WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee’s markup of the 2012 farm bill proposes cuts in conservation programs administered by the USDA, of $6.3 billion. Meanwhile, the House Ag Committee conducted a hearing on Capitol Hill to gauge farmers’ interest in conservation programs in an effort to draft its own version of a farm bill.

No matter which version or compromise of the bill is adopted, the availability of conservation funding for farmers and ranchers will likely be greatly affected when new legislation is passed this year or next. Illinois’ new state conservationist said even though the Senate markup calls for a drastic reduction in funding for conservation practices, the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in Illinois will continue to serve farmers and rural landowners.

“I am aware of those initial figures,” said Ivan Dozier, who was appointed to the position of state conservationist in April. “NRCS expected we’d be facing some cuts, given the economic climate of the times. Of course it’s disappointing, but we will be prepared for some cuts, and will find ways to absorb them in a way that still allows us to work with our farmers and continue to put conservation solutions on the ground.”

Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) was critical of the Senate committee decision, calling it the “wrong time“ to make critical cuts to conservation funding.

“Clearly the farm bill needs reform,” stated Kind. “But deep cuts to conservation programs are not the answer. There is waste to be found – including the billions of dollars in farm subsidies supporting few but very large agribusinesses, or the taxpayer funds going to subsidize Brazil’s cotton industry. We’ve got to weigh our priorities here and ensure a smart farm and food bill for the 21st century.”

Across the aisle, the House Subcom-mittee on Conservation, Energy and Forestry held a hearing April 26 to gather input from the ag community about how conservation programs should be structured in the farm bill.

Witnesses, including Garry Niemeyer, president of the National Corn Growers Assoc. and a farmer from Auburn, Ill., testified to the importance of conservation programs to assist producers and landowners, while also acknowledging the difficulty lawmakers face in reauthorizing farm bill titles.

“Given the fiscal challenges we face, we know that we will have to reduce conservation spending while improving the efficiency of program delivery,” said subcommittee Chair Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.). “(The) panel provided us with important feedback on how we can achieve these goals while keeping our farms profitable and ensuring a better return on investment for both our nation’s producers and the American taxpayer.”

Niemeyer said it is important to acknowledge the impact of farm bill conservation programs over the past several decades, which have resulted in lasting environmental improvements of agricultural lands. “Over a 20-year period from 1987 to 2007, soil erosion per bushel of corn decreased 69 percent, energy use per bushel of corn decreased 37 percent, irrigation water per bushel of corn decreased 27 percent, greenhouse gas emissions per bushel of corn decreased 30 percent and land use per bushel of corn decreased 37 percent,” he said.

“In light of the extremely difficult fiscal and economic conditions that our nation faces today, our groups recognize the monumental task before this committee to advance a new farm bill that addresses a broad range of nutrition and agriculture concerns across the country. Our growers also understand they must be a part of the solution to address our nation’s budget deficits and are prepared to accept spending reductions in farm programs.

“However, the size and scope of these cuts must not jeopardize important program functions. Fortunately, we believe there are opportunities in the conservation title to consolidate or eliminate duplicative programs in order to achieve savings, while also working more effectively for producers,” he added.

The Senate committee version of the farm bill was before the full Senate for amendments and approval, as of press time. If approved by the Senate, the bill would then be handed to the House committee for markup and approval before proceeding to the full House floor.