<%BANNER%>
Biennial Report
ALL VOLUMES CITATION SEARCH THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00075935/00003
 Material Information
Title: Biennial Report
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- State Soil Conservation Board
Publisher: The Board
Place of Publication: <Tallahassee> Fla
Creation Date: 1959
Publication Date: 1956-1966
Frequency: biennial
regular
 Subjects
Subjects / Keywords: Soil conservation -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Soil conservation districts -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
serial   ( sobekcm )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: State Soil Conservation Board.
Dates or Sequential Designation: Jan.1,1955-Dec.31,1956-Jan.1,1965-Dec.31,1966.
General Note: At head of title: Conservation of Florida's soil and water through Soil Conservationa Districts.
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 002689294
oclc - 46604019
notis - ANF6612
lccn - 2001229408
System ID: UF00075935:00003
 Related Items
Preceded by: Biennial report ...of State Soil Conservation Board
Succeeded by: Biennial report

Full Text

Fc 2 S


'U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE
LTIONAL AGRICULTURAL LIBRARY


Conservation
V of
rida's Soil and Water


through


JUL 7 1965 Soil Conservation Districts
C & RPKEP.


SBiennial Report
JANUARY 1, 1959 -DECEMBER 31, 1960


i


I-'ti
rai


5;==TZ~"-~=
;f~T~~c~t ~




















S1- 00f




















BOARD
E. E. CARTER
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA M WATKINS
ADM INISTRATOR
LYLE C. DICKMAN
RU.KIN, FLORID^ tatt foil (onsarvnation Boarb
D. R. IGOU L. M. HOLLINGSWORTH
EUSTIS, FLORIDA UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
ROLFS HALL
W. BRADLEY MUNROE GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA
QUINCY, FLORIDA
EUGENE MUGGED
GREENVILLE, FLORIDA





Honorable Farris Bryant
Governor of the State of Florida
Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida

Dear Governor Bryant:

The State Soil Conservation Board is pleased to submit to
you the Biennial Report for the period January 1, 1959 through
December 31, 1960.

This report covers major activities of the Board and fifty-
eight (58) soil conservation districts in Florida during the
period. Special recognition is given to the two hundred ninety
elected supervisors for directing the conservation program
carried out in the districts. These supervisors are dedicated
to the conserving of our soil and water resources and serve
without salary.

We are proud of the progress made and the fine cooperation
given by representatives of local, county, state and federal
agencies and organizations in assisting with this program.
There remains much to be done in the state on the better
management and treatment of our soil and water resources. Your
cooperation and assistance is solicited in this matter.






























Damage from uncontrolled water on cropland.














*X
1. I '



-' ..,'



Wind erosion in fields with no protective practices.
4








Contents

Page
State Soil Conservation Board Activities.................................. 6

W atersheds .................................................. ........................ 8

Our Land Resources ........................................ ......... ..... .... 14

Conservation Problems ........................................ ................. 15

Why Conservation Farm or Ranch Plans.................................... 16

Soil and Capability M ap.......................................... ........ .... 17

Conservation Plan M ap.................................. .......... ...... ... 18

Summary-Number Cooperators, Basic Farm Plans, Acreage,
Soil and Conservation Practices-Table I ...................... 19

Soil Conservation Districts ...................................... ............ 20

Progress Soil Conservation Districts, Number of
Cooperators, Basic Farm Plans and Acreage-Table II....30-31
Financial Report 1959 Table III ............................................ 33

Financial Report 1960 Table IV ............................................ 34




Acknowledgements

To the Soil Conservation District Boards of Supervisors for
providing Annual Reports which have been summarized for this
report.

To the Soil Conservation Service for data on applied conserva-
tion practices, watersheds and pictures. Also information on Our
Land Resources, Why Conservation Farm or Ranch Plans, Soil
and Capability Map and Conservation Plan Map.

To the Agricultural Extension Service for assistance in edit-
ing, cover page and Conservation Problems.

5








Biennial Report
STATE SOIL CONSERVATION BOARD
January 1, 1959 to December 31, 1960
This Biennial Report is made to the Governor, members of
the Florida Legislature and the people of the state. It reflects the
major activities of the State Soil Conservation Board and fifty-
eight organized Soil Conservation Districts of Florida for the
calendar years 1959 and 1960.
Soil conservation districts and the State Soil Conservation
Board were established and are operated under the provisions of
Soil Conservation Act, Chapter 582 Florida Legislature 1937 and
subsequent amendments made in 1939, 1941, 1949 and 1953.
During the period of this report the following were members
of this Board:
E. E. Carter, Vero Beach, Florida
Lyle C. Dickman, Ruskin, Florida
D. R. Igou, Eustis, Florida
Eugene Mugge, Greenville, Florida
R. L. Price, Graceville, Florida (to July 7, 1960 deceased)
W. Bradley Munroe, Quincy, Florida, was appointed Septem-
ber 6, 1960 to fill unexpired term of R. L. Price.
Twelve board meetings were held in discharging their duties
as established in the above named Act. In addition the Board
was designated by the Governor: (a) To act on applications sub-
mitted for planning assistance under the Watershed Protection
and Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566, 83rd Congress), and
(b) review completed Watershed Work Plans, and accept or reject
them in the name of the state. The Board also recommends
priority for planning assistance to the Soil Conservation Service.
The Board's Office is maintained at the University of Florida
in Gainesville with Dr. M. O. Watkins, Direction of Agricultural
Extension Service, serving as Administrator. A full time Executive
Secretary and stenographer assist the Board in carrying out office
and field work.
As revealed on page 20, Table II of this report, Florida has
fifty-nine organized Soil Conservation Districts including area of
sixty-two counties. During the past biennium the Taylor district
has been inactive. Districts have been assisted by the Board in:
Reviewing records in state and district offices to determine
if districts are organized and operated in accordance with provi-
sions of the Soil Conservation Act.
Meeting with District Boards of Supervisors, observing pro-
gram, procedure and activities.







