March-April 1981 Volume 36, Number 2 To advance the science and art of good land use

@

60 Viewpoint: New uses of old tools to conserve soil Steve J. Nacht contends that the nation must concern itself more with performance in soil conservation programs

62 The National Agricultural Lands Study, an interview with Robert Gray NALS’s director discusses the findings and recommendations from this 18-month federal study

69 How ya gonna keep ’em away from the farm? Edward Thompson, Jr., looks at conflicts between farm and city folk on the urban fringe

71 Farmland protection in the Netherlands Frederick R. Steiner describes the comprehensive planning effort that enables the Dutch to maintain a productive farmland base

77 Topsoil management on mined lands Gerald E. Schuman and James F. Power offer recommendations for using topsoil effectively in surface mine reclamation

79 The land and hazardous waste management Joseph S. Piuuto and Charles W. Townley review the impacts of toxic waste disposal on land

82 Soil erosion effects on soil productivity: A research perspective The National Soil Erosion- Soil Productivity Research Planning Committee summarizes some knowns and unknowns about erosion’s effects on soil productivity

91 Commentary: The National Agricultural Lands Study goes out with a bang Kenneth A. Cook looks at initial reaction to the NALS report

94 Commentary: Conservation district law: Choices and challenges for Wisconsin’s future Donald G. Last discusses leg is1 at ive proposals aimed at keeping conservation districts responsive to public needs in the Badger State

Departments 59 Pen points

97 In the news

102 Upcoming

103 Books, etc.

Research reports 107 Profitability of soil conservation practices in Missouri David E. Ervin and Robert Wash burn

111 Establishment of forage species on surface- mined land in Kentucky Donald S. Henry, William F. Kuenstler, and Samuel A. Sanders

114 Land values in two soil zones with and without fertilizers: An economic analysis H. Douglas Jose and Dwight D. Markland

Cover Bulb fields on reclaimed land near the city of Haarlem in the Netherlands. See page 71. Photo courtesy of the Royal Netherlands Embassy.

The Soil Conservation Society of America is dedicated to promoting the science and art of good land use, with emphasis on conservation of soil, water, air, and related natural resources, including all forms of beneficial plant and animal life. To this end, SCSA seeks through the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation and other programs to educate people so that mankind can use and enjoy these natural resources forever.

OFFICERS Presldent Jesse L. Hicks, Raleigh, N.C. Presldent-elect Robert C. Baum, Salem, Oreg. Vice-president Chris J. Johannsen, Davis, Calif. Second Vice-president Floyd E. Heft, Columbus, Ohio Past-presldent Gerald R. Calhoun, Bowie, Md. Treasurer H. Lynn Horak, Des Moines, Iowa

COUNCIL Elmer E. Offerman, Storrs, Conn. Maurice G. Cook, Raleigh, N.C. Carl V. Thompson,, Alexandria, La. Donald E. Van Meter, Muncie, Ind. Howard M. Hughes, Des Moines, Iowa Norris P. Swanson, Lincoln, Nebr. Earl Burnett, Temple, Tex. Richard F. Sanders, Ogden, Utah David R. Cressman, Kitchener, Ont. John R. Henry, Locust Grove, Va. Andy 1. Tucker, Stillwater, Okla.

STAFF Edltorial Dlnctor Larry D. Davis Editor Max Schnepf Asslstant Edltm James L. Sanders John Walter Production Assistant Betty J. Taylor

Advertising Representatlve Fox Assodates, Inc. 200 East Ontario Street Chicago, Illinois 60611

EDITORIAL BOARD

(312) 649-1650

A. D. Latornell (chm), Richmond Hill, Ont. Orville W. Bidwell, Manhattan, Kans. Blair T. Bower, Arlington, Va. James E. Box, Jr., Watkinsville, Ga. Donn G. DeCoursey, Oxford, Miss. Robert W. Harris, Wilsonville, Oreg. R. J. Hildreth, Oak Brook, 111. Gunnar C. Isberg, Minneapolis, Minn. Edward A. Johnson, Washington, D.C. William R. Oschwald, Urbana, Ill. J. Herbert Snyder, Davis, Calif. John F. Timmons, Ames, Iowa L. P. Wilding, College Station, Tex. J. Melvin Williams, Portland, Oreg. Warren Zitzmann, Washington, D.C.

