The House Farm Bill was guided to passage by Pennsylvania Congressman Glenn 'GT' Thompson (PA-R) who serves as Chair of the US House Agriculture Committee.
Conservation, Energy, and Environment
One of the most staggering funding cuts in the bill comes for Conservation Operations (Con Ops).
The House funds Conservation Operations at $800 million, roughly $50 million below its current funding level. Included in the $800 million is $636.243 million for Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA), a $61.38 million cut, and zero dollars for the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI), an $8 million cut.
This is the largest cut to CTA proposed by the House in recent years, and shows cuts above and beyond reductions in Conservation Operations directed at CTA.
As in past years, the House continues to attempt to zero out funding for GLCI, despite the growing popularity of grass-based systems among new farmers and ranchers.
This all comes after FY26 appropriations levels cemented one of the largest cuts to Con Ops and CTA in the last decade.
Producers across the country depend heavily on the availability of on-the-ground technical assistance to implement effective conservation practices.
CTA facilitates the administration of USDA conservation programs by supporting local staff, conservation planning, and the extension of specialized technical assistance to producers.
Conservation Operations funding also protects agricultural land and wetlands, supports NRCS soil surveys, snow surveys, water supply forecasting, and plant materials centers.
These provide important information and tools to help producers monitor and manage their land more effectively.
Cuts to CTA are especially notable this year, as the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the primary agency within USDA that delivers on-the-ground conservation assistance to farmers, ranchers, and landowners, is facing record-low staffing levels.
CTA funds are flexible in that they allow NRCS to support both its own staff and TA providers at third-party organizations.
This is perhaps one of the most important accounts fully funded in order to ensure producers can access conservation programs going forward.
Local and Regional Food Systems
While the number of farms in the US has steadily declined since 2012, according to the 2022 Census of Agriculture, an inverse effect is being seen with the proportion of farms reporting local and regional sales and the revenue generated from these sales.
Unfortunately, despite the clear economic opportunity local and regional markets offer farmers and rural communities, the House bill underdelivers on investments in programs that support local and regional farm economies.
Sustainable and Organic Research
The FY27 House bill also failed to adequately fund sustainable and organic research.
The Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE) received $40 million in the House proposal, $8 million below its current funding level, and well below the $60 million that NSAC and over 100 farmers, food, and farm organizations requested.
SARE provides farmers and researchers with vital opportunities to better understand agricultural systems, increase profitability, and build on farm resilience.
What's Next
Given that the US House Appropriations Committee was able to pass the FY27 Agriculture Appropriations bill nearly two months earlier than they did last year, all eyes now turn toward the Senate.
As of posting, the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee has yet to release a FY27 USDA funding proposal, though one is expected in the coming weeks.
In the past several years, the Senate has skipped a subcommittee markup, moving instead straight to a full Committee markup.
Click Here for the full NSAC Inside the US House Farm Bill analysis.
Visit the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition website for more information on federal farm legislation and policy.
[Posted: May 16, 2026] PA Environment Digest
No comments :
Post a Comment