Mr. BACON. What I want to get before you is this, if this range was going under some form of control that we recommend that it be put under some department of Federal Government, not any particular department. I do believe that all this grazing should go under one and the same department eventually, if it is to be handled by the Government at all. Mr. McLean drew up the following motion: If the public domain is going under any form of control it is the consensus of this meeting that it be put under control of the Government and in the same department as the Forest Service with a court of appeals.

Mr. BARCLAY. I second the motion.

Mr. GOODING. All in favor say "aye."

(Ayes carried unanimously.)

Motion read by Mr. Gooding as follows: "That the rights of both forest and public domain be legalized."

Mr. BACON. I move that motion be adopted.

Mr. HAMILTON. Second it.

Mr. GOODING. All in favor say "aye."

(Ayes carried unanimously.)

Motion read by Mr. Gooding as follows: "It is our recommendation that for efficiency, economy, and elimination of friction, the administrative offices of this bureau which will control both the forest and public domain be established in the West, preferably Denver or Salt Lake."

Mr. SPROAT. Make that Boise.

Mr. HAYES. Boise got the main line; we should have it at Dubois.

Mr. SPROAT. I make motion that it be put in Western States and leave out Denver and Salt Lake.

Mr. FAYE, Dubois. Second it.

Mr. GOODING. All in favor say "aye."

(Ayes carried unanimously.)

Mr. SPROAT. I would like to move a vote of thanks to the experimental station for the kind way they have treated us here and also the shearers for quitting their work for so long so that we could hold this meeting.

Mr. MCNAMARA. I second that motion.

(Meeting adjourned.)

PROCEEDINGS OF THE HEARING ON PUBLIC LANDS HELD AT MACKEY, IDAHO BY THE IDAHO WOOL GROWERS' ASSOCIATION, WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON, JUNE 3, 1925

Meeting called to order at 3 p. m. by Mr. Ed. Gooding.
Present: Sixty cattle and wool growers.

Introduction of Mr. Donald McLean by Mr. Dillingham, who discussed the methods for handling public lands, quoting arguments pro and con as given by different men in previous hearings.

Mr. GOODING. I will ask Mr. Dillingham to preside at this meeting. (Meeting turned over to Mr. Les Dillingham, secretary of the Idaho Cattle and Horse Growers, who presided.)

Mr. DILLINGHAM. The invitation was extended to all the livestock growers to come to this meeting by the officers of the Idaho Wool Growers' Association, principally for the purpose of getting the stockmen's opinions as to what manner of control they wish to have set up for grazing on the public lands and also I think the question on forest reserve grazing matters. The woolgrowers are holding these meetings all over the State, having 10 or 15 meetings in different. parts of the State. As I understand it, it is all leading up to getting a record of stockmen's views in their own towns and in the country so that it may be presented to the Public Lands Committee of the Senate when they appear in Salt Lake.

I am going to call on some of the men here for an expression. I would like to hear from Mr. West, secretary of the Thousand Springs Cattlemen's Association-his post office is at Dickey, Idaho-on the subject that has been brought before us, what his experience would lead him to believe.

Mr. WEST. This is something new; I haven't thought of it very much. I have been on the range quite a long time, and I don't care very much to have any more supervision by the Forest Service. They have ridden us pretty heavy in this section, and I don't know what would be just the best way. This

stock business is getting to be quite a bugbear, and I am getting pretty well disgusted, unless there is something done whereby we will know that we are going to have something permanent and not be bossed around so much and know what we are going to have from year to year. I think we will come out all right, and I think that some kind of cheap lease would be the best system, and that may be under the supervision of the forest system, but the way that bureau is now organized I don't think I care for it. It might be that there would be some way that it could be reorganized, but it would have to be quite a bit. I approve of a board of appeals; we don't seem to have any come-back whatever now with the Forest Department. I would like to see the headquarters moved west.

Mr. BACON. How do you stand on the legal rights of this question? Do you want this right legalized, the same as the water right or any other right?

Mr. WEST. Yes, sir. I think that is the proper system-whether you are going to be under the Forest Service or the Department of the Interior or notgetting a legal right or a long-time lease.