The JSWC (ISSN 0022-4561) is published six times a year in January, March, May, July, September, and November. Copyright 0 1981 by SCSA. SCSA assumes no responsibility for statements and opinions expressed by contributors. Subscription is by membership in SCSA or by subscription. Membership dues: $30.00 a year ($35.00 outside the U.S. and Canada). Institutional and individual subscriptions: $22.00 a year ($25.00 outside the U.S. and Canada). Address correspondence to SCSA, 7515 N.E. Ankeny Rd., Ankeny, IA 50021. Phone (515) 289-2331. Second class postage paid at Ankeny and Des Moines, Iowa. Postmaster, send form 3579 to JSWC. 7515 N.E. Ankeny Rd., Ankeny, IA 50021

Efforts to redirect ACP underway

Your timely review of the summary of phase I of this agency’s National Sum- mary Evaluation of the Agricultural Conservation Program, recently submit- ted to the White House by then Secre- tary of Agriculture Bergland, is sincerely appreciated. The author, Kenneth A. Cook, is to be commended for his suc- cinct discussion of some of the many and complex issues involved in soil and water conservation.

We are particularly desirous to have this evaluation widely scrutinized be- cause it is the first time that a quantita- tive evaluation of this type has been un- dertaken on a conservation program such as the ACP.

However, in order that your readers have a full understanding of present op- erations of the ACP, it should be em- phasized that the evaluation report ad- dressed only activities directed toward prevention of soil and water conserva- tion and pollution abatement prior to 1979. There have been strong efforts made in these last two years to redirect the program to correct some of the problems identified in the evaluation.

Beginning in 1979, two major changes were made in the ACP operations:

1. Cost-sharing has not been granted by county committees for any practice that could be classified as primarily pro- duction oriented-the conservation of soil and water resources must be the pri- mary purpose.

2. In order to assure that ACP shared the costs only for practices most needed to reduce erosion and enhance water conservation, each of the almost 3,000 county committees must review the con- servation needs within the individual county and give priority to those prob- lems for which treatment is most needed to stop soil loss, prevent pollution, and conserve water. Cost-share approvals are made for the highest priority practices.

This means that, beginning in 1979, county committees were encouraged to seek out farmers with conservation prob- lems to participate in the program rather than approve practices on a first- come, first-serve basis.

Another change made to further in- sure that cost-share monies are wisely used is the requirement that practices be maintained for lifespans of five years or

longer. The only exceptions are conser- vation tillage and cropland protective cover practices.

The point made in the article that participation in ACP is voluntary is an important one. Farmer committees may encourage their fellow farmers to adopt improved conservation practices, but they cannot dictate to them. That fea- ture has helped make the program effec- tive and workable.

The fact, as the article points out, that nine states have adopted their own cost-share conservation programs can be considered a hallmark of progress for ACP. Conservation-minded people and groups are seeing the enduring conserva- tion practices that can be achieved through use of modest expenditures of cost-share funds and are taking action to strengthen and extend such efforts.

We appreciate the attention given to the evaluation report. We believe that several needed improvements in the ACP identified by the evaluation have already been undertaken as referred to above. Further, we are now considering the development of a pilot program to test the concept of tying the cost-share level to the amount of soil loss prevent- ed. Also, we intend to continue eval- uating the program and to make chang- es where it appears the program can be made more effective in achieving the ob- jectives intended by law.

Alan Durick Agricultural Stabilization and

Washington, D.C. Conservation Service

On the change in format

I’m in the midst of enjoying the Jan- uary-February ‘81 new-format issue of the JSWC and want to add support for your past and present efforts to provide readers with a stimulating mixture of ar- ticles. I have for years appreciated the practically oriented, informative gener- al-interest articles as well as research re- ports. As a teaching and research professor

in natural resources, I have frequently been educated and enriched by JSWC articles of general interest which I find in no other technical journal that I regu- larly read. I routinely refer students in soil science, forest hydrology, and land use courses to the JSWC as a source of

broadly based, comprehensible informa- tion.

