Thanks to federal support for necessary local investments, this enormous progress toward a national goal was accomplished without bankrupting small cities and towns. For example, many conservation practices have high capital or management input costs, but do not generate additional revenues. Agriculture is not organized in a fashion that allows increased costs of production to be passed on to consumers. As such, on-farm expenditures for conservation compete directly with servicing farm debt, and other family financial needs. In addition, implementing more stringent and complex standards usually increases the need for more costly approaches and technologies.
Farmers are ready to do their part in accomplishing current and future national environmental goals.
However, what will be expected of a cattle feeder in North Dakota will be quite different from the challenges faced by citrus grower in Florida. Local leadership in designing and implementing realistic programs, focused on what local stakeholders agree are the most pressing local agricultural environmental problems is required. Our State Departments of Agriculture stand ready to provide that leadership. As I have noted, many are already moving forward to design and implement effective producer-oriented environmental programs, utilizing local and state resources. Programs like New York's AEM have the potential, given the resources, to assist even more producers for the benefit of the environment and our agricultural industry.