[BCNnet] NYTimes.com Article: Prairie Farmers Reap Conservation's Rewards

[judymellin@netzero.net]

This article from NYTimes.com 
has been sent to you by judymellin@netzero.net.



/-------------------- advertisement -----------------------\


Let NYTimes.com Come to You

Sign up for one of our weekly e-mails 
and the news will come directly to you. 
YOUR MONEY brings you a wealth of analysis
and information about personal investing.  
CIRCUITS plugs you into the latest on 
personal technology. TRAVEL DISPATCH offers 
you a jump on special travel deals and news.  

http://email.nytimes.com/email/email.jsp?eta5

\----------------------------------------------------------/

Prairie Farmers Reap Conservation's Rewards

By ELIZABETH BECKER



MEDINA, N.D., Aug. 23 — In the tawny summer landscape of the
Dakota plains, where grasslands interrupt fields of wheat, flax and
barley, the newest federally subsidized cash crop is fattening up
before heading south for the winter.

 Waves of ducks — 45 million mallards, pintails, gadwalls and
teals — will rise out of ponds and sloughs next month and fly
over the heads of assembled hunters and birdwatchers who are
flocking to the state and transforming tourism here.

 But the most immediate beneficiaries are the farmers who own the
waterfowl's habitat. In return for dependable annual payments, they
turn their fields into grasslands that require little upkeep and
become nesting and breeding grounds for ducks.

 The subsidies help families hold onto small farms and allow young
farmers to establish themselves.

 At the same time, they have ensured the revival of a North
American duck population that a decade ago was in serious decline.

 "Protecting these small shallow wetlands with grass cover for the
wildlife has been critical for the return of the ducks," said Ron
Reynolds, the biologist who leads the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service's habitat and population evaluation team that
tracks the ducks here.

 Now, as Congress debates the direction of farm policy over the
next decade, this Prairie Pothole region, which stretches through
the Dakotas into eastern Montana, is Exhibit A for lawmakers
promoting more subsidies for conservation and less for traditional
row crops like wheat and corn.

 While some members of Congress are trying to rein in subsidies to
large farmers that date to the Depression, North Dakota is a prime
venue for viewing the unrecognized side of the debate over the $171
billion farm bill: spending to conserve the open spaces, fields,
ranges and pastures, rather than subsidies for traditional crops.

 Half of the land in the continental United States — 900
million acres — is owned by private farmers and ranchers. How
that land is used in the next decade will affect the survival of
wildlife, like the ducks here, the quality of drinking water from
city taps, the amount of pollution in streams, rivers and bays and
the extent of urban sprawl.

 But many of the large farmers, backed by powerful agribusiness
lobbies, oppose increases for conservation programs, presaging a
big fight in coming weeks as the House and Senate debate their
different approaches.

 In the last five years, conservation payments have fallen to 9
percent of all farm subsidies from 30 percent of the payments.

 And the proposed House farm bill dilutes a crucial conservation
provision, known as the "swampbuster" section, that protects
wetlands on farms that receive federal subsidies.

 Yet even in North Dakota, where farmers are more dependent on
traditional subsidies than those in any other state are, farms in
several counties have stunned lawmakers by embracing conservation
and dedicating one-fourth of their cropland to the conservation
reserve program.

 "Cropping wheat is just very risky and expensive, and we would
have lost our farm if we hadn't signed up for the conservation
program," said Patty Hofmann, a 35-year-old farmer and a widow with
three young sons.

 Mrs. Hofmann and her late husband, Kendall, put most of their
fields into the conservation reserve program, turning it into
grassland where ducks and other wildlife could nest and breed near
small ponds on the property. Two years ago, they moved an old
one-room school house onto their farm and converted it into a small
hunting lodge.

 "Now that we've put in the grass cover, we wake up to pheasants
whistling in the morning and the grouse are all around the house,"
she said.

 Mrs. Hofmann will never get rich on the $13,000 annual
conservation subsidy she receives for her 450-acre spread. But the
money covers most of the mortgage on her land, and the $11,000 she
earns each fall from the hunters, who shoot duck, pheasant and deer
on her property, pay for her annual living costs.

