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

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

Order Code RL31486
Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
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
Summary
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
Introduction.
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
Program.
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.

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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
Introduction
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
Program.
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.

CRS-2
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
include:
! 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
Foundation.

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
Program;
! 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;

CRS-3
! 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
Title);
! 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

CRS-4
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
program.

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.

CRS-5
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
programs:
! 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;
and
! For the WRP, $1000 per acre.

CRS-6
Table 1. Comparison of Current Resource Conservation Law with Provisions in Title II of Farm Bills
Passed by House and Senate
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
A. Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program (ECARP)
1. Purpose and Programs. Renames
No provisions.
Renames ECARP the
Authorizes ECARP through long
ECARP the Comprehensive
Comprehensive Conservation
term contacts and acquisition of
Conservation Enhancement Program
Enhancement Program (CCEP), and
easements, to be implemented
(CCEP). [§2006(a) ]
places new name throughout §1230.
through the Conservation Reserve
Places new name throughout §1230;
[§207(a)]
Program, Wetlands Reserve
repeals §1230A. [§2006(b)] [Note: New
Amends §1230(a) to reflect changed
Program, and Environmental
good faith provisions for both
placement of conservation programs
Quality Incentive Program.
commodity and conservation programs
in 1985 FSA. CCEP includes:
[§1230(a) of the 1985 FSA as
are placed in §1613 of the commodity
Conservation Reserve Program;
amended by §331 of the 1996 FAIR]
title.]
Wetlands Reserve Program;
Good Faith protection provisions
Environmental Quality Incentives
added as §1230A of the 1985 FSA
Program; Wildlife Habitat
in §755 of the FY2001 Agriculture
Incentives Program; a new
Appropriations. [§1230A]
Grasslands Reserve Program; and an
amended Conservation of Private
Grazing 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.]
2. Priority Areas. Repeals §1230(c),
Repeals §1230(c). [§201(2)]
Adds a new subsection giving
Permits the Sec. to designate
which allows the Sec. to designate
priority to areas where projects
watershed, multistate areas, or areas
national priority areas for enhanced
could be completed most rapidly.
of special environmental sensitivity
conservation assistance. [§2006(b)]
[§211(b)]
for enhanced conservation
[Note: National priority areas are
assistance through the CRP, WRP,
affirmed, but only for the CRP, in
and EQIP. [§ 1230(c) of the 1985
§1231(f).]
FSA as amended by §331 of the

CRS-7
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
1996 FAIR]
B. Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)
1. Period of Authorization and
Reauthorizes CRP through FY2011.
Reauthorizes CRP through FY2006.
Authorizes program through
Purposes. Reauthorizes CRP through
[§211(a)]
[§212(a)]
FY2002, and states the purposes are
FY2007, and adds wildlife resources to
Adds wildlife resources to the
to conserve and improve soil and
the purposes of the program. [§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]
2. Eligibility. Repeals the limit on
Repeals the limit on enrolling
Makes eligible land that has a
Makes certain highly erodible land,
enrolling marginal pastureland to less
marginal pastureland to less than
cropping history for 3 of the 6 years
marginal pastureland, and other
than 10% of the total enrolled acres,
10% of the total enrolled acres,
preceding enactment (and land
cropland eligible. [Section 1231(b)
expands the definition of other eligible
expands the definition of other
enrolled in the CRP on that date),
of the 1985 FSA]
cropland to include threats to soil and air
eligible cropland to include threats
and adds a new subsection that
quality, and makes eligible land that has
to soil and air quality, and makes
makes land enrolled under the
a cropping history or was considered to
eligible land in production for at
continuous signup and the buffer
be planted at least 4 of the 6 years
least 4 years that would contribute
initiative eligible for the regular
preceding enactment, and that would
to conservation of ground and
program. [§212(b)]
conserve ground or surface water.
surface water. [§212(a)]
Adds a new §231(j) that requires an
Adds a new §231(i) that requires
equitable balance between soil erosion,
balance between soil erosion, water
water quality, and wildlife habitat when
quality, and wildlife habitat when
reviewing bids. [§2101(a)]
reviewing bids, with implementing
regulations to be issued within 180
days of enactment. [§212(d)]
3. Enrollment Ceiling. Raises ceiling
Raises ceiling to 39.2 million acres.
Raises ceiling to 41.1 million acres.
Authorizes enrollment ceiling at
to 39.2 million acres. [§2101(a)]
[§212(b)]
[§212(c)] [Note: §215(a), water
36.4 million acres. [§1231(d) of the
conservation, lowers the CRP
1985 FSA as amended by §332(b) of
enrollment ceiling from 41.1 million
the 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.]

CRS-8
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
4. Duration of Contract. Allows
No provisions.
Allows the Sec. to extend contracts
Allows CRP contracts for some land
producers to extend contracts for
on hardwood forests for up to 15
devoted to hardwood trees, shelter
hardwood trees, shelter belts, wind
years, and limits annual payments to
belts, wind breaks, or wildlife
breaks, or wildlife corridors for up to a
50% of the original contract amount. corridors to be longer than the 10 to
total of 15 years, allows the Sec. to
New contracts can be from 10 to 30
15 years allowed for other contracts.
extend contracts for hardwood trees of
years in length. [§212(d)]
[§1231(e)(2) of the 1985 FSA]
any length for up to 5 additional years,
and allows producers to extend contracts
expiring in 2002 for 1 additional year.
[§2101]
5. Conservation Priority Areas.
Allows land enrolled under this
Gives priority to areas where
Requires the Sec. to establish, at the
Retains prior law in §1231(f).
subchapter to be eligible to reenroll
designation would lead to the most
request of a state, priority
in the CRP. [§212(c)]
rapid completion of projects.
watersheds in specified and other
[§212(b)]
areas where enrollment would
“maximize water quality and habitat
benefits.” Areas must be
redesignated at least once every 5
years. [§1231(f) of the 1985 FSA]
6. Enrollment Subcategories.
Expands the pilot program to all
Deletes “pilot”, reauthorizes the
Authorizes a 500,000 acre pilot
Expands the pilot wetland program to all
states and limits enrollment in any
program through FY2006, and
program, with enrollment limited to
states, with some exceptions (wetlands
state to 150,000 acres. [§215]
increases the maximum size of
150,000 acres in any state for small
adjacent to larger perennial streams are
eligible sites from 5 acres to 10
wetlands(less than 5 acres) and
ineligible), and limits enrollment to 1
acres (but only up to 5 acres are
associated buffers in 6 specified
million acres of wetlands and associated
eligible for payments). [§212(e)]
upper Midwestern states. [A new
buffers in total and to 100,000 acres in
§1231(h), enacted in Title XI of the
any state. Eligible areas must have been
FY2001 Agriculture Appropriations
cropped 3 of the preceding 10 years.
(P.L. 106-387]
Enrolled wetland areas must be smaller
than 10 acres, with up to 5 acres eligible
for payments. These acres are not to
count against the 39.2 million acres
ceiling. [§2101]

