than it does and that will help some of our surplus situation if something was done for the livestock industry. It takes a good many pounds of grain to make a pound of meat, and there you have part of your answer if something was done along that line.

Now I want to call your attention to the unfair practices that some large farmers are doing in buying farms with poor lands and transferring wheat allotments from these poor farms to good land. This results in some of the best farms having nearly a hundred percent wheat acreage on all cultivated lands while poor farms are left for layout acres.

It is the cause of some of the surplus. If this sharp practice was stopped it might cost less to support wheat at 90 percent than it does at 822. Each farm should have its own allotment that would stay with that 160-acre farm.

I am here to tell you that is being abused badly. There is a recent ruling of the Department of Agriculture, I understand, that stopped tenants from doing that, but it didn't stop landlords where a man is both landlord and operator, he might only be farming with hired men, they are doing that. I could give you actual instances. A man, practically a millionaire, is doing that in our section of the country. So those are the main things.

In closing I will say it would be a sad reflection on our own way of life if the farmers went into a depression at the same time all other classes are having prosperity. Is it right for the middleman to get so much when producers of the necessary things of life get so little? The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, sir.

STATEMENT OF JAMES PETRIK, RENFROW, OKLA.

Mr. PETRIK. I am James Petrik. I own and operate a farm in northern Grant County, 560 acres. My allotment is 252 acres at the present time. With prices going up on stuff I have to buy, machinery and repairs, tires on my tractor, and the interest that I pay, is hard to do with the present prices that we get for our products.

I raise wheat, cattle, and poultry on the farm and I am speaking for a group of farmers, union people, from my neighborhood, local 577, and they are all for 90 percent, restore 90-percent parity. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, because of what I stated a moment ago, I am very, very sorry that the committee can't stay longer with you. They are after us now to utilize this hall and we will have to conclude with the next witness. My suggestion is that you kindly file your statements with the clerk who sits at the table to my left. All right, the last witness, please.

STATEMENT OF DAVID BERRY, ADAIR, OKLA.

Mr. BERRY. I am David Berry. I am a dairy farmer on 200 acres, general purpose farming mostly. These cotton and wheat allotments don't affect us too much. We have cotton and wheat but it is not as important as livestock production and dairy.

In our county we have already put from one-third to one-half of our cropland into grasses under the soil-conservation program.

believe that in order to have a farm program that is workable it must have the small farmer, soil conservation, and prices all tied together in one program. Therefore, we believe that the farmer should be supported, the small farmer should be supported to a limited amount of his farm program regardless of what that produces.

I will not give a definite amount. It would vary with the different sections of the country. In our section about $10,000 worth of produce would be a fair amount but it might be different in other parts of the country. However, if we, in order to support a farmer with prices, he should comply with the soil-conservation program and work out a program with the Soil Conservation Service and we wouldn't support farm price unless the farmer did that very thing-work out a program or plan of operation now being done with the Soil Conservation Service and to show you just what effect these crop controls are without this program of soil conservation being mandatory to receive crop supports, I can cite you a 160-acre farm in our community that has an 86-acre wheat allotment which is extraordinarily large for that type of farm in our community.

Most allotments will run anywhere from 10 up to 50 acres. And this particular farmer has never done any soil conservation work that I know of at all. We had a 5-inch rain in September and his land was plowed up and down the hills and the water went down his dead furrows and washed them out as deep as the ground had been plowed. I don't believe we ought to support prices for a wheat farmer to go out there and tear up his land and let it wash away, or cotton farmers,

either.

It ought to be tied together with a simple program and do away with controls if necessary. Support him on a definite amount of produce, regardless of what it is, hogs, chickens, cattle, or milk.

The CHAIRMAN. This would be difficult to administer.

Mr. BERRY. I don't think so. I think it would be easier to administer than this present program for the simple reason that all he would have to do is present his receipt showing how much he had sold.

The CHAIRMAN. Who would audit those receipts to see they are correct? You would have to do that. You are dealing with Government money.

Mr. BERRY. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. It would present probably insurmountable administrative problems.

Mr. BERRY. We did something like that once before and it wasn't insurmountable.

The CHAIRMAN. It has been submitted not only by you but by others and I assure you we will give that consideration.

Mr. BERRY. The three programs should be tied together in one program.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Now, I want to again express regret that we have been asked to give up this hall and I wish to say that all of you who have no prepared statements, if you will prepare your statements and mail them to me in Washington, or, the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, I will give you assurance that those statements will be placed in the record, to be presented to the Congress for consideration.

I want to repeat that I enjoyed being here in Oklahoma and I am very hopeful that through the testimony that we got here that we will be able to formulate some program that will be satisfactory and will asist the farmer in getting back on his feet; is there anything further?

