Targeting Environmental Priorities in Agriculture: Reforming Program Strategies (Part 3 of 8)

ubstantial evidence indicates that agricultural activity has led to major water quality , wildlife, and soil quality problems nationwide. The damages associated with each type of problem vary widely, depending on how production practices affect an area's natural resources. In certain geographic areas, the stress on the environment from farming or ranching is severe. At this writing, a number of federal programs have been designed to ameliorate these problems. However, although they single out some general problems, such as highly erodible lands, these programs generally miss opportunities for larger payoffs by not focusing on specific geographical areas and issues that require special attention. To achieve the greatest returns on tax expenditures , federal programs must be targeted to " priority " areas and successfully apply low-cost approaches. More effective targeting conserves budget resources for taxpayers, diminishes unnecessary program burdens on farmers, and keeps more land in production to serve consumer and trade interests. Reserving costly land retirement programs for cases of true incompatibility between production and environmental objectives will save expense. More emphasis on spreading low-cost or even profitable technologies that improve environmental health will not only save government expense but will give a greater chance of using private incentives to build enduring solutions. Moreover, relying on programs that emphasize low-cost approaches will spread scarce tax dollars over more priority areas. One major impediment to better targeting has been incomplete science and national information bases. To overcome these data deficiencies, OTA has assessed the efficacy of assembling an expert panel that would use the most complete scientific information available to identify priority areas. The expert panel process proved feasible and effective, identifying priority areas within which program targets could be refined with state and local input. The geographic distribution of priority areas identified for water quality, wildlife habitat, and soil quality confirms that different regions are vulnerable to different types and intensities of problems. For instance, surface water pollution from agrichemicals is more serious in the Corn Belt and Great Lakes regions than in the Southeast. The loss of wildlife habitat is a critical concern in the Prairie Pothole region, but wind