partment of the Interior, on account of the fact of their having the public lands. We think then that the users of the public domain ought to be Colorado residents and taxpayers. That is the first thing. We do not think that an outsider ought to come in here and take up, say, a large acreage under lease. From a fencing standpoint it would have to be a community, because a fencing standpoint would be absolutely and utterly impossible for the individual. Our fences in this district cost us $125 a mile to get the posts and the wires stretched. I have known in some sections in which I have lived of them paying as high as $140. Now, I think that Mr. Rees and Mr. Delaney have covered the subject. I only want to show the cost; that is what I am here for to-day. Senator JONES of New Mexico. Has the Forest Service been giving permits to people outside of the State when people within the State would want to get additional permits? Mr. CALLEN. Well, in one case that I know of we have had leases where favors were shown, and he has been a user and a taxpayer for some 15 or 18 years in the northern part of this State, and he has been forced to buy pasture and fence this up. He has been a man that has run 1,000, 1,500, or 1,300 head a year. He has been allotted a permit for 100 head. So it shows that it looks like favoritism has been shown in some cases; yes. Representative TAYLOR. They cut them down whenever they please. Senator JONES of New Mexico. How many livestock from outside of the State are given permits within the forest reserves of this State? Mr. CALLEN. As to the number? Senator JONES of New Mexico. Yes. Mr. CALLEN. I could not give it. Representative TAYLOR. We have the Forest Service officials here. Mr. CALLEN. Yes; the Forest Service officials are here, so that Mr. Blair could give you that. Senator JONES of New Mexico. I would like to ask Mr. Blair to give us those figures now. Senator CAMERON. Will you come forward, Mr. Blair, please. STATEMENT OF J. A. BLAIR, FOREST SUPERVISOR OF THE WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST Senator CAMERON (presiding). Will you give your name and your occupation, Mr. Blair? Mr. BLAIR. J. A. Blair. Forest supervisor of the White River National Forest. Senator JONES of New Mexico. Can you give us the information that I have just asked for, Mr. Blair, as to the number of head of livestock, designating the number of cattle, the number of sheep, for which permits are granted in the forest reserves of Colorado to people outside of the State of Colorado? Mr. BLAIR. I am unable to speak for any forest, only the White River. I am not familiar with the conditions on the other forests. On the White River forest for the season of 1925 there were not any permits issued for cattle outside of the State, and for sheep there were no permits issued to strictly outside men, that ran outside of the State, or were located outside of the State, what you would term foreign-owned sheep. We issued three permits, I believe, to men who have ranch property in the State, but take their sheep down across the Utah line on the desert to winter them. And aside from those, those are the only strictly outside sheep, and these people have their sheep on the ranch in Colorado at least a part of the year. But I understand they have some private holdings in Utah adjacent to the range they use on the desert that they use in connection. Representative TAYLOR. Who would be able to speak, Mr. Blair, for these other forest reserves? Mr. BLAIR. I presume Mr. Hatton would be better informed on the other national forests throughout the State. Mr. BOWDEN. Mr. Chairman, testimony was given by Mr. Hatton, in charge of grazing in the Rocky Mountain district, yesterday that 15 per cent of the livestock on the Colorado forest reserve was owned by nonresidents of this State. Mr. HATTON. Sheep, Mr. Bowden. Mr. BOWDEN. Fifteen per cent of the sheep. Mr. HATTON. Fifteen per cent of the approximately 1,000,000 sheep. That would be 150,000 sheep.. Senator JONES of New Mexico. Yes; I recall that testimony. Well, that is what I wanted. R. C. CALLEN (Resumed) Mr. CALLEN. I might cover the district north of here and the territory that Mr. Delaney represents. It is true that some of the Utah people who have large holdings in Utah have bought some small lanches in this State, giving them, they thought, a taxable right in the State. Senator Stanfield has ranches in the adjoining county on the east of us here, in Eagle County, running sheep in this district, but he has large holdings here. Senator JONES of New Mexico. You mean large permits? Mr. CALLEN. Yes; and holdings, too. He has both of them. He owns property and permits, too. But the public domain is the question