I would get better results. I have had a good deal of experience, and we had both.

Mr. BOWDEN. Do you think that disputes on the forest should be settled by some board outside of the Forest Service?

Mr. PHELPS. Yes; because, you know, sometimes we wait here so long to get results that we are put to a great hardship. The sooner you can get results sometimes the better, and then they know the conditions better. If you put a new man here, that man will not know the conditions. We have considerable men here who don't understand the business. They don't know what they are doing. They put rangers here and they don't know a damn thing. I know what I am talking about, and I do study some things and I believe I know some things. There is no question, of course, that the sheep will eat both. There is no question about it, and the same range will support more stuff if you put both on. Of course, putting on one sheep man and one cow man it is an exception for them to get along. Senator ASHURST. All right, that is all, thank you.

(Witness excused.)

STATEMENT OF MR. DODD L. GREER, OF ST. JOHNS, ARIZ.

Senator CAMERON. Give your full name and your residence.
Mr. GREER. Mr. Dodd L. Greer, St. Johns, Ariz.

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Greer, you are in the cattle business?
Mr. GREER. Not at the present time; no, sir.

Senator CAMERON. You have been in the cattle business?
Mr. GREER. Yes, sir.

Senator CAMERON. Would you like to make a statement to the committee?

Mr. GREER. Well, I am in the sheep business at the present time, and I have many different interests with both sheep and cattle, in particular on the Sitgreave National Forest. I think it was in 1920 the lady who owned the outfit died and her estate went into administration, and for some reason or other the administrator did not pay the forest fees and the permit was canceled. Subsequent to that time I took it up with the Forest Service at Holbrook and was denied a permit on the ground that the original area had been included in a forest or timber sale. The estate owns three patented ranches of 480 acres. They have owned some of this for 20 years and they had a permit for many years. I have no kick to make about the forest officials, but I was wondering whether or not it would not be possible, if that area was ever permanently excluded, to change that permit to some other locality on the forest.

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Roberts, you heard Mr. Greer's statement. Do you have any explanation you could give the committee on that point?

Mr. ROBERTS. I can't go very much into the details of the case. It started before I was on the forest, but as I recall the fees in that case were not paid one year, and I think there was a tr. spass case involved, which was not settled, and the sheep outfit moved off the forest and did not come back onto the range. They forfeited their preference through nonuse of the range, as I recall it. The trespass case was never settled up.

Senator CAMERON. What happened to the case? Will you look into the case and give us the information?

Mr. GREER. If you will pardon me just a moment. The papers that I have, Mr. Roberts, show a canceled check for the damage claimed by the Government as against the sheep. Of course, the original administrator, I don't know whether he intended to not pay the fees or just overlooked it. I am not familiar with the facts. It was subsequent to the lady's death that the permit was canceled, but then that investment there represents possibly $5,000 on the forest. Their homesteads have been purchased for the purpose of having a forest permit, and it works a real hradship.

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Roberts, will you make a report to this committee of this case so that we may thoroughly understand it? Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir.

Mr. GREER. There are several men at St. Johns who were unable to come here, and their policy as to public domain is that the public domain should be handled in the same way that the forest reserves are handied. They do not approve of lease or purchase of State lands. They feel that the leasing and fencing of State lands has hurt the cattle business more than anything else, either drought or loco. As to State and Government lands, it does not make any particular difference who administers them, if they were all under one head, and cattle or sheep would be charged per head the same as they are on the forest reserve, so that they might drift, you know, from on locality to another the same as it was years ago before we had the forest reserve. They think that would be the most satisfactory way of handling it, and, from personal observation, I know this, that most every man in this county that has bought any land has gone broke. You take Mr. Saunders, the gentleman who made the statement last night in St. Johns, he purchased at one time something over a hundred thousand acres of patented land, and their company is bankrupt to-day. They could not pay 10 cents on the dollar. Not only that, but the loco has increased in pastures a great deal more than it has on the ranges, and, if the entire public domain could be handled under one head and charged for per head a rate that would cover the charges of administration-it is very hard to work out a policy that will

Senator ASHURST. You suggest a per-head basis?

