Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Number Five
April 2001
Agricultural Sustainability
and Smart Growth:
Saving Urban-Influenced Farmland
This paper was written by Edward Thompson, Jr., Senior Vice President,
American Farmland Trust* in collaboration with the Funders’ Network for
Smart Growth and Livable Communities. It is the fifth in a series of translation
papers sponsored by the Funders’ Network to translate the impact of sprawl
upon issues of importance to America’s communities and to suggest opportuni-
ties for progress that would be created by smarter growth policies and prac-
tices. Additional issues addressed in the series of translation papers include
social equity, workforce development, parks and open space, civic engage-
ment, transportation, education, aging, public health, the environment, and
community and economic development.
Abstract
The sustainability of American agriculture Funders can help sustain agriculture in
begins with the land. Farmland closest to urban- influenced areas by encouraging
our cities and towns is among the nation’s more of these "hybrid" programs. Chan-
most productive and important for a vari- ges in national agricultural policy are also
ety of economic, environmental and aes- needed that both recognize the important
thetic reasons. The sustainability of the contribution of urban-influenced farms to
nation’s agriculture is being progressively American agriculture and retain these
compromised as this land is lost to lands in agriculture as a critical bulwark
sprawling development. The rate of farm- against the spread of urban sprawl.
land loss is accelerating as public policies
exaggerate the competitive edge that
development has over agriculture. Federal
farm policy, in particular, does little to help
* American Farmland Trust is a farmers in urban-influenced areas. States
private, nonprofit organization and local communities are leaders in
founded in 1980 to stop the loss adopting innovative approaches to farm-
of productive farmland and to land protection as an integral smart
promote farming practices that growth strategy. But their efforts suffer
lead to a healthy environment. from too little investment and a lack of
the political will to regulate sprawl.
AFT has regional offices
Successful farmland protection programs
throughout the country. exist, however, that combine substantial
Please visit AFT's website financial incentives to landowners with
at www.farmland.org. effective land use regulation.
© Copyright 2001 by the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities and the American Farmland Trust
Page 2
Introduction
There is a growing recognition that the it does not end – with the land that
protection of farmland around cities feeds us.
Not only does agricul- and towns – urban-influenced farmland1
tural protection fur- – contributes to smart growth and the This paper does not attempt to
ther smart growth, livability of our communities. Farms describe the many important efforts
and farmland are valued as scenic being made by nonprofit organizations
integral to smart landscapes and a part our heritage. and funders to promote more environ-
growth is the protec- They demand fewer public services mentally benign farming methods,
and, therefore, cost taxpayers less healthier foods and diets, local and
tion of urban-influ- than sprawling subdivisions.2 If pro- regional food systems and the survival
enced farmland. tected as part of the "green infrastruc- of family farms – all components of
Sustainability begins ture" around metropolitan areas, they what is generally thought of as "sus-
can help guide suburban growth and tainable agriculture." Necessary as
– although it does not promote urban revitalization. For all all these are, their achievement is
end – with the land these reasons, more and more com- made much more difficult – on both a
munities, with help from the private regional and national scale – by the
that feeds us. sector, states and the federal govern- growing threat that urban sprawl
ment, are taking action to protect poses to some of America’s most pro-
urban-influenced farmland. ductive, least environmentally problem-
atic land and to the families who are
It is equally important to recognize the trying to make a living on farms that
interwoven relationship between smart are fast being surrounded by subdivi-
growth and the sustainability of sions. As long as we continue to
American agriculture. Not only does waste fertile farmland – when it’s
agricultural protection further smart gone, it’s gone forever – it is question-
growth, integral to smart growth is the able whether any American agricultural
protection of urban-influenced farm- system can truly be said to be sus-
land. Sustainability begins – although tainable.
influence development patterns over People tend not to travel very far to
wide areas, sustaining agricultural use take Sunday drives in the country, to Americans care deeply
of that land is perhaps the best strat- visit pumpkin patches and Christmas about the loss of local
egy that gives smart growth a fighting tree farms, and to go hunting and fish-
chance. Thus, supporting family ing. And more and more of them are farms to development.
