The Conservation Reserve Program was created in the 1985 Farm Bill to trim grain inventories and reduce soil erosion on highly erodible cropland. The program is now more than 35 years old, having been a key conservation piece of seven federal farm bills.

This spring, USDA announced two new pilot programs within CRP. The Soil Health and Income Protection Program (SHIPP) is a short-term version offering three- to five-year contracts focused on soil health, with provisions allowing limited grazing and forage harvesting for livestock producers. CLEAR30 (Clean Lakes, Estuaries and Rivers) is a long-term program offering 30-year contracts focused on water quality practices for lands enrolled in CRP.

These new CRP variations continue the evolution of the program to better address secondary objectives, including preserving our long-run capacity to produce commodities, improve water quality, and provide wildlife habitat. By the time you read this, these new programs may be full.

However, if you are interested in either option, I encourage you to contact your local Farm Service Agency or Natural Resources Conservation Service office to learn more. While the acreage allocated to each program is small, expressions of landowner interest will help shape the future size of each option.

CRP holds around 1 million acres

Total enrollment in CRP has fluctuated — primarily at the discretion of Congress, which has changed program caps in order to address the balance between commodity supply management and program costs. The 1985 Farm Bill included a goal of 40 to 45 million acres. Subsequent farm bills changed the goal to an actual acreage cap, first at 36.4 million acres in 1990, growing to 39.4 million acres in 2002 and then shrinking to 24 million acres in the 2014 Farm Bill. The current farm bill will allow the program to grow to 27 million acres by 2023.

CRP acreage across the state has varied, as it should, in response to a complex combination of factors including program caps, rental rates and crop prices. After reaching a peak of 1.8 million acres in 1993, CRP acres in Minnesota declined to 1.1 million acres in 1998, and then it rebounded 1.8 million acres again in 2007.

Global commodity shortfalls in 2012, combined with the significant reduction in program caps passed in the 2014 Farm Bill, resulted in a second trough in which CRP acreage in Minnesota declined to 1 million in 2020. Current conditions are such that CRP acreage is likely to enter another growth phase.

Options, flexibility important

The long-term success of CRP is due to a broad base of supporters. Farmland owners appreciate the opportunity to idle marginal cropland in times of lower prices. Hunters like to see more habitat. And water quality advocates seek to minimize farming’s environmental footprint.

Unfortunately, I often hear CRP enrollment used inappropriately as a measure of farmer stewardship. During times when acreage is shrinking, there are lamentations that CRP will disappear entirely, even though 1 million acres has proven to be a solid floor for more than 30 years. I reiterate that changes in CRP enrollment are primarily driven by Congress. Landowner interest is steady, as landowners continue to offer more acres for enrollment than the program accepts.

Still others wonder how land can be enrolled in CRP for many years, then be brought back into production. Keep in mind that CRP payments represent annual rent. The land is not being bought — though some states, including Minnesota, use CRP as a lever to do so.

In my conversations with CRP participants, the overwhelming majority plan to reenroll when contracts expire, subject to program changes. The primary reasons the minority cites for not reenrolling include inadequate rental rates and changes in eligibility requirements.

I hope and predict that CRP will continue for several more farm bills. The expanding list of program options is a good sign — and positive response to feedback from farmers, farmland owners and others. Over time, the program is becoming more targeted to better address resource concerns and more flexible to address farmer needs.

Formo is executive director of the Minnesota Agricultural Water Resource Center.