Several alternative government programs have been used in the past to achieve policy objectives related to the levels of crop acreage and net farm income. Important questions remain relating to the effectiveness of past programs in achieving selected policy objectives. In particular, what is the relative effectiveness of long-term versus short-term acreage diversion programs? One of the major impacts of government diversion programs is in the allocation of land among competing uses. Several studies (Brandow and Learn; Christensen and Aines; Hathaway) indicate that the use of acreage control on single crops rather than on all crops results in less than proportionate reduction in output from a given reduction in acreage. However, only limited information is available on the interrelationships among major competing uses of crop, pasture, and privately owned forest acreage. Studies of these interrelationships (e.g. Dideriksen et al. and Zeimetz et al.) did not consider the influence of government programs. In particular, how do government programs affect these competing uses?