GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 1055 



Eis cultivation cost is built up this way. In February and March 

 he has to start out, and he has one round with a disk tiller, which 

 costs 70 cents, and later on he has two more rounds at $1.50; in 

 April and Jiine he goes around four times with the spring tooth harrow 

 at $4.50, and in June he puts in his seed cover crop and applies the slag 

 or phosphate. He has brushing, terraces, and cutting out his volunteer 

 sprouts, which would just rob the tree of the feililizer. And then 

 again in September he has to go around ^^ ith the offset disk with the 

 drag, and this at a cost of $1.40. He then has a fertilization progi'am, 

 which includes his cover crop, which requires 500 pounds of slag or 

 250 pounds of phosphate with 500 pounds of dolomite limestone at 

 a co-t of $4.25. And the trees we now assune that they are 9 years 

 old, and have 75 of them per acre, we assume that, and we have to 

 apply ammonium nitrate \\hich costs applied $11.90. The phosphate 

 applied v/ith the cover crop costs $3.70, and to apply this costs $1.50, 

 or a total on the fertilization program of $17.10, with an overhead 

 cost of $3,44. That gives you the cultivation co«t. 



On page 2 of exliibit B, you have the harvesting cost, which amounts 

 to $19.64. 



We have been optimistic in stating that we are producing a ton per 

 acre in using these figures. I am quite sure that everybody will agree 

 that we do not produce that. Those figures are very much on the 

 conservative side. 



Mr. Pace. Thank you very much. Are there any questions? 



Mr. Granger. You ai;e appearing here in support of H. R. 29, is 

 that correct? 



Mr. O'Connor. Yes. 



Mr. Granger. Has the author of this bill appeared before the 

 committee? 



Mr. Pace. Mr. Colmer has. Yes; he testified this morning. 



Mr. Granger. What does he propose to do with this. I was under 

 the impression that any agricultural crop that was produced under the 

 war-incentive program was under the Steagall amendment, why was 

 that dropped out? 



Mr. Pace. My understanding is that notwithstanding the state- 

 ments made here today there never was any official announcement 

 by the Department asking for increased production. 



Mr. Granger. They had incentive payments. They certainly did. 

 How much was that an acre? 



Air. O'Connor. I believe that we did have incentive bulletins or 

 requests by Mr. Wickard who was then the Secretary of Agriculture. 

 There is a gentleman here who is a pioneer in the industry and he can 

 recall from personal memory, I think. 



Mr. Pace. That was under the soil conservation ACP payment. 



Mr. O'Connor. That was under the soil conservation that is 

 cori'ect, but I believe also the Secretary of Agricidture, Mr. Wickard 

 also asked the tung industry to increase and produce more tung oil 

 for the armed forces during World War H. Mr. Rowlands, a pioneer 

 in the industry, would probably have a more vivid memory of that 

 request. 



Mr. Pace. In order to conform with the Steagall Act, there was 

 the necessity for issuance of an official proclamation to ask the pro- 

 ducers to increase production, and Mr. Pritchard advised me that he 



'.•12ir> — 40 — ser. n. pt. 5 20 



