STATE FARM BUREAU NEUTRAL ON AMENDMENT 7

Saying they have concerns about Hancock II, Missouri Farm Bureau officials say they will remain neutral on the proposal known as Amendment 7.

"There are 36 different ways that the proposed amendment can affect agriculture," said Lowell Mohler, chief administrative officer of the Missouri Farm Bureau in Jefferson City. "After polling our members, we have decided to remain neutral and provide information for our members."

The Farm Bureau, said Mohler, has tried to cut through confusion and lay out facts.

The bureau supported the Hancock Amendment passed by voters in 1980. But a poll of members this year indicated as many as 30 percent were undecided on Hancock II.

Mohler; LeRoy Deles Dernier, director of field services and young farmers activities with the bureau; and Paul Wilson, vice president of the state organization, were in Southeast Missouri Wednesday. The three are on a statewide tour to conduct hearings to discuss the Farm Bureau's displeasure with the Army Corps of Engineers' proposed Missouri River Master Plan.

The Southeast Missouri hearing was scheduled at Dexter. "While we are in the various areas we're also explaining our feelings on a couple of amendments that will be on November ballot," said Mohler.

The Farm Bureau supports Constitutional Amendment 2, which would enable the Department of Natural Resources to pay counties, schools and other political subdivisions for taxes lost because of acquisition of land for park use.

"Payments would come from the one-tenth of 1 percent sales tax for soil and water conservation and state parks," said Mohler. The bureau has had a long-standing policy supporting the concept of Amendment 2 for state agencies that are large holders of public land, he said.

Amendment 2 for state parks is similar to payments made now by the Missouri Department of Conservation for land it purchases and removes from property taxation.

The bureau is opposed to the Corps of Engineers' plan for operation of dams on the Missouri River. "It would be an economic hardship for thousands of Missouri farmers," said Mohler.

The Corps proposal calls for changes in the Missouri River Master Manual that would affect water flow. Under the proposal water released from upstream reservoirs would be increased three months in the spring and reduced in the summer. The bureau maintains it would shorten the navigation season by one month in the fall, a crucial time for farm shipments of corn, soybeans, wheat and sorghum.

"A University of Missouri study estimates that the loss of barge transportation on the Missouri River would result in increased shipping costs for farmers," said Wilson. "The most economical means of shipping grain is by barge."

University of Missouri economists say it would mean a $17 million loss to agriculture. That, the economists say, translates into a $43.3 million loss in the state's industrial output and the loss of 692 jobs.

Some barge company operators say they will be forced out of business on the Missouri River with the shortened season and lower water levels during the summer.

"And farmers along the Mississippi River from St. Louis to Cairo, Ill., will feel the effects," said Mohler.

"We're requesting that the Corps provide careful analysis of the potential direct and indirect impacts of the Missouri River Master Water Control program on Mississippi River navigation," said Mohler.