T

Grazing Service found they were a little premature in that. hadn't had the range surveyed, the thing worked up that point, they are kind of backing down from it. I did not have my set-up the position I just wanted it at the time, so I am operating unde license, which is issued from year to year.

Senator HATCH. You don't have a 10-year permit yet?

Mr. WOOLLEY. No; because I have made some changes at differ times and until I get it rounded out to where I want it, I am not i position to go into a 10-year permit.

Senator HATCH. You understand, Mr. Wooley, we are here cussing with you people the question of the proposed increase in f under the Taylor Grazing Act?

Mr. WOOLLEY. Yes, sir.

Senator HATCH. We want to get your views on that matter.

Mr. WOOLEY. Well, I think that Mr. Jamison has given you a pret good reason. Now, there are several things that enter into the i crease. I don't think there is any objection whatever on the part the licensees or permitees to pay the cost of administration of grazin but there are a lot of other things that are being saddled onto t Grazing Service that take their time, and the point I make is th Mr. Forsling in his testimony before the committee in Washingt said there is no relationship between the grazing fee and cost of a ministration of the Taylor Grazing Act. Now I just asked M Forsling this morning what he meant by that. He gave us a ver good explanation, but here, for instance, you have erosion control, yo have fire control, you have postwar problems, and while I don't blan these different services for wanting to get under the Grazing Servic yet that is the most democratic administration we have, and we ge better service, but it is my point, when the Grazing Service goes befor the Appropriations Committee in Congress, they say it is going to co so much money for administration on grazing service. All right. has cost so much, and I say there are a thousand things coming i there that the Grazing Service is required to administer that we shoul not pay for.

We are perfectly willing, so far as the Grazing Service is concerned to pay for the actual service of grazing. I will give you an illustration if you want to make an exchange of 40 acres of privately owned ground for 40 acres of the public domain, you first have to make your appli cation to the Grazing Service and they make a recommendation to th Land Department whether it should be rejected or granted. Al right, the local grazing official knows in 5 minutes whether it should be granted, but what do you have to do? You have a man from the Land Department come in an automobile and he will go around and every citizen under 75 years old he will ask whether it should be done or not, and then they will send somebody else out to report on him and about the time 8 or 10 of them come out, they will all go to the district grazier and ask his opinion, which he has already given. And he has to sit down and make a report of the whole thing, and if some little question comes up with a party out there, the Grazing Service says, "You can't do this." "The deuce I can't, I have done it all my life." "Well, but the Taylor Grazing Act, there is a law against it." "I will write my Senator."

Senator HATCH. And he does.

Mr. WOOLLEY. All right; the Senator then writes Mr. Forsling's office, and Mr. Forsling writes to somebody else and it will take 3

f your time to investigate that. That is the service that is the time of the Grazing Service to do those things. That is don't want to pay for. Yes, it is a land problem; let the Department settle it. Grazing-it wouldn't take half the time razing Service. We want to pay them. We are sold on the Service on any question that comes up and it is going to be wer to the Grazing Service; there are no more questions asked. 2 Arizona strip, we have been withdrawn until we haven't

else. So as far as the value of the grazing over there goes, >n a happy hunting ground for the last 50 years. Anybody Fated to withdraw something would go over on the strip and it. There are some questions we want to bring up on that a httle later.

HATCH. You heard Mr. Jamison say he believed it was per that the fees for grazing under the Taylor Grazing Act 4rrespond with those same fees paid for other land.

WOOLLEY. I don't know any other thing that is comparable. ve left is the rag tag and bobtail of the public domain of the Mates. Nobody else would have it. They couldn't make a it. They have to depend on our base property to make any the Government at all. We got along for 150 years without ag fees. The Federal range has been used by the livestock Until the Taylor Grazing Act, they didn't get anything but they did get it indirectly through the taxes on livestock. or HATCH. Was his estimate of an increase about right-to comparable with fees paid for other lands?

WOOLLEY. Well, Mr. Jamison gave you a particular area. NA HATCH. Your area?

WOOLLEY. We have no area over there comparable. Everyover there has been withdrawn for some other purpose. We

ut 200,000 acres withdrawn on the Grand Canyon National eat to protect the lava flow down at the bottom of the Grand

YO HATCH. You have some State land?

