496 AGRICULTURAL DISCONTENT 



this purpose. The participating agencies included the A.A.A., the F.C.A., 

 the F.E.R.A., and the C.C.C. The responsibilities entrusted to these 

 agencies ranged all the way from the purchase of surplus livestock, feeds, 

 and seeds, the continuation of rental and benefit payments, and the modi- 

 fication of acreage contracts to the granting of emergency loans, reforesta- 

 tion, and other measures "to conserve moisture, prevent wind erosion, 

 and to minimize the effects of future drought." 50 

 Of the more than $102,744,455 spent in the United States at the end of 



1934 for the emergency purchase of cattle, almost half the sum was spent 

 in the western Middle West. The hardest-hit states in the area were North 

 and South Dakota, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, and Minnesota, in the 

 order mentioned. The only state to exceed North Dakota in cattle pur- 

 chases was the giant state of Texas, whose wealth exceeded that of North 

 Dakota by many times. 51 



The effect of the weather on production was well shown during 1933- 

 34. For instance, in 1933 acreage reduction for wheat was unnecessary 

 because the unfavorable weather had already restricted the crop. 02 At the 

 end of 1934 the problem of oversupply had disappeared for the time being 

 for wheat, tobacco, corn, and hog products. The wheat carry-over for 



1935 was not expected to be much beyond the normal 125,000,000 bushels 

 as compared with the almost 400,000,000 bushels at the start of the 1932-33 

 season. Hog production, because of the drought, was lower than planned 

 under the A.A.A. This adjustment was not a controlled adjustment, 

 admitted the A.A.A., because there was no regulation of the acres brought 

 into cultivation, but rather an adjustment that was brought about by 

 the weather, over which man had little or no control. 53 



One of the features of the 1934 wheat program was the development 

 of a compliance-checking plan whereby it would be possible to determine 

 whether the farmers were complying with the terms of their adjustment 

 contracts. This task was accomplished through the wheat-allotment com- 

 mittees that were established in each of the counties. Each county com- 

 mittee checked and certified the compliance of the cooperating farmers 

 in its own county. Farmers and other local people in each county were 



50. U. S. Dept. Agri., A.A.A., Agricultural Adjustment in 1934, pp. 20-23. 



51. Ibid., p. 31. 



52. Ibid., p. 4. 

 53- UM P- 13- 



