"I—Lancaster Farming. Saturday. May 30.1970 Local Leaders Review Conservation Program (Continual f, om Page 1) aster County bv existing pro rams if adequate funds wcic nade available poihaps twice he current levels —New const) action is a very enous erosion and sodimenta ion problem in this area Pen lay commented. “In agncul lire, we seem to be beating our irains out and the building in dustry is one of the biggest vio ators and no one’s bothering them.' ’ —ACP is being hint more from a fund pnonty stand point than from the fact it’s not a good progiatn As the agri cultural population becomes relatively smaller, it’s necessary to look increasingly to city >-otes to get piograms such as \CP funded Perhaps ACP hould become more involved vrth urban pioblems —Animal wastes are becomi ng a biggei problem Com lamts are being made in reasmgly both fi om an air and vater pollution standpoint —Well pollution is a serious Problem —lt was agreed that most masting ACP piograms aie needed under some conditions and m some aieas But each area must take the overall ACP package and set pnouties that fit it’s own paiticulai aiea and farming conditions —Concern was expressed about a growing tendency of some farmers to cut coiners on established conservation prac tices This includes making grass strips narrower to the -'oint where the strips are prac ically worthless as a strip-crop-, ->ing device. Corn production is expanding