NEW HAMPSHIRE

Transfers to Soil Conservation Service and value of practices carried out

Mr. SLAYTON. For the year 1954, that would be figured at 4.2 percent transferred to the Soil Conservation Service; 1955, 3.1 percent; 1956, 3.6 percent.

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Slayton, we are glad to have your statement and I will take a little time to try to explain to you our experience with this 5 percent.

I told some folks who preceded you that when this 5-percent transfer was written into the law, ACP had farmers checking work done by SCS technicians.

Thus we had two sets of people doing the same work, with a layman or farmer passing on engineers' structures before payment. It just created dissension between SCS and ACP. The Congress felt that it was unsound.

There is another very practical side to this. When we told SCS to do the work, it was hard to get anybody to do work, as you know, unless you paid them. SCS' primary responsibility is this farm planning, as you know, and, if we had not provided for transfer funds for that work, all the work that ACP wanted out of SCS in a short time, would wait until the last. The SCS man would do his other work and since he would be doing this for you free, he would get around to you last.

This is a very practical thing in the Congress and you will not find anyone in the country stronger for the ACP than the folks on this committee. We have had to fight nearly every year to restore funds for ACP. One year it was from the Budget and the next year from the American Farm Bureau, and sometimes from others. We have always had that fight. I have been here and spoken on the floor by the hour trying to save this thing. Several times it was saved by only 2 or 3 votes.

You believe in the ACP. But in Congress, with 435 Members, you have a lot of them wrapped in SCS who do not especially care for ACP. In other words, to save the ACP we have had to use all of the votes that we could get, including those primarily for SCS. In my own judgment, the SCS interest in that 5 percent in your bill has enabled us to save your program 2 or 3 times.

I mention that to show you that there are several angles to this thing that might not be apparent at the local level. If you did not have it within your power to determine whether you would pay that SCS man or not, but had to look to him to serve you when he got around to it, knowing how other things work, it would be a long time before he got around to it, since his primary job is the other work. I do not mean this as a lecture, and we are glad to have your viewpoint, but I did want you to understand the reasons behind this.

Mr. SLAYTON. I can appreciate your feeling, too, that we might wait until the last minute for some work that we needed done.

Mr. WHITTEN. If you do not pay him, that has been my experience.
Mr. SLAYTON. It can work both ways.

Mr. WHITTEN. The paying customers come first, you know.
Mr. SLAYTON. That is right.

Mr. WHITTEN. We do appreciate your appearance and appreciate your coming over.

Mr. Bass. Mr. Chairman, before we leave, I want to add to what Mr. Slayton had to say. I have been around in my home State of New Hampshire and have seen the ACP program in operation, and several of the farmers around there, and I certainly subscribe to what Mr. Slayton just said.

Mr. WHITTEN. I think it is ridiculous for the Budget Bureau to try to cut the ACP program in half when it is participated in by a million and a quarter farmers and the same Budget. Bureau recommends spending $450 million on the conservation reserve with less than 100,000 farmers.

Mr. BASS. Both Mr. Slayton and I would like to express our appreciation to you and this hard-working committee for giving us this time and the privilege of testifying.

Mr. WHITTEN. Thank you. It is a pleasure to have you both.

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE

WITNESSES

R. P. COLMER, NATIONAL PLANT BOARD

F. HERBERT GATES, CHIEF OF THE DIVISION OF PLANT INDUSTRY, COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

FRANK A. SORACI, DIRECTOR OF PLANT INDUSTRY, NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

F. L. AYERS, RETIRING PLANT COMMISSIONER, STATE OF FLORIDA HAL JONES, FLORIDA

Mr. WHITTEN. We are glad to have with us Mr. R. P. Colmer, who is from the good State of Mississippi, and a longtime friend of mine. We are glad to have you with us, Mr. Colmer. I trust you will introduce your associates.

