COST

- BENEFIT ASSESSMENT

Conservation Reserve Program Interim Rule

Date: June 14 , 2010 Agency: USDA / Farm Service Agency

Contact: Alex ander Barbarika Natural Resources Analysis Group Economic and Policy Analysis Staff Farm Service Agency U.S. Department of Agriculture Washington. D.C. 20250 (202)

- 720

- 7093

I. Title

Conservation Reserve Program Interim Rule

.
II. Summary of Costs and Benefits

The changes to CRP in this rule are expected to cost about $ 67 million over ten years (2011

- 2020). This is a net cost that reflects roughly $ 77 million in additional CRP payments to participants over th e next ten years for additional land enrolled through the county maximum acreage waivers

, revised cropping history requirements and payments for pollinator habitat practices, minus roughly $10 million in reduced payments for the revised permissive uses. T here are expected to be non

- quantifiable environmental benefits from waivers that will allow more environmentally sensitive land to be enrolled through continuous signup, from additional highly erodible land enrollment that could result from making land in long

- term hay rotations eligible, and from the incentives for pollinator habitat.

T he provisions for cropping history years and local preference are expected to have little to no cost. These provisions will largely substitute one CRP participant for another, or one practice for another, leading to a shift in costs and benefits to different participants and practices, but little net cost or benefit for the CRP

program as a whole.

III. Need for Action

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 ( the 2008 Farm Bill, Public Law 110

- 246 ) , was enacted June 18, 2008. This cost

- benefit assessment (CBA) provides the analysis accompanying an interim rule that addresses changes to the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) that were not addressed in previous

CRP interim rules published June 29, 2009 and May 14, 2010. The earlier rules and CBAs addressed

non

- discretionary provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill . This rule addresses the F arm Bi ll’s discretionary

1provisions. These provisions are intended to

, among ot her things, improve the environmental benefits of the CRP and clarify allowable forage harvesting procedures.

IV. Overview

T he 2008 Farm Bill extends Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) enrollment authority through September
30, 2012

, limits enrollment to 32 million acres beginning October 1, 2009 , and makes changes to the

program . Interim rules were published previously implementing the mandatory 2008 Farm Bill provisions, including: (1) changes to Farmable Wetland Pilot Program eligibility criteria; (2) provision of

50

- percent cost

- share for tree thinning activities; (3) implementation of new payment limitation applicability and new adjusted gross income

- based eligibility criteria, and (4) implementation of the Transition Incentives Program. This interim rule covers the discretionary CRP provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill (see Table 1).

Table 1. 2008 Farm Bill Provisions Implemented with this Interim Rule

Provision 2002 Farm Bill 2008 Farm Bill Change/Comment

Maximum County

Enrollment Limited to 25 percent of county cropland acreage, unless producers were determined to have difficulty implementing soil conservation plans and local
economies would not be adversely impacted. Provides a n additional waiver
for enrollment of continuous signup practices (including CREP) upon request by local government. W aivers are still al lowed, but on a very limited basis because the vast majority of farms have implemented soil conservation plans.

Cropping History Required planted or considered planted status 4 of 6 years prior to 2002 for acreage to be enrolled

. Requires planted or considered planted status 4 of 6 years prior to 2008. Prohibits making land eligible by establishing cropping history after

enactme nt.

Local
Preference No p rovision. Requires giving preference to
lands located near the residence of person offering
the land. Applies only if lands have equal environmental
benefits to lands offered
from non

- local persons

.

Permissive
Uses Allowed managed grazing if grazing plan followed. Allows routine grazing if grazing plan followed, and prescribed grazing to control
invasive plants

. Removes p rovision limiting harvest of forage to no
more than once in three

years.

Pollinator
Habitat No provi sion. Provides authority to encourage development of pollinator habitat. Farm Bill provides authority, but no directions or goals.

Indian Tribes
and Limited
Resource
Farmers and
Ranchers No provisions. Provides authority to add
incentives for Indian tribes and
limited resource farmers and
ranchers. Farm Bill provides authority, but no directions or goals.

