Let me begin by recalling what I said in my introduction to USDA’s booklet, "America's Private Land, A Geography of Hope." I said that 50 years from now people will remember us, not for the details of our firm programs, but for our "commitment to preserve our natural resources to ensure the sustainability of our food supply." I said then, and I reaffirm to you today, that taking care of our land and water for our children and their children is at the heart of the legacy for which I want to be remembered.

Now I’m sure there are more than a few skeptics who might say, that all sounds fine Dan, but you’ve got a massive farm crisis on your hands. Falling commodity prices and shrinking incomes are putting a squeeze on many farmers and ranchers around the country. Don't you consider that more important than dealing with conservation and the environment?

Of course dealing with the farm crisis is critical. Naturally we spend a lot of our time and resources on addressing this crisis. But the first thing I would say is that the basic premise of the question is wrong. It implies that you have to choose between the environment and the economy as if they were two mutually exclusive and opposing forces. What this administration has shown in the last six years is that it is a Wise choice. All across the American landscape we are seeing environmentally friendly businesses reap huge profits while still being responsible to Mother Nature.

In agriculture, our farmers and ranchers are now seen not as part of the problem but as partners with a shared agenda.

It is important for the USDA to pursue the full use of its conservation authorities and programs to provide assistance to farmers during the farm economic crisis while achieving the intended conservation benefits.

We need to continue to look at innovative approaches for conservation that also improve the economics of farming, whether these approaches are through cash incentives, risk management, credit assistance, farm tax credits, or other means. And we need our very best efforts to ensure that conservation is an even more important contributor to the farm safety net.

But I also want to make clear that even as we are caught up in dealing with the immediate situation, it’s critical that we not lose site of the big picture. We cannot let the dialogue on ag issues become all trees and no forest. The firm economy will bounce back. But then we will still have to answer vitally important questions about what agriculture and the environment will look like in the next century.

Nevertheless, the counter-argument goes, farmers in trouble have got to make money now, or they’ll go under. But I ask you — on what page in the great book of farming does it say that to make money in agriculture you have to sacrifice the land and water? I would argue the opposite. Agriculture's very existence depends on land and water. And we now know how precious they are, and that we can no longer take them for granted.

I'm reminded of a line from The Grapes of Wrath. A farmer, lamenting his worthless, dust bowl farmland exclaims, "It’s my dirt, it’s no good, but it’s mine." That was a painful lesson for our grandparents. We’ve come a long way since the days when over-farming helped turn the dirt to dust. Science has taught us much, but I also think deep in our hearts we’ve come to a basic understanding that what we do today affects our quality of life and years to come. Today's farmers have a much greater understanding of sustainable farming. They appreciate the importance of good environmental practices to their long-term bottom line, and we need to be more aggressive and creative than ever in encouraging farmers to do the right thing.

Right now we are helping farmers and ranchers be better stewards of the land, and we are helping them add to their bottom line over the long-term. For example, farmers are reducing the need for commercial fertilizer by becoming better nutrient managers. Other practices that also help farmers and ranchers cut costs include conservation tillage, rotational grazing, irrigation water management, and using bio-engineered products that cut down on the need for pesticides.

What makes the conservation programs a success is the folks on the ground. No one sitting in an office here in Washington or a state capital is going to devise a be-all-end-all plan that will work on every farm or in every community. Good environmental practices are best developed by the people who best understand their own situations. Our role is to provide the technical and financial support they need.

We must recognize that we’re all in this together. That we can’t expect farmers and ranchers to shoulder all of the burden. That environmental management is a team effort and that each and every one of us has a role to play. That’s why EPA and USDA have come together, recognizing that we have a shared responsibility to help keep our lands healthy and our waters clean, and that the voluntary approach is the most effective way to achieve these goals. That’s why the work we do with the conservation districts and the states is so important. It is through local conservation districts that we've pinned the trust of private landowners so our folks can walk their land and provide them with important technical assistance. We’re all part of the team behind the farmer and the rancher.

But to do what we need to do, we need adequate funding and the federal budget wars are making things tough. Tough, but not impossible. We all know the squeeze is on. People are looking at their ledgers to see where and how to cut. This is true whether we're talking about a federal budget, a farmer’s operating budget or a household budget. But smart financial planning needs to be prudent, pragmatic and fiscally responsible, always with one eye on the future.

Those same fiscally responsible principles are at work in every agency and at every level of government today. We are continuing down the path of smart management. So when it comes time to deliver conservation programs, we are including those efforts in our push to be better managers while still being able to provide farmers and ranchers with the services they need.

But our concern for the environment does not stop at the farm gate. Since the environment is everywhere, so too must our efforts on behalf of the environment be everywhere — on public and private lands. And we must be practical in how we manage those lands.

This administration places high priority on smart growth — on carefully choosing the kind of development we want for the future, or what vice president Gore calls ‘livability.' Under this administration's Lands Legacy initiative, USDA is a key player in helping promote livability for all Americans by sustaining America’s open spaces, farmland, forests and wildlife through land acquisition, through helping cities and states develop urban parks, green ways, wetlands and wildlife habitat and through buying conservation easements and improving urban community forests.

We are moving forward aggressively with our environmental and conservation efforts. But with as much as we are doing, let’s not kid ourselves, them is much to be done. For example, we need to address the safety and stability of more than 10,000 aging small watershed dams that contribute to flood control, water supply, recreation and wildlife habitat.

Part of our effort is opening a dialogue on environment and conservation in the 21^st century. Later this spring we will have a panel on agriculture's role in land stewardship.

The bottom line is that the quality of life for future generations depends on the quality of the environmental choices this generation makes. As we prepare to meet the economic and conservation challenges of the next century, let us remember the words of the great Chief Seattle, "Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth."

Missouri Monitor. April 1999.