DEPARTMENT REPORT The Department of Agriculture recommends approval of the bill, and the Bureau of the Budget advises it has no objection. Following is the text of the Department's report: Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. COOLEY: Reference is made to your letter of March 25, 1949, requesting a report on H. R. 2015, a bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to convey and exchange certain lands and improvements in Grand Rapids, Minn., for lands in the State of Minnesota, and for other purposes. This bill authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture, with the approval of the National Forest Reservation Commission, to accept on behalf of the United States title to land within the Chippewa National Forest in Minnesota. This land, when accepted by the Federal Government, will be a part of that forest and will have national-forest status. Its value must at least equal the value of the federally owned improvements or structures located on the specified tract of land in the village of Grand Rapids, Itasca County, Minn. The bill also authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to convey without cost and by quitclaim deed to the village of Grand Rapids the land specified in the bill, exclusive of its structures and improvements. The 13.6 acres of land covered by this bill were donated in 1939 by the village of Grand Rapids to the Federal Government for use by the Forest Service in erecting and maintaining a central automobile- and equipment-repair shop. The deed has a reversion clause providing that if the land is not used by the Federal Government for a period of 5 years or more its ownership will revert to the village of Grand Rapids. The tract has been effectively utilized by the Forest Service of this Department, especially in connection with Civilian Conservation Corps equipment and activities, but is no longer needed. It is, however, suitable and needed for further industrial development in Grand Rapids, and it is understood some of the buildings. are needed for use by the local school district and by Itasca County. It is felt the land should therefore be returned without cost to the village of Grand Rapids, and the bill authorizes such action. During approximately 10 years use by the Federal Government, several buildings have been erected on the tract. They include one machine repair shop, three storage buildings, one utility building, one garage, one office, two cabins, and two oil houses. The repair shop is constructed of cement blocks, while the other buildings are of frame construction. Seven of these buildings are now, or soon will be, utilized for industrial or residential use under special use permit from the Forest Service. Two are being used for the temporary storing of blister-rust equipment by the Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, and one cabin may be used by that agency for a temporary office. One oil house is unused. The Federal Government owns these buildings and has the right to remove and sell any salvage values. On the other hand, they are much more valuable in place and many can be utilized with little alteration. It appears in the public interest, therefore, to transfer the buildings in place, providing the Federal Government obtains in exchange not less than the full value of the interest it has in these improvements. Authorizing the return of the land to the village of Grand Rapids without cost and the transfer of the improvements on the tract in exchange for at least an equal value of land within the Chippewa National Forest will benefit both Grand Rapids and the Federal Government. It will facilitate further desirable industrial development in Grand Rapids in addition to making available storage facilities needed by the local school district and county, and will facilitate consolidation of Federal forest land within the Chippewa National Forest. The Department recommends enactment of H. R. 2015. The Bureau of the Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the program of the President, there is no objection to the submission of this report. Sincerely, EXTENDING THE BENEFITS OF SECTION 23 OF THE BANKHEAD-JONES ACT TO PUERTO RICO AUGUST 3, 1949.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. COOLEY, from the Committee on Agriculture, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 4090] The Committee on Agriculture, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 4090) to extend the benefits of section 23 of the Bankhead-Jones Act to Puerto Rico, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. The amendment is as follows: Page 1, line 8, complete the citation in parentheses to read: "(49 Stat. 436; 7 U. S. C. 343C)": STATEMENT This bill will extend to Puerto Rico the full benefits of the various acts making and authorizing appropriations for cooperative agricultural extension work in the States and Territories. A similar bill, H. R. 212, extending the benefits of this legislation to Alaska, was reported favorably by this committee and passed the House this session. Appropriations and authorizations for cooperative agricultural extension work have been embodied in a large number of acts which have been adopted by Congress from time to time. The most recent of these was the Flannagan Act of June 6, 1945. This act made an additional appropriation of $12,000,000 for such work and provided that it should be divided among the several States in the following manner: (1) $980,000 to be divided among the States and the Territory of Hawaii in equal shares; (2) the remainder of the appropriation to be divided among the States and the Territory of Hawaii on the basis of the proportion of the farm population of each to the total farm population of the United States including Hawaii. The funds thus provided are to be used for the extension service work carried on jointly by the United States Department of Agriculture and the State agricultural colleges of the various States and the Territory of Hawaii. This is the work carried on through the county agent system. It is the understanding of the committee that Puerto Rico was not included