2Land Eligibility Land in long

- term hay rotations not eligible unless
rotation occurred with agricultural commodity
between 1996 and 2001. Allows longer period of years to be used to determine if hay
is in rotation

. Anecdotal evidence exists that some producers were denied eligibility because they were in long

- term
rotations.

Alternatives considered in this analysis are primarily to implem ent the changes or to not implement them. However, as these provisions are discretionary, other alternatives are analyzed where appropriate.

V. Costs and Benefits of this Rule

Table 2. Cost Estimates ($1,000,000) , Undiscounted

FY 2011

- 2015 FY 2016

- 2020 FY 2011

- 2020

County Waivers for Continuous Signup $36.1 $ 5. 1 $ 4 1. 2

Cropping History Window Update

-- -- --

Local Preference

-- -- -- Permissive Uses (Haying/Grazing)

- $4.2

- $5.7

- $9.9

Pollinator Habitat Incentives $ 10.5 $ 14.4 $ 24.9

Incentives for Indian Tribes and Limited

Resource Farmers and Ranchers

-- -- --
Long

- Term Hay in Rotation $8.5 $ 2.6 $ 11.1

Total $ 50.9 $ 16.4 $ 67.3

A. Maximum County Acreage Waivers

Before implementation of this interim rule, no more than 25 percent of a county’s cropland could be enrolled under CRP or the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) unless : ( 1) producers in the county were having difficulty implementing conservation plans

, and ( 2) local economies would not be adversely affected. This interim rule adds an additional waiver provision allowing the 25 percent limit to be exceeded for lands enrolled under CRP’s continuous signup, which includes the Farmable Wetlands Program (FWP), th e Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) , and conservation initiatives such as State Acres for Wildlife Enhancement (SAFE) , subject to county government request and Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) approval. For a number of years, most waiver r equests under the

pre

- 2008 Farm Bill waiver provisions were denied because nearly all farmers appear to have implemented their conservation plans. This change will allow additional acres to be enrolled in counties that are at the
25

- percent maximum.

As of April, 2010, only 27 counties have 25 percent or more of their cropland enrolled in CRP. A total of 102 have more that 20 percent of their cropland enrolled . These represent small percentage s of the 2,612
counties with CRP enrollment (Table 3 )

. 3Table 3 . Continuous and General CRP by Percent of County Cropland Enrolled. 1/

Percent of County Cropland Enrolled

< 10 % 10%

- 14% 15%

- 19% 20%

- 24% >=25%

Number of Counties 2,013 201 117 102 27 Acres Enrolled General Signup 7,239,070 4,511,253 5,355,597 7,426,423 2,123,154 Continuous/CREP CREP 767,634 115,556 65,749 21,606 617
Non

- CREP 1,867,391 517,340 334,981 210,269 17,603 Total Continuous 2,635,025 632,897 400,729 231,875 18,220 Total CRP 9,874,095 5,756,327 5,756,327 7,658,298 2,141,374 Source: CRP active contract data, April 2010. 1/ Does not include marginal pasture.

Examining enrollment by percent of county cropland enrolled indicates that the additional waiver provision will have little impact on overall CRP enrollment. As indicated in Figures 1 and 2 (the coverage maps at the end of this document) , there is very little overlap between counties with high continuous signup and those with high general signup enrol l ment. C ontinuous signup accounts for only 2 50 ,000 acres ( less than 1 percent of CRP’s 31 million acres) in counties with 20 percent or more of their cropland enrolled (Table 3 ).
C ost and benefit impacts will b e slight because few counties are at or near the 25

- percent limit , and those
that are have little continuous enrollment . O f the counties with more than 25 percent of cropland enrolle d, only one (Polk County, Minnesota) has a significant amount of continuous signup enrollment (see Appendix Table 2 ).

