The CHAIRMAN. Can you put it in any units of production? Mr. CHANDLER. Well, yes; I can put it in units of production, because I can get you the probable demand in acre-feet for irrigation purposes during a year and compare that with the possible availability of storage. The CHAIRMAN. We would appreciate if you would furnish us something that is tangible so that we would have a conception of what loss that would mean. Mr. CHANDLER. Very well, I will be glad to do what I can. I will probably have to get an engineer to assist me in doing that, but I will be very glad to do it. I can see no gain by enlarging the park. It occurs to me that everything is for loss. Take the grazing, the timber-there is not much timber there. Now, I want to say here while it occurs to me that such parks as the Redwood Park or the Sequoia Park, the General Grant Park, are ideal. We do not want those great magnificent trees destroyed and cut up into lumber, and that is the only way you can preserve them. Take the Save the Redwood League, of which Mr. Kent is a member, and of which I would have become a member except for an accident and I may become a member yet-I think it is one of the finest ideas in the world to preserve those great, big, magnificent trees, to keep the lumbermen from destroying them. Now, the mountain area through which this enlarged park is proposed and with which it is concerned can not be destroyed. The mountains are going to remain there just the same whether they are in the park or not. The enlarging of the park is not going to save the mountains. They will not be destroyel. They will remain just as they are. Senator ODDIE. Does this proposed area include any redwood trees? Mr. CHANDLER. I do not think it includes very many, if any. Now, I assisted Mr. Mather in buying the Redwood Meadows, which adjoin the park. The CHAIRMAN. Well, the trees could be preserved now because they are under the control of the Forest Service. Mr. CHANDLER. I presume they can. I am not familiar with the Forest Service. I am more familiar with the National Park Service rulings than I am with the Forest Service. The CHAIRMAN. Is there any destruction of the wild life within this area that would be conserved if it were inclosed in a park more than it is now being conserved? Mr. CHANDLER. As I understand it they permit hunting in the forest reserve. They do not permit hunting in the national park territory. The CHAIRMAN. Well, is it necessary for the perpetuating of the wild life that some additional protection should be thrown around it beyond that which it now receives? Mr. CHANDLER. It is my judgment that the deer, and that is the greatest part of our wild life in the mountains, are increasing. That is my judgment. I am not an authority on that, however. The CHAIRMAN. There is no conflict of interest between recreationists and the other interests that might utilize the resources of this area? Mr. CHANDLER. I do not know of any. The CHAIRMAN. Would the interests of the recreationists be as well preserved under the administration of the Forest Service in your opinion as they would be under the National Park Service? Mr. CHANDLER. I believe it is better conserved. I believe that the advantages that are allowed, the privileges that are allowed by the Forest Service are in addition to the privileges that would exist if it were in a national park. About 1910 Chester Rowell, whom most of you know, Senator M. B. Harris, of Fresno, and one of my sons started at Yosemite Valley and traveled the peak of the Sierra Nevada Mountains toward Mount Whitney with a pack train. They did the walking and they carried their luggage on the mules. They were unable to get through to Mount Whitney in 30 days. They were out 30 days, and they failed to reach Mount Whitney; in fact, they did not get to Kern River Canyon even. They went back the next year, practically the same party, and took up the track right where they left off, and went right on and went to Mount Whitney, and proceeded to climb Mount Whitney. My son is an expert with the camera. I expect he has a hundred views of that territory, magnificent, nothing superior any place. But that was under the Forest Service. It could not have been much better under the National Park Service. And under the National Park Service it is very expensive to take a pack train into the mountains. I have been there a few times myself. First you have to hire your stock, and you have to pay a pretty good price for them, which is all right, but it makes it expensive. Now, before I forget it, Senator Barber is the Congressman from Fresno. He and I are intimately acquainted. I have known him for 20 years. You remember there was a man named Van Name, who wrote an article in one of the magazines attacking the Park Service for eliminating three townships in the lower end of the park when they were proposing to enlarge it four years ago. Van