Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land
Rehabilitation
Megan Stubbs
Specialist in Agricultural Conservation and Natural Resources Policy
January 5, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R42854
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Summary
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administers several permanently authorized
programs to help producers recover from natural disasters. Most of these programs offer financial
assistance to producers for a loss in the production of crops or livestock. In addition to the
production assistance programs, USDA also has several permanent disaster assistance programs
that help producers repair damaged crop and forest land following natural disasters. These
programs offer financial and technical assistance to producers to repair, restore, and mitigate
damage on private land. These emergency agricultural land assistance programs include the
Emergency Conservation Program (ECP), the Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP),
and the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program. In addition to these programs, USDA
also has flexibility in administering other programs that allow for support and repair of damaged
cropland in the event of an emergency.
Both ECP and EFRP are administered by USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA). ECP assists
landowners in restoring agricultural production damaged by natural disaster. Participants are paid
a percentage of the cost to restore the land to a productive state. ECP is available only on private
land, and eligibility is determined locally. EFRP was created to assist private forestland owners to
address damage caused by a natural disaster on nonindustrial private forest land.
The EWP program and the EWP floodplain easement program are administered by USDA’s
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The EWP
program assists sponsors, landowners, and operators in implementing emergency recovery
measures for runoff retardation and erosion prevention to relieve imminent hazards to life and
property created by a natural disaster. In some cases this can include state and federal land. The
EWP floodplain easement program is a mitigation program that pays for permanent easements on
private land meant to safeguard lives and property from future floods, drought, and the products
of erosion.
Most of the emergency agricultural land assistance programs are funded through supplemental
appropriations, rather than annual appropriations. As a result, funding for emergency agricultural
land assistance varies greatly from year to year. Agricultural land assistance programs do not
usually receive the level of attention that triggers a supplemental appropriation. Therefore,
funding is typically provided for these land assistance programs as part of a larger supplemental
appropriation that funds a number of agencies and programs beyond agriculture. This irregular
funding method has left some agricultural land assistance programs without funding during times
of high request.
Restrictions placed on supplemental appropriations for disaster assistance have changed the way
the agricultural land assistance programs allocate funding, potentially assisting fewer natural
disasters. Language in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25) limits emergency
supplemental funding for disaster relief. Specifically, funding used for disaster relief must be used
for activities carried out pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act (Stafford Act, P.L. 93-288) for FY2012 through FY2021. This means funds
appropriated through emergency supplementals for disaster relief for these 10 years may only
apply to activities with a Stafford Act designation. Since funding for agricultural land disaster
assistance programs is appropriated almost exclusively through supplementals, this requirement
could limit the way agricultural land assistance programs work in the future, potentially assisting
fewer natural disaster events.
Congressional Research Service
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Contents
Overview .......................................................................................................................................... 1
Federal Emergency Assistance for Agricultural and Rural Land ..................................................... 1
Emergency Conservation Program ............................................................................................ 1
Purpose, Activities, and Authority ....................................................................................... 1
Eligible Land ....................................................................................................................... 2
Eligible Participant .............................................................................................................. 2
Funding and Allocation ....................................................................................................... 2
Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP) ....................................................................... 4
Purpose, Activities, and Authority ....................................................................................... 4
Eligible Land ....................................................................................................................... 4
Eligible Participant .............................................................................................................. 4
Funding and Allocation ....................................................................................................... 5
Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program ................................................................... 5
Purpose, Activities, and Authority ....................................................................................... 5
Eligible Land ....................................................................................................................... 6
Eligible Participant .............................................................................................................. 6
Funding and Allocation ....................................................................................................... 6
Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program—Floodplain Easements ............................ 8
Purpose, Activities, and Authority ....................................................................................... 8
Eligible Land ....................................................................................................................... 9