The attractive, new format and its contents should continue to provide pro- vocative reading for all of us interested in soil, water, and all natural resources conservation. Thank you for your efforts.

James R. Boyle University of Michigan Ann Arbor

I have been an SCSA member for about 20 years ....

The new JSWC is the greatest im- provement the magazine has made since I’ve been receiving it. I like the cover, “Pen Points,” “Viewpoint” (glad you kept that), “Commentary,” and “In the News” (hope you use this last one to keep us up to date on legislation prog- ress and political winds affecting conser- vation). I like having the general inter- est articles up front, although I usually read at least one of the technical articles in most issues.

Congratulations! Robert M. Kral ., Corsicana, Texas

Just a note to let you know that I really like the new format and think that it will help extend SCSA activities and help the organization to reach new audiences.. . . Great ideas!

Mark Lapping University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario

I have just read the January-February 1981 issue. This is a large improvement on the format of past issues.

My warmest congratulations. Philip M. Glick Chevy Chase, Maryland

I’ve told you before that I’ve always regarded the JSWC as the outstanding journal in the field of natural resources management, both from the standpoint of content and design. Now you’ve im- proved further upon the best with your January-February 1981 number. I like the explicit recognition of two kinds of content, that for the lay reader and that for the professional person interested in research results.

M. Rupert Cutler National Audubon Society New York, New York

March-April 1981 59

Long-Range Environmental Outlook: Pro- ceedings of a Workshop. 198 pp., illus., tbls., 1980. National Academy of Sci- ences, Washington, D.C. 20418. $10.50. This volume is not a comprehensive and

integrated treatment of long-range (25 to 50 years) environmental problems and it does not present a consistent point of view. Rather, it is a workshop document with many of the limitations of that format. However, the sight of diverse minds gnaw- ing at what purports to be the same subject has its own fascination.

The workshop’s task forces focused on four general areas-energy, agriculture, toxic substances, and the siting of hazard- ous facilities. In each case they aspired to identify future problems, establish their priority, and make recommendations for future research-that dearest function of NAS. Each subject area is treated by a background paper, a discussant’s response, and a summary of the task force’s conclu- sions.

The volume also includes an overall summary, an overview chapter (which seems to have had little effect on the rest of the discussion), and a review of past NAS environmental studies. Readers of this Journal may be tempted to skip to the chapter on agriculture, but they should re- sist that. All of the other areas discussed al- so have significant implications for agricul- ture and all are closely interrelated with each other.

The energy paper by Ayres, Bloyd, and Molburg is a good capsule treatment of that fashionable subject. The environmen- tal consequences of energy use depend on how much we use and how we use it. In., every case we are faced with “imponder- ables.” The authors note the wide range of demand forecasts and the disappointing failure of oil supplies to respond so far to higher real prices. They expect conserva- tion and “soft” energy paths to play a sig- nificant role, but their deployment will be limited by available capital. (Surely the same capital restraint will affect other courses as well.)

The major imponderable juxtaposes the feasibility and cost of large-scale coal gasi- fication against the feasibility and cost of nuclear power-two quite different paths. Most of the discussion is on the conse- quences of greatly increased use of coal un- der various systems of extraction, process- ing, and combustion. The authors believe that process design can eliminate most tox-

ic hazards, but they caution against hasty deployment of coal conversion technology before it is debugged. Bulk wastes and sul- fur can be turned to useful account, and land disturbance can be minimized by planning and regulation, leaving C 0 2 buildup as the main concern for research.

Discussant Koenig struck out in favor of community based energy systems in lieu of highly centralized ones, but that idea was not pursued. The task force agreed that priority attention should go to coal as the most probable source of expansion in com- ing decades, but one participant pleaded that expanded use meant “unlocking things that have been locked away for millenia in our geological structures”-a considera- tion that receives too little attention when coal is treated as a conventional resource.