Name wrote some sarcastic letters, and accused the Park Service of being interested with lumbermen; that that territory was covered with magnificent redwood trees. I wrote to Congressman Barber before he returned from his session, that would be in 1923, and told him that I was going through those three townships and see for myself the conditions that existed there. He wrote back and said he would like to go with me. We hired some stockmen, without letting any of the newspaper men know that we were going. We met Doctor Nice, of Three Rivers, which is just at the outlet of the Sequoia National Park, who is familiar with the mountains there, and we three went through the three lower townships. When I go into the mountains I carry a steel tape. When there is any question about a tree I measure it. And I think Congressman Barber and I came out with probably as good an idea of what was in those three townships as anyone. I will except the rangers, but I am not sure but what we had a better idea than any of the rangers in there. We spent five days in there. And there are several magnificent groves of redwood trees in that territory and never should have been considered at all toward elimination. I don't know why they ever considered it at all. But we did not try to influence the Congressman at all. We did not mention our views at all. But I know when he came out that he had a very decided view as to what should or should not be done. I want to emphasize again that the policy of the park has met with my approval as far as the protection of such things as the redwoods and many other of the things that are destroyed are concerned. I think they are rather drastic in some other lines. Nothing more. Senator ODDIE. You spoke a few minutes ago of the amount of moisture that was taken from the ground by this dense growth of foliage in the mountains. Mr. CHANDLER. That is on the plains. Senator ODDIE. On the plains? Mr. CHANDLER. Yes; where we grow our grape vines. On the flat. Senator ODDIE. I thought you meant on the mountains. Mr. CHANDLER. No; I meant on the plains. You see we are demanding more water than we use, and consequently we have got to prepare to conserve the water back in the mountains, which we have not done in the past. Now, there are probably 300,000 acres of irrigable land in the delta of the Kings River that are not now irrigated. I don't know whether we have got possibilities enough even if we store the water to irrigate those extra 300,000 acres. But I am very sure that we are depleting our water supply now in territory that we already have irrigated, and we are going to have to conserve that very materially. The CHAIRMAN. You said that park rules are drastic. In what way do you mean they are drastic, Senator? Mr. CHANDLER. Well, I can give you an example. The CHAIRMAN. Will you do so just to illustrate? Mr. CHANDLER. It was rather a joke, and I have told this in the presence of Colonel White, who is in charge of the Sequoia National Park, and he takes no exception to it whatever. I think it was the last time I was in Sequoia park, and I had my steel tape with me, and in order to measure the size of the tree I think the rule is to measure it 3 feet above the ground. Well, I had no way of holding that tape and going around, and I took off a little sliver of a stick, probably 2 inches long, that I could slip through the ring of my tapeline, and pushed it into the bark of a redwood tree. The bark is quite soft, and I could push it in. I walked around the tree and came back to that stick and got my dimensions, and then I forgot to pull the stick out. A few days afterwards Colonel White and I were along the trail, and he had notices put up all over the park not to put sticks up in the trees. Well, in fact some people had been throwing sticks up in the tree. I think you will still see, or have seen, if you have been there and seen the General Sherman a lot of sticks up there sticking out like porcupine quills that people had been throwing up there, and it became a nuisance. Well, he had put up a lot of notices, and there on this tree that I had measured was a notice not to stick those sticks in the tree. Well, Colonel White came along and pulled that stick out that I had put in the tree when I measured it, and he used language that would not look well in print, and he said, "What fools some people are anyhow for sticking sticks in the trees." Now, that is an example. I have told that in Colonel White's presence, and he sees the point very well. It was right to put those notices up. The public is a hard customer to deal with. You turn 43213-25-PT 14-4 a hundred thousand people loose in Sequoia Park and allow every man to stick a stick in a tree like I did and leave it there--a hundred thousand people probably visit it each year-and you can imagine what the trees would look like, and Colonel White was right about it. Your