more...

[John D.]

I guess my main point is that focusing on ag soils provides the
necessary foundation and subsequent spring board to address some of
the other important issues regarding agriculture. Clearly viable and
important agriculture takes place on less-than prime soils. There
needs to be room in our discussion for policy recommendations to
address more than a strict soils-based perspective. Also, as Carolyn
pointed out, we can't be so singulary focused on ag, ag, ag, that we
ignore/marginalize other important resources such as habitat for plant
and animal species/communities. I think good policy recommendations
would be sensitive to this.

Regarding the how much is enough question... Going down the road of
identifying a number is a bad idea because there is no "right"
answer. One could argue we conserve 100% of what is left because it
is only a fraction of what there once was. One could argue we don't
have to worry about protecting any of it (as Elon Gilbert did) because
when the poop hits the fan we'll bulldoze houses and farm the road
medians. This is bad negotiating.

I think the answer is we conserve as much as we can. If we make
recommendations that craft good policy, then the hope is most of what
is left will be conserved. Others, like CFAC, can argue whether it is
enough...

John