The co st of this additional waiver provision is estimated at $36 million over 5 years. This cost is estimated based on the expectation that there would be some additional enrollment as a result of the waivers over the

near term. For this CBA, costs are estimat ed based on the assumption that additional enrollment would occur through FY 2014, a s acreage in CRP stabilizes near the 32

- mill ion

- acre cap. Once the cap is reached, any additional enrollment because of the waivers would result in enrollment reductions e lsewhere.
Cost estimates include rental and cost

- share payments and incentives , and are detailed in Appendix Table 3

. With an updated baseline for the forthcoming FY 2011 Mid

- Session Review, the cost would be somewhat
lower.

The new waiver opportunity will allow enrollment of additional continuous signup acreage, which is expected to increase non

- quantifiable environmental benefits, as continuous signup practices and initiatives are designed to provide higher benefits per acre than ge neral signup lands.

As an alternative, this rule could specify a limit on the allowable percentage of cropland subject to the
waiver (no more than 50 percent of cropland in a county , for example) . This was not the selected alternative; no such limits ar e specified in the interim rule. Placing limits could potentially reduce the additional continuous signup acreage that could be enrolled in a few counties

, with only very minimal impacts on costs or benefi ts for the program as a whole, because (as noted a bove) very few counties are at or near the 25 percent level, and even fewer would be at or near at higher limit.

B. Cropping History Update

The 6

- year cropping history window used for determining eligibility is updated from 1996

- 2001 to

42002

- 2007. Under this provision, land that was planted or considered planted to an agricultural commodity

, or that was in conserving use in 4 of the 6 years

, meets basic eligibility criteria . Other criteria must be met as well, but except for one change for long

- term hay ing discussed later in this CBA, the land eligibility criteria were not changed between the 2002 and 2008 farm bills . The update allows land that has been cropped recently, but that was not cropped between 1996 and 2001

, to be eligible. T his is likely to result in only minimal changes in eligible land . In fact, it may result in reduced overall eligibility because acreage planted during 2002

- 2007 was lower than in 199 6

- 2001 (see Table 4 )

. While some individual fields may have been cropped during 2002

- 2007 that were not cropped during 1996

- 2001, t h e cropping history update is not expected to have any measurable impact s on CRP’s costs or benefits.

Table 4

. Acres Planted to Principal Crops b y Year.

Year Acres Year Acres
1996 333,682 ,000 2002 327,283 ,000
1997 332,072 ,000 2003 325,693 ,000
1998 329,970 ,000 2004 322,317 ,000
1999 329,255 ,000 2005 317,640 ,000
2000 328,685 ,000 2006 315,645 ,000
2001 324,584 ,000 2007 320,369 ,000 Average

‘ 96

- ‘ 01 329,708 ,000 Average

’ 02

- ‘ 07 321,491 ,000

Source: N ational A gricultural S tatistics S ervice

As there is no flexibility in the years of the 6

- year window and in the provision requiring planted or considered planted status in 4 of the 6 years, no alternatives are discussed

.

C. Local Preference

The rule enacts the 2008 Farm Bill requirement to give preference to enrollment offers from owners and operators that reside near the land offered over those from non

- local residents, in cases where the

e nvironmental benefits are equivalent. This change would have little or no impact on enrollment because
of the C RP offer accept ance process . Under the competitive general signup process , offers are selected based on an environmental benefits index (EBI) score. For each signup

, a minimum acceptable score is set and all offers with that score or better are accepted. Thus, local preference would have no effect because
all offers within a county with the same EBI score are either accepted or rejected. Unde r CRP's continuous signup, all offers that meet eligibility criteria are accepted without competition and local preference would
also have no effect. As a result, t his change is not expected to have any measurable impac ts on the costs or benefits of the C RP program as a whole

.