Eligible Participants ............................................................................................................ 9
Funding and Allocation ....................................................................................................... 9
Other Programs ........................................................................................................................ 10
Emergency Disaster Loans ................................................................................................ 10
Conservation Programs ..................................................................................................... 10
Issues for Congress ........................................................................................................................ 11
Funding Mechanisms ............................................................................................................... 11
Stafford Act Limitations .......................................................................................................... 12
Mitigation ................................................................................................................................ 12
Tables
Table 1. Appropriations for the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP),
FY2004-FY2015 ........................................................................................................................... 3
Table 2. Appropriations for Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP), FY2010-
FY2015 ......................................................................................................................................... 5
Table 3. Appropriations for the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program,
FY2004-FY2015 ........................................................................................................................... 6
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 13
Congressional Research Service
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Overview
Natural disasters can have varying effects on the landscape. For agricultural producers, natural
disasters are part of the inherent risk of doing business. The federal role for mitigating weather
risk is primarily through federal crop insurance and a suite of agricultural disaster assistance
programs to address a producer’s crop or livestock production loss.1
Other, separate U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs are designed to repair
agricultural and forest land following a natural disaster and potentially mitigate future risk. These
programs offer financial and technical assistance to producers to repair, restore, and mitigate
damage on private land. Agricultural land assistance programs include the Emergency
Conservation Program (ECP), the Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP), and the
Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program. In addition to these programs, USDA also has
flexibility in administering other programs that allow for support and repair of damaged cropland
in the event of an emergency.
This report describes these emergency agricultural land assistance programs. It presents
background on the programs—purpose, activities, authority, eligibility requirements, and
authorized program funding levels, as well as current congressional issues.
Federal Emergency Assistance for Agricultural and
Rural Land
Agricultural land assistance programs help producers rehabilitate crop and forest land following
natural disasters. These programs are described below.
Emergency Conservation Program
Purpose, Activities, and Authority
The Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) assists landowners in restoring land used in
agricultural production when damaged by a natural disaster. This can include removing debris,
restoring fences and conservation structures, and providing water for livestock in drought
situations. Restoration practices are authorized by the Farm Service Agency (FSA) county
committee, with approval from state FSA committees, and the FSA national office.2
1 Most of the USDA disaster assistance programs offer financial assistance to producers for a loss or reduction in
production. These programs include federal crop insurance, the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP),
and emergency disaster loans. The 2014 farm bill (P.L. 113-79) authorized and funded four disaster programs to cover
production losses from weather events, beginning in FY2012. These programs typically cover only production losses
and not damage to the land or production practices. These programs are discussed further in CRS Report RS21212,
Agricultural Disaster Assistance, and not in this report.
2 FSA county and state committees are composed of locally elected farmers and ranchers who advise FSA on
agricultural programs such as commodity price support loans and payments; conservation programs; incentive,
indemnity and disaster payments for some commodities; payment eligibility; and emergency programs. For additional
information, see CRS Report R40179, Farm Service Agency: State Executive Directors, and State and County/Area
Committees.
Congressional Research Service
1
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Payments are made to individual producers based on a share of the cost of completing the
practice. This can be up to 75% of the cost, or up to 90% of the cost if the producer is considered
to be a limited-resources producer. Payments are made following completion and inspection of
the practice.
The ECP was created under Title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-334) and
codified at 16 U.S.C. Section 2201-2205. The program is permanently authorized, subject to
appropriations. Authorized funding is for “such funds as may be necessary,” and once
appropriated, funds are typically available until expended.
Eligible Land
Land eligibility is determined by the FSA county committee except in the event of a drought, in
which case the national FSA office authorizes the use of funds. Following an on-sight inspection,
the land may be considered eligible if it is determined that the lack of treatment would:
• impair or endanger the land;
• materially affect the productive capacity of the land;
• lead to damage that is unusual in character and, except for wind erosion, is not
the type that would recur frequently in the same area; and
• be so costly to rehabilitate that future federal assistance is or would be required to
return the land to productive agricultural use.3
Land conservation issues that existed prior to the natural disaster are not eligible for assistance.