Reviewed accomplishments in districts and suggested ways
or activities for improving.
Providing instructions and suggestions by letter and publica-
tion for securing more effective conservation program.
Assisting in planning and participating in area meetings or
workshops for supervisors.
Arranged for and conducted six special and one regular elec-
tion of supervisors. Special elections were held in Bay, Clay,
Highlands, Levy, Peace River and Union districts. One hundred
fifty-two supervisors were elected with greater interest and parti-
cipation on the part of eligible qualified electors when compared
with prior elections.
Served as one of the sponsors of State Land Appreciation
and Judging Contest held in Gainesville, April 1, 1960. Also
presented to each of the 22 participating teams recognition
certificates.
Made summary of all District Annual Reports and activities
of the Board during period January 1, 1957 December 31, 1958.
Two thousand (2,000) copies of the report were printed and
distributed.
Recognition of District Supervisors for having served con-


tinuously 15 years.
to the following:


The Board presented an appropriate certificate


Name
T. J. Barns
Fred A. Boyd
J. F. Hollingsworth
W. A. Hunt
L. L. Doke
I. B. Lewis
Thomas L. Cain, Jr.
W. J. Folsom
Ralph Taylor
E. E. Carter
Paul Robertson
Henry Gatrell
L. H. Wear
T. J. Fletcher


Address
Largo, Florida
Greenville, Florida
Arcadia, Florida
Clermont, Florida
Alachua, Florida
Milton, Florida
Cocoa, Florida
Mims, Florida
Bell, Florida
Vero Beach, Florida
Vero Beach, Florida
Fairfield, Florida
Lakeland, Florida
O'Brien, Florida


District
Pinellas
Jefferson
Peace River
Lake
Alachua
Blackwater
Brevard
Brevard
Gilchrist
Indian River
Indian River
Marion
Polk
Suwannee River


Following each meeting of the Board a summary of actions
taken and timely suggestions were prepared, mailed to all super-
visors and interested individuals, entitled "State Soil Conservation
Board Highlights."
Representatives of state and federal agencies working with
districts have attended meetings of the Board and discussed prob-
lems and progress of programs.







STATE SOIL CONSERVATION BOARD FINANCIAL
STATEMENT FOR BIENNIUM 1959-61*
State Appropriations:
Legislative (Biennial)
Salaries .......................... ............ ................ $19,178.00
Expenses ................................................................. 8,296.00
Operating Capital Outlay ....................................... 250.00
Special Machinery and Equipment (new districts).... 1,696.00
$29,420.00
*Fiscal period July 1, 1959 to June 30, 1961

SMALL WATERSHEDS
The rapid growth and increasing popularity of the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention program of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture (Public Law 566, 83rd Congress) is shown by the
following table:
Prior to This Total
1-1-59 Period 12-31-60
Applications made, number 26 7 33
Applications made, acres 2,039,054 543,000 2,582,054
Watersheds approved for planning, no. 6 7 13*
Watersheds approved for planning, ac. 305,550 685,688 994,238
Watersheds approved for operations, no. 3 4 7**
Watersheds approved for operations, ac. 123,920 217,330 341,250
Watershed projects completed, no. 0 2 2
Watershed projects completed, ac. 0 63,700 63,700
*Planning has been suspended or terminated on 2 projects (246,500 acres).
**In addition to projects approved for operations, plans are complete or nearing
completion on 3 watersheds (306,488 acres).

New Applications
The following have been received, approved and transmitted
to the Soil Conservation Service:
Acres
Jumper Creek, Sumter County ........................................... 53,000
Wright's Creek, Holmes County .........................................100,000
Little Creek, Fish Creek and Minnow Creek,
Jackson County ................. .... ................ ............... 20,000
Istokpoga Marsh, Highlands County ................................. 21,000
Little Manatee River, Hillsboro and Manatee Counties........135,000
Barley Barber Swamp, Martin County ............................... 24,000
Haw Creek, Flagler and Volusia Counties...........................190,000
543,000
Planning Priorities Assigned
In, addition to priorities previously established, the Board
assigned high priority to the following watersheds during this
period:







Acres
Upper Josephine-Jackson Creek, Highlands County ......... 32,700
Sarasota West Coast, Sarasota County...............................154,680
Upper Tampa Bay, Hillsborough County....................... 71,808
South Sumter, Sumter County........................... ........ 80,000
339,188
Plans for the first two are complete. Planning is under way
on the others.
Watershed Plan Approvals
The following plans were reviewed and accepted in the name
of the state:
Acres
Taylor Creek, Okeechobee County................................ 89,500
Pine Barren Creek, Escambia County.................................... 61,200
Sebastian River Drainage District, Indian River County...... 33,930
Upper Josephine-Jackson Creek, Highlands County.............. 32,700
217,330
The first three have been approved for operations by the Soil
Conservation Service. The fourth is awaiting approval by Agri-
cultural Committees of the U. S. Congress.
Construction
Work was completed during this period on Fisheating Creek
Marsh project in Highlands County (51,200 acres). Construction
plans are practically complete and work will begin on the following
projects when local organizations secure the necessary easements
and rights-of-way, or meet other local obligations:
Taylor Creek
Pine Barren Creek
North St. Lucie River Drainage District
Sebastian River Drainage District
Legislation Needed
Watershed groups have been hampered in their efforts to
secure assistance under this program because there is no state
legislation to enable them to form effective organizations to meet
local responsibilities. Water management districts are needed in
many localities. Without legal authority to organize such districts,
many local groups will not be able to secure assistance.
A Look Ahead
While progress has been good under this relatively new pro-
gram, the accomplishments are dwarfed in the light of statewide
needs.
In a recent inventory of conservation needs in the state 228
watersheds covering 37,973,552 acres were studied. Watershed
projects were needed and feasible on a total of 162 with 26,786,995
acres according to tentative figures. It was estimated that the
following needs existed in these watersheds:
9









Floodwater and sediment damage reduction....5,203,304
Erosion damage reduction ............................... 117,188
Drainage ..................................... ............. 5,463,957
Irrigation ......................................................... 267,319
Recreational developments ............................. 60,313
Fish and wildlife improvement ..................... 29,990


19,394
4,847
16,641
2,519


With personnel and funds available for this work only two
to three watersheds can be planned each year. The present rate
of construction progress is even slower. In the meantime state
farmers are losing millions of dollars annually for lack of these
improvements.


