Mr. DICKINSON. Well, I have lived here for 12 or 14 years, you might say; that is, I have had this outfit up there that long. Senator ASHURST. You have had this cattle outfit about 14 years? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. How many cattle are you running on the national forest reserve now? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, I couldn't tell you just exactly what it is, but I think it is something like twelve hundred. Senator ASHURST. What is the condition of the range this year? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, it is fairly good. Senator ASHURST. You are suffering from extreme drought aren't you? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, we have been; yes. Senator ASHURST. The cancellation of the grazing fees, for this year, will aid the stockmen will it not? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. Now, how have you gotten along with the forest reserve officials? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, as far as getting along, I think I have gotten along with them all right. Of course they have some rulings we don't just exactly approve of. Senator ASHURST. Well, what are these rulings that you don't approve of? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, there is one thing, I figure their cutting is too harsh, and not giving us a show for what we feel like we are entitled to. Senator ASHURST. If they cut you too severely they will reduce you to a point that you can not make any profit, can not make bread and butter; is that true? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes; we can not exist. Senator ASHURST. Now then, dry years mean a poor calf crop with small stunted calves? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. And that poor and stunted crop will not be available for market until 1927? Mr. DICKINSON. No, sir. Senator ASHURST. Supposing you have a good year next year, that would mean a better calf crop in 1927, wouldn't it? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. And that crop wouldn't be ready for the market until 1928? Mr. DICKINSON. No, sir. Senator ASHURST. Well, then, the necessity for cancelling the grazing fees for 1926, is just as great as for 1925, isn't it? Mr. DICKINSON. I think so. Senator ASHURST. The ranges are very much run down, are they not? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. You have been using money for fees, and in order for the livestock industry to survive, it must have help, not only for this year but next year as well, is that true? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. How long, in your judgment, will it take the livestock industry to get back on its feet, assuming that it has good years? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, I don't think they can get back under from 5 to 10 years. Senator ASHURST. Then would you recommend strict justice for the stockmen rather than tyrannical conduct on the part of the officials? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. Are you affected in any way by the fences? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, no. Senator ASHURST. They don't bother you any? Mr. DICKINSON. I don't know as they bother me a great deal. Of course, we have a fence out here that has caused us quite a lot of trouble to keep it up. Senator ASHURST. Well now, the fees that you pay, have been paying, are a dollar a year per head, are they not? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Senator ASHURST. Is that range worth that? Mr. DICKINSON. Well, I don't know. Senator ASHURST. Was it worth that last year? Mr. DICKINSON. I don't think so. Senator ASHURST. You think not? Mr. DICKINSON. No, sir. Senator ASHURST. Then the Government is charging a fee for something for which they don't give the value, isn't that true? Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, sir. Mr. BOWDEN. Have you any recommendations to make on the public domain? Mr. DICKINSON. No; I don't believe that I feel that I can make any. Senator CAMERON. That will be all, thank you, Mr. Dickinson. Senator ASHURST. Thank you. STATEMENT OF MR. M. J. POWERS Senator CAMERON. Mr. Powers, you are in the stock business? Mr. POWERS. Yes, sir. Senator CAMERON. You are also a banker, are you not? Mr. POWERS. Yes, sir; principally stock business. Senator ASHURST. Can you give us the benefit of your experience or would you rather have us ask you questions? Mr. POWERS. I would just as soon you asked me some questions, if you like. Senator CAMERON. Mr. Bowden, will you take the witness? Mr. POWERS. Both; sheep business on the forest and cattle business on the public domain. Mr. BOWDEN. What forest? Mr. POWERS. Coconino. Mr. BOWDEN. How long have you been a permittee on that forest? Mr. POWERS. Fifteen years. Mr. BOWDEN. How large a preference have you on the forest? Mr. POWERS. The number of head, you mean? Mr. BOWDEN. Yes. Mr. POWERS. At the present time, this year, it is 3,808 head. Mr. BOWDEN. What fee are you paying? Mr. POWERS. I am paying about four hundred and some odd dollars a year. Mr. BOWDEN. Have you been cut in your preference in the last three years? Mr. POWERS. Yes, sir. Mr. BOWDEN. To what extent? Mr. POWERS. I haven't those figures, but the original outfit that I purchased was purchased from C. H. Schultz, one of the oldest sheepmen in this country. In fact, we are the only two men who have used this range. I was there in 1882, and I bought his outfit in 1910. He had a permit at that time for 5,000 head, and they cut that at that time 10 per cent, or 500 head; that was the ruling to take care of new beginners. Since that time I have been cut under the rulings; one time when I took in a partner on the sheep, sold him a quarter interest, they cut 10 per cent. Afterwards I bought it back, and they cut it again 10 per cent. And since that time it is cut down to 3,800 head, or 700 head since I have had it. Since that time the range lines have all been changed, and nobody received any benefit from the cut. I took that up with the forest supervisor and asked him what material benefit there would be to anyone in making these cuts. There was no question about the range carrying this stock at that time, but, of course, the regulations had to be lived up to, the 10 per cent cut, because that was agreed to or promulgated by the forest officials. In that connection I want to say the taking care of the new beginners is a theoretical idea that has been thoroughly exploded. I was at Ogden two years ago at the meeting of the forest supervisors, and the same condition prevailed there-that these small beginners couldn't make a living with the small permit for sheep. I have had to suffer these cuts. Mr. BOWDEN. You