May we take a little credit. We have had the Department people before us, and we have been making these points to them.

Mr. COOLEY. They must have heard Bob Poage's statement there. Mr. WHITTEN. You will be able to release Bob's statement prior to the hearing, but we claim credit because we pointed it out. There is plenty to be done in this field.

Mr. POAGE. The chairman has expressed better than I could the soundness of these programs and I recognize full well that it is the pressure this subcommittee has been able to put on this Department that has doubtless resulted in their willingness to at least increase.

Frankly I don't think those increases are adequate. I think that the increases should go substantially higher than that. I don't advocate a great multimillion dollar program because I want this program to remain sound and one that the farmers will support and not come back and say, "What did that bunch of crackpots spend this money for?"

I want them to say that they spent it to protect our farms downstream. I want them to say that they spent it to provide adequate water supplies. I want them to say that it was money well spent, and it can be said just as it has been said so far, I think in we could adequately, could reasonably spend in the neighborhood of $50 million to $75 million on each of these programs and spend the money intelligently.

Mr. WHITTEN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. POAGE. I will say on the record that I very much appreciate the attitude of this committee and the effectiveness of this committee in getting some concessions on the part of the Department. I don't think that there is any need further for us to go into the question of the merits. I know this committee is as familiar with the merits as anybody else. I simply want to repeat, that we want you to understand that the whole Agricultural Committee, as the chairman of that great committee has pointed out, and those of us from the Southwest as well as those from the humid areas, favor the whole conservation program, including the use of fertilizers, including those things that are important to the East. Frankly, we hope some day they will be important to us, too, and we want to especially emphasize the thing that we think is of special importance to our area and that is the development of this flood prevention and upstream work.

Mr. WHITTEN. Well, we certainly wish to thank you, gentlemen. We speak together on the floor and work for these things, but it is helpful to us to have these statements in our hearings.

Mr. COOLEY. Thank you, gentlemen, very much. We appreciate your hearing us.

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE

WITNESSES

L. Y. BALLENTINE, COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF NORTH CAROLINA, ACCOMPANIED BY:

BYRON G. ALLEN, COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF MINNESOTA STILLMAN J. STANARD, DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE OF ILLINOIS PHIL CAMPBELL, COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF GEORGIA GEORGE H. CHICK, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF MAINE, AND FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARKETING OFFICIALS

PHILLIP ALAMPI, SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE OF NEW JERSEY, AND CHAIRMAN OF THE MARKETING COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE DEPARTMENTS OF AGRICULTURE DANIEL J. CAREY, COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF NEW YORK S. W. BOX, DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF MARKETS, REPRESENTING COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF MISSISSIPPI, SI CORLEY C. HAROLD BRAY, DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF MARKETS, REPRESENTING COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF KENTUCKY, BEN J. BUTLER

RICHARD D. CHUMNEY, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE OF VIRGINIA, REPRESENTING COMMISSIONER OF AGRICUTURE, PARKE C. BRINKLEY

LEONARD ROUSE, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT TO COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE, KENTUCKY

Mr. WHITTEN. We are glad to have Mr. L. Y. Ballentine and his group representing the State departments of agriculture before the

committee.

Mr. Ballentine, we would like you to present your associates to the committee for the benefit of the members and for the reporter. Mr. BALLENTINE. Thank you, very much.

My name is L. Y. Ballentine, commissioner of agriculture of North Carolina. I have with me the commissioners of agriculture or their representatives from nine other States, and would like to introduce them to you:

Byron G. Allen, commissioner of agriculture of Minnesota.
Stillman J. Stanard, director of agriculture of Illinois.

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Vursell wanted to reserve the right to introduce him. He talked to me on the side; I say that so Mr. Stanard will know Mr. Vursell is on the lookout.

Mr. VURSELL. He is my boy.

Mr. BALLENTINE. Phil Campbell, commissioner of agriculture of Georgia.

George H. Chick, deputy commissioner of agriculture of Maine, and former president of the National Association of Marketing Officials.

Phillip Alampi, secretary of agriculture of New Jersey, and chairman of the marketing committee of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture.

Daniel J. Carey, commissioner of agriculture of New York.

S. W. Box, director of the division of markets representing commissioner of agriculture of Mississippi, Si Corley.

:

C. Harold Bray, director of the division of markets representing commissioner of agriculture of Kentucky, Ben J. Butler.

Richard D. Chumney, assistant commissioner of agriculture of Virginia, representing Commissioner of Agriculture Parke C. Brinkley.

Leonard Rouse, administrative assistant to commissioner of agriculture of Kentucky.

Mr. Chairman, in a brief statement, if you please, I would like to say we represent 43 States and Territories, participating in the matching fund marketing service program, and are here to request increased tunds for this work as instructed by the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture in Resolution No. 2 of its most recent annual meeting held in Portsmouth, N. H., the first of October, and I read the resolution:

Be it resolved by the National Association of Commissioners, Secretaries and Directors of Agriculture, meeting at Portsmouth, N. H., September 29 through October 3, 1957, that the Secretary of Agriculture be hereby petitioned to make adequate budgetary requests for the matched-fund program carried on with State departments of agriculture, or State marketing agencies in order that this important program may be conducted in the progressive manner contemplated by the original enactment.

Be it further resolved, That this resolution be called to the attention of the chairman of the Agricultural Subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee of both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

That concludes the resolution. I would like to make this further statement.

In order to enable the Federal Government to match the funds that have been made available by the States for this program, we seek an appropriation of $1,600,000 for payments to States, Territories and possessions, and in order that the Agricultural Marketing Service may more adequately serve the needs of the participating States and Territories by providing much needed technical service in setting up and conducting our marketing projects in the State, we also request an increase of $50,000 in the appropriation of the Agricultural Marketing Service for the administration and coordination of the State programs. This request will be supported by statements by each of the representatives here and by written statements which we would like to offer for the record.