STATUS OF PL 566 WATERSHED APPLICATIONS
FLORIDA
Authorized for Operations (Construction) COUNTY
1. East Chain of Lakes Highlands
2. Fisheating Creek Highlands
3. N. St. Lucie River Drainage District St. Lucie
4. Pine Barren Creek Escambia
5. Sebastian River Drainage District Indian River
6. Taylor Creek Okeechobee
7. Upper Josephine-Jackson Creek Highlands


Authorized for Planning
8. Palatlakaha (Suspended)
9. Sarasota West Coast (Complete)
10. Dry Creek
11. Orange Lake (Terminated)
12. Upper Tampa Bay
13. South Sumter

Applications Awaiting Planning Authorization
14. Bullfrog Creek
15. Six Mile Creek
16. Big Four
17. Jumper Creek
18. Wrights Creek
19. Little, Fish and Minnow Creeks
20. Istokpoga Marsh
21. Little Manatee River
22. Barley Barber Swamp
23. Haw Creek
24. Lower Alafia River
25. Pemberton Creek
26. Turkey Creek

Applications Disapproved or Not Feasible

27. Lake Region

28. Tributaries to St. Mary's River
29. Mill Creek
30. Dead Lake
31. Turnbull-Mill Creek-preliminary inv.
32. Bear Creek
33. Tsala Apopka


Lake
Sarasota
Jackson
Alachua
Hillsborough
Sumter


Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Sumter
Sumter
Holmes
Jackson
Highlands
Hillsborough f8 Manatee
Martin
Flagler and Volusia
Hillsborough
Hillsborough
Hillsborough


Putnam
Bradford
Clay
Baker
Nassau
Gulf, Liberty
St. Johns
Bay
Citrus


TOTAL-33 applications received


ACRES
12,500
51,200
60,220
61,200
33,930
89,500
32,700
341,250

36,500
154,680
100,000
210,000
71,808
80,000
652,988

25,216
28,480
100,000
53,000
100,000
20,000
21,000
135,000
24,000
190,000
48,000
36,000
64,000
844,696

92,000

191,000
39,680
95,000
56,000
80,000
189,440
743,120
2,582,054









PL 566 WATERSHED ACTIVITIES


LEGEND
AUTHORIZED FOR OPERATIONS ....
AUTHORIZED FOR PLANNING .....
APPLICATIONS ................ 0





































Control structure on Lake Clay in Lake Placid East Chain of Lakes Watershed Project
discharging floodwaters following Hurricane Donna in Sept. 1960.


Improved pastures and ranch buildings flooded, 15 inch rainstorm in Sebastian River
Watershed in September 1960. 70.000 acres of pasture, sugar cane and citrus suffered
an estimated damage of $208.000. Completed project would have reduced the damage
to $67,000.













i I


Water control structure in Fisheating Creek Watershed Project discharging floodwaters
Structure is closed in dry season to conserve water.

., Aw^

fe;.:


Newly constructed lateral channel empties into Fisheating Creek Main Channel. Both
removed Hurricane Donna floodwaters without damage to agricultural lands in the
watershed project area.








OUR LAND RESOURCES
Approximately 133/4 million acres of land in Florida have been
mapped by the SCS and The Florida Agricultural Experiment
Station.
After soils have been studied and classified on basis of their
characteristics, the various kinds can be grouped in many ways,
depending upon the need for interpretation.
Special groupings may be made for engineering qualities, for
important individual crops such as citrus, for forest use, for range
grazing, or for any other purpose involving soil use.
For agricultural purposes land is classified into one of eight
classes, based on degree or intensity of the conservation problem
and severity of restrictions in use. Class I land has no particular
conservation problem, and therefore no restrictions in use. Classes
II through VII have progressively greater conservation problems,
and progressively more limitations or restrictions in use. Class VIII
is incapable of producing useful vegetation, and is therefore limited
to use for wildlife, recreation, water supply, etc.
The following table shows the capability classification of non-
Federal land in Florida, reflecting the approximate acreage in-
herently suitable for various uses and the severity and extent of
conservation problems.

LAND CAPABILITY(I)
Land suitable for cultivation and other uses
CLASS ACRES
I Land with few limitations that restrict use. 173,594
II Land with some limitations that reduce the choice of
plants or require moderate conservation practices. 1.803,580
III Land with severe limitations that reduce the choice of
plants or require special conservation practices, or both. 10,417,667
IV Land with very severe limitations that restrict the choice
of plants, requires very careful management, or both. 9,956,710
Land suitable for permanent vegetation, wildlife, or recreation
V Land with limitations impractical to remove, that
limits its use to pasture, range, woods, or wildlife. 1,059,994
VI Land with severe limitations that restrict its use
to pasture, range, woods, or wildlife. 749,946
VII Land with very severe limitations that restrict its
use to grazing, woods, or wildlife. 793,797
VIII Land with limitations that restrict its use to wildlife,
recreation, water supply, etc. 863,507
Unclassified (swamps, marshes, airports, highways, townsites, etc.) 5,792,101
(,iSource: Preliminary summary, soil and water Conservation Needs
Inventory-1956-59, U.S.D.A.








LAND CLASSES AND SAFE LAND USES

THE LENGTH OF BAR SHOWS THE SAFE USES FOR EACH CLASS OF LAND
NOTE: THE SHORTER THE BARS THE FEWER THE SAFE USES

LIMITED MODERATE INTENSIVE LIMITED MODERATE INTENSIVE VERY
WILDLIFE FORESTRY INTENSIVE
GRAZING GRAZING GRAZING CULTIVATION CULTIVATION CULTIVATION CULTI





LLASS1 !
CULTIVATION













LASSCLASS

CLASSES
GLASS I .- u _--=. .-_- --
- -- i. .. ._ _- l -_ -_ .. ... .. .






