191 



17 

 government In cooperation with the states would provide the funding for these 

 experimental animals and facilities. 



Major federally supported research facilities for livestock research 

 should be located near complementary activities. Host Important are closeness 

 to the geographical center of production for the particular livestock being 

 researched and to a strong land-grant university. Locating major research 

 facilities «rt\ere production is concentrated also has the advantages of most 

 easily getting fanners' Input about production and marketing problems and 

 of most easily transferring technology back to farms. Associations with 

 universities have a major advantage over more Isolated Intellectual locations 

 for research facilities because the cost of getting and keeping excellent 

 scientists and technicians is generally reduced when they are part of a 

 university. In addition, access to advances in good general and pretechnology 

 scleinces And to low cost graduate student research assistants are j^reater at 

 major universities. 



In thinking about location of experimental animal research facilities, 

 I suggest something along the following lines. For dairy, I recommend not 

 more than four. Possibly, one each for the (1) Com Belt and Lake States, 

 (2) Northeast and Appalachla, (3) the Southeast, Delta States, and Southern 

 Plains, and (4) the West (Pacific, Mountain States, and Northern Plains). 

 For swine, I recommend one probably located in Iowa. For cattle finishing, I 

 suggest not more than two: one for the High Plains Region (Texas, Oklahoma, 

 Kansas, Nebraska, and Colorado) focused on very large feedlot operations (in 

 excess of 2,000 head per year) and another for other states having significant 

 cattle finishing and concentrating on small feedlot operations (less than 2,000 

 head per year). For broilers, I recomoiend one, located in Arkansas, Georgia, 

 Alabama, or Maryland. 



