AN ANALYSIS OF ON-FARM IMPACTS FOR SOIL CONSERVATION AND NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION ABATEMENT PRACTICES AND POLICIES ON REPRESENTATIVE FARMS IN SOUTHEAST MINNESOT

A number of concerns have been expressed over the effectiveness of past soil conservation and non-point source pollution abatement policies in getting farmers to adopt needed control measures. Although a national soil and water conservation program has existed for forty-five years, nearly one-third of the nation's cropland with erosion hazards remain inadequately treated. The Resource Conservation Act of 1977 initiated an appraisal of the nation's soil and water resources and directed the Secretary of Agriculture to develop a program for furthering conservation and protection of these resources. Consideration in developing such a program is being given to voluntary as well as mandatory implementation strategies.;The purpose of this study is to estimate on-farm impacts from alternative soil conservation technology and policy options and to assess impact differences among farms because of differences in their size, soil composition and enterprise combinations. Eight representative farm models of southeast Minnesota are used to simulate net income, soil loss and applied soil conservation technology under alternative policy options. The farm models include small and large farms, farms with moderate and severe erosion hazard soils and farms with and without roughage consuming livestock enterprises. The impact of seven policy options is estimated for each representative farm. Among the policy options are a replication of the current Agricultural Conservation Program, mandatory soil loss controls as proposed by the Minnesota legislature, and a minimum conservation farm plan as necessary under a cross compliance type of strategy.;The results show that alternative soil conservation practices and policy options impact on farm incomes, soil loss and applied conservation technology. The largest reduction in income occurs under mandatory policies which reduce soil loss rates of tolerance levels. The range of income reduction on the eight farms is from 4 to 17 percent. The change in applied technology needed to achieve soil loss tolerance includes a reduction in row crop acreage, increased use of conservation tillages and added practices of contouring and strip cropping. It was found that cost-sharing as under the current Agricultural Conservation Program did not change applied soil conservation technology and results in no change in income or soil loss on representative farms. The adoption of a minimum conservation plan results in an income reduction of as much as 7 percent.;Mandatory policy options impact grain farms more than livestock farms. The income reduction on grain farms is from 7 to 17 percent while on livestock farms the reduction is 6 percent or less. Farms with severe erosion hazards have larger reductions in income under mandatory options than farms with moderate erosion hazards. Also, the percentage reduction in income on small farms is greater than on large farms for the policy options analyzed.