assistant farm economist, who made a survey of the territory in Colorado embraced in the national forest. Mr. Klemmedson says [reading]:

About 10 million acres of the 134 million acres in the national forests of Colorado furnish pasturage and feed during the summer for over 25 per cent of the cattle and 40 per cent of the sheep owned in the State. During the year 1922 this forest area supported 351,510 cattle, 7,466 horses, and 855,170 sheep, grazing under paid permits. The average grazing season is approximately five months, and the fee for this period is about 50 cents for cattle and 60 cents for horses. In 1922, 20.2 acres were used to support a cow unit as compared with 17.3 acres in 1918, while in 1917 it took 20.6 acres.

Mr. Klemmedson says that the average grazing on the forest reserves is five months. Some few years ago, as I remember it, the grazing season opened about the 1st of May and closed in November-I wonder, Senator Callen, if I may have those slips, please. This is a grazing permit issued to Senator Callen in 1917 for 1,436 cattle and 25 head of horses. The permit is dated from May 1, 1917, to November 30, 1917. This is the permit for 1917.

I have another permit here that is dated in 1922; is dated from the 16th of May to the 15th of November.

Now I wish to call to the attention of the committee this fact, that in holding these cattle in the spring-and you will understand this is not condemning the Forestry Department for this method. As I say, they are trying to protect the grazing. But in preventing the grazing in the spring until this late date it necessarily means that the stockman must hold his stock at home on feed, which is an expensive proposition. Extending the time later in the fall means very little, for this reason. After about the first of this month these cattle begin to drift off the national forest, and it is almost impossible to keep them up there. At this time I will say that in a large percentage of the reserves in this particular part of the country there are not over 50 per cent of the cattle left. They have left the reserves and are down in the lanes coming home for feed, and it is impossible to keep them back up there. Also the cattleman at this time of the year is gathering his stuff and shipping it to market, so that at the expiration of the time for which this permit is issued there are no cattle left at all. By the 15th of November all the cattle are gone, so that you receive no benefit whatever from this particular extension of time.

Representative TAYLOR. If they were not gone they probably would be snowed in?

Mr. REES. Yes.

Mr. Klemmedson gives the cost of running cattle on national forests in Colorado. He has here a table showing the cost of running cattle there that I would like to give. The national forests included are the Cochetopa, Routt, Arapahoe, Gunnison, Sopris, Medicine Bow, Pike, Rio Grande, Colorado, Holy Cross, Battlement. The number of ranches that he studied in this report was 71. The number of cattle under study was 18,803. The net cost of carrying these cattle for the season was $2.26.

Mr. Klemmedson has submitted a table showing the costs on the different forests, but I do not think it is necessary to give each individual forest, but I will give the cost as an average of $2.26.

He also says this [reading]:

Differences in costs were caused principally by differences in grazing-fee charges for the range and the difference in the number of regular and extra riders used. Some ranges adjoin the ranches and all that is necessary is to open gates and drive the cattle in, and ride three or four times during the summer. Other ranges are located 20 or 30 miles away from the ranches, the country is rough, inacessible, located at high altitudes, and has no natural barriers, thus requiring a great deal more labor to keep the cattle from wandering off.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. Let me understand. That cost you are talking about now is the cost to the Government?

Mr. REES. That is the cost to the individual, the owner of the cattle.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. The individual who owns the cattle?

Mr. REES. Yes, sir.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. And does not relate to the Government cost?

Mr. REES. No, sir. He is making this survey for the Government, but it is the cost of running these cattle on the national forest to these individual stockmen, and the average was $2.26 for the season. Representative TAYLOR. Does that include salt? Mr. REES. Yes. [Continuing reading:]

These ranges also require much more labor to properly salt the cattle, to freight provisions, and gather cattle, due to excessive snow and rough country. Some outfits had to pay for drift fences, new trails, and had to pay freight to get cattle to and from the range, while others did not have these expenses. Three per cent of the cattle under study were run at a total cost of less than $1 per head, 77.per cent of the 42,254 head of cattle in this study while on the forest range had a cost between $1 and $2.50. The remaining 20 per cent had a total cost ranging from $2.50 to $5.50 per head.