Eligible Participant
An eligible participant is defined as an agricultural producer with an interest in the land affected
by the natural disaster. The applicant must be a landowner or user in the area where the disaster
occurred, and must be a party who will incur the expense that is the subject of the ECP cost-share
application. Participants are limited to $200,000 per natural disaster.4
Federal agencies and states, including all agencies and political subdivisions of a state, are
ineligible to participate in ECP.
Funding and Allocation
Funding for ECP varies widely from year to year. Most funding is authorized through
supplemental appropriations acts rather than annual appropriations. Table 1 provides a funding
history for ECP.
3 16 U.S.C. 2201.
4 7 CFR 701.104.
Congressional Research Service
2
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Table 1. Appropriations for the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP),
FY2004-FY2015
Fiscal Year
Funding Level
Authorizing Statute and Congressional Direction
2015 $9.2
million P.L.
113-235, for major disasters declared pursuant to the
Stafford Act only
2014 $0
2013 $10.8
million P.L.
113-6a
2013 $15
million P.L.
113-2, for necessary expenses related to the consequences
of Hurricane Sandy and major disasters declared pursuant to
the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) only
2012 $122.7
million P.L.
112-55, for major disasters declared pursuant to the
Stafford Act only
2011 $0
2010 $0
2009 $66.314
million
P.L. 111-32, repurposed previously appropriated funding, mostly
(approximate)
funds designated for Hurricane Katrina that went unused
2009 $155
million P.L.
110-329
2008 $89.4
million P.L.
110-252
2007 $16
million P.L.
110-28, payment and income limits apply
2006 $199.8
million P.L.
109-148, funds only apply to hurricane damage during the
2005 calendar year. Additional direction is provided for nursery,
oyster, poultry, and nonindustrial private forest land producers
2005 $150
million P.L.
108-324
2004 $12
million P.L.
108-199, for Southern California wildfires
Source: CRS, using historical appropriation and supplemental acts, FY2004-FY2015.
a. Funding provided under regular appropriations; therefore the Stafford Act requirement does not apply.
Funding total includes the Section 3001 and 3004 rescissions of 2.513%.
Funding is generally appropriated to remain available until expended. In some instances,
Congress has required that ECP funding be used for specific disasters, activities, or locations. For
example, funding appropriated in FY2015 was to be used for major disasters declared pursuant to
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act).5 Since ECP
does not typically require a Stafford Act declaration, this requirement limited the use of ECP
funds to select locations as well as for future disasters. For further discussion, see the “Issues for
Congress” section.
Once funding is appropriated, the FSA national office generally allocates ECP funds to the FSA
state offices. The local FSA county committees will then obligate the funds on a “first-come, first-
served” basis.6
5 For additional information related to emergency declarations pursuant to the Stafford Act, see CRS Report RL33053,
Federal Stafford Act Disaster Assistance: Presidential Declarations, Eligible Activities, and Funding.
6 71 FR 70889, Emergency Conservation Program Interim Final Rule, May 26, 2006.
Congressional Research Service
3
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP)
Purpose, Activities, and Authority
The Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP) provides cost-share assistance to private
forestland owners to repair and rehabilitate damage caused by a natural disaster on nonindustrial
private forest land. Natural disasters include wildfires, hurricanes or excessive winds, drought, ice
storms or blizzards, floods, or other resource-impacting events, as determined by USDA. The
program is administered by FSA.
FSA may provide up to 75% of the cost of emergency measures that would restore forest health
and forest-related resources following a disaster. Individual or cumulative requests for financial
assistance of $50,000 or less per person or legal entity, per disaster, are approved by the FSA
county committee. Financial assistance requests from $50,001 to $100,000 are approved by the
FSA state committee. Financial assistance over $100,000 must be approved by the FSA national
office.
The EFRP was created under Section 8203 of the 2008 farm bill, by adding a new Section 407 to
Title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978. It is codified at 16 U.S.C. Section 2206 and is
permanently authorized subject to appropriations. Authorized funding is for “such funds as may
be necessary,” and once appropriated, funds are typically available until expended.
