Q, g hf , [$9 4 ei a3’aE2?fiP:?;t Washington, D.C. 20540 Congressronal Research Servrce The Library of Congress THE RENEWABLE RESOURCES EXTENSION ACT Adela Backiel Analyst Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division August 1, 1986 Government "Pim!;iea‘t%.oa=:$§ A ' L36-5%. W &h.ng_m.,Z fin;-%».(§»;—:g;;§‘E3§ rapt -, S i gt mm, "mflI|I‘IIfIi“|"I[|is°"'iWwliiialllll 010-10394 19 ‘r -ABSTRACT The Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978 (RREA) will expire on September 30, l988, unless reauthorized by Congress. This report provides a brief legislative and funding history for the RREA program in the Extension Service, describes how the RREA program operates, and discusses legislative alternatives for the future of RREA. -TABLE OF CONTENTS P_a_.%:¢_ Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. l Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Legislative History of RREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 The RREA Program i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 Funding Natural Resource Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. lO Allocation of RREA Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. l2 Analysis of the RREA Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..;.' l9 Options for Reauthorization . . . . . . . ..‘ . . . . .[ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .f.... 24 Appendix A The Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978 Appendix B Synthesis of Planned 1985 State Renewable Resources Extension Programs Appendix C Distribution of Staffing Levels and Projected Needs by Program Area INTRODUCTION The Renewable Resources Extension Act of l978 (RREA) augmented the existing Extension Service Programs by legislatively directing extension efforts in natural resources. The early origins of RREA centered around the desire to provide more emphasis for forestry extension programs. In the process of developing RREA, its goals were made broader, and included natural resources other than forestry. As the RREA program has been carried out since passage of the Act, there has continued to be a strong emphasis on forestry; some argue that other resources should be given more emphasis. The RREA will expire on September.30, l988, unless reauthoriéed by Congress. The issues involved with reauthorization of RREA include whether the program should be continued at all, reauthorized as it currently operates, or reauthorized but with modifications from the current law. BACKGROUND The intergovernmental Cooperative Extension System has long provided ed- ucational opportunities to various public and specific audience groups, especially at the grass-roots level. These programs are provided through partnership efforts of Federal, State, and local governments. The Extension Service (ES) in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is the Eederal partner of the Cooperative Extension System. The mission of the Extension Service is "to provide national leadership and represent the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the Cooperative Extension System. The mission of the CRS-2 Cooperative Extension System is to improve American agriculture and streng- then American families and communities through informal, research-based education."1 _Agents, specialists, and volunteers in all States and counties dis- seminate information and research findings, acting as a link between the public and the research and education base provided by the land grant colleges and universities in each State and territory. The major activities of the Extension Service are organized into five major program areas: Agriculture, Home Economics and Human Nutrition, 4-H and Youth Development, Natural Resources and Rural Development, and Program Development, Evaluation, and Management Systems. Most State and county programs are generally organized into similar program areas. Extension activities were first authorized by Congress in l9l4 with the I\') passage of the Smith-Lever Act (Act of May 8, l9l4,.ch. 79, 38 Stat. 37 ). . The legislation established a partnership with the States, counties, and the 2 designated land grant colleges and universities. The Renewable Resources Extension Act (RREA, Act of June 30, 1978, P.L. 95-306, 92 Stat. 349) explicitly expanded the emphasis of extension work to include renewable resources as a specific program within the existing Cooperative Extension Service framework.3 The RREA legislatively added to the existing extension lChallenge and Change . . . a Blueprint for the Future--Extension Service, USDA. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Extension Service. April, 1983. p. 35. ' 2For a complete history and review of the Extension Service, see Congressional Research Service, Background for Extension Service Oversight hearings [by A. Barry Carr], February 26, 1982 in Hearings before the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture of the House Committee on Agriculture. February l7, March 9, and lO, l982. Serial No. 97-EEE. l982. pp. 284-304. 3See Appendix A for a complete text of the RREA. CRS-3 agriculture programs, extension programs inforestry, outdoor recreation, fish and wildlife management, rangeland management, and environmental management. (See Appendix B for examples of each of these programs.) Extension work has been accomplished over the years through a Memorandum of Understanding between the USDA and the land grant colleges and universi- ties. "Under the terms of this memorandum the Cooperative Extension Service must use Federal and matching funds to implement plans jointly approved by the State director of the Cooperative Extension Service and the administrator of the Federal Extension Service. In practice, this memorandum has allowed the State and county units to use rather wide discretion in planning programs adapted to local situations."4 Although forestry programs were included in the Smith-Lever programs, the Clarke—McNary Act of 1924 (Act of June 7, 1924, ch. 348, 43 Stat. 653) provided what was thought to be a much needed stimulus for forestry programs that were geared toward farmers. These "farm forestry" programs did, indeed, flourish for many years. However, appropriations and interest were still small relative to other priorities. Authorization for farm forestry programs came full circle when in 1955 the forestry education assistance programs outlined in the Clarke-McNary Act were administratively transferred back under the Smith-Lever Act, "principally for convenience in allotting the funds."5 Initially, the primary impetus behind the RREA legislation was extension forestry. However, the scope of the bill was expanded to include other areas of renewable resources, which generated considerable support and ensured passage. Awade, Larkin. History of Extension Forestry Organization and Relation- ships. Unpublished background report prepared for ECOP. 1975. p. 20. 5Ibid., p. 20. CRS-4 The types of programs Congress envisioned for RREA are best described in Section 3 of the law. More than anything else, this section identifies congressional goals for the RREA: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) provide educational programs that enable individuals to recognize, analyze, and resolve problems dealing with re- newable resources, including forest- and range-based outdoor recreation opportunities, trees and forests in urban areas, and trees and shrubs in shelterbelts; use educational programs to disseminate the results of research on renewable resources; conduct educational programs that transfer the best available technology to those involved in the management and protection of forests and rangelands and the processing and use of their associated renewable resources; develop and implement educational programs that give special attention to the educational,needs of small, private non- industrial forest landowners; develop and implement educational programs in range and fish and wildlife management; assist in providing continuing education programs for profes- sionally trained individuals in fish and wildlife, forest, range, and watershed management and related fields; help forest and range landowners in securing technical and financial assistance to bring appropriate expertise to bear on their problems; and help identify areas of needed research regarding renewable resources. Certain other major requirements of the law include: ‘Section 4: State Renewable Resources Extension Programs --development of a State renewable resources extension program by the State extension director and administrative heads of extension for eligible colleges and universities; consultation and cooperation with Federal, other State, and county extension staffs and organization; reviews of the program by the Secretary of Agriculture and the National Agriculture Research and Extension Users Advisory Board. CRS-5 Section 5: National Renewable Resources Extension Program --preparation by the Secretary of Agriculture of a l98O and l98S Renewable Resources Extension Program every five years of the program to provide national emphasis and direction to extension programs, taking into account the "respective capabilities of private forests and rangelands for yielding renewable resources and the relative needs for such resources identified in the periodic Renewable Resources Assessment provided for in Section 3 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of l974, and the periodic appraisal of land and water resources provided for in section 5 of the Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of l977." --preparation by the Secretary of Agriculture of an annual report to "set forth accomplishments of the Renewable Resources Extension Program, its strengths and weaknesses, recommendations for improvement, and costs of program administration, each with respect to the preceding fiscal year." Section 6: Appropriations Authorization --$15,000,000 authorized to be appropriated for the nine fiscal years l979 through l988; States are generally eligible for funds "according to the respective capabilities of their private forests and rangelands for yielding renewable resources and relative needs for such resources ” Legislative History of the RREA The role of natural resources within the Cooperative Extension System cannot be fully understood without reviewing its historical context. Prior to passage of the RREA, natural resource extension programs operated in the program arena called Agriculture and Natural Resources. Many individuals felt that agriculture was consistently dominating and receiving priority attention and funding to the detriment of the natural resources programs. Many reasons could be cited for this, the most common being the fact that the CRS-6 Extension Service and the Cooperative Extension System were responsible for all education efforts of the Department of Agriculture, and agriculture was, and still is, the largest and most visible aspect of the Department. The concern over the inadequacy of extension forestry programs prompted the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy (ECOP), an oversight group for activities of the Cooperative Extension System, to establish a task force on extension forestry in the mid l970s. The subsequent ECOP report stated that "forestry staffing and organization in ES-USDA is inadequate to co- ordinate the education programs of the Department" and recommended expanded extension efforts.6 A background report prepared for the ECOP forestry task force stated it in a more forthright manner: The inability of the Extension Service to respond to forestry needs is, in part, related to the lack of com- municated and understood forestry situations at decision- making