CRS-9
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
7. Duties of Owners and Operators.
Allows certain economic uses of
Adds a subsection allowing irrigated
Lists requirements for participation
Adds provision forgiving producers who
enrolled lands if consistent with soil,
land to be enrolled through the
and penalties for violators. Sets
violate their contracts by not installing
water, and wildlife conservation.
buffer initiative or a CREP at the
limits on commercial agricultural
approved conservation practices because
These uses include managed grazing
irrigated land rate. [Section 212(f)]
uses of lands in the CRP, but allows
of acts of nature. Expands
and haying (with reduced
Allows participants to plant native
the Sec. to permit harvesting or
circumstances to permit managed
payments), siting of wind turbines,
prairie grasses on enrolled marginal
grazing under very limited
harvesting and grazing when there is no
and harvesting biomass to produce
pastureland, to permit harvesting or
circumstances, and to undertake up
emergency. Replaces provisions that
energy (with reduced payments).
grazing for maintenance purposes
to 6 biomass production projects.
permit up to 6 biomass projects with
Deletes subsections (c) and (d).
on lands enrolled through the buffer
[§1232(a) of the 1985 FSA as
language permitting the installation of
[§213]
initiative or a CREP, and adds a new
amended by the 1990 FACTA]
wind turbines on CRP lands, subject to
subsection that makes crop
Sets a goal of planting 1/8 of the
certain considerations. Deletes
production on other highly erodible
land enrolled each year to trees or
subsections (c) and (d), and adds a new
land a violation of a CRP contract
habitat. [§1232(c) of the 1985 FSA]
subsection (c) that permits the Sec. to
unless it has a cropping history or
Allows alley-cropping. [§1232(d) of
limit repayments from producers subject
was a building site when it was
the 1985 FSA]
to foreclosure, and to reinstate the terms
purchased. [§212(g)]
of the contract when the producer
Adds a new subsection that permits
resumes control of the land.
wind turbines on CRP land (except
[§2101]
land enrolled in the continuous
enrollment), with payments reduced
based on the diminished value for
CRP. [§212(h)]
8. Funding and Administration.
Reauthorizes mandatory funding
Reauthorizes funding from the CCC
Provides mandatory funding through
Reauthorizes mandatory funding from
through FY2011. [§241]
through FY2006, and includes
the CCC. [§1241(a) of the 1985 FSA
the CCC, including funding for technical
funding for technical assistance in
as amended by §341 of the 1996
assistance, through FY2007. [§2701]
support of this program. [§211(c)]
FACT]

CRS-10
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
9. Study of Economic Effects.
No provisions.
Requires the Sec. to report to both
No provisions.
Requires the Sec. to report to both
Agriculture Committees on the
Agriculture Committees on the
economic and social effects of the
economic and social effects of the CRP
CRP on rural communities within
on rural communities within 18 months
270 days of enactment. Specifies 3
of enactment. Specifies 4 components
components of the analysis.
of the analysis. [§2101(b)]
[§212(l)]
C. Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP)
1. Enrollment. Authorizes WRP
Allows enrollment of up to 150,000
Authorizes WRP enrollment through
The 1990 FACTA adds a new
enrollment through calendar year 2007.
acres per calendar year starting in
calendar year 2006. [§214(c)] Sets a
§1237 to the 1985 FSA establishing
[§2201]
2002, with any acres up to the
maximum enrollment ceiling of
the WRP and capping enrollment at
Sets a maximum enrollment ceiling of
annual limit that are not enrolled can
2,225,000 acres, and an annual
975,000 acres. [Section 1237 of the
2,275,000 acres, and an annual
be enrolled in succeeding years,
enrollment goal of 250,000 acres, of
1985 FSA, as amended] Enrollment
enrollment goal of 250,000 acres.
through FY2011. [§221(a)]
which up to 25,000 acres can be
allowed through calendar year 2002.
[§2202]
Authorizes enrollment through
enrolled in the new Wetland
[§333(b)(1) of the 1996FAIR]
FY2011. [§221(c)}
Reserve Enhancement Program.
Enrollment ceiling increased from
[§214(b)]
975,000 acres to 1,075,000 acres.
[§808 of the FY2001 Agriculture
Appropriations (P.L. 106-387)]
2. Enrollment Options. Allows land
Deletes the 1/3 requirement, and the
Creates a new Wetland Reserve
Requires 1/3 enrollment each using
to be enrolled using permanent and 30
distinction between permanent and
Enhancement Program that allows
permanent easements, 30 year
year easements, and restoration cost
temporary easements. [§221(b]
agreements with state and local
easements, and long-term
sharing agreements in any combination.
government, and non-governmental
agreements. [§1237(b) of the 1985
[§2202]
organizations to restore wetlands on
FSA as amended by §333(a) of the
land in or eligible to be enrolled in
1996 FAIR]
the WRP. [§214(d)]
3. Easements and Agreements.
Replaces the 4 specific prohibitions
No provisions.
Describes the general terms of
Deletes subsection (h). [§2203]
with a general statement to allow
easements and agreements. Prohibits
only changes permitted in the plan.
altering habitat, spraying chemicals
Deletes subsection (e), which
and mowing, any activity that
distinguishes 3 lengths of
degrades the land, and any other
easements, and subsection (h).
activity that counters the purpose of

CRS-11
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior 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]
4. Changes in Ownership. Replaces
Replaces 1990 acquisition date in
No provisions.
Limits program entry if ownership
1990 acquisition date in §1237E(a)(2)
§1237E(a)(2) with provision to
changes occurred during the
with provision to make eligible at any
make eligible at any time land
previous year, and specifies terms
time land acquired through foreclosure
acquired through foreclosure where
under which easements can be
where the previous owner exercised a
the previous owner exercised a right
modified or terminated. [§1237E of
right of redemption. [§2204]
of redemption. [§224]
the 1985 FSA]
5. Funding. Reauthorizes mandatory
Reauthorizes mandatory funding
Reauthorizes mandatory funding
Mandatory funding from the CCC is
funding from the CCC, including
from the CCC through FY2011.
from the CCC through FY2006, and
authorized to implement the WRP.
funding for technical assistance, through
[§241]
includes funding for technical
[§1241(a) of the 1985 FSA]
FY2007. [§2701]
assistance in support of this
program. [§211(c)]
D. Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)
1. Program Purposes. Specifies that
Deletes reference to the programs
Specifies that EQIP is to promote
Identifies 4 programs that EQIP
EQIP is to promote production and
that were replaced; replaces the
production and environmental
replaces. Specifies that EQIP
environmental quality, and to optimize
purpose of responding to
quality while maximizing
maximize environmental benefits
environmental benefits by helping
environmental threats with the
environmental benefits per dollar
per dollar spent while meeting 4
producers meet regulatory requirements
purpose of providing environmental
spent by assisting producers to meet
purposes. [§334 of the 1996 FAIR
for soil water, and air quality, wildlife
benefits; and expands the benefits to
6 specified purposes. [§213(a)]
adds §1240 to the 1985 FSA]
habitat, and surface and groundwater
include air quality. [§231]
conservation and 4 other specified
purposes. [§2301].
2. Definitions. Adds definitions of
Adds non-industrial private forest
Adds definitions of “beginning
Defines “eligible land”, “land
“beginning farmer” and “practice”;
land to “eligible land”, and replaces
farmer or rancher”, “comprehensive
management practice”, “livestock”,
deletes definition of “producer”;
the notion of posing an
nutrient management”, “innovative
“producer”, and “structural