Mr. GREER. Yes, sir.

Senator ASHURST. Well, now, that is interesting, because everywhere we have been it has been almost unanimous that it should be a per-acre basis. Will you develop that a little more, why you think a per-head basis?

Mr. GREER. Well, for this reason. Throughout the country a man comes in and leases à township of land or a few sections of land and the first thing he knows somebody else wants to get it. That has been true of the Santa Fe lands. He will make an offer of purchase to the Santa Fe and that man is up against either buying that land or getting out and ninety-nine times out of a hundred he hasn't the money and that thing has ruined more men in this county than any other one thing in the stock business. Furthermore, if you take like it is on the forest, while there are many things that are not entirely satisfactory, yet if the entire public

domain could be handled under one head-I would not say he would necessarily need to include the forest reserve in that but they could be handled separately but the lands outside of the forest could be seggregated from the forest. If they were handled by the same committee or administration and each man's cattle or horses or sheep, whatever they may be, would be charged for the same as they are on the forest.

Senator ASHURST. Per-head basis?

Mr. GREER. Yes, sir; and in times of drought or in times of loco, they would be permitted and they could drift off into other localities. Now, you can't take care of a range cow as well as she takes care of herself, I don't think, if she is free and knows the country. Furthermore, if you have a pasture and are not permitted on the outside, whenever your pasture gets a lot of loco in it and a drought, you are strictly up against it and if you can't move onto the next land-if it was in a sort of community and every man had a right in any place. It might be better to allow a man to have what you might call a home ranch or one or two sections or several sections but cattle should be allowed to roam over the entire range that they are accustomed to and be charged a rate that would pay the administration of that land. It seems to me that there are many advantages, the inspection of the cattle and all those things, which could be more properly attended to than they are under present conditions. Senator ASHURST. Mr. Greer, you were present, of course, last night at the hearing in St. Johns?

Mr. GREER. Yes, sir.

Senator ASHURST. This is a little off the subject. Now, that gentleman, Mr. Henry Platt, who spoke last night at St. Johns, said that he had been seriously damaged and had suffered oppression by reason of the fact that a certain Doctor Gerdes had pronounced his (Platt's) herd of cattle as having been exposed to the scabies, but that Doctor Gerdes would not even go and look at the cattle. Is Doctor Gerdes here? We should look into that.

Senator CAMERON. Thank you very much. Now, is there any other cattleman or sheepman or homesteader who has anything to say, please come forward. Will you please give your full name to the reporters?

STATEMENT OF MR. H. A. PRIEBE

Mr. PRIEBE. Mr. H. A. Priebe.

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Priebe, where are you located?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, I am located here at Springerville at the present time. I have been on this forest and the Indian reserve country about 25 years.

Senator CAMERON. Are you in the stock business?

Mr. PRIEBE. Have been.

Senator CAMERON. Do you care to make a statement to the committee?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, sir, I would like to know as one of a hundred and ten million shareholders in the public domain where we stand in regards to the national forest.

Senator ASHURST. Well, what do you want to do?

Mr. PRIEBE. I wanted to take up a homestead.

Senator ASHURST. Whereabouts?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, anywhere where there is a fit place to take it up. Senator ASHURST. Have you cruised the land and looked it up? Mr. PRIEBE. Well, I have looked over several places. There are plenty of homesteads on the forest but they are not open to entry. Senator ASHURST. Under the act of 1906, agricultural lands within the national forest are susceptible to entry.

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, there are a good many of them that are ideal homesteads and that are reserved by the national forest for administrative purposes, which will never be used in one district, enough, so that as the land stands, that is merely to keep homesteaders off. I presume, to a certain extent, that unless I can make a living on the ground, why, I can't homestead. Well, I can make a living without making it off the ground itself but it seems to me it would be my privilege to die wherever I please.

