Page images

But whether they had ever been exposed or not nobody seemed to know. Certainly they had gone the full year that the United States said was all that was necessary to make sure infected cattle were free from the disease. They had been in the United States and there had been no outbreak, but I believe you said they might be carriers ?

Dr. CLARKSON. That is correct.

Mr. Poage. And they might infect others. You didn't know just how it could be done. Consequently, rather than leaving them in the United States you returned them to Mexico.

It seems to me now that that same situation, if applied here, would mean it would be ridiculous to bring in the cattle from the British Virgin Islands. They might be carriers, too. You don't know and I don't know. I profess that I cannot see any harm to it, but I could not see any harm that could be done in those Charrolais cattle in the United States, either, and neither could anybody else.

Why are we willing to waive all precautions here?

The CHAIRMAN. Isn't the difference one of breeding cattle and the other slaughter?

Dr. CLARKSON. We are dealing with a different disease. We were concerned with regard to the Charrolais cattle smuggled into the United States because of their exposure to foot-and-mouth disease. In this case we are talking about tick fever, and they are two entirely different things.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Poage said they were in the United States for more than a year and certainly were not exposed during that period of time.

Dr. CLARKSON. Not during that period of time but during the period of time before they came in from Mexico.

Mr. Poage. And during that same period of time we knew cattle in Mexico were exposed to that disease. But we said since a year had gone by we were sure they were all right.

We applied the same rule with Canada. We opened the border to them when they had gone 1 year without an outbreak.

But in our own United States, when we had the cattle here a year, well over a year—actually 20 months; wasn't it?

Dr. CLARKSON. 18 months, I believe.

Mr. PoAGE. When we had them here in the United States all that time and knew they had no symptoms of the disease we said "Well, it doesn't mean the same in the United States as it means in Mexico and Canada."

Now we say here that we are to bring these cattle in. How do you know they haven't got foot-and-mouth disease from the British islands? We know the British don't maintain the same kind of quarantine against foot-and-mouth disease as we do. How do you know they are not carriers? The fact you will slaughter them means nothing. You did not let cattle in from Mexico for slaughter when you thought there was foot-and-mouth disease there, because we know the slaughtering of those cattle exposes everybody in the country. They don't destroy that disease by slaughtering the cattle. It could spread any kind of disease.

Dr. CLARKSON. We are not bringing in any cattle or fresh prodlicts of any cattle where we had any idea they had been exposed to foot-and-mouth disease or had been infected with the disease at any time.


The situation in Mexico which we must keep in mind in talking about these smuggled cattle which were in the United States for a period of time as against the imports from Mexico which are now being permitted is that we are permitting exports from Mexico from the northern Mexican states where the foot-and-mouth disease never has existed and where with the work of the joint commission of the two countries we are certain that it did not exist.

Mr. Poage. You cannot be certain.

Dr. CLARKSON. We are exercising the utmost control to be sure we get cattle only from those northern Mexican states, and these cattle which we had the controversy about which were smuggled in did come from the central area of Mexico where we are not now and have not since 1952 allowed any imports into the United States.

Mr. Poage. And you are telling me that you know there is nothing in the northern area, and yet these cattle which got into the United States came all the way through northern Mexico.


Mr. Poage. As a matter of fact, moved through a half dozen northern Mexican States, and nobody denied it. If these cattle moved through northern Mexico, if there was danger from these cattle then all the northern Mexican States are infected or subject to infection. So the very fact you have suspicion on this matter casts suspicion on every northern State in Mexico because the cattle were there. If northern Mexico is clean then these cattle obviously must be clean.

Dr. CLARKSON. I cannot agree with you, Mr. Poage. The fact that there is smuggling indicates that no restrictions of these kinds can kep out all dangers of disease. You recognize that.

Mr. Poage. That is right. It has not been protected 100 percent from disease. The very fact they were able to bring in these Charrolais cattle through northern Mexico proves that. . They didn't fly them in but brought them in by truck from northern Mexico and we know where they entered.

