Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

NATIONAL FORESTS AND THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

SATURDAY, APRIL 18, 1925

UNITED STATES SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC LANDS AND SURVEYS,

Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment on yesterday, at 10.30 o'clock a. m., in the hearing room of the committee in the Capitol, Senator Robert N. Stanfield (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order and we will proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD C. FINNEY, FIRST ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR

The CHAIRMAN. Judge Finney, I have prepared a memorandum of some things that we would like to take up with your department. First, we will want information relative to the area of unreserved public domain in each State; classes of land and stock-carrying capacity of the public domain in each State. Whatever you have on that. I think you have a bulletin on that now, have you not? Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The names and areas of Indian reservations in each State; the amount received from grazing or leases on each reservation; the number and classes of livestock so grazed in 1924; the rate per acre or per head; that is, where you are receiving a rental. Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you receiving a rental from reclamation with

drawals?

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. There are several areas withdrawn on the first form reclamation act that are leased and for which

rentals are received.

The CHAIRMAN. It occurred to the committee that you have had Some experience there that might be interesting.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes; we will get that data also. The CHAIRMAN. The rate per acre or per head. I think you have not adopted the per capita charge, but per acre.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. That is true of the reclamation

grazing, at least.

charge as compared with the per capita charge for livestock. The CHAIRMAN. We are going to be interested in the per acre

Senator CAMERON. You lease at so much per acre,

head?

instead of per

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes; the charge I have in mind is so

much per acre.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, you are leasing for 7,000, or 10,000, or something of that sort?

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. The use of a given area of lands for a period of years.

Senator CAMERON. That is, for the land on the public domain, but on the Indian reservations so much per head?

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. I am not so familiar with that, but I think there is a charge per head. But that information I would be glad to get for you.

The CHAIRMAN. Information regarding both the livestock and the charge. The area of land reserved for national parks in each State.

The area of land in each State reserved for other purposes.

The number of homestead filings of each class in each State in 1922, 1923, and 1924,

The number of entries in each class and by States that should have been completed but were not completed in 1922, 1923, and 1924.

That is just a brief summary of some of the information we would like to obtain, and I will furnish you with a copy of this.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. We would be very glad to furnish that information, or any other information that the committee may desire.

The CHAIRMAN. Yesterday we placed in the record a copy of the tentative bill that you sent to this committee pertaining to the leasing of the public domain for grazing purposes.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes, sir. Now, if I may, I would like to make just a little preliminary statement. I may cover some data you have called for here.

I would like to open my statement by saying that according to the records of the General Land Office there was, on July 1, 1924, 186,604,000 acres of unappropriated and unreserved public lands in the United States proper. Of that amount, in round numbers, 129,000,000 acres had been surveyed, and about 58,000,000 acres has not yet been surveyed.

In the Territory of Alaska we have 349,851,000 acres of unreserved and unappropriated public lands.

We have 19 national parks, 30 national monuments under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior.

We have 25 reclamation projects, as you know, and several others in contemplation.

The total number of Indian reservations, including small agencies, is 210. The total acreage in Indian reservations is 71,992,067 acres. As you are aware, in 1920 Congress passed a leasing law, which applies to oil, gas, coal, oil shale, phosphate, and sodium.

In 1917 a potash leasing law was passed. Other minerals, such as gold, silver, and so on, are disposed of under the mining law of 1872, with amendments.

In my opinion, the remaining public domain is chiefly valuable for three purposes the principal financial value, I think, would be found in the minerals and the receipts therefrom under the general mining laws and the leasing act.

Next, possibly, would be the irrigable and irrigated areas, which are subject to reclamation under the general laws passed by Congress, and also by the States, under what is known as the Carey Act.

for 7

And the third principal value-and this is not in conflict with the other two, because it relates to lands that are not susceptible of irriea of land gation and the use will not interfere with the mineral development— is for grazing. And in terms of acres the grazing area or areas cover, of course, the major part of the acreage which I have mentioned.

lic domain

with that! ion I woul

livestock parks in

purposes. each Ste

at should and 19 ation we this.

Development for minerals or mining, either under the general land laws or under the leasing laws, will not interfere with grazing use, because, as you gentlemen know, the miner or oil driller occupies a comparatively small portion of the surface in his operations. The coal-mining and mineral development is done usually in shafts or tunnels under the ground and does not interfere at all with the surface. So that a grazing act, if passed, need not interfere at all with the development of these mineral resources. Nor need it interfere at all with the rights of way across the areas for canals for irrigation and power.

I have rather an interesting table showing the receipts from the disposal of public lands. It covers a period of 10 years, from 1915 to 1924. In 1915 the receipts from public lands-this includes purlad to chase moneys, bonuses, rentals, royalties, and fees and commissionswas $3,838,317.23. In 1919 the receipts had gone to $2,915,892.42. After the passage of the general leasing law in 1921, the receipts went up to over $13,000,000. Last year our receipts from public lands were $16,000,000 in round numbers.

Committe

a copy aining to

[blocks in formation]

chiefly r think

der the ed areas passed b s the Care

If I may, I will insert this table.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be inserted.
(The table is as follows:)

1915.

1916.

1917.

19181919.