farms and regional food systems patronizing local and regional farmers’ A recent national
becomes doubly important in urban- markets on a routine basis. The
influenced areas. urban-suburban majority is glad the public opinion poll,
amber waves of grain and purple for instance, found
Third, more people live near urban- mountains majesty are still out there, that setting aside
influenced farms. This is stating the but the countryside in their own back-
obvious, but there are several impor- yard is where they spend more time. open space around
tant implications that are easily over- Thus, Americans care deeply about cities for farming was
looked. One is that the environmental the loss of local farms to develop-
impact of farming this land arguably ment. A recent national public opinion among the most pop-
affects more Americans than that of poll, for instance, found that setting ular smart growth
any other agricultural land. Reducing aside open space around cities for strategies.
farm runoff in the Corn Belt and farming was among the most popular
restoring grasslands on the Great smart growth strategies.6
Plains are important environmental
goals, particularly to those who live Finally, to many Americans urban-influ-
and farm there. But because more enced farms appear to be symbolic of
people are directly affected, the public the entire agriculture industry.
benefits of promoting sustainable Modern production agriculture has
farming practices that result in clean more in common with large-scale man-
water and abundant wildlife habitat are ufacturing than with the Jeffersonian
perhaps greater on urban-influenced yeoman or Currier & Ives. Yet the
farms than anywhere else in the country. public seems to be unaware of this, or
Agricultural practices still need improve- at least to suspend disbelief, in
ment, but even now farm fields are al- expressing continued support for agri-
most always better for the environment culture. Why? Conceivably, it is
than acres and acres of pavement.4 because the landscape around most
cities is still dotted with the small
Once the land is paved, however, there family farms many people want to
is little opportunity to improve environ- associate with American agriculture.
mental quality. That is why New York It may be easy to dismiss this theory
City, for example, is helping upstate as sentimental. But you don’t often
farmers protect the watershed from hear agribusiness appealing for public
which the city draws its drinking financial support – which hit a record
water.5 But the deterioration of envi- $30 billion in federal tax dollars last
ronmental quality can actually begin year – on the basis of helping to save
much earlier due to what has been the 5,000-cow dairy or the guy farming
called the "impermanence syndrome." 10,000 acres with a six-figure John
Farmers who are simply awaiting the Deere.
developer’s buy-out offer simply do not
invest much in the upkeep or improve- In substance and as a symbol, urban-
ment of their operations, with results influenced farms and farmland are far
ranging from unsightly junk piles to more important to the sustainability of
increased pollution. American agriculture than is commonly
acknowledged. Without them, America
Another implication of the fact that would be a vastly different place. And
most people live near urban-influenced if they disappear, American agriculture
farms is that the rural landscape is will have to undergo a radical adjust-
highly accessible as an amenity that ment, putting true sustainability far-
contributes to the quality-of-life. ther out of reach. Indeed, trouble-
Page 4
The causes of the sprawl that con- On the other hand, our nation’s agri-
sumes and fragments farmland are culture policies do little to help family
too complex to detail here. But sever- farmers survive in urban-influenced
al factors are particularly relevant areas (or elsewhere for that matter).