Dr. CLARKSON. Smuggled them across the river.

Mr. Poage. And we know they moved through northern Mexico and if they had the disease and if they were carriers, you suggest then that all northern Mexico is subject to the infection!

Of course, I don't think it is.
Dr. CLARKSON. I don't either.

Mr. Poate. I merely mention the utter inconsistency and the ridiculous position of saying these Mexican cattle would infect the United States and then say bring them in from the British West Indies where we don't know a thing in the world about what they are doing

The CHAIRMAN. The British Virgin Islands.
Where are they now?
Dr. CLARKSON. Central Mexico.
Mr. MATTHEWS. I wrote this gentleman a letter concerning that.
Mr. Poage. There was a lot of pressure to send back those cattle.
The CHAIRMAN. Maybe you are the one who sent them back?

Mr. MATTHEWS. I don't know, sir. I don't want to take that credit. I just want to say that I don't know whether any other members of the committee wrote the gentleman but I know a lot of people in Florida wrote me and insisted I do everything I could to see that those cattle were sent back.


I imagine you had many requests from Congressmen. :. Dr. CLARKSON. And to keep the record straight, three of them are still here which we are still negotiating on trying to work out their return.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand that you permitted the cattle to stay in this country for 18 months and you did not confiscate them?

Ďr. CLARKSON. They were seized.

The CHAIRMAN. You returned them to the same people who brought them in here in violation of the law ?

Dr. CLARKSON. Yes; on condition they return them to Mexico.

The CHAIRMAN. Like returning stolen goods to the thief who stole them; is it not?

Dr. CLARKSON. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. After 18 months here in the country which we knew was free from disease? You must have had a lot of

pressure from certain folks to do that.

Dr. CLARKSON. No, sir; without pressure or without any urging from anyone, any cattle that have been exposed to foot-and-mouth disease we are convinced there are a number of them that become carriers for a long period of time, we have no way of determining which are which. We have no way of determining

The CHAIRMAN. But you let them come in from Mexico?

Dr. CLARKSON. We let them come in from northern Mexico and they do not come in from central Mexico.

The CHAIRMAN. None from central Mexico?
Dr. CLARKSON. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Hasn't central Mexico been free from foot-andmouth disease for 12 months ?

Dr. CLARKSON. We have not found evidence of disease down there for more than that.

The CHAIRMAN. Why won't you let them come in! Dr. CLARKSON. Because certain cattle have been exposed to the disease and we are fearful some will be carriers.

Mr. PoAGE. If this group of Charrolais cattle were carriers, then the cattle of northern Mexico were exposed because these cattle were carried through northern Mexico.

Dr. CLARKSON. Not necessarily, because the experience with the disease indicates that those that are carriers may not shed the virus at all times. We don't know when

Mr. Page. They may not but they were exposed nevertheless.
Dr. CLARKSON. But no disease occurred.
The CHAIRMĄN. Mr. Watts ?

Mr. WATTS. What limitation or prohibition does the British Virgin Islands have against importation of cattle from, say, Mexico?

Dr. CLARKSON. I cannot quote their regulations but they do have restrictions which do not permit the importation of cattle from coụntries where foot-and-mouth disease exists.

Mr. Watts. There is nothing in this bill which would prohibit importation of cattle into the British Virgin Islands and then subsequent importation into the American islands ?

Dr. CLARKSON. That is right. There is other legislation which prohibits importation into any United States Territory of cattle from à country where foot-and-mouth disease exists, and in all of our investigations of the importations of cattle we make the most thorough kind of examination to find out whether a disease does exist in those countries of origin:

Mr. Watts. What limitation is there against importation of United States Virgin Islands cattle into the United States?

Dr. CLARKSON. That is an interstate movement. They are under quarantine now because of infestations into the United States Virgin Islands,

Mr. Watts. They are allowed to ship meat here?

Dr. CLARKSON. Yes, and cattle can come through after meeting quarantine restrictions.

