GOVERNMENT

storage

RODUCER CONTRIBUTIONS FOR

LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

45 611

L1511 KSU LIBRARIES 

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON LIVESTOCK AND

FEED GRAINS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

EIGHTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861

MAY 2, 1963

Serial J

Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1063

JUN 28 ,s66.

•
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

HAROLD D. COOLEY, North Carolina, Chairman

W. R. POAGE,

GEORGE GRANT, Alabama

E. C. GATHINGS, Arkansas

JOHN L. McMILLAN, South Carolina

THOMAS G. ABERNETHY, Mississippi

WATKINS M. ABBITT, Virginia

PAUL C. JONES, Missouri

HARLAN HAGEN, California

LESTER R. JOHNSON, Wisconsin

D. R. (BILLY) MATTHEWS, Florida

FRANK A. STUBBLEFIELD, Kentucky

RALPH R. HARDING, Idaho

G. ELLIOTT HAGAN, Georgia

GRAHAM PURCELL, Texas

JAMES H. MORRISON, Louisiana

BENJAMIN S. ROSENTHAL, New York

ROBERT B. DUNCAN, Oregon

ALEC G. OLSON, Minnesota

ROBERT L. LEGGETT, California

SPARK M. MATSUNAGA, Hawaii

Texas, Vice Chairman

CHARLES B. HOEVEN, Iowa

PAUL B. DAGUE, Pennsylvania

PAGE BELCHER, Oklahoma

CLIFFORD G. McINTIRE, Maine

CHARLES M. TEAGUE, California

ALBERT H. QUIE, Minnesota

DON L. SHORT, North Dakota

CATHERINE MAY, Washington

DELBERT L. LATTA, Ohio

RALPH HARVEY, Indiana

PAUL FINDLEY, Illinois

ROBERT DOLE, Kansas

RALPH F. BEERMANN, Nebraska

EDWARD HUTCHINSON, Michigan

RESIDENT COMMISSIONER

A. FERNOS-ISERN, Puerto Rico

Mrs. CHRISTINE S. GALLAGHER, Clerk

HYDE H. MURRAY, Assistant Clerk

JOHN J. HEIMBURGER, Counsel

ROBERT C. BRUCE, Assistant Counsel

FRANCIS M. LEMAY, Staff Consultant

SUBCOMMITTEE ON LIVESTOCK AND FEED GRAINS

W. R. POAGE, Texas, Chairman

PAUL C. JONES, Missouri

D. R. (BILLY) MATTHEWS, Florida

GRAHAM PURCELL, Texas

ROBERT B. DUNCAN, Oregon

ALEC G. OLSON, Minnesota

SPARK M. MATSUNAGA, Hawaii

II

ALBERT H. QUIE, Minnesota

DON L. SHORT, North Dakota

CATHERINE MAY, Washington

DELBERT L. LATTA, Ohio

RALPH HARVEY, Indiana
4

CONTENTS

H.R. 5860, a bill to amend section 407 of the Packers and Stockyards Act Page

of 1921, as amended 1

H.R. 5861, a bill to amend section 407 of the Packers and Stockyards Act

of 1921, as amended 1

Resolution of the Agriculture Committee of the Senate of the State of Iowa_ 22

Statement of:

Datt, John C., assistant to the director, Washington office, American

Farm Bureau Federation 12

Davies, Aled P., vice president, American Meat Institute 9

Jackson, Jack, director, public relations, National Grange 12

Killick, John A., executive secretary, National Independent Meat

Packers Association 23

Liljenquist, L. Blame, president and general manager, Western States

Meatpackers Association, Inc 14

Magdanz, Don F., executive secretary-treasurer, National Livestock

Feeders Association 22

Naden, Kenneth D., executive vice president, National Council of

Farmers Cooperatives 10

N ance, James B., chairman, National Live Stock and Meat Board 2

IN e u m a n , Carl, general manager, N ational Live Stock and Meat

Board 8

River Markets Group 24

Sanders, C. T., executive counsel, Livestock Market Council of Certified Livestock Markets 23

Communications submitted to the subcommittee:

Bledsoe, Robert P., secretary, Wyoming Wool Growers Association,

letter of May 2, 1963 26

Brown, Patrick H., secretary-manager, Michigan Livestock Improvement Association, letter of May 3, 1963 27

Freeman, Hon. Orville L., Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department

of Agriculture, letter of May 1, 1963 15

Grouskay, Aubrey, chairman, board of directors, Arizona Cattle Feeders' Association, letter of April 29, 1963 28

Hudelson, Nicholas V., chairman, legislative committee, Kansas Livestock Association, letter of May 2, 1963 28

Maurer, Mrs. Joseph (Betty), president, Montana Cowbelles, Inc.,

letter of April 29, 1963 27

McMillan, C. W., American National Cattlemen's Association, letter

of April 26, 1963 25

Swaffer, Paul, secretary, American Hereford Association, letter of

April 30, 1963 29

UI
•.
PRODUCER CONTRIBUTIONS FOR LIVESTOCK

MARKET DEVELOPMENT

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 1963

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON LIVESTOCK AND FEKD GRAINS,

OF THE COMMIITEE ON AGRICULTURE,

TV ashirigtoin, D.C.

The subcommittee met, at 10 a.m., pursuant to notice, in room 1310,

Longworth House Office Building, the Honorable W. R. Poage (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Poage Jones of Missouri, Matthews, Purcell, Duncan, Olson, Matsunaga, lioeven, Quie and Short.

Also present: Representatives Johnson of Wisconsin and Findley.

Christine S. Gallagher, clerk; Hyde H. Murray, assistant clerk;

John Heimburger, counsel; Robert Bruce, assistant counsel; and

Francis LeMay, consultant.

Mr. POAGE (presiding) . The subcommittee will please come to order.

The subcommittee has met this morning to hear testimony on H.R.

5860 and H.R. 5861, which will be made a part of the record at this

point.

(H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 follow:)

[H.R. 5860, 88th Cong., 1st sess.](

A BILL To amend section 407 of the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921, as amended

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States

of America in Congress assembled, That the Packers and Stockyards Act of

1921, as amended, is amended by adding the following new subsection (c) to

section 407:

"(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the authority of the Secretary under this Act shall not apply to deductions made from sales proceeds for

the purpose of financing promotion and research activities, including educational activities relating to livestock, meat, and other products covered by the

Act"

[H.R. 5861, 88th Cong., 1st sess.].

A BILL To amend section 407 of the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921, as amended

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States

of America in Congress assembled, That the Packers and Stockyards Act of

1921, as amended, is amended by adding the following new subsection (c) to

section 407:

"(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the authority of the Secretary under this Act shall not apply to deductions made from sales proceeds for

the purpose of financing promotion and research activities, including educational activities relating to livestock, meat, and other products covered by the

Act."

1
2 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Mr. POAGD. These bills would consider the matter of continuing

deductions from the sale of livestock for promotion. It was hoped

that these bills would provide a satisfactory solution to the problem

that the livestock industry faces, and that they would be helpful to

the whole industry.

It seems to me there is more unanimity of feeling about this matter

than of any major matter that has come before this committee for a

long time. The response that we have been getting from the various

sections of the country indicates that.

We will now hear from Mr. James B. Nance, chairman of the

National Live Stock and Meat Board. Mr. Nance has been before

this committee on many occasions. We are glad always to hear from

you.

STATEMENT OF JAMES B. NANCE, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL LIVE

STOCK AND MEAT BOARD, ALAMO, TENN. ; ACCOMPANIED BY

ROBERT L. FARRINGTON, COUNSEL

Mr. NANCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a statement on

behalf of the National Live Stock and Meat Board.

My name is James B. Nance, Alamo, Tenn. I am chairman of the

National Live Stock and Meat Board, and am authorized by the

directors of the board to give our full support to the approval of

H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861. In fact, it is evident both to me and to

our board that enactment of the proposed legislation is vital to the

continued existence of the board, and will be of lasting benefit to the

producers and consumers of all red meat—beef, lamb, and pork.

I have been a hog producer all my life, am a past president of the

National Swine Growers Council, and have also been president of the

Tennessee Livestock Association, composed of producers of cattle,

sheep, and. hogs. I know from experience that the producers of all

livestock have the same basic problem: continual improvement of

their product and keeping the buying public aware of its value in

terms of its cost, palatability, and nutritional qualities.

The National Live Stock and Meat Board is incorporated under

the "not for profit" corporation laws of the State of Illinois. Its

main office is in Chicago. The board has the same Federal tax

exemption accorded to other similar organizations.

The directors of the board are leading producers, processors, and

users of beef, lamb, and pork. The meat board was organized as a result of ideas originating within the livestock industry. The basic

discussions began in 1919 when livestock slaughter was high, but prices

to producers were not sufficient to return a reasonable profit. Out of

these discussions came the realization that all segments of the livestock industry—farmers, ranchers, market agencies, packers, and farm

organizations—had a stake in the welfare of the industry as a whole.

A study conducted in 1962 by a program and policy study 'committee of the board, headed by Dr. Herrell DeGraff of Cornell University,

states that:

The primary factor that brought these groups together and which gave central

focus to their discussions was the prevalent folklore of that time that high-level

meat consumption was adverse to health. Some people believed that eating meat

predisposed one to rheumatism. A more prevalent view, then supported even
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 3

by a considerable segment of the medical profession, was that a high-protein diet

"oderloaded the kidneys. * * *" Vegetarian faddists were having a field day,

and their sophistry was adversely affecting the public image of meat and therefore the market demand. It was these types of belief that the meat board set

out to counteract by accumulating scientific nutritional information about meat

and disseminating such knowledge to the public.

The organization of the National Live Stock and Meat Board was

recommended by cattlemen in January 1922. About 23/2 months

later, March 10, 1922, the board was formally organized with 17 directors. Two of these directors were spokesmen for terminal markets,

2 represented retail distributors, 2 were meatpackers, and 11 were

representatives of livestock producers.

The basic purposes of the meat board, as set forth in its original

charter, are as follows:

(a) To initiate and encourage research and education in regard to livestock

and meat products;

(b) To disseminate correct information about meat in diet and its relation to

health; and

(c) To do all things necessary to promote the interests of the livestock and

meat industry.

Presently the board's directors, consisting of 41 members, represent the following organizations: livestock growers, feeders, and farm

organizations, 20; meatpackers,- 6; livestock marketing interests, 5;

meat retailers, 3; restaurateurs, 1; and livestock and meat interests

of individual States, 6.