CONSERVATION PROBLEMSVATON BELOW





There are probably at least six different conservation prob-
lems in Florida-erosion by water, erosion by wind, low soil
fertility, low organic matter, water control and physical land use.
They seldom occur singly. One of the most important of the six
problems facing Floridians today is the physical use to which our
land is put.
Competition between land uses in Florida is rapidly becoming
a more complex situation. The population which is expected to
double in the next ten years will need additional space. Com-
plicating the situation is the fact that these people must have
increased personal income.
Agriculture is now the basis for considerable industrial activ-
ity in Florida. Take the citrus industry for example. It is based
on an agricultural commodity, but it involves grove caretakers,







processing plants, packing houses, transportation, corporation
stockholders, can manufacturers, chemical companies, fertilizer
manufacturers, equipment manufacturers and dealers, research and
inspection facilities. The same is true for many other agricultural
commodities.
Admittedly, we must give attention to improving our facilities
which together with our natural environment attract vaca-
tioners, the affluent retired, and high-wage manufacturing. But
orderly planning is needed. Only by this method can we add these
income opportunities to the agriculture-based industrial develop-
ment that we now enjoy. It is improbable that either, to the exclu-
sion of the other will be sufficient for our expanding needs.

WHY CONSERVATION FARM OR RANCH PLANS?
A conservation plan provides a blueprint for the orderly
development and continuous use of the farm or ranch. It enables
the owner to progressively reach his goal for full use and profitable
operation of his land and water resource.
Beautiful buildings, good roads and enduring bridges are built
according to a blueprint-a plan. Profitable and enduring farms
and ranches are arranged and developed according to a plan-not
on a haphazard basis. The arrangement of fields for crops, pasture,
native range, woodland and wildlife use, as desired by the owner,
is based on reason-the capability or suitability of the land. The
treatment or conservation measures for each field is based on the
needs of the land for protection and improvement. The conserva-
tion plan is fitted to the land and the man like a made-to-measure
suit. A plan tailored to fit one farm and farmer would not fit on any
other farm or farmer. The principles are the same but the farms
and farmers are different.
Technicians of the Soil Conservation Service make soil and
capability maps of the farms and ranches of soil conservation dis-
trict cooperators. They assist the owner in interpreting the map
as a basis for decisions on land use and treatment. Relative costs
and benefits are provided to help the owner decide just what his
conservation plan will include. His decisions are placed on a con-
servation plan map or otherwise recorded in the conservation plan.
Farm or ranch plans can be revised if desired by the owner.
Technicians assigned to the district provide on-site assistance, if
needed, to apply the plan.
Farms and ranches which are being operated by a conserva-
tion plan based on sound technical and economic information are
the farms and ranches that are most certain to continue to produce
well and continuously. See page 17 for a typical soil map and
page 18 for a conservation plan based on the same farm.
16








-. a..n. SOIL AND CAPABILITY MAP .1-1so
U.S.DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
cooPERATING wIH
FLORIDA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION AND

SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT
COOPERaTOR John Doe
NRK UNIT No.20 COUNTY Alachua FLORIDA
APeaOx. SCALE I" 660* DAT 6-23-60
FIELD SHEET ANH FARM N-n IT-2R-109 (1)

~249AB I IIws-l Nearly level, slightly to moderately
h g- wet, deep acid sandy soils with high organic
content,
381A Scranton fine sand
$8e- 5 IIIse-3 Nearly level, very rapidly permeable,
deep sands with sandy texture throughout.
2h9AB1 lakeland fine sand

IIIws-i Nearly level, very wet, black, acid,
deep sandy soils with high organic content.
372A Rutlege fine sand

A "IIIse-5 Nearly level, slightly to moderately
S ~ wet, strongly acid, rapidly permeable deep
sands.
1Tse- 3 42ABI Blanton fine sand, low

-49A0 I IIIsw-1 Nearly level, wet to moderately wet,
a strongly acid sands underlain by organic stained
pan and clayey substratum.
265A Leon fine sand, dark colored surface

IVws-3 Nearly level, deep, strongly acid, very
wet sands.
3361 Plummer fine sand

IVsw-2 Nearly level, moderately wet, strongly
acid sandy soils with an organic-stained pan.
261A Leon fine sand

j Vsw-1 Nearly level and gently sloping, slightly
wet, nearly white deep sands.
310AB1 Pomello sand





CONSERVATION PLAN MAP
For. nFL3 a... Prepared by *-a-o
IU.S.DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
N Alachua
t aJ CconrrveM alDatrjr~

COOPERATOR John Doe
AooRESS Route 3. Box 180
COUNTY Alachua STATE Florida
PHOTO SHEET AND CODE NO. IT-2R-109 (1)
APPROXIMATE SCALE 1" 660' ACLES 360
PLAN NUMBER 1000 DATE 6-23-60
SCs TECHNICIAN Richard Roe
LEGEND FOR SYMBOLS ON MAP
Publ c Road Fare Rod
ExistiLg FenCe --- A- Propsed FenCe I-I---
Other ycrols (Specify) Firebreak
V-Dltcnh p p--

FIELD NO ACRES PLANNED LAN USE
1 46 Crops rotate 2 yrs. of row
crops with 3 yrs. of babia sod.
2 5 Homesite and barns
0.2 Wildlife Prepare rows, ferti-
lize & plant 1500 shrub lespe-
deza seedlings.
3 12 Pasture Pensacola bahia
4 5 Crops Home garden crops
0.2 Wildlife Prepare rows, ferti-
lize and plant 1500 shrub
lespedesa seedlings.
5 38 Pasture Pangola and white
clover graze in rotation.
6 L6 Crops rotate 2 yrs. of row
crops with 3 yrs. of babia sod.
7 7 Woods Plant 5000 slash pine
seedlings spaced 6x10 feet.
Plow firebreak.
0.2 Wildlife Prepare rows, ferti-
lize and plant 1500 shrub
leepedeza seedlings.
8 52 Crops rotate 2 yrs. of row
crops with 3 yrs. of bahia sod.
9 8 Woods plant 5800 slash pine
seedlings spaced 6x10 feet.
Plow firebreak.
0.2 Wildlife Prepare rows, ferti-
lize and plant 1500 shrub
lespedeza seedlings.
10 42 Pasture Pensacola bahia.
Graze in rotation.
30 Pasture Argentine bahia and
white clover. Irrigate.
Graze in rotation.
2 Wildlife Native wetland plant
11 51 Pasture Pensacola bahia.
Graze in rotation.
12 12 Woods Plant 8700 slash pine
seedlings spaced 6x10 feet.
Plow firebreak.
0.2 Wildlife Prepare rows, ferti-
lize and plant 1500 shrub
lespedeza seedlings.