Mr. BACON. Let me ask you another question in regard to rules and regulations. It was brought out yesterday that what they ought to do is simply do away with about 99 per cent of these rules and then what rules we do have have them made laws by Congress, and then let a man run his stock on the range and hold him responsible for the upkeep of the range. Then you would not have to be told in what canyon you could run you stock; in other words, run it like the stock business ought to be run. You would know what the law was and would know what would happen if you broke the law. What do you think of that as compared with a condition under which we have a different rule each year, and sometimes oftener than that?

Mr. WEST. I would like to have something permanent.

Mr. BACON. When this thing comes up we would like to be able to say that the stockmen are agreed upon this. We want to be very sure when we do go down there that we have the majority of stockmen back of us. I am tired of this monkey business; if we have to listen to what somebody tells us we can do and what we can't do, I want to get out of the stock business.

Mr. WEST. That is just the idea; we are dictated to on every side and every turn.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. I would like to hear from Mr. Larder, vice president of the Copper Basin Association.

Mr. LARDER. I haven't formed much of an idea. This is something that has just come up lately, but as far as handling cattle I think I have made a pretty good study of that. I don't think we are getting a square deal the way it is, because, as the gentleman says, every two or three days the forest ranger comes around and orders you to herd in this canyon and water over there and water over here, and we can't run cattle much longer like it is. But I am in favor of getting this in a lease some way, if we can, and settle it up so that we can run it ourselves. I don't think I need anybody to tell me how to run my cattle and I don't want to tell anybody how to run his cattle. That is about all I have to say in regard to it.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Are you finding it harder to exist in the cattle business under the rules and regulations laid down by the forest ranger than before they were established?

Mr. LARDER. I should think so. We could run our cattle at nominal expense then, and now it takes everything we get to run cattle because we can't satisfy the Forest Service. They are at us all the time. It is going to put nearly all the cattlemen in our association out of business. There has been about five big stockmen go out of the business in the last year, and I believe in two more years they will pretty nearly all be out of business.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. If that condition destroys the cattle business what will become of the ranches?

Mr. LARDER. They will be worthless. The cattle ranches are just headquarters for the cattle range.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Can't we hear from you, Mr. Drake, in regard to public lands and also as to your experience with the Forest Service?

Mr. DRAKE. I am in favor of leases both in the forest and in the open range. As it is we have no stability. We might have a good range this year and next year we might not have. If we have a lease it would appear to me that we could take it up with our banker and say we have so many ranches and this much range and this stock and we could borrow money on it. As it is

we have our ranches and stock and do not know whether we will be in business next year or not, and I am surely in favor of some kind of lease proposition. Mr. DILLINGHAM. Mr. Vaught, could we hear from you?

Mr. VAUGHT. I think there are more competent men to speak on this than I. I would rather hear someone else.

Mr. BACON. We would like an expression from you.

Mr. VAUGHT. All I can say is that I can't run it much longer under the present rules. I would like to be excused.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. These remarks as I take it will all be presented to this committee.

Mr. VAUGHT. I can't stay in the business simply because I can't run under the present conditions. If there can be any conditions made so we can live I would like to have them.

Mr. MCNAMARA. You mean under the forest?

Mr. VAUGHT. I mean all the conditions we are running cattle under to-day. I am in favor of a lease if it will be for a nominal fee.

Mr. BACON. But you wouldn't be in favor of the Forest Service as it is now administered?

Mr. VAUGHT. I would not. I would like to get the business back in my own hands.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. I would like to hear from Mr. Pack, secretary of the Lemhi Forest Wool Growers' Association.

Mr. PACK. I am a good deal like these other gentlemen, I don't pretend to be a public speaker, but I, of course, have my ideas on these things. Speaking of the Forest Service, I spent about seven years of the best part of my life as a forest ranger and I believe the trouble with the Forest Service is that the real business of the forest ranger has been completely taken out of the hands of the western man. Of course, we have a few local men as forest rangers, but the supervisor holds the ranger responsible for any mistakes that he might make, and on the other hand if the supervisor makes a mistake he will lay the ranger in the hole for his mistake, and if the district forester makes a mistake he is going to hold the supervisor for his mistakes, and it goes clear on up the line to Washington to where the western man is simply made the goat. The Forest Service is handled by a bunch of men in Washington that knows nothing about our local conditions. Oh, yes, they know something; but they haven't been out here and seen them. The big men of the Forest Service, the higher-ups, have been educated through books and schools. They have not learned it from practical experience, and I for one would be strictly against placing the public domain or remaining public domain under the Forest Service.

