OCR Text |
Show Page 8 Land Law UTAH FARM BUREAU (ConteVrom ( 1 ) Develop land-us- e agree- mencs that provide land users and : land administrators more complete direction as to the terms and conditions in which use of the public lands shall be contracted. (2) Provide users security of investment as an incentive to encourage the investment of private capital and management ability to improve the public lands and increase the growth and production of desirable forage on the public ranges. (3) Encourage increase of big game animals as the number of domestic livestock is increased. Administrative policies and procedures A vital area of the study by the Commission relates to the administrative policies, rules, and procedures which federal agencies employ in the administration of the public lands. There are nine federal agencies under three departments concerned with timber, grass, water, soil, minerals, and wildlife management. To add to these complexities, each of the agencies has its own personnel, each is governed by different laws and regulations, each charges different fees, and each is zealous of its prerogatives and objectives. Yet, in many cases, they manage areas that are similar, and in some instances, intermingled. . lands and industries. (8) Federal agencies which make should employ as uniform and consistent a payment policy and procedure as possible. should be based on the value of the land as established by local taxing policies. (9) Return to each state 90 percent of the mineral royalties received by the federal government from mineral resources within that state. payments-in-lieu-of-tax- es Payments-in-lieu-of-tax- Water policies state water laws The integrity of state water laws has long been debated in Congress and in the courts. It is important to the development and use of water that state laws be recognized and complied with by federal agencies. Therefore, we urge the Land Law Review Commission to ask Congress to enact legislation that will assure water rights created pursuant to state law will no longer be in jeopardy. Every federal agency, as a condition prece-- Administrative recommendations In relation to lands which remain at this time in public ownership, we offer the following recommendations relative to their administration: ( 1 ) Among the agricultural people whose livestock graze the public ranges are some of the nations most capable range managers and conservationists. Local government, industry, and other use groups also have capable and leaders who have interest in proper development and management of the public ranges. This experience and interest should be brought into effective use. The Taylor Grazing Act provided for the appointment of district advisory boards. We believe this principle is sound. We suggested the authorization of range management boards at local and regional levels; Authority of the board needs to be written in law so that the interests and abilities of these people are made effective and not lost in administrative shuffles. Management responsibility should be decentralized. (2) Land users responsible for range improvements should have opportunity to harvest increased forage. (3) Administrators should not change an interpretation of the law which would nullify longstanding contract commitments unless mutually agreed to by users. (4) Private ranges should not be forced to submit to management control by public administrators. (5) Appeals structure and procedure should be changed to eliminate the practice of agency administrators sitting as the appeals officer or appeals board. (6) Basic range analysis should remain flexible for changing conditions, but should be reasonably standardized for ranges with similar characteristics. (7) Provide maximum opportunity for coordination of public land management and improvements with management and improvement of dependent private well-qualifi- . es m pm January 1968 NEWS dent to the use of any water, should be required to conform to state laws and procedures relating to the control, appropriation, use, or distribution of such water. An interesting example of this problem is a situation we understand has developed in the state of Oregon. It is our understanding that the Forest Service is claiming the right to all water originating on the forests as of the date erf the creation of the Forest Reservation. This matter was documented and presented in detail by LaSalle Cole, Oregon, director of the National Reclamation Association, before the subcommittee on irrigation of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of die UJS. House of Representatives. Fifty-fopercent of the total land area of the Western states is in federal ownership, thus a large percent of all irrigation waters rise on federal land; therefore, the Doctrine of Reserved Water Rights, presented in the Oregon example, poses a very serious threat to the future of these states. To set aside this long established ur arid recognized practice by recognizing the Doctrine of .Reserved Water Rights would result, in chaos, stop development of water resources in the West, and put in jeopardy all water rights that have been established over the years. . Therefore, the American Farm Bureau urges the Land Law Review Commission to recommend in its report that Congress enact legislation that will end for all time the Doctrine of Reserved Water Rights. Acreage limitations The 1902 Reclamation Act, as amended, contains a provision that prohibits the Bureau of Reclamation ' from delivering water to over 160 acres of land in one ownership. The provision had its origin in Homestead Act the when farming was done with horse power and walking plows and when investments and overhead requirements were much less than they are today. That agricultural situation has changed. The overhead of a farm operation 105-year-o- ld has increased many times, living and labor costs have multiplied, machinery costs are very high, with the result that a holding will not support a farm operation except in the most favorable crop production areas. 160-ac- We, therefore, request the Public Land Law Review Commission recommend that Congress correct this problem by adopting legislation that will meet present economic conditions and reflect modern farming conditions, crop production, and the ability of the operator to carry overhead imposed by present day cost of The Public Land Law Review Commission heard several other presentations during its Washington meeting, including one presented by W. E. (Hi) Overton, Jr., of New Mexico, president of the National Wool Growers Association and a member of the national Farm Bureau livestock advisory committee. if a raw ed up no rap in people to deduct up to 10 of income with a maximum of $2500 a year, from their taxable income. What's more the earnings on that money is not taxable until Invest the money in an approved retirement program. Country Simple. you retire. HOW? Mutual Life has two programs already approved by the Internal Revenue Service. There's no need to have a lawyer set up these programs. It's already been taken care of. DETAILS? Just 0 call your Country Mutual Life agent. He has a film to show you on our programs. Look in the Yellow Pages under Country Mutual Life. The law now allows re self-employ- ed HR-1- tht company thatgoto costs right down tolms tacks COUNTRY MUTUAL LIFE |