The grazing fee, paid by 454 of the ranches running cattle on the Colorado national forest ranges during the summer of 1922 was 27 per cent of the total cost for the summer's feed and care. The direct labor bill paid out to riders made up 43 per cent of the total cost, and groceries for these men another 10 per cent.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. Does that cost statement there include the grazing fees?

Mr. REES. Yes, sir; I presume it does.

He also gives the percentage of calf crop on the national forest, that is interesting. Taken from 8,563 cows. The number of calves from the 8,563 cows was 5,231, or a percentage of 61.1 per cent.

Now, then, I wish to call to the attention of the committee this fact: That on these reserves and on the public domain, over which you have no control of the movement of your livestock, 61 per cent of calf crop is considered a good per cent. I doubt very much if, taken as a whole, it will average 61 per cent. In this particular locality if we get from 50 to 60 per cent, we figure we are doing pretty well. Private pastures, where you control the movement of your cattle and you are able to use your bulls to advantage, will have a calf crop of around 85 per cent, perhaps higher, as figures will show. I have not the figures here at this particular time, but they are available. You can get the figures from private pastures all over the country showing that the percentage of calves there will be 85 or 90 per cent, as against our calf crop of-well, take Mr. Klemmedson's figures of 61 per cent.

He also gives a table here:

Causes given by 146 ranchmen as the principal ones from which they lost cattle while on the national forest ranges of Colorado

146

Total number of ranches reporting_-__

He does not give the number of cattle under consideration, so that we can not estimate the per cent there.

I gave figures showing the lose by predatory animals on the national forest in this statement prior to this time. I also wish to say that I was talking to one of the stockmen this morning, a user of the national forest, Mr. Honeywall. Mr. Honeywall, coming off of his range just a few days ago, lost 20 sheep from poison, simply driving from the range, out of 300 sheep.

Representative TAYLOR. He is one of the county commissioners of this country, is he not?

Mr. REES. Yes. Mr. MacLaren, who has been utilizing the forest reserve this summer for grazing sheep and has around 3,000 sheep up there, has lost from poison 400. Those are actual figures, and, as I say, the loss has only recently been sustained by two stockmen. So that the losses from the poisonous plants are very, very great.

Now that is all I care to say at this particular time unless the committee desires to ask some questions.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. I judge from your remarks that you are trying to make two points, both with respect to grazing fees. The first is that the stockmen of this country, as a pioneer country, have made it what it is, and that they are entitled to reasonable consideration bearing that thought in mind.

Mr. REES. Yes, sir.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. Second, that you can not compare the grazing privileges on these lands in value with the grazing privileges on private lands which are privately controlled. There are many disadvantages which the stockmen must undergo in these national forests which they do not undergo on privately owned land?

Mr. REES. Yes.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. And that that takes away from these grazing privileges the value which private owners have?"

Mr. REES. Yes, sir. And I would make this statement to the members of the committee, that laying aside all other differences in the value of grazing as between private lands and the forest reserve, the privilege of being able to keep your stock from being disturbed by trespassers amounts to more in value than the difference between the cost of the grazing on the national forests. I think that that one item will more than cover the difference in the cost. And even at that I think that you can lease private land in this country-in fact, I know you can-you can lease private pastures in this country now as cheaply as the cost of running on the forest reserves. As has been

43213-25-PT 12-8

given in Mr. Klemmedson's table, the cost is $2.26 for grazing on the forest reserves. And I believe that pastures can be secured that are superior to the grazing on the forest reserves for around that amount

of money.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. What was the grazing fee charged at the time that estimate was made? How much of that $2.26 consists of the grazing charge?

Mr. REES. Well, he does not give it in this table, and it varies on the different national forests. The grazing fee is not the same on these different forests. I believe he did give the per cent here in one place. The grazing fee is 27 per cent. And 43 per cent was for riders.

Another thing that I would call to your attention is this: I received a wire from Mr. Coke T. Roberts, of Hayden, Colo., this morning saying that he would be unable to attend this meeting. Mr. Roberts runs a great many cattle-I judge, between one and two thousand-practically all steers. He also runs these cattle in private pastures, most all of them, all of the time. The figures can be obtained showing that Mr. Roberts markets the best cattle in northwestern Colorado. I believe it can be safely said his steers will outsell the majority of the cattle, or the average of the cattle, on the public domain and the forest reserves from $1 to $2 a hundred. This is his telegram:

B. F. DAVIS,

HAYDEN, COLO., October 4, 1925.

