domain is not in large blocks but in isolated tracts you ought to provide for some system of disposing of those tracts.

Mr. HAZELTINE. Thos small tracts are not worth fencing. You can't afford to fence around them. It costs too much.

Mr. BOWDEN. Would you recommend the sale or other disposition of those?

Mr. HAZELTINE. I see no objection to it. It would be very helpful. Mr. BOWDEN. You would not recommend a limitation on the size of the tract that could be sold?

Mr. HAZELTINE. I would not; no.

Mr. BOWDEN. What basis do you recommend should be used in determining forest grazing fees?

Mr. HAZELTINE. I had a talk with Colon:1 Greeley about that in California some years ago and he did not pay a bit of attention to me and I don't blame him, but I could not see why, with all the machinery the forest has at its disposal, it could not determine the value of the forage based upon the value of the project. I can't see why when a st er sells at $40 and the forest fee is a dollar, the forest fee should be a dollar wh n the same steer sells for $15. because the selling of the steer is the marketing of that forage and the forage certainly is not worth as much in a $15-steer as in a $40-steer. It seems to me the whole thing is wrong; that there is not a scientific relation between the cost of the forage and what you produce out of that stuff. The Colonel would not listen to me at all. I still think I am right.

Mr. BOWDEN. Now, getting back to what you want to accomplish by a grazing fee. Should the Government treat the grazing privilege as one which should be productive of revenue?

Mr. HAZELTINE. I live out here in the West and my interests are with these cowmen. I don't see why the forest should be made productive. My idea would be on that that it should pay for the running of the thing and no more. It was not started in the first place to produce an income. It was to protect the forest as a forest and the watershed of the Salt River Valley and all that, and I see no reason in the world why the poor cowman should be taxed for everything he can get off of the ground and the money spent here and there and elsewhere in so-called improvements. I should be for a fee that would compensate the cost of operation.

Senator CAMERON. Actual cost?

Mr. HAZELTINE. Yes.

Mr. BOWDEN. Under that basis, one permittee might have to pay more for what he gets-the value of what he gets-than another permittee?

Mr. HAZELTINE. Perhaps he would get more.

Mr. BOWDEN. Well, he might get less.

Mr. HAZELTINE. I don't just see why.

Mr. BOWDEN. Well, for instance, one permittee is ranging on a forest where administrative expense is high, but the value of the forage may be less than another permittee who ranges upon a better forest where administration problems are smaller and expense would be less. There is a varying value in forage?

Mr. HAZELTINE. Yes.

Mr. BOWDEN. Depending upon location and market conditions and type and nature of it-many factors that enter into it, of course. Mr. HAZELTINE. Couldn't that be averaged? I would not expect to cut the thing up in small pieces. On some of the Prescott forest here there is nothing to eat on it at all. You go over into the Mogollons and you find grass that high [indicating]. You could not take all of the barren country and charge it up and put it aside by itself. I think that could be averaged. I think the forest could handle that. Let me ask this: What does the Salt River Valley and other places that are protected by this forest in their watershed pay to the forest? I never thought of that. What do they pay? They get the benefit of all this. Where do they come in?

Senator ASHURST. Will you permit me

Mr. HAZELTINE. I will be glad if you will answer that, Senator. Senator ASHURST. We are proud of the justness of our Government toward the irrigationists, and we lend to the projects money for 20 years without interest and I think it should be 40 years without interest

Mr. HAZELTINE. I am with you.

Senator ASHURST. But the Government insists, however, that the cowman and the sheepman shall pay three times the value of the forage. We should treat all citizens alike. We appreciate fully your statements that you are not against the Government. My colleague and I and the other members of our committee are not against the Government. We are not against the forests. We want them perpetuated, but we object to their being made engines of oppression against our people. Let me illustrate. The grazing fees are three times too high. It is true that a third of the fees are returned to the counties for the benefit of the schools and roads, which means that the sheep and cattlemen are paying very much more to support the schools and roads than the other interests are. Why single out the cattlemen and the sheepmen and say to them you must pay much more to support the schools and roads than others must pay? It is the injustice of the system against which I inveigh.