The meat board carries out a number of promotional research and

educational activities, including grants to schools, colleges, and other

noted research institutions. It also has a staff of technical people,

nutritionists, chemists, home economists, to study and work with

technicians in the schools, universities, hospitals, and civic groups

By confining research expenditures mainly to recognized institutions

and qualified research workers, the board seldom has to pay the full

cost of a project, and is also able to participate in research on a much

wider scale than if the projects were undertaken solely with personnel

under the direct supervision of the board.

During the past 23 years-1939-63—the per capita consumption of

meat has increased from 133.6 to 163.7 pounds.

I have said that passage of the legislation before this subcommittee today is vital to continuation of the meat board as an effective

agency for meat promotion. That was not an understatement. From

the beginning of its operations the board has been financed by collections from livestock producers and contributions from packers.

From 1922 through the fiscal year 1930-31, collections from producers were 5 cents per car of livestock with a similar contribution

from participating packers. In 1931, the collection rate was increased

to 25 cents per car, with an alternative to the market agencies who assembled the contributions for the board, and to the packers, of paying

either the carlot rate, or a rate equal to 1 cent per head on cattle and

one-third of a cent per head on hews.

The collection rate now ranges from 2 to 3 cents per head on cattle,

two-thirds of a cent to 1 cent on calves and hogs, and two-fifths of a

cent to 1 cent on sheep and lambs. In the fiscal year 1.960-61 collections from producers and contributions from packers for the board

amounted to $1,058,935.16.
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Earlier in this statement I said that approval of the provisions

of the two bills now before the subcommittee was vital to the existence of the National Live Stock and Meat Board. That was not an

understatement.

Since the beginning of the meat board program-41 years ago—

the per head contributions from livestock feeders and growers have

been assembled by the marketing agencies handling the livestock.

These collections are doubly important because they are also the

basis upon which contributions are made by the packers. So if deductions from the growers decline, a corresponding reduction occurs

in the money received from the packers.

During the 41 years since beginning of the meat board programs,

the deductions from livestock feeders and growers have not been

based upon written orders, but upon the general understanding and

agreement, well known throughout the livestock industry, that no

seller has to contribute to the board's program unless he wants to,

and that deductions from the proceeds of any sale which are not

entirely satisfactory to the owner and shipper, will be refunded upon

request.

About June 1962, the Secretary of Agriculture published notice

in the Federal Register of a proposed regulation which would require any person making a deduction for meat promotional purposes

to hold a written authorization for such deduction. Based upon a

full explanation of the meat board program, and a request by the

Senate Committee on Appropriations, the issuance of the proposed

order requiring written authorization in support of each meat board

deduction has been extended by the Department of Agriculture until

July 1, 1963.

In the press release of the Department of Agriculture commenting

upon the extension, it was noted that the additional time permitted

before the effective date should make it possible for the meat board

to get legislation providing for continuance of the present meat pro- motion program.

Undoubtedly one factor in the decision of the Department of Agri- culture to require written formalization of the authority for meat

board deductions was the controversy that developed within the livestock industry over proposed changes which would have created prob- lems in the application of the Packers and Stockyards Act as con- strued by the Department of Agriculture. The controversies within

the industry have now been settled and the industry is more united

than ever in its history.

But the interpretation of the Packers and Stockyards Act and regu- lations made by the Secretary as an outgrowth of this controversy

have the effect of subjecting the meat industry to regulations which

will make it most difficult,. it not impossible, to continue the effective

program which it has earned out for the past 41 years.

• It clearly appears to be in the best interests of both the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the industry to exempt the program of

the National Live Stock and Meat Board from the Packers and Stockyards Act.

Enactment of the provisions of H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 would accomplish those purposes and would put deductions for meat produc-
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 5

tion on the same basis as deductions for the promotion of other agri-

'cultural commodities.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the privilege of presenting this

statement.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you very much, Mr. Nance. With reference to

your very last statement there with regard to the fact that this would

put deductions for meat promotion on the same base as deductions for

the promotion for other agricultural commodities; meat is the only

commodity at the present time which cannot enjoy a program of this

kind under the law. And all that would happen under this is that

'deductions might be made exactly as they are made for cotton, for

turkeys, and for dairy products and for a dozen other agricultural

products over the country—that is all that this would do, is that

correct?

Mr. NANCE. That is correct.

Mr. POAGE. Mr. Hoeven.

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. Nance, do you know of any opposition to this

type of legislation?

Mr. NANCE. No, sir; I do not.

Mr. HOEVEN. I have one other question as to the makeup of your

board of directors. Are the so-called country markets represented on

your board of directors?

Mr. NANCE. Yes, sir; through auction markets. Is that what you

mean?

Mr. HOEVEN. Yes, sir; the so-called country livestock markets?

Mr. NANCE. They are represented on it, on the board; yes.

Mr. HOEVEN. Thank you. That is all.

Mr. POAGE. Mr. Matthews.

Mr. MATTHEws. I would like to submit for the record a telegram

from the president of the Florida Cattlemen's Association in support

of this legislation for the record.

Mr. POAGE. If the gentleman would modify his request to submit

that along with a great many others that we have, rather than to

include it at this point.

Mr. MATTHEWS. I will be delighted to do that. I was anxious for

the gentleman to know that it was being supported by those in

Florida.

Mr. POAGE. We will insert it along with the others.

Mr. Duncan.

Mr. DUNCAN. I, perhaps, ought to know more about this than I do,

but as I understand it this will remove the authority of the Secretary

to order that the agency should have a written order from the farmer,

the owner of the cattle, before making the deduction?

Mr. POAGE. It would tend to remove the authority as to the deduction in its entirety. The Packers and Stockyards Act places a limitation upon what may be deducted from the sale of livestock by the

marketing agencies. Any such deduction of any kind is prohibited.

from being made. The Packers and Stockyards Act, probably, prohibits any deductions being made for any of these purposes. The

only purpose for which you can make them are those enumerated

within the provisions of the act, such as for watering and weighing

and handling and commissions on the livestock.

99-797-63---2
6 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Mr. DUNCAN. I did not so understand his statement. The Secretary has merely issued an order that before any such deductions could

be made that the packer had to have the authority from the producer

in his possession. Am I wrong in my interpretation of what you

said?

Mr. NANCE. It would be the marketing agency. It would not necessarily be a packer.

Mr. POAGE. You are not quite correct in that interpretation. I just

said that my understanding of the law is that it prohibits all deductions. Of course, I think that the shipper can always direct the

market agency to put his money anywhere he wants to.

Mr. DUNCAN. I see.

Mr. POAGE. What we are attempting is to clear this all up with this

amendment. No matter how you interpret the law, if we pass this

amendment, then we could make these deductions legally as they are

made for all other commodities other than livestock.

Mr. DUNCAN. May I ask one more question?

Mr. POAGE. Yes.

Mr. DUNCAN. Are these made by the marketing agency without

the written authorization of the owners thereof at the present?

Mr. NANCE. Yes, sir.

Mr. DUNCAN. They are now made?

Mr. NANCE. Yes, sir.

Mr. POAGE. They are made on the basis that if the shipper wants

to get it back, he can get it back.

Mr. NANCE. I might elaborate a little, Mr. Poage. As I said in the

statement, if someone requests that it not be made it will not be made

at all in the first instance.

Mr. POAGE. Mr. Short.

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Duncan raises a very important point, so far as this

whole consideration is concerned. It should be kept in mind that

while these bills before the committee eliminate the necessity of prior authorization, this is still a completely voluntary operation. As Mr.

Nance has just said, deductions will not be made if the shipper requests

that they not be made at the time he sends his livestck to the market.

If the deduction is automatically made, upon the shipper's request, the

deduction will be refunded.

Another important fact here that should be borne in mind is that

the deductions are also completely voluntary, so far as the marketing

agency is concerned. If the stockyards company, the commission

company, or the auction market concerned, do not wish to make this

deduction from the proceeds of sale of livestock they are free to make

that choice. This bill does not compel them to make these deductions.

Mr. POAGE. Mr. Quie.

Mr. Qum. The only commodity which has a mandatory checkoff

under the law is wool, is it not, and there the producer does not have

the right to withhold or prevent the deduction from being made. He

does not have that choice. The majority of woolgrowers decided to

do it. And so, really, this is a completely voluntary provision, more

so than that on wool.

Mr. POAGE. That is correct. The Wool Act has that in it.

Mr. QUJE. Also, if any livestock group other than the meat board

wanted to have a deduction made they would be permitted to do so

under this bill, is that right?
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 7

Mr. NANCE. They would what?

Mr. QUIE. They would be permitted to have a deduction made if

they so desired?

Mr. NANCE. It would be optional on the part of the market.

Mr. POAGE. That is the point that Mr. Short pointed out, that no

marketing agency has to make a deduction unless they want to do so.

If the marketing 'agency wanted to do it, they could deduct it, but

anybody could get it back. I think that the safeguard for the shipper

lies in this fact that, certainly, no marketing agency will get away with

the deduction of that kind very long if the livestock shippers do not

want it. They do not have to do business with such a marketing

agency. They can do business with someone else who does not deduct,

and no deduction will be made that the producer does not want over

any period of time or any extended area. Shippers still have the

right to demand their deductions back.

Anybody can make the deduction at the present time if the owner

of the livestock agrees. So we just leave this under the general law;

but we do not, by adapting this proposed legislation, say that anybody

making the deductions over the objection of the owner of the livestock

can do so. The owner of the livestock, if he objects to it if he does

not want it, does not have to submit to any deduction.

Mr. QtriE. I am more familiar- with the activities of the American

Dairy Association. There the producers have complete charge of it,

because of the voluntary nature of the deduction. And if it gets out

of line a little bit the A.D.A. certainly hears from the producers. I

do not think that we have any worry at all on this.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you, Mr. Nance.

Mr. NANCE. Thank you.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. May I ask a question?

Mr. POAGE. Certainly, you may.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. Mr. Nance, I am a purely theoretical farmer, and

I have never sold any livestock on a terminal market.

Does the invoice or the statement which the Commission man sends

to the shipper, to the livestock producer, indicate the item that is to

be taken out?

Mr. NANCE. Yes.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. Does it, also, carry any kind of printed statement that if he does not like this deduction and wants it back, and

applies within 90 days or something like that, that they will send it

back to him?

Mr. NANCE. I think that in the majority of cases—maybe not all

of the cases, but in the majority of cases that would be true. Certainly, it is the general understanding that that can be done.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. At least, the invoice would show that?

Mr. NANCE. It would show it, that is right.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. The deduction for the livestock and meat board

of $1.27 or something like that, so that this is not done without the

knowledge

Mr. NANCE. That is right.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. Of the seller?

Mr. NANCE. Yes.

Mr. QuiE. Will you yield there?