Agriculture was reviewed by Sylvan Wittwer in equally concentrated form. His message is the record and the hope of re- search for meeting man’s needs. For the future, we may have to rely more on re- newables, but, he observes, expanded out- put can be produced by farming practices that are either benign or harmful. He notes, for example, that sustained, inten- sive cultivation in Europe and Japan has improved their soil resource base.

Since World War I1 we have relied more on scientific advance than on increased re- source use to increase output. Opportuni- ties abound along this path. Plants are the original source of 95 percent of all food. Improved photosynthetic efficiency, bio- logical nitrogen fixaton, genetic improve- ments, genetic engineering, more efficient nutrient uptake, better resistance to stress, and development of hormonal regulators all have promise for increasing output and efficiency. Even without these new tech- nologies, current average yields could be improved several fold if farmers learned to match record yields attained by some. Theoretical maxima lie still higher. For an- imals, forage, aquaculture, and other branches of agriculture, the potentials for increased output also are great. As always in these discussions, the timing, economics, and institutional changes needed to pro- mote this bounty remain vague.

While Wittwer does not speculate exten- sively about the environmental conse- quences of such change (perhaps he thinks them mostly benign), his discussant notes that agriculture is not a closed system and will need to deal with its residuals. The land also may be asked to accommodate

residuals from outside agriculture, and we should try to learn to make advantageous use of them. The panel then ranked 10 problems in order of priority. I won’t spoil anyone’s fun by listing them, but some farmland preservation enthusiasts will be discomfitted to find the impact of urban and industrial expansion on farmland near the bottom of the list.

The remaining papers on toxics and haz- ardous facilities were not so cheery or self- confident. If the energy paper could speak of imponderables, a stronger word is need- ed here where deficiencies in basic scientif- ic knowledge and in risk assessment meth- odologies often preclude very certain con- clusions.

One conclusion is that society will have to play a larger role in decisions on the use of toxics and to accept responsibility for detrimental consequences even while at- tempting to perfect better predictive mod- els. There is hope that process change will reduce the environmental exposure to tox- ics. A suggestion that government desig- nate plant sites from which firms could choose met with skepticism about the superior foresight of government. The spe- cificity of many plant requirements also was cited as an obstacle.

Overall, the volume does not rate as must reading for those knowledgeable in environmental matters. However, it does provide a very concise discussion of energy and agricultural problems. The somewhat more opaque discussion of toxic substances and hazardous facilities conveys the im- mense technical and societal complexity of those matters. -STERLING BR UBA K E R , Resources For the Future, Washington, . D.C. 20036.

The Prairie. By J . E. Weaver and T J . Fitz- : patrick. 295 pp., illus., refs., tbls. 1980.‘ Prairie-Plains Resource Institute of Ne- braska, Aurora, Nebraska 68818. $6.00, postpaid. Dr . J . E. Weaver was known worldwide

as an ecologist and educator working in the area of natural plant communities. Be- tween 1916 and the late 1960s he authored and coauthored numerous scientific papers and books on plant ecology, prairie plants, and prairie plant environment.

The Prairie discusses the climate, soil, plant species, and complexity of the prai- rie, and includes a brief discussion of sec- ondary plant succession as related to dis-

March-April 1981 103

turbed areas. The book contains 120 fig- ures of plants, singly or in association with other plants, and 16 tables regarding the study procedure of the plant communities.

The area surveyed in the North America grassland for this publication covered the more humid easterly portion of the native grasslands in six states, including parts of Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, South Dakota, and Minnesota. This area’s prairie is composed of hundreds of native plants, including grasses, forbs, grasslike plants, and shrubs.

The Prairie, originally published in 1934 in the Duke University Press Ecological Monograph series, was considered a mas-

terpiece by early day plant ecologists. Even though the publication has been out of print for many years, the information in this timely republication is still extremely useful to students, conservationists, educa- tors, naturalists, and others. Although there has been a slight reduction of some of the figures from the earlier printing, the quality of the reprint is good.-PETER N. JENSEN, Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agrictiltii re; Lincoln, Nebraska 68501.

