Dr. HOLM. No; not of the hogs-of themselves. The order provides that dealers and handlers shall be classified into certain groups, and certain groups get different price considerations.

Senator BANKHEAD. You mean for the purchase of the serum? Dr. HOLM. Yes.

Senator BANKHEAD. They are divided into groups, and that group fixes prices?

Dr. HOLM. They are not fixed. They are allowed to purchase at certain prices or discounts.

Senator BANKHEAD. Then one man is liable to get it at one price and another man might pay a higher price.

Dr. HOLM. The wholesaler is permitted to buy at a cheaper price than the retail dealer, naturally.

Senator BANKHEAD. Is that the only classification difference between wholesalers and retailers, wholesalers and dealers?

Dr. HOLM. There are, for example, what are called "volume contract purchasers." I believe there is only one of those, the Illinois Farm Bureau.

Senator BANKHEAD. The chain-store idea, I think. Prices are fixed on volume and discount for quantity.

Dr. HOLM. Well, that may be. The law permits the serum control agency to classify all dealers, subject to the review of the Secretary. Senator BANKHEAD. That is all I want to ask on that.

Senator RUSSELL. Dr. Mohler, getting back to the question I asked you a few minutes ago, how are you getting along with the Bang'sdisease work?

Dr. MOHLER. Mr. Chairman, since this emergency appropriation was made available in July 1934, we have tested over 15,900,000 cattle and have taken out from the infected herds 1,140,000 reactors. The present status of the work is shown by this small map, where the outstanding State is Oregon, with 8212 percent of their breeding cattle under supervision. The second State is Virginia, with 64.9 percent of all their susceptible cattle under supervision. Washington comes third, 59.3 percent: Idaho fourth, 50.2 percent; Utah fifth, 44.5 percent; West Virginia sixth, 34.4 percent; Oklahoma seventh, 31 percent: Wisconsin eighth, 30.9 percent: Arkansas ninth, 28.9 percent; Minnesota tenth, 28.4 percent; and Missouri eleventh, 26.7 percent.

Senator TOWNSEND. You mean about 15 percent reacted?

Dr. MOHLER. An average of 15 percent reacted, Senator, on the first test, but we have been going over some of these herds now for the second, third, and even more times and of course, having eliminated some of the original infection, the percentage is now down to around 6 percent.

Senator TOWNSEND. What percent of the cattle have been examined?

Dr. MOHLER. Just about 1512 percent or over 7,300,000 since many of the 15,900,000 cattle examined were retests. Of the 60,000,000 cattle in the country only 47,800,000 are breeding or susceptible animals, the remainder being steers and calves. In the beginning the percentage of infection ran to about 15 percent, but it is now running about 6 percent.

Senator TOWNSEND. What has decreased that? Experience in control?

Dr. MOHLER. The principal things that have decreased it are the taking out of infected cattle from the herds and the removal of exposure from those that remained in the herd as healthy cattle, by disinfection and other sanitary measures.

Senator TYDINGS. How much of it is congenital and how much contagious?

Dr. MOHLER. It is entirely contagious, 100 percent. It is not congenital at all. It is due to a disease-producing germ. When I was at the hearings before the House committee, there were only four States that had appropriated indemnity funds to supplement Federal indemnities.

Senator RUSSELL. That was exactly what I wanted to develop in this hearing.

Senator TYDINGS. May I ask a question before you get off into that, along the line of my other inquiry?

Senator RUSSELL. Certainly.

Senator TYDINGS. You say this disease is contagious. Is it possible for cattle to get this germ in any other way than from other cattle?

Dr. MOHLER. Yes; it is possible by drinking water at a brook that drains an infected farm adjacent, or from eating contaminated feed or forage that comes from infected farms.

Senator TYDINGS. In your work of exterminating this disease do you not only kill the infected cattle but try to ascertain where the disease had its origin, and go there and take measures to stamp it

out?

Dr. MOHLER. Yes; that is all done as a matter of education for the owner of the cattle, but until this is placed on the same area basis as our tuberculosis work it is almost impossible to get the best results. The basic work on tuberculosis eradication was the area plan. We took the county as a unit. Obviously you cannot make much headway with an infection like this by testing the herd of John Brown here and Bill Smith's 3 miles away, but when it becomes an area proposition where they all have to be tested you can get somewhere.