levels of administration in state Extension Services and at the ES-USDA levels. . . . The rationale for equal program status for Extension forestry may be as strong as for the creation of Extension work under the Smith-Lever Act of l9l4 itself.7 A In addition, a general reform of legal authorities pertaining to natural resources and the environment was taking place during the l970s. Particular- ly, the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of l97& (RPA) and the National Forest Management Act of l976 (NFMA) changed the way publicly held forests are managed and how management activities are planned. As documented in Dennis LeMaster‘s book Decade of Change, which recorded the remaking of forestry legislation during the l970s, the Forest Service began drafting legislation, in l976, right after NFMA was signed into law, 6Extension Education in Forestry. Extension Committee on Organization and Policy. The North Carolina Agriculture Extension Service. January l976. pp. 5, ll. 7Wade, Larkin. History of Extension Forestry Organization and Relationships. l975. p. 8. CRS-7 “that would bring together and update, as necessary, Federal policies relating to cooperative forestry and forestry research," as requested by Senator Talmadge, then Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Senator Talmadge viewed the previous forestry legislation as primarily involved with western interests, and wanted "to do something for forestry in the South."8 To respond to Senator Talmadge’s request, the Forest Service organized a working group to help draft legislation, involving not only Forest Service personnel, but others from the forestry community such as university re- searchers, State foresters, and extension representatives. In December l976, the Forest Service submitted a draft bill to Senator Talmadge on forest and rangeland renewable resources research and cooperative forestry assistance programs, including extension. The bill was a composite of the suggestions of the members of the working group. The bill was not received enthusiastically by Senator Talmadge or forestry and conservation interest groups. Senator Talmadge, and others, thought "the bill would cost too much, although the price tag of the bill was never actually determined,” and the interest groups "did not perceive a pressing need for the legisla- tion."9 Actual legislative activity started on these topics in the House. The initial Forest Service draft was reworked into three separate bills by a working group under the auspices of the American Forestry Association called the "Areas of Agreement Committee." Subsequently, Representative James Weaver chairman of the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Forests introduced on June 24, l977: H.R. 8020: a bill authorizing and directing the Secretary of Agriculture to provide for cooperative forestry assistance to States and to private landowners; 8LeMaster, Dennis G. Decade of Change. Greenwood Press, 1985. p. 85. 9Ibid., p. 86. CRS—8 H.R. 8021: a bill authorizing and directing the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out research on forest and rangeland renewable resources; H.R. 8022: a bill providing for an expanded extension program in forest resources. Testimony on these three bills was first received during Subcommittee oversight hearings on implementation of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (RPA) in Washington, D.C. and four field 1ocations.lO During these hearings, interest groups’ position on the bills showed some changes, and the extension bill received favorable comment along with some suggestions for improvement; "38 witnesses testified in support of the bill and none in opposition."1l H.R. 8022 was revised based on many of the suggestions, and reintroduced by Mr. Weaver as H.R. 10618 on January 30, 1978. These revisions became.some of the primary facets of the legislation including extending the program to all forest and rangeland renewable resources and not just forestry; limiting the life of the program to 10 years; and requiring that the Secretary of Agriculture establish a national program and plan for and report on its implementation. 2 Specific hearings on the three bills were held by the Subcommittee on Forests on February 2, 1978. Table 1 shows the positions of some Rey interest groups on these three bills. H.R. 10618 was subsequently amended and reported favorably from the Subcommittee to the full Committee on Agriculture. A clean bill, H.R. 11779, was substituted for H.R. 10618, and introduced for full Agriculture Committee consideration on March 22, 1978. The full Committee approved H.R. 11779 on May 2, 1978. lOHouse Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Forests. Implementa- tion of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act. 95th Congress, 1st session. 1977. Committee Print. llHouse Report 95-1184, Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978. House Committee on Agriculture. May 15, 1978. p. 5. CRS-9 TABLE 1 lhdduuolsdumfllmansCnnpsaa&nChqnnmwehruu7AuinuneAd, §eFu~eaIandRang_ehndlenevobleI.uoerc:olae:rchAct,udthelenevfih IaourceoExundooAc1. ‘ Forest and lanqeland lenevable C00Oerative lenevaole Resources Forestry Resources Extension Act Assistance Act Research Act (H I. 9022. Organizations (H I. 8020) (H I. 3021) H.l. 1061!) Conservation Organizations Aaerican Forestry Association For For For Izaak Halton League D ‘ National Audubon Society For‘ For For National wildlife Federation For‘ For For Sierra Club For For For Uestern Forestry and Conservation Association Hildliie Hanaqelent institute For For For wilderness Society Yilber industry Trade Associations Aaerican Plywood Association For‘ Anerican Pulouood Association industrial Forestry Association National Forest Products Association For‘ Against Against North lest Tieber Association Southern Forest Products Assoc. Association For‘ ‘Western Forest Industries Association Western linoer Association Professional Groups Society or American Foresters For Other Grouos Alerican Fare Bureau Federation Forest Faruers Association For‘ National Association of Conservation Districts For For For National Association of State Foresters For For For SOUiCE: Dennis C. Leflaster and Terri S. Koester, ‘The Persuaderst An Analysis of iestieony on Organizations on Selected Forestry Legislation. 1960°1979.' American Forests, 86 (October 160) 12'1J. 59-62. ‘Hearings in the House of Ieoresentatives only. °For‘ indicates the interest group testified for the legislation but with sthstantial aoenchent. From: Dennis C. LeMaster. Decade of Change. Greenwood Press. 1975. p. 93. I CRS-l0 In the Senate, the first extension bill was introduced by Senator Mark Hatfield as S. l856 (in addition to other separately introduced bills for cooperative forestry and forest research). However, the bill that received the most attention and the only action was S. 3035, introduced by Senator Leahy on May 3, l978. No hearings were held in the Senate. The Senate Committee on Agriculture approved S. 3035 on May l0, 1978. On May 22, l978, the House passed H.R. ll779, as amended. On June 7, l978, the Senate passed H.R. ll779, as amended, in lieu of S. 3035 (Senate Report 95-879). The House agreed to the Senate amendments and cleared H.R. ll779 on June l6, l978. The President signed H.R. ll779 into law on June 30, 'l978 (Public Law 95-306). THE RREA PROGRAM Enactment of RREA was seen by its proponents as necessary for the same basic reasons that the Clarke-McNary Act was passed: a more visible presence for forestry programs was needed within the extension system framework. The RREA has made not only forestry but all renewable resources a higher priority at the State level. But, adequate funding is necessary for a completely successful program. And the RREA program was not funded until four years after enactment, has never been fully funded at the level for which it was authorized, and there has never been an RREA program proposed in an Executive Branch budget request. These facts indicate that RREA has not become a priority for the Administration and Congress, as was expected by its pro- ponents. CRS-ll Funding Natural Resources Extension RREA funds for natural resource extension work was not intended to supplant Smith-Lever funds for natural resources, but to supplement them. Therefore, RREA funds, together with Smith-Lever funds, equal the Federal portion of funds provided for natural resource extension in the country. These Federal monies are then joined by State and county funds to make up the joint Federal-State—County network of the Cooperative Extension Service. It is useful to compare pre—RREA program dollars with post-RREA program dollars to determine the trend in natural resources extension fundingn This review also allows analysis to help determine if RREA funding is acting as a leverage to entice additional non-federal funds for natural resources extension programs. Table 2 compares FY80 and FY85 natural resources program dollars with the total amount of money spent on extension programs (Federal and non-federal). Comparable data for natural resources program in the intervening fiscal years are not available because the States are not required to account to the national Extension Service office with details about program expenditures within the States. Data are available for FY80 and FY85 for natural resources programs because Extension Service performed national surveys with the specific purpose of aggregating this information. In FY80, prior to any appropriations for RREA programs, approximately $12 million was spent on renewable natural resources programs within the Cooperative Extension System. These funds provided for 381 staff years. The natural resources programs accounted for approximately 1.8 percent of the total amount of Cooperative Extension System funds ($681 million). The Federal portion of the $12 million was $3.7 million and the non-federal was $8.3 million. The Federal portion was l.6 percent of the total amount of Federal funds ($230 million) spent on extension in FY80; the non-federal CRS-12 portion was 1.8 percent of the total non-federal contributions ($451 million) to the extension programs. In FY85, four years after Federal appropriations began for RREA program, approximately $28.65 million was spent on renewable natural resources programs within the entire Cooperative Extension System. These funds provided for 573 staff years. The natural resource programs accounted for TABLE 2.--Natural Resources Extension Programs Dollars Compared With Total Extension Dollars for FY80 and FY851 (million dollars) FY80 FY85 Total Total Natural Extension Natural Extension§/ Resources (Federal and Resources (Federal and Programs non-federal) % Programs3/ non-federal) % Federal $3.7 $230.0 1.6 $9.7 $330.0 2.9 Non—federal 8.3 451.0 1.8 19.0 665.0 1 2.9 Total 312 0 $681.0 1.8 $28.7 $995.0 2.9 1/ Comparable data for FY81-FY84 natural resources programs are unavailable. 2/ Data for FY80 natural resources extension programs are from USDA Science and Education Administration. A Five-Year National Plan for Renew- able Resources Extension Programs. Miscellaneous publication no. 1384. June, 1980. p. 22. 3/ Data for FY80 total extension dollars are from the FY81 Budget Explanatory Notes for USDA-Extension Service. p. 255. §/ Data for FY85 natural resources extension programs are developed from USDA-ES. Draft Renewable Resources Extension Program. Second, Five- Year Plan, 1986-1990. 