103 



Both the condition and the capacity of our national research infrastructure are in need of 

 immediate attention. The general underinvestment in agricultural research for the past two 

 decades has forced university research administrators to use their scarce resources to sustain 

 research programs, often at the expense of the maintenance of the research infrastructure. 

 Nearly every agricultural research facility in the nation has a backlog of needed facility 

 renovations and new research facility construction projects that they have had to defer. 



Current Appropriations; To address this growing problem, many universities have resorted 

 to individual funding initiatives with Congress. A sharp increase in such activities has 

 occurred over the past several years. Klany, if not most, of these projects are reasonable 

 investments when considered in isolation. However, there arc a growing number of proposals 

 for facility projects which are only vaguely related to agriculture and that are competing with 

 mainstream proposals. There is not a method currently in use to assure an effective linkage 

 between strategic national priorities for new knowledge and technology and decisions on 

 federal funding of new facilities and equipment Additional funding of almost $500 million 

 would be required to fully fund (as requested) all the projects which have already received 

 some federal funds for planning, design or initial construction. 



The Previous Proposa]; Two years ago, NASULGC endorsed a proposal for federal 

 investment in agricultural research facilities that was recommended by a USDA/NASULGC 

 committee of distinguished scholars and administrators (attachment 1). This plan would 

 establish a competitive grants program under authority of the Research Facilities Act of 1963, 

 as amended, and called for a collaborative priority-setting effort involving NASULGC, USDA 

 and the Congress. However, the Strategic Research Plan of the Experiment Station 

 Committee on Organization and Policy and the Cooperative State Research Service is now in 

 place and is the functioning mechanism for establishing national strategic research priorities 

 for the land-grant universities in their rclationship with USDA. It is based on a broad 

 consensus among both the users and performers of research. I believe this can be used to 

 establish priorities for facilities and equipment needs of the system. Using this as the 

 mechanism for identifying priorities, I would commend the earlier NASULGC/USDA 

 proposal to the committee as one mechanism for providing federal support 



Finally, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully request that along with my statement you receive a 

 written statement for the record from Mr. Charles Schroeder of Nebraska. Mr. Schroeder is a 

 dedicated member of our citizens' advocacy group called "CARET" and he presents some 

 observations on the state of university research facilities from the perspective of an "end-user" 

 of agricultural research. I hope that you will agree to accept Mr. Schroeder's written 

 testimony for the record. 



