1204 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



true in the early part of the fall, when the first turkeys were looking 

 for a buyer with little current demand for turkeys for immediate 

 consumption. 



We feel sure this plan would be far more costly to the taxpayers 

 than the purchase program. On the other hand, we believe a pur- 

 chase program would be cheaper. It has been shown in the past that 

 the level of turkey prices has been substantially helped by the very 

 announcement of a Government purchase program. The announce- 

 ment of a floor price gives confidence to those who store, and the 

 Government has need to buy few, if any, turkeys. 



Thank you. 



Mr. Pace. Mr, Johnson, there is one change in your statement 

 from that of the previous statement. You said you did not think 

 the support ought to be over 90 percent. Those gentlemen recom- 

 mended that supports be from 60 to 90. Do you join in that 

 recommendation ? 



JMr. Johnson. I see no objection to joining with it, providing it does 

 not show a profit. If 70 percent would show a profit, we would want 

 the 60. 



Mr. Pace. The other question is this — I would like for Mr. Rice 

 and Mr. Hubbard also to listen to this question. 



Mr. Johnson, assuming that the interpretation placed on the Aiken 

 Act, which is scheduled to go into effect on the first day of January, 

 and the interpretation placed thereon by the Secretary of Agriculture 

 to the general effect that no support for any commodity is available, 

 but is rather prohibited, where the commodity is perishable in nature, 

 is not reasonably storable without excessive cost or excessive loss, if 

 that is interpreted to apply to chickens and eggs and turkeys, then do 

 you want the Aiken bill to go into effect on the 1st day of January? 



Mr. Johnson. No; I do not believe the turkey producers would. 



Mr. Pace. You feel they are entitled to a reasonable support? 



Mr. Johnson. That is correct. 



Mr. Pace. I might add here that in our hearings, which I have 

 reviewed here, the testimony of the Solicitor with regard to livestock 

 under that act was that there were only one or two ways that they 

 could support livestock. One would be to buy cattle and build pens 

 and feed them, and the other would be to kill them and put them in 

 storage. He thought that both of those methods were impractical. 



Of course, you cannot support the price of eggs and chickens and 

 tm'keys unless you buy them and put them in storage, where there is 

 certainly a high cost and a certain amount of loss. You think that 

 if that construction of the language is correct, it should certainly be 

 amended before it goes into effect? 



Mr. Johnson. That is the Aiken bill? 



Mr. Pace. Yes. 



Ai'e there any questions, Mr. Granger? 



Mr. Granger. Yes. I am just a little confused about your 

 statement there. You said you did not want the support price less 

 than 90 percent of parity, which was a break-even point. What do 

 you mean by that? You do not have to have 90 percent of parity to 

 break even; do you? 



Mr. Johnson. It is definitely the opinion of the turkey growers that 

 90 percent of parity is the break-even point. There are some reports 

 we have had recently from the west coast tliat 90 percent would not 



