assurance that there would be adequate appropriations. And, of course, we don't know what the Appropriations Committee is going to do about it. And you do not either.

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Correct.

Mr. JOHNSON. If they give you the $15 million, you will be 62 million short of what you used this y

year.

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. We will have $62 million less than we are spending this year.

Mr. JOHNSON. That is, if we do not give you any money?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Yes.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. If you have $62 million less in fiscal 1959, Dr. Van Houweling, what effect is that going to have on these charts that we looked at? Are some of these lines showing favorable progress going to turn in the other direction if you are going to slow down your eradication work?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. The letter that we submitted to the chairman from Dr. Clarkson, outlined a plan of work which said that the eradication efforts in the certified areas will be continued to further reduce the level of the disease and place those areas closer to our final goal of complete eradication.

In addition to this, we will be able to proceed with area work in about 400 additional counties. In the other parts of the country we will carry on as much of the program as we can with the funds available.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Did you ask the Bureau of the Budget for more than $15 million?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. The Department requested $15 million from the Bureau of the Budget.

Mr. JOHNSON. What did you request?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. The Animal Disease Eradication Division request was for $15 million in addition to what we currently have in the budget.

Mr. JOHNSON. That would give you $19 million?

Mr. ABERNETHY. That would give you $19 million?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Yes.

Mr. JOHNSON. I have one more question. Why didn't you ask for the same amount you are using this year?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. We thought there were some economies in the program that could be made. We, also, realized that we had gotten some of the big States completely modified certified and that there would be some tapering off in the total amount of funds required to go forward with the program.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. When a State does get relatively disease free, the cost of carrying on the maintenance program is less then the cost of bringing it up to that point, is that correct?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. About 50 percent.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. So that if you had an appropriation, say, of $19 million, would you be able to carry on your work in 1959 at the same level at which you are doing it in 1958 with $2112 million?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. We estimated that we could.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. Thank you.

Mr. JOHNSON. What I meant was that the States that went along should not suffer while States like Wisconsin and Minnesota cleaned

up-and now that we are cleaned up I do not think the program should be sloughed off just so long as we are taken care of.

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. We took this into consideration in trying to arrive at an estimate. There is just no way of predicting how fast some of these States will come along. Obviously, we will get into programs in States with the large cattle populations of Iowa and Texas, where we will have a complete program and it will cost a lot of money.

Mr. JOHNSON. I know the educational part of the program is a long-drawn-out affair.

In Wisconsin years ago you could line up two sides of farmers, one would say that it was all bunk, and so on. You must have that trouble in other States, too. And especially where dairying is not as big. Maybe there is more of that to contend with or just as much.

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Because of the intensive educational program that has been carried on there is less and less opposition, but there has been, and that is one reason some of these States are not as far along as others.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Do you feel the need for $19 million for fiscal year 1959 ?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. When the Animal Disease Eradication Division which has the direct operational responsibility of the program made their estimate for 1959 they requested $15 million in addition to the 1958 appropriation.

Mr. ABERNETHY. So you people who have really the responsibility of this thing and who are closest to the answer feel there is the need for $19 million?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. They did last year when they made their estimates.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Do you know whether they have changed their mind?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. Dr. Anderson is the Director of that Division. Mr. ABERNETHY. I have been waiting for him. What do you say? Dr. ANDERSON. I believe we have to consider the principle of disease eradication here. In attacking a disease, the pace at which you proceed is a very important factor. The faster you proceed, the quicker you can achieve eradication, and perhaps at less cost. We believe with the $15 million that is in the appropriation for 1959, that we can make substantial gain toward eradication of brucellosis. It may take a little longer, but we think we can carry on an effective program.

Mr. ABERNETHY. With the $19 million, you are effecting a $5 million economy under the 1958 authorization, are you not?

Dr. ANDERSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Are there any questions?

Mr. KRUEGER. No questions.

Mr. TEWES. No questions.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Do you gentlemen have any further statements you desire to make?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. I think a further comment on the level of the program, we can plan the program with the States at the level of the funds that are available.

Mr. ABERNETHY. You would, of course, have to do that?

Mr. VAN HOUWELING. Yes, sir; we can control the program, and that is what we would plan to do in 1959 to carry it forward at that level.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. I would like to clarify something that Dr. Anderson said, referring to this statement that the level of attack on this disease may have some effect on the overall ultimate cost of eradicating it. I believe you said that if your attack is heavier, it might in the end cost less money to eradicate the disease, than if you attack at a more economical level as you go along. Is that correct? Applying it to this specific situation, it might not result in an ultimate saving to appropriate $5 million less money for the work in 1959, because it would take you longer to accomplish your result; is that correct?

Dr. ANDERSON. I believe that is a correct statement.

Mr. JOHNSON. Turning to chart 12, where you say that your loss for 1957 was $27,400,000, you are not going to reduce that year by year faster by slowing up the program, are you?

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. I think that is correct.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Thank you very much.

We appreciate your coming over.

Dr. VAN HOUWELING. We appreciate the opportunity. Thank you. Mr. ABERNETHY. We will next hear from Mr. Healy.

STATEMENT OF PATRICK HEALY, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, NATIONAL MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. HEALY. My name is Patrick B. Healy. I am assistant secretary of the National Milk Producers Association.

First, I would like to tell you a little something about our organization. It is a federation of some 800 dairy cooperatives with an excess of 500,000 dairy farm families as members. We are the oldest and largest of the national commodity organizations.

We are here to make a plea today for the continuation of the brucellosis eradication program just as it has been run in the past for several reasons.

