Farmland protection efforts
By James D. Ritchie
Are they worth it? It's a hot-button issue. Nationally, some of these efforts have backfired. Right now, a land preservation bill is working its way to the Missouri House. It offers farmers a choice.
The Midwest is losing ground. Not so much to erosion or boundary disputes but to suburban sprawl. Take Missouri, for example. In the past 15 years, more than 500,000 acres of agricultural land were developed for other purposes. Of that total, 29 percent came from cropland, 32 percent from pasture and 37 percent from forestland. Developed land in Missouri now totals nearly three million acres or about 6.5 percent of the state's 41.9 million acres of privately owned land.
Suburban sprawl moves at a more rapid rate in some other states. Texas loses about 244,000 acres of farmland a year to nonfarm developments. In Pennsylvania, nearly as much land--224,000 acres per year--is converted to something other than agriculture.
The conversion of farmland to nonfarm uses is not just happening around urban areas such as St. Louis and Kansas City. Small- and mid-sized towns are experiencing leapfrog growth. A growing practice with cities both large and small is to annex road rights-of-way for several miles into the country. This gives city maps a sort of "octopus" appearance, with tentacles reaching well beyond the city proper.
"That's happening here," said Russell Martin, who farms a few miles south of Ashland in central Missouri. "Ashland has annexed the old U.S. Highway 63 right-of-way. The city limits are within a half mile of our property along the road."
Apparently, city councils believe this tactic gives them a good toehold for annexing adjacent areas, if and when development occurs.
Despite the nonfarm sprawl, urban areas still make up less than 3.5 percent of the total U.S. land. And, the loss of farmland to asphalt is not threatening food and fiber production. Although Missouri rural land is being converted at about 35,000 acres per year, total land in Missouri farms is 30.1 million acres, the same as a year ago. And that number has changed little during the past several years.
Still, suburban growth is one of today's hot-button issues, especially for farmers whose land is being hemmed in by rows of houses or shopping malls. Perhaps the biggest threat of this kind is posed by urban dwellers with a yen for the simple country life. They buy up 10- to 40-acre tracts of farmland and build houses on them.
Longer term, unchecked growth may become a threat to the U.S. farm productive edge. Once land is changed to nonfarm uses, it seldom changes back. You rarely see workers bulldozing shopping centers to make cornfields.
Especially in strong farm areas, states are looking for ways to keep farmland in agricultural production. The plans and programs proposed and adopted vary from state to state and often have unforeseen consequences.
Even well intentioned land-use planning does not always sit well with rural landowners. Take Oregon's Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC), for example. The Oregon legislature created LCDC and gave it broad regulatory powers in rural land-use development. First, LCDC zoned 97 percent of Oregon's nonurban land for farming and timber, ostensibly to protect rural land.
In and of itself, statewide land-use zoning may not be so bad. But Oregon's LCDC goes further. Now if an Oregonian wants to build a dwelling in an agricultural zone, he must prove that he is selling $80,000 or more of gross agricultural products from the land annually--whether it's 30 acres or 3,000. The rules establish "Exclusive Farm Use" zones that most Oregonians thought would apply only to prime farmland, such as that in the rich Willamette Valley. But in practice, the rules also apply to rocky, desert land that is virtually worthless for farming.
Missouri has what appears to be a more reasoned, voluntary approach to farmland preservation. State representative Jim Kreider of Nixa, Mo., introduced a bill in the 2000 General Assembly that allows counties to establish a farmland preservation program. Under the bill, property in the program could not be taken by eminent domain unless a majority of county commissioners and supervisors of the local soil and water conservation district (SWCD) approve. And sewer and water assessments must be held in abeyance until those improvements are made and the property is connected to the utility.
To be eligible for protection under Kreider's bill, property of 10 acres or more must be certified by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as being used as a farm. Also, the farm must be managed in accordance with NRCS erosion control practices.
The landowner and his local SWCD must agree that the land will not be used for nonfarm purposes for 10 years, except that three lots may be developed. Land admitted into the farmland preservation program is to be assessed at one grade lower than it would otherwise be assessed and taxed accordingly.
Landowners may opt out of the program by giving written notice to the county. If they want out of the agreement before 10 years have elapsed, they must pay any difference in taxes between the program assessment and the normal assessment.
As this is written, the farmland preservation bill (House Bill 1811) had passed the House Agriculture Committee with a unanimous "do pass" recommendation and had been forwarded to the Missouri House Speaker for inclusion on the House floor calendar.