Mr. HEIMBURGER. Yes.
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Quir.E. I know that in some markets it has been taken up in their commission annual meetings, so this no longer is shown on the notice.

However, this is understood within the organization.

Mr. NANCE. In most cases it is even posted.

Mr. Qum. Yes.

Mr. SHORT. As a part of the tariff or schedule of market charges for services rendered.

Mr. NANCE. Yes, that is right, like the tariff.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. On the matter of the contribution by the packers,

Mr. Nance, is this on a 50-50 basis—do they match the contributions?

Mr. NANCE. On their part—

Mr. HEIMBURGER. Is it on a volume basis or what?

Mr. NANCE. The participating packer contributes on the same perhead basis as the producer. Actually, it is based on their slaughter.

This is in addition to the service they perform in making collections

for the board on their direct purchases.

STATEMENT OF CARL NEUMAN, GENERAL MANAGER, NATIONAL

LIVE STOCK AND MEAT BOARD, CHICAGO, ILL.

Mr. NEUMAN. It is matched on a per-head basis on the slaughter

by the packer.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. Per head?

Mr. NEUMAN. That is right.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. I notice a variation on page 4, in the second paragraph, in that the collection rate now ranges from 2 cents to 3 cents

per head on cattle, two-thirds of a cent to 1 cent on cows and hogs, and

two-fifths of a cent to 1 cent on sheep and lambs. Why is that variation

here? I assumed that this was uniform collection throughout the

country.

Mr. NANCE. At the conclusion of the study report in 1962, which is referred to in this report, it was suggested that the deductions on the markets that would begin collections would be 3 cents on cattle, 1 cent

a head on hogs, and 1 cent per head on sheep and lambs. And that is being done on the new markets that have come in since this report was published. Of course, it is optional with the market. If they desire

to retain the 2 cents and not move to the 3 cents per head, that is their privilege. A lot of them have elected to stay on the 2-cent basis.

It is a thing that we hope can be worked out, so that we can move it to 3 cents per head, because we have two types of committees with- in the meat board which are new and which are functioning real well.

Rather, there are three, the specie committees of beef, pork, and lamb, in which the producers have a big voice, practically a complete voice as to how this money will be spent. And we had hoped that from the additional revenue we could give to the specie committee

more money for them to use as they might see fit in the promotion of beef, pork, or lamb as it should be decided.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. In other words, this program is so voluntary that the contributors can even decide just how much they will contribute is that it?

Mr. NANCE. That is correct. And this may seem minor, but the marketing agencies say that their bookkeeping system, that is, so far

as it is concerned, they would rather have it 1 cent rather than twofifths of a cent.
I

LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 9

Mr. HEIMBURGER. I can understand that. Just one more question.

Does the meat board engage in any paid advertising?

Mr. NANCE. None whatsoever.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. That is, paid advertising or promotion?

Mr. NANCE. None whatsoever.

Mr. HEIMBTJRGER. Thank you.

Mr. POAGE. If those are all of the questions of Mr. Nance, we are

very much obliged to you.

We will now hear from Mr. Aled P. Davies, vice president of the

American Meat Institute.

STATEMENT OF ALED P. DAVIES, VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN

MEAT INSTITUTE

Mr. DAVIES. Mr. Chairman and members, I do not have a formal

statement. I would like to say that we are in hearty agreement with

these two bills. And we subscribe to what Mr. Nance has said.

Our interest is long lasting and of some moment in the fortunes of

the National Live Stock and Meat Board.

Answering your question, Mr. Heimburger, the packers contribute

on their slaughter or what have you, between $350,004 and $400,000

a year.

The American Meat Institute itself makes a contribution for those

packers who are not participating between $15,000 or $20,000 a year.

And then plus our collections, I would say that the packers' contributions and collections amount to about 50 percent of the budget

of the National Live Stock and Meat Board, yet out of the 41 directors, we of the American Meat Institute only have 4 members and

the other packer organizations, I think, have 2 apiece, so that the

control and the direction of this voluntary association has consistently

and will be under the control of the livestock producers themselves,

although more than 50 percent of the total amount comes from us.

Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like to read a letter

addressed to you from the president of the American Meat Institute

at this point in the record as my testimony. This letter is addressed

to Mr. W. R. Poage, chairman of the Livestock Feed Grains Subcommittee of the House 'Committee on Agriculture and reads as follows:

DEAR CONGRESSMAN POAGE : Ever since the establishment of the National

Live Stock and Meat Board almost 40 years ago, the American Meat Institute

as an association has financially supported the activities of the meat board.

In addition, many of our individual members, both large and small, have made

deductions for the meat board on livestock purchased from producers, and

have matched the funds so collected to enable this organization to carry on its

work for meat promotion and education. This has been an outstanding contribution to the livestock and meat industry, and it also has served well the interests

of consumers by making them better acquainted with the nutritive qualities of

all meats.

The National Live Stock and Meat Board also has made available grants

for research which has resulted in increased knowledge about meat. Since

about one-third of farm income is derived from meat animals, this 'activity

makes an important contribution to the welfare of the entire agricultural

economy.

An analysis of the regulation recently issued by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture to be effective July 1, 1963, indicates that it would have the effect

of terminating the program which has been carried out so effectively by the

National Live Stock and Meat Board and financed jointly by the meatpacking

industry and livestock producers. We, therefore, are in accord with and will
10 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

support legislation which will remove from Federal regulation the deductions

from livestock sale proceeds made on behalf of the meat board.

We urge that corrective legislation be introduced as soon as possible to eliminate any uncertainty which may exist concerning the future of the National

Live Stock and Meat Board.

Mr. Po/vim Thank you, Mr. Davies. Are there any questions?

Mr. Short.

Mr. SHORT. I believe that in addition to the major packers, others

are contributors to the Live Stock and Meat Board, other than the

producers themselves; is that not true?

Mr. DAVIES. I believe that is correct, but, of course, there are some

small packers, too, who contribute, large and small, and then we,

through the meat institute make a grant every year to cover those

people, those members of ours, who do not themselves contribute or

match.

Mr. SHORT. I am wondering if there is anything in the Live Stock

and Meat Board constitution and bylaws which would preclude some

other interested segment of the industry from contributing to the

board such as the food chains?

Mr. DAVIES. I do not know of any objection to it. I have not

looked at the meat board charter recently, but I do not think they

can be prevented from making contributions.

Mr. SHORT. Thank you.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you, Mr. Davies. We are very much obliged

to you for your statement.

Mr. DAVIES. Thank you.

Mr. POAGE. We have with us Mr. Kenneth D. Naden, executive

vice president of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives.

We will be glad to hear from you now, Mr. Naden.

STATEMENT OF KENNETH D. NADEN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT,

THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF FARMERS COOPERATIVES

Mr. NADEN. I am Kenneth D. Naden executive vice president of the

National Council of Farmer Cooperatives. This organization is a

national federation of farmer-owned and farmer-controlled cooperative marketing and purchasing associations. Our member organizations market for their farmer-members varying percentages of most

commercial farm commodities and purchase for their farmer members their basic production supplies.

We appreciate the opportunity to bring to this subcommittee the

views of this organization on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861. We support

these bills to amend section 407 of the Packers and Stockyards Act

of 1921 and urge the subcommittee to give them a favorable vote.

The National Council of Farmer Cooperatives is appearing before

you today on behalf of one of its direct affiliates—National Live Stock

Producers Association of Chicago, Ill. This organization is one of

the largest and most influential agencies in the marketing of livestock

throughout the country. Its membership includes 28 cooperative livestock marketing and livestock credit associations in most of the important livestock assembly, selling, and slaughter centers of the United

States. Because of its nationwide operation, large volumes of busi-
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 11

nebs, and professional selling ability, it has exercised a significant

influence in stabilizing and raising farmers' income from growing

of livestock. Its marketing objective is reached mainly by assembling

large volumes for sale and injecting effective competition into the

markets on behalf of growers.

Progressive and skillful marketing includes extensive promotion

and advertising activities. Therefore, National Live Stock Producers

Association has been a continuous supporter of and its farmer members have made a substantial financial contribution to the National

Live Stock and Meat Board, the program of which is threatened by

the amendment to the regulations of the Packers and Stockyards Act

issued by the Secretary of Agriculture on February 26, 1963. The

bills before us arise because of the crisis which would occur if the

amendment were to become effective. The result would be a serious

disruption to the program of the meat board and to effective marketing

by producers. The reason for this is that prior written authorization by each and every farmer for a deduction from his returns

from the sale of livestock for promotion purposes is infeasible. Therefore, the principal reason for livestock farmer support for these bills

is because farmers recognize the value of the meat board's industrywide promotion program and want it continued. It is part and parcel

of their marketing activities:• Effective promotion must have widespread support from livestock farmers and other segments of the meat

industry. Recent increases in livestock numbers have raised meat

production to an alltime high. Continuation of effective promotion

programs is essential to maintenance of a strong consumer demand

for these products.

Support of livestock farmers for the meat board activities is shown

by the fact that they have been informed that if they object to the

present checkoff plan all they need to do is to request a refund and

it, will be promptly paid to them. Very few growers have objected

to the checkoff. Also grower organizations and feeder organizations

have repeatedly used the services of the meat board, including personnel, to put on cooking as well as cutting demonstrations at their

local and district meetings.

The bills H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 would permit a continuation

of this important industrywide program. It has been a dramatic

demonstration of the strength of the self-help principle and deserves

continuing support. Longstanding congressional support for farmer

cooperatives and for effective self-help activities will be reaffirmed by

approval of these bills.

We support the view of the National Live Stock Producers Association and again urge the committee to approve H.R. 5860 and 5861.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you very much, Mr. Naden.

If there are no questions, we are very much obliged to you for

appearing here.

Mr. NADEN. Thank you.

Mr. POAGE. We will next hear from Mr. Jack Jackson, director of

public relations of the National Grange.

We will be glad to hear you now, sir.
12 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

STATEMENT OF JACK JACKSON, DIRECTOR, PUBLIC RELATIONS,

NATIONAL GRANGE

Mr. JACKSON. Mr. Chairman, I am Jack Jackson and I am repre- senting the National Grange.

In official session earlier this morning the Executive Committee of the National Grange instructed me to present this statement urging committee approval of H.R. 5860, H.R. 5861, and any other identical proposals which may be under consideration.

I think that members of this committee—and most others present—

are familiar with circumstances which make us feel that there is press- ing need for a Packers and Stockyards Act modification such as that called for by H.R. 5860.

These have already been adequately reviewed here by Mr. Nance

and others this morning.

You know that, voluntarily through deductions from sales receipts,

livestock producers have for more than 30 years substantially financed

the operation of the National Live Stock and Meat Board

Representatives of nonproducer segments of the livestock industry

have likewise consistently and voluntarily contributed to the financial

requirements of the board's operations.

