페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

available so that they would not force cattle on the market and flood it.

However, instead of providing feed in that area so as to try to hold off those cattle from an already flooded market, he went into the market and started buying cows which added more demand which created some more selling. That is based on my experience and it led me to believe that the worst thing you could do in an already flooded market was to add more cows.

And I thought that you would save money if, instead of adding to the purchases, you had made the feed immediately available to enable those farmers to hold their cattle off the market.

Mr. PAARLBERG. We did several things at that time. We made credit available to those people. We made feed available to those who could hold their cattle. We had a purchase program and we bought his beef and I submit that all three of these things were helpful.

Mr. WHITTEN. Are there any further questions?
Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes.

SURPLUS FOODS FOR INSTITUTIONS

Listening to the discussion about the school program, do you under any of your programs reimburse any institutions which house the senior citizens, the old men, are those institutions run by the welfare agencies or by other interested groups! Mr. LENNARTSON. Are you speaking about milk! Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes.

Mr. LENNARTSON. No, the Special Milk law authorizes only a program for children of high-school age or under.

With respect to the old-age homes, and so on—the nonprofit institutions—the surplus foods are available to them and would be available to welfare agencies such as some of those in the city of New York where they have people coming to them to spend the day.

Mr. SANTANGELO. I suspected you run into quite a variety of institutions like that-you do feed them?

Mr. LENNARTSON. Yes.
Mr. SANTANGELO. They do feed them?
Mr. LENNARTSON. They do feed them.
Mr. SANTANGELO. Nonprofit?
Mr. LENNARTSON. Yes.
Mr. SANTANGELO. The chances are that they probably participate?

Mr. Davis. They do have a situation in the State of New York that is a little bit different from the purpose of these donationswhere the organization goes beyond just the care of needy old persons. If the old persons or older person is needy, if the institution is set up for the purpose of caring for needy persons they are eligible for the surplus commodities.

Mr. SANTANGELO. But not in the special milk fund?
Mr. Dayis. No, sir; that is for children only.

Mr. SANTANGELO. It might be a good idea to cover them because I understand the older aged people need milk as much as the younger people.

Mr. Davis. They would be getting the nonfat dry milk in those institutions and cheese and they have been getting butter as well as flour, cornmeal, rice and some of the other commodities.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Thank you very much.

Mr. WHITTEN. We wish to thank all of you gentlemen. We do have our differences of view because feelings are very strong on the subject. But we hope that the differences will stay the way they are, on principle and nothing else.

Mr. LENNARTSON. We very deeply appreciate the interest that you folks have always reflected in the programs that we are responsible for. We are happy to appear before you, and I mean that sincerely.

AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM

WITNESSES

ERVIN L. PETERSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE PAUL M. KOGER, ADMINISTRATOR, AGRICULTURAL CONSERVA

TION PROGRAM SERVICE FRED G. RITCHIE, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, AGRICULTURAL

CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE JAMES M. HUNT, DIRECTOR, PROGRAM ANALYSIS DIVISION,

AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE H. LAURENCE MANWARING, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, PRODUC

TION ADJUSTMENT, COMMODITY STABILIZATION SERVICE CHARLES L. GRANT, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND BUDGET OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

[blocks in formation]

Program by activities:
Direct obligations:

1. Cost-sharing assistance to farmers.
2. Repayment of loans from Commodity Credit Cor-

poration..-

Total direct obligations..
Obligations from amounts advanced by Commodity

Credit Corporation: Cost-sharing assistance to farmers.. Reimbursable obligations: Cost-sharing assistance farmers...

[blocks in formation]

to

Total obligations
Financing:

Unobligated balance brought forward..
Advances and reimbursements from-

Commodity Credit Corporation (loan).
Other accounts..

Non-Federal sources (7 U.S. C. 1387).
Recovery of prior year obligations..
Unobligated balance carried forward..

Appropriation (new obligational authority)..