with us. They come on the public domain, which is open, and nobody is in charge; nobody is in control. And, as I say, we want to keep down feuds. And that has been tried out a couple of times this summer. And there has been an agreement between the livestock people, both sheep and cattle owners, and the patented shale owners, that they would give the Colorado residents or ranches that could winter-feed their sheep or cattle the preference right. So that has all been settled with people who have carried their patents to oil shales through. We had a meeting some three weeks ago, when a controversy came up on account of Utah sheep coming in. A man fenced his oil-shale holdings; he had some large holdings. They then came in here from Utah, went onto this land, herded, and, I guess, stayed inside of the boundary of the fence. When he saw what they had done and the bad feeling that existed in the neighborhood in which he livedthis county and the adjoining county just below us, Mesa-he said, 43213-25-PT 12- -9 "Gentlemen, this will not happen again; I will not do it. I will abide by my colleagues who are the oil-shale people adjoining me, and I shall give the Colorado taxpayer and the Colorado homesteader and rancher the first preference right." Now, the question of what is the best solution of the public domain-there is a difference of opinion as to that. Whether it should be given to the State of Colorado, or should be under the same department as is the Forest Service and worked out that way, or howthey all have differences of opinion on that. Senator JONES of New Mexico. But as to this body of public land which exists up in this northwestern and western part of Colorado, the public land, you think there should be some supervision of the grazing? Mr. CALLEN. Oh, yes; absolutely. Now, take the public domain that exists between the ranchers and the farmers, the district that I live in; it varies in mileage and the driveways, ranging from 6 to 12 miles, before we come on the forest reserve. And of course we naturally turn out there. And they drift off on the forest reserve, on to that, and work their way on towards home. And another reason for the cutting down of the fees on the forest reserve; I want to say at the present time that there is fully 50 per cent of the cattle off the forest reserve at the present time. We have got two parties now trying to get the cattle back on the forest reserve at the present time. Representative TAYLOR. When we have these rains and squalls like we have at the present time do the cattle come right off of the forest reserve? Mr. CALLEN. Yes; the cattle come right off of the forest reserve and down on to the public domain. Now as to the public domain being further taken up from the standpoint of a homstead act, by which a man could take up a homestead that he can make a living on, we think that it is utterly impossible for a man to make a living on a homestead. While Congressman Taylor favored and worked hard and put through the 640acre homestead act, there is a difference of opinion on that. I have not seen a 640-acre tract that I would go to the expense of fencing. Senator JONES of New Mexico. Well, is that true, that all the public domain is not worth the taxes? Mr. CALLEN. Well, no; not north of here; I would say no because it is better grazing. This district through here in 1885 to 1900 was a blue-grass country. It used to wave in this country; it used to be 8 or 10 inches high. The sage followed after that. And in those days I would say a critter could live on 12 or 15 acres. And to-day it will take 40 acres on that same ground. I can not account for it, I don't know why it exists, unless it is by being populated, or what causes it, but there is a change in the grasses. It is only my opinion-now I am not speaking for others but some approve of the 640-acre homestead act, and think it is a good thing. Senator JONES of New Mexico. Well, what would you think of enlarging the area of that grazing homestead act? Mr. CALLEN. Well, if you did enlarge it you would have to have feed, and somebody to provide it, because you could not have feed enough; it will not take care of the livestock the year around. Representative TAYLOR. We haven't any public domain left in this part of the country that will maintain stock throughout the year? Mr. CALLEN. We haven't any public domain left in this part of the country, no, sir, that will maintain stock throughout the year. Representative TAYLOR. It has got to be in connection with the land that is now in private ownership where thew can get hay and feed probably, six, seven, or eight months a year. Mr. CALLEN. Yes. Every little creek and every little gulch is taken up; 100 acres hay be taken up, and