Senator TYDINGS. I take it you concede, from your remarks, that it is equally important to break up sources of infestation, because otherwise we would be appropriating money to exterminate diseased cattle all the time, and then leave the source from which infection came untouched.

Dr. MOHLER. Exactly.

Senator TYDINGS. So you do apply a considerable amount of the appropriation to that source?

Dr. MOHLER. Yes, sir.

Senator TYDINGS. And if you find these infected cattle on the farm you make some examination, trying to find out where it was locally acquired?

Dr. MOHLER. Yes.

Senator TYDINGS. And get that information?

Dr. MOHLER. Yes, sir. The addition of untested cattle or animals only supposedly disease-free, is one of the principal reasons why herds continue to show infection of Bang's disease even after several tests and the removal of reactors.

141560-37-5

Although altogether 64 factors have been found as possible reasons for recurrences of the disease after reacting cattle had been removed and slaughtered and the premises cleaned and disinfected, in 20 percent of them the addition of cattle from other herds was shown to be the chief cause of continued herd infection.

The next important factor, in the order of frequency, was the virulence and high incidence of the initial infection. This was listed as the cause in 15 percent of the cases. The presence of suspects in the herd was the cause of further cases in about 12 percent. Although the second and third factors are to a large extent beyond the control of the herd owner, losses from the first factor can be reduced materially by purchasing for replacement only those animals that are from so-called negative herds or cattle passing the test and held away from the herd until a second negative test is obtained. The three factors are considered to be the most important causes of infection found in herds after several official tests.

Other reported factors that have a bearing on recurrences of the disease, but to a much smaller degree, are: Poorly drained pastures and barnlots; infection from neighboring herds; dark, damp, insanitary barns and dirt floors; watering from pools in pasture; nonreacting aborters; failure to clean and disinfect following removal of aborting animals; too long intervals between tests; failure to segregate before and after calving; failure to dispose of aborters and reactors; use of bull from infected herd; reacting animals of other classes running with herds; access to manure piles or manure spread on pastures; feeding on ground; lack of information imparted to farmers; use of same implements for manure and feed; and ensilage contaminated by barn drainings into trench silos.

Senator TYDINGS. That is all I have, Senator.

Dr. MOHLER. The reason I refer to that, Mr. Chairman, is that since Senator Tydings has just come in I wanted to say that his State recently has appropriated $200,000 for indemnities in addition to the four States that I mentioned before the House Committee.

Senator RUSSELL. That makes 5 of the 48 cooperating with your Bureau in combating this disease?

Dr. MOHLER. In addition, Delaware came in since that hearing with $60,00 for the biennium, and the State of Washington with $200,000 for two years. So now, instead of being four, in the interval since the hearings before the House committee, there are three additional States providing indemnity funds, which makes seven. Besides, Pennsylvania has pending an $80,000 appropriation for 2 years and New York State $1,000,000 per year; because their legislature meets every year, while the other States have mostly biennial meetings. Wisconsin also has a bill now pending for $150,000 per year but they have not gone further than the introduction of the bill.

Senator TYDINGS. Do you think you are going to stamp it out eventually or just reduce it to the irreducible minimum?

Dr. MOHLER. I think if we can reduce it to the irreducible minimum that will be entirely satisfactory.

Senator TYDINGS. What do you think that irreducible minimum is, in percentage?

Dr. MOHLER. The irreducible minimum would be a point where there would be only a negligible spread of disease within the United

States. With our present knowledge we probably cannot stop infection from Mexico or from Canada or from bringing it on forage from some foreign point. When you talk about the irreducible minimum, that leaves in my mind rather a vague percentage.

Senator TOWNSEND. Do the farmers generally cooperate?

Dr. MOHLER. Very markedly. There are over half a million cattle now on the waiting list, whose owners would like to have us get to their farms as soon as possible to combat the disease. But of course we meet with opposition. Everything in this line is not entirely smooth. But we have not had the opposition in Bang's disease that we had in tick eradication or in the early days of tuberculin testing, or when we stamped out foot and mouth disease. You do not get 100 percent smooth operation in any of these endeavors, but it is remarkable how much encouragement these farmers are extending to us in trying to get their cattle tested and in clearing up this disease.

