« PreviousContinue »
emergency phase to long-time phase hastened by Hoosac
Farm income continued upward trend.
not affected by Supreme Court decision-Funds and
vided for supporting soil-conservation program.
Producing capacity of land impaired by past practices-
such purpose are considered.
with farmers—College specialists consulted-The county
planning project-Recommendations indicate goals.
ers and specialists recommend less intensive farming
methods--Economic reasons for proposed shifts.
regional problem-County committees recommend reduc-
for meeting specific problems.
ditions favor use of machinery to cut production costs, but
different uses-Tobacco generally grown in areas that have
to grow more food and feed crops.
profitable use for large tracts-Land especially subject to
production of more tame hay are proposed changes.
of a substantial part of arable farm land, or consolidation
ards and most desirable uses of land should be promoted.
too severe a tax upon soil productivity-Provisions stated
Federal Government in cooperative effort on privately
perform, in the field, those functions which can best be
ments specify commodities to which marketing agreements
shipments to market demand.
tors have contributed to this improvement- Agreements
into commercial channels- Funds obtained from customs
Fruits marketed in new forms-Cotton used in road-
ease, and mastitis eliminated.
offset in part by carry-over of 13 million tons-Livestock
feeds in 1936.
pointed-Soil-conservation program adjusted to assist in
removing livestock from drought-stricken area.
farming-Measures taken under conservation program
not incompatible with conservation of resources.
better system of land use-Crop-insurance plan would
protect producers and consumers against effects of drought.
Supreme Court decision of January 6, 1936-Payments due
Of these claims $28,000,130 was disbursed during 1936.
tions among option holders, totaled $66,878,687.19.