TAKEAWAYS

• Conservation practices are often better when used in a system rather than piecemeal
• Technical support is key to helping on-farm conservation programs succeed
• The NRCS is making funds available for systems-based conservation practices

Much has been made of the $700 million Regenerative Farming Pilot announced last year by the NRCS.

We all know what conservation is. We know what no-till is. We know what cover crops do and what improved soil health can accomplish. 

But at every farm conference I attend, there’s confusion and debate about what “regenerative agriculture” really means. 

Everyone has an opinion. Googling it provides endless nuances. It’s another example, in my humble opinion, of how buzzwords sometimes stifle progress rather than promote it.

At a very-well-attended press conference at Commodity Classic, I asked NRCS Chief Aubrey Bettencourt how the NRCS was defining regenerative agriculture. She immediately pointed to the landing page for the new program, which identifies 15 practices the agency considers “foundational” — and it’s not one practice or another.

“It’s multiple practices that are appropriate for that farm, that soil type, that climate, that cropping pattern, but that emphasizes soil health, water management and natural vitality,” Bettencourt said. “But that changes. The combination of those practices must be specific to the unique situation for every farmer.”

The practices the NRCS includes in the pilot program will look very familiar: crop rotation; contour farming; cover crops; mulching; drainage, forage harvest, grazing, reduced tillage and no-till, nutrient and irrigation water management; forest stands improvement, pest management conservation and strip cropping.

The emphasis of the program is using a system of practices in context of conservation management, rather than just one.

Ryan Britt, second vice president at the National Assn. of Conservation Districts, told me at the show the regenerative ag emphasis of the program is “still conservation” regardless of the term used. “And we've been doing conservation for a long time right beside the NRCS. As the national association we try to help our districts help the NRCS, but number one, we're trying to help the landowner. 

“So that may be helping with training for the district employees or board members. It’s also helping with grant opportunities as those come. We spend a lot of time trying to build up the district so that they can help the landowner.”

Britt said he’s excited about the emphasis on a whole-farm planning to conservation, rather than looking at once resource concern, such as a ditch that needs fixing. “Okay, what's going on? What's causing that ditch? How did we get here?” Britt said. “It’s not just about fixing the ditch but fixing everything around it. Having a plan for the next step and then having measurable results.”

Britt says there have been challenges at local conservation districts in the last few years due to shifting programs and emphasis, which requires farmers to pivot and align with current priorities. 

“Technical assistance is just a huge issue, to have enough people so when the landowner is interested, we actually have somebody there that can talk to them, show them what's working and not working, and where to go from there,” he says. 

Britt said he couldn’t argue with the NRCS’ definition of regenerative agriculture. “For me,” he adds, “I simplify it a little bit from what my grandpa told me, which was, ‘Leave it better than you found it.’”