WSP07068 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r. () " ~ ,O,"u 46 FRYlNGPA..'l-ARKANSAS PROJECT, COLORADO Mr. HALEY. Of course, I might say to my chairman that I realize that. I realize that. But I think these things, when we begin to get into propositions and the people of the Nati.on, faci'~g a $290 billion indebtedness, aRd the mterest here IS appro:mnately $9 bIllIOn II year, I think that these things should be lllid out there in the open and thor- oughly discussed, because ~he people are get~ing ~larme~l ab~ut it. OUf interest rate alone I thmk IS about the thu'd bIggest Item In the national budget. The people are asking why. I think they ought to be told why. I think that is all. Mr. ROOER. Mr. Langen. Mr. LANGEN. Mr. Palmer, I Imve noted with some interest your statement implying that this project is going to be of some help to the a~ricultural surplus problem. Now that ]s a l'retty desirable fea- ture, If it is true. Do you have any figures which mdicate the amount of acres of surplus crops that are going to be diverted into some other crop that is not in surplus! Mr. PALMER. Mr. LangeR, that would be conjecture of the most dif- ficult kind because a part of the answer would be determined by Fed- eral policy. We can look at the Colorado-Big Thompson project which is located just to the north of this area; we can tell you what has happened over the last 10 years. ~Ve can point out to you the number of acres that have been shifted from crops t.hat when t.hey were produced were in surplus and have been diverted to nonsurplus areas of production. . The logic of the thing, however, is thllt the farmer will plant. for his most productive market. If that market is made up of cereal crops, he is going to plant cereal crops. If he can make the most and his greatest return from the nonsurplus plantings, which he Clln plant under irri~ation, he is going to m.ove into that market. 'Ve would be !(Iad to SUbmit for the record t.he experience data of 10 years on the Colorado-Big Thompson project that would show the number of acres and yields in each of the major c.rop groups, that is, as they were produced 10 years ago and were produced III the last crop year. I think it is helpful for what you are looking for. I think it does indicate the trend that can be expected. Since this is an area of virtually identical climate and soils and physical environment and relationship to markets, I think the same general relationship would prevail as in the Fryingpan-Arkansas project area. Mr. LANOEN. You must have some knowledge or information rela- tive to these crops in order to justify your statement or I do not sup- pose it would have been mllde. Can you identify the crops! Mr. PALMER. Again for the Colorado-Big'Thompson area, whieh is virtually an identical area, the crops that were grown were barley, corn, oats, sorghum, ,,""heat, alfalfa. hay, other hay, irrigated pasture, other forage, ensilage, dry beans, sugar beets, the vegetables, seeds, fruits, and miscellaneous. On this list, in the case of barley, the acres and yie]d decreased to where the weIghted chunge was a minus 22.8 percent III that 10-year period. Of corn it went down by 17 percent. Of oats it went down by 17 percent aRd of wheat 70.9 percent. It is indicative of the shift that does come when people can plan for the market as I iRdicated in my statement.