Senator CLEMENTS. I would like to state to you and Mr. Kumpe and Mr. Southerland that Senator McClellan has expressed his interest in your testimony here today, as well as his regret at not being able to be present.

Are there any questions, Senator Williams?

Senator WILLIAMS. Mr. Hawks, I understand that the segment of the industry that you represent would be willing to accept the mandatory inspection if it would be provided and carried out under the existing facilities of the Department of Agriculture?

Mr. HAWKS. Yes, sir.

Senator CLEMENTS. Any questions, Senator Hickenlooper?
Senator HICKENLOOPER. No, I have no questions.

Senator CLEMENTS. Let me say to the witnesses here today, 37 of you, you may recognize that if there are any long statements to be made here today, that by necessity they are going to have to be summarized and presented for the record.

Mr. Southerland, do you have any further statement other than joining in this one?

Mr. SOUTHERLAND. That's right, sir.

Mr. KUMPE. Yes, I have one for the Southwestern Association. Senator CLEMENTS. All right, sir; you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF J. O. KUMPE, PRESIDENT, SOUTHWESTERN ASSOCIATION, AND GENERAL MANAGER, ARKANSAS POULTRY COOPERATIVE, INC., BENTONVILLE, ARK.

Mr. KUMPE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the Southwestern Association is composed of poultry industry men in production, hatching, feeding, financing, processing, and marketing broilers, fowl, turkeys, and eggs, in 6 States, namely, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, and Texas.

Our membership covers approximately 80 percent of the volume of broilers, fowl, and turkeys processed in these 6 States.

One of the original objectives of the Southwestern Association was increasing the quality of poultry and poultry products, and the efficient marketing of same.

The second and third ranking broiler producing States are found in our membership, namely Texas and Arkansas.

These 2 States alone make up 14 percent of the national production of broilers.

According to our volume of 160 million broilers you will find more plants under the voluntary inspection program for wholesomeness which demonstrates our belief in inspection of poultry products by the Poultry Branch, Agricultural Marketing Services, United States Department of Agriculture.

The following resolution was adopted unanimously by our association in February 1956:

We favor compulsory inspection for wholesomeness of all poultry products moving into interstate commerce, under the present Inspection and Grading Division of the Poultry Branch, Agricultural Marketing Service, United States Department of Agriculture, and that such inspection be paid for from public appropriated funds.

80695-56 -9

Two bills, S. 3588 and S. 3983, are now before the committee, both of which provide for a system of compulsory inspection. Of these two measures, we approve S. 3588 and oppose S. 3983.

We disagree with many of the provisions of S. 3983.
The principal objections in brief are as follows:

First, S. 3983 would stop all movement of poultry in interstate commerce after January 1, 1957, unless inspected as required by the provisions of the bill. Six months is not enough time for training additional inspectors needed for compulsory inspection in all plants processing poultry.

Second, S. 3983 would mandatorily put into effect inspection procedures developed 50 years ago for red-meat animals, and could limit the use of improved, more effective and less costly techniques that have been recently developed or may be developed in the future. Third, S. 3983 proposes to put compulsory poultry inspection in a mere division under Red Meat Inspection Branch of the Department of Agriculture.

In carrying out this provision we will lose the good improved and efficient methods developed in the Poultry Inspection Branch of the United States Department of Agriculture the past 28 years.

Poultry today accounts for about 11 percent of the gross income in agriculture.

It is the third most important produced farm income, totaling some $312 to $4 billion.

We oppose this provision of S. 3983 which would make poultry inspection for wholesomeness a subordinate division under Red Meat Inspection Branch of the Department of Agriculture, on the ground that the poultry business is large and growing larger and more important each year, and will best be served in the Poultry Branch, Agricultural Marketing Service of United States Department of Agriculture. This provision which would put administration of poultry inspection program in the Meat Branch completely overlooks and ignores the fact that there are substantial differences between poultry and red-meat animals; that their production, distribution, and marketing are different, and that they are in direct competition with each other in the market place.

The Southwestern Association believes that S. 3588 is the best of the two measures and that it will serve the poultry industry best by the following:

First, it will utilize the personnel now experienced in doing voluntary inspection for wholesomeness.

Second, take advantage of the experience gained the past 28 years in the Poultry Branch Agricultural Marketing Service of the United States Department of Agriculture on inspection of poultry.

