here and the Phoenix Title & Trust Co. has submitted a statement by its vice president.

Without objection, the statement on behalf of the Phoenix Title & Trust Co., by Mr. Benecke, will be accepted for the record at this point. Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF PHOENIX TITLE & TRUST Co., TUCSON, ARIZ., SUBMITTED BY FRANKLIN H. BENECKE, VICE PRESIDENT

My capacity is that of the appointed representative of the Land Title Association of Arizona, in appearing at this hearing of the Mines and Mining Subcommittee of the House Interior Department. The Land Title Association of Arizona is a nonprofit corporation organized for the promotion and betterment of the title industry throughout the State of Arizona. The function of a title insurance company as well as that of an abstract company or one issuing certificates of title is to report the condition of title as found through researching the record, to the properly interested person. The title insurance company backs up the correctness of their research by a contract arrangement in the form of a policy of title insurance; however, the basic purpose being to insure title as the same may be found of record. In a review of the matter under consideration today I find that a resolution in this connection was passed by the Land Title Association of Arizona in the convention assembled on the 4th day of November 1961 and forwarded to your committee. I further find that on October 13, 1961, John B. Wilkie, vice president and counsel, Arizona Land Title & Trust Co., Tucson, Ariz., forwarded a letter expressing his opinion and the opinion of others in his organization. On October 20, 1961, William S. Lindamood, vice president and counsel of Lawyers Title of Phoenix, Phoenix, Ariz., forwarded his letter expressing his opinion and the opinion of his associates relative to the particular matter under consideration. On October 31, 1961, Mr. Rhes H. Cornelius, president, Phoenix Title & Trust Co., Phoenix, Ariz., forwarded a letter stating his position and the position of his company and associates. The content matter of the resolutions and letters referred to is not repeated here because the same appears of record in the files of your subcommittee. It is only pertinnt to state that those particular communications referred to, as well as, I am certain, communications from others of our industry, all specifically support the proposal that your committee recommend to the Congress of the United States legislation that will remove this deterrent to the development of so much of the land in the State of Arizona caused by the reservation by the United States in its patents, of all minerals together with the right to prospect for, mine, and remove the same. It is pertinent to point out again, however, the fact that various mortgage lenders, including Federal National Mortgage Association of the Housing and Home Finance Agency, refused to commit to the purchase of home mortgages where the right to enter upon the land and remove minerals, thereby involving surface and subsurface rights, has been reserved in the said patent to the United States of America, without some type of affirmative assurance protecting them against loss resulting from the exercise of any right to use the surface of said land for the extraction or development of the minerals. This refusal constitutes a serious threat to our economy. With the current development of the Western States and the rapid increase of our total population, land use patterns are changing to a marked degree. As land becomes more valuable for residential, commercial, or other intensified use purposes, it is a simple fact that such use is in direct conflict with the further mineral exploration of these lands. The urban development of lands is not compatible with their continued mineral exploration.

On behalf of the Land Title Association of Arizona, I strongly recommend consideration of appropriate legislation by our Congress that will remove this deterrent to the development of so much of the land in our State. It is my further belief that any such legislation should be in the simplest form, easily workable, with a minimum of processing time and expense. Inasmuch as the intensified development of areas and improvement of the land for residential, commercial, or industrial purposes is entirely inconsistent and incompatible with the exploration and development of said properties, it is further recommended

that proposed legislation release or sell to the individual fee owner not only the nonleaseable materials within the boundaries of his land but the leasable materials as well.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. William S. Lindamood of the Lawyers Title & Trust Co. of Phoenix is listed as our next witness. Apparently Mr. Lindamood is not here, and we will go to the next witness on the list, Mr. Calvin Webster, a real estate broker here in Tucson.

Mr. Webster could not be here but has submitted a statement to the committee.

Without objection, the statement of Mr. Webster will be admitted to the record at this point.

Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF CALVIN WEBSTER

Gentlemen, I requested permission to appear before you as a citizen, a real estate broker, and a person interested in the orderly development of this great and growing city and the fabulous State of Arizona. Also, I am chairman of the board of Stewart Title & Trust of Tucson.

