I am E. Bowen Quillin, president of the Eastern Shore Poultry Growers' Exchange, Selbyville, Del. The organization which I represent has joined with the following other organizations in the preparation of this statement-they are: The Delmarva Poultry Industry, Inc., the Delaware State Poultry Commission, the Maryland State Poultry Council, the Eastern Shore Grain & Feed Dealers' Association, and the Delaware Poultry Improvement Association. Each of these organizations is represented here today, and these representatives will be glad to state their views in person, if the committee requests.

I want to point out that this statement represents the broiler production and marketing area popularly known as Delmarva. Delmarva is a peninsula consisting of the State of Delaware, 9 Maryland counties, and 2 counties of Virginia, located on the Eastern Shore.

The combined membership of these organizations represents more than 75 percent of the poultry producers on Delmarva; also represented by these organizations are the various feed dealers and manufacturers, poultry processors, hatcheries, allied poultry industries, and business organizations whose prosperity is closely asociated with the welfare of the Delmarva Peninula.

Statements presented at earlier hearings have emphasized the importance of poultry and poultry products in the agricultural economy. On a national basis, poultry is the third most important farm commodity, accounting for 11 percent of the total farm income. With your permission, I would like to say a few words about the Delmarva poultry industry. Delmarva is usually credited with being the birthplace of the commercial broiler industry. In a short period of 20 years broilers have become the lifeblood of the agricultural economy and the bellwether of the entire Delmarva area. Broilers account for 50 percent of the agricultural income of Delaware and almost 70 percent of the farm income of Sussex County.

In Maryland broilers account for slightly over 20 percent of the total farm income in the State; but in the Eastern Shore counties close to one-half of the farm income is from broiler production.

In 1955, total broiler production for the peninsula was close to 500 million pounds, returning growers approximately $125 million in terms of gross income. To us, poultry is important, and we are always interested in those conditions which will assure the public a wholesome product at a reasonable cost and at the same time serve the interest of this important industry.

The phenomenal growth of the broiler industry in Delmarva and other production areas is the result of several factors:

1. The production and marketing of a product that enjoys remarkable consumer acceptance.

2. The tremendous advancement in efficiency of all phases of the entire broiler industry. The public has been the benefactor of this efficiency by receiving an improved quality product at low relative prices.

3. The determination on the part of the industry to solve its own problem without the aid of Government subsidies.

We are in agreement with the objectives of both of the Senate bills under consideration, that of providing compulsory Federal inspection for poultry and poultry products. Such a program we believe would

be beneficial to all. Consumers would have the added assurance of a wholesome product. Poultry producers and those engaged in processing and marketing would benefit from increased confidence and acceptance of the inspected product. Also, such a program would put poultry on equal basis with red meats which have enjoyed the benefits of compulsory Federal inspection for many years.

After careful study of these two bills, S. 3588 and S. 3983, we believe that the Aiken bill, S. 3588, very definitely provides the best framework for developing a compulsory Federal inspection program for poultry. We recommend and urge its enactment for these reasons:

1. It establishes a practical timetable for the application of compulsory inspection of all plants, permitting those plants that are now under the voluntary plan to shift to the new plan as soon as the administrative machinery can be established. On the other hand, those plants that must make changes in their operation would have sufficient time to make these changes without disrupting the orderly movement of poultry from farm to market.

2. We question the advisability of designating by law a specific agency to carry out the inspection program. Senate bill 3588 leaves this decision to the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture. Senate bill 3983 would place poultry inspection in the hands of Federal Meat Inspection Service. We question the logic of this because poultry and read meats are two distinctly different products with different growers and growing conditions, processors, and pathology; and furthermore, poultry and red meats compete for the same "meat". dollar.

3. The voluntary inspection program now operated by the Agricultural Marketing Service has received wide acceptance. This program is used much more in Delmarva than in other areas. It is estimated that between 60 and 65 percent of the poultry processed on Delmarva now is inspected for wholesomeness. We feel it has been very helpful in raising to very high levels the processing and marketing standards now used by the processors on Delmarva. It seems logical that this experience and know-how should not be overlooked in selecting an agency to administer the compulsory program.