The entire program of the board has been built upon this system

of volunteer contributions. The history of this volunteer program

of cooperation by all segments of the industry makes it perfectly clear

that methods used are not in conflict with the interest of either producers, other segments of the industry, or the public.

However, it has recently been determined that the procedure used

in making deductions from the producer's sale of livestock is in conflict with current provisions of the Packers and Stockyards Act. It is

likewise apparent that there is no practicable, workable method

through which the board can adjust its procedures so as to comply

with present provisions of the act.

For these reasons appropriate modification of the act is highly

desirable.

H.R. 5860 will legalize the deduction procedure long used to pro- vide board funds and will provide a simple and equitable solution of

problems involved.

Thus, the National Grange urges approval of H.R. 5860 by your

committee and recommends passage by Congress at an early date.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you for your statement.

If there are no questions, we are very much obliged to you.

We will now hear from Mr. John C. Datt, assistant to the director of

the Washington office of the American Farm Bureau Federation.

We will be glad to hear you now, Mr. Datt.

STATEMENT OF JOHN C. DATT, ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR,.

WASHINGTON OFFICE, AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION

Mr. DATT. I am John C. Datt, assistant to the director of the Wash- ington office. We have about a 2/12-page statement. All of the points

have been covered by others, Mr. Nance and the other witnesses, and

I think that in the interest of saving time, I shall just file this statement and indicate to the committee on behalf of the American Farm
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 13

Bureau Federation that we do support the enactment of H.R. 5860 and

H.R. 5861, in order that the present system of financing the Live Stock

and Meat Board may be continued without interruption.

If there are any questions, I will be happy to answer them.

Mr. POAGE. We are very much obliged to you. And without objection, you may revise any of your remarks. Your statement will be

included in the record at this point.

(The prepared statement of John C. Datt follows:)

STATEMENT OF JOHN C. DATT. ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON OFFICE,

THE AMERICAN FARM BUREAU

We appreciate this opportunity to present Farm Bureau's views with regard

to H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 and similar legislation to amend section 407 of

the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 as it relates to deductions from sales

proceeds for the purpose of financing programs to increase the demand for meat

and meat products.

The Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 as amended requires that livestock

marketing agencies operating on public markets promptly remit to shippers

the full proceeds of sales of their livestock after the deductions of authorized

charges for such things as freight, feed, yardage, and selling commissions as

set forth in tariff schedules approved by the Packers and Stockyards Administration.

Many market agencies have voluntarily cooperated with the National Live

Stock and Meat Board over a period of 40 years by making small deductions

from shippers' proceeds for the Meat Board. These funds are used to finance

research and educational activities designed to increase the demand for meat

and meat products. This has been the principal source of funds for the program carried on by the Meat Board since its inception 40 years ago. Livestock

producers have always been free to ask that these deductions not be made and

to obtain refunds.

Although this system of collecting funds has had the sanction of the livestock and meat industry and of the Packers and Stockyards Administration

for a long period of time, there has always been the possibility that this situation

could change if ever a legal challenge were made. Such a challenge was

made last year through a suit brought by the National Beef Council against

the Secretary of Agriculture, the Meat Board and certain market agencies.

The Secretary of Agriculture, partly as a result of this suit, felt that he had

no choice but to issue and enforce a new regulation published in the Federal

Register June 30, 1962, which would prohibit such deductions without prior

written consent by livestock producers. The proposed regulation also specified

that market agencies making deductions for the Meat Board could not refuse

to make deductions for other organizations.

It was the opinion of the National Live Stock and Meat Board and the

market agencies that the proposed regulation would make it impractical, if

not impossible, to collect funds for the Meat Board's program. Consequently,

all major livestock and meat industry groups vigorously opposed the proposed

regulation. The Secretary of Agriculture on February 27, 1963, revised the

proposed regulation to become effective July 1 this year, even though the

National Beef Council suit had been withdrawn in January and the livestock

and meat industry had fully united behind the reorganized program of the

National Live Stock and Meat Board. It is generally believed that unless

the program regulation is withdrawn or Congress amends the Packers and

Stockyards Act before July 1, 1963, the program of the National Live Stock

and Meat Board will have to be greatly curtailed, if not discontinued.

We are pleased to note that all segments of the livestock and meat industry

constituting the National Live Stock and Meat Board, as well as the U.S. Department of Agriculture and congressional leaders, recognize the necessity for

prompt action of H.R. 5860 or similar legislation to make it clear that the

authority of the Secretary of Agriculture under the Packers and Stockyards

Act does not apply to deductions for meat promotion.

The effect of this proposed legislation would be to give livestock producers the

same privilege enjoyed by producers of other commodities such as dairy products,

fruits, vegetables, and poultry in financing the promotion of their commodities

on a voluntary basis outside the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture. It

99-797-63 3
14 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

would also permit livestock market agencies and other to continue to cooperate

in the present system of collecting funds for the Meat Board. Producers would

continue to have the right to request that deductions not be made from shippers'

proceeds and to obtain refunds. The proposed legislation would not require

market agencies or others to make deductions for any organization nor would it prohibit them from doing so if, in their good judgment, there was strong support

by livestock producers for such action.

This procedure is consistent with Farm Bureau policy over the years. Farm

Bureau opposes proposals for compulsory deductions for promotional activities,

but it strongly supports the right of producers to participate in voluntary programs such as that carried out by the National Live Stock and Meat Board.

We strongly urge prompt enactment of H.R. 5860 in order that the present

voluntary system of financing the National Live Stock and Meat Board may be

continued without interruption. Failure to enact such legislation would, in our

opinion, greatly curtail, if not destroy, the well-coordinated program being carried on by the Meat Board.

Mr. POAGE. Mr. Short.

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I might add for the information of Mr.

Datt that I have some communications from State farm bureau organizations giving their support.

Mr. PoAGE. I am sure that there are a number of those.

I should like to state that to this point we have had testimony from

the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the American Farm

Bureau Federation, the National Grange, and the National Meat

Board, and it is my understanding that Mr. James Patton of the

National Farmers Union is out of the country, but we have here a

statement—or a telegram—from the Farmers Union of Nebraska,

from the State president, who is also a member of the National Live

Stock and Meat Board, expressing their unqualified support of the bill.

We have a widespread representation of support for this bill. I

understand that at the moment, Mr. Liljenquist wants to testify. We

will be glad to hear from you now, Mr. Liljenquist.

STATEMENT OF L. BLAINE LILJENQUIST, PRESIDENT AND GENERAL

MANAGER, WESTERN STATES MEATPACKERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

Mr. LILJENQUIST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am L. Blaine

Liljenquist, president and general manager of the Western States

Meatpackers Association.

I want to vigorously endorse what has been said here this morning

in support of these bills.

The program of the National Live Stock and Meat Board is one of

the very outstanding examples of cooperation under our free enterprise system in promting an agricultural product. The results that

are achieved from this program are tremendous, and it is because of

the success of this program over the past 40 years that the Packers

and Stockyards Act has permitted this program to continue, even

though it was the view of the Department of Agriculture that it probably was a violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act, that is, that

the deductions were not permitted except and unless they had a prior

authorization before they were made, a prior authorization in writing.

Nevertheless, this is necessary to get this legislation in order that

this wonderful program of promoting meat in the United States can

continue.

Our association is represented on the board of directors of the

National Live Stock and Meat Board. Our association is doing all it
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 15

can to promote this program with our members, so that they will all

cooperate and participate in making financial contributions to this.

We need promotion.

Our whole economy is based on promotion of products. That is

one of the reasons why our standard of living is so high in this country; with 6 percent of the world's people we are producing about 50

percent of the world's wealth.

And so we want to continue our support for this program, and we

hope that this committee will be unanimous in its approval of these

bills and that you will all use your influence in helping to get this

legislation enacted into law as quickly as possible.

Thank you.

Mr. POAGE. We are very much obliged to you, Mr. Liljenquist. We

appreciate your appearance here today.

Is there anyone else in the room who wants to testify?

If not, I would at this time ask permission to insert into the record

the report from the Department of Agriculture on these bills, which

is favorable. The Department has no objection to the enactment of

the bill in its present form. The Bureau of the Budget advises that,

while there is no objection to the presentation of this report, time

limitations have not permitted obtaining the views of the Federal

Trade Commission and the- Department of Justice on the proposed

legislation.

(The report, dated May 1, 1963, follows:)

MAY 1, 1963.

Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY,

Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,

House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is with reference to your committee's request for

the Department's views on H.R. 5860, a bill "To amend section 407 of the Packers

and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended," and identical bill, H.R. 5861.

The Department has no objection to the enactment of the bill in its present

form.

The bill would amend the Packers and Stockyards Act to provide that the

authority of the Secretary under this act shall not apply to deductions made,

from sales proceeds for the purpose of financing promotion or research activities,

including educational activities, relating to livestock, meat, and other products

covered by the Packers and Stockyards Act. It is our understanding that the

purpose of this proposed legislation is to exempt from regulation under the

Packers and Stockyards Act deductions made for the types of activities referred

to in the bill when carried out by producer-sponsored organizations such as the

National Live Stock and Meat Board and that the bill is not intended to exempt

from the Packers and Stockyards Act deductions which may be made for such

activities carried out by organizations which are not producer sponsored. If

the bill is enacted in its present form we would so interpret and administer it.

The exemption provided for in the proposed legislation will place livestock

producers in the same position as the producers of other agricultural commodities with respect to such activities. It would appear only fair and equitable that

the producers of this major agricultural commodity should be placed on the same

basis in this regard as producers of other agricultural commodities.

The Bureau of the Budget advises that, while there is no objection to the

presentation of this report, time limitations have not permitted obtaining the

views of the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice on the

proposed legislation.

Sincerely yours,

ORVILLE L. FREEMAN.

Mr. POAGE. I would also like to ask permission to insert into the

record a considerable list of statements by other groups and individuals, as well as telegrams.
16 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Mr. JONES of Missouri. Would you yield for a parliamentary

inquiry?

Mr. POAGE. Yes.

Mr. JONES of Missouri. Is it necessary that all of these be included

in the record? Could we not just say that we have wires, and letters,

and statements, and list the names from whom received?

I dislike to waste a lot of money printing them, if all of these are

for it. I do not see any reason for spending the money for the printing of them. I think that we should have the list included in the

record.

All we are trying to do is have support for this legislation. I know

that other committees do it, but I just wonder if we could not be a

little more realistic about this and just indicate that we have the

letters, and the telegrams, and the statements, and list the names of

the people from whom received, without including them in the record.