D. Permissive Uses

The rule amends the permissive uses provisions to remove the prohibition against managed haying or grazing more than once every three years and adds routine grazing as a permissive use. Harvest of forage, whether managed or in response to an emergency, must be accompanied by a rental payment reduction commensurate with the economic value of the activity, generally set at 25 percent. H arvest is prohibited during nesting and brood

- rearing periods

, grazing must be consistent with the Natural Resources Conservation Service Field Office Technical Guide grazing standards

, and activities must be consistent with the conservation purposes of the program

– these restrictions on permissive uses are not changing with
this rule

. While some changes may occur in the frequency of harvest activities under the revised permissive use provisions , it is difficult to estimate the extent that this will occur. It is expected that each

5State’s Technical Committ ee will determine the allowable frequencies. Because of slow vegetative growth rates in the areas with the most CRP enrollment (Northern and Southern Plains, and Mountain production regions , as shown below on the map of Farm Production Regions ), it is lik ely that any increased harvest of forage would occur in the more eastern areas of the U.S.

About one million acres were hayed or grazed under non

- emergency conditions in each of 2007 and 2008 ( Table 5 ). If , under the revised provisions, haying and grazing increased by 2 0% in the 6 eastern regions (by about 50 ,000 acres per year), savings in CRP rental payments would be expected to total about $ 1,000 ,000 per year (Table 6 ). Any impacts on feed grain production or the livestock sector are expected
to be minimal.

The rule also adds: 1) routine grazing, 2) prescribed grazing for the control of invasive species , 2) haying and grazing in response to a drought or other emergency, and 3) wind turbine installations to the list of permissive uses subject to a rental payment reduction. These uses were already subject to a payment reduction by procedure, so th ese clarifying rule change s do not have any practical effect on CRP costs and
benefits

.

6Table 5 . CRP Acreage Hayed or Grazed under Non

- Emergency Conditions.

Table 6 . Estimated Additional Acres Hayed or Grazed per Year.

E. Pollinator Habitat Incentives The 2008 Farm Bill provides the authority to encourage the establishment of habitat for native and managed pollinators, and the rule amends the regulations accordingly. It states that CCC may encourage the development of habitat and use of conservation pr actices for pollinators, but does not address the specific nature of any incentives that may be adopted. According to the National Academy of Sciences, there is 2007
REGION AVAILHAYEDGRAZED TOTAL PCT.

Northeast300,0236510 75 0.0% Appalachian531,22576,7681,660 78,428 14.8% Southeast169,3222180 218 0.1% Delta States230,943960 96 0.0% Corn Belt3,706,627310,53531,032 341,567 9.2% Lake States1,634,61638,5233,213 41,735 2.6% Northern Plains7,215,640484,06841,967 526,035 7.3% Southern Plains5,035,6526,83359,187 66,020 1.3% Mountain7,460,04310,42060,509 70,929 1.0% Pacific2,125,1913,47010,061 13,531 0.6% U.S.28,409,282930,995207,6391,138,635 4.0%

2008
REGION AVAILHAYEDGRAZED TOTAL PCT

Northeast281,6704930 493 0.2% Appalachian438,0164530 453 0.1% Southeast144,46017435 208 0.1% Delta States194,18127282 354 0.2% Corn Belt3,320,101128,4909,360 137,850 4.2% Lake States1,485,64576,6362,413 79,050 5.3% Northern Plains6,405,322480,60429,905 510,509 8.0% Southern Plains4,811,59318,48014,293 32,773 0.7% Mountain7,192,719154,62481,528 236,152 3.3% Pacific2,072,7556,2416,500 12,741 0.6% U.S.26,346,463866,466144,1151,010,581 3.8%

ADDIT'LADDIT'L
AVAILPERCENTACRESPERCENTACRESAVERAGEPAYMENT
REGION FOR H/GH/GH/GH/GH/GRENTREDUCT.

