Agriculture, conservation must work together

By Jennifer Ellis and Bas Hargrove
Friday, March 28, 2008 5:32 PM CDT

Idaho is changing fast. And this growth is taking its toll on our private rural working lands. According to a recent study by Sian Mooney of Boise State University, Idaho lost 145,000 acres of range and cropland between 1997 and 2003, while developed lands increased by 56,600 acres. Idaho’s working ranches, farms and forests not only produce food, fiber and jobs, they provide other important benefits to Idahoans like clean water and wildlife habitat.

Conservationists and agricultural producers need to work together to find solutions to the tremendous challenges facing Idaho’s rural landscapes. We have a growing history of collaboration in tackling important issues like invasive weeds, post-fire restoration, and most recently House Bill 467—the Idaho Ranch, Farm and Forest Protection Act. H467 would have provided tax incentives to producers who donate the development rights on their lands. Although the bill died in committee, the can-do spirit of collaboration that led to this legislation lives on through a coalition of supporters comprising 30 groups representing more than 100,000 Idahoans.

What remains clear is that Idahoans must rally around pragmatic solutions rather than laying blame and grinding axes. And unfortunately, there still is too much of the latter happening on both sides—from the shrill cries of extremists who want to stop all uses of the land to the obstinate objections of folks who refuse to accept or acknowledge the changing operating environment. It has never been more important to rise above principled differences in search of pragmatic solutions. There’s simply too much at stake.

According to Professor Mooney, crop and livestock production contributes nearly $4 billion, or 7.3%, per year to Idaho’s gross domestic product, while recreation — much of which occurs on private lands — contributes over $2 billion annually, or 4.1%. Together these industries account for more than 88,000 jobs n over 10% of the state’s total employment.

Moreover, agricultural lands provide a boon to local tax bases, while new subdivisions are often a drain. Repeatedly, Idaho and national studies show that farmers, ranchers, and forest owners pay more in county and municipal taxes than they receive in services, while the reverse is true for residential property taxpayers. A 2004 report by the American Farmland Trust summarizing these studies showed that for every dollar in local taxes paid, working lands received just $0.36 in services, while residential developments received $1.15.

These figures do not account for other important benefits from private working lands less easy to quantify, such as contributions to our rural heritage, local communities, scenic beauty, and wildlife habitat. It’s these “quality of life” factors that are drawing more and more people to Idaho, and ironically, threatening the goose that’s laying the golden egg.

Idahoans care about these benefits, and they’re willing to pay more to protect them. In November, Republican public opinion researcher Bob Moore found that more than six in ten Idahoans were concerned about the loss of family farms and ranches, pollution of streams and lakes, and unplanned growth and development. Seventy percent favor setting aside more state money to protect land around lakes and streams, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, and preserve natural areas.

Leaders in conservation, agriculture, and the Legislature owe it to these voters, and to future generations of Idahoans, to find solutions to protect what’s best about Idaho. Despite the setback on H467, our coalition remains committed to meeting the challenges facing Idaho’s working lands.

Jennifer Ellis is president of the Idaho Cattle Association. Bas Hargrove is Policy Representative for the Idaho Chapter of the Nature Conservancy. and lives in Boise.

Comments »

Comment on this story

Comments will be approved within 48 hours

Name:

Email: (optional)

Comments:

Image Verification: (Case sensitive)