Do you see anything wrong with that?

Mr. POAGE. I think that is ordinarily a pretty good procedure. I

have recognized that most of these are very short communications,

except perhaps for the statements, but we will be guided by the wishes

of the committee as to whether they want to have them put into the

record or filed with the committee.

Mr. JONES of Missouri. I would say that if these people have indicated that they want to file a statement, I have no objection to that

being printed, so long as it does not include a lot of extraneous material. Howevcr, I have observed these printed hearings, and when

telegrams appear therein, every time they put in all of the heading

and the closing and everything else and we get about three or four of

them to a page, and it would be just as effective to indicate a list of the

people who sent them.

I think it has the same effect. All of these will be on file with the

committee and they will be available if anyone wants to check what

the person has actually said.

Mr. POAGE. So far as I am concerned, I have no objection to putting

a list in the record and then filing these endorsements with the committee. As I say, some have come in with statements attached, but

most of them have not. Where they do not have statements attached,

they will be filed. Where statements are attached, the statements

will be made a part of the record, and the record will include a list of

all endorsements which are filed.

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I would concur with Mr. Jones' suggestion. I think that the committee staff should review the statements

that have been forwarded to different members of this committee, and

any meaningful statements that provide further clarification of the

purpose of this legislation should be included in addition to the statements that have already been made. I would ask permission for all of

the members of the subcommittee, Mr. Chairman, to submit to the staff

communications they have received. I know that I have about the

same number of communications as you have. Many of them are

duplications of statements that have already been presented by the

chairman. I do not want to have duplication in the record. I think
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 17

there are other members who may have communications from other

people and I would like for all of us to have permission to insert in the

record the names of the people who have sent these communications

to us.

Every communication I have received, Mr. Chairman, is in complete

support of this legislation, and I might add that this is a good example

for those interested in other farm legislation. Those of us who have

served on this committee for a while are well aware of the fact that

most of the legislation that comes before this committee is somewhat

controversial. In this instance, we have an example where the people

involved have gotten together before they brought legislation before

the committee, have worked up the legislation, got the approval or the

endorsement of it, so far as I know, of everyone involved in this

instance, and I should hope that this might be a pattern for future

farm legislation that is brought before this committee.

Mr. MATSUNAGA. A point of inquiry: All of these communications

are for the bill?

Mr. POAGE. Every one I have received is for the bill. I think that

we should, following Mr. Short's suggestion, say that anybody who

has communications and wants them inserted may file them with the

clerk within the next day or so. -

Therefore, if we may follow this procedure, all of the letters and

telegrams and communications and statements that have been presented will be listed in the record.

The communications will be filed with the clerk and will be available

for examination. And where there are attached statements, they will

be included in the record.

We will follow that procedure. Is there any objection to following

that procedure?

Mr. HOEVEN. We will have the names listed?

Mr. POAGE. The names will be listed. Some of them have statements, and they asked that they be included in the record.

Mr. HEIMBURGER. A question: It is the idea that the staff will eliminate the duplications?

Mr. POAGE. That is right.

Mr. HEIMB17RGER. And to see that every name is listed?

Mr. POAGE. That is correct. I think that will serve the purpose of

everyone. There are a number here that I have not read as yet, but

we will not proceed to go through them. We will put them all in in

this way.

Is there anyone who has any communications or any requests in

opposition to this legislation?

Mr. SHORT. Or any further questions about the legislation?

Mr. POAGE. If there is anyone who has any further questions of any

of the witnesses, we will be glad to have them heard now.

Mr. Nance has suggested that we might like to have for the record

the additional growers organizations or associations now represented

on the National Live Stock and Meat Board Directorate. I think that.

is a list that the members would like to have, and without objection, it

will be put into the record.
18 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

(The document entitled "Organizations Now Represented on the

National Live Stock and Meat Board Directorate" follows:)

ORGANIZATIONS Now REPRESENTED ON THE NATIONAL LIVE STOCK AND MEAT

BOARD DIRECTORATE

American Farm Bureau Federation

American Meat Institute

American National Cattlemen's

Association

Iowa Livestock Council

Kansas Livestock Association

Livestock Auction Markets Association

National Association of Food Chains

National Association of Retail Grocers

National Farmers Union

National Grange

National Independent Meat Packers

Association

National Lamb Feeders Association

National Livestock Exchange

National Livestock Feeders Association

National Live Stock Producers

Association

National Milk Producers Federation

National Restaurant Association

National Society of Livestock Record

Associations

National Swine Growers Council

National Wool Growers Association

River Markets Group

Super Market Institute, Inc.

Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers

Association

Western States Meat Packers

Association

Mr. HOEVEN. I would like to direct this question to Mr. Nance. In.

view of the uncertain and fluctuatinglivestock market prices prevailing of late, I assume that the National Live Stock and Meat

Board has stepped up its program of appealing to the consuming

public to eat more meat. Would you tell us in brief what you are

doing to step up the program at the present time?

Mr. NANCE. I should be glad to tell you. I guess probably that

Mr. Neumann, who is general manager of the board, could give you

more up-to-date information.

Mr. HOEVEN. Whoever it might be, give us a little breakdown on

what you are doing. It is very important that we intensify the

program urging the consuming public to eat more meat.

Mr. NANCE. We have stepped up our program in TV, radio, press

releases with all organizations that might be able to help us, including

the restaurant people, the supermarkets, the supermarket institutes,

any outlets for meat which we might work closely with in a special

promotion effort during this time when we have large numbers of

both cattle and hogs. And I would say to you that we are very alert

to this necessity. We are moving right into it and every day, with

all of the facilities we have.

Mr. HOEVEN. I presume that you are receiving full cooperation at

both the wholesale and retail levels?

Mr. NANCE. That is right; that is correct.

Mr. POAGE. If there are no further questions, we are very much

obliged to all of our visitors who have participated in the hearing

this morning.

(Following is a list of those who wrote to the members of the Qom,

mittee favoring the proposed legislation—there were no communications opposing:)

Lula Ackelbein, secretary, Chaffee County Cowbelles, Salida, Colo.

W. P. Adams II, Odebolt, Iowa.

Clarence G. Adamy, executive vice president, National Association of Food

Chains, 1725 I St. NW., Washington, D.C.

S. J. Agnew, president, Washington Cattlemen's Association, 507 Nanum, Ellensburg, Wash.

J. Roy Allgyer, Independent Livestock Marketing Association, 2025 Riverside

Drive, Columbus, Ohio.
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 19

Elmer H. Anderson, president, Midwest Beef Council, Larrabee, Iowa.

John Armstrong, Selma, Ala.

Allan C. Atlason, secretary, National Society of Live Stock Record Association,

3964 Grand Avenue, Gurnee, Ill.

Jean K. Bader, secretary, Southwestern Colorado Livestock Association, Mancos,

Colo.

C. F. Baker, manager, Livestock Marketing Association, Dixon Branch Valley,

Dixon, Calif.

Stark Beard, secretary, Ohio Pork Growers Council, R.F.D. 1, Mount Gilead,

Ohio.

Charles F. Beermann, president, board of directors, Producers Commission Association, Sioux City Stockyards, Sioux City, Iowa.

Elton L. Berck, State president, Farmers Union of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebr.

Russell Bergeson, Midwest Beef Council, Radcliffe, Iowa.

Homer Bertsch, R.R. 2, Cambridge City, Ind.

B. M. Bevis, president, the National Livestock Exchange, Box 10052, McKellar

Station, Memphis, Tenn.

Harold Boucher, secretary, Hampshire Swine Registry, 1111 Main Street, Peoria,

J. H. Breckenridge, National Wool Growers, Twin Falls, Idaho.

Oscar Bredthauer, Oscar Bredthauer Feed Yards, Route 3, Box 56, Grand

Island, Nebr.

Dolph Briscoe, Jr., Uvalde, Tex.

Henry Brueck, Battle Creek, Iowa.

Nelson R. Brusa, manager, Red Bluff Branch Valley, Livestock Marketing

Association, Red Bluff, Calif. -

R. A. Bruton, IGA, Quinn Wholesale, Warsaw, N.C.

-Frank Caldwell, president, Modoc County Farm Bureau, Post Office Box 1692,

Alturas, Calif.

C. R. Carmichael, Rt. 1, Box 184, Los Molinas, Calif.

N. K. Carnes, general manager, Central Livestock Association, Inc., South St.

Paul, Minn.

'Ralph Cellon, president, Florida Cattleman's Association, Kissimmee, Fla.

S. Kent Christensen, Washington, D.C.

M. C. Claar, secretary, Idaho Wool Growers Association, 17 Broadbent Building,

Boise, Idaho.

C. F. Claflin, general manager, Equity Co-Operative Livestock Sales Association,

Post Office Box 1996, Milwaukee, Wis.

F. H. Cobb Co., IGA Supply Depot, Cortland, N.Y.

Bernard Collins, president, Iowa Swine Producers Association, State House,

• Des Moines, Iowa.

Vernon E. Cordell, director, Public Health, Food and Equipment Research Department, National Restaurant Association, 1530 North Lake Shore Drive,

Chicago, Ill.

'Stanley Cot, Post Office Box 65, Westley, Calif.

W.W. Cox and Sons, Post Office Box 155, Westley, Calif.

R. E. Cunningham, executive secretary, Omaha Livestock Exchange, Omaha,

Nebr.

-Homer R. Davison, president, American Meat Institute, 727 National Press

Building, Washington, D.C.

Scott Detrick, Louisvile, Ky.

'Edward M. Dichler, Box 213, Port Washington, Ohio.

R. R. Dougherty, Williamstown, Ky.

George Doup, president, Indiana Farm Bureau, Inc., Indianapolis, Ind.

Henry J. Eavey, director, Super Market Institute of America, Richmond, Ind.

Richard Eggimann, Jackson, Minn.

C. 0. Emrich, National Auction Markets, Norfolk, Nebr.

-Elof M. Erickson, general manager, W. H. Campbell Commission Co., South St.

Paul, Minn.

H. W. Farr, Farr Farms Co., Post Office Box 878, Greeley, Colo.

. John J. Faust, secretary, St. Louis Local Meat Packers Association, 706 Chestnut Street, St. Louis, Mo.

John D. Fehsenfeld, Livestock Producers Association, Troy, Mo.

L. W. Feldrniller, general manager, Stockton Branch Valley, Livestock Marketing

Association, Stockton, Calif.

-Frank G. Fitz-Roy, president, Baltimore Union Stock Yards, Inc., Brunswick

Street, Baltimore, Md.
•

20 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Joe S. Fletcher, secretary-general manager, Texas and Southwestern Cattle

Raisers Association, 410 East Weatherford Street, Fort Worth, Tex.

