Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T14:43:38.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Developing policy for a resource-conserving agriculture: The Food Security Act of 1985 in perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Harold D. Guither
Harold D. Guither
Affiliation:
Professor of agricultural policy at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801.
Get access

Extract

The Food Security Act of 1985 in odible land. The sodbuster provision will protect reserve acreage from future exploitation. Bid procedures should provide the most cost effective way to move the largest acreage into the reserve. Buying land to place it into the reserve will not be possible if the restrictions in thelaw are properly enforced.

Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , Winter 1986 , pp. 39 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. U.S. Congress, Committee of Conference, Statement of Differences, Between H.R. 2100 as Passed by the House and Senate Amendments Thereto, Book V: Title XII-Resource Conservation, 12 1985.Google Scholar
2. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agricultural Information Bulletin No. 495. Washington, D.C. 1985.Google Scholar
3. U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture, News Release, Summary No. 9, Conservation, 10 17, 1985.Google Scholar
4. U.S. House of Representatives, Food Security Act of 1985, Report of the Committee on Agriculture to accompany H.R. 2100, Report 99–271, 09 13, 1985.Google Scholar
5. U.S. Senate, Agriculture, Food, Trade and Conservation Act of 1985, Report of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, Report 99–145, 09 30, 1985.Google Scholar