because they help explain what must In recent years, about half of the
be done to protect our best farmland. income "earned" by farmers has come
Foremost among these factors is that from the federal government in the
agriculture generally cannot compete form of subsidized loans, crop insur-
with other enterprises in the market- ance discounts, disaster relief or out-
place for land. Corn chips simply right payments under a program called
aren’t worth as much as silicon chips. "Freedom to Farm."12 But most of
But the competitive advantage of the these government payments go to very
development industry has been greatly large commodity producers, relatively
exaggerated by government expendi- few of whom farm in urban-influenced
tures and policies that subsidize the areas.13 And while annual federal agri-
construction of homes, shopping malls culture expenditures have increased
and factories. Highways, for example, five-fold since 1996 – from $6 to $30
inflate the price of the land along the billion – the share devoted to soil,
right-of-way far beyond the ability of water, wildlife and land conservation
farmers to afford it, creating a bonan- has declined from one-third to one-
za for speculators while literally paving tenth. The sum Congress has appro-
Page 5
priated to help states and localities to serve the economic and conserva-
protect urban-influenced farmland – tion needs of farmers in urban-influ-
$40 million over 5 years – doesn’t enced areas, despite their significant
even amount to a rounding error in the contribution to agricultural production
federal agriculture budget. In short, and the quality of life of metropolitan
the federal government does very little communities.
ly enough to keep pace with the loss ties under the governor’s celebrated
Land trusts that have of farmland to sprawl. And it is a frac- Smart Growth initiative.
been most effective at tion of what is being spent by states
and localities to protect land for open Private Sector
protecting land for space, environmental and recreational Farmland Protection
commercial agricul- purposes. Of the estimated $10 bil- Private land trusts are also protecting
lion authorized by states for these pur- farmland. The Land Trust Alliance
ture have tapped into poses in the past two election cycles,16 reports that private organizations have
sources of public only about ten percent was dedicated protected an estimated 1.4 million
PACE funding, in to the protection of farmland for agri- acres of agricultural land with conser-
culture. Governor Christine Whitman’s vation easements, though it is not
effect, becoming ambitious New Jersey initiative known how much of this is actively
acquisition agents for accounted for most of this. At the farmed or to what extent the purpose
other extreme, the most recent land was to protect agriculture. Usually,
government. The conservation bond act passed by land trusts do not pay cash for ease-
value they add is their California – the state that leads the ments but instead convince landown-
ability to act more nation in both urban-influenced agricul- ers to donate their development rights
tural production and farmland loss – in exchange for federal income and
quickly than public earmarked only $25 million or one estate tax benefits that can enable
agencies, and their percent of its latest $2.5 billion con- landowners to recoup 50 percent or
servation bond to protecting working more of the value of the property
creativity in using agricultural land. This imbalance rights they relinquish. In contrast to
easements along with must be addressed if we want a truly easement purchases, however, dona-
other types of real sustainable agriculture to remain a tions appeal more to those who have
deterrent to sprawl around our cities. off-farm assets and do not depend on
estate transactions. agriculture for a living, than to full-time
A promising approach to achieving farmers who have few assets other than
greater balance between farmland and their land and cannot afford to give away
other open space conservation may what amounts to their retirement savings.
be found in Maryland’s new Rural
Legacy program. Championed by Thus, those land trusts that have
Governor Parris Glendening, it provides been most effective at protecting land
funding for the acquisition of ease- for commercial agriculture have
ments that achieve multiple conserva- tapped into sources of public PACE
tion purposes, protecting working funding, in effect, becoming acquisi-
farmland as well as environmental, tion agents for government. The value
open space and cultural resources. they add is their ability to act more
One of the motivations for this pro- quickly than public agencies, and their
gram was a project of the Chesapeake creativity in using easements along
Bay Foundation and American with other types of real estate transac-
Farmland Trust, called Future Harvest. tions – for example, purchase-and-
Funded by the W. K. Kellogg, Abell and leaseback, annuities and even limited
France-Merrick Foundations, this proj- development – to fashion solutions for
ect brought together agricultural, envi- individual farmers. Leaders in the
ronmental and government leaders to field, like the Marin Agricultural Land
identify "strategic" farmland – the Trust in California and Lancaster
land most important for environmental Farmland Trust in Pennsylvania, differ
as well as agricultural purposes – as a from most land trusts in that they
target for land conservation. The GIS- were established, and are run, mostly
generated maps produced by this proj- by full-time farmers. This has helped
ect are being used, not only to help them win the trust of other farmers
guide Rural Legacy acquisitions, but who are often wary of "outsiders,"
also to divert public infrastructure particularly those with an environmen-
investments away from rural areas tal agenda. Indeed, the latest trend is
and into already developed communi- for agricultural organizations to form
Page 7
their own land trusts. For example, in areas where a community does
with support from the David and Lucile want growth to occur, for example, by Except in those rural
Packard Foundation and the Great redeveloping brownfields and adopting areas where there is
Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund, the "smart codes" that speed up housing
Colorado Cattlemen’s Association and commercial construction and minimal development
Agricultural Land Trust has quickly make it less costly. pressure, it is unrealis-
become a private sector leader in pro- tic to think that agri-
tecting ranchland. But communities are finding that even
these additional incentives are not culture can be saved
Community Planning enough; that they must also resort to
and Growth Management simply by purchasing
land use regulation to limit develop-
Conservation easements, agricultural ment of farmland. Some have opted development rights or
security areas, tax relief and similar for agricultural protection zoning that using other incentives.