Northeast260,1530.1%23720.0%47$93$1,101 Appalachian387,9867.4%29,01420.0%5,803$64$92,845 Southeast120,3020.1%16720.0%33$38$317 Delta States173,9380.1%19020.0%38$45$426 Corn Belt2,937,6916.7%195,88920.0%39,178$85$832,529 Lake States1,221,3273.9%47,95920.0%9,592$60$143,876 Northern Plains5,388,9757.6%395,5960.0%0$39$0 Southern Plains4,050,2411.0%40,4140.0%0$35$0 Mountain6,335,2972.1%135,1210.0%0$33$0 Pacific1,951,0570.6%11,9670.0%0$50$0 U.S.22,826,9653.9%856,5546.4%54,691$78$1,071,093

7evidence of a decline in the abundance of some pollinator populations. If additional habitat is developed as a result of incentives provided, pollinators and the vegetation they pollinate will benefit, but the extent of potential non

- quantifiable environmental benefits are not assessed here.

Assuming 50,000 acres per year are established with pla nts with high pollinator benefits at a cost

- share $50/acre higher than that for typical CRP plantings, costs would be $2.5 million to approximately $3.0 million per year (see Appendix Table 5).

F. Incentives for Indian Tribes and Limited Resource Farmer s and Ranchers

Authority to provide incentives to Indian tribes and limited resource farmers and ranchers is included in the 2008 Farm Bill, and in the rule. Such incentives will be coordinated with other USDA programs that provide assistance to Indian Tribes and limited resource farmers and ranchers, and the specific amounts and eligibility requirements for the incentives has not yet been decided, so it is difficult to estimate the CRP
costs and benefits for the incentives at this time . In any case, pa rticipation in CRP will be subject to the 32 million acre cap, which will limit the costs and benefits of these incentives.

G

. Long

- Term Hay Eligibility

The rule expands eligibility to make lands in long

- term hay rotations eligible for CRP

, given all other eligibility criteria are met. It does so by amending the definition of an agricultural commodity to include
alfalfa and other multi

- year grasses and legumes, a change that will result in a small increase in eligible
lands. Based on the 1997 Nationa l Resource Inventory (NRI) data on crop histories of sample points, there are about 42 million acres in hay rotations of 4 years or longer. Many of these would meet the cropping history criteria without the 2008 Farm Bill changes. Assuming that lands in 5

- 8 year rotations would most closely resemble acreage that would become eligible as a result of this change, then eligibility would increase by up to 8.8 million acres (Table 7 ) . Not all of these acres would meet the CRP’s other eligibility
criteria , how ever

.

Table 7

. Acres of Continuous Hay (Average Rotation Length)

Length Acres 4 years 12.6 mil.
5

- 8 years 8.8 mil.
9

- 12 years 7.0 mil.
13

- 16 years 14.1 mil.
Total 42.4 mil.

States most likely to contain the most acres in the 5

- 8 year rotation category are in the Plains and Midwest, although New York also has a significant amount (Table 8 ). Because these lands are already in long

- term cover, the soil conservation and water quality benefit s from enrolling t h em in the CRP would probably be relatively low, although the permanent vegetative covers will benefit wildlife . In addition, s ome lands could be converted to annual cropping if not enrolled . T o be approved for enrollment, these lands would likely have to have a very high erodibility index or be specifically targeted within a CREP.

8Table 8

. States with the Most Acres in 5 to 8 Year Hay Rotations.

State Acres South Dakota 664 ,000 Wisconsin 599 ,000 New York 521 ,000 Kansas 493 ,000 Missouri 481 ,000 North Dakota 467 ,000 Montana 392 ,000 Pennsylvania 384 ,000

Alternatives regarding this provision would be the allowable length of the rotation. Allowing for a longer period of time for the land to be in continuous hay, for example 9

- 12 years, would increase eligibility by an
estimated additional 7.0 m illion acres

. Costs and benefits would be minimally affected by the length of rotation, because of the small change in eligible acreage that would occur relative to the estimated 270 million eligible acres (based on a CBA completed in 2003). The cost of this provisi on is estimated at $8.5 million over 5 years. With the updated baseline in the forthcoming FY 2011 Mid

- Session Review, this
estimate would be somewhat lower.

9Figure 1.

Figure 2.

10Appendix Table 1. CRP Enrollment, April 2010.