grazing privileges for your pack mules are restricted. I think they give exclusive concessions in most cases for pack trains and other concessions. That may be the best for the public at large. But it is rather hard on a man of ordinary means who has his own stock and wants to go through the park and pack his own feed and supplies and go back through the mountains. They will not allow him to do it. Now, whether that is proper or not I don't know. Now, this is not criticism. I wish Mr. Mather was here. This is not criticism. It is their policy. I am simply describing it. It might be for the best interests. I think in the Yosemite Valley that if you break your car down, for any reason at all that should happen, and one of your neighbors wanted to pull you out of there, I am not sure that you would have the privilege of doing that. The CHAIRMAN. Senator, would an extension of the park be beneficial to the park concessionaires? Mr. CHANDLER. I am not sure whether it would or would not. I would not want to answer that. As far as I am aware I do not think the park concessionaires have any interest in it. They may have, but as far as I am aware they have none whatever. The CHAIRMAN. Well, might not a park be so small that it would not attract concessionaires who would give adequate service by reason of the limited area, such as transportation lines and hotel facilities? Mr. CHANDLER. Do you mean might it be so small that it would be necessary or would not be necessary ? The CHAIRMAN. That it would be necessary to increase it in order to attract concessionaires who would provide adequate facilities? Mr. CHANDLER. I imagine there would be some national parks that would be in that condition. I do not call to mind any. The CHAIRMAN. That would not apply to Sequoia? Mr. CHANDLER. No, that would not apply to Sequoia, because the territory that is now in the park is not all traveled. We went through the threee lower townships there and we saw only a few people that were fishing. I did not keep count of the number of people we met, but I do not think we met two dozen people, and we were gone I think five days, and we were all over it, and we came out with a thorough knowledge of it. There are pocket meadows there. There is a place up there where you can land a flying machine as far as space is concerned, but the elevation is too high. It is 10,000 feet high, and the meadow is half a mile long, but the altitude would prevent it. They would have to go so fast when they were landing that it would not be practical. Senator ODDIE. If there were more adequate trails and roads through this proposed extension would more tourists visit it? Mr. CHANDLER. Yes; I think that with more roads particularly, more tourists would visit it; but it is a territory that it is particularly difficult to build roads over. Have you gentlemen seen the enlarged map of California down at the Ferry? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. CHANDLER. I wish while the Senators are here that some one who lives in California would show them the topography of the territory on that_map. I would like to do so myself, but I must leave to-night. I wish some one would show the committee the topography of the territory that is proposed to be included in there, and see how inaccessible it is to roads. I am going to guess, without any definite information other than my talk with Colonel White, that there is not one per cent of the people who enter Sequoia National Park as it now exists that take the trip through the proposed increased size of the park. I doubt whether there is onehalf of 1 per cent. That could be verified by Colonel White, because he knows all of that. Consequently if we deprive the irrigationists of the possibilities that we think we may need some time, for the acommodation of 1 per cent or one-half of 1 per cent of the people that go into the park now, it seems to me that it is an unnecessary sacrifice. That is all I have to say, unless you have any further questions. The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all, Senator, unless you have a further statement. Mr. CHANDLER. I have nothing more. was so disconnected. I am sorry that my talk (The data requested by the chairman of Mr. Chandler is here printed in the record in full, as follows:) Facts relating to Kings River Delta in re irrigation, etc. 1. Area within scope of existing canals.. --acres__ 1,000,000 _acres__ --acre foot- 800,000 1,900,000 1,400,000 3. Average annual run-off of Kings River___ 6. This leaves still a considerable waste from the average annual 200,000 7. Pine Flat project contemplates the use of ground water, in low water supply years, as much as.. --acre foot__ 500,000 300,000 600,000 8. As an average use per year.. 13. Aside from the area within Pine Flat project many thousands 400,000 200,000 The Mendota irrigation district_. acres__ __do____ 70,000 50,000 |