WOOLLEY. Very little. They have made selections. They are out on the Arizona strip, over here. There is some State e, yes. But when it comes to the use of State land, it is e for the protection around this property, to keep somebody getting in there. So we have an agreement with the State artment that any State lands within the service area of our we will lease from the State. Mr. Jamison said that if we pay that same fee on all the land, we couldn't stay in the So Mr. Jamison's comparison with the railroads' lands is a tear a comparable base as you can get as to the value. HATCH. Do you have any questions, Senator Gurney? GURNEY. No questions at all.

ar HATCH. Senator Willis?

WILLIS. I think not.

HATCH. Later, we will take up these other matters. Mr. Jamison, whom do you want to call next?

JVISON. Senator Hatch, I would like to have Jim Smith from Arizona. I would like to have him draw out a point he called on to just now about this grazing fee compared with the her lands.

STATEMENT OF J. M. SMITH, CENTRAL, ARIZ.

Senator HATCH. All right, Mr. Smith, will you state your name
Mr. SMITH. J. M. Smith, Central, Ariz.

Senator HATCH. Mr. Smith, you are in the cattle business?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Senator HATCH. How much land do you operate?

Mr. SMITH. I will have to do some figuring. Myself and eight operate land in four different counties and part of the State of Mexico, too-over in your State. We have a carrying capacity about between four and five thousand head.

Senator HATCH. You are a very fortunate man.

Mr. SMITH. Uncle Sam has part of my sons now.

Senator HATCH. I imagine so. Have you worked out a pl Mr. Jamison said you had something you wanted to submit.

Mr. SMITH. There is a point Mr. Jamison failed to elaborate that I think should be brought to the attention of the commit relative to the raise in fees. Now in making the comparison betw 60 and 80 cents that his figure gave, you must take into considerat that the 60 cents is for railroad lands, and he made the statem that the 3 cents charged by the State land department was in exe of, or out of comparison with, the 80 cents. I raise this point an want to elaborate on that a little more, that the State selected, exec the four sections which come to the State under the enabling act

Senator HATCH. Pardon me, you might put that in the record am not sure that it is in the record. The States were awarded thi sections, that is, New Mexico and Arizona, sections 2, 16, 32, and :

Mr. SMITH. Yes; and by the way, a lot of them have been exchang out of districts where the grazing is not good on them, for good lan over the rest of the State, and they are in under the Taylor Act no The fees are being collected. In other words, to get it into co punchers' language, it is easier to go out and make a living on sections of ground that have a 30-head-per-section carrying capacit than it is to go out on 500 sections of ground where you have not t same carrying capacity. You have to put water out to all the cattle and on this much ground, that would go into well, ye couldn't set the figure, but many times the amount of what the grou was valued at, any reasonable figure you would want to set on You would have to put improvements out over that entire strip ground, in order to make it as valuable as a 20-section set-up of goe high-carrying-capacity ground. You get the point I am driving a I am sure.

Senator HATCH. Yes.

Mr. SMITH. We went out as cow people at the State land depar ment and selected all the good ground that the homesteader didn get. You see, the homesteader selected all the best ground, and the the enabling act came along and we came into the Union late, as yo know, and the best ground that was left, why the State selected tha under the enabling act and all the best carrying-capacity ground an the ground in the closest proximity to water was selected.

Senator HATCH. Did you say you helped make those selections? Mr. SMITH. Yes; the cow people asked the State land departmen to make certain selections over the State and, of course, they asked for the highest carrying-capacity country, and the country in closes:

to water. When the Taylor Act got around to us, we didn't thing left but what somebody else didn't want, and now you wn that into a unit and you shouldn't make it comparative, - it is not comparative. A man shouldn't pay as much for Sot what few blades of grass grow on 200 sections of ground int of 20 sections of ground that he and his oldest girl can of. And you shouldn't have to pay as much as you are pay-State land department or the Forest Department. That is tention. And another point there, the State land depart-bere is O. C. Williams?-you are not spending all the reve- take in to run the Department.

- C. WILLIAMS. Not a dime.

SMITH. You don't spend a comparative amount. In other you are not getting to the point that you are not raising enough run the Department.

