It’s somewhat surprising, but federal farm policies can fail on a local level. Local USDA offices may struggle to assist farmers if staffing dwindles. I’ve witnessed this firsthand after my 30-plus years as a district conservationist with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
Rather than being behind a desk, my role involved collaborating with farmers directly, visiting their fields, and helping create conservation plans tailored to their needs. It was crucial that the funds Congress allocated actually reached those working the land. The staff in these regional offices are vital to USDA’s conservation initiatives.
I experienced this early in my career. When I joined the local NRCS office in the early 1990s, my first producer was a skeptical rancher. We spent time together, walking his property, and developed a grazing plan that involved deep wells and cross-fencing. The improvements were remarkable—his skepticism faded over time, a pattern I observed repeatedly.
Eventually, he began sharing his positive experiences with others. As interest surged, our small office rapidly expanded; we became the first in years to require more staff.
Today, however, this foundational support is under significant strain. A recent USDA Office of Inspector General report noted that the NRCS lost 2,673 employees, a 22 percent cut, just in the first half of 2025. That’s one of the largest reductions across the entire Department of Agriculture, and it’s a cause for concern for many farmers.
As someone who has been on both sides—former district conservationist and current farmer—I share these worries. Together with my son, we manage a 200 cow/calf operation and grow corn and soybeans in South Dakota. Like many farmers, we face rising costs, uncertain markets, and increasingly severe weather. These issues are just the beginning of what family farms like ours encounter.
Even the most efficiently run farms need support during such challenging times. That’s where the USDA’s voluntary, locally-led conservation programs come into play. These resources help farmers manage risks, boost productivity, and foster long-term resilience.
In my own farming business, programs like the Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) and Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) have been instrumental. They enabled us to install deep wells and create more efficient grazing systems, significantly increasing our productivity.
With such positive outcomes, it’s no wonder these conservation initiatives are popular. Farmers widely support funding for these programs, but the demand often exceeds what’s available. Even with additional funding approved in 2022, the USDA couldn’t fulfill nearly 64 percent of the applications for EQIP, CSP, and the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program last fiscal year.
Many in Congress, especially Republican leaders, see the value of these programs. Chaired by GT Thompson and John Boozman, recent legislative efforts like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act aim to bolster long-term conservation funding. Under the leadership of President Trump and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, a new $700 million restoration pilot program was announced, reflecting an acknowledgment of how conservation can enhance both agricultural productivity and public health.
While these are encouraging developments, conservation funds become ineffective without staff to manage them. As someone who identifies as a conservative, I commend efforts to prioritize farmers, but reforms shouldn’t come at the expense of fulfilling the USDA’s primary mission: serving farmers.
The recent job cuts have serious consequences. Losing each staff member lengthens the time farmers have to wait for application approvals and payments. This can force farmers into tighter financial situations—often taking on more debt and potentially missing crucial opportunities to safeguard their operations. In an already tight-margin environment, these delays can mean the difference between staying in business and shutting down.
It’s vital to remember that efficiency is about achieving results, not diminishing the workforce essential for producers. Ultimately, even the most favorable agricultural policies can’t succeed without ample staffing.
As a farmer, I aspire to pass my business down to the next generation. For that to happen, access to conservation programs and the necessary personnel is critical. Policymakers need to engage with farmers as discussions on the farm bill continue, ensuring that the USDA has the resources and staff needed to support those who grow our food.