No. 1, we find that this program is of extreme benefit to both producers and consumers.

No. 2, we feel very strongly that a crash program, a program in which we spend enough money early in the game, will be considerably less costly than one that we attempt to drag out.

Brucellosis is a cattle disease which costs farmers money every year. I think that has been fairly well put before the committee by the Government witnesses. And the sooner that we can eradicate this disease, bring it under control, the better off farmers will be, the more assurance there will be to consumers in the standards of their milk.

Certainly, if we are able to continue as we have during the past 4 years, with the steady continuous progress in the eradication of this disease throughout the country, it will not be many years before it will be a matter which can be left to the Department of Agriculture in their regular preventive medicine program and can be returned to a regular appropriated fund basis.

The momentum which we built up since this program was inaugurated under the 1954 Agricultural Act should not be impeded. These curves that the chairman referred to should not be allowed to go off.

I think that two of the charts which are in the Department's presentation on this thing are worthy of note, the one which shows the brucellosis eradication program status on September 30, 1954, and the one which shows the status as of December 31, 1957. There is such a vast difference in these two charts in the amount of modified-certified brucellosis-free counties and States, that they speak for themselves as to the merits of the program as it is now being run.

Therefore, we are making an appeal to keep it in its present status for sufficiently long that it will be no longer necessary to come before you to ask for special appropriations.

Mr. ABERNETHY. If they are assured of funds equivalent to $19 million, that would be sufficient for fiscal year 1959, do you go along with the gentlemen who just left the witness stand on that?

Mr. HEALY. We know that during the last year they did not spend all of what they were authorized to spend. We do not know why, whether there was a ceiling put on them or not by some agency within the Government, and they were forced to live within that ceiling or not. I do not know about that.

Since this is only an authorization which they are not bound to spend, $20 million, if that is what you authorized, they are bound to spend only what they can justify spending. I can see no harm at all in giving them sufficient funds because the Commodity Credit Corporation is not required to earmark that and hold it off from some other expenditure. The money is there. If they have the authorization and can find a way in some States to expand the program, why, certainly, the money should be made available to them.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Is it not reasonable to assume that the gentlemen who administer this program, even though we might authorize $100 million, the probabilities are they would not expend any more than they feel they could use in 1959 which is $19 million.

Mr. HEALY. Yes, sir. That is correct. Of course, they certainly know more about what would be needed to carry out whatever program they have.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I think they have done an excellent job.

Mr. HEALY. We, certainly, would like the record to show that we feel that they have, too. We do not think in something of this sort which cannot go on forever and ever and ever, that they should be impeded in the work they do by lack of sufficient funds to do it. If the people from the Department who work right with this say they could only use $19 million, certainly, we are not going to get into a big argument about $1 million. But we strongly feel that at least that should be available to them.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I do not think the feeling exists anywhere that they have been sitting around, but that they have expedited this to the fullest extent of their ability and to the fullest extent of the cooperation they have been able to obtain in the States.

Mr. HEALY. We found, for instance, this past year that one of the States was cooperating too much. In Tennessee, they had extended their program beyond what the allocation from the available Department funds were. And the Department was able to make more funds available so that they could continue their program throughout the

year.

So it is possible that while their program might only envisage the $19 million expenditure that some emergency, some contingency could

arise through the year which would make necessary some more money to continue operations in any one of the States.

If we can speed up the eradication of this disease, certainly, we are doing good for everybody connected with it.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Are there any questions from the members of the committee?

Thank you very much.

Mr. HEALY. Thank you.

Mr. ABERNETHY. The committee will now hear from Mr. Reed of the National Creameries Association.

Do you have a prepared statement?

STATEMENT OF OTIE M. REED, REPRESENTING NATIONAL CREAMERIES ASSOCIATION

Mr. REED. I have a statement that is just 1 sentence or 2 over a page long. I am certainly not going to take up much of your time this morning.

There is one feature in my statement, Mr. Chairman, that I would like to have cleared up. I was unable to be here yesterday morning, and so with your permission I would like to briefly discuss the continuation of the special school milk program which I understand was taken up yesterday and which is covered in the statement.

Mr. ABERNETHY. All right, sir.

Mr. REED. I do not think there should be any question that we should continue the brucellosis program at the high level as the Department of Agriculture thinks it needs in order to maintain the progress they have made.

I cannot pose before you as an expert on brucellosis. I have had some considerable practical experience with the program when I was in the Department of Agriculture and, also Mr. Johnson and Mr. Tewes on the dairy farm some 29 years ago in Wisconsin where we on this big farm were somewhat taking a lead in the brucellosis eradication. And I know from practical experience that it has been a very, very helpful program.

For example, on that particular farm-it was a large commercial farm-we milked about 400 cows. And I happened to be barn boss of one of the barns where our maximum capacity was 98 cows. In my barn they continually transferred the brucellosis reactors. And out of that herd of 400 cows continually milked, we lost between 20 and 40 a year at that time through brucellosis.

And I think sometimes we are inclined, perhaps, to overlook the fact that this program has a great deal to do with more efficiency in our production of herds if we can eliminate this disease as well as, of course, these public health connotations.

So I would urge the committee to authorize enough money to continue this program without any retrogression. That, of course, so far as I am concerned would have to be left up to the experts in the Department. But, certainly, let us be sure that they have enough money authorized.

With regard to the special school milk program we think that is a very fine program. One of our major problems, perhaps our major problem, as you all know, in the dairy industry is the supply and demand imbalance.