I mentioned I was chairman of the board of directors of Stewart Title & Trust of Tucson, but there is to be a representative appearing for the Arizona State Title Association who will give you facts as to the requirements of Fannie Mae, and also those of many eastern lending institutions regarding the "reservations contained in U.S. patents issued for land," and also those now reserved by the State of Arizona in its conveyances.

I have read the bill proposed by Congressman Aspinall, H.R. 8385. It appeared to me that this bill was far too general and without enough definition of the terms or powers to be granted. It has always seemed most important that any legislative body set forth definite standards for the administration of any bill. If the interpretation of a bill is left to the discretion of the administrator, even though it be a Secretary of the Interior, and our present one is well known to many of us in this hearing room, there easily may be a great misunderstanding between the intent of Congress and the actual effect on the public through the rules and regulations of the administrator.

This committee realizes much of the mining law is antique and should be corrected for our modern day methods. For instance, as a real estate broker we see holes dug at random but which indicate to a prospective buyer that a claim may be made, but even if no claim is filed it will take years for the hole to disappear. Why not provide for drilling to prove the existence of the ore body?

Further in reading H.R. 8385 it appears the burden is on the present homeowner to prove he is paying the "fair market value" for the minerals reserved on his land. This is unfair to the subdivider, the buyer of a lot, and the public. What is the mineral contained in this parcel of land? Also this would create a huge problem for the Department of Interior, a new staff, much time and effort, and this could be avoided by the Congress passing a bill releasing the mineral rights to the land in a certain definite area, subject however to the rights which already may be in existence.

I know you must listen to much repetition of already well-known facts, and therefore I trust this statement is not too long, and covers some of the points which you are here to consider.

Thank you for the permission to appear.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Without objection, the statement of C. Allen Saunders of the Paso Robles Community Association, Tucson, who was listed as a witness, will be made a part of the record. Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF C. ALLEN SAUNDERS, Paso ROBLES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, TUCSON, ARIZ.

The residents of the Paso Robles community in the Tucson mountains are naturally concerned about the recent use of our mining laws for the purpose of extortion. In this variant of the old protection racket, the racketeer files one or more mining claims in a residential area, then offers each property owner that portion of the claim on his own land at a high price. Mineralization is not important to this scheme, as it is the threat of development work that is the lever The racketeer tells the property owner, in effect: "I have a mining claim on your property and I am going to prospect for minerals. Give me $5,000 and I will not bulldoze down your saguaros and dig your front yard full of prospect holes."

Assigning the mineral rights of residential property to the property owner should eliminate this practice, which, if allowed to continue, is certain to lead to bloodshed, as there is no other known method of dealing with extortionists Accordingly, the membership of the Paso Robles Community Association re spectfully requests that you give this matter your fullest consideration, and urges prompt enactment of legislative protection for the residential property owner. Mr. EDMONDSON. The next witness is Mrs. L. V. Emmons. Mrs. EMMONS. I did not understand I was supposed to prepare : statement. I would like to present it in the morning, if I may. Mr. EDMONDSON. That will be perfectly permissible.

Mr. Martin R. Paulson.

Mr. PAULSON. Mr. Chairman, I appear on behalf of the Casas Adobes Community Club. I wonder if I could make my presentation the first thing in the morning.

Mr. EDMONDSON. All right, sir.

Mr. B. L. Johnson, Midchester Realty Co., Tucson.

Are there any other witnesses who want to be heard today who are here and ready to testify that have not been called? If not, then I w ask the committee members if they have anything they would like to say in advance of today's recess.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. EDMONDSON. We had announced earlier that the committe would meet at 10 tomorrow morning. I think under the circumstances we will meet at 9:30 in the morning.

Mr. Smith, if you want to lead things off in the morning with your slide presentation, we will be pleased to have you do so.

The subcommittee will stand in recess until 9:30 in the morning. (Whereupon, at 5:30 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to recor vene at 9:30 a.m., Friday, December 1, 1961.)

