Some conservation groups are angered by a preliminary budget document released by the White House that slashes the budget for NRCS technical assistance for farmers in the 2027 budget year.

Although the USDA has trumpeted efforts to get more agency funding to the farmers that needed it, the budget proposal shows conservation technical assistance would be from $850 million in 2026 to $111.4 million in 2027, and there would be widespread staff reduction at NRCS state offices as well. The NRCS has already lost more than 2,300 people since 2025.

Overall, the Trump Administration proposes to cut the USDA’s budget by nearly $21 billion, a 19% decline over 2026. The overall budget proposal would reduce spending across the federal government by $660 billion, but a $1.5 billion increase in defense spending is requested.

Speaking of the USDA, the White House said its budget proposal, “focuses on the needs of American farmers and ranchers, which is predominantly to get the federal government out of their business while supporting the great American food supply.

“The (USDA) is a bloated Washington D.C. bureaucracy with multiple management layers and many extraneous programs that are irrelevant to supporting an America First agricultural policy.”

The group Invest in Our Land (IIOL) blasted the data Sunday, noting that states like Arkansas, South Dakota, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Louisiana, Colorado and Minnesota would have only 6 to 8 staff after previously hosting 37 to 52 people. The organization notes the NRCS has lost 22% of its workforce.

“America’s farmers and ranchers are facing punishing economic headwinds ranging from high input costs and volatile commodity prices to extreme weather and growing uncertainty about the future,” said IIOL Executive Director Rebecca Bartels. 

“Federal conservation programs are among the most effective, proven, and popular tools they have to cut costs, boost productivity and build the resilience they need to survive these conditions. But these programs only work if NRCS has the staff to deliver them and right now, it doesn’t.”

“By failing to address this staffing crisis and instead proposing to eliminate all discretionary funding for Conservation Technical Assistance — the conservation planners, soil scientists, and engineers who are the backbone of NRCS program delivery — this budget proposal would make a bad situation worse.” 

The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) also criticized the Budget Proposal. 

“The Administration’s USDA budget proposes one of the most staggering disinvestments from farmers and rural communities in recent memory,” said Mike Lavender, NSAC Policy Director, in a statement. “Amidst rising farm bankruptcies and unprecedented instability in American agriculture, this budget proposal would double down on the damage and radically reduce USDA’s ability to serve farmers. 

“The budget entirely eliminates funding for farmer-led agriculture research, conservation support that helps farmers build productivity and resilience, and investments in urban agriculture and rural small businesses alike.”

The National Assn. of Conservation Districts (NAC) also panned the budget proposal, noting more than 70% of U.S. land is privately owned and the health of soil, water, natural resources and communities depends on stewardship decisions farmers and landowners make. 

“Conservation technical assistance provides technical expertise to any producer who needs it, regardless of whether they participate in an assistance program such as EQIP or CSP. That investment pays for itself many times over by providing the information and tools needed to encourage proactive stewardship and implement beneficial conservation practices," said NACD CEO Jeremy Peters. “Proactive stewardship, whether regenerating soils, protecting drinking water, or reducing wildfire risk, is far less costly than the economic and public health consequences of overlooking the health of our natural resources.”

There is a chance, however, that the budget austerity may not occur. E&E News’ Grace Yarrow reported, said Congressional appropriators have previously ignored President Trump’s suggestions to cut USDA’s budget and focused on protecting funding for bipartisan programs. 

“Last year, Congress rebuked Trump’s proposed $7 billion cut and instead funded the department at a similar level to the previous year as part of a November spending package negotiated to end the government shutdown,” Yarrow said.