Source: POLITICO'S MORNING AGRICULTURE, 9/7/18

Conservation practices like no-till and cover crops can deliver annual returns and increased yields for farmers, as well as improved value for landowners, bankers and crop insurers, according to a report from the Environmental Defense Fund. The group contracted with accounting firm K-Coe Isom to conduct a case study of three farmers to examine how conservation efforts affected their bottom lines. Results from that analysis were then compared with 10 other farms in the firm's finance programs.

The report found that conservation practices can impose cost increases, such as paying for cover crop seed, but yield cost savings in other categories, like decreased fertilizer costs as a result of planting cover crops, creating a net positive return. But there's not a one-size-fits-all for conservation plans, and it takes time to find the right combo of practices and management adjustments, the research concluded.

Why this matters: The analysis aims to provide a foundation for making a case for increased investment in USDA conservation programs. Currently there's a lack of comprehensive data on environmental and financial outcomes from conservation practices.

Farm bill breakdown: The farm bill conference committee is negotiating to reconcile two very different conservation titles. The House measure, H.R. 2 (115), proposes close to $1 billion in cuts to the conservation title over a decade, and would merge parts of the Conservation Stewardship Program into another incentive-based conservation initiative, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program. The Senate legislation, S. 3042 (115) , on the other hand, keeps funding consistent across the title and leaves in place CSP, which encourages long-term conservation practices.