TABLE I
Summary, Number Cooperators, Basic Farm Plans, Acreage,
Soil Survey and Conservation Practices
ALL ORGANIZED SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS IN FLORIDA
(Reported by State Office, U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Gainesville, Fla.)

Period
7-1-58-6-30-60 To 6-30-60
No. Acres No. Acres
District Cooperators 2,868 1,111,551 21,508 10,109,233
Basic Farm Plans 2,684 684,672 19,375 6,398,712
Soil Survey (acres) 1,620,029 14,100,967

Applied Applied
This Period To Date

CROPLAND
Conservation Crop Rotation (acres) 194,884 1,057,814
Contour Farming (acres) 16,346 189,657
Cover Cropping (acres) 373,279 2,038,900
Crop Residue Use (acres) 165,793 824,030
Strip Cropping (acres) 21,503 54,003
Field Windbreak Plantings (miles) 48 376

GRASSLAND
Pasture Plantings (acres) 215,057 2.018.961
Land Clearing (acres) 196,633 2,319,164

WOODLAND
Controlled Burning (acres) 397,358 1,586,338
Firebreak Construction (miles) 6,903 339,604
Woodland Improvement (acres) 182,798 1,450,212
Woodland Protection (acres) 397,358 1,586,338
Tree Planting (acres) 191,765 515,974

WILDLIFE
Fish Pond Treatment (No.) 856 4,047
Wildlife Area Treatment (acres) 55,825 441,193

STRUCTURAL PRACTICES
Bedding for Drainage (acres) 9,838 82,909
Channel Improvement (miles) 438 1,079
Check Dams (No.) 36 361
Dike Construction (miles) 222 2,418
Ditch Construction (miles) 3,388 34,600
Diversion Construction (miles) 23 163
Drainage Pumping Plants (No.) 101 1,405
Drop Inlet Construction (No.) 1,570 4,998
Drop Spillway Construction (No.) 1,156 4,768
Furrow Irrigation (acres) 48,104 296,505
Irrigation Pumping Plants (No.) 477 6,194
Irrigation Reservoirs (No.) 73 697
Irrigation Water Management (acres) 67,592 451,599
Outlet Channel Construction (L. ft.) 38,145 499,733
Pond Construction (No.) 362 3,033
Sprinkler Irrigation Systems (No.) 205 2,899
Terracing (miles) 313 15,311
Waterway Development (acres) 249 4,621
Well Construction (No.) 622 11,570







SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
Soil Conservation Districts are operated by five elected super-
visors from the district. They serve without salary for four-year
terms and have the responsibility of developing and carrying out
a program of conservation of soil and water resources within the
district. The funds for operating the non-technical activities of
districts are obtained by the District of Supervisors from various
sources. Some districts own certain farm machinery equipment
which they maintain for use of cooperators on rental basis to apply
conservation practices. This provides some income, but generally
funds must be obtained from other sources, i. e.,: out of affiliate
memberships county Boards of Commissioners, donations, etc.
A District Program and Work Plan is prepared and followed
by supervisors in promoting recommended conservation practices
for the district. This guide is carefully reviewed at least annually
and revised in keeping with research developments, changes in
economy and type of farming. Regular meetings of the Boards
are held to conduct the activities of the district. In most districts
monthly meetings are held.
Supervisors have recognized that a number of factors are
involved in an effective conservation program. It is too large a
task to undertake alone. Active leadership is a must. Specific plan-
ning is essential and the best of cooperative assistance is needed
from representatives of local, county, state and federal agencies.
Through a signed Memorandum of Understanding between
the Board of Supervisors, U.S.D.A. and Soil Conservation Service,
technicians are assigned to each district for giving direct technical
assistance to landowners. As of December 31, 1960, there were
122 technical persons giving direct assistance to the organized soil
conservation districts in Florida.
The job of these technicians in the district is to assist land-
owners, plan and establish a conservation program in accordance
with the overall district program and plan of work. They are
employees of the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service but follow
work priorities established by the supervisors. Their duties include
the making or revising of basic conservation farm and ranch plans,
explaining conservation practices, planning, preparing designs and
checking installation of conservation structures for water manage-
ment. It will be noted in Table I that in two years 2,868 new coop-
erators have been assisted and 2,684 basic farm plans made on
684,672 acres. To date 19,375 Farm Conservation farm plans have
been developed and are being installed on over 6,000,000 acres.
See page 18 for conservation map of a typically planned farm. In
addition, a number of state and area specialists were available for
helping districts with problems in soil and water.
20
































(74

I'.- -
a~


21,503 acres planted in strip crops, preventing soil erosion.






























Planted strips of small grain reduces wind erosion.

21



















. *t A1


1 i'. '


"* ir"


.~ .4~#


-`. ','4*.*l


Complete utilization of each acre of land according to its capability. These pines were
planted on idle land in 1954 after installation of drainage. The Florida Forestry Service
provides professional assistance on forestry to cooperators as part of the farm- conserva-
tion plan.


S.C.D. are assisted by many agencies and groups in getting conservation practices in
operation-as example, this drainage ditch in improved pasture was put in with aid
of ACP cost sharing.











































Technical assistance is available through S.C.D. for planning conservation practices-
seepage irrigation system, improved pasture and clover.


373,279 acres planted in cover crops by cooperators for soil improvement. The above
sesbania crop is used extensively as such by vegetable producers.


