restrictions, and among other provisions in the Sugar Act-which we certainly hope will be changed in the future-were the rights given to the Secretary of Agriculture to estimate consumption, not only for the purpose of supply but for the purpose of price control. In order to avoid making a mistake on the wrong side-from his standpoint, he made available so much sugar that the price of beet sugar was then $4.10. That went on for over a year, Mr. Hill.

Mr. HILL. Have you heard any of these economists down in the Department that seemed to oppose increasing our sugarcane and sugarbeet acreage have you heard any of them complain about the low price of sugar at the present time?

Mr. BOURG. Very encouragingly, yes; recently, not the same individuals, but since Secretary Clinton Anderson has come into office he has appointed Mr. Earl Wilson as Director of the Sugar Branch, and he very definitely takes the position that the price of sugar has been held too low, and that the payment of subsidies is not good permanent practice, and now that the war is over the price should be allowed to rise to a proper level among foods, and the subsidies reduced and finally eliminated.

Mr. HILL. Just a moment here, then-Secretary Anderson, as you know, comes from New Mexico, and he knows what a sugar beet looks like.

Mr. BOURG. Yes, sir.

Mr. GRANGER. We have got 3 more minutes, gentlemen. Are there any more questions? Thank you, Mr. Bourg.

Mr. FARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the opportunity to present to the committee the representative of the Hawaiian sugar industry, who is here, and ask him to make a statement as to what he is doing in the field of experimentation, Mr. Ernest W. Greene, president of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters Association.

Mr. GRANGER. The committee will be glad to hear him.

STATEMENT OF ERNEST W. GREENE, VICE PRESIDENT, HAWAIIAN SUGAR PLANTERS ASSOCIATION

Mr. GREENE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, my name is Ernest W. Greene. I am vice president of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters Association, and I speak for the sugar producers of the Territory of Hawaii, as the Delegate from Hawaii has just said.

In Hawaii we have a group of producers who are a complementary part of the domestic sugar industry, and who have supplied sugar for the consumers of this country for a great many years.

A good many years ago the producers banded themselves together in a voluntary agricultural cooperative, which in 1895 became the Hawaiian Sugar Planters Association, and the men who were then leaders in the industry appreciated at that early date so thoroughly the value and necessity of research that they founded 50 years ago this year the experiment station of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters Association, which in that half century has grown to be one of the recognized scientific institutions connected with the sugar industry, and I think it has recognition in the wide field of agriculture in general. I mention that in order that you gentlemen of the committee may know that the producers for whom I speak do appreciate the value of research.

They have put large sums of money into that experiment station, which has been supported entirely by the industry without ever having received any Government aid in money. The budget in recent years has run to something on the order of half a million dollars a year, which is regarded by the people there as the best investment they ever made, because of what it has meant to them in the scientific development of the industry, in the ability to combat successfully the pests, insects, and others that we encounter, as has been mentioned by some of the scientists who have testified, in enlargement of knowledge of soil handling and soil building, and increasing the productivity of soil, and particularly, as has been mentioned by others, in the breeding of superior cane varieties which will give a greater return for a given amount of labor, and thereby increase the efficiency of industry and enable it to survive in the modern world.

We have always, I believe, enjoyed the most pleasant cooperation with the scientists of the Department of Agriculture, and although I said we had received nothing in the way of financial aid, we have over many years received a great deal of assistance from them through their cooperation and exchange of scientific information and the general helpfulness that exists on the part of those bureaus of the Department.

Our scientists from the station have had the privilege of taking part in exploratory trips looking for superior cane varieties to use for breeding, those trips having been headed by Dr. Brandes, as has been mentioned. There is another trip in prospect. I hope you gentlemen can make it possible, because the introduction of new parent canes, which can transmit these desirable qualities that have been discussed by the scientists who have appeared before you, is a matter of greatest importance to the domestic sugar industry. Certainly anything that you gentlemen can do to promote interest in and increase the appropriations for the scientific research connected with sugarcane and sugar beets, conducted by the Department of Agriculture, will be a great service to the country and also a tremendous service directly to the people who are trying to maintain a domestic sugar industry.

