Potential Economic Impacts of the Managed Haying and Grazing Provision of the Conservation Reserve Program

By Campiche, Jody; Dicks, Mike et al. | Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, December 2011 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Potential Economic Impacts of the Managed Haying and Grazing Provision of the Conservation Reserve Program

Campiche, Jody, Dicks, Mike, Shideler, Dave, Dickson, Amanda, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics

The Food Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 included a new provision that allowed managed haying and grazing (including the harvest of biomass), if consistent with the conservation of soil, water quality, and wildlife habitat, in return for partial reductions in the annual CRP payments. The legislation provided for managed (or limited use) haying and grazing on the CRP acreage rather than prohibiting all use. This research analyzed whether or not the alternative grazing and haying scenarios would dramatically impact the price of beef or hay, and we estimated the impact such changes would have on state economies.

Key words: Conservation Reserve Program, Farm Service Agency, managed haying and grazing provision

(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)


The recently enacted Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 continues the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) that was initiated in the Food Security Act of 1985 "to assist owners and operators of highly erodible cropland in conserving and improving the soil and water resources of their farms and ranches" (Dicks, Llacuna, and Linsenbigler, 1988). The CRP offers annual rental payments and cost share assistance to establish a permanent vegetative cover while foregoing all other land uses for ten years. The CRP protects critical environments, such as wildlife habitats and watersheds, while simultaneously reducing agricultural production on fragile lands.

During the early years of implementation of the CRP, the criteria used to select eligible acres considered only erosion and government commodity program payment reductions, with no consideration given to wildlife habitat conservation (Dicks and Reichelderfer, 1987). Consequently, introduced grasses and legumes (CP1) comprised roughly two-thirds of the CRP acres (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1989). Introduced plant species (not indigenous to the area) protect the land from erosion but may not support native wildlife. Some wildlife may use habitats comprised of introduced plants when native habitat is not available, but those wildlife species usually respond primarily to structure (i.e., height of grasses) as opposed to plant species composition. Conversely, some grassland wildlife species are habitat specialists requiring specific plant communities for suitable habitat (Dicks and McLachlan).

CRP was not the first land retirement program implemented by USDA to protect soils, reduce crop surpluses, control overproduction, and support commodity prices. The Soil Bank Act (1956) created a long-term acreage reduction program similar to the current CRP as well as an annual Acreage Reserve Program. Other short-term acreage reduction programs were included in the Agricultural Adjustment Act (1933), Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act (1936), Emergency Feed Grain Program (1961), and Food and Agricultural Act (1962, 1965). Important shortcomings of these programs for wildlife were the short duration of contracts, a planting date not conducive to providing winter cover, undiversified planting mixtures, frequent disturbance, and lack of technical assistance. For example, annual acreage reduction under the Soil Bank Program and Feed Grain Program was accomplished using one-year contracts that required participants to plant cover (generally in mid to late July). Annual land retirement programs implemented between 1961 and 1983 resulted in increased soil erosion and contributed to declines in some grassland-dependent wildlife (Berner, 1984).

Amendments to the 1985 Farm Bill in 1990 and 1996 sought to enhance wildlife benefits of the CRP. Legislative improvements sought by wildlife conservation interests included the establishment of an application review procedure that ranked applications based on their environmental benefits (e.g., proximity to wildlife habitat, diversity of seeding, use of native plant species) and recognition of coequal status of wildlife with soil and water conservation.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Potential Economic Impacts of the Managed Haying and Grazing Provision of the Conservation Reserve Program


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?