Successfully preserving farmland takes many things. Three of the most important are: farmers who are devoted stewards of their land; money that is available to purchase the development rights to the land; and people who know the farmers and the sources of funds and who can bring them together at the right time. In the Connecticut River Valley we have been exceedingly lucky to have all these ingredients in place for 25 years. We benefit from wonderful views, historical continuity, diversity of people and in the economy, less development (and its related traffic and both air and water pollution), as well as from locally-grown food and other agricultural products. The goal of the program is to save the land for future agricultural possibilities, and it is working. According to Richard Hubbard, who has directed the program for years, "if you own farmland in this Valley and want to get the equity for it, there is no reason to start by selling house lots. Programs exist to get the equity to the farmer, and still preserve both the land the ability to farm it."
But the effort to save farmland for farming is not done. To make farming economically possible, large blocks of land must be saved, not scattered parcels. Unfortunately, the future of the programs and people who do this work is in danger. The state's Agricultural Preservation Restriction program, which has been used very successfully throughout our valley, is almost out of funds. And the people who have made the program a success seem to be leaving, perhaps from discouragement.
Amherst in particular has made good use of the APR program. According to figures provided by the Town's Conservation Department, Amherst currently has almost 1,842 acres in the program in 32 different farms. That's slightly over 10% of the total acreage in town. These lands make agriculture of various kinds possible in a town that has otherwise become very suburban in its land uses. Owners of the farms have been able to access the equity in their land, which in most cases is the only valuable asset they own, without converting the land into a use that removes it from the possibility of agricultural use. The APR program also reduces the cost of the land for a new farmer. Among Amherst's farmers are several who bought the land from the family who sold the development rights; they could not have afforded to buy it at house-lot prices. Our success has been based on the committed work of Pete Westover and others, plus the town's willingness to meet the requirement of paying 10% of the cost: we've put our money where our mouths are.
The Amherst Conservation Commission has several more farms on its list for future preservation. As of January, Amherst had five farms with applications pending. In the valley towns near us the number of acres needing protection is much bigger. In Hadley, for example, with some of the finest farmland in the country, there were four farms with applications pending, and the overall goal is to protect 4,000 acres (only 1,700 acres are now in the program). In Sunderland, 11 farms have applied, in Deerfield 11 more. All these are farms where the owners have decided to join the program, and are waiting for the money. Many of these owners are old, and want to protect their land as part of their legacy to it, their town, and their heirs. They have to decide now.
The APR fund currently doesn't have the money to respond, but all is not lost. The legislature is considering a major Environmental Bond bill which includes $45,000,000 for the APR program. You can help push that bond bill along by attending a rally in support that is scheduled for Wednesday, March 13, 9:30 am to 1:00 pm at the State House in Boston. Or, if you can't go to Boston in mid- week, by contacting your legislators to urge them to support it.
While you're contacting legislators, contact the Governor, too. It's her bond bill, so that's not a problem. The worry is who she'll appoint to replace Agricultural Commissioner Jay Healy, who has decided to take early retirement as of March 15th. It is absolutely crucial that whoever takes over that post be committed to continuing the existing program, and its highly successful staff. In other words, clear away roadblocks and stay out of the way of the people who know what they are doing, such as Richard Hubbard, the Deputy Commissioner who has run the APR program for years. He resigned, but we hope he can be lured back.
Among Hubbard's accomplishments has been making use of federal dollars to supplement state funds. In the future, there are likely to be far more federal funds available: the new version of the Farm Bill includes a Farmland Protection Program; the House version of the bill includes $50 million a year; the Senate version raises that to $375 million per year. Those funds can only be used as matches to an active state program.
Hubbard's major value, however, is as a person who knows the program, knows the farmers, and is known to them. Selling of land or rights by someone who grew up on the land is a very personal matter; people don't just say "yes" to the suit that knocks on the door. It takes years to build trust in a person and in the program that person represents. A study done by the American Farmland Trust five years ago found that 90% of the farmers who had sold development rights to the program would do it again; there is simply no substitute for that reputation. Farmers, like most large landowners, are naturally suspicious of "the state." It took most of a couple of decades to overcome that suspicion. In this area, he has worked with other people who also have worked for decades to preserve land; those people include officers and employees of land trust organizations (including Pete Westover, Dave Ziomek and Judy Eiseman) and employees of other state agencies, such as the Department of Environmental Management's Terry Blunt. These people, and the usually anonymous owners are our local heroes.