The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1956-01-13

farm prices IN the past three years.
Under the Soil Conservation Acre
age Reserve Bill, farmers would be
paid for taking part of their land out
of commercial production and put
ting it to soil and water conservation
and improvement uses. This proposal,
an integral part of any long-range
farm program, runs directly counter
to another bill, already reported ia
vorably by the House Agriculture
Committee despite Administration OBJ
jections. 1t is HR 6815 by Congress
man Poage of Texas to require sale
and return to farm-ranch production
of all the land acquired under the
Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act.
These ''Title LII lands" so called
because they were acquired under
Title III of the Bankhead-J ones Act,
compose a conservation acreage re-
serve which our parents set aside with
their tax money in the 1930s.
Then, you will remember, our fed
eral government bought up millions
of acres of grazing and crop land,
made practically worthless by success
sive years of drought and farm de-
preston, and retired it from produc-
ton. Through the years, federal-state
programs have restored some of this
land. Sponsors of HR 6815 say it is
now ready to be put back into agricul-
tural production.
HR 6815 would force sale of up to
7 million acres of land administered
by the Forest Service in % states.
Montana's stake is larger than that
of any state-for there are almost 2
million acres of this Title LII land
in 10 of our counties.
We Montanans can be proud of the
best grass conservation program in
the United States. The Montana
Grass Conservation Committee sup
cruises the SO cooperative state graz
ing districts under which the bulk
of the Title III lands in Montana are
administered.
The commission says forced sale
of all these lands under the terms
of HR 6S15 would Completely de-
stroy the stability of the livestock
by knocking out the Montana Grass
Conservation Act.
The commission also questions HR
6815's preference section, which gives
first preference to those whose lands
were acquired by the United Stats
since December 7, 1911, and second
to veterans. No provision is made
either for those "dusted off" the land
in the 1905 or for those farmers and
ranchers who have been leasing some
of this land for years and who are
dependent upon continued use.
Opposition also comes, among
Others, from the Montana Wool
Growers Association, the Montana
Association, several
grazing districts and individuals.
In a resolution adopted at it's con-
vention in November the Wool Grow
ers oppose HR 6815 saying it "indi-
Gates lack of understanding of the
type, location and economic use of
The public grazing lands concerned"
The Montana Association of State
Grazing Districts favors "maintain-
ng the status quo in regard to Title
III lands"
An article in the December Is issue
IF THE MONTANA STOCKGROW-
Err says "some features of this legis-
alton would be disastrous to present
Users of these lands if they were
enacted into law"
So far have mentioned only Title
III lands administered by the Forest
Service. This bill would give the Sec
etary of the Interior authority to
dispose of public lands under his
Jurisdiction which are near to lands
'eing disposed of by the Secretary of
Agriculture under this bill. Many of
he same objections will be raised to
his section. And there are other valid
rounds upon which it will be at
acked.
So there are grave and unanswered
uestions about HR 6815. These ques-
ions should be aired at public hear
ngs in Montana prior to action on
his bill