Farm strike
(Continued from Page 106)
lowa in September 1932, Farm Holiday member asked the
governors to declare an embargo on the movement of
farm produce across state lines. The governor of Min
nesota offered to declare an embargo and enforce it with
the state militia if the governors of neighboring states
would join with him. They declined, and no action was
taken.
Strike activities ceased for a month in September and
then were renewed on a sporadic basis, extending into
1933. In many areas, the protesters began using force to
stop foreclosure sales of farms. This resulted in some
state legislation to ease the debt situation.
Another national farm strike was scheduled for May 13,
1933, but was called off, partly because the Agricultural
Adjustment Act was signed on May 12, 1933. However, a
milk strike was carried out in Wisconsin that May. When a
newly-formed committee failed to get higher milk prices,
Wisonsin dairy farmers again went on strike in October
1933. Milo Reno had called a “last resport” farm strike to
begin on October 21, 1933, but it did not materialize.
Another strike threat in November also was averted.
The Wisconsin milk strike of October 1933 resulted in
considerable violence before it died out in mid-November.
It was the last major move under the “Holiday” banner.
Action by the governor of North Dakota to embargo wheat
shipments was related to the holiday movement, but was
not really part of it.
The farm strikes themselves did not raise the overall
level of commodity prices. However, even their critics
concede that they dramatized for the nation the serious
plight of agriculture and brought about more immediate
and vigorous action on the part of state and federal
governments to ease the crisis.
Withholding Actions in
For many years, the programs offered by the federal
government and reasonably good market prices, plus
steady increase in productivity, created a decent climate
for farmers. However, by the late 1950’s many farmers
were caught in a price-cost squeeze. Oren Lee Staley,
president of the National Fanners Organization, which
had been concentrating on collective bargaining since the
late 1950’5, wrote in 1960: “When a sufficient number of
farmers make up their minds to price their production
and hold for that price they will get a price as long as it is
fair and reasonable.” In a membership appeal, the NFO
said: “Holding actions are farmers determining a price
for their products and holding for that price. Thus, they
use the same principle that everyone in America has
already found necessary to be successful in their business
operations. Holding actions are only used to implement
our collective bargaining program.”
Holding actions by the NFO have been of two types. Test
holding actions of short duration involving a limited
number of commodities sought to determine farmer
support and market reactions. All-out holding actions had
the goal of reaching agreements with processors to
“stabilize prices and marketing conditions in the future.”
the 1960’s
Lancaster Farming, Saturday, January 21,1978
The NFO’s first all-out holding action began on August
28, 1962, and ended on October 2,1962. This action called
for withholding hogs, cattle, sheep, com, and soybeans.
The second all-out action began on August 20,1964, and
ended on October 1, 1964. This action called for
withholding livestock from market
In March 1967, NFO members in 25 states sought to
increase milk prices for farmers by 2 cents a quart
through milk withholding and dumping. Going to court
against the wishes of Agriculture Secretary Orville L.
Freeman, the Department of Justice obtained a tem
porary order in Des Moines, lowa, barring the NFO from
any use of threats or force to gain outside support for its
milk strike. The milk dumping ended early in April.
Early in 1968, the NFO asked its members to stop selling
grain until prices rose. A month later the action was ex
tended to meat animals. Local farm groups killed and
buried substantial numbers of hogs in March and April.
Some of the animals were donated to charity. These
particular withholding actions appears to have ended in
April or May. The NFP actions were largely ineffective in
raising prices.
Farm Withholding in
During the 1970’5, a number of local farm groups
withheld or destroyed farm commodities. Large quan
tities of potatoes were destroyed in Virginia and
Washington in the Spring of 1970. In the fall of the same
year, many poultry producers in Alabama suspended
operations for a short time. Dairy and beef producers in
some areas undertook dramatic programs in the Fall of
1974. Most controversial was the slaughter and burial of
calves in Minnesota and elsewhere. In some instances, the
meat was donated to disaster victims. In many cities,
NFO dairy farmers sold Cheddar cheese from the backs of
trucks at half the usual prices, claiming that they could
not sell it in the usual distribution systems for even that
much. A few weeks earlier, the president of the Georgia
Farm Bureau Federation urged farmers to keep com and
soybeans off the market until prices advanced.
Protests continued into 1975, with the sporadic donation
or destruction of calves, beef cattle, chickens, potatoes,
and other commodities. For example, calves were
slaughtered in a Texas community and the carcasses
were given to needy persons. In other areas, ground beef
was sold in cities by farmers off the backs of trucks at
bargain prices, just as cheese had been a year earlier.
Potatoes were burned or donated to the poor.
In the Fall of 1977, a new farm organization, American
Agriculture, called for a national strike by farmers for
better prices, and began setting up offices in farm areas.
The parades of farmers with their tractors in rural areas,
like the one in Plains, Georgia, on No”' - nber 25, were
partly to urge support for a nationwi< arm strike on
December 14.
Actions in recent years have had the 'sme effect as the
widespread actions of the 1930’5. They ,~ive dramatized
the cost-price squeeze faced by farmers as prices of farm
products have declines and the prices of goods - such as
gasoline, machinery, and fertilizer - purchased by far
mers have continued to rise. More people are being made
aware that the farmer is receiving a smaller and smaller
proportion of every dollar spent for food, - but, the final
effects of this year’s actions are still to be measured.
Packer violating
P & S Act
MAINLAND - T. M.
Lanids, Inc., Mainland, a
meat packing firm which
purchases livestock for
slaughter pruposes in
southeastern Pennsylvania,
northern Maryland, and the
Shenandoah Valley area of
Virginia, has been ordered to
cease and desist from
violating bonding
requirements of a federal
fair trade practices law for
the livestock, poultry, and
meat industries. The firm
STOLTZFUS MEAT MARKET
CUSTOM BEEF BUTCHERING V)
I CUSTOM BEEF BUTCHERING ) \
| Our Own Corn Fed Beef fk, V
| Right From The Farm /
jf \
—FRESH BEEF AND PORK— f | \
OUR OWN HOME MADE \j M
SCRAPPLE & FRESH SAUSAGE Ml
Bacon and Country Cured Hams
Orders taken for freezer Meats
PH; 717-768-7166
Directions: 1 block east of Intercourse
on Rt 772 • Newport Road
™RS. FRI. SAT.
STORE HOURS 9.5 g. 5
the!97o’s
has now fued a bond, as
required under the Packers
and Stockyards (P & S) Act.
The cease and desist or
der, like a permanent in
junction, was issued to in
sure future compliance with
the Act.
T. M. Landis, Inc., con
sented to the order and
waived oral hearing. The
firm neither admitted nor
denied the charges in an
administrative complaint
filed under the P & S Act.
107