DISPOSITION OF RESERVED MINERALS

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1961

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON MINES AND MINING

OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS,

Tucson, Ariz. The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 9:30 a.m., in room 323, Federal Building, Hon. Ed Edmondson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. EDMONDSON. The Subcommittee on Mines and Mining will come to order.

Our first witness this morning will be Mr. A. T. Smith, Tucson, Ariz. I understand Mr. Smith has some slides to show in connection with his presentation.

Mr. SMITH. I will show those after the talk.

Mr. EDMONDSON. All right, sir. You may proceed.

STATEMENT OF A. TURNEY SMITH, TUCSON, ARIZ.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I would like to preface my remarks before my speech, so to speak, that my testimony is going to be entirely different from that heretofore given because my situation is entirely different from any of the others who have testified.

My purpose is to show to this committee the actual damage that can be and has been sustained by me by reason of the law as it now stands, which has never been amended, and is being misinterpreted by the mining interests. And there is no relief for us property owners, so to speak, until such time as some remedial legislation is passed which will clear up the situation.

In this behalf, at this time I want to thank all of you gentlemen for the extreme kindness and endeavor that you have put in to come all the way out here from Washington just to hear our pleas. And I am extremely grateful to my friend Mo Udall more than words can convey. I think he has done a wonderful job since he has been there, and I think all of you people are doing a wonderful job, and I for one want to thank him beyond words that I can express.

My name is A. Turney Smith. I reside with my wife and four children on our ranch, called Sky Line Ranch Estates, about 11 miles southwest of Tucson, Ariz. This ranch comprises 495.45 acres of land, the U.S. patent to 416.42 acres of which was acquired under the Stock Raising Homestead Act of December 29, 1916, subject to reservation of mineral rights.

This ranch was purchased by me for the sole purpose of having a beautiful home in which to live during the remainder of my life.

Valuable improvements have been placed thereon, including natural gas, city water, and electricity.

During the month of April 1960, the Bear Creek Mining Co., a subsidiary of Kennecott Mining Corp., surreptitiously entered upon my land with bulldozers, digging machines, trucks, and a crew of men, without asking permission or even making known to me that they were on my land, and proceeded to dig large holes for approximately 15 mining locations, as well as bulldozing roads to each claim and destroying the trees and foliage necessary to do this work, all without my consent or knowledge.

They also used dynamite and dynamited so close to our dwelling that the house shook so hard that my wife ran from the house to see what was happening, thinking it was an earthquake. When she approached this crew of men and asked them what they were doing and with what authority they were doing it, she was told in impolite and certain terms that they did not have to ask permission or even notify anyone of their operations as they had the law behind them, and that they were going to continue perfecting their mining location until completed.

During a talk with the foreman of the Bear Creek Mining Co., he advised me that all of the operations of the Kennecott Mining Corp. were the open pit or strip mining type, which means that if and when said mining corporation begins said operations said 416 acres of said land will be completely destroyed including my dwelling, water system, and all other improvements, and without any renumeration whatsoever.

My ranch is only a small portion of the lands on which the mining interests have located lode mining claims covering thousands of acres, all of which is privately owned.

The need for remedial legislation is apparent when it is realized that any mineral locator can move onto lands on which the Government holds mineral rights and indiscriminately strip and destroy the surface lands of the private owner.

It is traditional with the American people, that where the law fails to protect them and their property rights they will take the law into their own hands and resort to bloodshed if necessary.

As I said in the beginning, my purpose is to show this committee the true side of this picture. All we have heard before has just been opposition against certain bills which have been presented and might be voted on.

My purpose is to come before you to show you the necessity for some legislation, and I have implicit faith in this committee in preparing the proper bills, and I have no complaint against anything that has been presented, and do not intend to try to tell you folks what kind of a bill you should pass. I have implicit confidence in your ability to prepare the proper remedial legislation, and even though it may not benefit me, because there will not be any ex post facto laws take effect, I still want to help all the others who may come into my terrible situation.