1986. p. 10 5/ Data for FY85 total extension program dollars are from the FY86 Budget Explanatory Notes for USDA-ES. pp. 8-19. CRS-13 approximately 2.9 percent of the total amount of Cooperative Extension System funds ($995 million). The Federal portion of the $28.7 million was $9.7 million ($2.5 of RREA funds and $7.2 of Smith-Lever funds) and the non- federal portion was $19 million. Both the Federal and non-federal portions individually accounted for 2.9 percent of the total Federal and non-federal contributions to natural resources extension programs. Between FY80 and FY85, the Federal support of natural resources exten- sion programs increased by $6 million, or 162 percent; the non-federal support for these programs increased by $10.7 million, or 129 percent. Not only have total dollars increased, but the percentage of total Federal and non-federal funds devoted to natural resources extension programs has also increased, from 1.8 percent in FY80 to 2.9 percent in FY85. This percentage ' increase suggests that natural resources programs have also become a higher priority within the Cooperative Extension System, including States and counties; in addition, the RREA has been successful at leveraging additional funds from the States and counties for these programs. Allocation of RREA Funds The majority of Smith-Lever funds are apportioned to States based on a formula involving rural population and farm statistics; these funds also have a matching requirement for State and county funds.‘ Another category of Smith-Lever funds are for special grants and programs; allocation of funds is based on different criteria depending on the type of program. RREA programs are divided into five categories: forestland management and wood utilization, rangeland management, outdoor recreation, fish and wildlife management, and environmental management and public policy. Funding for each of these program areas is displayed in Table 3 and Chart 1. The RREA does not have a matching funds requirement. Forest land management and TABLP ‘J "CR5-la 3."AREA Funding by Program Area3/ (H$ = thousand dollars) FY82 FY83 FY84 FY85 MS % MS 95 MS 95 MS 95 Forest Management and Wood Utilization l,4ll’ 7l l,462 73 l,Sl7. 76 l,709 68 Range 229 11 192 A 9.5 178 9 373 15 Fish and Wildlife l9l 9 228 ll.4 228 ll.4 286 l2 Outdoor Recreation 55 3 42 2 l2 0 .6 53 2 Environmental Management and Public Policy ll& 6 76 4 65 3 79 3 Total 2,000 l00 2,000 100 2,000 100 2,500 l00 3/Data for FY82 are from Background Paper on Non-Industrial Private Forest Lands, Their Management, and Related Public and Private Assistance, l983. All other data are from ES-USDA, personal communication, July l6, 1986. mgcflaou ucmmsozy a coma coca com“ ego“ « w W “ :oHumNHHH~: cos: a u:oeommcmz% HmmLoL_mM r 23$ j 22 m::.:3% -1 E; _m~ % A . mumfl 2 : .n_ % .f\\ N \ \\ H 4 coflgmmgumc - /1 \\\\\ g\\mmv\ \mmm\¥¢2: Lasagna 2; ,\ \ xm A 9 >ufl~o% ufl_n=_ W \\ x‘ xx - - ; ~m;:me:oLfl>:m %m+ xmmx- \\wm- .:\\\ - \\\\\mfi mm;< amgmoga >3 mcflucsm L Ammwmucmoumm omaawh Co cwmmmv mozam 1:... _ _: :2 w._;m;Ea: 322 ;m.: s1c>oz ::_=_o>3 >um.ufi 3oz :.=..___w_.xA. ma.wm::;:mmcz ..:_:~ _ .< c:m¢t:_ mxm=.< cu_xoI 332 ..wm;.._:a .._..w.V_ c...mc.:__z m_::____ :_;C mw__.~ .__.._L m_:_m;_> .m:3 M... _ .~_L >x;:.:cx _._::mm:: : _ m::,.m .3 m:__o;mu :u:om mvmmw::mP cc..o_m ::x_;._: .~._.w« m ......_ m.;£.1x.< .:..x:__.wm3 _;;;nm_mx.z m_:_x..> m_:c>_>m::z; xi; 392 :.L*w... :E:;m_< m:__c.mu :.;:z mmxwb w«:;oa__mu »w_m;A.mu. AP P END IX A PUBLIC LAW 95-306 [H.R. 11779]; June 30, 1978 RENEWABLE RESOURCES EXTENSION ACT ‘OF 1978 An Act to provide for an expanded and comprehensive extension Dl'°0"3m 1'0" ' forest and rangeland renewable resources. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives Of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the “Renewable Resources Extension Act of 19:8’. FINDINGS SEC. 2. Congress finds that—— . (1) the extension program of the Department of Agriculture and the extension activities of each State provide useful and pro- ductive educational programs for private forest and range land- owners and processors and consumptive and nonconsumptive users of forest and rangeland renewable resources. and these educa- tional programs complement research and assistance programs conducted by the Department of Agriculture; ('2) to meet national goals. it is essential_that_ all forest and rangeland renewable resources (hereinafter in this Act referred to as "renewable resources”). including fish and Wildlife» forage, outdoor recreation opportunities, timber. and water, be fully con- sidered in designing educational programs for landowners, proc- essors, and users: (3) more efiicient utilization and marketing of renewable resources extend available supplies of such resources. provide roducts to consumers at prices less than-they would otherwise iie, and promote reasonable returns on the investments of land- owners. processors. and users; (4) trees and forests in urban areas improve the esthetic qual- ity, reduce noise. filter impurities from the air and add oxygen to it. save energy by moderating temperature extremes. control wind and water erosion. and provide habitat for wildlife; and (5) trees and shrubs used as shelterbelts protect farm lands from wind and water erosion, promote moisture accumulation in the soil, and provide habitat for wildlife. TYPES OF PROGRAMS; ELIGIBLE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES SEC. 3. (a) The Secretary of Agriculture (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the “Secretary”). under conditions the Secretary may prescribe and in cooperation with the State directors of cooperative eijtoelrlision service programs and eligible colleges and universities, s a — (1) provide educational rograms that enable individuals to recognize, analyze, and reso. ve problems dealing with renewable resources. including forest- and range-based outdoor recreation opportunities. trees and forests in urban areas, and trees and shrubs in shelterbelts; (2) use educational programs to disseminate the results of research on renewable resources; (3) conduct educational programs that transfer the best avail- able technology to those involved in the management and protec- 92 STAT. 349 Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978. 16 USC 1600 DOIC. 16 USC 1671. 16 USC 1672. s-1:; t— 1 (N... C)": J... <23 U) “Eligible colleges and universities." 16 USC 1673. 7 USC 3123. LAWS OF 95th CD.°“~:'G.—-End June 30 tion of forests and rangelands and the processing and use of their associated renewable resources; ' . (4) develop and implement educational programsthat give special attention to the educational needs of small. private non- industrial forest landowners; . p (5) develop and implement educational programs in range and fish and wildlife management; ' . (6) assist in providing continuing education programs for pro- fessionally trained individuals in fish and wildlife. forest, range, and watershed management and related fields: (7) help forest and range landowners in securing technical and financial assistance to bring appropriate expertise to bear on their problems: and (8) help identify areas of needed research regarding renewable resources. ‘ ~ (b) As used in this Act. the term “eligible colleges and universities” means colleges and universities eligible to be supported and main- tained. in whole or in part. with funds made available under the pro- visions of the Act of July ‘2. 1862 (19 Stat. 503-505. as amended: 7 U.S.C. 301-4305. 307. 308). and the Act of August 30. 1890 (‘.26 Stat. 417-119, as amended; 7 USC. 321-6'26. 328l . including Tuskegee Insti- tute. and colleges and universities eligible for assistance under the Act of October 10, 1962 (76 Stat. 806—80'a",‘as amended; 16 USC. .'>8‘2a. 58Qa—1—-582a-7). . I (C) In implementing this section. all appropriate educational meth- ods ma_v be used. including. but not limited to. meetings. short courses. workshops. tours. demonstrations. publications. news releases. and radio and television programs. STATE RENEWABLE RESOURCES EX'I'F..\'S1'ON PROGRAMS Sec. 4. (a) The State director of cooperative extension programs (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the “State director"l and the administrative heads of extension for eligible colleges and universities in each State shall jointlv develop. bv mutual agreement. a single comprehensive and coordinated renewable resources extension pro- gram in which the role of each eli ble college and university is well- defined. In meeting this responsiililitv. the State director and the administrative heads of extension for eligible colleges and universities shall consult and seek agreement with the administrative technical representatives and the forestry representatives provided for bv the Secretary in implementation of the Act of October 10. 1962 (T6 Stat. 806-807. as amended: 16 U.S.C. 582a. 582a—1—-58‘2a—7). in the State. Each State’s renewable resources extension program shall be submit- ted to the Secretary annually. The National Agricultural Research and Extension Users Advisory Board established under section 1408 of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 shall review and make recom- mendations to the Secretary pertaining to programs conducted under this Act. ' (b) The State director and the administrative heads of extension for eligible colleges and universities in each State shall encourage close coo ration between extension staffs at the county and State levels, an State and Federal research organizations dealing with renewable resources. State and Federal agencies that manage forests and range- lands and their associated renewable resources. State and Federal agen- cies that have responsibilities associated with the processing or use 92 STAT. i350 'Act, the Secretary sha June 30 RESOURCES EXTENSION ACT of renewable resources. and other agencies or organizations the State director and administrative heads of extension deem appropriate. (c) Each State renewable resources extension program shall be administered and coordinated by the State director. except that, in States having colleges eligible to-receive funds under the Act of August. 30. 1890 ('26 Stat. 417-419, as amended: 7 U.S.C. 321-326. 328), including Thiskegee Institute. the State renewable resources extension program shall be administered by the State director and the admin- istrative head or heads of extension for the college or colleges eligible to receive such funds. (d) In meeting the provisions of this section. each State director and administrative heads of extension for eligible colleges and uni- versities shall appoint and use one or more advisory committees comprised of forest and range landowners. professionally trained indi- viduals in fish and wildlife. forest. range. and watershed manage- ment. and related fields. as appropriate. and other suitable persons. (e) For the purposes of this Act, the term “State" means any one of the liftv States. the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam. the District of Columbia. and the Virgin Islands of the United States. .\'ATIO.\'AL RE.\'E\\'.-\BLl'I RES()CR(.'ES EXTENSION PR0I(‘.R.A.