| 42. | How effective are status reviews in monitoring compliance with HELC provisions? | ||
| (CHECK ONLY ONE ANSWER) | |||
| 1. | Extremely effective | ||
| 2. | Very effective | ||
| 3. | Moderately effective | ||
| 4. | Somewhat effective | ||
| 5. | Slightly or not effective | ||
| 6. | Not applicable-- no highly erodible land in this county | ||
| 7. | No response | ||
| 43. | How effective are status reviews in monitoring compliance with wetland conservation provisions? | ||
| (CHECK ONLY ONE ANSWER) | |||
| 1. | Extremely effective | ||
| 2. | Very effective | ||
| 3. | Moderately effective | ||
| 4. | Somewhat effective | ||
| 5. | Slightly or not effective | ||
| 6. | Not applicable-- no wetlands in this county | ||
| 7. | No response | ||
| 44. | How effective is coordination between NRCS and FSA in implementing compliance with the HELC and wetland conservation provisions, overall? | ||
| (CHECK ONLY ONE ANSWER) | |||
| 1. | Extremely effective | ||
| 2. | Very effective | ||
| 3. | Moderately effective | ||
| 4. | Somewhat effective | ||
| 5. | Slightly or not effective | ||
| 6. | No response | ||
|