Third, the measure gives full assurance to the consuming public that only poultry food products which have been inspected for wholesomeness can be marketed in interstate commerce.

Fourth, S. 3588 has a definite purpose and objectives as stated in its legislative finding and declaration of policy. It is made up of terms which are constructive and meaningful, without being derogatory to, and destructive to public confidence in, one of our fine agricultural food products, namely, poultry.

Fifth, S. 3588 gives the Secretary of Agriculture full authority to conduct an effective inspection program to determine wholesomeness

but it does not tie him to a bird by bird ante-mortem and post-mortem type examination developed 50 years ago for red-meat animals.

On the basis of past experience of poultry industry and inspection officials working together to bring about more efficient methods along with being economical, it would appear to be highly desirable to leave to the discretion of the Secretary the circumstances which ante-mortem inspection should be made under in view of the greatly increased cost which would be entailed by such inspection and the lack of a definite knowledge as to its benefit.

Sixth, S. 3588 gives ample time for plants to qualify for compulsory inspection. Any plant that cannot be ready by July 1, 1958, to meet regulations pertaining to inspection, for wholesomeness, will never be ready. We feel that this is ample time.

Seventh, S. 3588 prevents overlapping and dual functions between agencies, in the same manner in which overlapping functions are prevented by Federal Food and Drug Act and Meat and Inspection Act.

Under S. 3588 the Secretary of Agriculture has certain jurisdiction relating to the inspection and processing level and the Food and Drug Administration would have jurisdiction and responsibility for the product after processing operations have been completed.

S. 3983 does not spell out the authority of each agency and consequently there would develop an intolerable duplication of functions and endless cost and confusion.

Eighth, S. 3588 provides for cooperation between Federal and State governments in inspection programs, which we in the Southwestern Association want in an inspection program.

We hope the Senate committee will recognize our industry recommendations.

We are the people that pioneered inspection of poultry for wholesomeness, and paid the bill for the many employees of the inspection branch of Agricultural Marketing Service, United States Department of Agriculture, who have developed an inspection program that gives the consumer a good wholesome product.

S. 3588 provides for those things experience has taught us are needed, such as:

One, dignity to program of inspection, headed up by our own Secretary of Agriculture.

Two, flexibility, to use new improved techniques that are now efficient, as well as economical.

Three, kept in a department that knows the problems of the poultry processes.

Four, explains the responsibility of each administration with which we have to work.

Five, gives us opportunity to work with Federal Government on State grading programs so we may have Federal-State grading programs in poultry products.

Six, not to hasten effective date which could create expensive problems to both producer and consumer.

Any plant should be given a reasonable time to become equipped for compulsory inspection.

None of the above is found in S. 3983 which shows the impracticability of the proposals contained therein.

Again we express our appreciation to the committee for affording the Southwestern Association this opportunity to present its views on these two bills.

Senator CLEMENTS. Mr. Kumpe, have you had an opportunity to look at the suggested amendments to S. 3588 that were made by the Department of Agriculture?

Mr. KUMPE. I have not.

Senator CLEMENTS. If you desire, or those others in your group, who desire to examine the suggested amendments to 3588 that were made by the Department of Agriculture, and I can assure you there are many of them, why, if you desire to submit a supplementary statement commenting on those suggested amendments, the committee will be glad to have them if you can give it to us within the next 5 or 6 days. Copies of those suggested amendments are here, and if you would, perhaps not only you but anyone else who is here today, who would wish copies of the amendments to the bill that were suggested by the Department of Agriculture, you can get them from the clerk of the committee at any time during the-day, and if any of you would like to revise your recommendations after you have seen the departmental suggestions, you may do so.

Mr. KUMPE. Thank you, sir.

Senator CLEMENTS. I see you have another person representing this Southwestern Association, Mr. Youngblood.

Are we going to receive testimony from people representing the same association?

Mr. KUMPE. I was to read the brief, and Mr. Youngblood

Senator CLEMENTS. I was going to ask Mr. Youngblood if he desired to state for the record a concurrence in the statement that has been made by Mr. Kumpe this morning?

STATEMENT OF OVID YOUNGBLOOD, YOUNGBLOOD POULTRY, WACO, TEX., REPRESENTING THE SOUTHWESTERN ASSOCIATION

Mr. YOUNGBLOOD. Yes.

Senator CLEMENTS. For the record, this is Mr. Youngblood representing the Southwestern Association, is that correct?

Mr. YOUNGBLOOD. That is correct.