WILLIAMS. About 8 percent of what we take in.

WITH. In other words, we know the State land department on these lands, is charging us too much money. I have told Mr. Williams and other people, and everybody knows that. these bad lands they have, they are charging entirely too money, and everybody recognizes the fact, but that is all gothe State institutions rather than in the form of a tax.

THATCH. Now you have some other ideas. I am not going with you about it, but I imagine 3 cents an acre is a little

SOTH. For State land?

NAT HATCH. Yes.

WTH. That is right.

Mar HATCH. Does one offset the other? Some land you are too little for and some land you are paying too much for, so LAPS up?

MITH. It perhaps would. Of course, the trouble with that, is one man has the good and another man has the bad. SO HATCH. I realized that when I asked the question.

or WILLIS. You couldn't get them to agree on that. WITH. We have never been able to get that thrashed out with people themselves. But after the raising of the fee, if you er fee enough to take care of all the operations of the Service, ion with what Mr. Wooley has said, the Service is doing so any other things we don't want to pay for. Now, we don't aring for the service we need under the Grazing Service, and for these people up to that point. If they don't do beyond are going to be for them. If they do, we are going to be them. But the 75 cents-they get 25 cents for operation, 25 cents goes for improvements, Grazing Service, and 50 s to the State. We don't want to be raised on this other 75 order that you may get your 25 cents to operate, because the sn't need the extra tax of 50 cents, and we would rather 25 cents, the additional above that, in our own business, of the Grazing Service, or anybody else running it for us. get that point?

For HATCH. I get your point.

SMITH. You have to raise a dollar in order to get 25 cents up you want it. That was the point I thought Mr. Jamison ake quite clear.

Senator HATCH. Do you think of anything else you want to br to the committee's attention?

Mr. ESPLIN. I think that is all.

Senator HATCH. Thank you, Mr. Esplin.

Mr. JAMISON. I would like to call attention to the fact these m who have testified here are considered large operators; that the m who have these smaller holdings like I have down here, are not he They cannot afford to come to these meetings, and very seldom ‹ I would like to call your attention to that fact. When you ask a m what his permits are, these men appearing before you are from t upper, the higher brackets.

Senator HATCH. That is important to show in the record, A Jamison. I am glad you mentioned that. That is another thi with which we have to contend. These are the big operators, t cattle barons of the West.

Mr. JAMISON. Yes; these are the cattle barons. Another thing would like to call your attention to is this: All of our product is be or mutton, and the price is not fixed by the producer. The price y get for our product is fixed either in Kansas City or Chicago or L Angeles. We have nothing to do with that, and so anything that v have to pay out must come out of us. We can't pass that along someone else. I would like to have your attention called to thi fact. Mr. Jackson, would you like to state your story?

Mr. ELMER JACKSON. I have another problem that we are goin into a little later.

STATEMENT BY ELMER JACKSON, KANAB, UTAH

Senator HATCH. Let's get your name for the record.
Mr. JACKSON. Elmer Jackson, Kanab, Utah.

Senator HATCH. Your operations are in Arizona?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes.

Senator HATCH. How much of a ranch do you operate?

Mr. JACKSON. I have been running between 2,000 and 3,000 sheep and from 200 to 300 head of cattle.

Senator HATCH. Mr. Jackson, I notice there are very few sheepmer who have grazing permits in this State.

Mr. JACKSON. Yes; that is true, because if anybody has more trouble than a cowman, a sheepman has, and because of the scarcity of labor- well, you just can't operate sheep if you don't have help and no one will herd sheep if they can get work any place else. I was interested in the remark of Mr. Jamison while it is a little revolutionary I never thought of it before--here's a remark that if these lands which the stockmen now operate, and which they have spent a lot of money in building and developing their ranches on, if they were deeded to the stockmen, as the homesteads of the Eastern States were, we could dispense with the services of all agencies other than some taxing unit to collect taxes for necessary government. I believe that is an idea we're thinking of; it has possibilities.

Senator HATCH. It is revolutionary to me,

Mr. JACKSON. And I would like to see more attention paid to it, with the idea of eliminating all these various agencies. Mr. Woolley mentioned the fact that the Grazing Service alone, the cost of grazing