If not, the committe will stand in recess until tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock, to met in Alexandria, La.

(Whereupon, at 4: 55 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9 a. m. the following day, November 9, 1955, at Alexandria, La.) (Additional statements filed for the record are as follows:)

STATEMENT FILED BY ROBERT ESHELMAN, DEER CREEK CHAPTER, FUTURE FARMERS OF AMERICA, DEER CREEK, OKLA.

I am Robert Eshelman, spokesman for the Future Farmers of America from Deer Creek, Okla. I would like to call to your attention the creed of our FFA members.

I believe in the future of farming, with a faith born not of words but of deeds-achievements won by the present and past generations of farmers; in the promise of better days through better ways, even as the better things we now enjoy have come up to use from the struggles of former years.

I believe that to live and work on a good farm is pleasant as well as challenging; for I know the joys and discomforts of farmlife and hold an inborn fondness for those associations, which, even in hours of discouragement, I cannot deny.

I believe in leadership from ourselves and respect from others. I believe in my own ability to work efficiently and think clearly, with such knowledge and skill as I can secure, and in the ability of organized farmers to serve our own and the public interest in marketing the product of our toil. I believe we can safeguard those rights against practices and policies that are unfair.

I believe in less dependence on begging and more power in bargaining; in the life abundant and enough honest wealth to help make it so-for others as well as myself; in less need for charity and more of it when needed; in being happy myself and playing square with those whose happiness depends upon me.

I believe that rural America can and will hold true to the best traditions in our national life and that I can exert an influence in my home and community which will stand solid for my part in that inspiring task.

Our members are young Mr. Chairman, but we are trying to train ourselves to be farmers the best farmers in the world. We are also duly and greatly alarmed about our present agricultural economic trends. If the trend continues then there is not much hope in the future of farming.

Farming is a nationwide industry and is of the most importance. This industry of farming has done the best job of feeding and clothing a nation that the world has ever known.

The Deer Creek FFA now goes on record as being in favor of the following recommendations:

1. That any farmer or any business or any laborer should be paid a fair price for worthwhile products on rendered services and we believe that parity is fair for all concerned so we therefore recommend that the farmer be guaranteed 100-percent parity on all basic commodities.

2. We believe in rural America and the family-sized farm, and that to do away with the family-size farm would be like cutting fingers from the working hand. Therefore we recommend that any assistance granted be directed to help the family-size farmer.

3. That we are young boys soon to grow into manhood. Many of us will either work in peace or fight in war. We believe that famine and distress in our foreign countries breed hate and commuism and we also believe that we can share our blessings which some people call burdensome surpluses. It is better to change a man's hate to love than it is to have to kill a man because of this hate. We therefore recommend that large grants be given to Christain rural overseas program or similar organizations to be distributed to our less fortunate friends.

The above recommendations were drawn up, discussed, and approved unanimously by the Deer Creek Future Farmers of America, at our regular monthly meeting, November 7, 1955.

FRANK WEBSTER,

Secretary,

TOMMY CURRIER, President, Deer Creek FFA.

STATEMENT FILED BY STANLEY ARNETT, BOISE CITY, OKLA.

I ask you to seriously consider the following farm suggestions. It is my opinion that the first responsibility of this Nation is to keep farm families on the farm. Many of our great leaders have been raised on the farm. The farm is an essential factor in our economy and national life. Under present low-farm incomes the farm youth is gradually being driven into industry where there are too many workers now. We always need families on the farm where conditions are best for developing healthy young men and women. I therefore propose that a law be provided that will allow a farm unit to produce all they want to produce of any farm product they chose to raise without restrictions, or Government regulations. I mean by a farm unit, a farm the proper size to raise a family on. East of the 100th meridian it should be any farm up to at least 160 acres. West of this meridian from 320 acres to 4 sections, depending upon the kind of land. Family-sized farms have never been the cause of overproduction and should not suffer for the troubles caused by our big farm units. These farms should be paid a parity for what they produce.

Next the item of parity. Parity within itself is a flexible item. It simply means a fair price for what the farmer produces. It is adjusted each year to fit the comparative farm prices to what the farmer has to buy. After that it should not be subjected to further flexibility. Any further flexing of this price simply means the farmer is being deprived of his just share of the national income. Let it be adjusted each year by a competent board of just men, and 100-percent parity established.

Next, if farmers grow big and want to farm on a larger scale than a farm unit would provide, let them not be deprived of realizing their ambition. But, inasmuch as they are the ones who overproduce, let them take the world market for that portion of their products which is in excess of what a farm unit would produce. About 85 percent of farm products are now being sold in the United States. This amount should be sold at parity. The other 15 percent could be sold on the world market. This figure could be adjusted year by year as it might need. This should solve our farm problems. There is no need of having one segment of the national economy in an underprivileged class.