CRS-12
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
modifies definition of “eligible land” to
environmental threat with the notion
technology”, “managed grazing”,
practice”. [§1240A of the 1985 FSA]
include private nonindustrial forest land.
of providing environmental benefits
“maximum environmental benefits
[§2301]
in that definition; and “producer” is
per dollar expended”, “practice”,
expanded to include non-industrial
and “program”. [§213(a)]
private forestry. [§232]
3. Program Establishment and
Reauthorizes EQIP through
Reauthorizes EQIP through
Authorizes EQIP through 2002;
Administration. Reauthorizes EQIP
FY2011; authorizes contracts of 1 to
FY2006; adds comprehensive
eligible practices include structural
through FY2007; adds incentive
10 years; repeals requirement that
nutrient management planning to the
and land management practices;
payments for comprehensive nutrient
structural practices be selected to
list of eligible practices; allows the
authorizes contracts of 5 to 10 years;
management plans; authorizes contracts
maximize environmental benefits
Sec. to provide conservation
provides cost-share of not more than
of 1 to 10 years; prohibits bidding down;
per dollar spent; deletes limitation
education to producers; authorizes
75% for structural practices;
limits cost sharing payments to 75% (up
on payments to large livestock
contracts of 3 to 10 years; limits
prohibits cost sharing to large
to 90% for limited resource and
operations to construct animal waste
producers to 1 contract for structural
livestock operations to construct
beginning farmers, or to address a
management facilities; and adds a
practices to manage livestock
animal waste management facilities;
natural disaster); prohibits duplicate cost
new provision to make incentive
nutrients through FY2006; limits
provides incentive payments for
sharing payments for the same practice;
payments at an amount and rate to
large confined livestock operators to
land management practices;
eliminates (by not including) the
encourage multiple land
1 contract over authorization period
provides funding (not to exceed
limitation on cost-sharing with large
management practices, with
for a waste storage or treatment
projected costs) for technical
confined livestock operations for waste
emphasis on payments for practices
facility; authorizes application and
assistance; and lists types of private
management facilities; specifies
that address “residue, nutrient, pest,
evaluation procedures for selecting
sources to provide technical
circumstances for modifying and
invasive species, and air quality
applicants; prohibits bidding down;
assistance. [§1240B of the 1985
terminating 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

CRS-13
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
management plans; and specifies
circumstances for terminating
contracts. [§213(a)]
4. Evaluation of Offers. Requires the
Replaces these provisions with
Adds higher priority also to be given
Requires Sec. to give higher
Sec. to give higher priority to cost-
general language about aiding
for special projects initiated by a
priority to assistance in priority
effective conservation practices, and
farmers to comply with
new partnership program to address
areas, maximize environmental
practices that address national
environmental laws and encourage
environmental issues placed in
benefits per dollar spent, or are in
conservation priorities. [§2301]
conservation, maximizing the
§1243(f), and to innovative
watersheds, regions, or conservation
benefits of using manure and other
technologies for structural or land
priority areas where states or
soil amendments, and encouraging
management practices. [§213(a)]
localities are active partners.
sustainable grazing systems. [§234]
[§1240C of the 1985 FSA]
5. Duties of Producers. Adds
No provisions.
Almost identical to current law,
Lists 5 duties; one is a prohibition
comprehensive nutrient management
except gives the Sec. greater latitude
against practices that counter the
plan to the list of plans to be
in determining the appropriate
purposes of EQIP. [§1240D of the
implemented to be eligible for EQIP
penalty for violations. [§213(a)]
1985 FSA]
assistance. [§2301]
6. Program Plan. Requires producers
Replaces mention of management
Almost identical to current law.
Lists the general contents of plans
seeking support for a confined livestock
and structural practices with
[§213(a)]
producers are required to submit to
feeding operation to submit a
providing greater environmental
the Sec. to participate. [§1240E of
comprehensive nutrient management
benefits. [§235]
the 1985 FSA]
plan, if applicable. [§2301]
7. Secretarial Duties. Deletes current
Deletes incentive payments from
Almost identical to current law,
Assigns 5 duties to the Sec,
requirements to provide an eligibility
implementing structural and land
except that it deletes (by not
including: preparing an eligibility
assessment; to provide technical
management practices. [§236]
including) the duty of providing an
assessment; providing technical
assistance; and to encourage obtaining
eligibility assessment. [§213(a)]
assistance in developing and
technical assistance and money from
implementing a plan; providing
other sources. [§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]

CRS-14
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
8. Payment Limits and Timing. Limits
Limits payments to $50,000
Limits total payments under all
Limits payments to $10,000
payments to a total of $450,000 for all
annually and $200,000 per contract;
contracts to $30,000 annually,
annually and $50,000 per contract;
contracts with an individual or entity
repeals language allowing annual
$90,000 for 3 year contracts,
specifies the annual limit can be
between FY2002 and FY2007; repeals
limits to be exceeded to provide
$120,000 for 4 year contracts, and
exceeded to maximize the
language allowing annual limits to be
maximum environmental benefit per
$150,000 for a contract of 4 years or
environmental benefits per dollar
exceeded to provide maximum
dollar spent, and provisions to delay
more. The Sec. can waive the
spent; and delays federal
environmental benefit per dollar spent,
federal expenditures until the year
annual limit to increase
expenditures until the year after the
and provisions to delay federal
after the contract has been signed.
environmental benefits. Deletes
contract has been signed. [§1240G
expenditures until the year after the
[§237]
provisions to delay federal
of the 1985 FSA]
contract has been signed. [§2301]
expenditures until the year after the
contract has been signed. [§213(a)]
9. Other Provisions. Replaces current
Replaces current language in
Replaces current language in
Lays out temporary transition
language in §1240H with provision that
§1240H with provisions that provide
§1240H with provisions that provide
provisions as EQIP replaces 4
uses an unspecified portion of EQIP
$30 million, in FY2002, $45 million
$100 million annually from EQIP
repealed programs. [§1240H of the
funds for competitive innovative
in FY2003, and $60 million
funds, starting in FY2003, for
1985 FSA]
matching grants of up to 50% and
annually in FY2004-11 from the
competitive innovative matching
specifies examples to include market
CCC for cost share payments and
grants and specifies examples to
systems for pollution reduction,
low interest loans to encourage
include market systems for pollution
promoting carbon sequestration in soil,
ground and surface water
reduction, promoting carbon
and leveraging these funds with
conservation. [§238]
sequestration in soil and other Best
matching funds from other sources to
Management Practices, and
promote “environmental enhancement
protecting drinking water quality;
and protection in conjunction with
permits funds from other sources;
agricultural production.” Adds new
limits funding to 50% of cost; funds
program as §1240I for ground and
unobligated by April 1 each year
surface water conservation to improve
can be spent on other EQIP
irrigation and water use efficiency and
purposes. Adds new program as
reduce water use by agriculture;
§1240I for groundwater
assistance is available only if the Sec.
conservation in the southern high
determines it will result in a net savings
plains to improve irrigation
of water. [§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

CRS-15
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior 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)]
10. Funding . Allocates 60% of
Reauthorizes funding from the CCC
Provides: $0.5 billion in FY2002;
Provides $200 million annually
funding each year to practices related to
through FY2011. [§241]
$1.3 billion in FY2003; $1.45
through FY2002 from the CCC for
livestock production. [§2301]
Provides: $0.2 billion in FY2001;
billion in FY2004-5; $1.5 billion in
EQIP, with 50% of the total going to
Reauthorizes mandatory funding from
$1.025 billion in FY2002-3; $1.2
FY2006; and $0.85 billion in
practices related to livestock
the CCC, including funding for technical
billion in FY2004-6; $1.4 billion in
FY2007. Provides funding for
production. [§1241 of the 1985 FSA
assistance, at: $400 million in FY2002;
FY2007-9; and $1.5 billion in
technical assistance from the CCC.
as amended by several annual
$700 million in FY2003; $1,000 million
FY2010-11. [§242]
[§241(b)]
agricultural appropriations laws]
in FY2004; $1,200 million in FY2005
Reauthorizes the livestock provision
Reauthorizes funding from the CCC
and FY2006; and $1,300 million in
through FY2011. [§243]
through FY2006, and includes
FY2007. [§2701]
funding for technical assistance in
Authorizes funding for the Ground and
support of this program. [§211(c)]
Surface Water Conservation Program at
$25 million in FY2002, $45 million in
FY2003, and $60 million annually in
FY2004-FY2007, with $50 million to be
allocated in the Klamath River basin as
soon as possible to carry out water
conservation measures. [§2301]
E. Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP)
1. Program Administration. Moves
No provisions.
Moves WHIP to §1240M of the
No provisions.
WHIP to §1240N of the 1985 FSA
1985 FSA. [§217(g)],
[§2502]
2. Period of Authorization.
Reauthorizes funding from the CCC
Reauthorizes funding from the CCC
Provides a total of $50 million from
Reauthorizes mandatory funding from
at: $25 million in FY2002; $30
at: $50 million in FY2002; $225
the CCC (from CRP funding) by the