in the act of June 6, 1945, merely because of the fact that the Territory of Puerto Rico had not, up to that time, been able to take full advantage of the appropriations which had already been made for this type of educational work. Those appropriations required that the sums allocated to each State and Territory must be matched by equal sums appropriated by the legislature of the State or Territory. Since the enactment of the Flannagan Act, Puerto Rico has increased its Territorial appropriations to the point where it is now utilizing all of the funds available under the previous authorization and appropriation acts. It was clearly the intention of Congress that these funds should be made avaliable to the States and Territories as rapidly as they were able to use them and it appears to be within the intent of the act that the benefits should now be extended to Puerto Rico. At the present time there are only 56 county agents on the island of Puerto Rico, serving some 74 agricultural counties. This staff of extension workers is entirely inadequate to meet the needs of the rural population of Puerto Rico for agricultural education. Extension of the full benefits of this legislation to Puerto Rico will make possible the employment of one county agent and one home demonstration agent in each of the 74 rural counties of the Territory, and its enactment is strongly recommended. In a statement filed with the committee, the American Farm Bureau Federation has recommended approval of this legislation. DEPARTMENT REPORT The Department of Agriculture has reported favorably on the bill and the report is concurred in by the Bureau of the Budget. Following is the text of the report: Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. COOLEY: This is in reply to your request of June 8 for a report on H. R. 4090, a bill "to extend the benefits of section 23 of the Bankhead-Jones Act to Puerto Rico." The objective of H. R. 4090 is to extend to Puerto Rico the same benefits of the act approved June 6, 1945, which the States and the Territory of Hawaii are at present receiving, for further development of cooperative agricultural extension work. The need for intensive extension work in Puerto Rico is especially urgent since 66 percent of the population are functionally illiterate. In rural areas about four-fifths of the schools provide instruction only in the first three grades and about three-fourths of the rural pupils can only attend half days because of a shortage of teachers and school buildings. This inadequate public-school training leaves an extremely great need for special information to the rural people in relation to such life problems as nutrition and health since, for example, the traditional food habits result in the use of little or no milk or leafy vegetables and tomatoes. Many serious health problems in Puerto Rico are closely related to illiteracy, lack of information, and a shortage of doctors. The great shortage of doctors, especially in rural areas, makes it especially necessary to extend information to the people relating to nutrition, health habits, and sanitation. The Puerto Rican imports, mostly for foods, textile fibers, and manufactures, exceed the exports by more than $100,000,000 a year. The greatest need in Puerto Rico, therefore, is to teach the rural people how to help themselves by producing more food, improving their own nutritional and health habits, and supplementing the family income by the use of spare time in gardening and handicrafts. Between 60,000 and 90,000 Puerto Ricans are unemployed each month. A large percentage of approximately 300,000 boys and girls of school age who are not enrolled or attending any school and also a large percentage of the thousands of men and women who have only part-time employment can be taught to supplement the family income through handicrafts and gardening. These activities can be taught effectively through 4-H Club work and adult extension work, which can be expanded a great deal through a larger staff of extension workers. On account of the small percentage of rural people who can read, meetings are difficult to announce. For the same reason, information cannot be successfully extended through bulletins and newspapers. There are practically no rural telephones and only 6 percent of the rural families have a radio. Information must be extended mainly through personal contacts. Farm and home visits are a difficult and slow means on account of poor mountainous rural roads so that a large percentage of the farm and home visits by local extension agents must be made on foot or horseback. These and many other handicaps make it desirable that the number of local or district extension agents be increased. There is still an average of about 3,375 rural families to be reached by each county agricultural agent and county home-demonstration agent. There are only 25 States that have more than the 236,115 rural families found in Puerto Rico and only 10 States with a larger farm population as estimated by the Census Bureau. On the basis of its farm population, Puerto Rico would now be entitled to $401,090 annually under section 23 of the Bankhead-Jones Act if the provisions of that section were applicable to it. The best evidence that Puerto Rico is ready to make effective use of the additional funds which this bill would authorize is the fact that the insular government is now appropriating almost $400,000 for extension work which is nearly $300,000 more than required to cover the necessary offset for the Federal funds now received in a total amount of $512,935. It seems most logical to help the people learn and understand the fundamental causes and practical remedies for their problems. The Cooperative Extension Service encourages rural people to adopt improved farm and home practices and to make the most effective use of all their resources. This Department recommends the enactment of the proposed legislation. The Bureau of the Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the President's program, there is no objection to the submission of this report. Sincerely yours, CHARLES F. BRANNAN, Secretary. |