CONTENTS Anderson, Don, West Pottawattamie Soil Conservation District, Iowa 157 224 Hill, E. Howard, president, Iowa Farm Bureau Federation... Hill, Hon. William S., Representative in Congress from the State of Herold, Leo C., chairman, Board of Commissioners, Winneskiek 70 12 Kline, Allan B., president, American Farm Bureau Federation. 58,72 148 McKeon, Daniel, Fairfield County Soil Conservation District, Ridge- 161 McKinney, Lawrence, secretary, Indiana Association of Soil Con- 151 Sanders, H. C., Association of Land-Grant Colleges and Universities. 125 239 Slusher, H. L., president, Missouri Farm Bureau_ 68 Smith, Russell, legislative secretary, National Farmers Union. 105 Stackhouse, Clay H., Ohio Federation of Soil Conservation District 215 Tossett, Otis, director, Mouse River Soil Conservation District, North 155 Winter, Everett T., vice president, Mississippi Valley Association.. SOIL CONSERVATION MONDAY, MARCH 1, 1948 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. We have met this morning for the consideration of bills H. R. 4150, introduced by Mr. Cooley; H. R. 4151, introduced by Mr. Hill; and H. R. 4417, introduced by Mr. Jensen. The Chair thought that perhaps the most logical way to present these measures would be to have the proponents of H. R. 4150 and H. R. 4151 present their case first. When that is settled, we will have the proponents of H. R. 4417 present their views. We expect to continue these hearings through Friday, and we will divide the time equally between the proponents of the two bills. There are really three numerically, but I think everyone here understands that H. R. 4150 and H. R. 4151 are identical bills. The first witness will be our colleague, Harold Cooley, who is the author of H. R. 4150. We will be glad to hear from you at this time; Mr. Cooley. STATEMENT OF HON. HAROLD D. COOLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to have this opportunity to discuss this matter, which as you know has been discussed from time to time for a number of years. The thing that really precipitated the introduction of the bills by Congressman Hill and me was the debate on the last agricultural appropriation bill and the position taken by the subcommittee handling the agricultural appropriation bill. I would like to submit some statements from the committee's report for the consideration of this committee at this time. In the report it stated: At this point the committee engaged in a long and earnest discussion concerning the duplication of many field activities of the Department and hoped to contrive a policy or a vehicle whereby these functions might be consolidated. The general limitations on an appropriation bill, however, stood in the way and the committee respectfully suggests to the Legislative Committee on Agriculture for the House of Representatives that this matter deserves immediate attention. At the present time the Extension Service has on its rolls 10,419 persons consisting of State supervisors, specialists, county agents, home demonstration agents, boys' club agents, clerks and assistants, virtually all of whom operate at the field level and maintain close contact with farmers in disseminating the research fruits and the recommended practices of the department. At the same time the Soil Conservation Service in its field operations maintains seven regional offices with 860 persons, 50 State offices with 419 persons, 550 district offices with a thousand persons, and 2,268 work unit offices with 9,350 1 persons. To this large field operation there must be added the Farm Home Administration with a total of 8,100 persons operating in area, district and county levels. It appears reasonably clear that there is both administrative and functional duplication in the field between these agencies and immediate steps should be taken to develop programs at county levels under unified management whereby substantial additional economies might be effected. I consider that to be, Mr. Chairman, a challenge to this legislative committee of the House. I feel that this committee should accept the challenge and should fully explore the situation to determine whether or not further economies can be effectuated, whether or not there is duplication of effort and a waste of either manpower or money. Until the field has been fully explored, we will constantly be reminded by the Appropriations Committee that this committee has failed to give attention to this important subject. In addition to the things pointed out by the Appropriations Committee, the fact is that we have certain soil conservation practices that are carried on by the Production and Marketing Administration. When the debate comes to the floor of the House, there are many Members of the House that are not aware of the fact that when we are talking about soil conservation practices under the Production and Marketing Administration, we are not talking about Soil Conservation Service. It seems to me that we should take into consideration the further fact that at least there are four agencies engaged in rendering somewhat similar services to