GENERAL

-------------- CONTINUOUS

------------- REGION TOTAL SIGNUP C REP N ON

- CREP TOTAL

NORTHEAST 386,493 74,870 295,702 15,921 311,622

APPALACHIA 790,620 504,783 165,959 119,878 285,837

SOUTHEAST 976,335 810,272 40 166,023 166,063

DELTA 1,428,705 1,010,152 56,517 362,036 418,553

CORN BELT 4,679,377 3,182,673 277,086 1,219,618 1,496,704

LAKE 2,308,106 1,717,816 200,324 389,966 590,290

NO. PLAINS 7,721,601 6,846,481 88,393 786,727 875,119

SO. PLAINS 4,159,040 4,096,046 253 62,741 62,994

MOUNTAIN 6,728,732 6,494,941 49,908 183,883 233,791

PACIFIC 2,141,984 1,961,720 53,241 127,023 180,264

U.S. 3 1 ,320,992 26,699,755 1,187,422 3,433,815 4,621,237

11Appendix Table 2 . CRP Enrollment in Counties with Greater than 24 Percent of Cropland Enrolled.

----------- ACRES ENROLLED

---------- PERCENT

STATE COUNTY TOTAL GENERAL CONTINUOUS ENROLLED

MINNESOTA POLK 136,295 125,216 11,080 46.81 IDAHO BANNOCK 81,501 81,467 34 40.86 TEXAS ANDREWS 35,624 35,624 0 35.98 NEW MEXICO QUAY 107,721 107,721 0 35.07 TEXAS KENT 24,922 24,922 0 33.84 NEW MEXICO ROOSEVELT 166,603 166,603 0 32.91

TEX AS BAILEY 118,075 117,985 90 32.49 IDAHO POWER 123,406 123,325 81 31.94 ALASKA DELTA 23,116 23,112 5 31.91

NEW MEXICO CURRY 186,499 186,499 0 31.45 KANSAS CLARK 63,993 63,940 54 29.65 COLORADO CROWLEY 21,461 21,461 0 29.45 OKLAHOMA CIMARRON 147,767 147,767 0 28.79 KANSAS HAMILTON 129,031 129,031 0 28.53 KANSAS MORTON 90,758 90,700 58 28.46 COLORADO PUEBLO 27,889 27,889 0 28.43

W ASHINGTON ASOTIN 24,956 24,956 0 28.31 MISSISSIPPI WILKINSON 4,892 4,892 0 28.14 MISSISSIPPI CLAIBORNE 12,842 12,676 166 28.03 MISSISSIPPI JEFFERSON 3,966 3,966 0 27.55 WASHINGTON DOUGLAS 156,266 155,801 465 27.46 LOUISIANA CALDWELL 3,188 3,130 58 26.95

IDAHO ONEIDA 58,532 53,416 5,116 26.95 TEXAS GAINES 179,523 179,523 0 26.63 MONTANA PRAIRIE 43,331 43,331 0 25.76 COLORADO KIOWA 182,954 182, 954 0 25.65 TEXAS DALLAM 112,847 112,847 0 25.34 OREGON SHERMAN 75,800 75,630 171 24.84 COLORADO WELD 247,269 246,319 950 24.6 5 KANSAS NESS 108,050 104,195 3,855 24.61 TEXAS YOAKUM 72,970 72,970 0 24.58 MONTANA HILL 285,201 285,017 184 24.44

MISSISSIPPI GRENADA 10,696 8,645 2,051 24.37 MONTANA DANIELS 144,186 143,402 784 24.36 OREGON WASCO 50,896 50,627 269 24.34 WASHINGTON GARFIELD 48,632 4 5,378 3,253 24.25 COLORADO LINCOLN 134,690 134,690 0 24.20 MONTANA TOOLE 171,154 165,614 5,539 24.17 COLORADO PROWERS 141,139 139,263 1,876 24 .02 OKLAHOMA BEAVER 110,256 110,256 0 24.01

12Appendix Table 3. Cost Estimates: Waivers of County Cropland Limits

.