‘rI SEC. 5. (la) The Secretary shall prepare a five-year plan for imple- menting this Act. which is to be called the"‘Renewable Resources Extension Pro am” and shall submit such plan to Congress no later than the last ay of the first half of the fiscal year ending Se tem- ber 30, 1980. and the last day of the first half of each fifth fiscal)year thereafter. The Renewable Resources Extension Program shall pro- vide national emphasis and direction as well as guidance to State directors and administrative heads of extension for eligible colleges and universities in the development of their respective State renew- able resources extension pro ams. which are to be appropriate in terms of the conditions. nee s. and opportunities in each State. The Renewable Resources Extension Program shall contain. but not be limited to. brief outlines ofgeneral extension programs for fish and wildlife management (for both game and nongame species). range management. timber management (including brief outlines of general extension programs for timber utilization. timber harvesting. timber marketing, wood utilization. and wood products marketing), and watershed management (giving special attention to water quality pro- tection), as well as brief outlines of general extension programs for recognition and enhancement of forest- and range-based outdoor rec- .1-eation opportunities. for planting and management of trees and for- ests in urban areas. and for planting and management of trees and shrubs in shelterbelts. (b) In preparing the Renewable Resources Extension Program. the Secretary shall take into account the respective capabilities of private forests and rangelands for yielclin the relative needs for such resources identi ed in the eriodic Renew- able Resource Assessment provided for in section 3 o the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 and the peri- odic appraisal of land and water resources provided for in section 5 of the Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977. (c) To provide information that will aid Congress in its oversi ht responsibilities and to ltlirovide accountability in implementing tgiis prepare an annual report, which shall be 92 STAT. 351 renewable resources and - “Sutc." Plan. aubmitul to Congress. 16 USC 1674. 16 USC 1601. ' 16 USC 2004. Report to Congress. PL. 95-306 16 USC 1675. 16 USC 1601. 16 USC 2004. 16 USC 1676. 7 USC 3101 DOZB. 16 use 1671 note. LAWS OF 95th CONG.—2nd SESS. June 30 furnished to Congress at the time of submission of each annual fiscal budg:e‘t.,»beginning with the annual fiscal budget for the fiscal year end- ing September 30, 1981. The annual report s all set forth accomplish- ments of the Renewable Resources Extension Program. its strengths and weaknesses. recommendations for improvement, and costs of pm- gram administration, each with respect to the preceding fiscal year. APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZATION SEC. 6. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to implement this Act $15,000,000 for the fiscal year en ing September 30, 1979, and $15,000,000 for each of the next nine fiscal years. Generally, States shall be eligible for funds appropriated under this Act accord- ing to the respective capabilities of their private forests and range- lands for yielding renewable resources and relative needs for such resources identified in the periodic Renewable Resource Assessment provided for in section 3 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 and the periodic ap raisal of land and water resources provided for in section 5 of the Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977. REGULATIONS AND COORDINATION SEC. 7. The Secretary is authorized to issue such rules and regula- tions as the Secretary deems necessary to implement the provisions of this Act and to coordinate this Act with title XIV of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977. ~ ' EFTECITVE DATES SEC. 8. The provisions of this Act shall be eflective for the period beginning October 1, 1978, and ending September 30, 1988. Approved June 30. 1978. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: HOUSE REPORT No. 95-1184 (Comm. on Agr'icultu.re). SENATE REPORT No. 95-881 accompanying S. 3035 (Comm. on Agriculture. Nutri- tion. and Forestry). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Vol. 124 (1978): May 22, considered and passed House. June 7. considered and passed &nnte, amended, in lieu of S. 3035. June 16, Home concurred in Senate amendment. WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 14. No. 27: July 1. Presidential statement. ' 92 STAT. 352 APPENDIX B A SYNTHESIS OF PLANNED l985 STATE RENEWABLE RESOURCES EXTENSION PROGRAMS INTROOUCTLON The Renewable Resources Extension Act of l979 (RREA) authorized expanding and increasing the comprehensiveness of natural resources programs conducted by the Cooperative Extension System. In FY l98S an appropriation of $2.5 million was allocated to 43 States for this purpose. Each State, working with a State advisory committee, has identified program priorities and developed a plan to address those needs. The 5-year National Plan for Renewable Resources Extension Programs served as a national framework for the expansion of State programs. The National Plan identified six major program areas. They include: forestland management; harvesting, processing and marketing of wood products; rangeland management; fish and wildlife management; outdoor recreation and environmental“ management and public policy. The following is a synthesis of programs planned by the States for FY l98S. It provides an insight into the scope, priorities and direction of expanded programs in each of the 43 States receiving an allocation of funds. The amount of funds allocated to each State and the planned expenditure of funds for each program area are included. " ' SUMMARY . Forty-three States have planned expanded natural resources programs with the FY ‘l985 Renewable Resources Extension Act appropriation of $2.5 million. The expansion occurred in six program areas. In the aggregate 5l.2 percent of the funds were directed towards forestland management; l7.2 percent in harvesting, marketing and processing of wood products; l4.9 percent in rangeland management; ll.5 percent in fish and wildlife management; 2.l percent in outdoor recreation and 3.l percent in environmental management and public policy program areas. States utilized different strategies in addressing their natural resource issues and needs for expanded programs. Some States chose to place a major emphasis in one program area while others chose to expand or implement new efforts in a number of program areas. Several States plan a coordinated interdisciplinary expansion of programs. In total, 36 States either expanded current program efforts or implemented new programs in forestland management, 24 in harvesting, marketing, and processing of wood products, l7 in rangeland management, l9 in fish and wildlife management, 7 in outdoor recreation, and l0 in environmental management and public policy. Synthesis of Individual State Programs Although the specific thrust or direction of individual State programs are unique to the situation in each State some commonalities can be identified. They include: Source: Extension Service - U.S. Department of Agriculture Forestland Management The primary audience is private non-industrial forest landowners. The emphasis of programs is on improving the productivity of ~forestlands. A majority of the programs also include a significant emphasis on multiple use management. Harvesting, Processing and Marketing of wood Products 0 Primary wood processors and private non-industrial forest landowners are the primary audience. The emphasis of programs for primary wood processors is the transfer of new technology that will result in increased profitability. The focus of programs for private non-industrial forestland owners is improving their marketing skills and understanding to how to market their timber and associated resources. Rangeland Management 0 Fish Ranch owners, managers and associated professionals are the primary target audience. Programs will emphasize management practices and systems, alternative grazing systems and the evaluation of the cost—effectiveness of alternative practices that improve range condition and enterprise profitability. ° Stewardship programs aimed at implementing optimal management strategies to meet public and private resource objectives is a major focus. and wildlife ‘Programs will be directed primarily at owners and managers of forests and rangelands. A considerable number of programs will be developed and delivered in concert with or as a component of forest and rangeland management programs. T The primary focus will be on management practices that improve fish and wildlife habitat quality. Outdoor Recreation Owners and managers of current and potential recreation enterprises are the primary target audience. Programs will focus on improving the business management skills of owners and managers and identifying potential recreation enterprises. Another focus is on planning and maintaining outdoor recreation enterprises. B-3 Environmental Management and Public Policy o The target audience is a diverse group ranging from elected public officials to users groups, professional resource managers, Forest and rangeland owners and youth. 0 Depending upon individual State issues, the Focus of programs will include municipal watershed management, urban forest resources, environmental management and conflict resolution. These limited resources have provided the individual States with both the direct and indirect ability to expand current and implement new natural resource programs. The direct effect is presented in this synthesis. The indirect effect is the impetus that these resources have provided to leverage other sources of funds. This has been achieved through redirection of resources from other program efforts and matching funds. A number of States have used RREA resources to secure matching funds from other federal and State agencies and private organizations for cooperative and joint programs. In addition, the entire RREA process has served to focus attention nationally and at the State level on natural resource issues and programs. In FY l98l, prior to an RREA appropriation, the Cooperative Extension System devoted approximately 388 staff years to natural resources programming. The total staff years planned for FY l985 (including RREA funds)is S73. Alabama $64,407 Forestland Management -— Two-thirds of the land area in Alabama is commercial forest. Commercial forests are currently producing at half of their productive potential. Two hundred thousand individuals own about 75% of the commercial forest acreage. Program includes (l) an expanded statewide system of show and tell whole woodland management jointly funded with TVA; (2) employment of specialists to increase predelivery of knowledge of low—cost herbicide technology for site preparation and timber stand improvement to increase softwood production; and (3) public awareness and landowner education programs for managing and improving northern Alabama hardwood stands. $ 9,833 Harvesting, Processing, and Marketing of wood Products -— The timber industry in Alabama is made up of many small contractors not traditionally considered as clientele of either the forest industry or professional Foresters. The program objective is to increase the knowledge and practice adoption of this group in improved equipment technology, harvesting practices, business management and pollution (control. Case studies will be conducted, education materials developed and workshops held utilizing expertise from the Auburn University Department of Forestry and the USDA Forest Service Engineering Research Unit. $13,371 Alaska $31,671 $12,600 Fish and wildlife Management —- Program objectives are to assist landowners and managers (1) to adopt proper forest production, harvesting, utilization and overall wildlife management practices and (2) to adopt proper control and management techniques for vertebrate pests, especially beaver - traditional educational methods will be used including agent training, publication, group contacts, mass media and demonstrations. Increasing fee hunting as a method for generating income will be emphasized in South Alabama. A beaver cooperative will be initiated in Central Alabama. TOTAL -- $87,611 Forestland Management -— There are four million acres of non-industrial forestland in Alaska. There was no Extension forestry program prior to 1982. Program objectives are to increase awareness and knowledge of biologic and economic potential of forest resources; wood lot management opportunities and skills; and different uses of forestland. The program is being developed in close cooperation with U.S. and Alaska Forest Service, Institute of Northern Forestry and the Bureau of Indian Affairs and will include a quarterly newsletter; news releases; woodland management workshop and handbook; 4-H leaders handbook; A-H Forestry and wildlife camp and school programs. Harvesting, Processing, and Marketing of wood Products -— Host wood building materials in Alaska are imported. The objective of this program is to increase the production and marketing of local wood products. working with the U.S. Forest §ervice and the Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development a quarterly newsletter will be produced and sawmill workshops will be held. TOTAL -- $44,271 Arizona $40,803 Rangeland Hanagement.