probably 40, 50, or 60 acres of it will be tillable. They are all taken up. The water and what little places that could be plowed and irrigated are all taken up. Senator JONES of New Mexico. The rest of it in the main is rough land? Mr. CALLEN. Yes; the rest of it is in the main rough land; it is grazing, rough land, which takes a large acreage for both sheep and cattle. Senator JONES of New Mexico. And the tillable portions are as a rule taken up? Mr. CALLEN. Yes, sir. Representative TAYLOR. All of them. Mr. CALLEN. All of them. The country is just as you see it here now. You will go up these mountains and you will get out on some flat tops. They will range from a comparatively large acreage to a small acreage. They will range in acreage from 500 to 800, up to 2,000 or 3,000, will be a flat top. And then there will be another break in the country, and it will go down into a creek. The most of it stands on end as you see it right here. I believe there is nothing more I have to offer. If there are any questions you want to ask, I would be very glad to answer them. Mr. BOWDEN. Are you a forest reserve permittee? Mr. CALLEN. Yes, sir. Mr. BOWDEN. On what national forest? Mr. CALLEN. The Battlement National Forest. Mr. BOWDEN. Are there any pending reductions in permits on that forest reserve? Mr. CALLEN. No. Mr. BOWDEN. Have 10-year permits been issued on that forest reserve? Mr. CALLEN. No, sir; five-year permits. Mr. BOWDEN. When were the five-year permits issued? Mr. CALLEN. 1920 I think. Mr. BOWDEN. And they have not issued new 10-year permits here? Mr. CALLEN. Well, I had the five-year permit, and I have not asked for one, so I could not answer that. Mr. BOWDEN. Are you in favor of 10-year permits on the forest reserve? Mr. CALLEN. No, sir. Mr. BOWDEN. What policy do you think should be pursued in administering the forest reserve for grazing purposes? Mr. CALLEN. In what way? What policy, in what way, do you mean? Mr. BOWDEN. How long a term should be given, or permit? Mr. BOWDEN. Are you in favor of a per head basis as is now used on the forest reserve or would you prefer that the Forest Service lease an area to the individual? Mr. CALLEN. The per head basis. Mr. BOWDEN. Could you state why you favor that? Mr. CALLEN. Well, I think it ought to be per head; the consideration of the ranch holdings that the man had, his location as to the range, and what stock he could winter to take care of it. I don't think anybody ought to have more than he can take care of in winter quarters, winter feed. Mr. BOWDEN. Do you graze your cattle on the forest reserve in common with the cattle of other permittees ? Mr. CALLEN. Yes, sir. Mr. BOWDEN. Do the sheep have individual allotments on your forest reserve, or are there any sheep? Mr. CALLEN. Yes, sir; there are a few sheep coming in from the extreme south. Yes, sir; they have different allotments set aside a district. Mr. BOWDEN. Do the cattle graze over the sheep allotments? Mr. CALLEN. Oh, they mix some. Mr. BOWDEN. What should be the basis for charging fees on the forest reserve, in your judgment? Mr. CALLEN. Price? Mr. BOWDEN. What principles should govern in determining what fees hould be charged on the forest reserve? Mr. CALLEN. The actual value of the grass there. One forest reserve would have a greater value than another. Mr. BOWDEN. How should that actual value be ascertained? What test would you apply to determine what the value is? Mr. CALLEN. Well, as to the range you take; one range might have bunch grass on, and another range might have blue grass or wild peas. One would have greater value for fattening. That has been worked out in splitting a herd, where one man would buy a bunch of cattle, split them up, and one lot would go to one range and another would go to another range. That could be determined in that way. Mr. BOWDEN. Are you in favor of the commercial value theory? Mr. CALLEN. Yes; its actual value from the commercial basis, what it will actually produce and deliver. Mr. BOWDEN. How will you determine what that is in dollars and cents? Would you put it up at auction and bid off the range or would you compare it with the price received for private ranges, or what principle would you favor? Mr. CALLEN. I would take the comparison of the distance from the market; I would compare it as to pastures; I think those things all ought to be considered. I would compare it with the eastern pastures, the pastures, say, of the Crow Reservation of Montana; the Kansas pastures. And I would compare that with the country right in here an area like this. Mr. BOWDEN. Do you think the Forest Service should get the full commercial value of the forage on the forest reserves? Mr. CALLEN. Why I would think so; yes. |