the farmers and much to my surprise and amazement, and I think maybe to the surprise of members of this committee, I found out on a recent trip down home that thay have what they call a balanced farm program. In my home county 35 farmers put up a certain amount of money, I think it was $50 a year apiece. The Federal Government in some way matches that fund and they have their own agricultural extension agent. He devotes his entire time to these 35 farms. He is doing it on some sort of premises which contemplates demonstrational projects. I told this man that I did not know about his activity and I was wondering if it were possible for me to join the club. He said no, he could not let me in. They had 35 members in the club and he was operating under the title of assistant county agent. That shows you that there is a great need for assistance to farmers, when the farmers themselves are willing to dig down in their pockets and put up the money. Of course, the sum of $50 a year to have an expert college graduate that is skilled in the arts of agriculture come out to your farm and tell you and your tenants how you should operate seems to me to be a good investment on the part of the farmer. Mr. ANDRESEN. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. COOLEY. Yes, sir. Mr. ANDRESEN. Did the gentleman find out under what law the Federal Government was providing a grant for such services? Mr. COOLEY. I made that inquiry and I was told that it was money that was provided for experimental purposes. In other words, these farms, 35 of them, are supposed to be 35 small demonstration or experimental projects. You can see the trouble that might lead to. Here I am a farmer engaged in farming and I cannot get into the club because I was not one of the original 35. I do not think we ought to use Federal funds to provide aid and assistance to some farmers which is denied to others. Mr. ANDRESEN. I agree with you on that, but I think that is what they call the Missouri plan. Mr. COOLEY. That is right. Mr. ANDRESEN. It probably originated in Missouri. Did the gentleman find out from what sources these funds come, under what law the Department has the right to grant these funds? Mr. COOLEY. I do not know of any such law, but I think it is an interpretation which has been placed upon certain laws which we have enacted here in Congress. They think they have a right to do what they are doing, I am sure, and I am sure they did it in good faith. But the fact remains that it has been very quiet. I got home, as you know, frequently, and I did not even know that we had such a program in my home county and the county agent's office is about 25 steps from my own office. Mr. PACE. Will the gentleman yield right there? Mr. COOLEY. Yes, sir. Mr. PACE. If the county agent of that county is so engaged that he has not been able to render adequate service to these 35 farmers and they found the need to assist the county agent, how is it the gentleman figures that the county agent can take on the additional duties of the Soil Conservation Service and render an adequate service to the farmers of those counties? Mr. COOLEY. I am sure that my friend knows that it is not my purpose to unduly burden the Extension Service. I would just like to say this to clear the air Mr. PACE. Your bill proposes to transfer the Soil Conservation duties over to the county agent, does it not? Mr. COOLEY. It provides for transfer of the Soil Conservation to the Extension Service, a transfer of certain activities of the Production and Marketing Administration to the Extension Service, and to coordinate the activities of those three agencies under one directing head. It further provides for the creation of a State committee to be composed of nine members, four of whom would be ex-officio members. One would be the director of extension, another the director of experiment stations, another a person selected by the organization created under the Soil Conservation Act, and the other the Commissioner or Secretary of Agriculture of the particular State. Mr. PACE. But if your county agent cannot do the job today, what do you do when you burden him with another problem? Mr. COOLEY. I will go a little further, if you will let me proceed. Mr. PACE. I am sorry. Mr. COOLEY. When it is all brought together under this State committee, the State committee then, in cooperation with local committees, provides a program, prepares a program, and submits it for approval, a program which is adapted to the State involved. In reply to your question, I would just like to point out that an abundance of false and misleading propaganda have gone out over this Nation in opposition to the bills introduced by Congressman Hill and me. They have tried to lead the farmers to believe that we are out to destroy the Soil Conservation Service. I say "they" and I mean the Soil Conservation Service people themselves. I want to say this for the record, and if it is not correct Mr. Hill can correct it. I do not believe that there are any two better friends in Congress of the Soil Conservation Service than Congressman Hill |