CRS-16
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
the CCC, including funding for technical
million in FY2003-4; $35 million in
million in FY2003; $275 million in
end of FY2002. [§387(c) of the 1996
assistance, at: $15 million in FY2002;
FY2005-6; $40 million in FY2007;
FY2004; $325 million in FY2005;
FAIR]
$30 million in FY2003; $60 million in
$45 million in FY2008-9; and $50
$355 million in FY2006; and $50
FY2004; and $85 million annually in
million in FY2010-11. [§ 252]
million in FY2007. All funding is
FY2005 through FY2007. [§2701)]
to remain available until spent.
Provides funding for technical
assistance from the CCC. [§217(g)]
3. Distribution of Effort. Requires
No provisions.
No provisions.
No provisions.
Sec. to address regional wildlife issues
of concern [§2502]
4. Pilot Program. Allows the Sec. to
No provisions.
Allows the Sec. to use up to 15% of
No provisions.
use up to 15% of the funds to provide
the funds to enroll land for at least
additional payments to landowners who
15 years to protect “essential plant
enroll land for at least 15 years to
and animal habitat.” [§217(d)]
protect and restore plant and animal
habitat. [§2502]
F. Farmland Protection Program (FPP)
1. Program Administration. Moves
No provisions.
Moves the FPP to §1238H-J of the
No provisions.
the FPP to §1238H-J of the 1985 FSA
1985 FSA and requires that the
and requires that the program be
program be administered by NRCS
administered by NRCS [§2503]
[§218(a)]
Repeals §388 of the 1996 FAIR and
Repeals §388 of the 1996 FAIR.
amends §211 of the Agricultural Risk
[§218(c)]
Protection Act of 2000 [§2503]
2. Funding Level. Reauthorizes
Provides up to $50 million annually
Reauthorizes funding from the CCC
Provides up to a total of $35 million
mandatory funding from the CCC,
through FY2011 from the CCC. [§
at: $150 million in FY2002; $250
from the CCC by FY2002. [§388(c)
including funding for technical
253(b)]
million in FY2003; $400 million in
of the 1996 FAIR]
assistance, at: $50 million in FY2002;
FY2004; $450 million in FY2005;
$100 million in FY2003; $125 million
$500 million in FY2006; and $100
in FY2004 and in FY2005; $100 million
million in FY2007. Provides
in FY2006; and $97 million in FY2007.
funding for technical assistance
[§2701]
from the CCC; limits the federal

CRS-17
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
Limits the federal share to 50%, and
share to 50%, and limits the portion
limits the portion of the non federal
of the non federal share provided by
share provided by the landowner to
the landowner or in inkind goods
25%; prohibits bidding down. [§2503]
and services to 25%; prohibits
bidding down. [§218(b)]
3. Eligible Land. Deletes the maximum
Deletes the maximum and minimum
Same as §253(a); and also defines
Makes between 170,000 acres and
and minimum acreage limits, and
acreage limits, and makes historic
eligible land to include cropland,
340,000 acres eligible if the soil is
expands the list of eligible land to
and archaeological sites eligible.
rangeland, grassland, pasture land
prime, unique or productive, and an
include cropland, rangeland, grassland,
[§253(a)]
and forest land that is part of an
offer is pending from a state or local
pasture land, incidental forest land, and
agricultural operation. [§218(a)]
government to limit non agricultural
historic and archaeological sites.
uses. [§388(a) of the 1996 FAIR]
[§2503]
4. Eligible Participants. Expands
Expands eligibility to also include
Identical to §253(c). [§218(a)]
Makes eligible any state or local
eligibility to also include federally
federally recognized Indian tribes,
agency that has made an offer to
recognized Indian tribes, and non profit
and non profit organizations that
purchase a “conservation easement
organizations that meet specified
meet specified qualifications.
or other interests”. [§388(a) of the
qualifications. [§2503]
[§253(c)]
1996 FAIR]
5. New Program Options. Allows
No provisions.
Allows up to $10 million to be spent
No provisions.
appropriations of “such funds as are
annually to provide matching grants
necessary” for FY2002 through FY2007
for market development, and
to carry out farm viability programs.
technical assistance to participants.
[§2503]
[§218(a)]
G. Other Programs (Including Technical Assistance)
1. Resource Conservation and
Permanently reauthorizes program,
Permanently reauthorizes program,
Provides assistance to encourage
Development Program (RC&D).
and makes numerous other, mostly
and makes numerous other, mostly
and improve the capacity of state
Permanently reauthorizes program, and
minor or technical amendments.
minor or technical amendments.
and local governments and non
makes numerous other, mostly minor or
[§254]
[§216]
profits in rural areas to develop and
technical amendments. [§2504]
[Note: Many of the changes in the
[Note: Many of the changes in the
implement conservation programs.
two bills are different from each
two bills are different from each
Authorized through FY2002. [Title
other, but they do not appear to
other, but they do not appear to
III of the Bankhead-Jones Farm
change the basic intent or operation
change the basic intent or operation
Tenant Act as amended by §1528-
of the program.]
of the program.]
§1538 of the 1981 AFA]

CRS-18
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
2. Small Watershed Rehabilitation
Authorizes $15 million annually in
No provisions.
Provides financial and technical
Program. Authorizes mandatory
“FY2002 and each succeeding year”
assistance to rehabilitate water
funding from the CCC of: $45 million in
to fund the Small Watershed
structures that are nearing or past
FY2003; $50 million in FY2004; $55
Rehabilitation Program. [§257]
the end of their design life.
million in FY2005; $60 million in
Authorizes appropriations of: $5
FY2006; $65 million in FY2007; and $0
million in FY2001; $10 million in
in FY2008. Also authorizes
FY2002; $15 million in FY2003;
appropriations, to remain available until
$25 million in FY2004; and $35
spent, of: $45 million in FY2003; $55
million in FY2005. [§313 of the
million in FY2004; $65 million in
Grain Standards and Warehouse
FY2005; $75 million in FY2006; and
Improvement Act of 2000]
$85 million in FY2007. [§2505] [Note:
This is the only “no year” funding in the
conservation title.]
3. Conservation of Private Grazing
Adds encouraging the use of
Moves the program to a new §1240P
Provides coordinated technical,
Lands. Moves program from §386 of
sustainable grazing systems to the
of the 1985 FSA, makes numerous
educational, related assistance to
the 1996 FAIR Act to §1240M of the
list of activities for which assistance
other, mostly minor, changes, and
preserve and enhance privately-
1985 FSA. Provides coordinated
can be provided. [§251]
authorizes$60 million annually
owned grazing lands; authorizes 2
technical, educational, related assistance
through FY2006. [§217(a)]
demonstration districts; authorizes
to preserve and enhance privately-
Repeals provisions establishing
appropriations of $20 million in
owned grazing lands; to be funded as a
program in §386 of the 1996 FAIR.
FY1996, $40 million in FY1997,
specific line item in the NRCS budget;
[§217(b)]
and $60 million in FY1998 and each
authorizes 2 demonstration districts;
subsequent year. [§386 of the 1996
authorizes appropriations of $60 million
FAIR]
annually for FY2002 through FY2007.
[§2502]
4. Technical Assistance. Adds a new
Allows producers to seek assistance
Adds a new §1244(f) to the 1985
Allows persons who need and apply
§1242 to the 1985 FSA requiring the
from third parties, who have the
FSA requiring the Sec. to create a
a conservation compliance plan to
Sec. to create a certification program to
specified expertise, and requires the
certification program for third
obtain technical assistance from
approve third parties to provide
Sec. to develop a system for
parties to provide technical
approved sources other than NRCS;
technical assistance within 180 days of
approving qualified third parties
assistance, specifies standards for
the Sec. must document a rejection
enactment, specifies standards for
who provide technical assistance to
certification, permits the Sec. to
of assistance from those sources
certification, permits the Sec. to repay
EQIP participants within 6 months
repay landowners who use third
[§1243(d) of the 1985 FSA]

