hungry people to starvation. Is this the way to build a better
world?"

Even though the Committee recognizes that farmers and ranchers have not been pollution villains, this legislation has been developed in an effort to improve the quality of living for all Americans while recognizing the basic needs of a modern and efficient agricultural industry in this Nation.

The Committee also recognizes that during recent years there has been an increasing public concern over the uses and application of pesticides. This rising concern has reflected expanded interest in environmental protection by many citizens. This bill is in part a result of the growing awareness of possible undesirable effects of pesticides and a realization of the necessity of considering these disadvantages along with the beneficial effects realized through protection of public health and enhancement of agricultural productivity.

The basic law presently regulating pesticides or "economic poisons" as they are presently known is the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act of 1947, as amended, supplemented by sections of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act concerning possible toxic residues left on foodstuffs. The Committee feels that this basic law regulating pesticides in the United States needs to be thoroughly overhauled in order to better serve the Nation in the light of these changing situations.

The machinery for managing these chemical compounds which are being introduced daily into the environment needs updating to properly balance all of the many factors interrelated with our current management of pesticides.

The Committee acknowledges that the wise use of pesticides has saved millions of lives by controlling insect vectors of diseases such as malaria and typhus, and the Nation as a whole has benefited tremendously from the efficiency of insect and weed control made possible by agricultural applications of pesticides of various sorts.

But on the other hand, there is evidence of diminished effectiveness of control and increased undesirable effects on non-target and beneficial organisms resulting from indiscriminate use and abuse of invaluable pesticides.

The Committee found the greatest need for revision of existing law to be in the areas of strengthening regulatory controls on the uses and users of pesticides, speeding up procedures for barring pesticides found to be undesirable; streamlining procedures for making valuable new control measures, procedures, and materials broadly available; strengthening enforcement procedures to protect against misuse of these biologically effective materials; and creating an administrative and legal framework under which continued research can produce more knowledge about better ways to use existing pesticides as well as developing alternative materials and methods of pest control.

The Committee has worked on each of these problems. H.R. 10729 imposes new controls and sanctions on both the uses and the users of pesticides. Old FIFRA is changed from a labeling to a regulatory program. New tools for restricting the introduction and dissemination of pesticides into the environment are given to the EPA. Continued and expanded research, both private and public, is encouraged.

A SEARCH FOR BALANCE

As the Committee labored through the months of hearings and discussions, one central legislative philosophy developed . . . . the theme of a "search for balance."

Expert witness articulated divergent opinions. Individual members of the Committee expressed and debated diverse views. The Committee solicited advice from environmentalists, from farm groups, from State and Federal officials, from the chemical industry, and from the public. These views too were panoramic.

Sifting through the spectrum of opinion, the search for a reasonable balance led the Committee to the legislative concepts of H.R. 10729 which recognize both the benefit and risk of these materials in society; to policies which call for the continued but more carefully controlled use of pesticides; to programs which will mesh, not clash, with the States; and to a philosophy which calls for those of divergent viewpoints to each try to see the problem of environmental pesticide control through the eyes of those with whom he may disagree.

In summary H.R. 10729 is not a "farmer's bill." It's not a "manufacturer's bill." Neither is it an "environmentalist's bill." It is rather a mixture of each, a composite of all, and the manifestation of a sincere effort by the Committee on Agriculture to meet the need for reasoned progress in this important area of public concern.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The use of chemicals in agriculture began with the trend toward intensive farming in the mid-19th century. Cultivation of specialized crops created imbalances in nature which provided insects and other pests ideal conditions in which to multiply.

As an example, the Colorado potato beetle in 1850 lived on local plants and maintained a balanced population in its natural environment. When the early settlers planted potatoes, the beetles were furnished a vast new supply of food. They multiplied. They became a pest to the new settlers and spread eastward to other potato fields as a result of their own population pressure. Nothing was effective against this new pest until the arsenic compound, Paris green was applied.

By the latter half of the 19th century, United States agriculture was well on the way toward becoming a commercial production industry. Progressive, scientific farming was promoted by the founding of the land-grant colleges, the agricultural experiment stations, and the creation of an extension-education system. These institutions, together with the United States Department of Agriculture, made up an extremely effective organization of applied research, informational and demonstration programs, and consulting services for farmers.

As a result of these developments in which the increasing use of chemical pesticides played an important role, most of U.S. food supplies and substantial quantities for export are now produced by fewer than 5 percent of the population.

SCOPE OF PRESENT PROGRAM

Under present law more than 60,000 products made from one or more of 900 chemical compounds are currently registered. Of these, farmers use pesticides to fight harmful weeds, insects, plant diseases, and other pests attacking their livestock and food crops; plant regulators to produce seedless fruits and vegetables and to prevent premature dropping of fruit; and plant defoliants and desiccants to cause leaves to drop or plants to mature uniformly so that mechanical harvesting can be used more efficiently.

