tables of the South. Our new crops program would be located in this location. Also, we intend to work on oilseeds.

Mr. WHITTEN. We are opposed to moving oilseed work from New Orleans.

Dr. Shaw. We have had the work on cottonseed at New Orleans, and we had intended to have the cottonseed work done at the southeastern laboratory, along with other oilseed work.

Mr. WHITTEN. Did you not understand the agreement of the Congress—that this was not to be used to transfer work from New Orleans?

Dr. Shaw. I had not understood that, sir.

Mr. WHITTEN. That was the agreement, and we had better get that straight.

You might proceed.

Dr. Shaw. Îhere was a statement in the conferees' report that work on peanut quality would be continued at New Orleans.

Mr. WHITTEN. The agreement was that in creating this new laboratory it was not to supplant or take away from the work at New Orleans.

Dr. Shaw. I had not had that information before, sir.

1965 BUDGET DECREASES

Mr. WHITTEN. Well, you might proceed. What research work is being cut out by the budget that is before you, and where would this be located, and what is the nature of it?

Dr. Shaw. We have a reduction of $264,000 on research, at some small field locations, which is being completed or that is recommended for termination because of lower priority.

Mr. WHITTEN. Would you list those ?

Dr. Shaw. Termination of breeding, nutrition, and management research on marten, foxes, and mink at Peterburg, Alaska, is proposed.

Mr. HORAN. What page?
Dr. Shaw. I am reading from page 33 of the explanatory notes.

We were spending $25,500 at this location and expect to discontinue that work.

Poultry feeding, physiology, and management research at Glendale, Ariz., where we are now spending $40,200, is expected to be eliminated.

Research on the control of water-stargrass and pond weeds at Clarkedale, Ark., where we are spending $14,800, is to be discontinued.

Research on the biology and control of insects affecting tobacco at Quincy, Fla., $14,000, is to be eliminated.

Research on the biology and control of insects and spider mites affecting cotton at Tallulah, La., where we are spending $48,000, would be eliminated.

Studies of gully control procedures for use on the Connecticut River terraces at Durham, N.H., at $22,500 would be eliminated. The research on the isolation, identification, mode of infection and nature and extent of damage by pathogens associated with diseases of white clover at Durham, N.H., where we are spending $13,500, would be eliminated.

Research on irrigated soils at University Park, N. Mex., where we are spending $19,500, would be discontinued.

Research on the biological control and methods of detection of the European chafer and methods of treatment of infested nursery stock at Geneva, N.Y., $11,000, would be discontinued.

Research related to irrigation and to control or modification of wind, water, and soil movement at Mitchell, Nebr., where we are spending $27,500, would be eliminated.

Research on cotton genetics at Brownsville, Tex., where we are spending $14,500, would be discontinued.

And research on biology and control of insects affecting sugarbeets and vegetables at Logan, Utah, $13,000, would be discontinued.

There was also a $50,000 decrease in the budget proposed for the imported fire ant program.

Mr. WHITTEN. Now, I ask this because in many particulars the budget before us is unrealistic, both with regard to the temper of the Congress and with regard to some of the work.

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING RESEARCH

Dr. Shaw, what cuts have been made in the marketing research funds and where are they applied ?

Dr. Shaw. In the Agricultural Marketing Service you mean?
Mr. WHITTEN. Yes. The research phase of it.
Dr. Shaw. Well, they propose to discontinue
Mr. WHITTEN. Is that in your field?
Dr. Shaw. It is not under my direction, no, sir.

Mr. WHITTEN. In other words, you are limited to the Agricultural Researce Service, you and Dr. Brady?

Dr. Shaw. Weil, no. Dr. Brady has

Mr. WHITTEN. Well, he has got three other groups, but he does not have anything to do with marketing research?

Dr. Shaw. Except to coordinate that research with the other.

Mr. WHITTEN. Well, that means to keep you all on speaking terms. What power does he have? That is what you have to judge these things by. Can he knock any heads together? What power does he have?