General Environmental Geology. By Donald R.

Coates. 701 pp., illus., refs., tbls.,

Water Erosion Calculator Now it’s faster, simpler, more accurate to estimate soil erosion caused by water for all land use and soil conditions: Purdue University (SEA-AR).

Approved by the Washington Office of the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) and the Water Erosion Laboratory,

r / Cropland r / Rangeland r / Forestland Idle land Thousands now in use by: r / Pastureland I/ and more County Agents

Find answers and solutions quickly by setting its two sliding scales to factors for the terrain being studied. See at a glance how the change Of a factor affects the answer.

Soil Conservationists Foresters Range Conservationists

: ~;;~J~$;ntalists . Agronomists College Professors Vocational Agricultural Instructors Now made of lona-lastina. more

durable materials, y&r cal&lator is protected by a heavy-duty sewn carrying case.

Farmers Resource Specialists Students

WATER EROSION CALCULATOR Based on the Universal Soil Loss Prediction Equation used by the Soil Conservation Service of the U S Department of Agriculture A = RKLSPC where A = Average annual soil loss (TIAIYR ) R = Rainfall factor K = Soil erodibility factor L = Factor for length of slope S = Factor for percent of slope P = Conservation practice factor C = Cropping and management or plant cover factor T = Soil loss tolerance TIAlYR (Maximum permissible soil loss) These factors are found on the calculator or in recorded data for the area and terrain being studied Actual size is g1/2x3 inches Carrying case-10 x 3% inches

ORDER NUMBER 278 $9.50 each

WIND EROSION CALCULATOR For quick, accurate calculations of soil loss due lo wind Similar to Water Erosion Calculator described above Based on SCS of USDA equation E = f(IKCLV). Actual size-8% x 3% inches Carrying case 9 x 4 % inches ORDER NUMBER 279 $7.50 each

apps., gloss., index, 1981. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Somerset, N.J. 08873. $21.95.

The ELF Odys.sc>y: National Security Ver- sirs Enviroriinental Protection. By Low- ell L. Klessig and Victor L. Strite. 310 pp., tbls., bibliog., index, 1980. West- view Press, Boulder, Colo. 80301. $25.00.

The Search for Predictability: Platining and Conflict Resolution i n Gruys liar- bor, Washington. By Nan Evans, Marc J. Hershman, George V. Blomberg, and William B. Lawrence. 117 pp., refs., apps., gloss., 1980. Tech. Rpt. WSG 80-5. Washington Sea Grant, Seattle, Wash. 98105. $5.00.

America’s Soil and Water: Condition a d Trendy. 32 pp., illus., 1980. Soil Conser- vation Service, Washington, D.C. 20013.

Air Urban Air Polltction Modelling. By Michel

M. Benarie. 405 pp., illus., refs., in- dexes, 1980. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 02142. $45.00.

Global Energy Future-s and the Carbon Di- oxide Problem. Council on Environ- mental Quality, Washington, D.C. 20006.

Forests

Regional Silvicirlttire of the United States (second edition). Edited by John W. Barrett. 551 pp., illus., apps., index, 1980. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Somer- set, N.J. 08873. $31.50.

National Forest Landscape Management: Timber (volume 2, chapter 5). 223 pp., illus. Agr. Handbook No. 559. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washing- ton, D.C. 20402.

Rare and Endentic Trees of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. By Elbert L. Lit- tle, Jr., and Roy 0. Woodbury. 26 pp., refs., index, 1980. Cons. Res. Rpt. No, 27. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. -

The Eisenhower Consortiirtn for Western Environmental Forestry Research: Re- search Highlights, 1972-1 980. Cjmpiled by Gordon D. Lewis. 31 pp., 1980. Eisenhower Consortium Bull. 8. Na- tional Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22161.

Lake State-s Primary Forest Industry and Timber Use, 1975. By James E. Blyth, James H. Whipple, Allen H. Boelter, and Steven Wilhelm. 39 pp., illus., tbls., 1980. Forest Service Resource Bull. NC-49. North Central Forest Ex- periment Station, St. Paul, Minn. 55108.