'







The Florida Agricultural Extension Service has county agri-
cultural agents in each district. These agents assist District Boards
of Supervisors in establishing and carrying out educational work
in the district conservation program. Forty-seven county agents
also serve district boards as secretaries.
Twelve Soil Conservation Districts representing 14 counties
sponsored Land Appreciation Schools and Judging Contests during
1960. 235 boys (members of 4-H and FFA) participated in local
events. The first state Land Judging Contest was held in Gaines-
ville April 1, with 22 teams (81 boys) taking part. (12 FFA and
10 4-H.) The winning teams and coach (4-H, Clay Soil Conserva-
tion District and FFA, Lafayette Soil Conservation District) were
given a trip to participate in the International Land, Pasture and
Range Judging School and Contest, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,
sponsored by Florida Association of Soil Conservation District Su-
pervisors Station WTVT-TV Tampa and Cartledge Fertilizer Com-
pany, Cottondale. J. H. Herbert, Jr., Extension Conservationist,
provided the leadership in organization of this program.

Name Name
S.C.D. 4-H Club FFA Chapter
Orange Hill Vernon
Chipola River Jackson Marianna
Calhoun Frink
Bradford Starke
Tupelo Gulf Wewahitchka
Lafayette Mayo
Suwannee River Suwannee
Alachua Alachua Santa Fe
Clay Clay Green Cove Springs
Levy Levy Chiefland
Gilchrist Gilchrist Trenton
Hillsborough Hillsborough Turkey Creek
Hardee Hardee Peace River
County Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Commit-
tees and District Supervisors work together in selecting and recom-
mending conservation practices to be cost-shared under the AC
Program for the district. In fact a number of supervisors also
serve on the County ASC Committees.
Teachers of Vocational Agricultural Departments cooperate
with the supervisors. Vocational agricultural students are in-
structed as to the recommended conservation practices for local
needs, with emphasis to include them in individual projects. Super-
visors are interested in this arrangement and have assisted FFA







chapters by sponsoring contests, i.e., speaking and land judging
and providing awards. They have also provided planning assistance
on school laboratory areas, use of district equipment on projects
and in many other ways.
Representatives of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission have given valuable assistance to district cooperators
during the period of this report. Help has been given on game
management, fish management, furnishing foundation stock for
farm ponds and materials for wildlife plantings. This service was
made possible by signed Memorandum of Understanding between
the District Board of Supervisors and the agency. Annually this
agency has been distributing to district cooperators approximately
the following materials:
500,000 shrub lespedeza seedlings
10,000 lbs. combine pea seed
8,000 lbs. partridge pea seed
5,000 lbs. common lespedeza seed
In addition to the above, during 1960, a considerable quantity of
brown-top millet was supplied. Under present arrangements with
Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission landowners pay
cost of materials.
Florida Forest Service Farm Foresters work with district co-
operators through a Memorandum of Understanding, under which
specialized woodland services are made available as part of the
farm conservation plan. This includes professional forestry assist-
ance on-the-ground. It produces and makes available pine and
other seedlings for planting. Note results reported on cooperator's
farms of work on woodland, Table I, page 17.
The U. S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
has assisted districts and their cooperators in the application of
sound fish and wildlife management practices. Special emphasis
during the past two years was given in providing fish for stocking
farm ponds and recommendations for wildlife conservation in the
planning of watershed projects under the Watershed Protection
and Flood Prevention Act.






































District cooperators receiving bluegill and bass for stocking 1218 ponds. This assistance
supplied by U. S. Dept. of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service and Florida Game
and Fresh Water Fish Commission.

.... s ,, ..


'r~~ .1 -
~


Corn, millet and chufa planted for feeding wild ducks and geese. The area is flooded
with water in October.








NATIONAL SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT
AWARDS PROGRAM
Seventeen Soil Conservation Districts in Florida participated
in the National Soil Conservation Districts Award Program spon-
sored by the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company during the
period May 1, 1958 April 30, 1960. In this program the districts
are judged on accomplishments of their own annual work plan with
established score sheet. The winners were:
1958-59 Hillsborough Soil Conservation District......1st place
Bradford Soil Conservation District .........2nd place
1959-60 Chipola River Soil Conservation District.... 1st place
Levy Soil Conservation District ................2nd place


Chipola River S.C.D. receiving the 1959-60 Goodyear Soil Conservation Award
Plaque.








SPEAKING CONTEST
The speaking contest sponsored by District Boards of Super-
visors and FASCDS was carried out each year. The contest is de-
signed to develop leadership of young people through participation
in public speaking activities and stimulating interest in conserving
our natural resources. Eliminations were held within each Soil
Conservation District and areas in determining contestants for
state contest. Subjects used were: "Conserving Florida's Wildlife
through Soil Conservation Districts" and "How Soil and Water
Conservation affects the Urban Poulation." Reports on these con-
tests reveal the following: Number of Districts participating, 38;
Number Schools participating, 197; Number student contestants,
1,089; Estimated Number people hearing speeches, 40,020; and
total amount awarded, $3,614.
SOIL STEWARDSHIP WEEK
Soil Stewardship Week was co-sponsored by the State Soil
Conservation Board, Florida Association of Soil Conservation Dis-
trict Supervisors and 47 District Soil Conservation Boards of Super-
visors in the state. Governor Collins designated the week (May
3-10, 1959 and May 22-29, 1960) by Proclamation. During the
period emphasis on the basic motivation behind good soil conserva-
tion is man's recognition of his responsibility under God to protect
and use wisely His precious gift of soil. A summary of activities
for these weeks shows:
839 churches cooperating; 698 sermons delivered on soil
stewardship with 107,168 people attending. In addition 40 meet-
ings or tours conducted by supervisors.
















Ministers in district were invited to meet with supervisors in preparation for
Soil Stewardship Week-a number held special tours.
28








FLORIDA BANKER'S AWARD PROGRAM
Members of the Florida Banker's Association and Boards of
Supervisors have continued to work together in recognizing farm-
ers and ranchers who have completed a substantial part of their
Basic Conservation Farm Plan prepared by the landowner with
assistance of the Soil Conservation Service. This program includes
the selection of qualified district cooperators by the District Board
of Supervisors and the Banker secures and presents the Certificate
of Award to recipient during some event or agricultural meeting
held in the soil conservation district. 76 individuals were given
certificate of award during the period of this report before an
audience of 14,366.


