- 5 -
share the cost with petitioner of establishing the conservation
plan.
According to the terms of the CRP contract, the
representatives of the CCC had the right of access to the CRP
land and the right to examine petitioner's records or other lands
for the purpose of determining whether petitioner was complying
with the terms and conditions of the CRP contract. Finally, the
CRP contract incorporated the regulations in 7 C.F.R. sec. 1410
(1997) for the CRP and stated that in the event of conflict, the
regulations would prevail.
The CRP program was administered by the CCC and the
Agricultural Stabilization Conservation Service during the years
in issue.
In 1992, the first year of the CRP contract term, petitioner
disked the CRP land and planted seed to establish ground cover.
In doing so, petitioner used the same equipment he had used
previously in farming the CRP land. In subsequent years,
petitioner performed minimal, if any, upkeep on the CRP land.
During the years in issue, petitioner worked a farm, under a
sharecrop arrangement, on a separate piece of land north of
petitioners' farm, and he continued to raise laying hens on their
farmland contiguous with the CRP land. Petitioner did not grow
any crops on petitioners’ farmland during the years in issue. In
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011