Proceedings of Ohio Private Woodlundy Workshop, 1979. Edited by Robert J. Stoll, Jr., Robert W Donohoe, and David P. Worley. 25 pp., apps., 1980. Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife, Columbus, 43224.

104 Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

Development of Classesfor Evaluating the Condition of Agricultural Conservation Program Conifer Plantings. By William B. Kurtz, Thomas J. Mills, and Ralph J. Alig. 7 pp., refs., tbls., 1980. Forest Ser- vice Res. Note RM-388. Rocky Moun- tain Forest and Range Experiment Sta- tion, Fort Collins, Colo. 80526.

Timber Supply, Land Allocation, and Economic Efficiency. By William F. Hyde. 240 pp., illus. tbls., apps., 1980. Johns Hopkins University Press, Balti- more, Md. 21218. $19.00.

Human Populations

Rural Development and Urban-Bound Mi- gration in Mexico. By Arthur Silvers and Pierre R. Crosson. 160 pp., apps., 1980. RFF Res. Paper R-17. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md. 21218. $6.95.

Soils

Stute Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Laws: A Review of State Programs and Their Nat irral Resource Data Reqrtire- ments. Prepared by Susan B. Klein. 122 pp., bibliog., 1980. National Confer- ence of State Legislatures, Denver, Colo.

E-stimating Your Soil Erosion Losses with the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE). By Robert D. Walker and Rob- ert A. Pope. 17 pp., tbls., 1980. Cooper- ative Extension Service, University of 11- linois, Urbana-Champaign, 61801.

Soil and Water Construction Structures, Hydraulic Models and Field Applica- tions. 33 pp., illus., 1980. AAT-NC-6. St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Labora- tory, Minneapolis, Minn. 55414.

Measurement and Prediction of Erosion and Sediment Yield. By Paul B. Allen. illus., tbls., 1981. Southern Series No. 15. Science and Education Administra- tion- Agricul tural Research, Chicka- sha, Okla. 73018.

The Soil Resource: Origin and Behavior. By Hans Jenny. 377 pp., illus., refs., tbls., apps., index, 1980, Springer-Ver- lag New York Inc., New York. N.Y. 10010.

Assesstnetit of Erosion. Edited by M. De- boodt and D. Gabriels. 563 pp., illus., refs., tbls., index, 1980. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Somerset, N.J. 08873. $80.50.

Soil Erosion. Edited by M. J . Kirby and R. P. C. Morgan. 312 pp., illus., refs., tbls., index, 1980. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Somerset, N.J. 08873. $67.00.

Water

Hydrology and Quality of Water Re- sources. By Mark J. Hammer and Ken- neth A. MacKichan. 486 pp., refs., app., index, 1981. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Somerset, N.J. 08873. $19.95.

Groundwater Hydrology (second edition). By David Keith Todd. 535 pp., illus.,

apps., index, 1980. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Somerset, N.1. 08873. $25.95.

iri the Eastcrn United Statm. By Eugene M . Carpenter 14 pp., refs., 1980. Forest

Fish and Wildlife

Compatibility of Fish, Wildlife. and Floral Resources with Electric Power Facili- ties. By the Urban Wildlife Research Center. 130 pp., apps. Edison Electric Institute, Washington, D.C. 20036.

Status, Ecology, and Management of the Lesser Prairie Chicken. By Maple A. Taylor and Fred S. Guthery. 15 pp., il- lus., refs., 1980. Forest Service General Tech. Rpt. RM-77. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colo. 80526.

Ag ricu I t u re

Service- Resource- Bull. NC-51. North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn. 55108.

Trends in Energy Use in Industrial Cottn- tries: A n Overview. By Joy Dunkerley. 165 pp., apps., 1980. RFF Res. Paper R- 19. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md. 21218. $8.00.

Energy Development in the Southwest: Problems of Water, Fish and Wildlife in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Edited by Walter 0. Spofford, Jr., Alfred L. Parker, and Allen V Kneese. Vol. 1,552 pp.; vol. 2, 540 pp. 1980. RFF Res. Paper R-18. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md. 21218. $25.00.