Mr. HAZELTINE. I think you have covered it exactly.

Senator CAMERON. You heard me ask Mr. Favour about the intermediate credit bank. Have you any suggestions to make on that, Mr. Hazeltine?

Mr. HAZELTINE. I think that can be made very helpful. I don't want the cow man to be in a position of a suppliant that must be carried along and I think we must guard against anything that would pauperize any class of individuals but I do feel that a wise extension of credit at the present time could be most helpful. I appreciate the fact that it is very difficult for a man sitting up in Berkeley to know how to make a wise loan on a bunch of cattle over in the Mogollon Mountains and I view with charity the list of questions he asks, some of which the old man himself could not answer, but I do think there ought to be some medium through which credit for a reasonable length of time could be secured and that would mean not six months, with two or three extensions, except in the case of cattle on feed. The cattle situation has got to the point now where it has got to be really capitalized and not merely loaned to. The cattle situation has ceased to have any capital of

its own. I remember the time and you remember the time when cattle men had money and they had money in the bank and they had money in the local stores and, before the days of the bank when old Boss Head down here and others that operated these country stores carried quite a bit of cash belonging to the cattle men. That is all gone and most of the stores are broke in an effort to carry the cattle men along. That is not, of course, the cow man's fault. It is the fault of the financial situation of the country and he has got to be brought back and two or three things are necessary to bring him back. One is some capital to start on. Another is the assurance that he won't be jumped on for the capital-for the principal amount of it in too short a time. Now, I have been talking with some of the cow men and they say we can't pay that sum, it is impossible, that is all there is to it. Well, I say, boys, look here. protect the capital, divide up into ten payments and figure on making one payment a year and protect all the rest. Well, that looks kind of possible you know and I would like to see the Government arrange some kind of a scheme that would enable a man to view his indebtedness in smaller portions. It would look better. It would be more hopeful and I think it ought to work out. I don't want the Government to lose the money but I think they would get it back that way.

Senator CAMERON. Would it be possible, for instance, yourself as a banker and the bankers in this section of the country and invite some of the others or invite them all in and take the intermediate credit bank bill and make such suggestions as you deem wise that the cattlemen could operate under and furnish it for this committee to work on later? We will give you plenty of time, because we don't have to make this report until next December.

Mr. HAZELTINE. We might do something along that line.

Senator CAMERON. I think you could be very helpful to the committee. I know you could, and I think the conditions that exist here are not much different from what exist in the other 10 Western States that are interested in this problem.

Mr. HAZELTINE. I would be very glad to try, Senator.

Senator CAMERON. You might take it up at the next State bankers' convention, if you meet this summer or fall.

Mr. HAZELTINE. October or November we generally meet.

Senator CAMERON. What we are trying to get at, as far as the committee can, is information on which to recommend relief at the next session of Congress, and I believe we can work out a solution that will be helpful, but, of course, we must appeal to the very man in the business-the bankers-that are located in the section of the country where the business is. Of course, this question does not go farther east than our 11 Western States, and consequently we are honestly working for the best interests of the cattle and sheep industries that use the public domain, forest reserves, and Indian reservations.

Mr. HAZELTINE. I will do the best I can.

Senator ASHURST. Just a moment. I want to explore further into the grazing-fee situation. Now, the remission or the cancellation of the grazing fees for this year will prove of immense benefit temporarily, will it not?

Mr. HAZELTINE. Yes, sir.

Senator ASHURST. But owing to the fact that this is a dry year the calf crop next year will be short and stunted?

Mr. HAZELTINE. Yes, sir.

Senator ASHURST. And that stunted and short crop will not be available for market until 1927?

Mr. HAZELTINE. That is correct.

Senator ASHURST. And assuming further that there is a good year the next year-1927-that good calf crop of 1927 will not be ready for market until 1828; isn't that true?

Mr. HAZELTINE. Correct.

Senator ASHURST. Therefore, doesn't the same necessity exist for cancellation of the fees in 1926 as exists now for 1925?

Mr. HAZELTINE. I think that is very good reasoning. We can't see that far ahead, and a little rain would cheer us wonderfully, but we have a long, hard pull before we get any money back.