And I would be against placing it in the hands of the Department of Interior, because I believe they are similar in a lot of respects. I spent one year under that department and I believe that both departments are more less alike. They do not understand our local conditions. If it could be handled some way I would like to see it kept out of politics, but the suggestion of turning it back to the States, getting it close to home, is the most logical if we could place it under some board of control of stockmen. That would be my idea of handling it.

Mr. MCLEAN. If promised a court of appeals would you prefer to have it under the Government?

Mr. PACK. I would rather not see it under Government supervision at all. If it could be placed under State control with a board of that kind to handle it, that would be my idea. I think the Government departments are too far. away from us, and they do not know local conditions. I think the suggestion of leasing it through associations would be good. The fact, as you have explained it, that I may lease a piece of good range this year, but next year it might be a dry season and I don't have any water would mean that I would be out of luck. If we could lease it through an association, I believe that would be the better way.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. We would like to hear from you, Mr. Olson.

Mr. OLSON. I don't believe I have anything to say; my ideas might not be just the same as some of the others.

Mr. BACON. That is what we want to hear.

Mr. OLSON. I think for my part individually I would much rather see the State handle it, but I don't think that all of these Western States could exist under the same rules. I have run cattle in two or three States in my life and our conditions here are nothing to compare with conditions in the State that I

came from here. If I understand it right, in some of those reports McLean read there, they argue that a man who has no ranch property has as much right on these public lands as if he had ranch property. I don't believe in that. Here in our local country if you haven't the ranch property you can't run the cattle. In the State that I came from you could run a band of 10,000 sheep or 15,000 cattle if you had a house to live in. Now, with my ranch out there, if that public range is put under Government control, then I guess I and the local men ought to have a prior right, as we live right there, and they ought not allow some transient sheepman to come in and feed off the range right in front of my door. I would prefer to see it turned over to the State and handled by the State.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Mr. Evans, secretary of Pass Creek Association.

Mr. EVANS. We are taxed enough, looks like to me, without any more onto us. What range there is on the outside looks to me like it ought to be all right without putting it into a forest reserve.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. But recognizing the fact that we are very likely to have legislation that will establish some control on unoccupied lands, what kind of control would you prefer?

Mr. EVANS. If it is leased, will it go to the highest bidder?

Mr. DILLINGHAM. No; I don't think anyone anticipates that.

Mr. EVANS. How would they do?

Mr. DILLINGHAM. They would set a limit. Mr. Drake discussed with me that proposition this morning, but do not think it was made very clear here. Will you explain that?

Mr. DRAKE. My idea was that not less than one-fourth cent an acre or more than one-half cent an acre would be charged, and where there was waste land it would be classified as waste" by the committee, and there would be no charge at all on the land.

66

Mr. EVANS. Who would set this price or regulate that?

Mr. DRAKE. I don't know that we talked that over.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. It would depend on whether it was given to the State or some department of the Government to handle.

Mr. EVANS. It should be leased through an association rather than through the individual. I figure on the start that if it were given to the highest bidder some big sheepman would take it all.

Mr. OLSON. Take conditions up our creek. We have cattle there and sheep with our local cattle, and we get along very well with our local sheepmen, and if we had that in shape so that we could lease it through the cattle association, I think the cattle association would let our sheep neighbors have range that live in our neighborhood, but I don't think our association would be in favor of transients coming in and getting what little we had in this country. What little water is in our country is in mine and Pack's canal, and if they come we will try and keep them off.

Mr. McLEAN. It would eliminate the large outfits coming in and crowding us, such as we have had so much of in the past.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Gentlemen that live up in this country are pretty well posted on this country. Mr. Smith, secretary of the Alder Creek Cattle Association, we would like to hear from you.