-- Eighty seven percent of the land area in Arizona is rangeland. Livestock producers have traditionally been the primary interest group concerned with range resources and have been the primary target audience of range Extension programs. Rapidly expanding urban populations have created new range interest groups concerned with RV's, hunting, fishing, camping and conservation. Their interests are not always compatible with livestock interests and their knowledge of rangeland management is often limited. Expanded program objectives target non-rancher user groups, including youth, to help them understand and appreciate basic range management concerns and principles. Specific education materials and programs will be developed in consultation with leaders of these interest groups and distributed and presented as appropriate. TOTAL -- $40,803 Arkansas $37,738 $37,738 —- Most of Arkansas's private non—industrial still allowing their timber to be harvested without providing for regeneration. The RREA expanded program will include county forest land owner surveys; organize county forestry advisory committees; carry out educational programs, including Forestland Management forest landowners are .demonstrations and tours, workshops, media releases, and short courses for landowners and Foresters. M Harvesting, Processing, and Marketing of wood Products -- Recent surveys in southern and western Arkansas show that one half the , counties lack resources to develop information on marketing for rural non—industrial private forest landowners. Educational programs will be developed, based on needs identified by county land owner surveys, and be delivered through the use of demonstrations; tours; media releases; and short courses for foresters, accountants and land owners. TOTAL -- $75,476 California $23,200 $23,2l2 $23,200 Forestland Management -— California's l6.3 million acres of connwmcial forests are producing wood at only 54% of their biologic potential. Population pressures are creating additional problems particularily in or near urban areas. Objectives of the forestry programs are to increase investment on industrial forest land, improve forest reproduction, minimize environmental/aesthetic degradation, and implement concepts of forest management in urban and urban/rural interface areas. Program will be carried out through short courses, applied research, printed materials and visual aids to assist county offices. Harvesting, Marketing and Processing of wood Products -- California produces about lO% of the nation‘s saw timber. Program objectives are to (l) increase primary product recovery, (2) disseminate new research and technology, and (3) improve understanding of wood properties and performance requirements. This will be_accomplished through short courses, applied research and publications for county staff and primary processors. Fish and wildlife Management -- The objectives of the program are to (l) increase awareness of animal damage problems and (2) to provide information to land owners and managers on new and improved solutions to wildlife damage problems. This will be accomplished by problem identification and solution delivery through county agents using appropriate Extension methods, including farm advisor training curricula and courses, leaflets, a rodent control handbook, slide tape programs and computer software to improve wildlife damage control decisionmaking. $23,200 Rangeland Management -- There are aDOcoximately 38 million acres of rangeland in California. Implementation of range management practices could increase range—livestock production by two to four fold on at least l0 million acres of grass and woodland-grass. wildlife habitat, watershed and/or forage production can be improved on l0 million acres of brushland by burning and post—fire management. The objectives include the development and use of computer simulation and resource allocation models as a means to improve and/or aid landowners in making cost-effective management decisions. workshops will provide landowners with hands-on training in how to analyze the impacts and costs of site specific management alternatives. TOTAL “ $92,8l2 Colorado 3 3,738 3 5,000 $ 9,000 3 9,000 Forestland Management -- Aspen is the most plentiful Forest type in Colorado, comprising 28% of the private commercial forestland. The l985 expanded program will focus on (l) introducing aspen management practices to land owners and (2) creating an awareness of aspen management issues and techniques in the four urban population centers of the front range. Included will be the publication of an aspen insect and disease booklet and one or two public TV programs in association with the College of Forestry and Natural Resources‘Aspen Research program. Harvesting, Processing and Marketing of Wood Products -- Sixty—two of Colorado‘s ninety-five sawmills produce less than one million board feet of timber annually and few employ a professional wood technologist. The l98S expanded program will focus on promoting quality techniques for small saw mills, increasing lumber recovery by lO%, and increasing economic returns by l0% through educational workshops in cooperation with the U.S. and Colorado Forest Services. Range Management —- The l985 expanded program will be targeted at range livestock producers and will include (l) a prescribed burning workshop, (2) several demonstrations of habitat manipulation and (3) range and resource management workshops including range management principles, plant identification, grazing management, animali nutrition and range improvement. Fish and wildlife Management -- The 4-H shooting sports program is expanding rapidly in Colorado. No statewide guidelines or program materials are currently available. The l98S expanded program will include: a statewide and regional shooting sports workshops to train leaders, agents, and consultants; to identifying program needs; state fair shooting competition and development of manuscripts for leader and youth manuals. B-7 Colorado (CONT 1 $ 7,000 $l4,000 Outdoor Recreation -— The l985 expanded program Focuses on providing professional assistance to rural communities in park and recreation planning and development. Community workshops are being planned. Assisting with these workshops are two CSU department-heads, three professors, five Extension specialists, four professional park and recreation administrators and two landscape architects. These workshops will provide local officials with the skills to identify and plan for rural community recreation needs and programs/development. Environmental Management and Public Policy -— Colorado citizens lack objective information on natural resource management. The l985 expanded program will develop two public TV programs, on a trial basis, focusing on issues, objectives, and scientific information relating to natural resource issues and management alternatives. This is a broad based interdisciplinary effort. TOTAL -- $47,738 Florida 339,092 $ 8,725 "Forestland Management -- Forest improvement opportunities exist on 7.3 million acres of commercial forestland in Florida. Sixty percent of this land is controlled by non-industrial private landowners. In many cases the knowledge of forestry practices, management options and economic incentives possessed by these owners is not adequate to effectively use the productive capability of their land. The potential exists to increase the yield of timber by l5 cu. ft./acre/year. Many landowners have land available that has the potential of producing products as additional source of family income, yet are unaware of the financial and technical assistance provided by local, State, and federal agencies. The objective is to: (l) improve the financial return from forestlands; (2) teach small timber producers to improve their forest management practices; (3) inform landowners of how to reduce soil erosion, and (4) provide training for Extension professionals to increase their knowledge of forest management practices. Program efforts will Focus on improving productivity through written material, meetings, demonstrations, and the use of a computerebased forest management and information system targeted at these landowners. Rangeland Management -- Ranchers have been faced for some time with increased input costs and declining profits. Currently the quantity and quality of cool season forage is limited. The objective of this expanded program is to teach ranchers and ranch managers management practices and techniques for improving the quality and quantity of cool season forage. Demonstrations, tours, meetings, news letters, and county staff training will be used to deliver this program. B58 Florida (COnt;L $22,458 Fish and‘wildlife Management -- The impacts resulting from human population pressures in Florida are creating serious problems on the entire natural resource base. Youth typically have an interest in .nature and need to develop an appreciation and understanding of ecological processes as a guide to future citizen decisions that impact the natural resources base. This program provides an expanded emphasis on conservation education for youth through county staff and volunteers. The objective is to provide information and training for youth so that up-to-date information and appropriate attitudes regarding the management and conservation of natural resources are reinforced or changed. Efforts will be to train groups of leaders, teachers and county staff members. Teaching methods will include workshops, demonstrations and printed materials. TOTAL -- $70,275 Georgia $94,545 forestland Management —- Forest management on private, non-industrial lands is perceived to be a critical need if the nation is to supply anticipated wood demands in the future. The objectives are to expand programs that increase awareness of benefits occurring from improved forest management practices. This is an expansion of a continuing activity with much greater intensiveness. The funds will support two Statewide Extension foresters and an area Extension forester to work with county and district Extension agents to develop and implement forest resource programs. TOTAL “ $94,545 5 9,000 forestland Management -- Much of the private forestland in Idaho is in poor condition. The more than 30,000 private nonindustrial forest landowners in the State lack the basic understanding of how to manage their forestland. RREA funds will be used to expend current program efforts. The objectives of this expanded effort will include «inservice training for county agents, a series of workshops on forestland management practices for private landowners and continuing education workshops for professional foresters. An additional objective is to teach teachers