24 S.C.D. in cooperation with Florida Bankers Association selected 76 cooperators
for receiving Conservation Award.






TABLE II
PROGRESS SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS, NUMBER OF COOPERATORS, BASIC FARM PLANS AND ACREAGE
June 30, 1960

Date No. of No. of
Name of Organized Location Acres in District Basic Farm
District (Charter) (County) District Cooperators Acreage Plans Acreage


Alachua
Baker
Bay
Blackwater
Bradford
Brevard
Charlotte
Chipola R.

S Choctawhatchee R.

Clay
Dixie
Duval
Flagler
Franklin
Gadsden
Gilchrist
Glades
Gulf

Hamilton
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Hillsborough
Holmes Creek

Indian River
Jefferson


4- 5-44
3-23-53
8-25-52
3-17-42
3-13-50
2- 5-45
4- 6-44
5-24-40

3-21-40

10- 5-49
7-23-47
7-10-53
2- 3-52
1-27-53
6-20-41
8- 7-45
7-17-47
11-13-43

8- 7-46
6-16-44
5-29-44
2- 5-42
8- 5-46
1- 7-38

1-29-45
7-25-40


Alachua
Baker
Bay
Santa Rosa
Bradford
Brevard
Charlotte
Jackson, Cal-
houn 4 Liberty
Walton &% W
Holmes
Clay
Dixie
Duval
Flagler
Franklin
Gadsden
Gilchrist
Glades
Citrus &
Hernando
Hamilton
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Hillsborough
E. Holmes V
N. W. Jackson
Indian River
Jefferson


570,880
374,400
481,920
655,360
187,520
660,480
497,280

1,378,240

821,000
382,720
440,320
497,280
309,120
348,160
325,120
216,960
477,440

677,120
328,960
403,200
759,680
666,240
665,600

275,000
327,040
382,720


246,226
54,004
93,538
106,776
91,669
197,812
201,122

417,611

179,927
143,838
350,262
97,228
109,847
22,043
138,125
81,107
152,187

93,133
137,382
248,750
478,170
305,259
244,496

114,677
77,388
206,209


187,348
28,425
21,714
80,608
35,128
171,702
128,679


818 207.517


139,461
76,851
12,648
50,555
35,651
6,840
120,559
70,781
127.566

74,930
110,096
218,673
382,148
269,442
173,126

110,237
45,444
177,279




Date No. of No. of
Name of Organized Location Acres in District Basic Farm
District (Charter) (County) District Cooperators Acreage Plans Acreage
Lafayette 9-20-48 Lafayette 347,520 255 253,115 196 45,298
Lake 4-21-44 Lake 637.440 647 146,460 603 120.648
Lee 7-10-47 Lee 503,040 178 122.528 162 97,851
Levy 9-29-47 Levy 705.920 348 95,219 330 89,376
Madison 6-26-41 Madison 449,280 594 167.743 541 140.579
Manatee River 5-15-45 Manatee 448,640 371 198,777 332 144,761
Marion 12-31-41 Marion 1,034,880 419 159,993 327 113.976
Martin 5- 6-50 Martin 357,760 88 180,734 74 133,725
Nassau 5- 5-50 Nassau 416,000 234 83,902 229 51,335
Ochlockonee R. 7-17-40 Leon 438,400 610 200,346 610 200,346
Okeechobee 1-11-51 Okeechobee 499,200 104 290,291 64 99,176
Orange 7-23-45 Orange 586,240 431 134,807 421 95.443
Orange Hill 4- 3-40 Washington 382,080 619 94,810 615 93,938
Osceola 10- 9-50 Osceola 848,000 147 704,249 116 59,930
Pasco 4- 8-46 Pasco 480,640 177 111,483 155 51.382
Peace River 4-27-44 DeSoto 414,720 455 529,557 399 398,181
Perdido River 3-20-40 Escambia 398,573 423 69,126 406 66.045
S Pinellas 11-15-43 Pinellas 168,960 430 50,447 413 49,092
Polk 2-19-45 Polk- 1,191,040 737 316,498 668 214,955
Putnam 1-22-45 Putnam 513.920 357 193,452 323 122,760
St. Johns 9-14-55 St. Johns 357.860 108 59,336 59 12.764
St. Lucie 9-21-50 St. Lucie 376.320 231 234,741 146 97,559
Santa Fe 12-14-42 Columbia 503,040 429 152,131 422 151,022
Sarasota 7-14-47 Sarasota 328,960 212 131,927 198 81.856
Seminole 11- 7-47 Seminole 205,440 306 59,229 281 46,763
Sumter 2-16-43 Sumter 359,040 504 158,214 464 126,196
Suwannee River 3- 4-42 Suwannee 433.280 454 117.207 444 115.633
Taylor 12-15-55 Taylor 660.480 0 0 0 0
Tupelo 2- 3-45 Gulf 356,480 52 47.915 41 10,025
Union 3-12-48 Union 153,600 160 104.532 151 49.399
Volusia 6-19-43 Volusia 713.600 520 213,024 511 122,379
Wakulla 7- 3-50 Wakulla 392,960 107 30,438 107 30.438
Yellow River 6-20-41 Okaloosa 513,536 622 108,216 572 102,473
STATE TOTAL 29,286,609 21.508 10.109,233 19,375 6.398,712






































S.C.D. participated in sponsoring exhibits on conservation at fairs, meetings and public
buildings.


Recognized for leadership and assistance to Florida S.C.D. Left to Right: W. A. Hunt,
Clermont; D. W. Maxwell, Lake City: John E. Lambe. Marianna: Tom Maxwell,
Quincy; Z. C. Herlong, Micanopy: G. E. Snow. Orlando; and E. E. Carter. Vero
Beach not present when picture was made.