Dr. Shaw. Perhaps he should answer this.

Mr. WHITTEN. Dr. Brady, what power do you have? The reason I am asking is we have become more and more disturbed about the fact that it looks like we are building up two systems of research here.

The other day I went to get the compilation of the laws having to do with agriculture. I looked and looked and began to think that I had lost what little training I had in bibliography. Then I discovered that you have two separate compilations published by the Department.

So you have nothing to do with marketing research as such in your capacity, Dr. Shaw?

Dr. Shaw. Not administering it. I do have the responsibility of working with Dr. Brady in coordination, which involves examination of their projects, and so on. But I do not have anything to do with determining the projects.

Mr. WHITTEN. Lets take cotton, which is an easier subject than some for me. Just explain cotton starting back with the seed and going all the way from the work on seeds and oils, to work on boll

so on.

weevils, to work on ginning, to work on improving textile strength, to work on cleaning, to work on spinning, to treatment of the fibers for crease resistance, and then on down to storage and handling, and

Dr. Shaw. We have all of the work that has to do with the growing of the crop and up through ginning in what we call our farm research area. That includes, the insecticide work, plant breeding, soils, and agricultural engineering research related to cotton.

Then we also have the work on processing and developing of new uses, treatments and processes, modifications, and so on for cotton.

Mr. WHITTEN. You mean getting cotton where it is highly in demand and very, very serviceable is not marketing?

Dr. Shaw. The development of new products or new finishes for products, anything that changes the characteristics of cotton, is in our field.

Mr. WHITTEN. We are having trouble with this problem. We have to increase the crease resistance. Those in marketing say, "if we had crease-resistant cotton, it would improve marketing greatly: However, funds have been cut out for that kind of research in this budget, have they not, Mr. Grant?

Mr. GRANT. There is a reduction in the budget for transportation and facilities marketing research of the Agricultural Marketing Service. This research does not involve crease resistance and other quality characteristics, however.

1965 BUDGET DECREASES FOR RESEARCH

Mr. WHITTEN. I think I will ask Mr. Grant at this point in the record to show what reductions are in the budget in the field of research, whether it is in ARS or whether it is in XMS or in this other area.

You might also show how long the work had been going on there and what the results have been.

Mr. GRANT. Yes, sir.
(The information requested follows:)

Research reductions budgeted for fiscal year 1965

I. SUMMARY

1. Agricultural Research Service:

Salaries and expenses, research : Completion of work or termination of
lower priority research at small field stations-----

$264, 000 2. Cooperative State Research Service :

Payments and expenses, payments under sec. 204 (b) of the Agricultural

Marketing Act: Payments to the State agricultural experiment sta-
tions for marketing research on agricultural products.-

500,000 3. Statistical Reporting Service: Salaries and expenses, consumer surveys--

94, 000 4. Agricultural Marketing Service:

Marketing research and service: Research on market facility planning

and wholesaling and retailing operations, and research on other
physical handling of farm products in marketing channels...

862, 000 Total.---

1, 720, 000

1 Includes all research program reductions proposed in the 1965 budget for the Department of Agriculture exclusive of the Forest Service.

II. DETAIL 1. Agricultural Research Service: Salaries and expenses, research:

Completion of work or termination of lower priority research at small field stations ($264,000):