Cal Foss, president, North Dakota Beef Council, Valley City, N. Dak.

R. T. Foster, John Morrell & Co., 208 South La Salle Street, Chicago, Ill.

Fred C. Francis, Joliet, Ill.

Mrs. Robert M. French, secretary, Washington State Cowbelles, Okanogan,

Wash.

Fred Frick, president, Farm Bureau Marketing Association, Arvin, Calif.

Kenneth R. Fulk, secretary, Iowa State Fair, Des Moines, Iowa.

Harry Gamage, chairman, River Markets Group,'342 Livestock Exchange Building, Sioux City, Iowa.

J. Marvin Garner, secretary, The Chester White Swine Record Association,

Rochester, Ind.

Lloyd H. Geil, general manager, Poultry and Egg National Board, 8 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Ill.

Hon. LeRoy Getting, the Senate, State of Iowa, statehouse, Des Moines, Iowa.

Emerson W. Graver, Pennsylvania Meat Packers Association, 1813 Ranstead

Street, Philadelphia, Pa.

Donald Greenaway, executive vice president, National Restaurant Association,

1530 North Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, Ill.

Gene Gunter, director and treasurer, National Livestock and Meat Board, Livestock Exchange Building, Wichita, Kans.

John H. Guthrie, president, California Cattle Feeders Association, 972 South

Goodrich Boulevard, Los Angeles, Calif.

Cedric Hall, Hall & Hall Farms, Hornick, Iowa.

F. V. Heinkel, president, Missouri Farmers Association, Columbia, Mo.

Vance C. Hendricks, Route No. 1, Orient, Ohio.

E. Howard Hill, president, Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, 507 Tenth Street,

Des Mones, Iowa.

William J. Hoevischn, RFD No. 4, Sidney, Ohio.

Joseph W. Houston, secretary, Tennessee Livestock Association, Inc., Post

Office Box 1071, Knoxville, Tenn.

II. C. Jackson, general manager, California Farm Bureau Marketing Association,

Post Office Box 1348, Visalia, Calif.

Joseph I. Jacobs, general manager, Producers Livestock Marketing Association,

200 Exchange Building, Union Stock Yards, North Salt Lake, Utah.

Karnes Johnson, president, North Dakota Stockmen's Association, 107 South

Fifth Street, Bismarck, N. Dak.

Laverne A. Johnson, National Swine Growers, De Kalb, Ill.

M. T. Johnson, Jr., president, Texas Beef Council, Amarillo, Tex.

Kenneth W. Johnston, meat director, National Livestock Meat Board, Buffalo,

N.Y.

R. E. Judd, National Association of Swine Records, Peoria, Ill.

Joe Judge, 311 Woodland Lane, Carmel, Ind.

Miss Marie Keifer, National Association of Retail Grocers, of the United States,

360 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Ill.

Vesper E. Kellogg, Post Office Box 353, Sutter, Calif.

John A. KiHick, executive secretary, the National Independent Meat Packers,

740 11th Street, NW., Washington, D.C.

Clayton T. Kingston, 1159 North 26th Street, Fort Dodge, Iowa.

Dorsey Kirk, Oblong, Ill.

William J. Kuhfuss, president, Illinois Agricultural Association, 1701 Towanda

Avenue, Bloomington, ni.

Glenn Lake, president, National Milk Producers Federation, Detroit, Mich.

R. K. Leavitt, secretary-treasurer, Missouri Swine Producers Association, 125

Mumford Hall, Columbus, Mo.

Gerald E. Leighton, president, the Chicago Live Stock Exchange, 726 Exchange

Building, Chicago, Ill.

Sam Lenke, Meat Department Roundup, Wholesale Grocery Co., Spokane, Wash.

Glenn Lewis, Exeter, Nebr.

Mrs. George Lockhart, president, Kannah Creek Cowbelles, Whitehaven, Colo.

Robert L. Maderia, executive director, National Institute of Locker & Freezer

Provisioners, 224 East High Street, Elizabethtown, Pa.

Don F. Magdanz, executive secretary-treasurer, National Livestock Feeders,

Association, 309 Livestock Exchange Building, Omaha, Nebr.

C. Malone, Zumbro Hotel, Rochester, Minn.
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 21

Mrs. Margaret Manke, secretary, American Scotch Highland Breeders' Association, Edgemont, S. Dak.

E. H. Mannschreck, president, Oklahoma Live Stock Marketing Association,

Oklahoma City, Okla.

Walter A. Maritz, Rural Route 6, Marion, Ohio.

0. L. Marguesen, president, chamber of commerce, 1226 Dodge Circle, Fort

Dodge, Iowa.

Edwin E. Marsh, executive secretary, National Wool Growers Association, 414

Crandall Building, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Gene Mason, secretary, American Berkshire Association, 601 West Monroe Street,

Springfield, Ill.

Roger Mason, 1038 North 24th Street, Fort Dodge, Iowa.

Harvey A. McDougal, McDougal Livestock Co., Collinsville, Calif.

Mrs. Natalie McElroy, State legislative chairman, North Dakota Cowbelles,

Jamestown, N. Dak.

Mr. and Mrs. Tom McElroy, Route 2, Box 4, Vale, Oreg.

Flint McRoberts, the McRoberts Farm, Monticello, Mo.

Bernard E. Michael, Route 7, Frankfort, Ind.

Dave Mitchell, manager, Producers Commission Association, Sioux City Stockyards, Sioux City, Iowa.

C. W. Monier, president, National Lamb Feeders Association, Box W 7, Montgomery, Ill.

James P. Monier, Illinois Swine Improvement Association, Greenview, Ill.

Kenneth W. Murray, manager, Lafayette Branch, Producers Marketing Association, Indianapolis Stockyards, Indianapolis, Ind.

Carl J. Nadasdy, general manager, North Central Wool Marketing Corp.,

101 27th Avenue SE., Minneapolis, Minn.

Cornelius C. Noble, president, Noble's Independent Meat Co., Madera, Calif.

Mrs. Betty Lou Nygren, Fallon, Nev.

Arthur W. Oaklief, Newcomerstown, Ohio.

Ed Oeschger, Bay Port, Mich.

J. L. Olson, vice president, Geo. A. Hormel & Co., Austin, Minn.

Robert L. O'Neal, Blackwater, Mo.

P. A. Park, Route 3, Bellefontaine, Ohio.

Wade A. Parker, vice president, Pacific Meat Co., North Columbia Boulevard and

Burrage, Portland, Oreg.

Mack S. Patton, president, North Carolina Cattlemen's Association, 201 New Bern

Avenue, Raleigh, N.C.

R. C. Peters, IGA meat director, Quincy, Fla.

J. C. Petersen, Box 390, Spencer, Iowa.

Elias 0. Peterson, Truman, Minn.

P. E. Petty, Swift & Co., 115 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Ill.

R. L. Pfeiffer and Leness Hall, Carnation Milk Farms, Carnation, Wash.

A. G. Pickett, secretary, Kansas Livestock Association, State Office Building,

Topeka, Kans.

Wilbur L. Plager, secretary-treasurer, American Yorkshire Club, Inc., 1001 South

Street, Lafayette, Ind.

Mrs. C. S. Radebaugh, Jr., president, Florida Cowbelles Association, Route 3,

Box 725, Fort Pierce, Fla.

Howard H. Rath, chairman of the board, the Rath Packing Co., Waterloo, Iowa.

Elvert Redicker, Vallonia, Ind.

Frank Richards, secretary, American Angus Association, 3201 Frederick Boulevard, St. Joseph, Mo.

Thomas Ringkob, Jackson, Minn.

Bruce Roadarmel, Route 4, Bowling Green, Ohio.

Grady Romans, president, Malheur County Livestock Association, Ontario, Oreg.

James E. Ross, secretary-treasurer, Missouri Livestock Association, 130 Mumford

Hall, Columbia, Mo.

Mylan E. Ross, secretary-manager, National Live Stock Producers Association,

155 North Wacker Drive, Chicago, Ill.

Louis A. Rozzoni, president, California Farm Bureau Federation, 2855 Telegraph Avenue, Berkeley, Calif.

C. T. "Tad" Sanders, executive counsel, Livestock Market Council, VFW Building, Broadway at 34th, Kansas City, Mo.

Ferd Schmidt, president, Iowa Beef Producers Association, Maquoketa, Iowa.

Don Schroeder, meat director, J. M. Jones Co., Champaign, Ill.

A!IP
22 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

Clyde H. Seever, Rural Route 2, Oaktown, Ind.

Charles Shuman, Post Office Box 1692, Alturas, Calif.

Charles B. Shuman, president, American Farm Bureau Federation, Merchandise

Mart Plaza, Chicago, Ill.

Howard Silveus, Lake-Lan Farms, Silver Lake, Ind.

W. E. Smith, executive secretary, National Swine Growers Council, Box 98,

Nelson, Mo.

John J. Snyder, Valley Springs Hereford Ranch, Post Office Box 536, Valley

Springs, Calif.

Harold G. Spies, secretary, Kansas Swine Improvement Association, Animal

Industries Building, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kans.

John R. Story, assistant director of perishables and meat director, Independent

Grocers' Alliance Distributing Co., 131 South Wabash Avenue, Chicago, Ill.

John Stover, Route 1, Cedarville, Ohio.

Lester Stratton, Wentworth, S. Dak.

Norm Svinth, director, IGA Table Rite Meat Department, Post Office Box 189,

Salem, Oreg.

A. L. Swanson, president, Swanson Super Stores, Cherokee, Iowa.

Mrs. Marie Tyler, president, American National Cowbelles, Jamestown, N. Dak.

Percy H. Upton, secretary, Nebraska Angus Association, Inc., Madison, Nebr.

Luther W. Wade, president, Mississippi Cattlemen's Association, Inc., Post

Office Box 325, State College, Miss.

Hon. John A. Walker, chairman, Agricultural Committee, Iowa State Senate,

Des Moines, Iowa.

Tom Wallace, Texas Sheep & Goat Raisers Association, San Angelo, Tex.

R. H. Walton, general manager, Michigan Livestock Exchange, 6750 Dix Avenue,

Detroit, Mich.

Richard Westerberg, chairman, Oregon Beef Council, Portland, Oreg.

Wallace W. Wolf, president, Kansas Swine Improvement Association, South

Haven, Kans.

H. C. Wollam, president, the People's State Bank, Cleveland, Minn.

S. Ward Woody, Post Office Box 22, Woody, Calif.

Clyde M. York, president, Tennessee Farm Bureau Federation, Columbia, Tenn.