Eligible Land
For land to be eligible for EFRP, it must be nonindustrial private forest land and must:
• have existing tree cover or have had tree cover immediately before the natural
disaster and be suitable for growing trees;
• have damage to natural resources caused by a natural disaster, which occurred on
or after January 1, 2010, that, if not treated, would impair or endanger the natural
resources on the land and would materially affect future use of the land; and
• be physically located in a county in which EFRP has been implemented.7
Land is ineligible if it is owned or controlled by the federal government, a state, a state agency, or
a political subdivision of a state.
Eligible Participant
Eligible recipients include owners of nonindustrial private forest land, defined as rural land that is
owned by any nonindustrial private individual, group, association, corporation, or other private
legal entity, that has definitive decision-making authority over the land. A payment limitation of
$500,000 per person or legal entity applies per disaster.
7 7 CFR 701.205.
Congressional Research Service
4
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Funding and Allocation
The EFRP was created in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (2008 farm bill, P.L.
110-246). Congress initially appropriated $18 million to the program in an FY2010 supplemental
appropriations act. Funds were not obligated, however, until FY2011, when final regulations were
published. Table 2 provides a funding history for EFRP.
Table 2. Appropriations for Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP),
FY2010-FY2015
Fiscal Year
Funding Level
Authorizing Statute and Congressional Direction
2015 $3.2
million P.L.
113-235, for major disasters declared pursuant to the Stafford
Act only
2014 $0
2013 $13.8
million P.L.
113-6a
2013 $23
million P.L.
113-2, for necessary expenses related to the consequences of
Hurricane Sandy and major disasters declared pursuant to the
Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) only
2012 $28.4
million P.L.
112-55, for major disasters declared pursuant to the Stafford
Act only
2011 $0
2010 $18
million P.L.
111-212, for disasters that occurred on or after January 1,
2010. Additional direction was provided to expedite the program’s
implementation
Source: CRS, using historical appropriation and supplemental acts, FY2010-FY2015.
a. Funding provided under regular appropriations; therefore the Stafford Act requirement does not apply.
Funding total includes the Section 3001 and 3004 rescissions of 2.513%.
Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program
Purpose, Activities, and Authority
The Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program assists sponsors, landowners, and
operators in implementing emergency recovery measures for runoff retardation and erosion
prevention to relieve imminent hazards to life and property created by a natural disaster. Eligible
activities may include removing debris from stream channels, road culverts, and bridges;
reshaping and protecting eroded banks; correcting damaged drainage facilities; establishing cover
on critically eroding lands; removing carcasses; and repairing levees and structures. EWP funds
cannot be used to perform operation or maintenance for existing structures or to repair, rebuild, or
maintain private or public transportation facilities or public utilities. EWP is administered by both
USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS).
The federal contribution toward the implementation of emergency measures may not exceed 75%
of the construction cost. This can be raised to 90% if the area is considered to be a limited-
resource area.8
8 The definition of a limited-resource area is a county where average housing values are less than 75% of the state
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
5
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
The EWP was created under Title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-334) and
codified at 16 U.S.C. Sections 2203-2205. The program is permanently authorized, subject to
appropriations. Authorized funding is for “such funds as may be necessary,” and once
appropriated, funds are typically available until expended.
Eligible Land
Private, state, tribal, and federal lands are eligible for EWP. EWP is administered by NRCS on
state, tribal, and private lands and by USFS on National Forest System lands. EWP assistance
funded by NRCS may not be provided on any federal lands if the assistance would augment the
appropriations of another federal agency.
Eligible Participant
All projects under EWP must have a sponsor. Sponsors must be a state or political subdivision,
qualified Indian tribe or tribal organization, or unit of local government. Private entities or
individuals may receive assistance only through the sponsorship of a governmental entity.9
Sponsors are responsible for:
• obtaining necessary land rights and permits to do repair work;
• providing the non-federal portion of cost-share assistance;
• completing the installation of all emergency measures; and
• carrying out any operation and maintenance responsibilities that may be required.