Mr. WATTS. In other words, does this bill contemplate the killing of those cattle in the American Virgin Islands?

Dr. CLARKSON. That is right.

Mr. Watts. As a result of this bill if the British Virgin Islands saw fit to change their law you could get Mexican cattle into the British Virgin Islands and consequently into the American Virgin Islands and meat into this country?

Dr. CLARKSON. We could. That is a matter of watchfulness on the part of the Department which we must maintain in regard to our imports from all countries.

Mr. WATTS. You would have no control over that importation, would you?

Dr. CLARKSON. That is correct, but this is an authorization to the Secretary, and one which we do not have to follow.

Mr. Johnson. You could shut them off if they were doing it. Is that right?

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Dr. Clarkson.

The next witness is Representative Saylor of Pennsylvania, who desires to speak in behalf of S. 1166.



Mr. SAYLOR. I desire to speak in behalf of it but not probably in the manner that the chairman might like. I want to speak against it.

The CHAIRMAN. The chairman has no likes or dislikes with regard to the bill.

You may proceed and be assured you will have an impartial hearing.

Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this bill is an effort by the Department of Agriculture to counteract the action of the Interior Department and the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee when they held hearings on the Organic Act for the Virgin Islands last year.

At the time a number of the members, a number of representatives from the Agriculture Department appeared before our committee and offered these arguments which have been presented to you. They were considered by the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee and unanimously rejected. They were rejected for the reason there is no desire in behalf of our committee or its members to bring into this country any hoof-and-mouth disease or any ticks. This is merely a bill which authorized importations into the Virgin Islands.



If the members of this committee would see fit, and I would recommend, Mr. Chairman, that you send a committee down to the Virgin Islands before you take action on this bill, I know in all probability the members would not object to that trip but it can be accomplished over a week end. I say that in all sincerity because unless you have actually seen the

The CHAIRMAN. All of the members of this committee have seen the islands, I think, most of them, except the chairman. We cannot hold this up until we send the group down again.

. Mr. SAYLOR. I would be delighted to have the chairman go there. If all the members have been there I would congratulate them on being down there.

One of the things to which I object principally about this bill is that there are importations not only from the British Virgin Islands but from the French islands that are down there, and it can become rather embarrassing to the State Department to have preference given to the British Virgin Islands and not given to the other islands down there.

This is an effort to allow the people in the Virgin Islands to have enough food to eat, and this bill would create a number of hardships.

I notice that they have changed their position with regard to chickens. The former Governor of the Virgin Islands said it may be a strange thing but you would find chickens flying from island to island.

Families down there are intermarried. They live on 4 or 5 of those islands down there. They come back and forth and they bring chickens.

The Department of Agriculture came up with the anomalous situation that they wanted somebody to take their chickens, take them over to Puerto Rico, put them in quarantine for a week, and then bring them back to the Virgin Islands.

Nobody down there raises any food in that amount. This is principally to take care of the food of the Virgin Islands themselves.

They are coming close to being self-supporting, and if the action of the Agriculture Department is put into effect it will counteract one of the beneficial effects which the Organic Act accomplished last year.

The Governor has informed me that they are in a fairly good state at the present time, that their food supply has been increased, and if this bill is enacted'it will put them in the same position they were 2 years ago wherein they were short of supply.

They do not have all the facilities over there for refrigeration which we do. There is no idea of bringing into this country and there is no purpose in the original Organic Act to authorize bringing into this country any tick-infested cattle, any cattle infested with hoof-andmouth disease, or anything else. It is only an attempt to allow the

, people of the Virgin Islands to have a standard of living which everyone feels is already too low and should be raised.

I therefore come in to oppose this bill.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood that the Interior Department approved the bill. Can you give us some information about that?

Mr. SAYLOR. If they have approved the bill they have changed their position since they talked to me about it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know, Doctor Clarkson? Dr. CLARKSON. Last year, in our discussions with representatives of the Solicitor's office and with the Office of Insular Affairs, the De


« PreviousContinue »