CRS-19
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
landowners who use third parties, and
of enactment. [§244(b)]
parties, and establishes an advisory
establishes an advisory committee for
committee for the certification
the certification program. [§2701]
program. [§204]
5. Conservation Compliance. Adds
No provisions.
No provisions.
Producers may lose access to
new provisions prohibiting the Sec.
specified federal farm program
from delegating the authority to
benefits if they cultivate highly
determine whether a person is not
erodible land without following a
complying with conservation
conservation plan or if they alter
compliance or wetland conservation
agricultural wetlands to produce
requirements to “any private person or
crops. [§1211-1214 and §1221-1224
entity”. [§2002]
of the 1985 FSA]
6. Agricultural Management
No provisions.
No provisions.
Authorizes financial assistance, of
Assistance. Permanently authorizes
up to $50,000 per year, to producers
financial assistance, of up to $50,000
in 10 to 15 states, to be determined
per year, to producers in 15 designated
by the Sec., that have been
states, primarily in the northeast, that
underserved by crop insurance, to
have been underserved by crop
install conservation practices and
insurance, to install conservation
take other specified actions that will
practices and take other specified
reduce their “production, price, or
actions that will reduce their financial
revenue” risk. Permanently
risk. Permanently authorizes funding
authorizes mandatory funding at $10
from the CCC, capped at $20 million
million annually from the CCC.
annually from FY2003 through FY2007,
[§133 of the Agricultural Risk
and at $10 million in other years.
Management Act of 2000]
[§2501]
7. Repeals of Authorized Programs
Repeals provisions: creating the
Repeals numerous conservation
No provisions.
and Activities. Repeals numerous
Wetlands Mitigation Banking
programs in current law and
conservation programs in current law
Program [§1222(k) of the 1985
reauthorizes them in Subtitle D of
and reauthorizes them in Subtitle D of
FSA], the Environmental Easement
the 1985 Farm Security Act (and
the 1985 Farm Security Act (and thereby
Program [§1239 of the 1985 FSA],
thereby making them subject to
making them subject to highly erodible
the Conservation Farm Option
highly erodible land and wetland
land and wetland conservation
[§1240M of the 1985 FSA], and the
conservation compliance provisions.
compliance provisions.) Location of
Tree Planting Initiative [§1256 of
Exact location of each change were

CRS-20
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
each change were noted in the entries
the 1985 FSA]; exempting CRP and
noted in the entries for each
for each program, above.
WRP payments from any limits
program, 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].
[§262]
H. New Programs
1. Conservation Security Program
No provisions.
A. Program Purpose. Authorizes a
No provisions.
(CSP).
CSP in §1238– §1238C of the 1985
A. Program Purpose. Authorizes a CSP
FSA to enroll land and assist
in §1238– §1238C of the 1985 FSA to
producers to promote resource
enroll land and assist producers to
conservation on lands producing
promote resource conservation on lands
agricultural commodities,
producing agricultural commodities,
sometimes called “working lands”
sometimes called “working lands” from
from FY2003 through FY2007.
FY2003 through FY2007. Specifies 19
Specifies 11 acceptable conservation
acceptable conservation practices,
practices and allows the Sec. to
ranging from nutrient and endangered
approve other practices. [§201]
species management to contour farming
and strip cropping, and allows the Sec.
to approve other practices. [§2001]
B. Definitions. Defines 15 terms.
No provisions.
Defines 21 terms. [§201]
No provisions.
Eight terms are dropped from the Senate
-passed bill, and 2 are added; “enhanced
payment” and “non-degradation
standard” [§2001]
C. Eligibility. Producers must enter
No provisions.
C. Eligibility. Producers must enter
No provisions.

CRS-21
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
into a conservation security contract to
into a conservation security contract
implement an approved conservation
to implement an approved
security plan at 1 of 3 levels, or tiers, of
conservation security plan at 1 of 3
conservation on private agricultural land
levels, or tiers, of conservation on
that has been in crop production at least
private agricultural land that has
4 of the preceding 6 years, except for
been in crop production at least 3 of
land enrolled in the CRP, WRP. or new
the preceding 10 years, except for
Grasslands Reserve. [§2001]
land enrolled in the CRP, WRP. or
new Grasslands Reserve. [§201]
D. Participation. Producers must have
No provisions
Producers must have an approved
No provisions.
an approved plan for eligible lands.
plan for eligible lands. Producers
Producers can receive an advance
can receive an advance payment
payment when they enroll, base
when they enroll, base payments,
payments, and bonus payments for
and bonus payments for certain
certain practices (that address state and
practices (that address state and
local priorities). [§2001]
local priorities). [§201]
E. Participation Options. Three tiers of
No provisions.
Three tiers of participation are
No provisions.
participation are specified with
specified with acceptable levels of
acceptable levels of practices, and
practices, and minimum
minimum requirements for each will be
requirements for each will be
determine at the state level and
determine at the state level and
approved by the Sec. Tier 1 contracts
approved by the Sec. Tier 1
will be 5 years; Tier II and III contracts
contracts will be 5 years; Tier II and
will be 5 to 10 years, and contracts can
III contracts will be 5 to 10 years,
be renewed. Total annual payments are
and contracts can be renewed. Total
limited to $20,000 for Tier I, $35,000
annual payments are limited to
for Tier II, and $45,000 for Tier III.
$20,000 for Tier I, $35,000 for Tier
[§2001]
II, and $50,000 for Tier III. [§201]
F. Termination and Renewal.
No provisions.
Participants can terminate contracts
No provisions.
Participants can terminate contracts and
and retain payments if they were in
retain payments if they were in full
full compliance when they
compliance when they terminated, and
terminated, and the termination
the termination would not defeat the
would not defeat the contract

CRS-22
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
contract purposes. Violations caused by
purposes. Violations caused by
natural disasters are not considered
natural disasters are not considered
violations. Producers can renew
violations. Producers can renew
contracts for 5 to 10 years; holders of
contracts for 5 to 10 years; holders
tier I contracts must agree to apply
of tier I contracts must agree to
additional conservation practices in the
apply additional conservation
land already under contract or adopt new
practices in the land already under
ones on another portion of their
contract or adopt new ones on
operation. [§2001]
another portion of their operation.
[§201]
G. Duties. Producers agree to
No provisions.
Producers agree to implement the
No provisions.
implement the plan, to provide records
plan, to provide records to the Sec.
to the Sec. on implementation, and to
on implementation, and to avoid
avoid inconsistent actions. The Sec.
inconsistent actions. The Sec.
agrees payments that rise with each tier,
agrees payments that rise with each
and are limited based on complex
tier, and are limited based on
standards spelled out in the legislation.
complex standards spelled out in the
Funds are not available for animal waste
legislation. The Sec. can approved
storage and treatment facilities, or waste
1 state pilot program. [§201]
transfer devices, or for buying and
maintaining equipment that is not
“integral to a land-based practice.
[§2001]
H. Regulations. Regulations are to be
No provisions.
Regulations and other implementing
No provisions.
issued within 270 days of
actions can start on the date of
enactment.[§2001]
enactment. [§206]
I. Funding. Authorizes mandatory
No provisions.
Amends §1241 to authorize
No provisions.
funding from the CCC, including
mandatory funding from the CCC,
funding for technical assistance, at an
including funding for technical
unspecified level, from FY2002 through
assistance, at an unspecified level,
FY2007. [§2701]
from FY2002 through FY2006.
The amount available for technical
[§202]
assistance is limited to 15% of the total