27

$25,500

$44, 900

37

40, 200

242, 000

Research at Petersburg has demonstrated the usefulness of antioxidants

and other feed additives in the feeding of fish and fish waste to mink at
high levels without the occurrence of steatitis or yellow-fat disease.
Practical diets based on use of sea fish or sea mammals have been de-
veloped for blue fox, mink, and marten. Other work has shown the
effect of hormones on weight gains in female mink. The station has
provided information on fur farming to the Alaskan government and co-
operated in the establishment of mink enterprises in Alaska. Infor-
mation leading to more efficient fur farming has been disseminated
continuously to the fur farm industry in Alaska, the Pacific Northwest,

and over the United States.
More than 80 publications on research conducted at Glendale have been

published. Much of the work has been concerned with management
and nutrition of poultry under high-temperature, semiarid conditions.
In recent years physiological aspects have been included. Significant
contributions have been made with respect to the effect of restricted
feeding, water consumption, hatchability, the effect of pelleted diets,
and the effect of artificial lighting.
In nutrition studies, the emphasis has been on effect of gossypol content

of cottonseed meal on egg quality, effect of alfalfa saponins on chick
growth, and requirements of vitamins A and D. Protein require-
ments of growing chickens and laying hens under tropical semiarid
conditions have been determined. The effect of antibiotics and other

feed additives have also been studied.
Research was initiated in 1956 to find controls for water-stargrass and

other aquatic and ditchbank weeds of drainage systems in the Missis-
sippi Valley area. Water-stargrass is no longer a serious problem in
the drainage canals of Arkansas having progressively diminished to
minimum infestation because of natural ecological changes in the canals
during the past few years. A great deal of useful information has been
obtained on the botany and physiology of water-stargrass and water
primrose, a serious weed in farm ponds and lakes. Information has
also been obtained on the use of herbicides as soil treatments to control
marginal weeds in farm ponds and on ditch banks. The information
will be of practiral value to farmers and others in controlling certain
aquatic and ditchbank weeds in the Midsouth.

8

Control of water-stargrass and pond

14, 800

97, 900

Quincy, Fla.

Tobacco insect investigations.

47

153, 500

1, 669,600

14,000 | This station has played a major role in the development of measures for

controlling insect pests of importance to the production of cigar tobac

cos for more than 40 years,
One of the best known accomplishments was the early development of

poisoned cornmeal baits for control of tobacco budworm, a remedy
that has been in use with some modifications for more than 30 years.
The laboratory has contributed materially to basic knowledge of the
biology of the tobacco hornworm, which was published in the USDA
Bulletin 896. The work has been especially useful as background in-
formation to guide current studies on nonchemical approaches to the
control of this insect. Publication of USDA Circular 639 covering re-
search at the station on the control of insects affecting cigar-type tobac-
co, has served as a guide to growers of all types of tobacco for more than

20 years.
Other outstanding publications from this research at Quincy include de-

scriptions of the stages and life history of the tobacco flea beetle pub-
lished in 1925, methods of control of aphids on tobacco published in
1952, and an account of the effects of accumulated DDT and TDE

residues in tobacco soils published in 1960.
48,000 The station was selected after a thorough survey was made to find a
place where boll weevil research could

be conducted under heavy in-
festations every year and where conditions for its propagation and sur-

vival were optimal.
Prior to the era of organic insecticides which began about 1945, much of

the progress made in boll weevil control stemmed from the Tallulah
Laboratory. The discovery of calcium arsenate as an effective in-
secticide for cotton insect control was made at Tallulah and practical
methods for its use were worked out there. The development of the
airplane as an agricultural implement stemmed directly from research
on its use in the application of calcium arsenate there. Much of the
machinery for the application of insecticidal dusts to row crops came

about as a result of experiments conducted at the station.
Research there has contributed materially to the development of control

methods for a number of cotton insects other than the boll weevil,
among them the cotton aphid, cotton fleahopper, rapid plant bug,
tarnished plant bug, and other closely related species, field cricket and
several minor pests.
The pioneering work at Tallulah in studying the insect fauna of the
upper air by the use of traps mounted on airplanes is of special signifi.
cance. It adds a great deal to our knowledge of the dispersal of in-
jurious insect pests. This work, conducted from 1926 to 1931 was
published as Technical Bulletin 673.
Particularly outstanding in recent years has been the research conducted
at Tallulah on thrip control, early season boll weevil control, and di-
apause control in the fall of the year.