DATE: August 11, 1987

TO:

RE:

EXHIBIT 5

Mr. Alonzo Spang Sr. and Senator Conrad Hearing

Committee

Superintendent Ft. Berthold Agency
New Town, No. Dak. 58763

Personal case history for Senator Conrads Hearing
on distressed economics of farming and ranching
conditions & 2340.
at Ft. Berthold pursuant to the Bill in

Congress H.

Dear Mr. Spang and the Hearing Committee:

At this point in time I would like to make available
to you and the Committee an overview of some of my
personal situations reflected and caused by the
economic crisis we have been in that caused the
crushing of our production process:

1).

2).

3).

I started ranching in 1959 and paid over
$400,000.00 in BIA leases to the present. My sons
are 26, 27 and 31 and played an integral part;
Terry took out a unit and FmHa loan in 1979, but
conditions reflected a negative future for farming
and ranching at that time and they left to seek
employment and alternative careers.

I myself decided to stay and weather with the
storm. Terrance has this year decided to return
to seek out and rebuild back into ranching

as their first priority has always been ranching.

We have always had a negative feed supply since
we were moved to the bench lands, and I strived
to correct this through a development process on
lands purchased at high rates through FmHA to
over come this. This is the reason for my
scattered land base. My feed supply results are
astonishingly successful at this point. The debt
load is also astonishingly high, and under the
present circumstances, impossible to repay.

I am very pleased to see the communities all
working together in a struggle to overcome a bad
situation in favor of a better future for all the
farmers and ranchers of America. If we get to debt
settle or a buy out with our lands within this bill
I would like to see the Indian land debt settled on
what the land can produce or (capital value)
settlement rather than fair market value which is
around 40% higher than the Indian lands production
average. However, either settlment would be better
than none.

Pursuant to all our meetings and appeals plus the meetings with you and Paige Baker on 8-10-87 and within the ramifications of Senator Conrad and Representative Dorgans Bill HR 4320 it is my understanding, that this is all designed to put us ranchers and farmers back into production on a positive cash flow basis, rather it comes from an Tribal Administrative buy out or a settlement within FmHA and it is not a design to just supplement a Tribal land acquisition program, because if this is the case then you should let me know as soon as possible. I want you to know that my greatest concern is to retain my land.

Please use this statement for the panel's review on personal case history pursuant to the material received dated 8-3-87 (several Tribal Farmers and Rancher's Panel #2 on the hearing scheduled for 9-1-87.)

If you have any questions please contact me at my address
P.O. Box 325, Halliday, No. Dak. 58636.

Addendum to testimony dated August 11, 1987

Senator Conrad Hearing Committee Sept. 1, 1987.

Pursuant to your request, when time disallowed you to call on me, when I had my hand up at the Sept. 1, 1987 hearing, "I could write in my testimony" so I will add this testimony with the one of August 11, 1987 addressed to Supt. Spang and Senator Conrad Hearing committee.

Senator, I would like to call to your attention to the fact that the eligibility requirement of "The Indian borrower's present debt to the federal government may not exceed $400,000, accumulated principal and interest", within our Chairman's proposal of 25 USC 1451 restructuring; would eliminate all of us ranchers, that were in the business through the 1960's on, and therefore I would like to make this statement, in reference to it:

I

In

Through the years I have developed a stock yards and scale located in the Mandaree area 40 miles from New Town and directly across Lake Sakakawea from my cow ranch at Twin Buttes as my Dad's ranch was located there on the river. own two key tracts of land on the Mandaree side of the lake which are both fenced, and it seem's they are very attractive to the Indian rancher's of the late 1970's as these guys did not have the expensive transitional period of the 1950's. this period a group of Republican non-Indian Ranchers controlled 95% of the grazing land on Ft. Berthold. The low price of the grazing fees reflected that they controlled these also. After the incentive was in place, 95% Indian use, the lease fee rose fifteen fold ($6:00 to $78.00 AUY). would like to add that without the 1960 expenses these later Indian Ranchers can boast of profits. At the present time they are getting fat off our fences, springs, and general improvements of the 1960's. As a matter of fact two of us Indian Ranchers who took over the "BIG LEASE" from the nonindian ranchers were offered a substantial bribe if we would Just let the Big Lessors continue the status quo.