Senator ASHURST. Along that line, can you give us the description of these lands that you attempted to enter?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, I took one of the rangers up here to a certain piece of land in Milligan Valley. That is up there about 9 miles from here.

Senator ASHURST. Have you the exact description?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, they ran a survey line on it, and I could not give you the description exactly, but the office has it here-local office.

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Sizer?

Mr. PRIEBE. Yes, sir. Mr. Sizer informed me that he could not let me have it. I asked him about it, but the ranger came down there at one time and we run lines on it.

Senator ASHURST. Did you make an attempt to enter any other tract of land on the forest?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, Mr. Sizer told me that there were not but about two places at that time. One was that I would have to enter it under contest, and the other one was up at Mineral Tank or Mineral Creek.

Senator ASHURST. Now, this land which you attempted-these two tracts of land which you attempted to enter, were they more valuable for timber or agricultural purposes?

Mr. PRIEBE. I don't think they were valuable for timber. There wasn't any timber on it.

Senator ASHURST. How much timber was on the first one you mentioned? I mean, were there saw logs?

Mr. PRIEBE. Nothing.

Senator ASHURST. No saw logs?

Mr. PRIEBE. No saw logs.

Senator ASHURST. What kind of timber, if any, was upon the first tract you mentioned?

Mr. PRIEBE. I think there was a few pine trees in different stages of growth.

Senator ASHURST. How many pine trees were on that? Was it, anyhow, one-half pine?

Mr. PRIEBE. No, sir.

Senator ASHURST. Was one-fourth of it pine?

Mr. PRIEBE. Probably one-fourth.

Senator ASHURST. What was the general height of the pine? Mr. PRIEBE. I guess some of it probably was 25 feet-something like that.

Senator ASHURST. Do you say that the remaining portion of that tract was agricultural land?

Mr. PRIEBE. Yes, sir.

Senator ASHURST. Any cedar or juniper upon it?

Mr. PRIEBE. Some cedar.

Senator ASHURST. How much uncleared land was on that 160-acre tract, and how much you would need to clear?

Mr. PRIEBE. There were only about 80 acres.

Senator ASHURST. And you were not allowed to file?

Mr. PRIEBE. No.

Senator ASHURST. Did anyone tell you that they wished that for a ranger station?

Mr. PRIEBE. No, sir; it was not exempted on that ground. It was just merely that I could not make a living off of that much ground.

Senator ASHURST. Their judgment was that they had an overlordship over you and that they were the persons to determine whether or not you could make a living?

Mr. PRIEBE. Yes, sir, that was it exactly.

Senator ASHURST. We have had too much of that policy. Under our American system of Government, it is not the function of Wash.ington and not the function of Forest Reserve officials to tell anybody where he can or can not make a living. That is for you to determine. What about the second tract?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, sir, I did not try the second tract, because I had been discouraged on the first. All along on this forest here in different places, there are a number of tracts that are more susceptible to agricultural purposes than any other thing.

Senator ASHURST. Here is the distinction. Were you willing to enter and make a living out of agriculture on them?

Mr. PRIEBE. Well, I wanted a place where I could call it home and where I could do some agricultural work and probably have a little stock around me.

Senator ASHURST. Now, are you willing to put up your life and time and efforts against that tract of land?

Mr. PRIEBE. I would. I have been making preparations for the last 10 years for that purpose. I have stock and had at that time various things that I needed for a farm and I have got it yet.

Senator ASHURST. Now, what about the second tract of land? Mr. PRIEBE. No, you are mistaken. I did not offer to take up the second tract.

Senator ASHURST. You only really then offered to enter one tract? Mr. PRIEBE. I asked for that one tract and when they told me what there was and what I could take up, I did not try to take up any of the others. They were reserved as administrative sites and up above a certain height I could not enter.