457, 000 444,000 264, 535, 118 251, 459, 939

444, 000 255, 444, 000

-16, 593

-15, 939
--36, 500,000 -39,000,000

-144, 869 -115, 000
-312, 131 -329, 000
-77, 464

15, 939
227, 500,000 212,000,000

-20, 000, 000

- 115, 000 -329, 000

235, 000,000

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE
Total number of permanent positions.
Average number of all employees..
Number of employees at end of year.
Å Ferage GS grade and salary..
Direct obligations:
01 Personal services:

Permanent positions..
Other personal services.

Total personal services.
12 Travel
03 Transportation of things
04 Communication services
16 Printing and reproduction.
07 Other contractual services:

Advances to "Administrative expenses, sec. 392,

Agricultural Adjustment 938" (7 U.S.C.

1392)

Services performed by other agencies 08 Supplies and materials. 09 Equipment 11 Grants, subsidies, and contributions

Cost-sharing assistance 15 Taxes and assessments.

Total direct obligations.. Reimbursable obligations: 11 Grants, subsidies, and contributions..

Total, Agricultural Conservation Program Service

341, 294
27, 246
2,421
6,693
13, 730

$425, 570

1,630 427, 200 46, 900 1. 200 6,900 8,000

$427, 765

1, 645 429, 410 43, 510 1,200 6, 900 8,000

[blocks in formation]

ALLOTMENT ACCOUNTS

[blocks in formation]

Total number of permanent positions.
Full-time equivalent of all other positions.
Average number of all employees..
Number of employees at end of year.
Average GS grade and salary..
01 Personal services:

Permanent positions..
Positions other than permanent.
Other personal services.

Total personal services.
12 Travel
& Transportation of things.
04 Communication services
6 Rents and utility services.
06 Printing and reproduction.
07 Other contractual services.

Advanced to

“Administrative expenses, sec. 392, Agricultural

Adjustment Act of 1938" (7 U. S. c. 1392).
“Local administration, sec. 388, Agricultural

Adjustment Act of 1938" (7. U. S. C. 1388).
Services performed by other agencies.
Supplies and materials.
19 Equipment..
11 Grants, subsidies, and contributions.
13 Refunds, awards, and indemnities.
1 Taxes and assessments...

[blocks in formation]

Total, allotment accounts...

Total obligations..
Obligations are distributed as follows:

Agricultural Conservation Program Service.
Corninodity Stabilization Service.
Forest Service..

24, 883, 101

25, 186, 750 251, 459, 939

25, 186, 750 255, 444, 000

264, 535, 118

239, 652, 017
24,771, 880

111, 221

226, 273, 189
25,062, 960

123, 790

230, 257, 250 25,062, 960

123, 790

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Secretary, now we come to the agricultural conservation program, which is also under your leadership.

JUSTIFICATION OF THE ESTIMATES Mr. WHITTEN. I would like pages 264 through 275 of the justifications, volume 1, included in the record at this point.

(The pages referred to follow:)

AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE

PURPOSE STATEMENT The agricultural conservation program is authorized by the provisions of sections 7 to 16 (a), inclusive, and section 17 of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, as amended. The purposes of the

act include (1) restoring and improving soil fertility, (2) reducing erosion caused by wind and water, and (3) conserving water on land. To achieve these objectives, the Agricultural Conservation Program Service offers cost-sharing assistance to individual farmers and ranchers in all of the 48 States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands for carrying out approved soil-building and soil-and-water conserving practices on their farms. This assistance represents only a part of the cost of performing the practice. The farmer bears the balance of the cost and in addition supplies the labor necessary to carry out the practice. Allocations are made to States based upon conservation needs.

Cost-sharing assistance is offered only for the practices considered necessary to meet the most urgently needed conservation problems of the farm, which would not otherwise be carried out to the extent needed. To be eligible for cost-sharing the farmer must make application therefor before beginning the practice.

