of $44 million
(CBO estimates increase in budgetthrough FY2006.)
authority of $45 million through
FY2006, and $254 million through

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by Senate Prior Law
land Protection Program (FPP).FPP mandatory funding authorized atFPP mandatory funding authorized at:FPP authorized upper and
funding, including funding forno more than $50 million annually,$150 million in FY2002;lower acreage enrollment
authorized at:and the upper and lower acreage$250 million in FY2003;limits of 340,000 acres and
illion in FY2002;enrollment limits are eliminated. $400 million in FY2004;170,000 acres, respectively,
illion in FY2003;(CBO estimates increase in budget$450 million in FY2005;through FY2002, with total
illion in FY2004 and FY2005;authority of $250 million through$500 million in FY2006; and mandatory funding of $35
illion in FY2006; and FY2006, and $500 million through$100 million in FY2007.million. (16 U.S.C. 3830)
illion in FY2007. FY2011.)Not more than $10 million annually goes to(CBO estimates no additional
e limits are deleted. Also authorizesa new Market Viability Program, and thespending through FY2007 in
Farm Viability Program, andupper and lower acreage enrollment limitsbaseline.)
funds from FY2002are eliminated. (CBO estimates increase in
h FY2007. (CBO estimates increasebudget authority of $1.750 billion through
et authority of $597 million throughFY2006.)
g/wonservation and DevelopmentRC&D is authorized permanently toRC&D is authorized permanently toRC&D authorized such
s.orAuthorizedappropriate such funds as may beappropriate such funds as may be necessary.discretionary funds as may
leakanently to appropriate such funds necessary through
://wiki. (§2504)FY2002. (16 U.S.C. 3453-
http 3461)
orridor DemonstrationNo provisions.Authorizes, from mandatory fundingNew program – no
Authorizes appropriations ofprovided for EQIP, $10 million in FY2003;provisions.

” for FY2002$15 million in FY2004; $20 million in
h FY2007 for projects on theFY2005; $25 million in FY2006; and $0 in
arva Peninsula. (§2601)FY2007 for a nutrient reduction pilot
program in the Chesapeake Bay drainage
(and also funds a drinking water suppliers’
pilot program).

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by Senate Prior Law
ed RehabilitationAuthorizes appropriations of $15No provisions.Authorized appropriated
. Authorizes mandatory fundingmillion annually in discretionaryfunding at:
illion in FY2003;spending “for FY2002 and each$10 million in FY2002;
illion in FY2004; succeeding year.” $15 million in FY2003;
illion in FY2005;$25 million in FY2004; and
illion in FY2006;$35 million in FY2005.
illion in FY2007; and (16 U.S.C. 1012)
es appropriated funding at:
illion in FY2003;
illion in FY2004;
illion in FY2005
illion in FY2006; and
iki/CRS-RL31486illion in FY2007. (CBO estimates
g/wet authority of $275
s.orh FY2007.) (§2505)
leakrogram (CSP) No provisions.CSP mandatory funding authorized at “suchNew program – no
://wikiandatory funding authorized atfunds as are necessary”. (CBO estimatesprovisions.
http” starting inincrease in budget authority of $387 million
ates increase inthrough FY2006.)
et authority of $369 million through
ps and Cooperation Use up toNo provisions.May use up to 5% of the mandatory fundingNew program – no
andatory funding forfor EQIP for special projects whereprovisions.

ation programs for special projectsenhanced technical and financial assistance
is provided; any available funds not
ided; any available funds obligated by April 1 of the fiscal year may
ated by April 1 of the fiscal yearbe reallocated to EQIP.
ing mandatory funding. (§2003)

2002 Farm BillFarm Bill Passed by House Farm Bill Passed by Senate Prior Law
asin Program for SoilNo provisions.Authorizes appropriations of $5 millionNew program – No
on and Sediment Control annually from FY2002 through FY2006.provisions.
es appropriations of $5 million
from FY2002 through FY2007.
Private Grazing Lands. No provisions.Authorizes appropriations of $60 millionAuthorized appropriations of
es appropriations of $60 millionannually from FY2002 through FY2006.$20 million in FY1996; $40
from FY2002 through FY2007. million in FY1997; and $60
million in “each subsequent
fiscal year.” (16 U.S.C.


rotectionNo provisions.Authorizes appropriations of $5 millionNew program – no
Authorizes appropriations of $5annually from FY2002 through FY2006.provisions.
from FY2002 through
g/wagement Assistance. No provisions.No provisions.Permanently authorized $10
s.oranently authorizes mandatory funding,million annually to go to 10
leakes an additional $10 millionto 15 states that are
in FY2003 through FY2007. underserved by crop
://wikiates increase in budgetinsurance. (7 U.S.C. 524)
http of $50 million through FY2007.)(CBO estimates no additional
spending through FY2007 in
erminal Lakes (CBO estimatesNo provisions.No provisions.New program – no
et authority of $200provisions.

2002.) (§2507)