methods of protecting farmland are all permits non-farm development only at When sprawl begins
voluntary and offer financial incentives a very low density so it will not conflict
to farmers in exchange for restrictions with commercial agricultural opera- to threaten, the key
on land development. This explains why tions. The ability of local governments issue becomes how to
they are more popular in the farm com- to adopt this kind of regulation
munity than the other basic approach to depends on state enabling authority, quickly stabilize agri-
farmland protection – mandatory land which varies widely. Oregon, California cultural land use over
use regulation – which many landown- and Maryland, for example, have been a wide area.
ers consider an uncompensated "tak- very supportive of local land use regu-
ing" of their private property rights. lation, while Virginia and Texas severe-
ly limit local land use powers due to a
But incentive programs have draw- much stronger tradition of private
backs, too: they are costly and slow to property rights. Attitudes change,
protect land. In their initial stages, however, and as sprawl causes more
they can do little more than produce a and more problems for cities and sub-
"checkerboard" pattern of protected urbs as well as rural areas, political
and unprotected farmland. Thus, and judicial support for effective local
farmers still face the risk of land use land use regulation seems to be on
conflicts with neighbors and uncertain- the rise. Though most mainstream
ty over whether enough farms will agricultural institutions continue to
remain in an area to support busi- resist regulation of any kind, many
nesses like farm equipment dealers farmers appear to support regulation
that, in turn, support the farms. that protects their interests. For exam-
Except in those rural areas where ple, a recent American Farmland Trust
there is minimal development pres- survey showed that 58 percent of the
sure, it is unrealistic to think that agri- nation’s agricultural landowners would
culture can be saved simply by pur- support restrictive zoning if it protects
chasing development rights or using their "right to farm" against conflicts
other incentives. When sprawl begins with encroaching development.17
to threaten, the key issue becomes "Hybrid" Approaches
how to quickly stabilize agricultural
to Farmland Protection
land use over a wide area.
A handful of localities have overcome
One approach being taken by more landowner resistance to effective agri-
local communities – and states – is to cultural protection zoning by linking it
avoid planning and paying for roads, with the purchase of agricultural con-
water and sewer systems in areas servation easements as a way to com-
that they want to remain agricultural. pensate farmers and invest in the
This idea is central to Maryland local farm economy. These "hybrid"
Governor Parris Glendening’s Smart programs18 combine incentives and
Growth initiative. Another helpful regulations in such a way that the
approach is to facilitate development strengths of each counteract the weak-
Page 8
campaigns are critical. They need the and dumb growth. The playing field is
practical tools to influence whether simply too uneven. Foundations need to
and how the land is developed. Foun- support better under-
dations need to support better under- Thus, state and federal policies must
standing and awareness of effective change to give the protection of our standing and aware-
planning and fair land use regulatory best farmland, and efficient urban ness of effective
approaches. Another important role is development, a fighting chance
to advances strategies that raise pub- against sprawl. To achieve this goal,
planning and fair
lic funds for PACE programs that there must be better documentation land use regulatory
assure nobody bears an unfair of the impact of policies on land mar- approaches.