I would greatly appreciate your deleting the $400,000, limitation of the Chairman's proposal. As the proposal stands, only the young Farmers and Ranchers would benefit from it.

I

(1)

EXHIBIT 6

Questions submitted by Senator Kent Conrad to FmHA:

Please state the number of the FHA administered farm loans, and the dollar amount, made by Indian farmers on the Fort Berthold Reservation as of the date of this letter.

(2) Please state the aggregate number of acres of trust lands pledged by Indian farmers to secure these loans on Fort Berthold.

(3) Please state the number of loans, and their amounts, Indian farmers that are presently delinquent on Fort Berthold.

to

referenced

(4) Please state, with reference to the above delinquent loans, the present status of FHA action as to each loan.

(5) Please state the expectd number of defaults outstanding Indian farmer loans on Fort Berthold.

on all

(6) Please state the expected number of trust acres your agency is likely to acquire by way of foreclosure, the Fort Berthold Reservation. or voluntary conveyance,

on

(7) Please state the loan servicing options made available to distressed Indian farmers on the Fort Berthold Reservation.

(8) Please state whether any of the delinquent loans to Indians have been refinanced, or otherwise restructured, as a result of the exercise of any loan servicing options on Fort Berthold.

(9) Please state how many Indian farmers, if any, have voluntarily liquidated their debts with FmHA on Fort Berthold.

(10) Please state how many Indian loans have been foreclosed on the Fort Berthold Reservation.

(11) Please state the loan qualification procedures used to ensure the viability of loans made to Indian farmers on Fort Berthold.

(12) Please state the nature, and scope, of the cooperative relationship between FHA and the Bureau of Indian Affairs to ensure that only viable loans are made to qualified Indian borrowers.

(13) Please state whether FmHA has issued any joint statements with BIA regarding the procedures to be followed when trust lands are pledged as security for a loan.

(14) If so, please attach a copy of any such document to your response.

(15) Please state whether the BIA оп Fort Berthold has ever rejected any proposed FmHA loan, or required a modification, to a Indian barrower that required a pledge of trust land as security for the loan.

(16) Please state whether Farmers Home Administration provides any technical assistance to tribal farmers to assist them in improving the management of their farm operations.

(17) Please state any recommendations your agency may have to resolve the debt credit crisis on Fort Berthold.

This is in response to the Seventeen (17) questions that you forwarded to my office concerning FmHA loans to Indian farmers and ranchers on the Fort Berthold Reservation.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

FmHA has Eighty Five (85) Indian farm and ranch borrowers on the Fort Berthold Reservation with a total outstanding debt of approximately $22,000,000.00

The aggregate number of trust land acres pledged by Indian operators to secure FmHA loans on the Fort Berthold Reservation is approximately $43,000 - 45,000 acres.

FmHA has Sixty Seven (67) Indian farm and ranch loan borrowers
that are delinquent with loan balance of approximately
$19,000,000.00 of which $18,400,000.00 is delinquent.

The present status of FmHA action as to the Indian delinquent is as follows:

(a) Forty (40) borrowers received the Notice of Intent forms.

1. Twenty one (21) of these have been accelerated.

2.

Nineteen (19) of these are waiting hearings, mandatory conferences, refinance action or have not responded to letters requesting information.

(b) Twenty Six (26) Indian borrowers have partially
voluntarily liquidated but still owe a debt.

(c) Eleven (11) are delinquent in 1987 and the majority will be current by the years end.

FmHA expects that approximately Forty (40) Indian
farmer/ranchers will default under present conditions.

6. FmHA expects approximately Thirty Two Thousand (32,000) Indian trust land acres will be acquired through foreclosure or voluntary conveyance on Fort Berthold or possibly acquired by