644 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



the future. At that time a number of you gentlemen requested that 

 the Wheat League give further study to the details of a two-price 

 plan for wheat and report back to you at a later date. The organiza- 

 tion has requested me to give you what suggestions we can regarding 

 how a two-price plan for wheat might be put into operation. 



The Oregon Wheat Growers League is a commodity organization 

 composed entirely of wheat farmers in Oregon. It is the successor to 

 the Eastern Oregon Wheat League which has now been expanded to 

 include the entire State. As I told your committee in 1941, the pur- 

 pose of this organization is to unite the farmers in their efforts to 

 solve the many problems that confront them. There are no paid 

 employees in the organization, and the work is carried by committees 

 that are appointed by the executive committee, which, in turn, is 

 elected by the membership at the annual convention. 



It is as chairman of the Federal agricultural programs committee 

 that I represent the Wlieat League here today. Along with me are 

 Mr. Paulen Kaseberg of Wasco, Oreg., president of the Oregon Wheat 

 Growers League; Ray Small of Walla Walla, Wash., president of the 

 Washington-Idaho Wheat Growers League; Leo Horrigan, of Prosser, 

 Wash., vice president of the Washington-Idaho Wheat Growers 

 League — I might say these gentlemen endorse fully the statement I 

 am making, as they have studied it carefully — H. R. Weatherford, 

 Wallowa, Oreg., chairman, field crops committee, Oregon State Farm 

 Bureau; and E. J. Bell, Pendleton, Oreg., administrator, Oregon 

 Wlieat Commission. 



As Mr. Kaseberg told you last month our organization has con- 

 ferred with other organizations of wheat producers in Washington, 

 Oregon, Idaho, and Montana. Since I appeared before you in 1941, 

 we have been meeting with these other organizations and have agreed 

 upon a national wheat program which Mr. Kaseberg presented to you. 

 What we should like to see is a program that would "insofar as prac- 

 ticable" (1) guarantee parity on that portion of the crop consumed 

 as food in the L^nited Stetes, (2) be self supporting from a financial 

 standpoint, and (3) minimize the necessity for acreage reduction. 



The present law does none of these things. Loan rates would be 

 drastically reduced from the present levels and would be far below 

 parity as it has been figured in the past. Even with reduced loan 

 rates, acreage allotments and marketing quotas will still be tight 

 under the present law. We understand that the allotment for 1950 

 will require a reduction of 20 to 25 percent from the acreage planted 

 for the 1949 crop. In our area and in other semiarid re|;ions where no 

 alternative uses for the land are available these allotments will 

 seriously interfere with normal farm operations. We much prefer 

 to operate our farms efficiently, even though this would require selling 

 the surplus into export, feed, or industrial markets at lower than 

 parity prices. While we would be willing to accept lower price sup- 

 port levels, the present law will require strict acreage allotments 

 along with reduced wheat prices. 



My farm is fairly representative of the region. I have 1,000 acres 

 of crop land and it is half in wheat and half in summer fallow. Because 

 of the limited rainfall in our area, we are limited as to the crops we 

 can produce. It is impossible to diversify to any great extent. It is 

 difficult to make profitable use of the diverted acres under allotment 