(The following statements were also submitted to the subcommittee:)

RESOLUTION

Be it resolved by the senate agriculture committee of the 60th general assembly, That the Agriculture Committee of the Senate of the State of Iowa strongly

supports the bills introduced in the Congress, to wit: H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861,

by Congressman William R. Poage of Texas and Congressman Don L. Short of

North Dakota as the most practical solution to the problem presented by the

regulations of the Department of Agriculture relating to the Packers and

Stockyards Act of 1931, as amended, regarding deductions from sales proceeds

for promotion and research; be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States, to Congressmen Poage and Short, to the Iowa

delegation in the Congress of the United States, to the National Live Stock and

Meat Board and to the American Farm Bureau.

SENATE AGRICULTITRE COMMITTEE,

JOHN A. WALKER, Chairman.

STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL LIVESTOCK FEEDERS ASSOCIATION BY DON F. MAGDANZ, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY-TREASURER, AND B. H. JONES, ASSOCIATE SECRETARYTREASURER

(The National Livestock Feeders Association is a voluntary, nonprofit, nonpolitical organization of persons engaged in the business of feeding and finishing livestock—cattle, hogs, and lambs—for the slaughter market. It is incorporated under the laws of the State of Nebraska.)

The National Livestock Feeders Association firmly supports the passage of

H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861. This legislation would amend the Packers and Stockyards Act to withdraw the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture over de-
9

LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 23

ductions made from sales proceeds for the purpose of financing promotion and

research activities relating to livestock and meat products.

The proposed legislation would make it possible for the deduction procedure

as followed by the National Live Stock and Meat Board to be continued.

For years livestock feeders have contributed a major share of the financial

Support for the National Live Stock and Meat Board. The producer segment of

the livestock and meat industry voluntarily furnishes approximately 65 percent

of the meat board's revenue, which, in itself, emphatically demonstrates widespread approval of the meat board's programs and deduction' procedures.

The National Live Stock and Meat Board is recognized as the authority in the

fields of meat nutrition and meat preparation. It is highly important that this

position not be jeopardized and that the services in this connection to the consuming public be continued and expanded.

This association views the deduction for meat research, education and promotion as constituting a special case apart from those functions which are defined as stockyards services, for which supervision is provided under the Packers

and Stockyards Act.

Therefore, we recommend favorable action on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 by the

Subcommittee on Livestock and Feed Grains and by the House Committee on

Agriculture.

STATEMENT OF C. T. "TAD" SANDERS, EXECUTIVE COUNSEL, LIVESTOCK MARKET

COUNCIL OF CERTIFIED LIVESTOCK MARKETS

The Livestock Auction Markets Association is the industry trade association

of livestock auction markets posted under the Packers and Stockyards Act as

"stockyards" and registered under the same act as market agencies selling on

commission.

Livestock auction markets actively participating in the association are identified by name and trademark as "certified livestock markets."

It has been the consistent policy of the association to encourage the voluntary

support and action of its "certified livestock markets" in livestock and meat industry undertakings to advance meat research, education, and promotion by

as,sisting in the financing, through processing a uniform per head amount of

livestock sold from the proceeds of sale, to a designated industry agency for

such purposes. A substantial number of such markets have traditionally processed such funds under the agency relationships that exist between them and

livestock owner-customers consigning livestock for sale. This action is deemed

by such markets as a part of their services as such markets.

Certain questions have been raised in recent years as to the legality of such

action and services by all market agencies under the Packers and Stockyards

Act.

This association therefore fully supports H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 and urges

favorable action by the subcommittee, the Committee on Agriculture, and the

Congress to enact such legislation into law.

Because of a pending regulation under the Packers and Stockyards Act to become effective July 1, 1963, affecting the established and recognized industry

procedure of processing livestock-owner proceeds of sale amounts per head for

meat research, education, and promotion, it is urged that Congress enact H.R.

5860 and H.R. 5861 without delay. Such action, in our opinion, will serve to

more firmly establish the basis and value of such endeavors by the livestock and

meat industry which have proven their worth to all elements of the industry and

the consuming public over many years.

STATEMENT OF JOHN A. KILLICK, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL INDEPENDENT

MEAT PACKERS ASSOCIATION

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, my name is John A. KiRick. I

am executive secretary of the National Independent Meat Packers Association,

the headquarters of which is located at 740 11th Street NW., Washington, D.C.

Our association is comprised of approximately 400 independent meat-packing

firms located in all parts of the United States, plus about 200 additional firms

which are involved in the meat-packing industry as suppliers to meat packers.
24 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

In order to clarify the meaning of the word "independent" in the title of our

association, I would like to explain that this means in general ( though there are

certain exceptions) that our members are essentially one-plant operations

serving a community or a region, in contrast to meat-packing firms with national

or near national distribution of their products. Quite obviously, the economic

welfare of our members is greatly dependent upon the continued acceptance and

increased consumption on the part of the consuming public of meat and meat

food products.

For some 40 years, the National Live Stock and Meat Board has contributed

greatly toward the achievement of this goal, by its prolonged and expert campaign of meat promotion, education, and research. When the very existence

of the National Live Stock and Meat Board seemed to be threatened by a proposed

amendment to regulations which were published last year by the Packers and

Stockyards Division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, we notified Secretary of Agriculture Orville Freeman and the then Director of the Packers and

Stockyards Division, Mr. Clarence Girard, of our apprehension over the proposed amendment to packers and stockyards regulations, as published in the

Federal Register, which, in our opinion, would have made it impossible for the

National Live Stock and Meat Board to continue to function. We asked that

public hearings be held regionally so that every livestock producer in the Nation

could be given an opportunity to express his views in person about the potentially

devastating impact on the livestock and meat industry of these proposed amendments, but such hearings were never scheduled by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture.

It was with some dismay, therefore, that we witnessed in the Federal Register

of February 27, 1963, the publication of an amendment to become effective July

1, 1963, because we remain convinced that no benefit whatever could possibly

accrue from this amendment, and that if this amendment is allowed to become

effective it could only open the door to chaos and confusion in the production,

processing, distributive and promotional aspects of the livestock and meat indu8-

try. Moreover, we felt that this amendment would impose an unnecessary,

expensive and unbelievably complicated clerical and financial burden on the

meat-packing industry.

In view of the known position of our association on this matter, we were

naturally gratified to learn of the introduction, on April 25, of H.R. 5860 by

Representative W. R. Poage and an identical bill, H.R. 5861, introduced by

Representative Don L. Short. These bills would have the effect of permitting

market agencies and meat packers to process producer contributions from the

sales of livestock in the manner presently in use, and it is our understanding

that these measures have the support of the directors of the National Live Stock

and Meat Board.

Our association is represented on the National Live Stock and Meat Board by

Mr. John G. Stephen, president of Arbogast & Bastian, Inc., Allentown, Pa.,

and he has informed me that as NIMPA's representative on the Board he had

voted in favor of the proposed legislation. Moreover, the Executive Committee

of NIMPA, meeting in Dallas, Tex., on March 7, 1963, also voted unanimously

to direct me to indicate the support of our association to any solution of this

problem which would enable the National Live Stock and Meat Board to continue

its program of meat promotion, education, and research in the manner in which

it is presently being conducted.

Therefore, we are asking to have this statement entered in the record as

tangible evidence of the desire of the National Independent Meat Packers Association for the Subcommittee on Feed Grains of the House Committee on Agriculture to report favorably on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 and we humbly beseech

you to urge the passage of these measures, so that one of the strong foundations

of the economic welfare of the livestock and meat industry will not be

jeopardized.

STATEMENT OF RIVER MARKETS GROUP

This statement is submitted in support of H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861 by the

River Markets Group. These bills, if adopted, would amend section 407 of the

Packers and Stock Yards Act of 1921. The River Markets Group is a voluntary trade organization composed of the Live Stock Exchanges at Sioux Falls,

Sioux City, Omaha, St. Joseph, Kansas City, and St. Louis.
LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 25

These bills, which were introduced on April 25, 1963 by Representative W. R.

Poage and Representative Don L. Short, would in effect permit marketing agencies and meatpackers to process producer's contributions from the sales of

livestock in the manner presently in use. The passage of these bills would guarantee the continuance of the National Live Stock and Meat Board. The board

conducts a nationwide program of meat research, education, information and

promotion. It is the country's only nationwide meat promotional organization.

It is a nonprofit service organization. Through a wide variety of services and

facilities, it disseminates correct information on meat cookery, care, storage,

selection, nutrition, and other factors related to the subject of meat. Established

by the several branches of the livestock and meat industry 40 years ago, the

board is now recognized as the major source of meat information and nutritional

facts for use both by professional workers and consumers.

It is regarded as a pioneer and leader in the development of the type of selfhelp industrywide promotion program which is carried out without Government

funds and for the benefit of the general public as well as the sponsoring industry.

Many valuable findings in regard to human nutrition have come out of research

made possible by some 250 grants-in-aid provided by the board to medical schools,

hospitals, and foundations during the past 40 years. The members of our organization have been deducting and remitting shipper's funds to the National

Live Stock and Meat Board for well over 30 years. Last year approximately

$330,000 was collected and remitted by the six member markets.

The two bills, as introduced by Representative Poage and Representative

Short would serve to legalize the deduction procedure now in use. At the present time our country is faced with depressed livestock prices. It is a crucial

period for the livestock producer. Established programs of meat education, promotions, and research must be kept at a high level. Any lessening of red meat

promotions at this time could have drastic consequences in all branches of

the livestock and meat industry and hence have a drastic consequence on the

national economy as a whole.

The National Live Stock and Meat Board, since its original inception has been

financed in part through voluntary contributions of livestock growers and feeders in cooperation with livestock marketing firms, who assemble the funds on a

per head basis at the time the livestock is marketed. Contributions to the program are made on some 42 percent of all livestock marketed and slaughtered in

the United States, generally at the rate of 2 cents per head on cattle; two-thirds

cent per head on hogs and calves and two-fifths cent per head on sheep and

lambs. The total contributions provide the board with a budget of slightly over

$1 million a year.

' The River Markets Group and its member marketing agencies and dealers

unanimously endorse the above bills and urge their adoption.

(The following communications were also submitted to the subcommittee:)

AMERICAN NATIONAL CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION,

Denver, Colo., April 26, 1963.

Re H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861.

Hon. W. R. POAGE,

Chairman, Livestock and Feed Grains Subcommittee, House Committee on Agriculture, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR Mn. POAGE : The American National Cattlemen's Association, headquartered in Denver, Colo., for 65 years, is an affiliation of thousands of individual members, 37 State cattle producer and feeder associations and more than

100 local, regional, and breed associations.

Through more than 40 of its 65-year life, the organization has firmly and

positively supported the principles and activities of the National Live Stock and

Meat Board.

