States are ready and waiting to share their full responsibility for this part of the forestry job on the small privately owned woodlands of the Nation.

As a further word of explanation, the proposed authorization of $2,500,000 under section 5, which provides for the educational part of the job to be handled as at present by the State agricultural extension services through the land-grant colleges, with financial participation by the Federal Government up to 50 percent of the total cost of the work, was based on specific calculations as follows:

Of the 44 million small forest owners and farmers, approximately 1,000,000 of these will not do their own forestry work and will have no need of this educational advice and guidance or technical instruction in forest management techniques. This number was deducted. An estimate was made of the small holdings that might be sold to block in large woodland areas owned by lumber companies. Also, it is known that some woodland owners will refuse any kind of educational assistance; in both categories about one-fourth million small owners are involved. Deducting the foregoing 14 million woodland owners leaves 3,000,000 small owners in need of educational advice and assistance. Records show that one extension forester can work effectively with about 3,000 woodland owners annually through group instruction and demonstration. Therefore 1,000 extension foresters would be needed to work with 3,000,000 small woodland owners. An allowance for salary and expenses of $5,000 was made for each man. This results in a total cost of $5,000,000 annually. Shared equally by Federal and State Governments, the Federal share would be $2,500,000, arrived at gradually through successive increases.

In arriving at the proposed authorization of $6,000,000 for the new section 10, which provides for the service part of the job to the individual woodland owner, the number of small woodland owners was further reduced. After eliminating the small owners who would not do their own forestry work-those who could not be helped because of their present economic situation, those who might sell their forest properties, still others who will get assistance from nonpublic sources, and those few who are already doing a reasonably good woodland management job-the figure of 2,000,000 small woodland owners was arrived at. These owners are those who immediately need service help in their own woodlands and will use it and won't get it except from a public agency.

To be effective the service program should reach these 2,000,000 small woodland owners at least once within a 10-year period. To do this 200,000 must be worked with each year. Records for the past 9 years show that one service forester (farm forester) can go directly into the woods and assist about 100 small woodland owners each year. To help 200,000 each year would require 2,000 service foresters. At $5,000 per man for salary and expenses the Federal share would be $5,000,000 a year matched by $5,000,000 State funds, arrived at in successive stages so as to establish the program on a sound Federal-State cooperative basis.

The new section 10 provides for comparable service assistance to about 39,000 small sawmills and other wood-using industries who obtain their logs and forest products almost entirely from these small forests. Better management in the small woods is closely coupled to better practices in the operation of these small mills and wood-using industries; better utilization of the timber cut; utilization of more species; reduction of waste in operation; and more efficient operations. All this improvement depends on helping the small operators in the same way as the small woodland owner. The two are inseparable because one grows the product, the other buys it. Practically nothing is being done now. Therefore, it is difficult to estimate the number of men needed with the same degree of accuracy as the estimates for education and direct service assistance to the small woodland owners. However, it can be safely estimated that somewhere between 150 and 300 specialists to advise these small operators would do the job.

At $8,000 per man, expenses and overhead included, since he must be skilled in small sawmill operation, 125 such men would cost the Federal Government $500,000. The States would match this with an equal amount.

A third, but distinctly different kind of service work is provided for under proposed section 10. Many large forest-land owners, large forest processors, and large sawmill operators employ their own service foresters. Also numerous consulting foresters are employed by such individuals and companies. Yearly the Federal Government is being called upon to give advice to these company and private foresters in photogrammetry, forest-survey methods, silvicultural procedure, forest-management economics, forest-products utilization, and to help put the results of forest research into actual practice in the woods. A few highly trained and expert forest specialists as Federal employees are now at work in this

field. It is estimated that no more than about 20 such specialists would be needed for the entire country. This is the only forest management assistance to large forest owners and processors included in the proposed section 10. No single State would need such a group of specialists full time and very few, if any, States could afford to employ them. It is intended that the Federal Government would provide this service in the same small extent that it has done for many years in the past. To maintain this leadership which also assures that the latest forestry techniques are maintained among the large owners, and to administer the other provisions of section 10 (the service foresters and the service assistance to small forest-products operators and wood-using industries) would cost about $500,000. This makes the total authorization for the proposed section 10, the $6,000,000 as stated, which would be matched by $6,000,000 of State funds.

