This article reports on analyses of the cost effectiveness of three soil erosion control policy alternatives, specifically 1) uniform-rate cost sharing, 2) variable-rate cost sharing, and 3) fixed subsidy payments per unit reduction in erosion. A brief discussion of the place of these alternative subsidy strategies within the content of the current policy environment is presented. Integer programming is employed to simulate adoption of "best management practices" (BMPs) on a set of representative farms in a case study watershed in response to these alternative subsidy strategies. Conclusions and policy implications are outlined.