how to use forest management teaching materials in their classroom programs. The programs will be delivered through the use of workshops, tours and publications. Harvesting, Marketing and Processing of wood Products -- In Idaho there are approximately 200 primary wood processing firms. These firms are partially dependent upon the timber supplied by more than 30,000 nonindustrial private landowners in the State. RREA funds will be used to provide expanded efforts in improving forest B-9 Idaho (Cont;) $19,471 3 5,000 landowner's*knowledge of marketing methods and skills. In addition, information will also be developed on timber demand and timber prices. A directory of primary processors will be updated and distributed to landowners. Programs will be delivered through Iworkshops, meetings, news letters, mass media, and publications. Rangeland Management -- The approaches of rangeland management in Idaho are changing as a result of changes in political philosophy, financial conditions and recent experiences in coordinated, cooperative management from Extension stewardship program. The objectives of this expanded effort are to increase program emphasis on cooperative, coordinated management planning and monitoring for ranchers, ranch managers and land management agency staff members. This will be achieved through workshops, demonstrations, meetings, tours, publications, and news letters. I Outdoor Recreation -- Tourism is second only to agriculture in economic importance. A major problem in the tourism industry is the rapid turnover of businesses which is in large part due to the lack of business management and marketing skills by owners and managers. Updating the management skills and marketing Idaho's tourism opportunities isva high priority. The objectives of this new effort is to develop education programs that increase and improve the personnel management, financial management, marketing and leadership skills of Idaho's tourism enterprise owners and managers. This program will be accomplished through workshops, tours and publications. TOTAL -~ $49,47l Illinois $52,939 Forestland Management - Illinois has 3.7 million acres of non—industrial private forestland. Forty-one percent of the live sawtimber is oak. Because of inadequate regeneration and low intensity of management, these private lands are producing only about half of their productive potential. The objectives are to: (l) increase woodlot management of maximum profits and yields, (2) teach management practices for recreation, wildlife and aesthetic values, and (3) improve Christmas tree quality. This will be done by increasing the number of contacts through county and multi—county % workshops and meetings for woodland owners through newsletters, news releases, and county adviser inservice training programs. TOTAL “ $52,939 Indiana $42,537 Kansas $23,467 Forestland Management - Indiana‘s forestland base consists of about 4 million acres. This represents approximately l7% of the State‘s land area. Nearly all (98%) of this forestland is classified as commercial Forest. Ninety-one percent is privately owned and farmers control almost 70%. The Indiana Division of Forestry estimates that fewer than l0% of the timber sales involve a professional forester. The objective is to provide educational programs for forestland owners that describe and demonstrate new technologies for managing forestland. Two audiences have been identified. The first is the non-industrial private woodland owner. For the first group, an intensive eight-week course (4 class hrs/wk) and in addition, one and two day/evening programs on specialized topics will be initiated along with supplemental new publications, workbooks, and manuals. The second group, professional foresters, will have educational programs and materials directed towards silviculture, pesticide application training, microcomputers, timber tax management, growth and yield. TOTAL -- $42,537 Rangeland Management :7 Kansas rangelands (l6.7S million acres) plus tame pasture (2.5 million acres) provide the base grazing resource for the livestock industry. Current economic costs have reduced the profitability of traditional management methods. The objectives of the expanded program are to: (l) develop an interdisciplinary grazing land data base to determine the current management, condition, and productivity of rangelands and relevant grazed forages. Comparison of various grazing methods and/or combinations of grazed forages will be evaluated for use in the education program and (2) accelerate the development of computer assisted decisionmaking aids for use by Extension personnel and producers. TOTAL -4 $23,467 Kentucky $20,000 forestland Management —- Approximately half a million private landowners control 90 percent of the l2 million acres of forestland in Kentucky. Historically, the lands have been high-graded and burned, leaving second growth forests of poorer quality than the original stands. The objectives of the expanded program include providing information on small woodland management, fire control, tree identification and Christmas tree management. Programs will also utilize the 500 acre University of Kentucky demonstration forest management areas. Forest reclamation techniques on surface mines will also be demonstrated. Kentucky (Cont.l $l5,lO7 $20,000 3 3,500 $ 3,000 Harvesting, Harketingg and Processing of wood Products -- A substantial amount of the hardwoods in Kentucky are either not graded or are misgraded. In order to be competitive and to receive better prices for lumber, increased numbers of better trained lumber graders are needed. To meet this need, lumber grading short courses for professionals will be conducted. Drying lumber properly in a cost effective way also greatly increases the value of lumber. Kentucky has over 40 companies who dry wood. During the program year, workshops will be held on the latest research and technology on wood drying methods. An annual forest owners survey will be conducted. Brochures and other publications will be developed for use by county agents. Fish and wildlife —— 49 percent of Kentucky's land area is in forest, yet less than l0 percent of that land is managed for wildlife or fish. There is a tremendous potential to improve and increase both wildlife and fish habitat. workshops will be held to teach county agents, landowners, and the general public information on management practices that can improve both wildlife and fish habitat in the State. Brochures on fish and wildlife management will be developed. The County Agent Fish and wildlife Management Handbook will be updated. Outdoor Recreation —- The Kentucky tourist industry generates more than $l.B billion in sales each year. It employs in excess of B0,000 people. Much of the appeal is the Quality of our forests, waterways, and lakes. Business owners and operators need to understand sound business practices and have an appreciation and understanding of natural resources management. A workshop tour will be developed and conducted to demonstrate recreation/tourism management techniques for businesses that are located near and dependent upon forests. Environmental Management and Public Policy‘-— Kentucky has a rich and diverse natural resource base. Environmental damage has resulted from the careless use of these resources. A need exists for up-to-date youth education materials that teach the responsibility of stewardship of these natural resources. A number of 4-H materials and activities are planned to address this need. TOTAL -- $6l,607 Louisiana $44,245.20 Forestland Management —- Louisiana has the potential to greatly increase forest production and profitability to small forestland owners. workshops, meetings, demonstrations, field tours, electronic technology and newsletters will be used to provide current forest management information to the landowners, professionals, and general public. Louisiana (Cont.) s22,i22.eo , $ 7,374.20 Harvesting, Marketing; and Processing-wood Products -- Seven hundred forest landowners in Northwest Louisiana have the potential to double their production of timber. In order to develop programs to meet their needs, RREA funds were used to hire an area forest agent. workshops on competitive bidding techniques for timber sales will be held for landowners. Farm visits, meetings, newsletters, and mass media will also be used to deliver information on competitive bidding techniques, as well as harvesting and processing information. Fish and wildlife Management —- In a Statewide survey, ll percent of the forestland owners listed beavers as creating a wildlife damage problem and 5 percent indicated that coyote damage was a problem. There also exists considerable potential to increase forestland owners income by charging hunting fees. workshops for landowners will teach approved techniques to reduce animal damage from beavers and coyotes. Information on how to improve wildlife habitat and income generating opportunities will be provided to forest landowners. Information on fish and wildlife management will be targeted at the general public, through regular articles in newspapers throughout the State. ' TOTAL -- $73,742.00 Maine $10,000 $49,873 Forestland Management -- Forests and forest products are important to Maine. Ninety percent of the State is covered by forests. The forest industry is the largest industry in the State. Outdoor recreation, including hunting and fishing, influences both the quality of life and income from the tourist industry. woodlot owners need to know how to best manage their property to achieve their objectives. Newsletters, field days, demonstrations and individual consultation on forest management information will be used to provide woodlot owners and the general public with information. Harvesting, Marketing, Processing-wood Products -- Forest cover 90 percent of land and contribute 40 percent of the total State's economy. A curriculum and information base will be developed so that forest product utilization and marketing can be improved. This program will be delivered through local county agents. Methods used will include: workshops, demonstrations, cmununication networks, and publications. TOTAL -- $59,873 Maryland $l2,734 3 4,200 $l0,000 Forestland Management -- Ninety percent of the commercial forestland in Maryland, 2,280.0U0 acres, is held by 95,800 owners. Non-industrial private forest owners, 83,346 of them, own l,64l,600 acres of forestlands. Only l5 percent of the total forested land is being properly managed. The objective of the forestland management program is to improve profitability and protect the environment. The . program will also increase citizen awareness of the economic and environmental contribution of forests to Maryland economy. An in-service training program of county agricultural agents on the application of forest management will be conducted. A videotape entitled, "women in Forestry“ will be developed to show women the important role they could have in Forest management. A computerized plant information file will be developed to provide information on plant selection for forest and landscape uses. Rangeland Management (Grazing Land) -— Much of the grazing land in Maryland receives little or no management. Productive capability of these lands and reduction of soil erosion could occur with improved management. Two Extension publications on Forage grasses and legumes will be prepared. Slide tape sets on improving grazing lands will be updated and a field day demonstrating no-till renovation seeding will be conducted. Fish and wildlife -- The State of Maryland has many warm water impoundments that are being undervutilized for the production of fish and recreation opportunities. Proper educational