I further suggest that these products should be sold on the world market f. o. b. our ports. Let them be transported in whatever the buying nation chooses to transport them in; their ships or any one else's.

Concerning the parity on cattle it is my opinion that if a price floor were from time to time, as it became necessary, set on fat cattle, that the other grades would fall naturally in line.

STATEMENT FILED BY FRED BAILEY, YUKON, OKLA.

I would like the opportunity to testify before your committee, not as a member of a farm organization, but as an individual who has farmed for 45 years and who now owns and operates a 260-acre family-sized farm in Oklahoma County, Okla.

During my childhood there was a family living on each 160 acres of land. I have seen farm families come and go. Today I am 1 of 5 out of a possible 100 who has remained on the farm. Through these years fertile farms by the scores have become so eroded by wind and water that they are now only wastelands. A good soil-conservation program through the years could have saved this land. For the past 15 years I have been following soil-building practices: Rotation of crops, raising legumes, terracing, et cetera. Since the inauguration of the Soil Conservation Service and other fair-deal legislation I received some assistance in my terrace building and proper land use. The program of the last 2 years prohibits the average small farmer or tenant from participating in this practice because it places harvesting restrictions on legumes grown.

There is also the matter of the minimum price being lifted on legume seed. During the fair-deal program the farmer was assured 12 cents per pound minimum on vetch and clover; whereas the seed dealer had formerly paid 7 and 8 cents per pound. Under the present program the seed dealer is again paying 7 and 8 cents per pound on a below normal crop yield.

Parity: There are very few occupations in America which create new wealth, farming is one-oil is another. Oil operators have their subsidy in the form of 272-percent depletion. They contend drilling for oil is a hazardous business and they must have protection. Farming is also a hazardous business; therefore, in my opinion, the farmer is entitled to and should have 100 percent of parity.

Under the present sliding-scale program the farmer must work 121⁄2 hours for the same service, wage, or goods that others work only 7%1⁄2 hours to receive. Should the scale be lowered another 8% percent the farmer would then work twice as many hours as the man in other fields for the same services, et cetera. This should explain the decline in the farm census.

A solution to the farm problem would be strict acreage control and full farm parity, together with a proper conservation practice. Under such a program the farmer with small acreage could survive and it should be acceptable to the man with large acreage.

Since the land is the main tax base, it would be a more prosperous country to have people living on small farms and farming them than for one man to operate one-half a township. He will remove all buildings and soil conservation means nothing to him.

The present farm program is now drawing heavily on farm reserves and many of us are facing bankruptcy. We appeal to the legislative and executive branches of our Government to correct this situation.

STATEMENT FILED BY ROBERT BAKER, LOVELL, OKLA.

I believe the farmer is entitled to 90 percent of parity on all farm products including livestock, which of course would call for controls and allotments. 1. No business can continue to operate and sell their products below the cost of production.

2. The falling farm income not only affects the farmer but the rural businessman, implement dealer, and all rural life which will gradually spread to the larger cities affecting our national economy.

3. Under the present price spread between what the farmer sells and what he has to buy there is no inducement for our young boys to stay on the farm. I believe this could be a serious blow to our family-type farm.

4. The individual farmer has no way to bargain for a fair price for his product. He takes it to town and says: "What will you give me?" Then says: "What will you take for that." Ninety percent price supports helps to do away with this situation and gives the farmer a fair price for his product. 5. I believe the farmer is entitled to a fair share of the consumer's dollar which he is not receiving now.

STATEMENT FILED BY DON BALDWIN, ANADARKO, OKLA.

In order that the economy of our great country may continue well balanced it is the general good judgment of the people of Caddo County, Okla., that we need to continue at least the 90-percent-parity agriculture program. This program has helped the farm communities to put young, capable men on the farms and in many instances they are still heavily in debt. To take this program away from them would mean financial destruction and an exodus of the younger farmers going to the cities and towns in search of employment and this will certainly happen under a flexible program. Many veterans have their GI moneys invested in their farms or equipment, or both. They entered the farming business under the program of 90 percent parity; doing away with the program could well be compared to cutting the wage of labor one-half or more, or lowering the tariff 50 percent.

We are all aware of the good increase in wages, earnings, and purchasing power in nearly every field of endeavor; nearly every field but the farmer, but his economy has declined. Ninety-percent-parity program will mean a continued prosperity for the farming industry; flexible program will mean an influx of windshield farmers.