4. We feel that the provisions for ante mortem inspection as stated in S. 3983 is impractical and unworkable in an area such as Delmarva, where the free movement of live poultry across State boundaries is a necessity for orderly marketing and competitive selling.

We have buyers in the Eastern Shore Poultry, Inc., from four different States. They have been approved as buyers. I think it is safe to say about 50 percent of the poultry moved from the house to the plant would move across State borders. This, obviously, would make it very impractical to have inspection in the field.

5. To make a compulsory inspection program fully effective and equally applicable to all processors, some means of regulating intrastate movement of poultry is needed. Senate bill S. 3588 provides for this by giving the Secretary of Agriculture, in cooperation with local health authorities, the power to establish such a program in a designated city or area, thereby coordinating all poultry inspection. It seems only fair to point out that no other phase of the poultry and livestock industries has made greater increases in efficiency during the past 25 years than has the broiler-fryer business. During 1930,

only 20 pounds of poultry meat could be realized from each 100 pounds of feed; today, an equal amount of feed will produce 38 pounds of chicken meat, an increase of 90 percent.

Such progress in the poultry industry results in reasonable consumer prices, giving Mrs. Housewife a decided advantage as she selects broilers and fryers for her family's meat. And she is choosing chicken often. During the past quarter of a century, broiler growing has increased from less than a million a year to more than 1 billion. Think of it from one-quarter pound broiler meat annually, to 18 pounds per person in 1955. During the same period, all chicken-meat consumption increased from about 10 pounds per person to about 29 pounds.

Such a record as that just reviewed has been no accident. This progress could have been made only through fair dealings with consumers, giving them a wholesome, economical meat buy as they have continued to purchase poultry at a rapidly increasing rate.

In closing, let me say again we are in favor of compulsory inspection of poultry and poultry products. We believe the inspection program should be one that provides sufficient safeguards to the consuming public without adding unnecessarily to the cost of marketing. In our humble opinion, we believe Senate bill S. 3588 provides the necessary framework for establishing a workable compulsory Federal inspection program. We hope the subcommittee will give it favorable consideration.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to present this statement.

Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you very much, Mr. Quillin.

The committee is to understand that you feel that the adoption of some form of compulsory inspection for poultry would be a benefit, not only to the consumer, but also to the farmer and all segments of the industry involved. Is that right?

Mr. QUILLIN. That is right, sir.

Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you.

I am wondering if you would not, for the record, identify the men that you have with you and the organization which they represent, or perhaps we can go down the line, and each one of you identify yourselves.

Mr. QUILLIN. Dr. John Hammond, Delaware State Poultry Commission. Next is Sterling White, of the Delmarva Poultry Industry. Next is Mr. Phillips, representing the Maryland State Poultry Council. Next is Mr. Gordon, representing the Delaware Poultry Improvement Association.

Senator WILLIAMS. Do any of you gentlemen have an additional statement that you wish to submit for the record?

Thank you, Mr. Quillin.

Our next witness is Mr. Herbert Beyers.

STATEMENT OF HERBERT BEYERS, SECRETARY, NORBEST TURKEY GROWERS' ASSOCIATION, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH

Mr. BEYERS. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I represent the Norbest Turkey Growers' Association, Salt Lake City, Utah, which is a cooperative marketing association, with cooperative

1

corporations affiliated as members. This organization has a membership of approximately 4,000 turkey growers located in the States of Utah, California. Oregon, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Illinois. In addition to this, we get a considerable volume from neighboring States.

We are one of the pioneers in developing and using the inspection services of the Department of Agriculture for wholesomeness of poultry. Since this program has been on a voluntary basis and our members have, therefore, had to pay for inspection for wholesomeness, they have been a competitive disadvantage with producers who have not utilized the service.

In the beginning there was no previous experience in poultry inspection, so both the Department and the plants using the inspection service on a voluntary basis had to work it out. While our plants are principally on turkeys and a very small percent of the birds show any evidence of disease, our turkey growers are determined to eliminate even this very small percent.