programs can provide an increase in the production of warm water finfish species which will enhance landowner income generating opportunities, as well as recreation opportunities. A needs assessment of warm water L impoundment resources in Maryland will be implemented, a one-day workshop in 3 locations on warm water finfish species and their management for landowners will be conducted, and a bulletin on the control of aquatic weeds will be developed. TOTAL -- $25,934 Massachusetts $l5,870 Forestland Management -- This program will work with varied clientele to increase knowledge of the multiple benefits, including economic, aesthetic, water, and wildlife derived from the forests of the Commonwealth. A forestland management correspondence course for private forest owners will be developed, a videotape for the general public on forest management will be produced, a workshop on methods of efficient log bricking will be conducted, forest management demonstration plots will be developed, a workshop on business law for foresters, and a business management course for loggers will be conducted. A forest management handbook for forest landowners will be produced. a Massachusetts LCont;1 $l2,800 $ 6,700 $ 3,700 Harvesting,.Marketing, and Processing—wood Products —— The objective is to increase productivity of dry kiln operators. A kiln drying workshop and hardwood lumber grading workshop will be conducted. Three publications on sawmill safety and operation will be revised. Fish and wildlife -- Inservice training sessions for Massachusetts natural resources officers will be conducted. A series of l7 publications on selected wildlife species will be produced. Massachusetts hunting and fishing regulations will be translated into Spanish and Portuguese. A 30 minute videocasette on how to improve wildlife and fish habitat and a slide tape set on land use practices to enhance wildlife habitat will be produced. Teaching materials for 4-H leaders on wildlife and fish management will be developed. Environmental Management and Public Policy -- Forest management of local government watersheds offers the dual benefit of increased water supply and increased municipal income. Model municipal watershed plans will be produced. A watershed management handbook for use by officers will be developed. TOTAL r- 339,070 Michigan $35,000 $l9,000 3 4,500 $ 4,000 Forestland Management —— Forests cover 53 percent of Michigan's land area, some l9.3 million acres. The goal is to increase wood production by 5 percent among program participants. This will be done through development and distribution of new publications, the development of a major forestland management handbook, and by news articles and public service announcements, local meetings, and workshops. A Harvesting, Marketing, and Processing;wood Products -- One of the deterrents to timber stand improvement is the lack of information on the value of trees and the need to protect the property during harvesting operations. Meetings, demonstrations and individual counseling will provide landowners with current information on harvesting, marketing and processing of wood products, with emphasis on harvesting and marketing information. Fish and wildlife -- Trees provide many things for wildlife, including food and shelter. Strategies for managing forests to provide wildlife habitat need to be understood and applied. A series of meetings for landowners, Conducted in cooperation with the Michigan DNR, one managing woodlands for game and non—game species, and control of wildlife damage will be developed. 0 Outdoor Recreation -- with more than half of the land area of Michigan devoted to forests, the role of forestland in outdoor recreation is of major importance. Hunting and outdoor recreation can be improved by proper forest management. Educational resource materials will be used to show how outdoor recreation can be incorporated into multiple use forestry planning. D-L3 Michigan (cont.) 3 9,508 Minnesota $5l,205 Environmental Management and Public Policy -- Urban Forestry in Michigan is a prime example of the aesthetic value of trees. The understanding of policy issues requires a better understanding of both facts and values. The objective is to explore and identify new mechanisms for the management of urban Forest resources, Materials will be developed showing the special role of trees in watershed management, windbreaks and shelterbelts. TOTAL -- $72,008 Forestland Management -- Four thousand full or part-time loggers harvest 3.7 million cords of wood annually from l3.7 million acres of commercial forests with an annual sales value of forest products exceeding $2.5 billion. However, in the last three years, the net capital ratio of logging firms has decreased from l.73 to l l2. Program objectives are to: (l) Increase efficiency of logging production by using improved production techniques; (2) Improve safety management, reduce down—time from accidents and reduce losses from injuries; and (3) Increase adoption of formal recordkeeping and mprove business management systems. . :07 K -- 351,205 Mississippi $63,l50 $l5,793 Forestland Management -- More than half of the ll.8 million acres of private, nonindustrial forestland in Mississippi is producing less than 60 percent of the potential of fully stocked stands and over lO0,000 of the owners need management information for practices that are affordable and beneficial. Approximately 2 million acres of these lands are in a “cutover condition" needing regeneration to reestablish pine on these harvested pine sites. Insects and other pests cause major losses to Christmas tree producers and to other timber crops. Program objectives are to: (l) Train forest landowners in forest management; (2) Produce needed management "how to" publications; inform owners through monthly newsletters and information fact sheets as well as other means of technology transfer; (3) Through cooperation with other agencies, form forest productivity committees in each county to identify landowners with cutover acres and provide them with regeneration information and assistance; and (4) Utilize microcomputer programs, to provide budget data and pest control data to reduce losses from insect infestations_and other pests to Christmas trees and pine stands. Harvesting, Marketingg and Processing of wood Products —- Private, nonindustrial forest landowners need current information on timber prices, marketing alternatives, marketing procedures and preharvest planning. Marketing information is needed by most of the l33,000 Mississippi Hissouri sicij, -334 'harvested-for-fuel purposes; $lO,775 $38,03l (Cont.) I private non—industrial forestland owners in Hississippi. New State legislation passed recently mandated new property appraisals impacting private forest landowners. Because of use value methods, these owners need information to avoid paying excessive taxes on categories of forested lands, thus decreasing management incentives. Program objectives are to: (l) Provide monthly market information to PNIF landowners and to train owners in timber marketing procedures through the use of workshops; (2) Provide intensive training in timber taxation for forest landowners and make new procedures on timber taxation available to enable them to reduce excessive taxes on some timber lands; and (3) Hake increased marketing and taxation information available to PNIF owners. TOTAL -- 378,943 Forestland Management -- Missouri has a forestland base of l2.8 million acres supporting a timber-based economy of $806 million. Over 80 percent of the woodland acreage is owned by nonindustrial private forestland owners with an overabundance of low quality and _ understocked hardwood stands. Program objectives are to: (l) Improve the quality of timber stands through careful selection of trees (2) Improve landowner awareness of the multiple benefits of proper timber management; and (3) Increase landowner understanding of the economic impacts of various woodland tax incentives for management and improved family and community benefits from forest management. Harvestingg Marketing, and Processing of wood Products -— with more than 900 small primary wood-using industries in the State, Missouri is a leading producer of products made from oak, walnut, and eastern red cedar, but lacks the research and technological base for the innovation and marketing of new products. Program objectives are to: (l) Inform primary and secondary wood-using industries and contractors, builders and other construction-oriented businesses of new construction technologies, improved preservatives, truss-frame construction, etc.; (2) Through mass media and other information delivery, inform consumers; and (3) Conduct an industry survey which is expected to benefit wood—related organizations and communities for industrial plant planning and expansion decisionmaking. Fish and wildlife Management -- Over 25 percent of Missouri's land base is in forest and rangeland under private ownership. These lands and the 250,000 acres of small ponds and lakes and associated lands including riparian zones provide the habitats for much of the State's wildlife and fisheries resource. Few of these private lands and waters are receiving proper management nor are they producing the level of benefits nor economic impact possible. Program objectives are to: (l) Provide the latest technologies available to help these private landowners and managers realize that improved management can Missouri (Cont.) Montana $28,203 $12,182 $16,021 increase multiple-use productivity and profitability; (2) Reduce land—use conflicts through improved understanding of trespass laws, lease arrangements and income potential; and (3) Improve pond productivity through proper management, renovation, stocking and regulated fishing pressure. Demonstration projects, workshops, seminars, county meetings, and other information delivery will be used to reach owners and managers. TOTAL “ $63,340 Forestland Management -- Montana nonindustrial private forestland owners and managers need information to improve productivity and regenerate softwoods on productive sites since the predicted demand in the near-term is for softwoods. Program objectives will be expanded to: (1) Provide information to private forest landowners on alternative techniques of woodlot management; (2) Improve landowners and managers knowledge of forest regeneration, including planting and maintenance of windbreaks and shelterbelts; (3) Provide increased information on taxation and reforestation tax incentives; and (4) Assist 4-H club members and leaders with Forestry projects. Harvesting, Marketing and Processing of Forest Products —— Producers face a challenge of managing an adequate level of income from a variety of farming and ranching enterprises. Price levels may not provide a profitable return on production inputs. Therefore, producers must change or adjust marketing techniques and activities to limit losses, protect against erosion of equity and reduce net marketing costs. Expanded program objectives are to: (1) Provide tangible materials that will enable producers to identify and develop marketing and pricing goals for their products; (2) To enable producers to evaluate advantages and disadvantages of specific marketing options; and (3) to enable producers to calculate and compare returns from the products after marketing costs are paid. Rangeland Management —- Approximately 70 percent of Montana's surface acreage is rangeland which provides most of the forage for livestock from which cash sales total about $800 million annually. Unfortunately, about one-half of this rangeland is in poor or fair condition. Program objectives are to: (1) Improve rancher knowledge of range management