The undercurrent that you referred to, I think may have developed as a result of the difficulty we had in launching the Competitive Research Grants program.

It was probably perceived by some of the agricultural experiment station directors that in launching this new program, the Department was going to abrogate its responsibility to support the Hatch funds. This budget and the previous budget show definitely that we are going to continue to support the formula funds and our longstanding relationships with the states.

There is nothing more sacred to us in our day-to-day operations than the partnership with the land grant universities.

Mrs. SMITH. I appreciate that answer, Dr. Bertrand.

UTILIZATION RESEARCH

Now, Dr. Thomas, or Dr. Bertrand, there has been a tendency for SEA to either back away from or get out of utilization research and by this I mean research into non-food uses of agricultural products. Can you explain the reasons for this policy?

Dr. BERTRAND. If I may comment on the previous question before answering that, I would appreciate saying that the current budget shows, I think, a very well balanced budget between our in-house program of research, extension, and the extramural or cooperative program.

Now with regard to the post-harvest technology research. The budget has been less than we would have liked to have had for post-harvest technology research for a number of years. This has been as a result of tight budget situations and constrained spending levels and the setting of priorities.

We have been attempting to place increased priorities on productivity on the farms and ranches of this country.

At the same time, there are certain areas of post-harvest activity that industry has shown a willingness to take up. That has relieved some of the pressure.

However, I would be the first to admit that I think we need more emphasis on post-harvest technology in this and probably other budgets.

Mrs. SMITH. Thank you.

Now, Dr. Greenwood, I would like to turn to you. Let me first say that we think you do an outstanding job. We are very appreciative of that.

Let me say secondly that I am a friend of your program. I have received the highest honor that my university can give to a person who works in the extension service. I am a winner of the National 4-H Alumni Award.

I say this to establish that I am a friend so my first question will not sound unfriendly. I do not mean it to be.

Does the 4-H still have a program for training and grooming poodles?

Dr. GREENWOOD. Not to my knowledge.

FARM SAFETY PROGRAM

Mrs. SMITH. I ask this because there is some concern on this Committee, and there is concern out in the country, about the direction of USDA.

I agree fully with our Chairman that the majority of the people live in the cities. Our nutrition programs in the cities have been very valuable. The votes of the city people for farm programs are very valuable.

But I think it is important that we keep a balance and that we do not get away from the nuts and bolts of agriculture. This is all in preface to the fact that I am shocked to see that you recommend taking out $1 million for farm safety.

We think this is one of the very best programs that you have had. Yesterday, Dr. Bertrand and all of you were not prepared for all of our questions. I was not prepared today, Dr. Greenwood, for you recommending elimination of the Farm Safety Program. I would have had a lot of facts and figures for you.

We have objected to taking this out in the past. It has been tremendous the way we have cut down on farm accidents. This has been a great program.

The reason I brought up the poodles is that I do not have the examples at my fingertips, I could get them, but I think we are doing some things that are not as important as farm safety. I am very much concerned about the proposal to take that out. I want to have you comment on it.

Dr. GREENWOOD. I would like to make a few comments on the farm safety program. We, too, feel that it is an important program. The earmarked funding for farm safety was initiated in the mid1970's. At that time, only eight states had sound farm safety programs. I think perhaps Nebraska was one of them.

Mrs. SMITH. Yes.

Dr. GREENWOOD. Since we have had earmarked funding, we have seen viable programs developed in each of the states. It is our assessement that more than half the states at this time would retain the program by redirection of funds available within their state.

I expect in the remaining states that the farm safety program would be retained but conducted at a reduced level of effort.

WESTERN LIVESTOCK MARKETING INFORMATION PROJECT

Mrs. SMITH. Dr. Greenwood, does the Extension Service have any plans to provide additional funding to the Western Livestock Marketing Project for accumulation and dissemination of information relating to drought conditions?

Dr. GREENWOOD. Extension has provided continued funding for the Western Livestock Marketing Project, which provides appropriate and timely marketing information to livestock producers. This information will include analysis and dissemination of information related to the drought situation as it relates to livestock producers. We are also considering funding for a special project proposal with the Western Livestock Marketing Project to provide direct delivery of information via electronic computer capabilities to farmers and ranchers who have use for this information.

I should point out that the Western Livestock Marketing Project operating out of Colorado State University is funded jointly by several Great Plains States, the Economics and Statistics Service, and by SEA-Extension.