Senator TYDINGS. I did not hear your opening remarks, and just in a sentence may I ask you what is the percentage of this disease with reference to the total population of cattle-what was it when you started and what is the percentage of disease today?

Dr. MOHLER. We started this work, you remember, in July 1934, and the first year the percentage of the original tests showed approximately 15 percent reactors. In the last year that percentage has been reduced to about 6 percent.

Senator TYDINGS. So you have wiped out, you think, 9 percent of the disease?

Dr. MOHLER. No; because this average of 6 percent includes the new herds that have not been tested previously. You see, we are combining the first test cases with the second and third and fourth retests. But the original tests showed an average of 15 percent. We are down to 6 percent now, but we are constantly going into new badly infected herds that have never been tested before. We only have 7,390,000 cattle under our supervision, and there are about 48,000,000 breeding cattle to be tested.

Senator RUSSELL. This appropriation that is carried in this bill, approximately 144 million dollars is the unexpended balance of what fund? I want to get that clear in my mind.

Mr. JUMP. It is the unexpended balance of a combination fund that Congress established last year when it reappropriated the unexpended balance of the $10,000,000 appropriated by section 37 of the A. A. A. amendment act of August 24, 1935. Section 37 authorizes a $40,000,000 appropriation, and appropriated $10,000,000 outright.

Senator RUSSELL. The Jones-Connally Act?

Mr. JUMP. No, but the Jones-Connally balances are also in there. That is why I referred to it as a combination fund. Both the section 37 and the Jones-Connally balances were drawn upon and combined, and this reappropriation in the bill for next year is a further reappropriation of the combined unexpended balances of the original Jones-Connally Act $150,000,000 and of the $10,000,000 appropriated in section 37 of the A. A. A. amendment.

Senator RUSSELL. Approximately how much of that unexpended balance will those two funds contain after this bill is enacted, if it goes through in its present form?

Mr. JUMP. My recollection is, Senator Russell, about $8,000,000. I would have to check on that-some place between 7 and 10 million. The money is still being used, but I think it will be between 7 and 10 million dollars. It may run slightly higher, dependent upon this year's expenditures.

Senator RUSSELL. Dr. Mohler, have you been giving any thought to the amount the States will be required to contribute to this work. as they have on nearly all other work of your Bureau? I understand the Federal Government now pays for all the inspection, the entire expense, and what you get out of the States is just out of the goodness of their hearts and their desire to see an intensive campaign waged in their States.

Mr. MOHLER. That is to the extent of a $25 limitation for grade animals and $50 for pure-bred registered animals. The States do not cooperate at all in indemnities, except in these four States I mentioned earlier, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Virginia. In addition are the three States that have come in recently, and other States will come in shortly. If you recall the testimony before the House committee, several members wanted to know how long it would take to clean up this disease at the present rate and under the present conditions. I told them that unless the States came in like they did on tuberculosis and appropriated a certain amount of money to help the Federal Government it would be at least 20 years. Senator RUSSELL. Well, they are not being required to contribute to this, and I am of the opinion that before we make an appropriation for next year these unexpended balance will be exhausted and I think the Department of Agriculture should give consideration to requiring the State to do something.

Senator TYDINGS. You mean in this bill?

Senator RUSSELL. Not in this bill. This is an unexpended balance. I fought that out last year and was voted down. But there will not be any unexpended balance next year. It will be an appropriation. for a new fund.

Senator TYDINGS. Is there any way that we could write a limitation in this bill in such a way that we would put the States on notice that Congress hereafter would make it a requirement, because some of these legislatures only meet once every 2 years, and we always run into the difficulty of not being able to notify them, and then we get into the position where a large percentage of them do not meet, and if there is any way-I am sympathetic with your idea-if there is any way that you can serve notice on them that it was going to be done, the problem of doing it would be simplified considerably. Senator RUSSELL. That would be a rather unusual limitation.

Senator TYDINGS. Could you take for the year so much appropriated for the fiscal year ending so and so, 1938, but thereafter to be matched by 25 or 50 percent? It would not be binding on that appropriation, but it would be indicative in your Department of the wish of Congress.

Senator RUSSELL. The legislation would be subject to a point of order.

Senator SMITH of South Carolina. Yes; it would.

Senator TYDINGS. I do not believe anybody would object to it. At least we would show them that Congress was interested. Dr. MOHLER. It would at least be informative.