CRS-23
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
expended each year. [§2001]
2. Grasslands Reserve Program
Creates a 2 million acre grasslands
Creates a 2 million acre grasslands
No provisions.
(GRP).
reserve, split evenly between
reserve, of which up to 500,000
A. Reserve Size. Creates a 2 million
restored grasslands and virgin
acres will be native grasslands in
acre GRP including restored or
(never cultivated) grasslands in
tracts of 40 acres or less in §1238N-
improved grassland, rangeland, and
§1238 of the 1985 FSA.
P of the 1985 FSA. §1238N sets
pasture land in §1238 of the 1985 FSA.
§1238(b)(1) sets minimum size for
minimum size for enrolled parcels at
Minimum size for enrolled parcels at 40
enrolled parcels at 50 contiguous
40 contiguous acres east of the 98th
contiguous acres, but the Sec. Can waive
acres east of the 90th meridian and
meridian and 100 contiguous acres
that requirement. [§2401]
100 contiguous acres west of the
west of the 98th meridian [§219(a)]
90th meridian. [§255(a)]
B. Eligible Lands. Defines eligible land
Defines eligible land to include
Same definition of eligible land as
No provisions.
to include natural grass and shrub land
natural grass and shrub land that has
in H.R. 2646, except that it also
that has a potential to serve as important
a potential to serve as important
allows incidental additional land
plant or animal habitat, or has been
plant or animal habitat, or has been
that is necessary for the
historically dominated by natural grass
historically dominated by natural
administrative efficiency of an
or shrubland. Also allows incidental
grass or shrubland. [§255(a)]
easement to be enrolled. [§219(a)]
additional land that is necessary for the
administrative efficiency of an easement
to be enrolled. [§2401]
C. Enrollment Options. Allows
Spends at least 2/3 of funds on
Allows permanent easements, 30
No provisions.
permanent and 30-year easements, and
contracts of 10 to 20 years, and the
year easements, the longest
rental agreements of 10, 15, 20, and 30
remainder on 30 year or permanent
easements allowed by state law, and
years. Up to 60% of the funds can be
easements. [§255(a)]
30 year rental agreements. §1238Q
spent on easements and 30 year
allows Sec. to delegate easements to
agreements; the remainder will be spent
state agencies, private conservation
on shorter agreements. The Sec. may to
organizations and land trusts.
delegate easements to state agencies and
[§219(a)]
private organizations if certain
conditions are met. [§2401]
D. Permitted and Prohibited Uses of
Permits contract holders to use
Similar to H.R. 2646 for permitted
No provisions.
Enrolled Lands. Permits contract holders
common grazing practices, and
and prohibited uses of enrolled

CRS-24
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
to use common grazing practices,
permits haying and mowing outside
lands. [§219(a)]
rehabilitate land after fires, and build
the bird nesting season, but prohibits
fences; restricts uses during the bird
all agricultural production (except
nesting season; and prohibits all
hay) and almost all practices that
agricultural production (except hay) and
disturb the land surface. [§255(a)]
all other activities that disturb the land
surface. [§2401]
E. Ranking Criteria for Bids. Requires
Requires the Sec. to develop ranking
Requires Sec. to work with State
No provisions.
the Sec. to develop ranking criteria for
criteria for reviewing applications,
Technical Committees in developing
reviewing applications, with emphasis
with emphasis on support for native
ranking criteria, and to give priority
on support for grazing operations, plant
vegetation, grazing operations, and
to grazing operations, maintaining
and animal diversity, and grasslands
plant and animal diversity, and to
or restoring biodiversity, and land
most threatened by conversion. [§2401]
set the terms for restoration.
under the greatest threat of
[§255(a)]
conversion. [§219(a)]
F. Payment Levels. Describes how
Describes how payment levels are to
Describes how payment levels are to
No provisions.
maximum payment levels are to be set
be set for each form of participation,
be set for each form of participation,
for each form of participation, sets cost
sets cost sharing payments for
provides that rental agreements be
sharing payments for restoration at 90%
restoration at 90% for virgin
reviewed and adjusted at least once
for virgin grasslands and 75% for
grasslands and 75% for restored
every 5 years, limits cost-sharing
restored grasslands. [§2401]
grasslands, and provides technical
payments to 75% for restoration,
assistance. [§255(a)]
and provides technical assistance.
[§219(a)]
G. Penalties for Violation. After a
No provisions.
Describes the roles of the Sec. and
No provisions.
violation, the agreement or easement
the landowner in implementing
will remain in force, and the owner may
restoration agreements, and lists the
be required to refund part or all the
penalties for violations, and allows
payments, with interest. [§2401]
periodic site inspections. [§219(a)]
H. Funding. Authorizes a total of up to
Amends §1241 of the 1985 FSA to
Amends §1241 of the 1985 FSA to
No provisions.
$254 million between FY2003 and
provide a total of $254 million
provide such sums as necessary
FY2007 from the CCC (including the
through the CCC through FY2011to
from the CCC to implement the
provision of technical assistance).
implement the GRP. [§255(b)]
GRP. [§219(b)]
[§2701]

CRS-25
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
3. Partnerships and Cooperation.
No provisions.
Adds a new §1242(f) to the 1985
No provisions.
Adds a new §1243 to the 1985 FSA to
FSA to allow special projects as
allow special projects as recommended
recommended by a state
by a state conservationist, which can
conservationist, which can respond
respond to meeting the requirements of
to meeting the requirements of three
three specified federal environmental
specified federal environmental
laws or addressing watersheds or other
laws or addressing watersheds or
areas with significant environmental
other areas with significant
problems. Allows the Sec. to provide
environmental problems.
incentives. Participants agree to a plan
Participants agree to a plan to adjust
to adjust implementation of
implementation of conservation
conservation programs to increase
programs to increase environmental
environmental benefits. Funding uses
benefits. Funding uses 5% of EQIP
5% of mandatory funding for
funds annually, with any unused
conservation programs, with any funds
funds to go to other EQIP activities
not obligated by April 1 to go to other
that year. [§203]
conservation activities that year. [§2003]

4. Great Lakes Basin Soil Erosion
No provisions.
Authorizes $5 million annually
No provisions.
and Sediment Control Program.
through FY2006 to implement a
Authorizes appropriations of $5 million
new soil erosion and sediment
annually from FY2002 through FY2007
control program for the Great Lakes
to implement a new soil erosion and
basin in §1240O of the 1985 FSA.
sediment control program for the Great
[§217(a)]
Lakes basin in §1240P of the 1985 FSA.
[§2502]
5. Grassroots Source Water
No provisions.
Authorizes appropriations of $5
No provisions.
Protection Program. Authorizes
million annually through FY2006 to
appropriations of $5 million annually
use technical assistance capabilities
from FY2002 through FY2007 to use
of rural water associations that
technical assistance capabilities of rural
operate wellhead or groundwater
water associations that operate wellhead
protection program in §1240Q of the
or groundwater protection programs in
1985 FSA. [§217(a)]