We recognize that we have been allotted only 30 minutes of time, and we will do our best to confine our remarks to that time limit.

At the conclusion of this statement, we would welcome any questions that members of the committee may have to offer.

I am asking that Mr. Byron Allen, of the State of Minnesota, make the first statement since his time is limited due to schedule to leave Washington.

Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, it so happens that Mr. Allen is an old and long-time friend of mine. I have known Mr. Allen for a good many years and during all of that time, I have known how interested he has been in agriculture. He has a number of farms in which he is interested. He is very close to the soil, and he certainly keeps in very close touch with agriculture in our State as well as in the country.

I think it is a real privilege to have Mr. Allen before this committee today, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. WHITTEN. Thank you, Mr. Marshall.

Mr. ANDERSEN. Mr. Chairman, I would also like to join in welcoming Mr. Allen before us today. I, too, have known of his work through the years.

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you.

Mr. WHITTEN. I would like to say to Mr. Allen that I think the farmers of America and the Congress of the United States are fortunate indeed in having 2 Minnesotans on this committee, 1 a Democrat and 1 a Republican. In the years that I have served on this committee there have never been 2 men who looked at matters more objectively or worked harder for agriculture than these 2 gentlemen, without reference to any politics whatsoever.

Mr. MARSHALL. Thank you.

Mr. NATCHER. Mr. Chairman, would you yield at that point?

I would like to join with you in your statement as to my good friends, Representative Marshall and Representative Andersen.

As I have said on the floor on more than one occasion, these two men are certainly friends of agriculture and the people in Minnesota should be proud of both of them.

Mr. ALLEN. We are, sir.

STATEMENT OF BYRON G. ALLEN

Mr. Chairman, I have before me a rather long statement for the short period that is allowed here today, that I will not read but will want to give some of the highlights in this statement and then file it with the clerk for inclusion in the record.

Mr. WHITTEN. All right, Mr. Allen.

Mr. ALLEN. We all realize this is a very busy committee, and it is best to highlight this.

In connection with highlighting this statement which I will file with the clerk, I would like to point up to the fact that the various State departments of agriculture in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture have 125 matching fund marketing service projects and that they fall actually into 4 major fields. One of them is the fruit and vegetable field in which 21 States have marketing service programs on fruits and vegetables. Minnesota happens to be one of those States. Of this number, 24 are engaged in activities to improve quality, 19 to expand outlets, 11 to improve facilities and increase efficiency, and 19 are to provide basic new data and marketing information for new producers and processors.

In the field of dairy products which our State is very much interested in, we have rather broad marketing service work underway in 20 of the States and Territories; 10 of these are engaged in quality improvement. Minnesota is 1 of those States, 1 of these 10. And among our current projects is a mobile bacteriological laboratory which, incidentally, this past year has been working in your district, Mr. Marshall, and they plan next season to probably move into Congressman Andersen's district. This bacteriological laboratory and its technical staff work with the creamery and processing staff, work with the people of the State to improve their quality and thereby command a better market in Minnesota's products in the dairy field, 82 percent of which have to be marketed outside the boundaries of State.

In the poultry and egg field, a total of 24 States are working in this particular branch of endeavor, 20 are in the quality improvement field, 12 are in the expanding outlets field, 7 are in improving efficiency in terms of the marketing procedure, and 10 are providing marketing information.

When I give these figures, I am pointing up the fact that some of the States are carrying on in several of the fields enumerated.

In the livestock field, 25 of the States and Territories are conducting marketing and service programs relating to livestock. I am sure that my colleague, Mr. Stanard, of Illinois, will have the best story to tell in this particular field, Illinois being such a great livestock marketing center.

In the grain field, the United States Department of Agriculture, acting under the authorization of the Congress of the United States, has been working to improve the quality of grain as it hits the market, particularly from the standpoint of contamination by insects and rodents.

Our neighboring State of North Dakota has a very extensive project underway in improving quality programs and eliminating rodent contamination in the wheat area of that State.

There is also work being done over the United States in the grain field on the matter of drying facilities and education in the handling of grain so that there shall not be deterioration in the wet years of harvest such as we have had this past year.

The cotton States are working on programs designed to improve ginning and on the marketing operations. These are being carried on in Louisiana, North Carolina, and Virginia.

The States of North Carolina and West Virginia, for example, are providing assistance to their tobacco farmers through actual demonstration of the proper methods of sorting and otherwise preparing tobacco for the market.

The State departments of agriculture provided marketing service to assist producers and marketing agencies in improving marketing of such minor agricultural products as grass seeds, honey, maple sirup, dry beans and, forest products.

In that connection, I would like to point up that the State of Minnesota has an extensive field of work in the minor agricultural products; for example, maple sirup, wild rice, and commodities of that sort.

I am sure, Mr. Marshall, you are familiar with the work now being done in the State of Minnesota in the maple-sirup field among some of your own constituents on the Indian lands.

With that brief summary, I would present two copies to the clerk. (The prepared statement of Mr. Byron G. Allen, commissioner of agriculture of Minnesota, is as follows:)

TYPES OF MARKETING SERVICE WORK BEING DONE

The 125 matching fund marketing service projects being carried on in the States fall into 4 major fields. These are expanding market outlets, maintaining product quality, reducing marketing costs through improving facilities and equipment, and providing new basic data and market information. The work involves all the major commodities and many of those of less importance nationally, but important to the area where the work is being done. Perhaps the best way to show what the States are doing in this program is by pointing out some of the activities by commodities, as reported by the States concerned.