Not only has the official policy of the American National Cattlemen's Association so expressed such support in repetitive resolutions, but the bulk of our

affiliated organizations over the years have established similar policies.

We have, collectively, supported the National Live Stock and Meat Board

because:

1. Research into and promotion of use of meat and meat products is vital to

the maintenance of a healthy and prosperous livestock industry through the

various "fads" and ups-and-downs of consumer preference for red meat.
26 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

2. We recognize that as diverse an industry as that of livestock production;

breeding, feeding, and marketing must have coordination in such interrelated

activities as meat research, education, and promotion.

3. The board, made up as it is of proportionate representation from all phases

of livestock and meat interests, has proven over the years that it can reflect

the wishes of producers, handlers, processors, and sellers of animals and product

in an effective, balanced fashion. With recent changes in board concept and

activities, i.e., the creation of specie promotion committees, even more effectiveness is promised.

4. Through their constant support of board policies and activities, as evidenced

by widespread willingness to contribute funds, individual stockmen, as well

as ,marketing and packing interests, have indicated that the board's method of

financing is appropriate and acceptable.

For these reasons, the American National Cattlemen's Association wishes to

join with other organizations and individuals of the livestock and meat industry

in heartily endorsing H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861. Further, we wish to emphasize

that prompt consideration by Congress is necessary if the work of the board

is not to be disrupted by even temporary invocation of the Secretary of Agriculture's regulation relative to fund collections under the Packers and Stockyards Act. With the beef cattle industry in its current precarious situation,

all avenues of marketing, promotion and consumption must be kept open and

vigorous. To this end, the National Live Stock and Meat Board must provide

uninterrupted services.

We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the hearing record

on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861.

Cordially,

C. W. MCMILLAN.

WYOMING WOOL GROWERS ASSOCIATION,

Casper, Wyo., May 2, 1963.

Hon. W. R. POAGE,

House Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN POAGE: The support of H.R. 5860, by the Wyoming Wool

Growers Association, is hereby voiced in this letter and your including it in the

hearing record of the above mentioned bill will be appreciated.

Because meat production has reached record highs, it is especially necessary

at this time for the National Live Stock and Meat Board to be allowed to continue

their excellent program in promoting the products of the livestock and meat

industry.

The amendment of February 26 to the regulations of the Packers and Stockyards Act, would greatly jeopardize the excellent all-industry, self-help program

of meat research, education, information, and promotion which has been conducted for the past 40 years through the services and facilities of the National

Live Stock and Meat Board.

Therefore the Wyoming Wool Growers Association, which represents the in,

terests of the Nation's second largest sheep producing State strongly supports

H.R. 5860 and urges its prompt enactment.

Very truly yours.

ROBERT P. BLEDSOE,

Secret airy, Wyoming Wool Growers Association.

GREAT FALLS, MONT., April 29, 1963.

Hon. W. R. POAGE,

Livestock and Feed Grans Subcommittee,

House Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SIR: The Montana CowBelles, Inc., is a 1,600 member organization of

ranchwomen with 40 affiliated local groups. We are an auxiliary to the Montana Stockgrowers Association, and our purpose is to promote public acceptance

and use of cattle industry products and to promote better public relations be-
4

LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 27

tween the cattle industry and the general public. Without the assistance of the

National Live Stock and Meat Board, we would be unable to carry out the purpose

of our organization.

We support the National Live Stock and Meat Board because:

• 1. Research into and promotion of use of meat and meat products is vital to

the maintenance of a healthy and prosperous livestock industry through the

various fads and ups-and-downs of consumer preference for red meat.

2. We recognize that as diverse an industry as that of livestock production,

breeding, feeding, and marketing must have coordination in such interrelated

activities as meat research, education, and promotion.

3. The board, made up as it is of proportionate representation from all phases

of livestock and meat interests, has proven over the years that it can reflect

the wishes of producers, handlers, processors and sellers of animals and products

In an effective, balanced fashion. With recent changes in board concept and

activities, i.e., the creation of species promotion committees, even more effectiveness is promised.

4. Through their constant support of board policies and activities, as evidenced

by widespread willingness to contribute funds, individual stockmen, as well as

marketing and packing interests, have indicated that the board's method of

financing is appropriate and acceptable.

For these reasons, the Montana CowBelles, Inc., wishes to join with other

organizations and individuals of the livestock and meat industry in heartily

endorsing H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861. Further, we wish to emphasize that

prompt consideration by Congress is necessary if the work of the board is not

to be disrupted by even temporary invocation of the Secretary of Agriculture's

regulations relative to fund collections under the Packers and Stockyards Act.

With the beef cattle industry in its current precarious situation, all avenues of

marketing, promotion, and consumption must be kept open and vigorous. To

this end the National Live Stock and Meat Board must provide uninterrupted

services.

We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the hearing on

H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861.

Very truly yours,

B E'rr y MAURER

Mrs. Joseph Maurer,

President, Montana Cowbelles, Inc.

MICHIGAN LIVESTOCK IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION,

East Lamming, Mich., May 8, 1963.

Congressman W. R. POAGE,

Livestock and Feed Grains Subcommittee,

House Office Building, "Washington, D.C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN POAGE : I am writing on behalf of the officers and directors of the Michigan Livestock Improvement Association in support of your

H.R. 5860 and Representative Short's H.R. 5861, "Fund collection system for

the National Live Stock and Meat Board."

We feel that the work of the meat board should go on uninterrupted and

strongly recommend that the appropriate legislation be passed to attain this

goal.

The work that the National Live Stock and Meat Board has done in the past

40 years has been of invaluable help to the livestock and meat industry. It

is of paramount importance at this time that their good services not be interrupted because of the surplus situation of livestock and meat. The only way

that this surplus can be relieved is through an active promotional program

backed by research and education such as the National Live Stock and Meat

Board carries on.

We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the hearing record

on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861.

Sincerely yours,

PATRICK H. BROWN,

Secretary-Manager

(For Blaque Knirk, president).
28 LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT

(The following communications were received and submitted by

Representatives W. R. Poage and Don L. Short:)

POMONA, KANS., May 2, 1968.

DEAR SIR: The Kansas Livestock 

Association, 

with a membership of 6,500,

has represented the livestock industry in our State for over 50 years. It is with

pride that we recall that our organization originated the idea of having the

National Live Stock and Meat Board to carry out a self-help program of meat

research, education, information, and promotion which it has conducted the

past 40 years. The livestock industry would suffer greatly if the activities Of

this organization were curtailed in any way.

Our association has firmly supported the National Live Stock and Meat Board

through resolutions and active participation by our members in the many activities of the board. We believe its services are vital and necessary because:

1. Research into and promotion of use of meat and meat products is vital

to the maintenance of a healthy and prosperous livestock industry through tlite

various fads and ups and downs of consumer preference for red meat.

2. We recognize that as diverse an industry as that of livestock production,

breeding, feeding, and marketing must have coordination in such interrelated

activities as meat research, education, and promotion.

3. The board, made up as it is of proportionate representation from all phases

of livestock and meat interests, has proven over the years that it can reflect

the wishes of producers, handlers, processors, and sellers of animals and animal

products in an effective, balanced fashion.

4. Through their constant support of board policies and activities, as evidenced

by widespread willingness to contribute funds, individual stockmen, as well as

marketing and packing interests, have indicated that the board's method of

financing is appropriate and acceptable.

As chairman of the Kansas Livestock Association legislative committee, I

wish to assure you that we join with other organizations and individuals

of the livestock and meat industry in heartily endorsing H.R. 5860 and H.R.

5861. Further, we wish to emphasize that prompt consideration by Congress is

necessary if the work of the board is not to be disrupted by even temporary

invocation of the Secretary of Agriculture's regulation relative to fund collections

under the Packers and Stockyards Act. With the beef cattle industry in its

current precarious situation, all avenues of marketing promotion and consumption must be kept open and vigorous. To this end the National Live Stock and

Meat Board must provide uninterrupted services.

I respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the hearing record

on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861.

Very truly yours,

NICHOLAS V. HIIDELSON,

Chairman Legislative Committee,

Kansas Livestock Association.

ARIZONA CATTLE FEEDERS' ASSOCIATION,

Ph,oenim, Ariz., April 29, 1968.

DEAR SIR: We have just learned that Congressman W. R. Poage and Congressman Don Short have introduced identical bills (H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861) ,

which would amend the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921, by removing

the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture from jurisdiction over market

deductions for meat promotion purposes.

In our opinion, such legislation will be extremely beneficial to all segments

of the livestock industry over the United States. It will keep alive the National

Live Stock and Meat Board, which for the past 40 years has done a tremendous

job in meat research, education, and promotion. Voluntary fund contributions

by farmers, feeders, marketing and packing interests to the National Live Stock

and Meat Board for many, many years have been an industry-accepted practice

and continuance of this successful, accepted practice is necessary in order that the

meat board may do more and more in the research, educational, and promotional

fields.

We strongly endorse H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861. We urge the Congress to take

prompt and favorable action on this legislation.
•

4

LIVESTOCK MARKET DEVELOPMENT 29

We respectfully request that this letter be introduced and made a part of

the record of hearing on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861.

Very truly yours,

AUBREY GROUSKAY,

Chairman, Board of Directors.

(The following communication was received and submitted by Representatives W. R. Poage, Spark M. Matsunaga, Don L. Short, and

Albert H. Quie :)

AMERICAN HEREFORD ASSOCIATION,

Kansas City, Mo., April 30, 1963.

DEAR Sin: The American Hereford Association represents over 50,000 breeders

of registered Hereford cattle, with headquarters in Kansas City, Mo. Membership in the association comes from all States and the District of Columbia. The

association has been in existence since 1881.

The association has and does now support the principles and activities of the

National Live Stock and Meat Board. This support we feel is justified because

of the meat board's activities in:

1. Research and promotion of the use of meat and meat products in the maintenance of human health and the prosperity of the livestock industry.

2. The meat board's activity in research and promotion of all segments of the

livestock industry.

3. Its support by producers, handlers, processors, and retailers of meat and

meat products, and

4. The willingness of the industry to support its program in all of its phases.

We, therefore, join with other organizations and individuals of the livestock

and meat industry in endorsing H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861. Prompt action by the

Congress is imperative if the work of the board is to be continued.

We respectfully request that our opinions be made a part of the hearing record

on H.R. 5860 and H.R. 5861.

Sincerely,

PAUL SWAFFAR, secretary.

Mr. POAGE. The committee will now go into executive session to

consider this legislation.

Thank you very much. •

(Whereupon, at 11:05 a.m., the subcommittee proceeded into executive session.)
inummil.....

I/