techniques; (2) Utilize the grazing land simulator to increase public appreciation and understanding of rangeland management; (3) Encourage ranchers to implement improved range management practices; (4) Increase percentage of well managed rangeland in State; and (S) Disseminate information to ranchers on how Ito adopt new strategies of rangeland management, rotation and protection. TOTAL -- $56,406 Nebraska $2l,734 Nevada 3 6,570 $l2,000 $l3,565 Rangeland Management -- There are approximately 24 million acres of rangeland in Nebraska covering almost one-half of the entire land area. Approximately 47 percent of these lands are in poor to fair condition. There is a growing need for providing ranchers with new I and improved practices to help them achieve more efficient levels of livestock production which are compatible with proper use and conservation of these resources. Program objectives are to: (l) Train adults and youth in the basic principles and practices of range management to enhance management capabilities; (2) Improve the condition and production efficiency on rangeland, hay meadows and irrigated forage. N TOTAL “ $2l,734 Harvesting, Marketing and Processing of wood Products -- Fuelwood is not abundantly available in or near urban centers in Nevada and is increasing in cost. The demand for fuelwood presents significant income generating opportunities. Homeowners also lack information on the use of fuelwood for home heating. The objectives of the expanded effort are to provide homeowners and landowners with information on fuelwood characteristics, fuelwood sources, fuelwood production practices, home heating safety, and air quality considerations. Information will be delivered through fact sheets, meetings and exhibits. Rangeland Management -- Ninety-four percent of Nevada is rangeland with nearly all being administered by federal land management agencies. Private rangelands include railroad holdings leased to livestock grazing users and properties which usually include water sources and riparian areas belonging to ranchers that are intermingled with public lands. The objectives include expanding education programs that improve the understanding and application of rangeland monitoring techniques, the process of cooperative planning and decisionmaking and range improvement methods by rangeland users, agency administrators and environmental interests, meetings, publications, demonstrations, workshops, and tours will be used. Fish and wildlife management ~- The need to provide continuing education and inservice training for professional wildlife biologists has been identified as a high priority. This expanded program will provide "state of the art“ training in a workshop-seminar setting for resource professionals and managers including Extension staff. TOTAL -— $32,l35 New Hampshire $l4,7S0 $l3,9l8 Forestland~Management ea Ninety thousand individuals and corporations own forestland in New Hampshire. Over one—third own more than l0 acres each, and over half have owned their land for less than l0 years. Educating this vast public on good multiple-use forestland management is the objective of this program. It will include such topics as forest finance, taxation, and decisionmaking using computer teaching applications to forestry. The program will stress efficient delivery of the educational information) Harvesting, Marketing and Processing of Wood Products -- The wood industry is an important source of income and employment in New Hampshire. Educational programs enable industry to remain competitive through more efficient harvesting, processing, and marketing. Among the topics to be addressed are use of computers to assist managers in decisionmaking, wood for energy, proper application of business methods in harvesting and better use of available marketing information. Superimposed on these programs is the continued need for emphasis on safety in harvesting, processing and burning wood, as well as the concern for erosion (due to harvesting) and air pollution (due to burning). TOTAL -- $28,668 W New Jersey $24,238.33 $ 9,070.57 Forestland Management - These RREA funds are for an expanded private, non-industrial forestland owner education program. In New Jersey, some 20,000 of the larger landowners control 75% of the forestland, with more than 40,000 owning the smaller sized tracts that make up the balance of the forestland. Only 3% are farmers -- most are absentee landowners who would be inclined to manage their forests if educational programs could reach them. Educational programs are designed to provide information about management and about the availability of landowner assistance through agencies or consultants to those owners who decide to undertake management. Harvesting, Harketing and Processing of wood Products -- Past timber harvesting operations in New Jersey have frequently resulted in damage to the values that landowners wanted to protect. New Jersey forests are reaching maturity. Many should be harvested, but some landowners hesitate because of past experience with or past observations of logging damage to aesthetics, soil and water, and remaining vegetation. This educational program will focus on providing incentives for loggers to correct past poor practices in order to regain the public confidence so mature trees can be profitably harvested, at a profit to the landowner as well, while avoiding unnecessary damage to the forest. New Jersey 3 2,294.lO New Mexico $36,004 3 8,000 $ 2,000 (Cont.l Environmental Management and Public Policy —- New Jersey is Faced with.a-wide array oF environmental issues that have serious implications For its natural resource base. One oF the most important First steps is to develop a citizen understanding and awareness oF the environment. The objectives of this eFFort are to expand and strengthen youth environmental education programs. Existing delivery systems will be used. These include summer indepth camp programs on outdoor education, weekend workshops, and the preparation of materials For use through public school teacher networks. T TOTAL -‘ $35,603 Rangeland Management —- New Mexico has approximately 70 million acres oF rangeland. Livestock graze on 95% of this land area. Primary concerns Focus on alternative grazing systems and management practices that improve Forage production through brush and weed control. Another major concern is the ability oF landowners to understand the impacts and implications oF oil and gas exploration and development. The objectives oF this program area are to expand educational programs that Focus on: improved range condition and increased forage production through brush and weed control; to ‘ provide ranchers with the knowledge to evaluate alternative grazing systems; and provide Factual information to ranchers For evaluating the type and value oF impacts oF gas and oil exploration and development as well as restoration and rehabilitation techniques. Field trials, tours, meetings, newsletters and publications will be utilized in the delivery process. Fish and wildlife Management -— The expanded Fish and wildliFe management program area will Focus on the wildliFe resources oF the more than 70 million acres of rangeland in New Mexico. The objectives include: education programs For ranchers and ranch managers on improving wildliFe habitat; teaching ranchers how to saFely utilize the newest cost eFFective techniques in animal damage control For sheep and other domestic livestock; and provide landowners with the basic knowledge to develop the income generating opportunities available through Fee hunting. Demonstrations, agent training, publications, tours, workshops, and the mass media will be used to deliver the program. Environmental Management and Public Policy -9 New Mexico has moved rapidly From a rural to urban population. During the l970's, New Mexico‘s population growth was in excess 0F 28 percent. New resident urban and suburban Families are unFamiliar with plant species, soil, climate, and cultural practices For establishing and maintaining shade trees and other plant species to improve environmental quality. The objectives oF this expanded eFFort include developing New Mexico umm cowmcwuxz HUUHDOM m<~:< :<¢oo¢; n <:z< zm mcmmz cmeumwcmm cz< mgu>:; czHm;3 co._aa=mv 1-m < com new _mn .<_o_ >Q_4o¢ u_4a=¢ u__ oc e nan on _m «mo. _o a~ non mo ac oz< ._ozz .<_z~zzo:_>z. «mg an m. mam- mm mm a.a a. non um.- cc mm zo__<.¢g.¢ ¢ooa_:o am ~¢ N «mm ow on new mm. u_n u_~_ mm. .o ._ozz u$_4a._z oz< =m_. um. ow m awn m~ ~_ gem a. ne~ now n~ _o _z~xue< ca _m>u; m.m3 «cm. cu mucag cam. cam. .~>o mugzommz cam. sag. .a>o4 _egmcmg sag; weagmogg ._ m~.a.m .o «ma. ;..z a=.._a~m use ow Emgaogg guess: a? cam. cam. gm): cmummz u_a¢ =_ a:.g.mma meagmagm cu< mmamgumo :_ =_ m:.__aum «gem» mLam> umaoggmo cma_ oma_ meaaum a:.cmoz u_:o3 go meagmoga mamgmoga coco»: _.num _.a~m go :_ :_ _o modnum uazp mma~gu:_ 5a.: zu_3 .o _o=::< «mm. _o ommo;u:_ mgao> m;am> I ~:mu;m¢ _uao— mo.a.m ucmugog magnum mmdaam gcmugoa _a:o_u.cu< acougma acougma ._aum __aum m z < a u o z ¢ 2 p _ 3 m z < u > K m < — m m u _ < _ m g o z w m z : 2 C-2 RS _om omm mm . awn mm om mom mm .m xmm c. on non mo. ac amc mm auamuz mazsm mm ggqpm mm ;¢<~m 4 u¢<~m go pzmuzwg mo< 4<»o» .mm4~zmHuH¢¢u oz< >4u>_»uu¢¢w was: ob zo~»_mg oz< u_4~T .mu_4gg:m mumz_H azmpxu ob >~ug;zzu .>»m¢m<: Aqufizozoum Hmoa mzb mm: o» omwz mmu~mm>m<: mumr .>»_4_m<~H;oz¢ ¢mzzoaz<4 oz< >pH>__u=oo; oz<4~mmmo¢ mmzH :z< .m»wxa« .mw_ao4oz:um» zo_+ 4<__zu_e mzb zozx op cum: mmwo(z~ .mwuz=omwz =mH<;gm w; um: oz< ¢o4m>m= pmum ch 39: oz< .maz<4 wmuz» _=om< mz:_mHu >uH4o¢ ozaom uxqz op >bw_uom ago we ozHum-44m3 4w 92¢ u_:ozouw mzp op u»=m_m~zoo mwwz» oz< maz<4»mwmo¢ 2, _ _ g. 9 _ u...— u-1'-J .g__ ‘,3 —n&- hzu 2-n . zozg op awwz mmuzpo az< :p=o> .mmmx<:>uH4om .mxwz3o ~mmz:_ gwomuz mm ¢;<»m 4m4 oz_gg<»m pzuzzsu .mm=mm_ z ug<»m mz ;¢<»m Aqzuaug pzumzzu 4 ¢¢<»m go Hzuumwg mo< 4~H>-u=oozg w>o¢;zH =24 mgqca mm: m4¢~».=» zw_;;zcuu< op mmoz<:u 4mm zoabauummm zoo; <-o:< mwummommz oz<4%oz_Nm z< .mwm_agmu»zm 9244 oz_~_4 zo mzmzpum wzHmm ommaqu .mmwz»m 4<_uzb~4<:o zw~_H;fim<__¢omg oz< >uzwHu_¢¢w .zo_pu=oom¢ gmusauz z_ »4=mum moz<4 ozflNu~4oQ mo pzwzuw»g4<=o go; az_a_>om; mg »<:~ zo_»<»mou> mo oz<»m < m<: mo .m:~<»m 4oz¢z_ Ham .zoo¢ mo mH<; z_ mm< maz<4 wz_~o amomuz mz g¢<~m 4w4 oz_¢g< mm. mm. 4<»oH m_ x- m m_ amm m_ cm awn pm om xom mm qm xmm mm ouamuz mozam mm mgqhm mm gmqhm we pzwuawg .>__>__u=aom¢ mmmfig oz< coo; mo; mmuH4oa mwmmzomw; ;ua mom om:mH4m<»mw umzomuozg w>~mzu:mxgzc oz< w>~_uu¢¢m z< zw ou>4omwz mm o» ouuz m»uH4¢zoQ gm: m4;H~4: .muH>mwm uoH>ozg ob >bH4_m<¢oo4oz:uw_ _zuzmo¢: or _z<-w:p-Lo-mPm wzoo mm ozHg 4 zuzho oz< :-¢ .m~4=: .m4~m¢H4 .mgozu moz zm:_o oz< w¢_4o;_z >m wa_mmmux .mm>HHumamo wmozp w>u_:u< op moz<4 m_u:_ wa#_uw~mo g_w: >¢Hz<4u oh zuzb m;m~z; pme amomwz mmm; ozfimgqpm Hzwmmso mwsmmfi z ¢¢ ¢¢<_m 4<¢uom¢ pzwzzau 4 ¢¢<~m mo Hzmuaug ¢o< 4<»op .>pH4HmH~H_w¢:ou oz< pfigoaa zmumo oz< >»fi4~mHm¢_~zua_ oh zmz_ m4m_¢g >m amawuz mH woow43oz¥ oz< mmwzwm<2< owcmmz m¢ u¢<_m 4w4 oz_¢¢< so we 4<»o» mm x¢m m_ m am. s m. xmm m_ mm xsm ~m awoumz mozzm mz ¢¢<»m mm ¢u<~m 4 ¢¢<»m go Pzmuamg .m4<_u_¢uo Q~4m=g oz< .m¢w¢o4m>ma .m¢mzz<4¢ >m >~H4<:o 4<~zmzzo¢H>zu mo wacw43oz¥ mH<:oua oz< mumzp go uuzwmm< mzp >m ou»:o_4m wz< mz<: .oz<4 pmumom 924 wuz_mmmuxm 2H ozHp4=mwz m_ mzmu24: >m m44Hxm bzmzwo-4<:o zwH<3 ozfiuaouz .uwo=4m wo<3mm oz< muhmqz 4<:Hz< .zmN_4_pzm¢ .mmoHu_~mu¢ oz~o:4uzH .m4m zo_bz<: 2H magma :24 mzmzzo uazm woom43ozx w_<=ouo< mo xu<4 .wmoz¢zH zo\oz< .ozHz_<»z_ oz< ._z<>m4m¢ .pzu¢¢=u m=o=z_~zoo ouuz mmwzpo oz< mzo~<4mHom4 .m4<_u_¢¢o oH4m=¢ .m¢ue_~z:::ou .m¢uzzooz<4 guawwz mz ¢¢<_m 4m4 uz_¢¢u_4o¢ 4<~zmzzom_>zm H ER ALE;/*‘ or vv/2., 3:41.»; 1.-T35?‘-1'i’”’e/§_':’«’.‘-‘?‘~".§3g‘I"}?""§',a*' :3