CRS-26
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
§1240O of the 1985 FSA. [§2502]
6. Desert Terminal Lakes. Authorizes
No provisions.
No provisions.
No provisions.
the transfer of $200 million from the
CCC to the Bureau of Reclamation (in
the Department of the Interior) to
provide water to “at-risk natural desert
terminal lakes”. The funds can not be
used to purchase or lease water rights.
[§2507]
7. Conservation Corridor
No provisions.
No provisions.
No provisions.
Demonstration Program. Permits one
or more states, with local governments
on the Delmarva Peninsula, to develop
and implement over 3 to 5 years a
conservation corridor plan to improve
the economic viability of agriculture and
the environmental integrity of
watersheds. [§2601-§2603]
The federal share will be up to 50% of
the total, and appropriations are
authorized at such sums as may be
necessary each year between FY2002
and FY2007. [§2604]
8. Administrative Requirements for
No provisions.
Adds a new §1244(b) which
No provisions.
Conservation Programs.
provides necessary funds from the
A. Assistance for Limited Resource
CCC to assist certain limited
Producers. Adds a new §1244(a) to the
resource, socially disadvantaged,
1985 FSA which provides unspecified
and beginning producers, and
incentives through conservation
Indian tribes to participate in
programs to assist beginning and limited
conservation programs by providing
resource producers and Indian tribes to
“education, outreach, monitoring,
foster new opportunities and to
evaluation, and related services.”
“enhance environmental
The Sec. may contract with other

CRS-27
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
stewardship”[§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]
B. Privacy of Personal Information
No provisions.
Adds a new §1244(g) to prohibit the
No provisions.
(Confidentiality). Adds a new §1244(b)
Sec. from releasing personal
to prohibit the Sec. (or any contractor to
information about individuals
the Sec.) from releasing personal
related to conservation programs,
information about individuals related to
except in aggregate. [§204]
conservation programs, except in
aggregate. Exceptions are specified.
[§2004(a)]
Treatment of data collected using the
Natural Resources Inventory to protect
the identity of individuals is specified.
[§2004(b)]
C. Regional Equity of Conservation
No provisions.
Requires that each state receive at
No provisions.
Spending. Requires the Sec. to give
least $12 million annually from
priority to funding of specified
FY2002 through FY2006, for
mandatory conservation programs in
conservation programs. Of the total,
states that have received less than $12
$5 million is to be used for EQIP,
million by April 1 each fiscal year
and $7 million is to be used for
(Spending for the CRP, WRP, and the
other conservation programs, with
Conservation Security Program is
any portion not obligated by April
excluded from this calculation). [§2701]
1of the fiscal year to be reobligated
to other specified programs. [§241]

9. Assessment of Conservation
No provisions.
Requires the Sec. to develop a plan
No provisions.
Programs. Requires the Sec. to
to better coordinate and consolidate
develop a plan to better coordinate and
the implementation of conservation
consolidate the implementation of
programs to insure funding of

CRS-28
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
conservation programs to eliminate
highest priorities while accounting
redundancy, streamline program
for regional variation. [§ 205(a)]
delivery, and improve services to
Requires the Sec. to provide the plan
producers. [§ 2005(a)]
(and recommendations) to both
Requires the Sec. to provide the plan
agriculture committees within 180
(and recommendations for
days of enactment. [§205(b)]
implementation ) to both agriculture
Requires the Sec. to provide a plan
committees by December 31, 2005.
(with a cost estimate) for updating
[§2005(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
to report to them on plan
implementation by April 30, 2005.
[§205(c)]
Requires the Sec. to revise
conservation technical standards
within 180 days of enactment, and
to update them every 5 years.
[§205(d)]

CRS-29
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 Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).
CRP capped at 39.2 million acres;
CRP capped at 41.1 million acres (the Water
CRP capped at 36.4 million
Capped at 39.2 million acres; mandatory
mandatory funding authorized through
Conservation Program would reduce it to
acres; mandatory spending
funding, including funding for technical
2011. (CBO estimates increase in
40.0 million acres, and then adds a .5
authorized through FY2002.
assistance, authorized through FY2007.
budget authority of $574 million
million acre pilot program, making the final
(16 U.S.C. 3831-3836, and
(CBO estimates increase in budget
through FY2006, and $1.517 billion
total 40.5 million acres.) Mandatory
3841) (CBO estimates
authority of $706 million through FY2007.)
through FY2011.)
funding authorized through FY2006. (CBO
baseline spending of $10.2
(§2101)
estimates increase in budget authority of
billion through FY2007.)
$931 million through FY2006.)
Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP).
WRP capped at 150,000 acres per
WRP capped at total enrollment of 2.225
WRP capped at 1,075,000
Capped at total enrollment of 2.275 million
calender year, and any acres within
million acres, with annual (calendar year)
acres in total with no annual
acres, with annual enrollment ceiling of
that cap not used in a given year can
enrollment limited to 250,000 acres, of
enrollment goal or limit;
250,000 acres; mandatory funding,
be enrolled in subsequent years;
which up to 25,000 acres can be enrolled in
mandatory spending
including funding for technical assistance,
mandatory funding authorized through
a new Wetland Reserve Enhancement
authorized through FY2002.
authorized through calendar year 2007.
2011. (CBO estimates increase in
Program; mandatory funding is authorized.
(16 U.S.C. 3837-3837f, and
(CBO estimates increase in budget
budget authority of $859 million
(CBO estimates increase in budget authority
3841) (CBO estimates no
authority of $1.498 billion through
through FY2006, and $1.726 billion
of $1.383 billion through FY2006.)
additional spending in
FY2007.) (§2201)
through FY2011.)
baseline as enrollment cap
has been reached.)
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program
WHIP mandatory funding authorized
WHIP mandatory funding authorized at:
WHIP authorized through
(WHIP) Mandatory funding, including
at: $25 million in FY2002;
$50 million in FY2002;
FY2002 at a total of $50
funding for technical assistance, authorized
$30 million in FY2003 and 4;
$225 million in FY2003
million in mandatory
at: $15 million in FY2002;
$35 million in FY2005 and 6;
$275 million in FY2004
spending from the funds
$30 million in FY2003;
$40 million in FY2007;
$325 million in FY2005;
made available to implement
$60 million in FY2004; and
$45 million in FY2008 and 9; and
$355 million in FY2006, and
the CRP. (16 U.S.C. 3836a)
$85 million annually in FY2005 through
$50 million in FY2010 and 11.
$100 million in FY2007.
(CBO estimates no additional
FY2007. (CBO estimates increase in
(CBO estimates increase in budget
(CBO estimates increase in budget authority
spending through FY2007 in
budget authority of $360 million through
authority of $155 million through
of $1.23 billion through FY2006.)
baseline.)
FY2007.) (§2502)
FY2006, and $385 million through
FY2011.)

