producers and agricultural leaders and 

 they have recommended a number of 

 changes for consideration. 



Some have urged greater flexibility in 

 the establishment of allotments to per- 

 mit more efficient farming. Some have 

 urged that other feed g^'ains be included 

 under the control program. It has been 

 suggested that administration of the pro- 

 gram should be further decentralized and 

 that a one-contract-per-farm progrram be 

 developed, and that a single county con- 

 trol association shou}d be in charge of 

 the entire adjustment program within the 

 county. Important and influential ad- 

 visors have urged a control of livestock 

 indirectly through a direct control of 

 feed grain production. These suggestions 

 should be given careful consideration. 



It is true there are difficulties in es- 

 tablishing allotments on the base period 

 production. The historical base method 

 tends to establish as a vested property 

 right the amount of past ptoduction. If 

 the past base was not according to good 

 farming practice it is frozen there never- 

 theless, even though there may have been 

 unusual conditions that established it 

 that way. Perhaps, although base period 

 production in each region or farm should 

 continue as a guide in establishing al- 

 lotments, it should be used more as a 

 rough measuring stick only, and allot- 

 ments should be determined partly on 

 good farming practice and practical 

 equity. 



It is also true that other feed grains 

 must b6 considered as well as com. The 

 drought encouraged the growing of other 

 feed grains on land kept out of com last 

 year, and there are no restrictions on the 

 growing of feed grains other than com 

 this year. However, little could be gained 

 in the long run, by merely shifting from 

 com to some other feed g^rain. 



Neither can there be much argument 

 from tlje long time point of view against 

 eliminating the overlapping of admin- 

 istrative machinery. Duplication of effort 

 should be avoided. 



The most important suggestion is that 

 for controlling livestock production 

 through a control of feed gn:«in. If that 

 could be done it would set aside the 

 problem of making specific allotments 

 to livestock an4. would simplify restric- 

 tions. Hog farmers know the difficulties 

 encountered in establishing satisfactory 

 individual allotments for livestock, with 

 the scarcity of records and the difficulty 

 of maintaining equity among producers. 



Difficulties Arise 



Since it is found necessary to attach 

 hog allotments to the individual rather 

 than to the farm, difficulties arise in 

 ntaking provision for new producers each 

 y»ar and dividing payments between 

 tenants and landlords. This difficulty 

 would increase with the passage of time. 



Another difficulty, of course, is in check- 

 ing compliance, obviously more compli- 

 cated than in the case of acres of land 

 spread out to be seen and measured. 



Of course, in considering the possibility 

 of controlling livestock through feed 

 grains in the future we should not judge 

 it by how it might have worked last 

 year. Last year the only way that hog 

 production could have been curtailed 

 through com control would have been to 

 create such an unfavorable price re- 

 lationship that forced liquidation would 

 have resulted. This severe type of ad- 

 justment is not desired. There has been 

 too much of that in the past. But now 

 that the downward adjustment has been 

 made, the objective should be to main- 

 tain a reasonable relationship between 

 the price of feed and the price* of live- 

 stock, i 



Now, to what extent would a control 

 of feed grrain acreage control the produc- 

 tion of livestock? 



As for hogs the answer is clear. The 

 ups and downs of com production have 

 been followed in about a year with cor- 

 responding changes in hog production. 

 As for cattle, the tonnage of beef pro- 

 duced in the Corn Belt would, no doubt, 

 be curtailed through a control of corn 

 production at least until the crop land 

 previously used for com became pro- 

 ductive in the form of hay and pasture. 

 Because of the effect of the 1934 drought 

 in hay, pasture, and seed supply, it would 

 be at least two or three years before the 

 maximum increase in hay and pasture, 

 which might result from a grrain pro- 

 gram, could be obtained. 



Effect on Beef 



Western cattle producers would be 

 concerned as to how they would be af- 

 fected by a feed grain qrogrram. Their 

 first reaction, no doubt, would be that 

 it would limit their outlet for feeder 

 cattle, and hence reduce their financial 

 returns. Such a result is unlikely. As 

 indicated earlier, during the first two or 

 three years the tonnage of beef con- 

 tributed to our markets from the Com 

 Belt would probably be reduced. This 

 would reduce the competition on the 

 slaughter market for grass cattle from 

 the West. Reduced competition from 

 pork would also be a price raising in- 

 fluence on grass cattle. In fact, even if 

 the acreage retired from grain produc- 

 tion were devoted entirely to the pro- 

 duction of hay and pasture within the 

 next two or three years, the total meat 

 production would be smaller than if such 

 acres were utilized for grain production. 

 An average acre of feed grain produces 

 approximately twice as much feed as an 

 acre of hay or pasture. In addition, some 

 portion of acreage retired from feed 

 grain production would go into soil-im- 

 provement crops, be fallowed, or be de- 



voted to -feed or woodlots. The increased 

 pasturage probably would also encourage 

 Corn Belt farmers to bring in from the 

 range states a larger number of cattle to 

 be finished on grass in the Com B^t. 



It is true that in years of large com 

 crops the range cattle producer enjoys 

 a good demand for feeder cattle during 

 the fall. But in practically every case 

 on record th>3 has resulted in an ex- 

 cessive market supply of beef during the 

 following summer, materially lower 

 prices, and a very weak demand for 

 feeder cattle, due to the heavy losses of 

 feeding operations during the previous 

 season. Past experience indicates that 

 in the long run, tiie beet interests of the 

 western cattlemen are served by keeping 

 the tonnage of beef within reasonable 

 bounds, and thereby supporting the price 

 of cattle for slaughter. i 



Effect on Dairying 



The effect upon dairy production is not 

 so clear-cut. A tendency toward dairy 

 expansion in the Northeast would be 

 curbed by the rising grain prices, but 

 it is possible that in the Middlewest the 

 increase in acreage of pasture and hay 

 would tend to encourage dairy production 

 there. However, there are other off- 

 setting factors. One is that during pe- 

 riods when other forms of livestock pro- 

 duction are profitable in the Middlewest 

 the tendency is to decrease dairying. As 

 in the case of beef cattle, any incentive 

 to expand dairying would be very limited 

 in the next two or three years because of 

 th& after-effects of the drought on pas- 

 ture and hay supplies. In the long run, 

 the net effect of a feed grain progpram 

 on dairy production for the country as a 

 whole would be small. 



Incidentally, since poultry consumes 

 about 10 percent of our com crop, ac- 

 cording to estimates made by the Bu- 

 reau of Agricultural Economics, a feed . 

 gnin t)roduction control program would 

 have an effect on poultry production. 



A-nd there is another very important 

 factor in considering a feed grain acre- 

 age control program. That is the land 

 itself. Any sound progfram for the future 

 must definitely take into account the use 

 of land and its conservation. No pro- 

 grzm, however glittering prospects it 

 may offer for the immediate future, is 

 sound if it does not consider the lan^. 



A program to keep the acreage of 

 feed grains at a lower level than that of 

 recent years, and to use the retired acres 

 for the production of hay and pasture, 

 would be a boon to the Com Belt for the 

 land's sake. It would give producers a 

 chance to bring back some of the fertility 

 that has been sacrificed in recent years. 

 High fixed charges for land use and low 

 returns per bushel during the past few 

 years have forced intensive farming. The 

 individual farmer caught in the helpless- 



p 



26 



I. A. A. RECORD 



:-:. . Iv^> 



PEBE 