Fewer, Larger U.S. Ehrins by Year 2000- and Some Consequences. B y Thomas Land Use

McDonald and George Coffman. 19 pp., illus., 1980. Agr. Inf. Bull. No. 439. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250.

Animal Agriculture: Research to Meet Hu- man Needs in the 21st Century. Edited by Wilson G. Pond, Robert A. Merkel, Lon D. McGilliard, and V. James Rhodes. 355 pp., illus., 1980. Westview Press, Inc., Boulder, Colo. 80301.

Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: Production and Efficiency Statistics, 1979. 9Opp., tbls., 1981. Stat. Bull. No. 65. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250.

Foreign Ownership of U . S. Agricultural Land, February 1 , 1979, through Feb- ruary 1 , 1980. By J. Peter DeBraal. 38 pp., refs., tbls., app., 1980. Agr Inf. Bull. No. 440. U.S. Department of Agri- culture, Washington, D.C. 20250.

Drought in the Great Plains: Research on Impacts and Strategies. Edited by Nor- man J. Rosenberg. 225 pp., apps., 1980. Water Resources Publications, Little- ton, Colo. 80161.

Advances in Agronotn y (volume 33). Edit- ed by N. C. Brady. 374 pp., refs., tbls., index, 1980. Academic Press, Inc., New

The Future of American Agriculture as a Strategic Resource. Edited by Sandra S. Batie and Robert G. Healy. 291 pp., refs., tbls., 1980. The Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C. 20036.

The Politics of Land-Use Rejorm. By Frank J . Popper. 321 pp., refs., bibliog., index, 1981. University of Wis- consin Press, Madison, 53715 $20.00, cloth; $7.50, paper.

Ecological Planning for Farmlands Preser- vation: A Sourcebook for Educators and Planners. By Frederick Steiner. 122 pp., illus., refs., tbls., gloss., bibliog., 1980. Washington State University Coopera- tive Extension, Pullman, Wash. 99164.

The Coastal Almanac: For 1980- The Year of the Coast. By Paul Ringold and John Clark. 172 pp., illus., tbls., index, 1980. W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, Calif. 94104. $19.95, hard- bound; $9.95, paper.

Alternative Energy Facility Siting Policies for Urban Coastal Areas: Executive Summary of Findings and Policy Rec- ommendations. 21 pp., refs., apps., 1980. DOE/EV/01528-T1. National Technical Information Service, Spring- field, Va. 22161. $6.00.

York, N.Y. 10003. $41.50. Law, Legislation and Politics Producing Farin Crops (third edition). By Lester V . Boone, A. Chester Richer; and Indian Water Rights: A Public Policy und Harold K . Wilson. 303 pp., illus., refs., Administrative Mess. By Richard L. index, 1981. Interstate Printers & Pub- Foreman. 233 pp., refs., tbls., app., lishers, Inc., Danville, Ill. 61832. bibliog., index, 1981. Interstate Prjnt- $16.65. ers, Danville, Ill. 61832. $8.95.

Energy Outdoor Recreation

Natural Resources and Energy: Theory and Policy. By Chennat Gopalakrish- nan. 138 pp., illus., index, 1980. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Wo- burn, Mass. 01801. $12.50.

Energy CL Woodfrom Intensively Cultured Plantations: Research and Developinent Program. 28 pp., 1980. Forest Service General Tech. Rpt. NC-58. North Cen- tral Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn. 55108.

Wood Fuel Potential from liarvctsted Areas

Risk and Accidcnts in Outdoor Recreation Areas: Selected Papers. Compiled. by Richard L. Bury. 31 pp., refs., 1980. In- formation Rpt. No. 80-1. Department of Recreation and Parks, Texas A&M Uni- versity, College Station, 77843. $1.00.

Black- White Ethnic Differences in Out- door Recreation. By Randel Washburne and Paul Wall. 13 pp., refs., tbls., 1980. Forest Service Res. Paper INT-249. In- termountain Forest and Range Experi- ment Station, Ogden, Utah 84401.

March-April 1981 105