At the present time State expenditures for the service work such as that included in the proposed section 10 is about $967,129 and the current Federal appropriations from all sources are $558,941.

The proposed authorization for the four amendments to the Clarke-McNary Act total $31,000,000. If the maximum appropriation were reached through successive stages as recommended, it would still be an expenditure of less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the total present Federal budget. This $31,000,000 would essentially represent the sum total of all Federal assistance to private forest owners and processors, practically all of them small. Our security depends on an ample supply of resources when we need them. At present 90 percent of all our timber and other forest products come from the privately owned woodlands involved in this program which places equal responsibility on both the Federal and State Governments.

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, I have a number of statements to be inserted at this time. They are from Congressmen Hébert of Louisiana, Patman of Texas, Bennett of Michigan, Mansfield of Montana and Stanley of Virginia. They asked that I present these to you to be inserted in the record.

Mr. GRANGER. Without objection they will be inserted and all of them will become a part of the record.

(The statements referred to are as follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. WRIGHT PATMAN, OF TEXAS

Mr. Chairman, Texas is one of the 19 States which hasn't yet placed all of its State and privately owned forest lands under organized forest-fire protection. I am not proud of this condition because it includes many acres of fine Texas timberland in the 98,000,000 acres in the Nation now being allowed to just loaf along at the real job of producing salable forest products. This committee is aware of the fact that protection from fire is one of the foundations of a sound forestry program. If we allow wild fire to sweep over our woodlands we destroy the means whereby nature would reclothe and regenerate the land. In my own district in Texas, we have placed some of our forest lands under the FederalState cooperative-protection system. Other forest areas in my district have no organized protection. One can readily see the marked contrast between the areas protected from fire and those that must shift for themselves. One is alive and holds much promise for future stands of valuable timber. The unprotected area bears scars of past forest fires and numerous small trees are continually destroyed a process which defeats nature or any efforts of man to regenerate the area.

It is because fire recognizes no State, private, or county boundary lines that I hope this committee will recognize the need for extending the Federal participation in the cooperative fire endeavor with the various States. We read over and over again that the public is responsible for 9 out of 10 forest fires. As long as the public is responsible for such a waste then it is only equitable that the public should bear its part of the burden of protecting our forests from fire. We have a sound basic structure in the Clarke-McNary Act of June 7, 1924. The amend

ments provided for in many of the bills introduced in Congress by my colleagues to amend and supplement the Clarke-McNary Act not only provide an adequate fire-control program but go further. Increased forestry extension activities, tree planting, and direct woodland-management assistance through the farm foresters are also provided for. In Texas there are 640,000 acres of privately

owned lands in need of planting to trees; lands not now productive. dred thousand acres of this amount are in the hands of small owners.

Four hunI wish to go on record before this distinguished committee as favoring the bill introduced by my colleagues, Mr. Granger (H. R. 2296) and the companion bill introduced by other Members of this Congress. A realistic Federal-State forestry program for the private woodlands in our Nation is now in the making.

STATEMENT BY HON. WRIGHT PATMAN, OF TEXAS, BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE IN SUPPORT OF H. R. 2001

THE NATION-WIDE FOREST SURVEY

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I live in eastern Texas, which has more than 10,000,000 acres of some of the best pine land in the South. This area furnishes raw material for hundreds of sawmills well distributed throughout the area and two large pulp mills. Our forest industries provide more than 6,000,000 man-days of labor in the woods and manufacturing plants. We must maintain and, if possible, improve the forest resource which supplies this raw material.

Basic to doing this is reasonably up-to-date information on our forests. The Forest Survey, under the direction of the Southern Forest Experiment Station of the Forest Service, covered eastern Texas in 1935. Reports and maps were issued which gave us a good picture of the situation. Since then, requirements for pulpwood and certain types of sawlog material have increased. Some effort has been made to compute up-to-date figures on our stand of timber which show total area, volume, growth, and whether the sawlog material is being overcut. The earlier figures showed overcutting in northeastern Texas and a small surplus to build up the growing stock in southeastern Texas. Just what the situation is at present is not shown by any figures that are available to me.

Since the purpose of the Forest Survey is to obtain such information, the logical thing, it seems to me, is to look to that project to furnish it. I understand that this bill is designed to increase the authorization so that we could expect a resurvey in the near future. The Forest Service states that Texas is scheduled for resurvey, but not immediately because the appropriation for such work cannot exceed $250,000 annually, which holds progress to a slow pace.