Secretary Colorado Stockgrowers' Association,

Glenwood Springs, Colo.:

However, will be
Have lived here
Put up 250 tons

I am sorry, but will be unable to attend your meeting. pleased to have you put the foregoing up to the committee. 16 years. Own 1,500 acres land. Lease some 10,000 acres. hay, but have bought hay since 1916 as follows: 1916, 1,214 tons; 1917, 1,632 tons; 1918, 1,994 tons; 1919, 2,722 tons; 1920, 1,240 tons; 1921, 930 tons; 1922, 1,689 tons; 1923, 1,933 tons; 1924, 1,915 tons. All owned and leased lands, also ranches, that produced above hay adjacent to forest reserve. Applied for a permit for 1,000 cattle last spring. Application was approved for 100. Am one among the heaviest taxpayers in the country, and am asking for a permanent permit for 1,000 cattle, beginning 1926.

COKE T. ROBERTS.

Senator JONES of New Mexico. Down at Pueblo yesterday some of the witnesses spoke of the cost of feed in private lands and on the national forests, and the figures were given as a dollar a head per year where they were run the year around on the national forest, and $3 a head where they were run on the private land, and it seemed to be the opinion of those people that the man could better afford to pay the $3 a head for grazing on the private lands than $1 a head for grazing on the forest reserves. What would be your judgment about that?

Mr. REES. I don't think there is any question about that. As I said before, just being able to control the movement of your stock and keeping trespassers from disturbing them is worth more than that. They will run off more than that value from your stock. Laying aside all these other losses and the inconvenience.

Senator CAMERON. According to that report which you just read the $2.26 was only for five months, wasn't it, on the forest reserve? Mr. REES. That was for the entire period.

Senator CAMERON. That is practically five months?

Mr. REES. Yes.

Representative TAYLOR. We do not have any year around grazing

here.

Senator CAMERON. But on the private lands most of that is all the year around, is it not? You rent it for a year?

Mr. REES. Naturally you can utilize it as long as possible in the fall or early in the spring.

Senator CAMERON. Is there a big difference between that and five months in the year when you take that into consideration?

Mr. REES. Yes.

Representative TAYLOR. We do not have any year around grazing in this country, do we, on the forest reserve?

Mr. REES. No; there is no year around grazing here.

Representative TAYLOR. Four months; three and a half months. Mr. REES. In fact, these sheep on the forest reserve are not up there, I believe, more than around three months. They are practically all gone now, I think, out of the reserve. I am not familiar with that particular line of business, but I know that they are leaving the reserves, or have left just as fast as they possibly can.

Now, these other stockmen that are here have other ideas along this line, and so there is no necessity for me taking up any more. time. I will be glad to have some of the others come on.

Senator CAMERON. Thank you. Mr. Delaney.

Representative TAYLOR. I will say to the committee that Mr. Delaney is the district attorney of this northwestern district of Colorado and lives in this town.

STATEMENT OF FRANK DELANEY, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLO., DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senator CAMERON (presiding). Give your full name, your residence, and your occupation, Mr. Delaney.

Mr. DELANEY. Frank Delaney. Glenwood Springs, Colo. At the present time I am district attorney of the ninth judicial district of this State.

Senator CAMERON. Mr. Delaney, you have a statement that you wish to make to the committee?

Mr. DELANEY. I have, gentlemen of this committee. I might preface my statement by explaining to you that I have lived in northwestern Colorado my entire life, with the exception of a few years that I was on the outside and a short time that I attempted to practice law in the state of Arizona. During that time I have been particularly familiar with conditions throughout northwestern Colorado so far as the stockraising business is concerned.

My people came into Rio Blanco County in 1884, and they have been engaged in the livestock business ever since.

I make this statement to enable the committee to understand that I am not appearing here as a hired advocate but simply to present certain conditions to this committee, and I have in mind the welfare of the community which I will designate as northwestern Colorado. My remarks will not pertain to conditions on the forest reserve at all. I am not as familiar with conditions there. The experience