CRS-30
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
Environmental Quality Incentives
EQIP mandatory funding authorized
EQIP mandatory funding authorized at:
EQIP authorized at $130
Program (EQIP) Mandatory funding,
at: $0.200 billion in FY2001;
$0.50 billion in FY2002;
million in mandatory
including funding for technical assistance,
$1.025 billion in FY2002 and 3;
$1.30 billion in FY2003;
spending in FY 1996, and
authorized at: $0.40 billion in FY2002;
$1.200 billion in FY2004 through 6;
$1.45 billion in FY2004 and 5;
$200 million annually in
$0.70 billion in FY2003;
$1.400 billion in FY2007 through 9;
$1.50 billion in FY2006; and
FY1997 through FY2002.
$1.00 billion in FY2004;
and $1.500 billion in FY2010 and 11.
$0.85 billion in FY2007.
(16 U.S.C. 3839aa-3839aa-
$1.20 billion in FY2005 and 6; and
Authorizes mandatory funding for a
Includes new programs for Partnerships and
8, and 3841) (CBO
$1.30 billion in FY2007.
Ground and Surface Water
Cooperation at 5% of annual EQIP
60% of funding each year goes to livestock
Conservation Program at: $30 million
authorization, Conservation Innovation
estimates $1.2 billion in
producers and 40% to crop producers.
in FY2002; $45 million in FY2003;
Grants at $100 million per year, Southern
additional spending
Unspecified portion of EQIP funding will
and $60 million in FY2004 through
Plains Groundwater Conservation at $15
through FY2007 in
go to new program for conservation
11. (CBO estimates increase in
million in FY2003 and increasing to $35
baseline.)
innovation grants, and specified portions of
budget authority of $4.650 billion
million in FY2006, and a pilot program for
$25 million in FY2002, $45 million in
through FY2006, and $10.850 billion
drinking water suppliers in the Chesapeake
FY2003, and $60 million annually in
through FY2011 for EQIP, and
Bay watershed at $10 million in FY2003 and
FY2004 through FY2007 will go to a new
increase in budget authority of $255
increasing to $25 million in FY2006. (CBO
ground and surface water conservation
million through FY2006, and $555
estimates increase in budget authority of
program (with $50 million of that total to
million through FY2011 for the water
$5.227 billion through FY2006.)
be used in the Klamath Basin). (CBO
conservation program.)
estimates increase in budget authority of
$4.6 billion for EQIP and $360 million for
water conservation through FY2007.)
(§2301)
Grassland Reserve Program (GRP)
GRP capped at 1million acres of
GRP capped at 2 million acres, with up to
New program – no
Capped at 2 million acres, and mandatory
“restored grassland” and 1 million
500,000 acres of native grasslands. GRP
provisions.
funding is capped at a total of $254 million
acres of “virgin grassland”, and
mandatory funding authorized at “such sums
through FY2007. (CBO estimates increase
mandatory funding is capped at a total
...as are necessary.” (CBO estimates
in budget authority of $83 million through
of $254 million through FY2011.
increase in budget authority of $44 million
FY2007.) (§2401)
(CBO estimates increase in budget
through FY2006.)
authority of $45 million through
FY2006, and $254 million through
FY2011.)

CRS-31
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
Farmland Protection Program (FPP).
FPP mandatory funding authorized at
FPP mandatory funding authorized at:
FPP authorized upper and
Mandatory funding, including funding for
no more than $50 million annually,
$150 million in FY2002;
lower acreage enrollment
technical assistance, authorized at:
and the upper and lower acreage
$250 million in FY2003;
limits of 340,000 acres and
$50 million in FY2002;
enrollment limits are eliminated.
$400 million in FY2004;
170,000 acres, respectively,
$100 million in FY2003;
(CBO estimates increase in budget
$450 million in FY2005;
through FY2002, with total
$125 million in FY2004 and FY2005;
authority of $250 million through
$500 million in FY2006; and
mandatory funding of $35
$100 million in FY2006; and
FY2006, and $500 million through
$100 million in FY2007.
million. (16 U.S.C. 3830)
$97 million in FY2007.
FY2011.)
Not more than $10 million annually goes to
(CBO estimates no additional
Acreage limits are deleted. Also authorizes
a new Market Viability Program, and the
spending through FY2007 in
a new Farm Viability Program, and
upper and lower acreage enrollment limits
baseline.)
appropriates necessary funds from FY2002
are eliminated. (CBO estimates increase in
through FY2007. (CBO estimates increase
budget authority of $1.750 billion through
in budget authority of $597 million through
FY2006.)
FY2007.) (§2503)
Resource Conservation and Development
RC&D is authorized permanently to
RC&D is authorized permanently to
RC&D authorized such
Program (RC&D) Authorized
appropriate such funds as may be
appropriate such funds as may be necessary.
discretionary funds as may
permanently to appropriate such funds as
necessary.
be necessary through
may be necessary. (§2504)
FY2002. (16 U.S.C. 3453-
3461)
Conservation Corridor Demonstration
No provisions.
Authorizes, from mandatory funding
New program – no
Project. Authorizes appropriations of
provided for EQIP, $10 million in FY2003;
provisions.
“such funds as are necessary” for FY2002
$15 million in FY2004; $20 million in
through FY2007 for projects on the
FY2005; $25 million in FY2006; and $0 in
Delmarva Peninsula. (§2601)
FY2007 for a nutrient reduction pilot
program in the Chesapeake Bay drainage
(and also funds a drinking water suppliers’
pilot program).

CRS-32
2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
Small Watershed Rehabilitation
Authorizes appropriations of $15
No provisions.
Authorized appropriated
Program. Authorizes mandatory funding
million annually in discretionary
funding at:
at: $45 million in FY2003;
spending “for FY2002 and each
$10 million in FY2002;
$50 million in FY2004;
succeeding year.”
$15 million in FY2003;
$55 million in FY2005;
$25 million in FY2004; and
$60 million in FY2006;
$35 million in FY2005.
$65 million in FY2007; and
(16 U.S.C. 1012)
$0 in FY2008.
Also authorizes appropriated funding at:
$45 million in FY2003;
$55 million in FY2004;
$65 million in FY2005
$75 million in FY2006; and
$85 million in FY2007. (CBO estimates
increase in budget authority of $275
million through FY2007.) (§2505)
Conservation Security Program (CSP)
No provisions.
CSP mandatory funding authorized at “such
New program – no
CSP mandatory funding authorized at
funds as are necessary”. (CBO estimates
provisions.
“such funds as are necessary” starting in
increase in budget authority of $387 million
FY2003. (CBO estimates increase in
through FY2006.)
budget authority of $369 million through
FY2007.) (§2001)
Partnerships and Cooperation Use up to
No provisions.
May use up to 5% of the mandatory funding
New program – no
5% of the mandatory funding for
for EQIP for special projects where
provisions.
conservation programs for special projects
enhanced technical and financial assistance
where enhanced technical and financial
is provided; any available funds not
assistance is provided; any available funds
obligated by April 1 of the fiscal year may
not obligated by April 1 of the fiscal year
be reallocated to EQIP.
may be reallocated to another program
receiving mandatory funding. (§2003)

2002 Farm Bill
Farm Bill Passed by House
Farm Bill Passed by Senate
Prior Law
Great Lakes Basin Program for Soil
No provisions.
Authorizes appropriations of $5 million
New program – No
Erosion and Sediment Control
annually from FY2002 through FY2006.
provisions.
Authorizes appropriations of $5 million
annually from FY2002 through FY2007.
(§2502)
Conservation of Private Grazing Lands.
No provisions.
Authorizes appropriations of $60 million
Authorized appropriations of
Authorizes appropriations of $60 million
annually from FY2002 through FY2006.
$20 million in FY1996; $40
annually from FY2002 through FY2007.
million in FY1997; and $60
(§2502)
million in “each subsequent
fiscal year.” (16 U.S.C.
2005b)
Grassroots Source Water Protection
No provisions.
Authorizes appropriations of $5 million
New program – no
Program. Authorizes appropriations of $5
annually from FY2002 through FY2006.
provisions.
million annually from FY2002 through
FY2007. (§2502)
Agricultural Management Assistance.
No provisions.
No provisions.
Permanently authorized $10
Permanently authorizes mandatory funding,
million annually to go to 10
and authorizes an additional $10 million
to 15 states that are
annually in FY2003 through FY2007.
underserved by crop
(CBO estimates increase in budget
insurance. (7 U.S.C. 524)
authority of $50 million through FY2007.)
(CBO estimates no additional
(§2501)
spending through FY2007 in
baseline.)
Desert Terminal Lakes (CBO estimates
No provisions.
No provisions.
New program – no
increase in budget authority of $200
provisions.
million in FY2002.) (§2507)