Accepting the Forest Service estimate of the appropriation authorization needed effectively to handle this survey, I hope this committee will give favorable clearance to H. R. 2001.

STATEMENT OF HON. F. EDWARD HÉBERT, OF LOUISIANA, IN SUPPORT OF H. R. 2001 BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

THE NATION-WIDE FOREST SURVEY

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, Louisiana supports three major forest types, i. e., the well-known Mississippi Delta hardwoods, the turpentine pines or naval stores trees, and the nonturpentine pines. Louisiana ranks seventh in lumber and other timber-products production among the Eastern States. We are conscious of the high place of timber in our development and current economy. It was greatly to our benefit to have the Forest Survey cover our State in 1934–35. Maps and reports were issued and have been available and used for guidance for years. Forestry and forest industries normally employ more people than any other industrial group except farm cropping. We must keep this source of jobs and wealth in good condition.

At the time of the survey, the saw timber, according to a report of the findings, miscellaneous publication 519, Louisiana Forest Resources and Industries, was being cut considerably faster than replaced by growth, the clean-cut area in southwest Louisiana was not restocking naturally, and the forests in all parts of the State were generally understocked with trees.

What is the situation today? We need a new survey to find out. When will we get it? Information furnished by the Forest Service lists Louisiana for a maintenance survey to make the original figures current. But this is several years in the future and is contingent on funds being appropriated for the purpose. I am told by the Forest Service that the maximum of $250,000 which can be appropropriated under the present authorization for resurveys is entirely too slow to permit keeping the survey findings satisfactorily current, even for just the heavily logged regions, not to mention the remaining lightly cut areas. Consequently, recommend that your committee favorably act on this bill which is the first step in alleviating this situation.

I

STATEMENT OF HON. F. EDWARD HÉBERT, OF LOUISIANA

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to present in a brief way the importance of the forest resource to my own State of Louisiana. When the great stands of virgin pine were being cut, there were many sawmills active. My State now ranks first among the States in the production of hardwood lumber. Almost 1,000 wood-using industries and many thousand workers are dependent upon the productivity of our forests.

There have been some significant changes in my State as a result of heavy cutting. I wish I could show you distinguished members of this committee some of the vast open areas that once supported fine stands of old growth timber. Some of the original pine stands that were skidderlogged and later burned are practically devoid of any tree growth as far as the eye can see. I know that there are many idle acres of land in other States that should now be at work growing valuable stands of timber.

In striking contrast to the denuded forest land in my State, I wish your committee could see the largest commercial private timber plantation in the world located at Bogalusa, La. This company now has 40,000 acres of plantations, and some of them are now being thinned for pulpwood. It is truly a remarkable sight for it indicates how bountifully productive our forest land can be if properly managed, and a stand of trees is maintained on it.

More than half of Louisiana is in forest. This means that about 16,000,000 acres of timberland are vital to the economy of my State. About 9,000,000 acres are in small woodlands in tracts averaging 77 acres each. Seven million acres of these forests are still unprotected from forest fires and are now producing only one-third or less of the forest products they should be growing. A basic State-wide fire protection program for Louisiana will cost just over $1,000,000 annually. In 1948 my State spent $514,000 to protect the woodland now under our organized protection system. Sixty-four percent, or $326,000 was State and private money, while only 36 percent of $188,000 represented the Federal share. We feel this Federal-State cooperative fire-control program should not only be more evenly matched, but also adequately provided with funds.

Complete fire protection, a sufficient quantity of forest tree seedlings at reasonable prices, sound forestry extension education, and direct forestry assistance in the woods of the small private woodland owner are four measures that, if conducted on an adequate basis with the States, will result in rejuvenating, improving, and maintaining our forest resources, not only in Louisiana, but in the Nation. I am confident that this committee will recognize the urgent need for extending the Federal-State cooperative forestry endeavors that are provided for in the bill introduced by my distinguished colleague Mr. Granger, of Utah, H. R. 2296, Mr. Sikes, of Florida, H. R. 1971, and numerous others. I wish to support these bills, which provide for amending the Clarke-McNary Act of June 7, 1924. I personally feel that H. R. 2296 and the numerous companion bills that have been introduced will start this Nation on the road to a Federal-State cooperative forestry program on private woodlands, that in future years will be referred back to as one of the most far-sighted accomplishments of this, our Eighty-first Congress.