Mr. COLMER. Thank you, Mr. Whitten. It is always a pleasure to appear before your committee and have an opportunity to discuss with you the crops regulatory program. This is the reverse this afternoon. I am with Mr. Gates, the new chairman of the National Plant Board; Mr. Soraci, of New Jersey, representing the eastern plant board; and Mr. Ayers, of the great State of Florida.

Mr. WHITTEN. You might proceed as you would like, then, with your statement.

STATEMENT OF MR. F. HERBERT GATES

Mr. GATES. We have met before, I am sure.

Mr. WHITTEN. If it is agreeable with you, you might wish to include your statement in the record as though presented, and talk to us. You may follow any course you like.

Mr. GATES. If you don't mind, I will present it.

My name is F. Herbert Gates, chief of the division of plant industry, Colorado Department of Agriculture.

I appear before you today as chairman of the National Plant Board and past chairman of the western plant board, the official organization of the plant pest control and quarantine officials of the national regional boards.

I have been delegated by the national and western plant boards to discuss the crop regulatory problems of the research services of the Department of Agriculture to recommend that your honorable body considers with all seriousness these problems and their impact on the economy of the agriculture of the United States. The plant boards are very appreciative of the interest shown in research and education in the agricultural problems and we are fully aware of the necessity of this research and education; however, we of the plant boards believe that research and education is not sufficient in itself and that provisions must be made for controls if this research and education is to be effective.

It is not necessary to take more of your valuable time but will submit, what we are pleased to call, fact sheets, on those problems directly relating to agriculture. Those control programs that are in association with other sections of the country, we, of course, can only rely upon the judgment and recommendations of the opinions of control fficials from those areas. We have had ample time to review these

recommendations and feel that they are indeed modest and if the plant boards were privileged to know the intimate details of these programs we might suggest an increase in the appropriations. I wish to submit the fact sheet of the control programs as they concern the appropriations of the plant pest control and plant quarantine branches of the Agricultural Research Services.

(The fact sheet is as follows:)

BARBERRY ERADICATION, CONTROL OF RUST OF SMALL GRAINS

Barberry eradication necessary for the control of rust of small grains is a control program of importance to all grain-growing areas. Stem rust is the oldest and most destructive plant disease affecting wheat, oats, barley, and rye. A program of barberry eradication has been a State-Federal cooperative program for more than 20 years, and as a result of the eradication of barberrys the loss to small grains by rust has been greatly reduced with the exception of periodicals (flareups) that have occasioned during this period. At the present time there is no commercial variety of wheat that is immune from attack by rust. This has been clearly demonstrated by the newly identified Race 15-B, 15-B has developed since 1950 and is now known to occur and has become destructive in practically all wheat-growing areas.

It has been reported that in one season loss to durum wheat in the Dakotas and Minnesota was 10 million bushels. Every commercial variety of wheat, both winter and spring, grown anywhere in the United States and Canada is susceptible to this rust. The eradication of barberry must continue if the United States is to keep control of stem rust in the wheat-growing areas. More than 3 billion bushels of small grain are grown each year in the United States. It might be said that the small-grain industry is the backbone of the economy of the United States. Any serious interruption to this industry must not be permitted to occur.

The accomplishments in the breeding of so-called rust-resisting varieties is commendable and should be pursued with great intensity in the future. This breeding of the so-called rust-resistant varieties, however, is not enough; eradication of barberry is absolutely essential. It has been estimated that as a result of the barberry eradication programs of the past years that perhaps 90 percent of the barberry bushes have been eradicated. This program of eradication must continue until such a time as the threat to the small-grain crop is on a standby basis.

The regional plant boards recommend that an appropriation of not less than $680,000 be appropriated in the consideration of the present budget.

