special hobby of mine (or a number of years. I spent 

 21 years in a land grant university and was trained in 

 a land grant university I think that there are some 

 very important problems here and I would like to just 

 identify what I think they are. 



I think it's terribly important that we maintain the 

 investment in this area and federal investment has 

 been declining States have increased their invest- 

 ment in agriculture and certainly they are to be compli- 

 mented for that. There is a great deal of pressure 

 being put on the land grant system, from the federal 

 establishment generally, and it's my feeling that we're 

 going exactly the wrong way. 



I think what is happening here is that, because of 

 the great concern about accountability, the system is 

 being coordinated to death. Some of the very most 

 able people are spending all of their time trying to 

 take this very loose system, coordinate it, and present 

 some kind of a plan to the Congress that proves that 

 there's no duplication and there's no overlap. I think 

 the strength of this system historically has been its 

 decentralization. I do not believe you can organize 

 research for the entire land grant system from Wash- 

 ington, DC, or from any central point. It's the Dr. 

 Borlaugs working in the local area that make the dif- 

 ference, and so I think that there's great danger here. 



At the same time, I think that the federal govern- 

 ment has a major responsibility in agricultural 

 research, and I'll just mention two areas I think some 

 investment in basic research often has to be under- 

 written by the federal government because I think no 

 one state can be sure it's going to get a return on 

 that kind of investment. And so I think the amount of 

 basic research is needed. We cannot expect to get it 

 entirely from the state and I think the area of national 

 agricultural policy is a peculiar responsibility of the 

 federal government. 



I think that what is happening at the present time, 

 and there has been a real trend in this direction in the 

 last ten years, is to try to push the system into a 

 straight jacket, a blueprint from Washington. I simply 

 think that is going to be counter-productive with 

 respect to agricultural research 



I apologize for the little speech here, but it is an 

 area which I feel very keenly about and I certainly 

 think, whether I am right or wrong, it is an important 

 area that the governors should be very well aware of. 



(Governor Lamm): Governor Olson 



(Governor Olson): Correct me if I'm wrong, but I 

 think the Farm bill had some provisions that 

 responded to the embargo problem There is, I 

 believe, compensation required if we embargo in the 



future At a minimum, there was at least a response to 

 the embargo problem which may bode well for the 

 future. 



It's been my observation that states have just two 

 areas that can affect their agricultural well being — 

 marketing and research. It may be my only conces- 

 sion to the New Federalism in the sense that we are 

 going to increase our research in North Dakota and 

 also some dollars for marketing. 



In '81, we funded a Northern Cross Institute of 

 North Dakota State University which will be for the pur- 

 pose of quite similar institutions around the country, 

 Dr. Castle, to emphasize the crops grown in our part 

 of the country, but in research I hope it will be more 

 than symbolic in a very tight budgeting situation that 

 we will enhance dollars available for research. But I 

 suspect it will be very parochial. 



We grow premium wheats in North Dakota even 

 though we were the number one wheat producer last 

 year. That was because Kansas had some unfortu- 

 nate experience with weather. We grow premium 

 wheats and we have a difficult time marketing them 

 worldwide where the emphasis is on its pricing. So, 

 we'll be parochial and somewhat self-serving in our 

 research and I'm concerned that while we're empha- 

 sizing the high protein potential of North Dakota 

 wheats, we may be losing a sense of the quality, bak- 

 ing quality, the quality of gluten and this type of thing. 



We're concerned there We'll be parochial and I 

 guess that fits. Dr. Castle, with your approach. And 

 that IS why I would like to see a fairly general agricul- 

 tural policy for the United States. I'd like to have it 

 speak to the embargo issue and to set some goals. 

 For the nation it seems to be the only industry that we 

 retain a basic strength in worldwide. No one can 

 compete with us in agriculture, and it's because of the 

 things that Dr. Borlaug indicated. 



But, within that larger policy framework, I'd like to 

 be able to, as governor of North Dakota, to look after 

 our particular interests within that large policy for the 

 United States. It's an observation, but I'd like to see 

 us doing something about it at the Western Gover- 

 nors' Conference, because it has been a stable 

 thread throughout our existence out here, Dick, as you 

 indicated. We need work on it. 



(Mr. Bressler): Governor, I would just like to com- 

 ment on your remark on the provision in the legislation 

 that tried to accommodate the farmer in the event of 

 an embargo Then it gets going in the wrong direc- 

 tion, because that doesn't do anything for the cus- 

 tomer. It's the customer that we're worried about 

 because he is the fellow that ultimately is going to 



37 



