I think what Last Dollar suggests in his opening posting makes a lot of sense. It is important that sportsmen contact FSA and let them know we want the CRP program to continue because of the many benefits it provides to upland birds, other wildllife, soils, the ag economy, and good water and air quality.
But I have to differ a bit with Larry who says the future of the program is threatened by requiring the agency to do some impact analysis on their programmatic decisions.
The comments of many here show the program does have impacts on the environment, many of them highly positive. Some of the latest significant changes to the program came though not under the current administration but under George W. who was ready to allow widespread early spring mowing of CRP all the way north to the Canadian border, and the same mowing (without any payment reduction) under a new "Emergency Feed Use" provision just prior to the most recent election. It would have turned the CRP program into a hay production program instead of a commodity price support, soil, and wildlife conservation program.
Let's see... 40 million acres of farm land growing grass instead of grain with public subsidy payments from taxpayers ranging from $40-75/acre. I see it as an important investment. Others see it as socialism, welfare, or worse.
Larry, just do the math on the costs, the geographic extent and the resource effects.... Do major changes in the program warrant an EIS? Heck yes.
