Page images
PDF
EPUB

of starts would depend upon the number of projects for which sponsors have acquired water rights, land easements and rights-ofway and have installed the necessary nonstructural measures.

1981 CONSTRUCTION STARTS

Mr. WHITTEN. What is your latest estimate for the number of projects that will be started during fiscal year 1981?

Mr. BERG. There were five new construction starts in fiscal year 1981. However, we have been informed by OMB that there will be no additional new construction starts for fiscal year 1981, with all available funds being used for ongoing work.

Mr. WHITTEN. In connection with Public Law 566, you state that SCS is continuing to emphasize accelerated conservation land treatment in approved watersheds. You say that, "this provides more conservation land treatment in tributary areas above dams and is one nonstructural alternative to dams and channel modifications." Would you please give the Committee some examples of where you are using this and exactly what is being done?

Mr. BERG. The LaPlatte River Watershed in Vermont is the only land treatment plan approved for operations to date. We have others that are in the final review stages such as Lovejoy Pond Watershed, Maine, and Johnson Creek Watershed, Washington. The land and streambank conservation practices for erosion and sediment control in Vermont include use of diversions and grassed waterways, sediment buffer zones bordering the LaPlatte River and tributary brooks, critical area plantings, livestock exclusion, permanent conversion to pasture and hayland, terraces, proper waste management and utilization systems, and rock riprap bank protection.

PHASEOUT OF THE RC&D PROGRAM

Mr. WHITTEN. I notice you are phasing out RC&D. I do not know of any hold on you to phase out RC&D projects.

Mr. BERG. This policy began with a reduced budget proposal for fiscal 1977.

Mr. WHITTEN. Congress overrode that proposal then as well as in 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981. When are you going to realize Congress means to keep the program?

Mr. BERG. We would like to suggest that although the budget proposal for 1982 is to phase this program out——

Mr. WHITTEN. They have been proposing to phase it out for about five or six years.

Mr. BERG. Yes, Mr. Chairman. We would suggest the new policy people in the Department have not had an opportunity to look into all of these activities in detail.

Mr. WHITTEN. If you do not have the project, there will be nothing for them to observe.

Mr. BERG. The way we are presently heading in fiscal 1982 is that RC&D will be phased out.

Mr. WHITTEN. How many areas are requesting authorization as RC&D areas as of this time?

Mr. BERG. There are 48 requests on hand at present for authorization as RC&D areas.

Mr. WHITTEN. What consideration has been given to tightening the RC&D program up in order to make it more effective.

Mr. BERG. The Secretary of Agriculture appointed a USDA task force in 1978 to study the management of the RC&D Program. The task force looked at five areas related to management of the program. These included program objectives and focus, local leadership, the relationship between substate districts and RC&D areas, program delivery, and the role of the RC&D Coordinator. The task force report concluded that the program could be made more effective with better management of the RC&D Program.

Consideration was given to the task force report's findings in developing the fiscal year 1982 program budget. As envisioned by the task force report the program would emphasize natural resource concerns and their protection and development, rather than economic and employment benefits to be achieved through accelerated conservation treatment as originally conceived for the program objective in 1962.

The General Accounting Office has studied the program in 11 states and is currently drafting their report. Recommendations from this report might be useful in guiding program management; however, the Department has not yet seen the report.

CRITICAL AREA TREATMENT

Mr. WHITTEN. According to pages 3 and 4 of your statement, you say that $6.7 million will be devoted to accelerated treatment of serious conservation problems in various areas of the country. What will you be doing in these areas that you have not been doing in the past?

Mr. BERG. The program in these areas calls for intensifying our normal technical assistance activities to accelerate the application of those conservation practices which are most effective in treating the identified problems. This will be accomplished through the assignment of some additional SCS personnel to these areas and also through the use of cooperative agreements with local conservation districts and other concerned units of government. The objective is to work with land users on the land to fully identify the magnitude of the resource problems on individual operating units and to develop an orderly plan of action in dealing with these problems. By accelerating SCS assistance in these targeted areas, we can prioritize available resources in treating the "worst first" and thus maximize program accomplishments in these areas. This also encourages the focusing of other program efforts, both federal and nonfederal, and available financial assistance in providing a coordinated response needed to solve the problem.

Mr. WHITTEN. How will you distribute the additional resources you will be devoting to these areas?

Mr. BERG. A total of $6.7 million and from 175 to 200 staff-years will be devoted to the work in these critical areas. I would like to provide a table for the record which shows the distribution of these funds by problem area.

[The information follows:]

[blocks in formation]

1. Excessive erosion rates in the Palouse (20 to 30 tons per acre; Washington, Idaho,
some 100-200 tons per acre on steeper slopes).
Oregon.