Senator CLEMENTS. Do you desire to make a statement? The committee will be glad to hear you.

Mr. YOUNGBLOOD. No other than concurrence with Mr .Kumpe's

statement.

Senator CLEMENTS. Thank you very much, Mr. Youngblood.

Before Dr. Carpenter presents his views, I would like to say to the representative of the Department of Agriculture, who is here, you heard at the last hearing a number of criticisms of the operation of the voluntary system. If the Department would like to present some statement to the committee with reference to those criticisms, the committee would be very glad to have them, and I take it that if you desire to present a brief on those criticisms you could certainly do it in the next few days.

Mr. NATHAN KOENIG. The Department would be glad to comply with the subcommittee's request.

SUPPLEMENTARY STATEMENT FILED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE WITH REFERENCE TO CERTAIN TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES CONCERNING THE USDA POULTRY INSPECTION SERVICE

(1) Existing poultry inspection programs are not administered by qualified veterinarians.-These are the facts: (a) The Chief of the Poultry Inspection Branch, Agricultural Marketing Service, is a graduate veterinarian. He has four key assistants, each of whom is also a graduate veterinarian.

(b) The poultry inspection service maintains four area offices-Philadelphia, Pa; Chicago, Ill.; Des Moines, Iowa, and San Francisco, Calif. Each area office is in charge of an area supervisor and designated assistant, both of whom are graduate veterinarians.

(c) Circuit supervisors supervise the activities of a group of plants within regions of an area. There are 9 circuit supervisors in the poultry inspection service each of whom is a graduate veterinarian.

(d) There are also 234 graduate veterinary inspectors in charge at poultry processing plants throughout the United States.

(e) There are 125 civil servant lay inspectors who are supervised closely by graduate veterinarians.

(2) AMS licenses company employees.-The Agricultural Marketing Service uses licensed company employees who are responsible for sanitation in plants producing dressed poultry. Poultry produced in these plants does not bear the inspection legend. These licensees operate under the direction of a civil service supervisor. Whenever an application is received for the sanitation service, the plant is visited by the Federal area supervisor who inspects the plant facilities and operating procedures. Unless the plant complies with the strict sanitary requirements of the Department's regulations the application for service is rejected. If the plant qualifies, however, and there is an experienced qualified employee in the plant, he is designated, i. e., licensed, as the one person in the plant who will be held primarily responsible for sanitary conditions and procedures in such plant. The sanitary conditions and precedures are also closely checked by a civil servant area supervisor who visits the plant at least once and often several times a month. The periodic check by area supervisors conforms to the practice followed in supervising food establishments by local governments or the supervising of the manufacture of biologicals for human use by the Public Health Service. In such cases a governmental employee is not stationed at all times in a particular plant, but the plant's facilities and procedures are first determined to be acceptable and thereafter frequent checks are made to see that the acceptable conditions are maintained. Under the Department's program, in addition to such official checks, a responsible company employee is designated to supervise the continuous maintenance of proper sanitary conditions at all times. The so-called licensing of such an employee is for the dual purpose of clothing him with official authority to direct the immediate elimination of any insanitary conditions which might develop and to have someone upon whom responsibility may be fixed in the event of violations. The subject was discussed with a Public Health Industry Advisory Committee on August 3, 1951, and this committee indicated that results are more important than type of employment. However, because the purpose of licensing company employees has become widely misunderstood, the Department is following a policy of transferring responsibilities from licensed company employees to civil servant employees as rapidly as possible. The effectuation of this policy has been retarded by the magnitude of the sanitation program and the difficulty in obtaining qualified personnel willing to accept civil service appointments of uncertain tenure in view of the intermittent nature of the work.

(3) AMS transfers inspectors upon industry request.-It was testified that "* ** should a company want to have an inspector transferred and request same, and be willing to pay the cost of his transportation and the cost of the new inspector's transportation to the plant, it may achieve such result." This statement is not correct. The decision to move inspection personnel is at the sole discretion of the Department of Agriculture. The Agricultural Marketing Service regulations requiring companies to pay the cost of moving inspection personnel at their request was to discourage such requests. The language may have been ill advised, but no company has ever paid such costs, and no employee would be transferred just because a company requested it.

(4) Aspersions on the integrity of the Poultry Division.-Testimony refers to the Agricultural Research Service as an agency with integrity and a desire to protect the public. The Department agrees with this statement but thoroughly