Senator ASHURST. Even assuming, taking the brightest side, that next year is a good year, good markets and good ranges, that means a good calf crop in 1927?

Mr. HAZELTINE. Correct.

Senator ASHURST. But that 1927 crop is not available until 1928? Mr. HAZELTINE. That is entirely right.

Senator ASHURST. The testimony before us is to the effect that the supply of bulls has diminished and that much money must be spent in the next year or two in improving the ranges, in improving the stock and purchasing bulls, and if this money must be used for grazing fees in 1926 and 1927 the range conditions can not be improved?

Mr. HAZELTINE. That is absolutely correct, Senator.

Senator ASHURST. I think that is all.

Senator CAMERON. Thank you very much, Mr. Hazeltine. (Witness excused.)

STATEMENT OF MR. H. BASIL WALES

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Wales, will you give the stenographers your full name and your present business?

Mr. WALES. H. Basil Wales, forest supervisor in charge of the Prescott National Forest, Prescott, Ariz.

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Bowden, will you take the witness, please? Mr. BOWDEN. How long have you been in the Forest Service, Mr. Wales?

Mr. WALES. On a permanent position for 14 years.

Mr. BOWDEN. Would you state your age for the record?

Mr. WALES. I am past 37.

Mr. BOWDEN. And you were 23 years old when you went into the Forest Service?

Mr. WALES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BOWDEN. Where have you been employed since you have been in the Forest Service, Mr. Wales?

Mr. WALES. Prior to my permanent appointment I was employed three months as field assistant on the Apache Forest of this State in timber survey work. From July 1, 1911, to May, 1917, I was assigned to the Datil Forest in New Mexico.

Mr. BOWDEN. What was your work there?

Mr. WALES. I was forest assistant.

Mr. BOWDEN. What was the nature of your duties in that position?

Mr. WALES. Assistant to the supervisor in charge. I was given all classes of work on the forest to handle and I spent about one year particularly on land classification.

Mr. BOWDEN. And then from that assignment where?

Mr. WALES. I was transferred to the Manzano Forest, headquarters Albuquerque, N. Mex. I was there approximately five months and was then transferred to the Coronado Forest, with headquarters at Tucson. At Albuquerque and at Tucson I was deputy supervisor, excepting at Tucson the last year that I was there I was in charge of the forest. That takes me up to June, 1920. Since that date I have been here at Prescott.

Mr. BOWDEN. And you have been supervisor of the Prescott Forest?

Mr. WALES. Since June, 1920.

Mr. BOWDEN. Are you a graduate of any college?
Mr. WALES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BOWDEN. What college?

Mr. WALES. Michigan State College.

Mr. BOWDEN. Did you take up a forestry course?

Mr. WALES. Yes, sir; forestry. The first two years was the same course as the agricultural students followed. The last two years, specialization.

Mr. BOWDEN. That is the Michigan State Agricultural College? Mr. WALES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BOWDEN. And you went right from college into the Forest Service?

Mr. WALES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BOWDEN. Have you any statement that you wish to make to the committee relative to any of the testimony that has come before this committee or any observations that you have made?

Mr. WALES. I would like to make a statement relative to some of the testimony. I believe I can clear up some of the points; that is, particularly with regard to Mr. William Wilkins's statement last evening. He made several statements, one of them in connection with sheep watering on Mingus Mountain. At the time our ranger-by the way, I have a ranger in charge of that district who was born and raised in New Mexico on a stock range, and I consider him, and I believe the permittees also consider him, a sufficiently good stockman. Ranger Moot met the caporal up on the mountain, and in conversation with him, as Mr. Wilkins stated, it was brought out that they were planning to take the sheep up on the mountain and water. Now, in order to get into that water it was necessary for the sheep to use a road which was constructed by the Forest Service in cooperation with the county of Yavapai and citizens of Jerome, and also in getting up on the mountain it would be necessary for them to go over a trail which was constructed by the Government. Mr. Moot called me on the phone and asked about the proposition. I told him it would be absolutely all right to go up there, but that the provisions of the regulations relative to road and trail damage in