getting too far away. There are a lot of regulations concerning the handling of stock on the public domain. There is a necessity first for herding them, for if you turn them out and they drift to the mountainous territory, it is a bad proposition. My father was a cattleman all of his life, and I sat in the saddle when I was a boy, so I know this problem from its infancy. NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES REQUESTED Mr. RICH. May I ask this question? You said that you had 76 full-time employees, and now you are asking for 42 additional employees? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. RICH. In the field and in the office here, which will require $150,000 additional? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. SALARY AND EXPENSES OF DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARDS Mr. RICH. Then you have another item, covering the salaries and travel expense of members of district advisory boards, $100,000. do you utilize that? HOW These Mr. CARPENTER. That is the same as it was last year. district advisers are allowed $5 a day, but they are not allowed any subsistence or anything for room and board. They are allowed cents a mile if they come in their own automobiles, which they de largely, to the meetings. It is about what a juror gets. Mr. RICH. $5 a day and 5 cents a mile? Mr. CARPENTER. If they come in their own autos. If they come on the railroad, they get their railroad fare and $5 a day while they are serving, and out of that they have to pay for their meals and board. and they have to give their time. Mr. FITZPATRICK. In most cases they must lose money. The CHAIRMAN. They do not gain anything. They come hundreds of miles, and sometimes they stay a week or 10 days, passing on per haps 1,000 applications for permits, and they are rendering a wonderfu public service. Then, too, they are selected by the people themselves. They are very substantial stock people, a good class of people. Mr. RICH. If we kept this appropriation down to the same amoun that it was last year, would that not assist in the consolidation of these two divisions, and would you not recommend that we do that for the reason? The CHAIRMAN. No; it would injure this one, and it would not have anything to do with the consolidation at all. It would hamstring the administration, and they are running it on a very economical basis. Where I would like to see you cut is on the forest reserves. Mr. FITZPATRICK. And then they could not use the additions. acreage. The CHAIRMAN. There is that difference between 80,000,000 and 142,000,000 acres, and that accounts for the whole business. We ar keeping faith with the Government on this thing. Now, Governor, do you have anything special that you want to ask? ESTABLISHING OF RIGHTS FOR USE OF WATER AND GRASS ON PUBLIC RANGE LANDS Mr. SCRUGHAM. No; but a statement might assist the other members of the committee in understanding the background of this situation. Nearly all of the users of so-called public range lands have established previously what might be termed a usufructuary right, a right that came from beneficial use, that was looked upon as an actual right. In a similar manner, they established their rights to the beneficial use of water, and those rights were universally recognized in the publicland States. The water right is under the jurisdiction of the States, for the reason that the public-land States, as a condition to their admission into the Union, were compelled to cede back to the Federal Government the unappropriated lands within their State. But they did not cede back the water. There is quite a distinction between the water on the land and the right to use the land itself. Water, being such a scarce commodity in all of the far-western States, at least the so-called intermountain public-land States, the old doctrine of riparian rights could not apply to the unused water. In order that the people might settle there, those engaged in mining or stock raising had the right to go on any land where there was unused water and appropriate that water for beneficial use, and the right to hold that water was established solely on the basis of beneficial use. I just bring that in to show you some of the background of this situaion that we are facing, for it is necessary to have these various rights carefully delineated and understood, both as to the establishment of he right to use the grass on the range and the right to use the water on the range. I am in favor of increasing this appropriation $100,000 in order that he job may be cleaned up. The CHAIRMAN. I may say that that land out in that country is not worth a nickel without water. We have to have water, and we have o have the title to it, and there is a great scarcity. So we have an elaboate system of adjudicating, determining, and recording water rights with respect to the quantity each man has, where he takes it, and everything of that kind. That is a very complicated matter in our country, for it is an arid region entirely, as you know. Are there any further questions, or do you desire to add anything Further, Mr. Carpenter? Mr. CARPENTER. No, sir. GRAZING FEES The CHAIRMAN. You might place in the record some information about the income that we get from these fees, and where it goes. Mr. CARPENTER. The estimate of income for last year was $760,000. That was charged at the rate of 5 cents a head a month for cattle, and 1 cent a month for sheep, or on a ratio of 5 to 1 for forage. But that estimate, when it came to collections, was cut down for various reasons largely because of the severe drought in Montana and Wyoming, where a rebate of fees was allowed under the law. So that there was due, for the part of the reason completed-we have not covered the full year-$543,263.07. Of that amount, as of March 1, 1937, we have collected in actual cash $450,374.06, and of course the collections are still to come in and the experience in collecting these fees is that well over 90 percent comes in, for the reason that it is necessary for them to pay in order to get a license next year. Then, half of that money goes back to the State and the other half goes to the Federal Government, and f Congress wishes to appropriate one-half of that money for improvements it may do so. Approximately half of the estimated fees for last year wou d have covered the expense for last year, and this year our estimate of the fees to be received is $1,000,000, and half of that will approximately cover all of the costs of its administration and the other half will be returned to the States. Mr. RICH. Then for this last year, up to the present time, you figure that you are going to take in $543,263.07? Mr. CARPENTER. That is right. Mr. RICH. And that will be on June 30? Mr. CARPENTER. That will be for that fiscal year. Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. RICH. And you have already taken in $450,000? Mr. CARPENTER. That is right. Mr. RICH. But you say you do not figure that you are going t collect all of this $543,000? Mr. CARPENTER. Well, very close to it. Mr. RICH. Then, half of that, which is $272,000, is what the Government is going to get back, and you are proposing to spend $400,000. Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. RICH. And the difference between $273,000 that you will take in as the Government's share, and the amount that you will spend as the Government's share, is $127,000, so that you are in the red, se far as the Government is concerned. Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir; and the explanation is- Mr. RICH. But you pay the States one-half. Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. RICH. And you will get, of the amount that you have collected $272,000, but the Government will pay out $400,000. Therefore, you are in the red, as I said, the amount of $127,000. Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. RICH. Then how is the statement correct that these grazing interests pay back to the Federal Government what is spent on this work? You do not do it. Mr. CARPENTER. We did not do it this year, the reason being that because of the severe drought in several of those States, the fees were rebated and not collected, and are not in this estimate. Mr. RICH. The fact of the matter is that we do not get the money to pay for the service? Mr. CARPENTER. The fact is that for the last year you will not ge back every dollar. Mr. RICH. And we will be at least $127,000 in the red? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. FITZPATRICK. That is to the United States, but the State! involved receive 50 percent, and the total amount received was greater than the total amount expended. Mr. CARPENTER. Oh, yes. Mr. RICH. Let me say to my friend here from New York that, in addition to the fact that we will be in the red $127,000, they can spend $136,500 out of the money received for the benefit of those States, if they want to. They can spend one-fourth of it for that purpose. Mr. CARPENTER. For improvements on the grazing districts on the Federal reserves. The CHAIRMAN. Tell him what that is for. Mr. CARPENTER. That is to rehabilitate the land, largely for water development, which cuts down over-grazing; for the elimination of rodents, many of which are squirrels, rats, gophers, kangaroos, and prairie dogs, and it is estimated that 50 of those will consume as much forage as a sheep, and many of them cut off the tops of all of these grass seeds and carry them to their holes, completely destroying the vegetation. Then we have predatory animals there, such as the wolves, the coyotes The CHAIRMAN. And there is a poisonous weed that grows out there that kills thousands of cattle, and they have tried to cut that out. Mr. CARPENTER. It is for general improvements on the Federal reservations. PUBLICATION FOR ISSUE TO GRAZING INTERESTS Mr. RICH. What advertising does your special branch of the Interior Department do? Mr. CARPENTER. Every 3 months we get out a little bulletin like this, and send it to every licensee in the United States. Mr. RICH. Is this all of the advertising that you do? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. RICH. And this goes to the grazing interests, so that they will know just what you are doing? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr. RICH. And it is a monthly magazine? Mr. CARPENTER. No, sir; it is issued every 3 months. Mr. RICH. And it is published by the Department? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes. Mr. RICH. And that is all of the advertising that you do? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir; that is correct. Mr. RICH. May I keep a copy? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes. I brought it along in case you wanted it. NEED FOR ADDITIONAL RANGE EXAMINERS, GRAZIERS, AND OFFICE EMPLOYEES Mr. O'NEAL. May I ask upon what theory or basis you propose an increase of 42 men in your personnel? Mr. CARPENTER. The increase in the acreage. Mr. O'NEAL. I understand that. That is a general statement, as to the increase in acreage; but may I ask you to go a little more in detail about it, as to how that is arrived at? For example, do you consider that you must have one man to a certain number of acres, or how is that arrived at? Mr. CARPENTER. The increase in acreage is 37 percent, and th increase in funds is 37 percent, but the increase in personnel is 5 percent, and the reason for the difference in the increase of permanen personnel over acreage and over funds is due to the fact that we stepped up the range examiners from 5 to 15 men. Those range examiner are the men who go in and estimate the carrying capacity and estimat what you call the dependence of commensurate properties. We have such an immense acreage, and we have had but 5 men t Mr. O'NEAL. And the others are for what purpose? The CHAIRMAN. Tell them what this commensurate property means Mr. O'NEAL. Just what does a grazier do? I am sorry that I am ignorant about these matters, but I do understand that generally a these offices have more experience, they have need for less overhead t carry on the same amount of work, and I do not quite understard the purpose of increasing the office force, even though the acreage i increased. Will you explain that to me, please? Mr. CARPENTER. The total office force in the 10 Western States i about 22, and it will be 34 under the new bill if allowed. The clerica work to be done is largely the handling of the applications, which soor becomes a considerable file. Then we have to report on the com mensurate dependent property The CHAIRMAN. Will you tell them what that means? Mr. CARPENTER. Say that I have a ranch The CHAIRMAN. I wish you would start from the grass roots on this thing. Mr. CARPENTER. Say that I have a ranch and I want to turn out or the public land. Just because I want to does not give me any righ to do so. The CHAIRMAN. In other words, we do not want somebody from Oregon to come in and eat up our range for we have somebody in our own State who has a local habitation, who has to pay taxes and the range should be allotted to the men of the latter type. Mr. CARPENTER. So I will put in my application and state wha my lands are, not just the acreage, but the amount of grain and hav and forage that they produce and, as is only natural, the applicant state pretty fully what they consider their commensurate rating is of that land, and we have found it necessary to go and check the estimate check on the number of haystacks that they have, on the amount of feed that they raise, and so forth. That is what we call the dependen commensurate property. On the other side, we have to check the carrying capacity of the range, which is quite a technical matter. Mr. O'NEAL. But I do not yet understand why you would needs many more in the office. How much more material do they handle How many more applications or letters? Is there any information on that? Mr. CARPENTER. Yes, sir. Mr O'NEAL. How do you arrive at the fact that you will need these additional office employees? |