don't favor that regulation? Mr. POWERS. I don't favor that regulation because I don't think it is needful, and it is a detriment to me or anyone else. Mr. BOWDEN. You don't favor taking care of new beginners? Mr. POWERS. Not as long as they can't make a profitable business of it. Mr. BOWDEN. Granted that they could, would you still favor new beginners at the expense of the present or prior permittees? Mr. POWERS. I think that is a question. If he wants to go in the business, let him buy somebody out. If I go in the mercantile business, I will buy somebody out or take a chance on going in without buying somebody out. Mr. BOWDEN. Do you want more sheepmen or cattlemen, or are there enough now? Mr. POWERS. I think the range is very well stocked at the present time. Mr. BOWDEN. Then, you don't see any reason for holding out an inducement if there are too many in at the expense of those already in? Mr. POWERS. I think that is a theoretical, mythical idea, the same as homesteading. Mr. BOWDEN. Have you any comment to make on the forest fees? Mr. POWERS. I think that should be covered by the cost of administration. This has been gone over, but I will add my testimony. Of course, the forest people tell us that these reserves were not made to take care of grazing-it was incidental-that they were made to protect the forests, watersheds, and timber. At the same time we are a benefit to them, because our men are scattered and our flocks help keep down forest fires by keeping down the grass and weeds; and they prevent forest fires. As an incidental proposition to the Forest Service, the cost of administration should be a reasonable fee, and we are willing to pay that for the protection we get in our allotment. Senator ASHURST. Will you excuse me, Mr. Bowden? Mr. Powers, of course, the fee which you now pay for grazing livestock on the forest is considerably in excess of the costs of administration? Mr. POWERS. About three for one. Senator ASHURST. Now, take a certain unit for a fee, one-third of it is the costs of administration, isn't it? One-third of that goes into the Federal Treasury, whilst another third, it is true, is returned to the various counties for certain of the roads and schools, which means that the livestock interest must pay a higher rate of taxes to support the roads and schools than the other citizens not engaged in the livestock business, and you pay other taxes also. In other words, in the system they now adopt and employ, those who use the national forests not only pay for the use of the forests but have to pay additional taxes for local self-government as well, which is unjust, of course, so you think the costs of administration is the only fee that should be charged? Mr. POWERS. It seems fair to me unless they want to commercialize the public range. Senator ASHURST. Well, explore that a moment. The Forest Service or the National Forestry Bureau seem to take the position that they want to commercialize the range; why not commercialize the post office; there is as much sense and reason in that as there would be in commercializing the national forest, isn't that true? Mr. POWERS. That is the way I would look at it. Mr. BOWDEN. Do you want to criticize the policy of the Forest Service of basing the fee on the rental price from comparable private lands? Mr. POWERS. That could be partly answered by the question we just discussed. If they want to commercialize the range, I don't think they should. Mr. BOWDEN. Do you think that is a fair basis of determining the fee, taking as a premise that you are going to charge the commercial value of the forage? Now, is it a proper way to get at the commercial value of the forage to take as a basis what private lands rent for? Mr. POWERS. Not under their present regulation, because the question of improvements comes in here; a stockman builds his dams and fences, and when he has that permit renewed he has to sign a waiver of these rights. When I sign for my permit I have to agree that if I let this permit go these improvements will revert to the Government, so that is one reason you have got to secure a contract which you can enforce against the Government. Mr. BOWDEN. You do not have a great deal of assurance that you can continue in the enjoyment of the property? Mr. POWERS. No. I am to be cut another 44 per cent in the next three years, and that is the beginning of the end, because it means they are going to put me out of business. Mr. BOWDEN. Do you know why you are going to be cut another 44 per cent? Mr. POWERS. No; but it is supposed to be for the protection of the range. Mr. BOWDEN. Have you a 10-year lease? Mr. POWERS. I was at Ogden when that was discussed, the 10-year permit. Of course, we had to have something stable in order to do business with our banks, or to make our improvements, or to protect our ranges and do business, but before this became operative they put it off a year, and, as I understand, they were to make this cut varying in different percentages because it was 44 per cent. Then they went and changed the fee, I believe; raised the fee for 1927, and said it was for the protection of the range of which they are the sole judges. In other words, it is not a protection; it is not an agreement, so far as I am concerned. Mr. BOWDEN. Not formulated there at least? Mr. POWERS. No; I believe that the range will carry a certain amount of stock, and we must have something stable to do busi ness on. Mr. BOWDEN. Have you an individual allotment? Mr. POWERS. Yes, sir. Mr. BOWDEN. Do you favor individual allotments? Mr. BOWDEN. Do you believe there is occasion for the creation of an agency to which your permittees may appeal? Mr. POWERS. Well, I believe there is. I believe it is un-American for the Forest Service to be judge, jury, and supreme court of all controversies. I believe it would be more fair to have a local boardlocal in the sense that it might be acquainted in the northern part of the State or something of the kind, with the Forest Service and the stockmen represented on the board; practical men. You could find men of ability and integrity and knowledge of their business, that is all we want. Mr. BOWDEN. You recommend that? Mr. POWERS. Yes. Mr. BOWDEN. What recommendations have you relative to the public domain? Mr. POWERS. You mean as to the control? Mr. BOWDEN. Yes. Mr. POWERS. Well, that has been quite a controversial question among the national woolgrowers and the American National Livestock Association representing the Western States. However, I would not say I am in favor of such control. I believe I would rather have it under governmental regulation, then we could have an investigation of this kind where people could be in touch with the real |