 And she will be able to rear her sons on the land settled by their
German forebears.

 Originally proposed by mainstream national environmental groups,
the conservation reserve program has won the support of groups like
the National Rifle Association and Pheasants Forever.

 Last year, Ducks Unlimited, a group that works to preserve
waterfowl habitat, opened a $2.7 million northern plains
headquarters in Bismarck, N.D., hoping to protect if not expand
this mecca for hunters.

 The Prairie Pothole Region is named for the thousands of shallow
ponds carved into the upper plains by glaciers more than 10,000
years ago. From the air their undulating shapes seem to have been
painted by Salvador Dali. On the ground these homely ponds teeming
with insects appear randomly, some nestled alongside gullies and
roads, others tucked in the middle of fields and pastures.

 The potholes provide ideal breeding country for shorebirds,
songbirds and gamebirds that follow the migratory route to Central
and South America. This time of year the skies are filled with
white pelicans and blue herons as well as the ubiquitous Canada
geese.

 But until 1985, farmers freely drained those ponds to expand their
fields, planted crops and unwittingly removed much of the nesting
cover of North American ducks, 70 percent of them born and bred in
the Prairie Pothole Region.

 By the 1980's, drought added to the farm-driven calamities, and
the population of ducks, pheasants, grouse and even deer dwindled.
Midwesterners who once lived for the first day of hunting season
packed away their guns.

 "It was hard to even find a deer back then, and there were years
when we didn't have a pheasant to hunt," said Lyle Sjostrom, a
61-year- old farmer who was early to enroll his land in the
voluntary conservation program.

 Then Congress included the conservation program in the 1985 farm
bill, and the farmers of North Dakota enrolled more than three
million acres of cropland; nationwide, more than 36 million acres
have been put aside for this program. The same farm measure
included the "swampbusters" provision that withdrew all federal
subsidies to farmers who drained wetlands.

 Like in a biblical tale, the rains returned in the early 1990's,
filling the protected potholes. Grass replaced wheat fields. And
the ducks returned.

 Critics, like the big grain companies, predicted that American
farmers would underproduce wheat and corn by putting aside so much
acreage, but the opposite has occurred.

 Thanks to technological advances and the globalization of the food
market, there is a glut of grain worldwide, and prices have
remained flat at 1960 levels.

 And now there is a waiting list of farmers who want to put their
land in conservation programs.

 By getting into the program early, Mr. Sjostrom said he was able
to hold onto the farm and begin passing it on to his 32-year-old
son, Todd.

 "If we'd kept our land in wheat the fixed costs for equipment,
fertilizer would have played havoc with our budget," Mr. Sjostrom
said.

 Instead, the Sjostroms now have 40 percent of their 4,000 acre
farm in the conservation program. Todd Sjostrom, who has a
full-time job selling seeds, is one of the few members of his
generation who can afford to become a farmer.

 "This takes the gamble out of farming and makes it profitable," he
said. "If we stuck to wheat and had to buy all the equipment, we'd
barely cover our expenses with commodity prices the way they are."

 This autumn Congress will decide how much to expand conservation
programs and whether to keep the swampbusters protection in tact.

 The farm bill written by the House Agriculture Committee would
allow farmers to drain their wetlands again and still be eligible
for nearly all federal subsidies. While the lawmakers say the
current provision is too strict, conservationists argue that when
farmers ask for billions of dollars in subsidies taxpayers have the
right to demand that wetlands be preserved.

 "We think the farm bill can continue this extraordinary
partnership between farmers and conservationists," said Joseph
Satrom of Ducks Unlimited, "but changes in the swampbuster program
would have a devastating impact." 

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/27/national/27FARM.html?ex=999925736&ei=1&en=7b6221a8bc7af1af

/-----------------------------------------------------------------\


Visit NYTimes.com for complete access to the
most authoritative news coverage on the Web,
updated throughout the day.

Become a member today! It's free!

http://www.nytimes.com?eta


\-----------------------------------------------------------------/

HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters 
or other creative advertising opportunities with The 
New York Times on the Web, please contact Alyson 
Racer at alyson@nytimes.com or visit our online media 
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to 
help@nytimes.com.  

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company