Althouth farmers use by far the largest volume of the pesticides produced in this country, approximately half of the pesticide products registered by EPA are designed for nonfarm uses around or in homes, apartment buildings, and industrial plants.

Industrial uses of chemical products registered as pesticides are quite varied. For example, manufacturers use chemical pesticides against fungi in literally thousands of products ranging from asphalt, paint, and plastics to jet fuel. Other pesticides are used by industry to make such products longer lasting and more attractive to consumers. All sterilizing, disinfecting, sanitizing, germicidal, and bacteria killing chemicals-except those sold exclusively for use on or in the living body of man or other animals are classified as "pesticides" and must be registered. These include products to sterilize and disinfect surgical and dental instruments, barber shop and beauty parlor instruments and equipment, dairy equipment, and such restaurant equipment as dishes and glasses.

Homeowners and apartment dwellers alike use pesticides practically every day. The housewife fights such insects as roaches and ants with pesticides; she combats mildew and other fungi in clothing with fungicides; and she applies detergent-sanitizers in her laundry and antibacterial sprays in her bathrooms and kitchens to keep them sanitary and clean smelling.

Homeowners regularly use insecticides on their lawns, rose bushes, and other ornamentals to protect them against insects. They also apply fungicides on lawns to control grass diseases and herbicides on lawns, driveways, and other areas to control weeds. All of these types of chemicals are registered under present law and will be strictly regulated under the provisions of H.R. 10729.

PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS

In addition to making an invaluable contribution to efficient food. production, pesticides have saved millions of lives as a result of their widespread use to control or eradicate pest carried diseases such as malaria, typhus, sleeping sickness and yellow fever. A widely recognized scientist believes that the much maligned pesticide DDT has saved more lives than all the anti-biotics combined.1

CONSUMER BENEFIT

The great forward strides in production efficiency made possible by the use of chemical pesticides in combination with other improved

1 See Page 469, Printed Hearings Serial 92-A, Remarks of Prof. Robert White-Stevens, Bureau of Conservation and Environmental Science, Rutgers University, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, at the 52nd Annual Meeting of the American Farm Bureau Federation, in Houston, Texas, December 7, 1970.

[p. 6]

agricultural practices makes it possible for consumers to obtain their domestically produced foods with a smaller and smaller share of their spendable income.

It is commonly reported that consumers, in 1971, are spending 16.5 percent of their disposable income for food. For their production efforts, farmers receive less than a third of these retail-food expenditures. About 5 percent of consumers' disposable income goes to farmers, perhaps 2 percent goes for imported food and approximately 9.5 percent is required to pay the processing and marketing charges. There are few, if any, countries in the world where such a small percentage of consumers' expenditures is required to purchase the farm supplied foods. There also are few countries which use as much chemical pesticides as American farmers.

CURRENT PRODUCTION AND SALES OF PESTICIDES AND RELATED PRODUCTS

For the purposes of the following Table 1, the term "pesticides and related products" includes fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, rodenticides, and related products such as plant hormones, seed disinfectants, soil conditioners, soil fumigants and synergists. The following data also reflects 100-percent active material and excludes such materials as diluents, emulsifiers, and wetting agents.

U.S. production of pesticides and related products in 1970 amounted to 1,034 million pounds-6.4 percent less than the 1,104 million pounds reported for 1969. Sales in 1970 were 881 million pounds, valued at $870 million, compared with 929 million pounds, valued at $851 million, in 1969.

The output of cyclic pesticides and related products amounted to 727 million pounds in 1970-about 11.3 percent less than the 819 million pounds produced in 1969. Sales in 1970 were 602 million pounds, valued at $702 million, compared with 666 million pounds, valued at $697 million, in 1969. The output of DDT amounted to 59 million pounds in 1970-the lowest since 1949. Production of acyclic pesticides and related products, increased in 1970 amounting to 307 million pounds, compared with the 285 million pounds reported for 1969. Sales in 1970 were 279 million pounds an increase of about 6.3 percent as compared with 263 million pounds in 1969; the value of sales increased to $169 million in 1970, compared with $154 million in 1969-a gain of 9.6 percent.

[p. 7]

SYNTHETIC ORGANIC CHEMICALS, 1970

TABLE 1. PESTICIDES AND RELATED PRODUCTS: U.S. PRODUCTION AND SALES, 1970

[Listed below are all pesticides and related products for which any reported data on production or sales may be published (Leaders are used where the reported data are accepted in confidence and may not be published or where no data were reported.) Table 2 lists all pesticides and related products for which data on] production or sales were reported and identifies the manufacturers of each]