Mr. COLLINS. For travel.

Mr. WOODRUM. Why did we appropriate $126,000 more than you needed for that purpose, or what change of program enables you to use that money for something else?

Mr. ROUGH. It was originally intended in the appropriation, and in applying for that amount of money, to cover the whole thing.

Mr. COLLINS. The travel expense has heretofore been absorbed in and was therefore a part of the construction cost.

Mr. WOODRUM. I asked you if the $126,000 was budgeted under the item of "Air navigation facilities", and why you can now use the $126,000 for travel. That was the question I asked.

Mr. COLLINS. I misinterpreted it to this extent: Our budget shows the specific amount under classification 12, covering repairs and alterations, including all necessary expenses, including travel for repairs and alterations, and that is likewise true of the new construction item, coming under classification 32.

Mr. WOODRUM. Is that true with respect to the other items or amounts you are withdrawing from funds to make up the amount you figure for travel? You cannot use it for those other purposes, if you withdraw it from the items under which it was specifically appropriated. Is the statement you have made true with respect to the other amounts?

Mr. COLLINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. WOODRUM. It does not represent any increase of the appropriation?

Mr. COLLINS. No, sir; and no change of the program.

Mr. BACON. As a matter of fact, when your estimates were before the subcommittee, the whole Department was undergoing a reorganization.

Mr. COLLINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BACON. And it was very difficult to determine the amount of travel necessary for each one of your divisions.

Mr. COLLINS. That is true. As a matter of fact, there was one other thing which made it very difficult to estimate: There was considerable uncertainty as to just the amount that would be appropriated for the establishment of air navigational facilities, and without a definite fixed sum, it would be difficult indeed to estimate the travel. We could not do that until we knew what the program would be.

Mr. BACON. Now, you do know what the program is. You have completed your reorganization. You do not wish to increase the appropriation for travel, but, as a result of the reorganization, with a definite planning program, you want to allocate a certain amount of travel money from one division to another.

Mr. COLLINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. LUDLOW. Having this money under one head would give you greater administrative flexibility, would it not?

Mr. COLLINS. It gives less flexibility.

Mr. LUDLOW. How can that be?

Mr. COLLINS. Primarily, because a consolidated travel appropriation prevents the use of administrative discretion. When consolidated an insufficient travel allowance stops construction work. On the other hand, if not consolidated, money not needed for travel may be used for other elements of construction costs. In the tabulation presented the way we worked it out was primarily for our own information and guidance. It is designed to cover personnel who are

operating under these various appropriations, and the allotment necessary for each purpose or service.

Mr. LUDLOW. You get one general fund for traveling expenses under the Department of Commerce.

Mr. COLLINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. LUDLOW. Does not that give you greater administrative flexibility in the expenditure of the travel money? In other words, what is the purpose of allocating this in one sum?

Mr. STUTSMAN. The figures prepared by the Department of Commerce came up in the usual form, showing the travel money available to each one of the bureaus. The Appropriations Committee gathered together all of the items which were stated to be available for travel in the several bureaus, and they made one appropriation, consolidating the travel funds. The consolidated travel fund was located in the Secretary's office for suballotment to the bureaus. That changed the whole routine of handling it. Following the hearings before the House committee, and after passage by the House, it went before the Senate Appropriations Committee, and there was a supplemental estimate for the Bureau of Air Commerce of $100,000 for traveling expenses, and which was considered in connection with the appropriation bill. When the appropriation was finally made, all of the travel money having been consolidated into the one travel fund, that money was shown in the act as being inclusive of all travel for the Department of Commerce; so that the sums that they had contemplated as being available for travel, in the estimates for the Bureau of Air Commerce, are not, under the law, available for their travel unless they get the help of this committee. We have had a large program involving 3 or 4 million dollars added to the estimates that went originally to the Budget, and which cannot be taken care of without this rearrangement of the travel item.

Mr. LUDLOW. This system has been set up just to conform to the system that has been set up for the Bureau.

Mr. STUTSMAN. It was set up by the House Appropriations Committee as an experiment, as they frankly indicated to us, to see whether or not, it would be satisfactory during the first year of trial.

THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1937.