CITRUS BLACKFLY AND MEXICAN FRUITFLY CONTROL

Citrus blackfly and Mexican fruitfly at the present appear to be primarily insects of citrus fruits; however, there is no assurance that this is an established fact. There are insects in the same family that have posed threats to other fruits. It is, also, to be recognized that the economy of the citrus areas may at times determine the economy of other sections of the United States. The only need for the control of citrus blackfly and Mexican fruitfly is very moderate when evaluated against the overall value.

The National Plant Board requests that the appropriation of $385,000 be approved.

GOLDEN NEMATODE CONTROL

The National Plant Board is very much concerned with the infestations as they exist in certain areas by golden nematode. This insect, at present, is not known to exist in those States of the western plant board, however, the production of potatoes in this area is one of major importance and in many sections is the fundamental activity of prosperity, however due to the great distance of the consuming market, insect pests and plant diseases, now present and other economic influences; potato production in the Western States cannot survive under the penalty of more pests or diseases.

The National Plant Board resists any importation of any new pests or diseases and recommends an appropriation of $328,000 for the continuation of the golden nematode control program.

GYPSY MOTH CONTROL

It appears to members of the plant boards that the support of funds for gypsy moth control is evident if one reviews the past activities of this program. This program must be continued if the economy of the Northeastern States is to be preserved. Recent and new outbreaks of the infestation of gypsy moth demonstrates clearly the need for the assistance of controls and surveys.

The National Plant Board recommends that sufficient funds be appropriated to continue the activities of this program; looking forward to the eradication of this serious pest.

HALL SCALE ERADICATION

The infestations of Hall scale in the United States is attributed to activities of the Federal department. It seems apparent that if the control programs as initiated against Hall scale are continued, that Hall scale may be eradicated. The National Plant Board recommends an appropriation of not less than $70,000 for the continuance of the eradication of Hall scale.

INSECT DETECTION AND ADVISORY SERVICE

The National and Western Plant Boards recommend and believe that it is necessary that not less than $310,300 be appropriated for the very valuable activities of the insect detection and advisory service.

This service in its short period of existence had demonstrated its value and it would appear that more emphasis must be placed on early detection of infestations especially those that may be imported on plant material from foreign lands. An illustration may suffice in the introduction and establishment of the Khapra beetle in the States of Arizona, California, and New Mexico.

INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT

The plant boards approve the appropriation of $659,300 for this very valuable contributory service. Under the State provisions of this activity 40 States now have identical legislation and because of this Federal and State legislation it is quite evident that the manufacture, sale, and distribution of insecticides is today as ethical, honest, and sincere as are the similar activities in the food and drug administration or any other kindred service.

The farm population, today can purchase with confidence insecticides offered for sale. This confidence, including the assurance of insect and disease control, knowledge of toxicity for the protection of human life, residue tolerances for the protection of the producing public and the elimination of the questionable pesticides.

JAPANESE BEETLE CONTROL

Japanese beetle has not as yet become a problem of the members of the western plant board. We are all familiar with the program, however, and desire that all control projects be processed with vigor in the areas of infestations and that this insect not be permited to become established in any additional areas.

The National Plant Board realizing this activity as essential requests their appropriation of not less than $543,000.

PEACH MOSAIC DISEASE

Peach mosaic is a serious disease of peach, first recognized in 1931 in Texas and now known to be present in the States of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Texas.

The disease is caused by a virus which is transmitted from diseased to healthy trees by a microscopic eriophyid mite. In the spring newly formed leaves on affected trees become mottled with yellow and short internodes with profuse branching are produced. The surface of the fruit in many varieties is irregular and bumpy. The commercial value of an infected planting may be destroyed within 3 to 6 years. At one time 30,000 infected trees were known to be present in each of the States of California and Colorado. In addition to peaches, the disease affects almond, apricot, nectarine and plum.

The objectives of this program are: (1) preventing further spread of the disease by adequate nursery and budwood inspection and uniform State quarantine enforcement; (2) assistance to growers in reducing of the incidence of the disease in infected commercial areas and (3) conducting surveys for the disease