TABLE III
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR FLORIDA CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
January 1, 1959 to December 31, 1959


Districts


Alachua
Baker
Bay
Blackwater
Bradford
Brevard
Charlotte
Chipola River
Choctawhatchee River
Clay
Dixie
Duval
Flagler
Franklin
Gadsden
Gilchrist
Glades
Gulf
Hamilton
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Hillsborough
Holmes Creek
Indian River
Jefferson
Lafayette
Lake
Lee
Levy
Madison
Manatee River
Marion
Martin
Nassau
Ochlockonee River
Okeechobee
Orange
Orange Hill
Osceola
Pasco
Peace River
Perdido River


Receipts
(Including
Balance
Brought
Forward)

$ 22,060.21
811.99
131.61
830.42
1,282.69
523.68
8.48
1,400.64
1,367.39
160.37
2,493.20
211.55
739.08
2,381.39
3,813.44
3,029.96
625.71
937.52
758.99
977.72
2,825.24
127,469.75
1,511.65
773.99
849.80
3,451.52
35,159.35
5,104.99
3,798.30
3,277.93
8,066.68
695.00
4,019.84
128.69
413.17
6,725.03
867.39
1,242.24
2,764.49
985.22
295.17
802.59
395.75


Expenditures


$ 982.32
389.76
22.45
73.55
527.98
248.27
0
342.00
206.50
51.80
1,762.60
46.76
184.00
1,672.51
148.58
997.08
560.14
322.85
216.95
694.29
88.03
124,902.99(2)
1,200.49
207.75
282.55
499.40
34,310.42
587.59
987.14
1,123.72
4,350.94
695.00
1,624.63
125.53
85.59
1,539.89
164.50
628.38
2,011.74
255.54
161.46
270.50
44.84


Balance
Carried
Forward

$ 21,077.89
422.23
109.16
756.87
754.71
275.41
8.48
1,058.64
1,160.89
108.57
730.60
164.79
555.08
708.88
3,664.86
2,032.88
65.57
614.67
542.04
283.43
2,737.21
2,566.76
311.16
566.24
567.25
2,952.12
848.93
4,517.40
2,811.16
2,154.21
3,715.74
0
2,395.21
3.16
327.58
5,185.14
702.89
613.86
752.75
729.68
133.71
532.09
350.91









IABLE III (Continued)

Receipts
(Including
Districts Balance Expenditrres Balance
Brought Carried
Forward) Forward

Pinellas 1,259.28 132.43 1,126.85
Polk 3,670.92 530.49 3,140.43
Putnam 1,402.05 877.00 525.05
St. Johns 813.97 727.99 85.98
St. Lucie 120.03 82.15 37.88
Santa Fe 17,467.32 10,052.38 7,414.94
Sarasota 423.01 164.74 258.27
Seminole 669.66 665.56 4.10
Sumter 1,676.64 245.35 1,431.29
Suwannee River 98.59 45.92 52.67
Tupelo 997.67 192.98 804.69
Union 479.88 329.22 150.66
Volusia 3,033.63 846.36 2,187.27
Wakulla 964.28 472.90 491.38
Yellow River 2,071.70 861.93 1,209.77
TOTAL $291.318.45 $201,826.41 $ 89,492.04
(2)Includes funds for watershed development
TABLE IV
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR FLORIDA SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
January 1, 1960 to December 31, 1960

Receipts
(Including
Districts Balance Expenditures Balance
Brought Carried
Forward) Forward


Alachua
Baker
Bay
Blackwater
Bradford
Brevard
Charlotte
Chipola River
Choctawhatchee River
Clay
Dixie
Duval
Flagler
Franklin
Gadsden
Gilchrist
Glades
Gulf
Hamilton


$ 21,938.43
1,073.23
109.16
763.87
1,352.61
328.30
8.48
1,308.66
1,330.24
837.85
1,815.65
2,729.64
667.63
4,095.37
3,808.36
2,968.56
585.57
917.17
864.04


$ 1,154.67
483.36
64.50
105.00
597.06
259.89
0
670.30
190.13
614.35
1,383.52
2,009.71
151.80
3,880.60
95.43
1,553.46
292.88
571.47
239.95


$ 20,783.76
589.87
44.66
658.87
755.55
68.41
8.48
638.36
1,140.11
223.50
432.13
719.93
515.83
214.77
3,712.93
1,415.10
292.69
345.70
624.09









TABLE IV (Continued)
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR FLORIDA SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
January 1, 1960 to December 31, 1960

Receipts
(Including
Districts Balance Expenditures Balance
Brought Carried
Forward) Forward


Hardee 783.93 772.26 11.67
Hendry 2,956.60 633.48 2,323.12
Highlands 56,545.55 54,298.46(2) 2,247.09
Hillsborough 2,040.07 1,846.51 193.56
Holmes Creek 601.24 170.00 431.24
Indian River 592.25 236.00 356.25
Jefferson 3,727.99 210.70 3,517.29
Lafayette 33,652.08 33,613.31 38.77
Lake 5,128.43 596.58 4,531.85
Lee()
Levy 3,087.12 1,396.76 1,690.36
Madison 5,064.77 2,249.04 2,815.73
Manatee Riverc,)
Marion 2,902.11 671.40 2,230.71
Martin 298.16 227.98 70.18
Nassau 3,345.45 3,215.73 129.72
Ochlockonee River 5,370.01 395.19 4,974.82
Okeechobee ()
Orange 840.60 193.21 647.39
Orange Hill 1,445.03 1,103.14 341.89
Osceola 985.22 360.79 624.43
Pasco 243.71 140.66 103.05
Peace River 724.59 439.87 284.72
Perdido River 675.91 591.32 84.59
Pinellas 1,126.85 112.52 1,014.33
Polk 3,770.39 765.16 3.005.23
Putnam 1,555.04 631.71 923.33
St. Johns 476.83 336.97 139.86
St. Lucie 62.88 25.00 37.88
Santa Fe 15,981.48 6,299.31 9,682.17
Sarasota 630.27 291.17 339.10
Seminole 565.10 552.70 12.40
Sumter 1,527.59 188.27 1,339.32
Suwannee River 131.71 116.54 15.17
Tupelo 969.44 201.75 767.69
Union 624.76 414.12 210.64
Volusia 2,968.35 729.91 2,238.44
Wakulla 646.78 381.50 265.28
Yellow River 2.273.97 1,231.65 1,042.32


TOTAL $211,825.08 $129,958.75 $

(,)No report received
(2 Includes funds for watershed development


81,866.33




r