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS B. STANLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGress, FROM THE FIFTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, IN SUPPORT OF H. R. 2296

Mr. Chairman and members of Subcommittee No. 3 of the House Committee on Agriculture, I am grateful to you for the opportunity to express my approval of the purport and provisions of the Granger bill, H. R. 2296.

The development and maintenance of our forest resources is vital and essential to national defense, employment, and prosperity. It is imperative that sound forestry practices and methods be developed and encouraged.

The various States, through their appropriate forestry agencies, are making much progress in forest fire prevention and suppression, reforestation of idle, eroded, and abandoned acreage and in the general production, marketing, and utilization of timber and forest products. This most valuable and worth-while program can be greatly improved and advanced if the Federal Government will extend to the States the cooperation, aid, and assistance, as provided by H. R. 2296. As stated in the bill, privately owned forest lands make up the bulk of our Nation's forest-land resources. The owners of such lands are entitled to the services, facilities, aid, and guidance which the Federal Government is equipped and prepared to offer, as proposed by this bill.

The land-grant colleges and universities, county extension agents and forestry agencies in the States are in position to administer the functions proposed in a manner which will bring valuable results.

The expenditure of Federal funds would and should be on the basis of similar expenditures by the States. In this connection, I would suggest that consideration be given to a possible change in the language of section 5, page 3, lines 17 to 25, in order that there will be the specific requirement that the entire amount expended by the Federal Government be fully matched by the States.

I congratulate the sponsor of this bill for introducing this proposed legislation and I express the hope that it will be favorably reported by this committee and enacted into law in the near future.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN B. BENNETT OF MICHIGAN

Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished committee, I am appearing in behalf of not only the welfare of forests of my own State of Michigan, but those of the Nation.

In

My State of Michigan was once the foremost timber State of the Nation. spite of the devastating cutting and the great fires that have run uncontrolled through our forests in years past, timber is still one of our many important resources. The annual value of finished wood products and the labor return was about $300,000,000 last year. We realize that a large part of Michigan must remain permanently in forests, because our lands are suited chiefly to the growing of trees.

You gentlemen of this committee know as well as I that the original timber supplies of this Nation are fast disappearing. We must grow our lumber and other forest products that we need today, and in the future-as a crop-much of it on privately owned woodlands.

Fortunately for my State, we have progressed to a point where all of our forest land, State, county, and private, that needs forest fire protection is receiving some measure of organized protection. We are providing 69 percent of the money necessary to furnish fire protection on non-Federal forests in my State, and the Federal Government is helping to the extent of only 31 percent instead of the 50 percent contemplated or intended under the Clarke-McNary Act of June 7, 1924. When Michigan led the Nation in the production of lumber, back in the 1880's, a great bulk of this lumber went to the far corners of our Nation to build homes, factories, railroads, and the like. Lumber from our forests contributed immeasurably in the late 1860's and for 30 years thereafter to the development of our great central plains region. Today the Nation benefits from a resource that was taken from our land in staggering quantities.

Today in Michigan 42 million acres of denuded or understocked land is in need of planting to trees. It is a job that can be accomplished within a reasonable period of time only by the combined efforts of the Federal and State Governments and the private landowners. All have a responsibility. Many of our woodland owners need all the useful information on forestry that they can get. In addition to the extension of good forestry practices through education, the private woodland owner needs direct advice and assistance in his own individual woodland.

STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE MANSFIELD, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, MONTANA Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am appearing today in behalf of H. R. 2296 and H. R. 2001. I have received communications from Mr. L. M. Tarbet, secretary of the Blackfoot Forest Protective Association, Missoula, Mont.; Hon. Rutledge Parker, State forester, Missoula, Mont., Kenneth P. Davis, Montana State University School of Forestry, Missoula, Mont., and many others who are interested in these particular measures.

H. R. 2296 broadens the base of the present Clarke-McNary law both as regards financial authorization and in the rendering of forestry assistance to all kinds of forest landowners, not just farmers. The Clarke-McNary law and pattern of cooperation has proven its worth over the years and I am in favor of seeing its base expanded because I know that in Montana it would be of real benefit.

The other bill, H. R. 2001, provides for a new maximum authorization for the forest-survey program. I know you gentlemen are acquainted with this survey and understand that it has been and is the basic source of forestry information