INTERIOR DEPARTMENT

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

STATEMENT OF A. E. DEMARAY, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR

ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL LANDS FOR YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK

Mr. WOODRUM. Mr. Demaray, we have in Document No. 300, on page 4, some suggested language with reference to the acquisition of certain land for the Yosemite National Park in California.

You might insert in the record at this point Public No. 195, 75th Congress, which is the authorization Act.

(Said act is as follows:)

[PUBLIC-No. 195-75TH CONGRESS]

[CHAPTER 469-1ST SESSION]

[H. R. 5394]

AN ACT To provide for the acquisition of certain lands for, and the addition thereof to, the Yosemite National Park, in the State of California, and for other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to acquire, by purchase when purchaseable at prices deemed by him reasonable otherwise by condemnation under the provisions of the Act of August 1, 1888, on behalf of the United States under any fund or moneys available for such purpose, at the time of the passage of this Act, except from the general fund of the Treasury, any of the following-described lands in the State of California now in private ownership, to wit: Section 25, lots 3, 4, 5, 8, and 9, section 34, northeast quarter, southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, lots 1 to 10, inclusive, section 35, section 36, township 1 south, range 19 east; southeast quarter northwest quarter, east half southwest quarter, southeast quarter, lots 2, 3, and 4, section 30, section 31, township 1 south, range 20 east; sections 1, 2, and 3, east half section 10, sections 11 and 12, north half section 14, northeast quarter section 15, township 2 south, range 19 east; southeast quarter northwest quarter, east half southwest quarter, lots 3 to 7, inclusive, section 6, township 2 south, range 20 east, Mount Diablo meridian.

SEC. 2. When title to the aforesaid privately owned lands has been vested in the United States, all of the lands described in section 1 hereof shall be added to and become a part of the Yosemite National Park and shall be subject to all laws and regulations applicable thereto: Provided, That nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect any valid existing rights.

SEC. 3. The provisions of the Act approved June 10, 1920, as amended, known as the Federal Water Power Act, shall not apply to any of the lands added to the Yosemite National Park pursuant to the provisions of this Act.

Approved, July 9, 1937.

Mr. WOODRUM. Will you give us a brief statement with reference to this item, and explain the necessity for it?

Mr. DEMARAY. The purpose of this proposed item is to authorize the President to make an allocation of certain funds earmarked for the acquisition of the privately owned lands described in the act of Congress approved July 9, 1937 (Public No. 195, 75th Cong.), providing for the acquisition of certain lands for, and the addition thereof to, the Yosemite National Park, in the State of California.

The lands proposed to be acquired consist of one of the finest stands of sugar pines in the world. I have a few photographs here of the type of timber involved. Approximately 6,700 acres of such lands would be acquired. All except 500 acres of the forest is owned by the Yosemite Lumber Co.

The funds proposed to be allocated from the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1937 would not be taken from the new money— the $1,500,000,000. The funds proposed to be used are old Public Works moneys. These funds have been transferred and were made available for Emergency Conservation Work purposes under authority of the 1935 Relief Act, and have been earmarked for acquisition of the lands in question. For the information of the committee, I shall be glad to leave a copy of a letter of February 6, 1937, addressed to the President by Secretary Ickes requesting the transfer fo P. W. A. funds and transmitting a draft of Executive order to allocate them for the proposed acquisition. Since February 6, 1937, these funds have been earmarked by the Bureau of the Budget. The authority

1 So in original.

to use them for the purpose intended has expired, and therefore it is necessary to secure this item.

The proposed Executive order to allocate the funds was not issued for the reason stated to the Senate and House Public Lands Committees during the hearings on H. R. 5394 (Public, No. 195, 75th Cong.), namely, that the issuance of the order would put the vendors on notice as to the amount of funds at our disposal, and consequently would tend to set the price of the lands. Therefore, it was not considered to be to the best interests of the United States to issue the order while the Congress was considering the legislation authorizing the sugar-pine lands to be acquired for and added to the Yosemite National Park. This legislation, as you know, was passed by the Congress on July 2 and was approved by the President on July 9, 1937, but the authority to use the earmarked funds expired on June 30, 1937. As the earmarked funds represented an unexpended balance under the 1935 Relief Act, they were reappropriated and continued available for expenditure under the 1937 Relief Act. However, the latter act contains no authorization for the use of funds for land acquisition purposes, so it is now necessary to secure legislative authority to allocate the funds in question for the same purpose as they were originally earmarked on February 6, 1937. The Interior Department advised the President of this fact when reporting favorably on enrolled bill H. R. 5394 (Public, No. 195, 75th Cong.).