burden. kets and development patterns. For
example, much attention has been
Above all, communities need the politi- paid to the "taking" of private property
cal will to take the steps that are truly by government rules designed to man-
necessary, not only to prevent sprawl, age growth and protect the environ-
but also to protect agricultural land for ment; but policy research has largely
the long run. This kind of political will neglected "givings" – government
comes from a broad local consensus actions that reward and indeed,
among those with most at stake. encourage landowners to contribute to
Fresno County, California, the nation’s sprawl.21 Funders should underwrite
leading farm county, is a good exam- this kind of research with a long-term
ple. There, with the support of The view toward eliminating the subsides
James Irvine Foundation, influential to low-density, scattered development
local groups like the Farm Bureau, that are deeply engrained in the
Chamber of Commerce and Building American economy and politics.
Industry Association came together
and agreed upon a set of guidelines At the same time, public investment in
for future community growth that urban-influenced agriculture and in the
included, among other things, urban protection of our best farmland needs State and federal poli-
growth boundaries and investment in to be dramatically increased. A priori-
the purchase of agricultural conserva- ty should be reorienting federal farm cies must change to
tion easements.20 This blueprint is policy so that it pays much more give the protection of
now being implemented by the county attention, and devotes a larger per-
and its municipalities and offers a centage of agricultural spending, to our best farmland,
model for foundations interested in farms in urban-influenced areas. and efficient urban
effective consensus-building on growth These farms make a far greater contri- development, a fight-
management issues. bution to U.S. agriculture – and to the
quality of our communities – than they ing chance against
Level the Playing Field get credit for. They face the same sprawl. To achieve
Communities do not exist in a vacu- economic and environmental chal-
um. While local initiative to protect lenges as agriculture everywhere else. this goal, there must
farmland is necessary, it is not But farms near cities are also subject be better documenta-
enough. As this paper has discussed, to the unique risks associated with tion of the impact of
state and federal government policies encroaching development. These
and spending priorities have a signifi- include everything from higher produc- policies on land mar-
cant influence on land use, often tion costs and taxes to conflicts with kets and development
favoring sprawl at the expense of suburban land uses. Arguably, they
urban-influenced agriculture and effi- also face greater public demand to patterns.
cient development. They define the minimize environmental impacts than
playing field. Not that local govern- farms more remote from population
ment is blameless, but, too often, centers. And, right now, the only
communities – and individual farmers "safety net" many urban-influenced
– do not have a real choice between farms have is to sell out to developers
developing and protecting farmland or, – contributing to the next round of
in the broader context, between smart sprawl. Funders can play an impor-
Page 10
and regulation; that we must deliber- tion."23 This will be quite a challenge,
ately and carefully employ both to ar- but it is one that must be successfully There are deep cultur-
rive at fair, effective solutions to land met if we are to sustain agriculture – al, economic and
use challenges like urban sprawl and for the benefit of all – in the urban-
environmental improvement. Promo- influenced areas of America. political divisions
ting more programs and policies that between rural and
reflect this "hybrid" approach is one of There are promising signs that the urban interests that
the most important things funders can process of reconciliation is beginning.
do to help achieve, not just the sus- With the encouragement of funders, must be bridged.
tainability of urban-influenced agricul- new institutions and collaborations are The tendency of both
ture, but smart growth and environ- emerging that unite respect for private
mental protection more broadly. property and its profitable economic "camps" to keep their
Bring Us Together
use with an honest determination to own counsel, to mis-
conserve land resources, protect the trust and even to
As a practical matter, the doctrine of environment and end sprawl. The agri-
shared responsibility will not achieve cultural land trusts certainly represent demonize the other
widespread acceptance, let alone on- this trend. So do joint projects between must be overcome.