1920

[blocks in formation]

2, 915, 892. 42
4,068, 590.35

13, 604, 825. 43

11, 238, 983. 81

10, 227, 446. 04

16, 013, 915. 07

[blocks in formation]

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. The total receipts under the several leasing acts, as I recall them, including the general mineral leasing act, the potash leasing act, and the Alaska coal leasing act, up to

December 31, 1924, have been $44,905,508.

That to the law, as follows: To the States within which the minerals were produced, $14,851,604; to the reclamation fund, $20,463,536; to the United States Treasury.

[blocks in formation]

The total receipts of the department to December 31, 1924, under the several

leasing acts were as follows:

Alaska coal leasing act..
Potash leasing act-----
General mineral leasing act

Total.....

$19, 205

25, 069

44, 861, 234

44, 905, 508

follows: To the States within which the minerals were produced, $14,851,604; The proceeds under the general mineral leasing act have been distributed as to the reclamation fund, $20,463,536; to the United States Treasury, $9,546,093.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. There is still considerable interest in homesteading, and pursuant to the committee's request we will furnish data later as to the number of homestead entries.

But the larger percentage of the entries are stock-raising homestead entries, under which they may take 640 acres, which are supposed not to be suitable for agricultural purposes but suitable for grazing lands, and theoretically 640 acres of grazing lands will be sufficient to support a family. As a matter of fact, I think you will find very few 640-acre tracts in the public domain that will support a family by the raising of livestock.

The CHAIRMAN. The indications are, Judge Finney, that the agricultural lands are about exhausted, as indicated by the filing act. Assistant Secretary FINNEY. I would say, speaking by and large, the agricultural lands are about exhausted, outside of the limited areas which may be reclaimed through irrigation, except in Alaska, where there is so little known as to the possibilities, and even there they are very limited.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not believe it is the intention of the committee to extend our investigation or research as to the situation in Alaska.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. I see.

The CHAIRMAN. That is something in the future and so far away that we are not concerned with it now.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. The department has felt for some time that one of the most important questions to be solved was the use of the grazing lands on the public domain, not only because the remaining area is largely of that character, but because something should be done to protect and foster and encourage the livestock industry and prevent over and unrestricted grazing on the public lands. As you know, at the present time the public lands are subject to grazing at sufferance; it is at the will of the Government that people may use them.

There is a law passed back in the eighties which prevents the fencing of the public domain. The result is, of course, that no given area can be given to any particular person; all are free to drive their cattle or sheep or livestock on a common area. That results, in many cases, in overgrazing, and in some cases the total destruction of the forage crops that would otherwise grow on the land. We believe it is to the interest, not only of the large stockmen but the small stockmen, to devise some method whereby that matter can be controlled and the stockmen be given some assurance of a definite area which they might utilize for livestock.

The CHAIRMAN. That goes also to the stabilization of the industry. Is it your opinion that he should have some assurance of a continuance of that right?

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. He should have an assurance, I think, for a definite term of years.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Judge Finney, referring to the grazing on the reserved area, particularly the forest reserves, you are informed there is no law authorizing that? As you said a moment ago, it is simply a matter of sufferance that they are there.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And under the bureaucratic system which tolerates and permits it, this sufferance could be terminated, and it would be possible to prohibit that grazing with scarcely more than a moment's notice in those areas. What I am attempting to illustrate is the instability of the grazing of the forest reserves as now provided for.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. My recollection is that the act providing for that sets forth that it should be for the protection of the water and timber, etc., and there is no specific mention of use for grazing. And the grazing system grows up by the sufferance of those having charge of those lands.

The CHAIRMAN. Exactly.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. And consequently the grazing might be stopped by order or regulation.

Senator CAMERON. Under the present forestry law, or the law they are at the present time working under, there is no definite regulation under the law as to grazing?

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. No, sir. So far as I know, there is no law of Congress which establishes grazing rights or tenure on the public lands. It rests solely in the discretion of the departmental officer in charge of the areas.

Senator CAMERON. And they can make such regulations as they see fit.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Without any intent to criticize or impugn the integrity of anyone that has been connected with the grazing on the forests, I would like to propound this question to you as a judge and advocate of law, and with the sense of broad-minded fairness that we know you possess: Does it not seem to you that it would be more fair to the user of the public domain-referring to the grazing nowthat he be vested with the right where it would not be subject possibly to the prejudice of the bureau? What I mean is, some statutory provision wherein, in the case of a conflict of opinion or disagreement as between the user of the grazing right and the administering bureau, that they could go entirely outside of the bureau to have a decision made as to the conflict of argument that may have arisen. Do I make myself clear?

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Yes; I understand clearly. Let me say first

The CHAIRMAN. I have a further question that I want to propound, after you answer that.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. Let me say first, of course, the Constitution and the laws of this country provide that Congress shall have the power to dispose of the public domain, and that includes not only the unreserved areas that I have mentioned but the forest reserves, etc. I feel, and have always felt, that it is better for the people who are interested in the public lands for the executive officials who have to deal with those public lands, and for everyone, that Congress shall by law fix the methods of disposition or use and leave to the executive only the power to carry out by appropriate regulation and administration the laws that have been passed by Congress. Congress not only has the right of disposal and supervision by law, but, as has been stated by the Supreme Court, Congress has the right to authorize the lands to be sold, or reserved for forests, or other

« AnteriorContinuar »