to the office in Washington, not as a check but as a means of coordination and reporting back to the States any suggestions as to what is being done in other States. We have a number of chemical research projects, but by and large I should say that perhaps more of the chemical research is being done perhaps on State funds, because there are $2.20 of State funds for each $1 of Federal funds. Senator MURPHY. Has anyone broken down the appropriation asked for here and shown the purposes to which this is to be devoted, the allotments to be made to the specific kinds of work to be done? Senator BANKHEAD. Dr. Warburton was a previous witness and he went pretty fully into that. His testimony will be in the record. Senator MURPHY. I did not hear that. Is there a break-down presented there? Senator BANKHEAD. I don't know that there is a break-down in detail of the exact number of agents that will be used. But his testimony is in the record. Senator MURPHY. Very well. Senator BANKHEAD. Go ahead, Doctor. STATEMENT OF J. G. LIPMAN, DEAN OF THE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY - Mr. LIPMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am dean of the College of Agriculture and director of the agricultural experiment station of the Land Grant Institution in New Jersey at Rutgers University, head of the department of soil chemistry and bacteriology since 1901, and director of the experiment station since 1911. I am also editor in chief of Soil Science Information in general, dealing with the subject of soils; a member of the national committee on soil erosion and during the war I was civilian employee of the Ordnance Department of the United States Army in connection with the nitrogen fixation process at Muscle Shoals; also delegate in 1922, 1924, and 1926 from the United States to the International Institute of Agriculture at Rome, and in 1928 to the World Dairy Congress at London. At the time of the American Revolution there were about 90 to 95 people out of every 100 living on the farm and off the farm in America. At the present time there are 25 people out of every 100 living on the farm, and 75 in towns and cities. Now, these 90 to 95 people in Revolutionary days supported themselves and they had enough food left for 5 to 10 more people, and some for export. At the present time these 25 people support themselves, they have enough food available for 75 other people in towns and cities, and a large volume of agricultural exports, and the variety and quality of food are better and the standards of living higher. Those are very startling differences, and the agricultural experiment stations of the United States have had much to do with the greater efficiency in production and quality of food now available. Since I have but a very few minutes I would like to call your attention-merely mention certain major contributions of scientific research in the United States toward the advancement of American agriculture. There is the item of land crops, livestock, the item of the protection of plants and animals against insects, diseases, parasites; the crops that are nonfood crops, like fibers and fats and so on, drugs; the entire question of processing; the entire problem of human and animal nutrition; the development of our forests insofar as insect control, control of fungi and bacteria may be concerned, and then the economic and social development as based on research. Obviously, I can barely mention some of these things, but I will give you one or two examples. For instance, on the prairies of Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, and Louisiana we find deficiencies of phosphorous, which stunts the cattle. In some places the cattle go about looking for bones which they eat. We have a similar situation in Montana and Wyoming. The Texas station has shown that by either feeding bone meal or adding super-phosphate to the soil they can correct that deficiency in the grass of those prairies. It acquires something which is lacking now. Or again, not many years ago in Florida they used to bring in trainloads of horse manure, stable manure, because they found that despite a generous amount of fertilizer that they used, tomatoes and other plants would not thrive. They discovered that that something lacking was manganese, and now 100 pounds of manganese sulphate corrects that deficiency, and they are no longer bringing trainloads of stable manure into Florida. Or again, during the war a chemist at the Hawaiian station discovered that a very extensive area not very far from Honolulu, which is now the greatest pineapple-growing section in the world, was valueless. There was too much manganese in that soil, and the iron in the manganese was not soluble enough. By spraying only 5 pounds of sulphate of iron on the pineapples he was able to correct that deficiency. A few weeks ago I was in California. The California station discovered that one of the very troublesome destructive deficiencies in citrous fruits, oranges, lemons, and grapefruit, known as mottle leaf, could be controlled by spraying zinc sulphate on the leaves of the trees. Or again, the Department of Agriculture experiment station discovered a trouble in tobacco growing known as "sand drown", due to magnesium deficiency. The Kentucky station has shown that copper is necessary for the development of the vitamins essential in nutrition. These are just a few problems relating to soils. You are familiar with the fact that more than half of the total area of the United States has been surveyed and soil maps have been constructed. You know something about the work that has been done on soil erosion, the building up of organic matter by means of green manure, and so on. Now, as to crops. Because of the work of the agricultural experiment stations, breeding selection, the limits of the Corn Belt have been pushed 2 or 3 hundred miles farther north. Such varieties as Golden Glow, Hickory King or Silver King, which grow much farther north have been developed-also crops resistant to disease, particularly wheat, oats, rye. Kansas has developed the so-called "canned red wheat." Michigan has developed the Rosen rye. And so we have in the Far West and Middle West and Northwest and South superior plants, either superior because they can resist disease or because they have a better quality, edible quality, or in the case of cotton a longer staple, greater tensile strength, and so on. These are just a few bare examples of how research has improved the quality of the crop yield per acre and commercial quality. Take the livestock situation. Dr. Theobald Smith, formerly with the Department, showed that the cattle tick is the carrier of a parasite which is responsible for Texas fever. Now, this is just a type of finding, and you know how the cattle tick has been gradually cleared until within a few