Appendix Table 4. Cost Estimates: Additional Acres Hayed or Grazed. County Maximum Waivers
FY 2011FY 2012FY 2013FY 2014FY 2015FY 2016FY 2017FY 2018FY 2019FY 2020Total
Initial Contract Year Acres$/A Rental Payments
FY 20100750000000000 FY 201150,000773,825,0003,825,0003,825,0003,825,0003,825,000 FY 20125,00078390,150390,150390,150390,150 FY 20135,00080397,953397,953397,953 FY 20145,00081405,912405,912 Total65,00003,825,0004,215,1504,613,1035,019,0155,019,015000022,691,283
Cost-Share
FY 20100100000 FY 201150,0001023,060,0001,530,000510,000 FY 20125,000104312,120156,06052,020 FY 20135,000106318,362159,18153,060 FY 20145,000108324,730162,36554,122 Total65,0003,060,0001,842,120984,422535,931215,42554,12200006,692,020
PIP
FY 2010080000 FY 201150,000822,448,0001,224,000408,000 FY 20125,00083249,696124,84841,616 FY 20135,00085254,690127,34542,448 FY 20145,00087259,784129,89243,297 Total65,0002,448,0001,473,696787,538428,745172,34043,29700005,353,616
SIP
FY 201001000 FY 201150,0001005,000,000 FY 20125,000100500,000 FY 20135,000100500,000 FY 20145,000100500,000 Total65,0005,000,000500,000500,000500,0000000006,500,000

Total10,508,0007,640,8166,487,1106,077,7795,406,7805,116,434000041,236,919

Haying/Grazing
FY 2011FY 2012FY 2013FY 2014FY 2015FY 2016FY 2017FY 2018FY 2019FY 2020Total Rental Payment Reductions Acres$/A
FY 20100200 FY 201150,000201,020,000 FY 201250,000211,040,400 FY 201350,000211,061,208 FY 201450,000221,082,432 FY 201550,000221,104,081 FY 201650,000231,126,162 FY 201750,000231,148,686 FY 201850,000231,171,659 FY 201950,000241,195,093 Total450,00001,020,0001,040,4001,061,2081,082,4321,104,0811,126,1621,148,6861,171,6591,195,0939,949,721

13Appendix Table 5. Cost Estimates: Pollinator Habitat Incentives.

Appendix Table 6. Cost Estimates: Long

- Term Hay in Rotation. Pollinator Habitat
FY 2011FY 2012FY 2013FY 2014FY 2015FY 2016FY 2017FY 2018FY 2019FY 2020Total
Initial Contract Year
Cost-Share Acres$/A
FY 20100500 FY 201150,000512,550,000 FY 201250,000522,601,000 FY 201350,000532,653,020 FY 201450,000542,706,080 FY 201550,000552,760,202 FY 201650,000562,815,406 FY 201750,000572,871,714 FY 201850,000592,929,148 FY 201950,000602,987,731 Total450,00002,550,0002,601,0002,653,0202,706,0802,760,2022,815,4062,871,7142,929,1482,987,73124,874,302

Long-Term Hay Rotations
FY 2011FY 2012FY 2013FY 2014FY 2015FY 2016FY 2017FY 2018FY 2019FY 2020Total
Initial Contract Year Acres$/A Rental Payments
FY 201001000000000000 FY 201110,0001021,020,0001,020,0001,020,0001,020,0001,020,000 FY 20125,000104520,200520,200520,200520,200 FY 20135,000106530,604530,604530,604 FY 20145,000108541,216541,216 Total25,00001,020,0001,540,2002,070,8042,612,0202,612,02000009,855,044
Cost-Share
FY 2010050000 FY 201110,00051306,000153,00051,000 FY 20125,00052156,06078,03026,010 FY 20135,00053159,18179,59126,530 FY 20145,00054162,36581,18227,061 Total25,000306,000309,060288,211267,965107,71327,06100001,306,010

Total306,0001,329,0601,828,4112,338,7692,719,7332,639,081000011,161,054

14