1990 Farm Bill Forum 



Proceedings 



Everett Snortland 



Director 



Montana State Department of 



Agriculture 



Impacts of Compliance 



Montana's agricultural heritage is almost 

 unexcelled as our state's 147,000 square miles 

 and 93.2 million acres encase 60.7 million acres 

 of land in farms and ranches. This is second 

 only to Texas. Montana is fourth in the nation 

 with approximately 2.4 million acres in the 

 Conservation Reserve Program. 



Agriculture is the number one industry in 

 Montana. We usually rank about second in the 

 nation in spring wheat production, third in 

 winter wheat production, third in barley and 

 second in oat production. We are sixth in sheep 

 and wool production, seventh in beef cattle 

 production, eighth in sugar beet production 

 and 12th in alfalfa hay production. We produce 

 all forms of livestock, potatoes, canola, corn, 

 cherries, grapes, hay, honey and other alterna- 

 tive crops. 



I was bom and raised on a grain farm south- 

 west of Conrad, Montana, that was home- 

 steaded by my grandfather in 1909. 1 have 

 exp>erienced the impact of farm programs as an 

 active small grain producer, and as a state legis- 

 lator, lobbyist, and an administrator, serving as 

 the state executive director of the Montana Ag- 

 ricultural Stabilization and Conservation 

 Service from July 1981 to January 1989, and 

 currently serving as director of the Montana 

 Department of Agriculture. Through all of this I 

 have grown to appreciate the complexity of the 

 issues we face and the enormous responsibility 

 of appropriately dealing with the difficulties 

 associated with these issues. 



As we look at the continuing decline in our 

 population associated with direct agricultural 

 production, we can suspect that many of the 

 provisions of the 1990 Farm Bill will be made 

 by nonfanmer/ranchers. As long as we are able 

 to provide an abundant supply of cheap food 

 we must anticipate a disproportionate increase 

 in environmental concerns involving such 

 issues as food safety, clean air and clean water. 



farm worker safety, conservation, endangered 

 species and animal rights. It is a foregone 

 conclusion that as an industry, we must address 

 these issues. 1 am confident that our legislative 

 representatives can balance these issues while 

 maintaining the viability of our strong agricul- 

 tural industry. We must balance these things 

 with production realism in addressing issues 

 such as noxious weeds on federal lands, the 

 Russian Wheat Aphid, and export demands in 

 relation to world and domestic need. 



An example of what we face was illustrated at a 

 national conference on organic and sustainable 

 agriculture in March 1989. Dr. Charles Ben- 

 brook, executive director of the board of agri- 

 culture. National Academy of Sciences, cau- 

 tioned those eager for an immediate turn 

 around from the reliance on agrichemicals to 

 diversified, organic systems that they must be 

 patient. He said, "I think it is very impxartant for 

 us not to underestimate the difficulty of a 

 farmer going to a new diversified ag system." 



We have seen individual states addressing 

 many key issues. Montana agriculture took the 

 bull by the horns and worked with environ- 

 mental groups to pass HB 757, addressing ag 

 chemicals in the groundwater. As states move 

 forward to resolve issues such as this, the 

 federal government should use restraint. Let 

 states address their needs. It has proven to be 

 effective to allow states to move forward with 

 their individual programs, certifying those 

 programs to meet federal legislative require- 

 ments. The EPA and USDA/APHIS programs 

 are examples of this cooperative process that 

 enables states to address issues on a local basis. 

 Although all cooperative programs can be 

 improved, this process works and can continue 

 to work while being more responsive, and less 

 expensive to the taxpayer. 



I sincerely encourage the legislature to work to 

 balance the 1990 Farm Bill. We cannot allow 

 extreme jx)sitions to dictate development of its 

 provisions. Montana has the capability to work 

 cooperatively with you to address the issues 

 facing us in the 1990s. Let's work together to 

 provide flexibility for local input and response 

 to provide the ability to address differing geo- 

 graphical considerations and parameters. 



Montana Chapter, Soil and Water Conservation Society 



August 28, 1889 