years now there will be no cattle tick and no Texas fever affecting the livestock industry in the United States. You know something about how cholera serum and the use of serum for hog cholera was developed. Recently in New Jersey we discovered a serum for vaccine to protect poultry against infectious bronchitis. And so there is a long list of research that has to do with the protection of livestock against diseases, parasites, insects. And in the same way you are no doubt familiar with the fact that the beef steer of today will produce practically twice as much meat as the beef steer of 40 or 50 years ago. The average production of milk per cow in the United States is something like 33,800 pounds. In Denmark it is over 6,000 pounds. In some of the States like Rhode Island and New Jersey it is 6,000 pounds now. Senator BANKHEAD. For what period of time? Mr. LIPMAN. Per year. Production per annum. We are building up more efficient beef animals, more efficient steers, more efficient hogs, more efficient sheep, more efficient cows. And that has been done by the study of the laws of heredity and the improvement in quality, economic quality, and food quality. Now, the processing. We hear so much about processing. That, of course, is a very wide field. The putting of corn into a silo undergoing lactic acids, fermentation, that is processing-milling, tanning, all sorts of fermentation, alcoholic, acidic, vinegar, the making of citric acid-no end of various changes, particularly in dairying, the whole question of the processing of milk. And this product is based on the research, very fundamental research of the experiment stations. We are also familiar in a general way with what nutrition has meant, the balance of proteins, carbohydrates, fats, the significance of vitamins A, B, C, and so forth, and the relation of soil to nutrition. For instance, the relation of iodine to goiter and the correcting of that condition by applying iodine, potassium iodide to the soil, and so forth. I am sorry that I can just briefly mention that and stop. Then in the case of the economic situation, the studies of taxation, studies of types of farming, studies of yields as related to soil type, and the economic standards; studies of sanitation on the farm, and no end of things of an economic and social character have been made by the stations and the Department of Agriculture, and are contributing to the changing of the practices and standards of living. Of course, that applies also to machinery and labor-saving devices of all sorts, and the stations and the Department of Agriculture have done splended constructive work in lightening the burden of labor in the farm home. Now, just a word about the use of the funds which are made available through the proposed legislation. There are many new things that have come into the picture. Mention has been made of the trend toward decentralization of population, toward bringing people out of the congested sections in the large cities back to the land. To illustrate that, we in New Jersey have a colored population of 225,000. That is 5 percent of the total. But the colored population represent a relief load of 25 percent of the total. Two out of every three colored people in New Jersey are on relief. Eighty years ago a quarter of the colored population of the United States was urban; now it is about 50-50, and the colored race is rapidly becoming urbanized. It is not fair to the colored race; it is not fair to the whites, and they represent a large part of the problem of the use of the land, so that they may be off relief, so that they can be self-supporting. Take the whole question of fish and game. In the East and elsewhere, people are raising silver foxes, muskrats, pheasants, quail. The business of producing fur-bearing animals and game birds-and that applies to fish as well-is in its infancy. There is a great deal of experimental work involved in dealing with the various parasites and diseases of game animals, birds, fishes and so forth, and as we develop our forest areas and forest policies, and in turn allot some marginal lands to forests, we shall have to use these as a source of income supplementing the timber crop, and the experiment stations, if they have these additional funds available, could render a splendid service in these newer phases of land use in the United States. The same is true of various recreation problems and research related to recreation, additional research relating to rural organization, rural taxation, rural sanitation. I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I have taken more time than I really meant to. Senator BANKHEAD. It has been a very interesting statement, I am sure. Mr. LIPMAN. I wanted to give you just some idea of the problems that are facing our experiment stations and what they have contributed to the advancement of American agriculture. Senator BANKHEAD. We thank you very much for it. Are there any questions, gentlemen? Mr. LIPMAN. I have a list here of the appropriations being made from Federal and State sources. Senator FRAZIER. Appropriations for these various things you have mentioned? Mr. LIPMAN. Yes, sir. These are the appropriations made by the Federal Government and the individual States for research. In 1931 the Federal contribution to the States was $4,340,000, $90,000 to each State by the Federal Government for this service. The States contributed in 1931 $9,166,554. In the following year, 1932, the Federal Government's contribution remained the same, practically, $4,357,000, but the States provided $12,658,000. In 1933 the Federal contribution again remained the same, while the States provided more than $11,000,000. In 1934 the States provided $9,757,000. In other words, since 1931, the appropriations of the several States, the total, has decreased from about $12,658,000-that was in 1932- to $9,757,000. Senator FRAZIER. How do you account for that decrease? Mr. LIPMAN. Because of the fact that the State legislatures were under compulsion to reduce the appropriations to the State agricultural experiment stations. Senator BANKHEAD. They reduced them for all purposes, didn't they? Mr. LIPMAN. For all purposes. The income from other sources was merely a question of economic conditions in the States. I have a brief here, if you would care to have it. Senator BANKHEAD. Yes, we will put it in the record. (The papers referred to follow :) Revenues of State experiment stations by sources of income, 1931 to 1934 1 Appropriations authorized by the Hatch, Adams, and Purnell Acts. ? Balances from State revenues of preceding year and income from fees, sales, and miscellaneous sources. Appropriations through Department of Agriculture: 1931, $85,300; 1932, $62,450. Appropriations through Department of Agriculture: 1931, $45,200; 1932, $43,520; 1933, $40,000; 1934, $32,344. |
