1990 Farm Bill Forum 



Proceedings 



Famiing and ranching is important to 

 Montana's economy and to the food supply of 

 Montana, our nation, and the world. Farmers 

 would like to depend on selling their grain on 

 the open market at a profit each year. But there 

 is a need for some sort of base price or price 

 protection to ensure that the majority of farmers 

 and ranchers can stay in business. If we are 

 going to depend upon a cheap and abundant 

 food supply for the world, we think some 

 measure of crop price guarantees are in order. 



CRP is also working as a wliole to reduce grain 

 production. It is working to provide price 

 support with a reduced supply along with 

 protecting some of our more fragile cropland 

 from erosion. 



CRP is also increasing wildlife. This increase in 

 wildlife doesn't mean that there is more game 

 damage. CRP acres are supplying more forage 

 by improNing wildlife habitat. CRP has also 

 increased the awareness of good conservation. 



Although CRP has been effective, we have a 

 few items we would like considered in the 1990 

 Farm Bill. 



The present CRP program was originally 

 designed for lands that should not have been 

 farmed in the first place. There has been a lot of 

 discussion that the farmer who was already 

 doing a good job of protecting the resource, or 

 not farming highly erodible land, could not 

 qualify for the program. Many people looked 

 on it as a program that paid a support to some 

 who had not been good stewards of the land. 



CRP is a contract and that contract shouldn't be 

 changed every time there is a problem. Weeds 

 should be controlled and haying or grazing 

 should not be allowed on CRP acres. Proper 

 management will keep the land productive. 

 This may require cutting or some other practice, 

 but many people believe we should not deviate 

 from the contract. 



It may be beneficial to have local officials who 

 are familiar with local problems, soils, and 

 people involved more in making decisions on 

 regulations. Quit the policy of changing the 

 "rules." It is confusmg to both the agencies and 

 the landowners. 



Montana Chapter, Soil and Water Conservation Society 



Districts also bclie\-e all highly errx-hblo lands 

 should qualify for CRP, even if the land did not 

 have a cropping history. 



Montana soil surveys need to be continued. We 

 also need for the old surveys to correlate with 

 the new surveys so there is continuity. 



We encourage the continued funding of the 

 Agricultural Conservation Program (ACP) and 

 the Great Plains Conservation Program (GPCP). 

 The ACP program in Montana has increased 

 water saving practices, contributed to better 

 range management, and helped control weeds. 

 The GPCP is a tool for complete natural re- 

 source planning. Through GPCP, the entire 

 picture is looked at — rangeland management, 

 no-till, irrigation, soil erosion control, water 

 qualit)', and other practices. 



Agricultural research stations should be funded 

 well. Research is important for crop production, 

 water quality, and erosion control. We are 

 seeing a decrease in available funding, which is 

 hurting research. 



We would like to see changes in the saline seep 

 reclamation. We would favor some special 

 practice that would allow a producer to treat 

 grain cropland for a saline seep problem 

 without losing the grain base acres that are 

 seeded to a crop such as alfalfa. We believe 

 producers should be encouraged and assisted 

 in treating saline seep areas in order to increase 

 their productivity while improving ground and 

 surface water. We are supportive of SCS's goal 

 to do aerial photography of wetlands, as this 

 will give us a more accurate accounting of the 

 number of acres affected by saline seep. 



The weed problem in Montana is no small 

 problem. We need funding to cost share for 

 control of weeds and for research into biological 

 methods of control. Some of the herbicides that 

 are most effective in controlling weeds are 

 becoming suspect to contributing to both 

 groundwater and surface water pollution. 

 These problems need to be look at closely. 



MACD recommends that the 1990 Farm Bill not 

 contain any major modifications to the 1985 

 Food Security Act. 



18 



August 29, 1983 