We have other needs as well at present. As you know, we have been working under war conditions. We have suffered in Hawaii a great shortage of labor, just as has occurred in other areas, except that because of our location in the war area it has not been considered possible to supply us with prisoners of war to augment the labor in our sugar fields, as it has been possible to do in other domestic areas on the mainland. We have not had the benefit of such activities as the introduction of Mexicans under the war powers, for agricultural work during these war years; Bahamans and Jamaicans, to the southern part of the country. The Department has assisted the producers in Hawaii in getting some additional machinery to try to offset the great reduction in labor available, and while much of that had to be taken second-hand, it was a privilege to get anything at that time, and we pay tribute to those in the Department who by their representations to the War Production Board made those things possible.

I know your time is limited. I do not wish to impose on it, but I do wish to express the appreciation that producers in Hawaii have for the interest that you gentlemen display in delving into the prob

lems of sugar production, the research problems as well as the problems of labor and the equipment and material that are needed in order to keep up the domestic production of this most essential food.

Mr. GRANGER. Thank you very much for your fine statement, Mr. Greene. We will now hear Mr. Fred G. Taylor, of the American Sugar Beet Policy Committee.

STATEMENT OF FRED G. TAYLOR, SECRETARY, AMERICAN SUGAR BEET POLICY COMMITTEE

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I represent in this presentation as secretary the American Sugar Beet Policy Committee, which comprises growers and processors of the Western States. Also I have the honor to be vice president of the United States Beet Sugar Association.

Mr. Gordon Lyons, representing the California sugar beet growers, was here on Monday, but was obliged to leave last evening, and asked me to present a brief statement from him.

Mr. Lyons represents the California sugar-beet farmers, and in that statement he says:

First, we feel that the gentlemen from the Division of Sugar Plant Investigations of the USDA have been much too modest in speaking before the committee of their accomplishments in the field of sugar-plant development and breeding.

The work of this group in developing sugar-beet seed which is resistant to the virus of the leaf hopper and other diseases to which sugar beets are subject has been of inestimable value to our industry. Indeed, many areas are now growing beets successfully with this new seed, which were without hope in the days when only European seed was available.

We think it a remarkable achievement, directly attributable to the fine work of this group, that in the space of a little more than a decade, the American sugar-beet industry has progressed from complete dependence upon foreign sources of supply to the point where it not only produces enough seed for its own needs, but is exporting substantial qualities as well.

And he might have added that the seed is superior to that which we formerly secured from Europe. Continuing his statement:

While we are happy to speak so highly of this work, we do not want to leave the impression with the committee that all of our problems have been solved. Indeed, the contrary is true. We feel that much can and will be done in the way of improvement of present seed varieties, not only to make them more resistant to a wider range of pests and diseases, but also to develop a higher average sugar content.

You have heard mention here of the recently developed technique of breaking the present multicelled sugar-beet seed ball into fragments containing only one or two cells. As this process is further developed and refined, it too will be a tremendous boon to our industry because it will enable us to eliminate a very large percentage of the hand labor now required each year in thinning operations. The ultimate goal in this particular would of course be the development of a sugar-beet seed ball which would contain only one cell or germ. You have heard Dr. Brandes refer to the fact that such seed is known to exist. We believe that he and his colleagues will, if given the opportunity, find ways and means to make this available to our industry in due time. We most certainly hope that they will be given that opportunity, as well as the opportunity to continue their present activities.

There has been some comment here with regard to progress in mechanizing field operations in our industry. In California, a combined harvesting machine is now operating with great success. This unit lifts, tops, and loads the beets in one operation which requires a tractor driver, a machine operator, and whatever number of truck drivers may be required to keep the machine going through the field. Some 90,000 acres of beets will be harvested in California this year,

and at least half of this quantity will be handled by these machines. The only reason why there are not more of them is that during the war years their production was curtailed. We fully expect that within a short few years, practically all of the crop there can be so handled.

These machines are so built that, with a change of lifters to accommodate different soil conditions, they can be used throughout the beet-growing areas in California. In their present stage of development, they are quite bulky and heavy, and their cost is comparatively high. However, present models are greatly improved over the originals, and we can anticipate that this improvement will continue to the point where they will give maximum efficiency and sell at substantially reduced prices.

With this example before us, we feel fully confident that the day of complete mechanization of our field operations is not too far removed. Further research and experiment is needed to adapt these machines to use in beet-growing areas outside of California. The lack of a satisfactory planter to handle the sheared seed is preventing us from obtaining the full benefits of that development. These things will all come in time, and we feel definitely that these men in the USDA can do much to help us in speeding the arrival of that day.