Funding and Allocation
Funding for EWP varies widely from year to year (Table 3). Most funding is authorized through
supplemental appropriations acts rather than annual appropriations.
Table 3. Appropriations for the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program,
FY2004-FY2015
Fiscal Year
Funding Level
Authorizing Statute and Congressional Direction
2015 $78.6
million
P.L.
113-235, for major disasters declared pursuant to the Stafford
Act only
2014 $0
2013 $63.7
million
P.L.
113-6, $48.2 million must be made available for major disasters
declared pursuant to the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).a
(...continued)
average, per-capita income is less than 75% of the national per-capita income, and unemployment during the preceding
three years is at least twice the U.S. average (source: 7 CFR 624.4(e)(1)).
9 7 CFR 624.6(a)
Congressional Research Service
6
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Fiscal Year
Funding Level
Authorizing Statute and Congressional Direction
2013 $180
million
P.L.
113-2, for necessary expenses related to the consequences of
Hurricane Sandy and major disasters declared pursuant to the
Stafford Act only
2012 $215.9
million
P.L.
112-55, for major disasters declared pursuant to the Stafford Act
only
2011 $0
2010 $0
2009 $0
2008 $100
million
P.L.
110-329
2008 $390.464
million
P.L.
110-252
2007 $0
2006 $50.955
million
P.L.
109-234, to provide financial and technical assistance to remove
and dispose of debris and animal carcasses in areas affected by
Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season
2006 $300
million
P.L.
109-148, to repair damages from hurricanes in the 2005 calendar
year
2005 $104.5
million
P.L.
109-13, for unfunded projects as of April 25, 2005, requires
USDA to count in-kind materials and services toward the local
matching requirement for Washington County, Utah, in response to
the January 2005 flooding event
2005 $250
million
P.L.
108-324
2004 $150
million
P.L.
108-199, to repair and prevent damage to non-federal land in
watersheds impaired by fires initiated by the federal government, and
to waive the cost-sharing requirement for assistance. Specifically
wildfires in southern California, including Los Angeles, Riverside, San
Diego, and San Bernadino counties
Source: CRS, using historical appropriation acts, FY2004-FY2015.
a. Funding provided under regular appropriations; therefore the undirected $15.6 million does not require a
Stafford Act declaration. Funding total includes the Section 3001 and 3004 rescissions of 2.513%.
NRCS provides assistance based upon a determination by the NRCS State Conservationist10 that
the current condition of the land or watershed impairment poses a threat to health, life, or
property. Sponsors must submit a formal request to the NRCS State Conservationist within 60
days of the natural disaster or 60 days from the date when access to the site becomes available.
No later than 60 days from receipt of the request, the State Conservationist will investigate the
situation and prepare an initial cost estimate to be forwarded to the NRCS national office. Before
release of any funds, the project sponsor must sign a cooperative agreement with NRCS that
details the responsibilities of the sponsor (e.g., funding, operation, and maintenance). No funding
is provided for activities undertaken before the cooperative agreement is signed.
Approval of funding is based on the following rank order:
10 The NRCS State Conservationist is the lead federal official for the agency within a state. NRCS State
Conservationists are responsible for direction and supervision of all NRCS programs with a state.
Congressional Research Service
7
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
• exigency situations;11
• sites where there is a serious, but not immediate threat to human life; and
• sites where buildings, utilities, or other important infrastructure components are
threatened.12
Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program—
Floodplain Easements
Purpose, Activities, and Authority
Floodplain easements under EWP are administered separately from the general EWP program.
The easements are meant to safeguard lives and property from future floods, drought, and the
products of erosion through the restoration and preservation of the land’s natural values. All EWP
floodplain easements are held by USDA in perpetuity. Floodplain easements are purchased as an
emergency measure and on a voluntary basis. If a landowner offers to sell a permanent
conservation easement, then NRCS has the full authority to restore and enhance the floodplain’s
functions and values. This includes removing all structures, including buildings, within the
easement boundaries and providing up to 100% of restoration costs. In exchange, a landowner
receives the smallest of the three following values as an easement payment:
• a geographic area rate established by the NRCS State Conservationist;
• the fair market value based on an area-wide market analysis or an appraisal
completed according to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practices (USPAP); or
• the landowner’s offer.