the-ground results, unless the people farm and environmental groups to
and institutions on opposing sides of reduce agricultural runoff, like Future
land use and environmental issues Harvest in the Chesapeake Bay region,
are brought together. There are deep the New York City watershed coalition,
cultural, economic and political divi- and the consortium known as AFW
sions between rural and urban inter- (Agriculture, Fish & Wildlife) in the Pacific
ests that must be bridged. The ten- Northwest.24 The National Cattlemen’s
dency of both "camps" to keep their Beef Association, Trust for Public Land
own counsel, to mistrust and even to and Western Governors Association are
demonize the other must be over- partnering to conserve rangelands.
come. As former EPA Administrator American Farmland Trust has com-
William K. Reilly has put it, "The bined with a number of state Farm
moment cries out for a new reconcilia- Bureaus to promote PACE programs.
Conclusion
Sustainable agriculture is most often throughout the Rockies. The Willa-
thought of as farming that is both eco- mette Valley and Puget Sound littoral
nomically and environmentally healthy, in the Northwest. And California’s
benefiting both food producers and incomparable Salinas and Central
consumers. But the significant part of Valleys. The entire country would be
U.S. agriculture located within com- the loser.
muting – and now telecommuting –
distance of our expanding population If there is a single most important
centers is becoming debilitated in cause of this tragedy in the making,
both respects. Within a generation, perhaps it is that urban-influenced
some of the nation’s most productive, agriculture seems to exist in a "no
spectacular, historic farming areas man’s land." As a rural land use in an
could be fragmented and destroyed by urban context, it is of only secondary
urban growth: The Hudson, Connec- interest both to those who concern
ticut and Champlain Valleys in New themselves with the problems of cities
England. The Chesapeake Bay water- and to those preoccupied with rural
shed in the Mid-Atlantic. The Carolina issues. More than anything else, this
Low Country. The Bluegrass in Ken- must change. Funders of both sus-
tucky. The fruit belt on the shores of tainable agriculture and smart growth
the Great Lakes. Mountain valleys can lead the way.
Endnotes
1. For purposes of this paper, "urban-influenced" farmland is defined as that which is close enough to metropolitan areas,
resorts or other attractions to be affected by development pressure, but not so close or fragmented that farming the land is
no longer economically viable. The latter may still be valuable as open space, but it cannot really be considered "farmland."
2. See, e.g., The Cost of Community Services in Frederick County, Maryland (American Farmland Trust, 1997). This is one of
dozens of local AFT studies finding that farmland typically uses only about 30 cents worth of services for every dollar it con-
tributes in local taxes, while housing developments cost $1.25 for every tax dollars their residents pay.
3. Farming on the Edge: A New Look at the Importance and Vulnerability of Agriculture Near Cities (American Farmland Trust,
1994)
4. For example, parking lots generate almost 16 times more nonpoint source runoff than a meadow of comparable land area.
The State of the Cities 2000 (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development), at 66.
5. Policy Group Recommendations (Ad Hoc Task Force on Agriculture and New York City Watershed Regulations, 1991).
6. Beldon, Russonello & Stewart, as reported in Americans Want Smarter Growth: Here’s How to Get There (Smart Growth
America, 2000), at 2.
7. 1997 National Resources Inventory (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2000)
www.nhq.nrcs.usda.gov/CCS/NRIrlse.html.
8. An unscientific, but nonetheless probative calculation of the density of new development can be made by dividing population
increase by acres developed during a given period. Between 1982 and 1992, approximately 13.8 million acres of rural land
were developed, while the U.S. population grew by 23.4 million. The average density of new development, obtained by dividing
these figures, was 1.70 people per acre. Between 1992 and 1997, the comparable figures were 11.2 million acres and 12.8
million people, resulting in an average density of only 1.14 people per acre. Land use data from USDA National Resource
Inventory; population data from U.S. Bureau of Census.
9. Alternatives for Future Urban Growth in California’s Central Valley: The Bottom Line for Agriculture and Taxpayers (American
Farmland Trust, 1995), at 8.