Mrs. SMITH. I appreciate those comments.

I have no more questions. Let me reiterate my support for formula funding and the special grants. I am especially pleased to see the increase in the request that will allow the extension activity to remain at their current level.

Mr. TRAXLER. Would the gentlelady yield?

Mrs. SMITH. Yes, I would be delighted to yield.

Mr. TRAXLER. On the point you raise, I am curious. Was that a request that you did submit to OMB? Did that clear your agency? Did that go over to OMB?

Dr. BERTRAND. Yes, it did.

Mr. TRAXLER. Mrs. Smith, it was part of their request to OMB. Mrs. SMITH. I see.

Mr. TRAXLER. Thank you.

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Natcher?

Mr. NATCHER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to commend all you ladies and gentlemen in the Extension Service. Dr. Bertrand, I think it speaks well of you and all your associates for the work that has been performed in this country by the Extension Service.

I have served on this subcommittee for a number of years with my Chairman. Without the Extension Service in this agricultural appropriations bill and some of the other agencies, we would have trouble passing it. It has been that way all down through the years.

EXTENSION AGENTS' SALARIES

Each year we talk a little about the salaries of the extension agents. I think that neither you, Dr. Greenwood, nor any of your associates can set the salaries. We cannot set them on this Committee. If we could set them on this Committee we would not have any trouble.

They are set back in the states, as you people well know, by the state authorities and the county authorities and those that sponsor the program.

In Kentucky the salaries they pay extension agents are still too low. If you have a man or a woman in the Extension Service and they have two or three children and the children want to go to college, then they are in trouble, serious trouble.

Mr. Chairman, with your permission, as you know there was always a table inserted in the record at this point setting forth the salaries of the extension agents in the 50 states.

Mr. WHITTEN. Without objection, that will be placed in the record.

[The information follows:]

EXTENSION AGENTS SALARIES

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
SCIENCE AND EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT

Mr. NATCHER. Dr. Greenwood, as you know, in Kentucky we have come from almost the bottom but we are now up some. We are doing better. But we are still not doing good enough.

When you travel down into the Commonwealth of Kentucky, talk with those people a little. We would appreciate it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Myers?

Mr. MYERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I share the concern that our good colleague from Kentucky has about the role that the extension people perform. It is a very necessary one.

I have to admit that I remember a few years ago when we asked the Extension Service to perform one task. We had to drag them screaming and kicking into it, but they came and did a good job.

EXTENSION ENERGY PROGRAM

I wonder what is being done today so far as solar application is concerned. A few years ago we put some funds into your budget for solar. I think it is now related to insulation and so forth, and to winterizing.

Are you still continuing that program? What has happened to that?

Dr. GREENWOOD. The fiscal year 1981 appropriation contained an earmarked item of $300,000 for energy. As a result of this funding we have located an agricultural engineer at the two agricultural research centers, which are located at Tifton, Georgia, and Peoria, Illinois. These two extension specialists take the research findings. from these research centers and transmit then to the various state extension services. The specialists also inform the researchers of the concerns of the states in terms of energy-related problems. Mr. MYERS. Would you briefly detail the work you are doing? Is that what you consider passive solar applications?

You can provide that for the record. Let us not take the time today.

Mr. WHITTEN. Without objection, so ordered.

[The information follows:]

EXTENSION SOLAR ENERGY

Almost every state has educational programs on the use of solar energy for heating livestock structures, greenhouses, family housing, and water heating. They are addressing both active and passive solar heating.

Our state specialists are developing and distributing information on utilizing passive solar for supplemental heat for existing homes and in planning new and/or remodeled housing.

We have distributed several thousand house plans designed for solar heating. The plan was developed by the Agricultural Research Unit at Clemson, SC. Both active and passive solar are utilized in this plan.

We have two active solar demonstration programs made possible by DOE passthrough funds. We have had no earmarked funds for a solar program.

During the past year, we have had on-farm demonstrations using solar for heating livestock structures in nine states at approximately ten locations in each state. States participating in this demonstration program, are: Ohio, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota, Illinois, Virginia, Vermont, and Iowa.

Underway for this crop season will be a similar demonstration program in nine states to use the sun to dry grain/crops. Crops to be dried are: corn, wheat, tobacco, fruits, potatoes, soybeans, hay, and peanuts. States participating are: Maryland, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, and Michigan.