Section 382 of the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (1996 farm bill,
P.L. 104-127) amended the EWP authorization to include the purchase of floodplain easements.
Prior to this amendment, NRCS had been directed in a 1993 emergency supplemental
appropriations act (P.L. 103-75) to use EWP funds for the purchase of floodplain easements under
the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP)—a farm bill program for restoring wetlands through the
voluntary purchase of long-term and permanent easements on agricultural land. This became
known as the Emergency Wetlands Reserve Program (EWRP), which purchased floodplain
easements on cropland with a history of flooding in the 1993 and 1995 Midwest flooding events.
Following the 1996 farm bill amendment, NRCS began an EWP floodplain easement pilot
program in 17 states in FY1997.
The 2014 farm bill (P.L. 113-79) amended the floodplain easement section of the EWP program
to allow USDA to modify or terminate floodplain easements when the landowner agrees and the
change “addresses a compelling public need for which there is no practical alternative, and is in
11 Exigency means those situations that demand immediate action to avoid potential loss of life or property, including
situations where a second event may occur shortly thereafter that could compound the impairment, cause new damage,
or the potential loss of life.
12 7 CFR 624.8(c)(3)
Congressional Research Service
8
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
the public interest.” Modification or termination requires a compensatory arrangement
determined by USDA.
Similar to the general EWP program, EWP floodplain easements are authorized under Title IV of
the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-334) and codified at 16 U.S.C. Sections 2203-2205.
The authorization of appropriations is for “such funds as may be necessary,” and does not expire.
Eligible Land
Lands are considered eligible for an EWP floodplain easement if they are:
• floodplain lands that were damaged by flooding at least once within the previous
calendar year or have been subject to flood damage at least twice within the
previous 10 years; or
• other lands within the floodplain that would contribute to the restoration of the
flood storage and flow, erosion control, or that would improve the practical
management of the easement; or
• lands that would be inundated or adversely impacted as a result of a dam breach.
Land is considered ineligible if:
• restoration practices would be futile due to “on-site” or “off-site” conditions;
• the land is subject to an existing easement or deed restriction that provides
sufficient protection or restoration of the floodplain’s functions and values; or
• the purchase of an easement would not meet the purposes of the program.13
Eligible Participants
EWP participants must have ownership of the land. Unlike the general EWP program, EWP
floodplain easements do not require a project sponsor.
Funding and Allocation
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5) provided $290
million to Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations, of which half ($145 million) was to be
used for the purchase and restoration of EWP floodplain easements. Per requirements in ARRA,
the funding was obligated by FY2011. Through the end of FY2011, NRCS reported enrolling
1,402 easements on 184,675 acres, as well as 1,344 closed and restored easements on 179,457
acres.14
13 7 CFR 624.10
14 Easements are considered enrolled when they are accepted into the EWP programs but before final completion of
closing procedures (e.g., eligibility determinations, surveys, compensation, investigations, and title options). Easements
are considered closed when the easement acquisition is complete, all contract documents are filed, and the deed is
officially restricted by the easement. Source: FY2013 President’s Budget Request, congressional justification, pp. 25-
72.
Congressional Research Service
9
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
Prior to the ARRA funding and since 2001, congressional appropriations language had prevented
the acquisition of floodplain easements.
Other Programs
Emergency Disaster Loans
Emergency disaster (EM) loans are available through USDA’s Farm Service Agency when a
county has been declared a disaster area by either the President or the Secretary of Agriculture.