2. Excessive erosion rates in the rowcrop areas of the cornbelt (up to lowa, Missouri..
25 tons per acre).

3. Excessive gulley, sheet, and rill erosion in untreated areas of the Georgia, Alabama. Southern Piedmont.

$840,000 $1,410,000

840,000 1,405,000

740,000 1,235,000

4. Excessive erosion rates of characteristically windblown, silt loess, sandy soils in the western Tennessee regions (23-90 tons per acre).

Tennessee, Kentucky,

875,000 1,490,000

Mississippi.

296,000 491,000

Utah.

409,000 669,000

5. Highly saline water and soils in irrigated areas of the West on the Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Virgin and Arkansas Rivers 1.

6. On-farm irrigation efficiencies below 40 percent in the water short Idaho, Montana, Nevada, areas of the West.

Oregon, Utah, Wyoming.

This is in addition to ongoing work on salinity problems in the Upper Colorado River Basin area.

Mr. WHITTEN. Was any additional legislation required in order to start this critical area program?

Mr. BERG. No, these activities are being carried out within the existing legislative authority of Public Law 46, the Soil and Water Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1936, as amended.

WATER AND SOIL-MOISTURE SHORTAGES

Mr. WHITTEN. According to page 7 of your statement, you say that potentially serious water and soil-moisture shortages in many parts of the United States are developing, and that these deficiencies may well carry into the 1982 season in some areas. What does this hold for increased erosion in these areas?

Mr. BERG. One of the more serious erosion consequences of prolonged drought in the western states is increased wind erosion. Our February 20, 1981 wind erosion report which covers all of the 10 Great Plains States indicates 13.5 million acres of land is in a condition to blow. This is an increase of 3.5 million acres over February of 1980. While recent rains may reduce the acreage, temporarily, as long as the soil-moisture condition is below normal there will be an increased potential for wind erosion.

Most of the Rocky Mountain States are experiencing below normal stream flows as a result of one of the lightest February snowpacks on record. By summer many irrigators could be out of water, leading to crop failures. As a result, some irrigated areas would be left fallow or have inadequate cover for erosion control for the 1982 crop year. This situation would further increase the potential for erosion by wind or water.

Soil moisture is also below normal in much of the East and Northeastern United States. Unless these conditions improve by summer, many cropland fields will not have adequate cover to provide erosion protection.

Mr. WHITTEN. What could SCS be doing to help alleviate these problems or at least the potential soil erosion problems that could be caused by these water and soil-moisture shortages?

Mr. BERG. SCS could and is working with the farmers and ranchers in water short areas to encourage the use of emergency tillage and the need to maintain vegetative cover where possible. In addi

tion SCS is providing technical assistance for the application of water conserving and wind erosion prevention practices. Much of SCS technical assistance is provided through the Great Plains Conservation Program and the Conservation Technical Assistance Program.

GREAT PLAINS CONSERVATION PROGRAM

Mr. WHITTEN. What is the current status of your plans for expanding the Great Plains Program?

Mr. BERG. We do not plan to expand the program beyond the current 518 active counties until such time as resources are available. Eligible counties were recently expanded from 469 to 518 counties. This was the first expansion since 1972. We will have to shift existing technical and financial assistance as determined on a priority basis after applications for assistance are received. We feel this will stretch available resources to the maximum thus limiting additional expansion at this time.

Mr. WHITTEN. Would you please bring the Committee up to date on the current situation in the Great Plains with respect to wind erosion problems?

Mr. BERG. We would be pleased to, as we have just released our second report of the 1980-81 wind erosion season. I will submit the full report for the record. In summary, 4,183,000 acres have been damaged to date in the Plains. This compares to 3,124,000 during the same period last year. The northern Plains States were the hardest hit, with 67 percent of the damaged areas. The persistent lack of moisture that is also resulting in the light snowpack in the Rocky Mountains is the major factor contributing to the damage. [The information follows:]

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

This report is a summary of wind erosion conditions from January 1 to February 28, 1981. It is based on estimates from SCS field offices in cooperation with other USDA field representatives and local authorities. Reports were submitted from 542 counties in the Great Plains States. Counties reporting are those in which wind erosion is prevalent or is expected during the current wind erosion season. The acreage of land damaged is cumulative for the period. Wind erosion figures for this

same period a year ago are given for comparison.

LAND DAMAGED

The 542 counties reported 4,183,866 acres damaged through the end of
February. Of the total land reported damaged, 94 percent (3,953,416
acres) was cropland, 4 percent (153,535 acres) rangeland, and 2 percent
(77,005 acres) other land. The Northern Plains States reported 67
percent of the land damaged (2,792,375 acres), and the Southern Plains
States reported 33 percent (1,391,491 acres). The greatest damage was
in South Dakota (901,500 acres) or 22 percent of the total, and the
least was in Wyoming (28,475 acres) for this period. Total land damaged
this year is three and one-half times more than the land damaged during
the same wind erosion period 1 year ago.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »