The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1948-11-05

versities which concludes:
This committee expresses Its con
viction that it is not sound public
policy for Extension (Service) t.
give preferred service to any farm
organization or to be in a position
to be charged with such actions. The
committee is further convinced that
it would be in the public interest for
any formal operating relationships
between the Extension Service and
general farm organization such
as the Farm Bureau to be discon-
tinued at the earliest possible mo-
ment"
The joint committee was composed
of five men appointed by the secre-
tary, Mr.. Anderson, and five men
appointed by the Association of Land
Grant Colleges and Universities. One
of the latter five died, and was re-
placed by Dean H. P. Rusk of Illinois,
the only person out of the II who
dissented with the findings. Dean
Rusk's Illinois college has been no
torious for its close operation with
the Farm Bureau affiliate in Illinois.
and even the dean agreed, in his
dissent, that violations of standards
of proper conduct should be stopped.
The remaining members unani-
mously agreed to the clear and posi-
tive findings quoted above. In fact,
the group added:
&c convinced
that the best interests of EXten-
sion work, the Farm Bureau and
the farmers themselves will be
served when all legal connections
and exclusive operating arrange
ments between the farm bureaus
and the extension service are dis
continued 1t is recommended
that Extension Service officials
and the Farm Bureau leaders in
the states concerned take the mi
tiative in this matter. The Ex-
sion Service can function most eff
fectively only when it is recog-
nized as a public agency available
to and operating in the interests
of all on an equal basis"
The committee called attention to
a 1922 statement by. the Department
of Agriculture on the work of Ex-
tension agents.
"The key sentence in that state
ment is worthy of re-emphasis
here" the committee wrote. at
stated:
"'They County agents) may
not properly act as organizers for
farmers associations; conduct
membership campaigns; solicit
membership; edit organization
publications; manage cooperative
enterprises; engage in commercial
activities act as financial or bust
ness agents; or take part in any
of the work of farmers organiza-
tons, or of an individual farmer,
which is outside their duties as de-
fined by the law and by the APP
proved projects governing their
work
"This statement is sound and
md should be carefully observed by
Extension workers" the joint COM
nittee reported.
The National Farmers Union and
he Grange have long opposed the
ontinuing improper relationship be- II
ween the Extension Service and the
'ureau in many states. In about II
alf of the states of the US. (almost II
very state in which the Bureau is II
trong) the county agricultural II
gents, on public payroll, have been
ne backbone of membership work H
nd the day-to-day conduct of FB H
usiness. In Iowa, the Extension H
ervice office is generally labeled, H
Farm Bureau office, discouraging H
on-members from seeking Exten- H
on assistance, although it is public II
provided. In New York state, H
,rsons are bluntly denied informa- HI
on or aid from the Extension Serv- HI
e unless thew paw Farm Bureau Ill