Agricultural producers in the declared county and contiguous to the county may become eligible
for low-interest EM loan. EM loan funds may be used to help eligible farmers, ranchers, and
aquaculture producers recover from production losses (when the producer suffers a significant
loss of an annual crop) or from physical losses (such as repairing or replacing damaged or
destroyed structures or equipment, or replanting permanent crops such as orchards). A qualified
applicant can then borrow up to 100% of actual production or physical losses (not to exceed
$500,000) at low interest rates.15
Conservation Programs
In addition to the authorized land assistance programs, USDA uses a number of existing
conservation programs to assist with rehabilitating land following natural disasters. In many cases
this assistance comes through the use of waivers and flexibility provided to the Secretary of
Agriculture. The following section discusses programs recently used by USDA to offer
assistance.
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)
The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) provides payments to agricultural producers to take
highly erodible and environmentally sensitive land out of production and install resource-
conserving practices for 10 or more years.16 In limited situations, harvesting and grazing may be
conducted on CRP land in response to drought or other emergency (except during primary nesting
season for birds). In many cases environmentally sensitive land is ineligible for harvesting and
grazing. Emergency harvesting and grazing is authorized by the national FSA office at the request
of a county FSA committee.17
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)
The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) is a voluntary program that provides
financial and technical assistance to agricultural producers to address natural resource concerns
on agricultural and forest land. USDA has recently granted permission for farmers and ranchers in
15 For additional information on EM loans, see CRS Report RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance.
16 For additional information on CRP, see CRS Report R42783, Conservation Reserve Program (CRP): Status and
Issues.
17 A requesting FSA county committee must document a 40% or greater loss in hay and pasture production due to
either (1) precipitation levels at an average of 40% or greater loss of normal precipitation for the four most recent
months (i.e., drought conditions); or (2) precipitation levels at an average of 140% or greater increase in normal
precipitation during the 4 most recent consecutive months (i.e., excessive moisture conditions).
Congressional Research Service
10
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
drought-stricken areas to modify current EQIP contracts to reschedule planned conservation
practices until drought conditions improve. EQIP may also be used to proactively mitigate
potential damage from natural disasters through the use of conservation practices. (e.g., residue
management to improve the soil’s capacity to be more drought-resilient or vegetative buffer strips
along waterways to reduce erosion and crop damage in the event of a flood).
Issues for Congress
Funding Mechanisms
Since most of the agricultural land assistance programs are funded through supplemental
appropriations, rather than annual appropriations, this makes funding sporadic and unpredictable.
It usually allows appropriators to use budget authority separate from the annual appropriations
process. A supplemental appropriation provides additional budget authority during the current
fiscal year either to finance activities not funded in the regular appropriation, or to provide funds
when the regular appropriation is deemed insufficient.
The supplemental appropriations process for funding disasters has been a subject of continued
debate because of concerns over increased federal spending and the lack of a fiscal planning
mechanism. Some support the current funding system, citing that disasters are unpredictable and
flexible funding mechanisms are needed to react in a timely fashion. Others counter that some
level of disaster assistance will always be needed, regardless of timing, and the use of
supplemental spending allows lawmakers to circumvent budgetary enforcement measures as well
as enacting potentially non-germane provisions that might not pass on their own.18
Most agricultural land assistance programs do not receive the level of attention that triggers a
supplemental appropriation. During years of large-scale disaster events that receive national
attention, funding is typically provided for the agricultural land assistance programs as part of a
larger supplemental appropriation that funds a number of agencies and programs beyond
agriculture. This results in funding for emergency agricultural land assistance that varies greatly
from year to year. Funds are typically provided to remain available until expended, which has
allowed smaller, more localized disasters to be addressed in years without supplemental
appropriations. Despite this small overlap, the inconsistent funding has left some agricultural land
assistance programs without funding during times of high request volume.