Mr. SMITH. These gentlemen have expressed my views and opinions pretty well, and just like Mr. Olson said, if transient outfits should come in we would buck that. We have a case there in our own community, where Mr. Pack, for instance, formerly owned cattle and run on that range, and he helped protect that range along with us fellows, and now that he is in the sheep business I think he is entitled to part of that range, and I don't see why some transient man should be entitled to part of it. If it went under some control, which I think it should, under Government control or State control. I believe it would be satisfactory under either, just so it is under some supervision of some kind. Forest supervision is very satisfactory so far. We had a lot of range outside the forest which we wanted put under Government control. When it was put under Forest Service we had quite a bit of red tape to go through in order to get it, but we finally got it under forest supervision and it has been very satisfactory since. I can't see why the public domain which is lying on the outside now can't be under forest supervision or State, just so that we know where we are at. We have always been living in some fear of being cut, of being crowded out; we don't know just where we are: we don't know just how many sheep or cattle we can run. I can't see why it can't be put under supervision of some kind and

control that would be satisfactory all around. I am a good deal like Mr. Olson; if it should be a case where it came right down to argument that the man who is prior and had been there first should be given the preference, and he is the man that should deserve the right and the next man, so on down the line. I think it should be under supervision, either State or Government. Mr. DILLINGHAM. Mr. Fullmer, Lemhi Wool Growers' Association.

Mr. FULLMER. Mr. Chairman, my opinion is that it should be under State. I think that whatever fees there are the State should be entitled to them. Of course, we get part of the forest fees for schools and roads, but I think the State should handle it, and I think we could get better adjustment from the State than we could from the Government. I have no kick with the supervisors or rangers, but I think that what they do they do because the law says they must do so, and I think the rangers here are good rangers, but we have different conditions here to what they have in the East, and a lot of eastern Senators and statesmen have their way in what our national forests should be. Our national forests are in the West and our open range in the West and I think that we in the West should handle it. Mr. Olson brought up the fact that conditions in Utah are different from Idaho. They are different. If it were under State control, the State of Idaho could handle her conditions according to the way she saw fit, and I think it could be handled that way much better than where there was a law passed which handled them all under one particular law, but I do think that under State control that each should know their own conditions. We know our conditions on the Lost River and how to handle them, and I think in regard to that it should be just as Mr. Pack says, handled under an association. Take our conditions here: there are several sheepmen and cattlemen could run together, and that should be adjusted so that the sheepman and cattleman should have a place. So I am in favor of putting it under State control.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. All of the range, both forest and public domain?

Mr. FULLMER. I would prefer it if it could be. I think our State ought to handle everything in it.

Mr. MCLEAN. Do you think there is any chance of that?

Mr. OLSON. Mr. Dillingham, I think we should work to get the forest under the State.

Mr. FULLMER. In the East they have national parks and no income from them, and they want to have our forests pay for those where there is no income and where they have an income from the timber and grazing of the cattle to pay the expense. If we get it out of there, we could handle it much cheaper. There is a condition that exists in Utah that I rather hope never will exist here. The sheepmen were more fortunate than the cattlemen, and the State of Utah sold grazing lands for lambing and spring lambing, and they put a lot of cattlemen out of business. If this could be handled under a lease, it would be very much nicer, and those adjacent to the land could use it. The man who was making the money was buying the land and controlled it, and I know several men who bought it from the State, and I don't favor that. I think if it could be done under a lease it would be better than sold.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Mr. Thalman, identified with the Lemhi Wool Growers' Association.

Mr. THALMAN. As for the forest, I think forest fees are too high in the forest. I don't sanction it going into the forest. I am like Mr. Pack; I would like to see it handled through the State or through the association. The forest men come out here and tell you how to run your business; and if you were to turn it over to them they would make a failure of it. That gets tiresome, to have some one come around and tell you how to run your own business. I think it should be under a long lease and should be handled by the State. I think it would be more satisfactory if it were handled by the State, and I think it could be handled a lot cheaper than it can under the forest supervision. While I have no complaints to make of our rangers and foresters we have here, this condition does work a hardship on us. Like these cattlemen say, if they keep on, they are going to put us out of business, and to put it into the Interior it would be a good deal the same as under the forest. It would be handled by people too far away.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Do you think the stockmen generally appreciate the importance of the coming out to the West of the Agricultural Public Lands Committee for hearings on this question?