1210 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



5. The program lends itself to improved production and marketing 

 of the wool clip because the payment is based on the percentage of 

 the sale price. 



6. Such a program would eliminate the additional cost borne by 

 the producer as a result of the Government actually taking over 

 the wool. 



7. The program would save the Government money and cut down 

 red tape when compared to a purchase program. 



8. The plan would give the Department of Agriculture the most 

 accurate record of prices received and pounds of wool produced 

 whether support was necessary or not. 



9. Last but not least, it takes the Government as far as possible 

 out of the business and still provides a support program when necessary. 



Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like, if I may, in addition, to cover 

 a few matters which I did not think were too well covered the other 

 day when the Secretary appeared. 



Under the present parity basis of the 1909-14 price, which the 

 President of the United States and former Secretary of Agriculture 

 Anderson have both stated is not proper for wool, as of May 15, 1949, 

 the 44.8 cents per grease pound. 



Parity under the Agricultural Act of 1948 for wool is 48.2 cents a 

 pound as of March 15, 1949, and the support level is 43.4 cents. 

 Now, the price support standard for wool under Secretary Brannan's 

 proposal is 49.8 cents per pound. 



The present support level under the purchase program for wool 

 was established by specific legislation without regard to any per- 

 centage of parity, and under the Wool Act of 1947 it is 42.3 cents per 

 grease pound. The average price for wool as of May 15, 1949, accord- 

 ing to the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, is 50.6 cents per pound. 



As to prices today, the price for good fine, and half-blood Australian 

 wool, comparable with the Texas fine and Territory half-blood wool, 

 is approximately 68 cents a pound, and at the present time the 

 market is hardening in Australia on those types of wool. 



In closing, may I say if Congress does permit a trial run of produc- 

 tion payments on wool, we suggest that they specify that those pay- 

 ments be made on th(^ basis of a percentage calculation ,and not 

 ''straight across the board." 



Thank you very much. 



Mr. Pace. The hurried reading of your statement, of course, did 

 not permit of a complete analysis. State again to me, briefly, the 

 significance of this percentage method. It seems to me, in the example 

 you used, that the man who receives the most for his wool would get 

 the biggest payment. 



Mr. Jones. That is correct. Perhaps one reason why he would get 

 the biggest payment is because on the fleece that came off the sheep's 

 back, he had more actual clean wool in that fleece than the man who 

 got 30 cents, because there would be less percentage of grease, dirt, 

 and vegetable matter in his wool. On that fleece, just to take one 

 fleece as a example, the man who got 30 cents per pound would 

 probably receive, for the same quality of wool, the same amount of 

 money per fleece as the man who received 60 cents per pound when the 

 fleece contained less dirt. 



Mr. Pace. Well, you would not make any payment to him where 

 he sold it for as much as the support price, would you? 