The variation of funding has led some to suggest that funds for agricultural land assistance
programs be continuously funded either through annual appropriations or mandatory spending
authorized in omnibus farm bills. A similar consideration occurred in the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (2008 farm bill, P.L. 110-246), which attempted to end the “ad hoc” disaster
assistance to agricultural production by authorizing five new disaster assistance programs using
mandatory funding.19 Some have suggested that the use of permanent disaster funding could be
expanded beyond production to include emergency land assistance. Others contend that the farm
18 For additional discussion on emergency supplemental appropriations, see CRS Report R43665, Supplemental
Appropriations for Disaster Assistance: Summary Data and Analysis.
19 Program authorities for all five programs expired September 30, 2011, and were not reauthorized until the 2014 farm
bill. For additional information, see CRS Report RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance.
Congressional Research Service
11
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
bill disaster programs are expensive and are difficult to reauthorize or expand in the current fiscal
climate.
Stafford Act Limitations
Emergency agricultural land assistance programs do not require a federal disaster designation
from either the President or a state official. Recent changes in appropriations and budget
language, however, have altered how disaster funding for the programs may be used.
It is not uncommon for Congress to provide directional language in emergency supplemental
appropriations that requires land assistance funding be used for specific disasters, activities, or
locations. This was true for a number of programs and years (described above in the “Federal
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural and Rural Land” section). For example, in FY2015,
funding appropriated for ECP, EFRP, and EWP was to be used for “major disasters declared
pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act,
P.L. 93-288).”20 Currently, the Stafford Act is the primary statutory authority for most federal
disaster response and recovery activities, especially for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) and its programs, including the Disaster Relief Fund. The Stafford Act
authorizes the President to issue major disaster, emergency, and fire management declarations at
the request of the states.21 The agricultural land assistance programs do not typically require a
Stafford Act declaration; therefore this requirement in the FY2015 appropriations act limits the
use of program funds to select locations. Since funds are typically available until expended, the
Stafford Act requirement will also limit what areas will receive future assistance.
Beyond the FY2015 appropriations, the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA, P.L. 112-25) further
limited emergency supplemental funding for disaster relief. Under Section 251(b)(2)(D) of the
BCA, funding used for disaster relief must be used for activities carried out pursuant to the
Stafford Act for FY2012 through FY2021. This means funds appropriated through emergency
supplemental acts for disaster relief for the next several years may only apply to activities with a
Stafford Act designation.
Since funding for agricultural land disaster assistance programs is appropriated almost
exclusively through supplementals, this BCA requirement could limit the way agricultural land
assistance programs work in the future, potentially assisting fewer natural disaster events. For
example, droughts are traditionally not declared as major disaster events under the Stafford Act.22
However, droughts are one of the eligible natural disasters for land assistance programs—
primarily to assist livestock producers with providing water to animals.
Mitigation
Another contentious issue for federal land assistance programs is mitigation. Mitigation actions
are steps taken to reduce risk before a natural disaster occurs. Currently only one mitigation
program exists for emergency agricultural land assistance—the EWP floodplain easement
20 Section 743 of P.L. 113-235.
21 For additional information related to emergency declarations pursuant to the Stafford Act, see CRS Report RL33053,
Federal Stafford Act Disaster Assistance: Presidential Declarations, Eligible Activities, and Funding.
22 The last presidential drought or water shortage disaster declared for a state was for New Jersey in 1980.
Congressional Research Service
12
Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation
program (described above). This program purchases floodplain easements on agricultural land
that has a history of flooding (2 of the previous 10 years). Under the program, the land is
permanently taken out of production and restored to a natural function. This program has been
authorized since 1997; however, prohibitions in appropriations language have limited available
funding for the program. The program received $145 million in FY2009, and has received no
subsequent funding.
Some have questioned the use of federal restoration funds in areas with a high risk of damage by
natural disasters, citing that it encourages poor land use decisions. While the alternative of
mitigation can potentially reduce the future cost of federal assistance, the initial cost of the
permanent easement and restoration is sometimes viewed as too expensive a federal cost.
Author Contact Information
Megan Stubbs
Specialist in Agricultural Conservation and Natural
Resources Policy
mstubbs@crs.loc.gov, 7-8707
Congressional Research Service
13