Imperial Valley press., 1937-06-10
SUGGESTIONS
WILL BE HEARD
ON FARM PLAN
Recommendations to Be
Made on Altering '38
u. S. Program


recommendation for the 1888 Agri-
cultural Conservation program at
meeting at the courthouse at 1:30
pm. Friday, according to Frank
Beyschlag, farm advisor. Similar
discussions are being held in other
counties in formulating recommen-
dationS to be sent to the various
state headquarters and in turn to
Washington.
According to figures tabulated
May 2r, Beyschlag states it is es-
timated that California farmers
will receive $3,350,000 in total pay
mentS from last years 1896 pro-
gram, of which So, 100000 or GA per
cent were diversion payments;
$590,000 or l8 per cent were special
payments on cotton, sugar beets,
flax and rice; and 100000 or 18
per cent were for soil building
practices such as seeding legumes.
Payments received to date in I'M
perial county total $207 ,849.67. 1t
is estimated. however, that last
years payments here will finally
total $359,749 of which $276,992 or
n per cent are diversion payments;
seven per cent of the total are for
special payments including $5,954
for cotton and $17,789 for flax;
and soil building payments will be
$59,014 or l6 per cent of the total.
One of the questions for Fridays
meeting is whether a change in
the percentages of payments for
soil building and for diversion
should be made in 1888.
The objective OF the program is
to secure additional soil conserv-
ing measures and to lessen the use
Of land for soil depicting crops and
practices. Under the 1896 program
payments were made in many cases
for practices which would have
been carried out any way without
payments. These payments, there
fore, may not have resulted in a
gain in soil conservation. It is
pointed out by the farm advisor
that many local ranchers who ro-
tated from soil depicting crops into
alfalfa in 1886 with no thought of
the program in mind fell heir to
large diversion and soil building
payments. This accounts for the
fact that Imperial county is re-
ceiving over 10 per cent of the
payments made in California al
tho but about two and a half per
cent of the applications for pay
ment originated here. The meet
ing at the courthouse will vote on
whether 1888 payments should be
made for an acreage of a practice
which is not additional to the acre
age of that practice normally fol-
lowed, and whether payments are
stimulating the adoption of addi-
tional soil building and soil con-
serving practices.
Whether soil depicting bases on
farms should be determined by
appraisal of the normal cropping
systems ON those farms, or by the
average ratio of soil depicting to
soil conserving crops on all farms
in the county, or by a balanced
cropping system with a recommend
ed proportion of soil depicting
crops to soil conserving crops, or
by other means will also be discus
sed. The farm advisor said that
the method used by committeeman
in setting soil depicting bases is
an important factor in determin-
ing the amount of payments.
If farm is assigned large soil
depicting base, it is possible for it
to show a large diversion and hence
secure a larger diversion payment
than if it is assigned a smaller
soil depicting base acreage. In the
1886 program soil depicting bases
were assigned to farm almost
wholly in accordance with the acre
ages harvested on that farm in
1885. That is, if wheat was harvest
ed on the entire acreage of hun
dred acre farm in 1885 that farm
was assigned soil depicting base
of 100 acres for the 1886 program.
but if alfalfa was harvested on
the entire acreage in 1885 it re-
ceived no soil depicting base. For
this years 1897 program, however,
the local county committee has
favored a balanced cropping sys-
TEN and regardless of the use of
the land during 1885 Or 1886 has
decided to assign 100 acre farm
soil depicting base of somewhere
between 40 and 80 acres. The soil
depicting base will be less than
GO acres if such a farm has been
in alfalfa most of the time during
the past period of 10 years c. SO.
The soil depicting base will be more
than 60 acres if the land is known
by the community committeeman
to have been used almost exclusive
ly for soil depicting crops for a
long period of years.
Other questions to be answered
at the meeting include whether
any soil building practices included
in this years program should be
omitted and what other practices.
if any, should be added. The ques-
ton will be asked, Has the pro-
gram tended to keep land of low
productivity in cultivation?' Con-
structive suggestions are requested
regarding the present method of
administration of the program thru
a state committee and county and
community committees.