Conservation measures for which cost-sharing assistance is offered, include practices primarily for:

1. Establishment of permanent protective cover.
2. Improvement and protection of established vegetative cover.
3. Conservation and disposal of water.
4. Establishment of temporary vegetative cover.
5. Temporary protection of soil from wind and water erosion.
Cost-sharing assistance is available in the form of:

1. Partial payment of the purchase price of materials and services needed by the farmer for carrying out approved practices, or

2. Partial reimbursement to farmers who have carried out approved practices at their own expense.

Materials and services are obtained through local private sources where practicable. Rates of assistance vary by practices and by States and areas so as to make the most effective use of available funds.

As of November 30, 1957, the Agricultural Conservation Program Service had 57 full-time employees and 1 part-time employee, all of whom are located in Washington, D. C. Appropriation: Appropriated, 1958.

$212, 000, 000 Budget estimate, 1959..

235, 000, 000

Agricultural conservation program

On direct ap-On program propriation authoriza

basis tion basis

Appropriation Act, 1958 and base for 1959.
Budget estimate, 1959

Change

$212,000,000 $250,000,000 235, 000.000 125,000,000 +23,000,000 -125,000,000

Summary of increase, 1959 (on basis of direct appropriation) Increase to carry out the 1958 program in the amount authorized. +$23,000,000

The agricultural conservation program is operated on a program or crop year basis and cost-sharing assistance is given to farmers upon completion of approved measures. Funds for cash payments earned under the 1957 agricultural conservation program, which closed on December 31, 1957, were made available in the Department of Agriculture and Farm Credit Administration Appropriation Act, 1958. In that act, the Congress also authorized the formulation and administration of a $250 million program for 1958 for which this estimate is submitted.

Project statement (on basis of program authorizations)

[blocks in formation]

1. Cost-sharing assistance to farmers Other program expenses.

Total program expenses...
2. Operating expenses, county committee
expenses:

ASC county committees..
Forest Service

Total county committee expenses.
National and State office expenses:
Agricultural Conservation Program

Service
Commodity Stabilization Service.
ASC State committees
Forest Service

Total National and State office expenses..
Total operating expenses.

Total obligations.
Adjustments:
Difference in amount used for purchase

of conservation materials and services
from prior fiscal year appropriation
for current program and amount used
for such purchases from current fiscal

year.
Received by loan from CCO
Repayment of loan from CCC.
Available for repayment of loan from

CCC...
Appropriation or estimate..

426, 447

599, 484 3, 471, 172

12, 685 4, 509, 788

547, 750

945, 840 3, 516, 235

15, 975

547, 750

945, 840 3, 516, 235

15,975 5,025, 800 24, 698, 000 250,000,000

24, 324, 709 239, 939, 014

5, 025, 800 24, 698, 000 250,000,000

-19, 800,000 - 20,000,000 +24,800,000

+1, 548, 775

-$19, 800,000
-36, 500,000 -39,000,000 +19,000,000
+13,950,000 +1,000,000 +23, 800,000
+8, 562, 211
227, 500,000 212,000,000 +23,000,000

235,000,000

INCREASE

(1) An increase of $23 million on a direct appropriation basis.—The appropriation request for fiscal year 1958 was reduced from $250 million to $212 million, or a reduction of $38 million due to the availability of underearnings in this amount on the 1955 program. An increase of $38 million would normally be required in the 1959 appropriation in order to carry out a 1958 agricultural conservation program of $250 million as authorized by the Congress. However, due primarily to underearnings on the 1956 program only an increase of $23 million is required to carry out the program as authorized. The underearnings will be used to repay part of the 1958 loan from the Commodity Credit Corporation, thereby reducing the amount to be repaid from the 1959 appropriation. Advance authorization for 1959 agricultural conservation program

The Budget proposes an advance authorization of $125 million for cost-sharing payments to farmers who carry out approved soil and water conservation measures on their farms during the 1959 crop year. This reduction of $125 million below the present level of $250 million is proposed because of the general necessity to

« 이전계속 »