We believe that the department handling poultry inspection has done a commendable job in protecting the health of the public.

Our records show that we have been able to put wholesome inspected poultry on the market; that it has had good acceptance by the public. Our organization supports Senate bill 3588 under which the Secretary of Agriculture will administer the compulsory law when it is enacted. We oppose Senate bill 3983 which places the administration of the inspection law under the Meat Division of the Department of Agriculture.

We believe that this proposed legislation should take advantage of the 28 years of experience already gained in the inspection of poultry. We have found the present inspection service to be alert and diligent. They have held post-mortem inspection on all poultry, and ante-mortem inspection when they deemed it necessary. As one of the pioneers in the use of inspection services, our members have made substantial investments in modern processing facilities costing between $300,000 and $400,000 per plant where refrigeration is included. We have 12 member plants under this inspection service. By this experience and these expenditures, we have demonstrated our desire to supply the consumer with the best of wholesome turkeys. We, therefore, resent the untrue and derogatory statements which have been leveled against the present inspection service and our industry by persons that have had little or no direct experience with it. Under the present poultry inspection services conducted by the Department of Agriculture, there has been developed a system of poultry inspection which we believe offers the consumer the most wholesome poultry in the world.

Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you very much, Mr. Beyers. We will make the same suggestion to you that we have to the others. If, after studying the recommended amendments, as incorporated in the committee print by the Department of Agriculture, you have any further statement you wish to file, we would be glad to have it. Mr. BEYERS. Thank you.

Senator WILLIAMS. The next witness will be Mr. G. A. Heinze.

STATEMENT OF G. A. HEINZE, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, MINNESOTA POULTRY, BUTTER & EGG ASSOCIATION, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.

Mr. HEINZE. My name is G. A. Heinze, and I am the executive secretary of the Minnesota Poultry, Butter & Egg Association representing the buyers, sellers, dealers, processors, packers, distributors, and so on, of poultry, butter and eggs in the State of Minnesota. There are 2,500 licensed produce buyers within the State, approximately 60 percent of which are poultry and egg operators.

As reported by the State-Federal Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, there were produced in the State of Minnesota during the year 1955, 8,016,000 head live turkeys weighing 128,256,000 pounds, of which approximately 127 million pounds were sold, bringing in cash income of $37,133,000.

During the same period there were produced 19,777,000 head chickens weighing 89,737,000 pounds. Of this amount, approximately 79 million pounds were sold, bringing in a cash income of $12,241,000; a combined amount of approximately $50 million. The balance of both the chickens and turkeys apparently were consumed by the producers.

In addition to the poultry processing plants coming within jurisdiction of the United States Department of Agriculture, there are a number of other possibly smaller processors that do not avail themselves of the Department services. Some of this poultry may move in interstate commerce, but the larger part remains within the State of Minnesota, being consumed in the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth.

You have before you bills S. 3588 and S. 3983. We are in accord with bill S. 3588 for several reasons, some of which we will enumerate. 1. S. 3588 in section 2, which is the legislative finding, has a definite proposition and objective. Its terms are conservative and meaningful and are not destructive of public confidence in one of our fine agricultural food products. The proposals give full insurance to the consuming public that poultry that has been inspected for wholesomeness can be relied upon as a good food product.

2. S. 3588 gives the Secretary of Agriculture full authority to conduct an effective inspection program to determine the wholesomeness of the product. It provides for both ante mortem and post mortem type of examination when, in the process of operation, it is deemed

necessary.

3. S. 3588 would vest the authority contained therein, in the Secretary of Agriculture in the same manner in which other powers of the Department are now vested in the Secretary. We need only point out, as referred to above, that the Department is now providing excellent service in the State of Minnesota. We also which to direct to your attention, that the Department is experienced in this matter of poultry inspection, as such work has been carried out by them for approximately 25 years.

4. S. 3588 provides that the mandatory or compulsory inspection service could be put into effect within any reasonable time upon request of the processors, but the full program must be put into effect by July 1, 1958. S. 3983 provides that the program go into effect on January 1, 1957.