That is the statement of Mr. Gordon Lyons, and I have a brief statement that I would like to present an my own account. In order to give you a picture of the research of the long past I will deal with a few historic facts.

The beet-sugar industry is young in America. The first successful operation was conducted only 65 years ago, 1879, and it was 20 years later, 1900, before we reached a production of 100,000 tons of sugar per year. In the following 20 years we reached a production of more than a million tons and in the early 1930's we exceeded a million and three-quarter tons.

During this entire period we had the very helpful cooperation of the United States Department of Agriculture in dealing with our technological problems. As time has proceeded their work has become increasingly important and valuable to the industry.

The agricultural scientists of United States Department of Agriculture, which has included agronomists, geneticists, entomologists, chemists, agricultural engineers, and others, have either led or have been associated with the leadership in every important agricultural development of the industry. In the past few years they have led some projects and greatly aided others that have brought about a literal revolution in the cultural practices that have been followed throughout the entire history of the industry.

The changes which will be brought about through these projects, and which are well under way, give great promise of advancing certain phases of the agricultural technology of the industry within a decade of time more than it has advanced in its entire previous history. That is the active history of the industry. I refer to such items as (1) the establishment of a domestic beet-seed industry; (2) the successful conquest of the white-fly or curly-top disease by breeding resistant seed; (3) the development of segmented seed; and (4) the mechanization which segmented seed has made possible. Mechanization has only been made possible, gentlemen, by the introduction of that seed, which accounts for this rapid progress that I call revolutionary.

These developments seem sure to have far-reaching economic effects. The hand labor required to produce a crop will be reduced by half or more if our expectations are realized and the disagreeable stoop labor which has been so necessary up to this time may be entirely eliminated.

In order that you good men of the Committee of Agriculture who are so importantly interested in all matters pertaining to agriculture may know more fully the significance of our research efforts of the long past, I wish to draw a very brief comparison which will indicate something of our progress.

To take a long back look, I recall that the first year's operation of the company with which I have the honor to be associated resulted in producing 612 tons of beets per acre with a sugar content of 11 percent and a purity of 80 percent. We extracted from these beets 115 pounds of sugar per ton, which was slightly more than half of the sugar contained in the beets. Our yield was about 750 pounds per acre. That year we processed 10,000 tons of beets and made 11,500 bags of sugar. Fifty years later in 1 year we produced a million tons of beets, 1412 tons per acre, with a sugar content of 1612 per cent, and a purity of 85 percent, and we extracted 300 pounds of sugar from each ton, or about 94 percent of the sugar the beets contained. Our yield was nearly 4,300 pounds per acre.

We made in that year four times as much sugar in 1 day as we made in the entire first year of our operations.

This heartening story of progress can be told only because of the constant effort in technological improvement which has been put forth by our industry, through the scientists of our own organizations and the fine leadership and cooperation supplied by the scientists of the United States Department of Agriculture.

While we have come far and accomplished much, there are at this time projects that await the magic touch of the agricultural scientists that are as important as any that have been dealt with in the past. And in all of the circumstances that confront the industry, we probably need their assistance now as much as we have needed it at any time. I am thinking particularly of some of the projects that have been mentioned by Dr. Brandes: (1) The breeding of a single germ seed ball; (2) the conquest of the disease of black root; (3) agronomic studies of cultural practices to make mechanization more completely effective; and (4) continuing the breeding for better resistant strains and higher sugar content and more tons per acre.

I would like to amplify, in a short paragraph, Dr. Brandes' reference to the efficiency of the beet-sugar industry, which is often mistakenly referred to as inefficient. We have the best of reasons, supported by reliable statistics, for believing that the domestic beet-sugar industry is the most efficient division among all of the divisions of the world when measured in terms of the man-hours invested in its product. The only competitive disadvantage that we occupy in the sugar world is that of meeting the higher wages, higher taxes and the higher standards of living that are supported and nourished by our industry, which is typical of American industry generally. And we look to a future time when, through continued technological improvement, we may overcome even this great handicap.

I would like to put into the record something that I have previously said about these agricultural scientists of the United States Department of Agriculture. In their own behalf they evidence a modesty that is almost unbecoming. I would like to put a few paragraphs in the record which reflect my feelings toward these men.

Regarding the achievenment of producing beets immune to the ravages of the whitefly, the Utah and Idaho Culitivator, of which I at