10. For example, construction of Georgia Highway 316 between Atlanta and Athens increased the value of the farmland within a
mile of the right-of-way by 350 percent. J. Bergstrom, et al., An Unlevel Playing Field: How Public Policies Favor Suburban
Sprawl over Downtown Development in Metropolitan Atlanta (American Farmland Trust, 1999) at 11.
11. R. Kling and E. Sparling, The Last Roundup? How Public Policies Facilitate Rural Sprawl and the Decline of Ranching in
Colorado’s Mountain Valleys (American Farmland Trust, 1999), at 9.
12. In 2000, federal farm support payments accounted for $22.1 million (48.6%) of the $45.4 million net farm income. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, www.usda.gov/briefing/FarmIncome/fore.htm.
13. In 1997, 43% of farm support payments went to the largest 6% of U.S. farms. These 114,000 farms produced about three-
quarters of the gross value of all agricultural products. 1997 Census of Agriculture. (U.S. Department of Agriculture)
14. Investing in the Future of Agriculture: The Massachusetts Farmland Protection Program and the Permanence Syndrome
(American Farmland Trust, 1997)
15. For statistics on individual states and localities, see Farmland Information Center, www.farmlandinfo.org/fic/tas/index.htm#fs.
Throughout its evolution, foundations have played an important role in PACE. For example, the Pew Charitable Trust supported
early efforts by the state farm bureau to educate farmers in Pennsylvania about conservation easements, thus providing an
impetus for a PACE program that has become one of the nation’s leaders. In Ohio, the George Gund Foundation played a sim-
ilar role, as did the Irvine, Hewlett and Packard Foundations in California. Foundations have also supported efforts to improve
existing PACE programs. The Sudbury, Cricket and Dunn Foundations in Massachusetts and the Jane B. Cook Charitable Trust
and Vermont Community Foundation in Vermont all supported American Farmland Trust surveys to determine farmer opinions
about those states’ PACE programs.
16. See, e.g., Voters Invest in Parks and Open Space: 1998 Referenda Results (Land Trust Alliance, 1999)
17. E. Thompson, Jr., Sharing the Responsibility: What Agricultural Landowners Think about Property Rights, Government and the
Environment (American Farmland Trust, 1998), at 9.
18. E Thompson, Jr., "Hybrid" Farmland Protection Programs: A New Paradigm for Growth Management?, 23 William & Mary
Environmental Law & Policy Review 831 (1999).
19. All figures through 1999. *Varies with type of agriculture. # Cropland only. Additional rangeland also included in agricul-
tural zone. @ Includes $60 million in private investment by developers under "transferable development rights" pro-
gram. See Thompson, n. 18 infra.
20. See A Landscape of Choice: Strategies for Improving Patterns of Community Growth, Fresno Growth Alternatives Alliance
(1998).
21. But see E. Thompson, Jr., "The Government Giveth," 11 Environmental Forum 22 (Environmental Law Institute, 1994).
22. The Joyce Foundation, for example, has recently funded two opinion surveys by American Farmland Trust. One will ask agricul-
tural producers in urban-influenced areas about the extent to which current federal farm policies are serving their needs. The
other will investigate what the general public believes should be farm policy priorities.
23. "Across the Barricades," in H. Diamond and P. Noonan, Land Use in America (Island Press, 1996), at 190.
24. An in-depth analysis of successful and unsuccessful agriculture-environmental collaborations can be found in Engaging
Agriculture: A Review of Processes of Engaging Agriculture to Protect the Environment by Protecting Farmland (American
Farmland Trust, 2000), a study funded by the Bullitt Foundation.
This article was printed with soy-based inks on recycled paper
Collins Center for Public Policy, Inc., 150 SE 2nd Avenue, Suite 709, Miami, Florida 33131
Phone: 305-377-4484 • Fax: 305-377-4485 • Email: bstarrett@collinscenter.org • www.fundersnetwork.org