Prompt authorization of funds is urgent if the Yosemite sugar pines are to be saved. The Yosemite Sugar Pine Lumber Co. extended its railroad right-of-way clearing into the authorized purchase area about one-half mile during the time the legislation was being considered by Congress, and has continued to do so since the passage of the act. The company was requested to cease timber cutting and further grade construction on July 3, but has disregarded this request. The superintendent of Yosemite National Park recently notified us that the company had issued orders to its employees to proceed with timber felling in section 3 adjacent to the cleared portion of the right-of-way. This is in the southwest quarter of the section and parallel to the portion of the right-of-way that is shown on the map in red.

I have a little map here showing the right-of-way of the railroad, and showing in red the portion now under construction. They have issued orders for the felling of the trees in the southwest corner of section 3.

The company officials have indicated orally that logging will not be extended beyond section 3 this season, but we have no reliable assurance that this will be adhered to. Their reported plans call for railroad right-of-way clearing across section 11 as indicated by the green line.

We are powerless to interfere in any way with the cutting of this park forest until the funds intended for the purchase are definitely known to be available. The company may voluntarily agree to stop, but its defiant attitude offers little reason to anticipate that it will do this.

It is hoped this committee and the Congress will approve this item, and thereby preserve for posterity the sugar pines adjacent to Yosemite National Park, which have already been authorized to be acquired by the Congress and made a part of that park.

Mr. WOODRUM. I would like to call attention to this language in the authorization act approved July 9, 1937, to which Mr. Shield has directed my attention.

That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to acquire, by purchase when purchaseable at prices deemed by him reasonable-otherwise by condemnation under the provisions of the Act of August 1, 1888, on behalf of the United States under any fund or moneys available for such purpose, at the time of the passage of this Act, except from the general fund of the Treasury.

Now, where does that leave you? This fund is in the general fund of the Treasury.

Mr. DEMARAY. No, sir; our understanding is that the funds are funds that were reappropriated.

Mr. TABER. But reappropriated for a different purpose.

Mr. DEMARAY. They were reappropriated but Senate amendments put in the 1937 Relief Act, said that the funds appropriated thereunder shall be available only for relief work. That eliminated their availability for land purchase.

Mr. WOODRUM. This does not in any way diminish the amount contemplated for the 1937 relief bill.

Mr. DEMARAY. No, sir; the President does not have to allocate this money. It is still held by the Bureau of the Budget.

Mr. LUDLOW. What would become of the $2,500,000 if this legislation should not be passed?

Mr. DEMARAY. I understand that at the end of the availability of funds in the 1937 Emergency Relief Act, it would be returned to the general fund of the Treasury.

COST AND NATURE OF LAND PROPOSED TO BE PURCHASED

Mr. WOODRUM. How much per acre are you proposing to pay for the land?

Mr. DEMARAY. The act provides for the purchase of approximately 6,700 acres of timberland. In that connection, I would like to call attention to the memorandum of the Bureau of the Budget, in which they refer to 5,000 acres. That seems to be a typographical error, because there are 6,700 acres of timberland, 800 acres of cut-over land, and 500 acres now within the national forest, making 8,000 acres, which will be transferred to the park.

Frankly, in the acquisition of these lands, we are having the cooperation of the National Forest Service, and we will use their experts in making the necessary appraisals. They have indicated that they believe the property should be purchased for less than $2,000,000. That is one reason why we have always tried to avoid having the actual amount set out, but because of the situation we now find ourselves in, there is no way to avoid it.

Mr. CANNON. Have you had any negotiations with the owners of the land?

Mr. DEMARAY. Yes, sir; we have had a number of negotiations with them.

Mr. CANNON. Will they sell it?

Mr. DEMARAY. They refuse to sell it.

Mr. CANNON. How long have they owned the land?

Mr. DEMARAY. They have owned it for many years. The present company represents a reorganization of prior companies which have owned it in part. This consolidation of the companies has owned it for about 5 years.