trees. I think as long as the present demand continues we are going to grow the trees because there is a great profit in growing them. As long as demand continues we will have trees. You will need stimulation of the growing of trees when the time comes that the public will not buy the products made from trees. Then you may need to give some kind of stimulation, either in education or in some other way. Mr. GRANGER. I think if a lot of these small farmers had been told years ago the value of their trees, they probably would not have cut them down and planted them to other crops because they were more valuable than the crops they planted. I think that is one of the things that is needed now.

I think generally the fellow who has a little grove of trees on his farm does not know the value of them. I think it is somebody's duty to tell him the value of the things he has. When he finds out what he has he may do something about it.

I remember a fellow I used to know. He has been dead for quite some time. He told me in the early days that they had a big cattle outfit and they used to have a lot of bulls. When they had had them a few years they had to get rid of them. They did not want to kill them, since it was not humane, but some fellow would come along and they would give them to him.

This old man went to Chicago one time and found out that there was value in those bulls. They sold them for 4 or 5 cents a pound there. He said they had been giving bulls away for 50 years and they finally found out they were worth something.

Maybe that is true with some of these little farmers. They do not know exactly what they have, and the value of it.

Certainly you would not object to educating people to know the value of the things they have in the way of forests, would you?

Mr. COLGAN. Certainly not. I would say that we would help in that education. I would also say that if you could keep that education as close to home as possible, that if either the States or the counties or the townships could do it, it would be the best plan. I do not believe every ill we have should be cured in Washington. We should take care of some of our problems in our States and counties, and some we should take care of ourselves.

Mr. GRANGER. I agree with that. But I do feel that the record is clear that since the Government has gone in with a little incentive that the thing has grown back home. We hear now that the States are contributing much more than the Federal Government is contributing to these programs. I think it is the result of being told what the value of their forests is.

Mr. COLGAN. I think they should be encouraged to give more and not be encouraged to come here and get it for nothing.

Mr. GRANGER. I agree with that, too. I hope that you will furnish us with a brief. So far as the subcommittee is concerned, we will not take any action until we have your brief.

In addition to that, we are going to have some justification on the part of the Forest Service people as to the necessity of these amounts that are carried in these bills.

Mr. COLGAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. WORLEY. Do you suppose if the Federal Government made no appropriation at all this year that the States themselves would assume these duties?

Mr. COLGAN. Some of them would and some of them would not, in my opinion. The allocations for fire control have fallen off in some of the Western States because of the increased work in the Eastern States, and the Western States have in most cases appropriated money to take up the slack.

Mr. WORLEY. Most all of the States of the Union are in better financial condition than the Federal Government is.

Mr. COLGAN. I think that is right, too.

Mr. WORLEY. And they are better able to assume these duties. Mr. COLGAN. That is right.

Mr. GRANGER. Thank you very much.

Mr. Frantz, we will be glad to hear from you at this time.

STATEMENT OF HARVEY R. FRANTZ, FOREST CONSERVATIONIST, INTERSTATE COMMISSION ON THE DELAWARE RIVER BASIN

Mr. FRANTZ. I have a very brief statement I would like to read. My name is Harvey R. Frantz, of Bethlehem, Pa. I am forest conservationist for the interstate commission on the Delaware River Basin. This commission is a joint governmental agency for the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, to which those States have delegated the responsibility of formulating practical policies and programs for the development of the natural resources of the Delaware River Basin.

The commission is composed of legislative, executive, and administrative officials of each of the four supporting States. Its primary objective is to secure a coordinated and integrated plan for the development of the Delaware River watershed. In the attainment of this goal, the commission works cooperatively with all branches of the Government-Federal, State, and local.

I appear before you to urge your approval of H. R. 2001, a bill introduced by Congressman Sikes, to increase the appropriation authorizations to the Secretary of Agriculture for a national survey of forest resources.

In the judgment of the Commission which I represent, the forests of the country constitute one of the Nation's most valuable resources. It is imperative that this national asset be appropriately managed and husbanded. This can only be accomplished on the basis of a comprehensive inventory of the quantity and quality of our forests and of the prospective requirements for timber and other forest products. This conclusion applies in full measure to the 13,000 square-mile area comprising the Delaware River Basin.

This commission strongly endorses the continuation of the national forest survey on its present scale. For several years we have looked forward to this inventory of the type, condition, and extent of the forest cover in the Delaware River Basin and consider it prerequisite to an orderly program for the restoration and development of the neglected forested area of the region. The commission has cooperated with the Pennsylvania State Planning Board in providing for up-todate aerial mapping of the region in order that new techniques developed by the United States Forest Service may be utilized to obtain much needed reliable information.

The commission believes that the amounts requested in the bill are reasonable and proper in view of present-day dollar values and the

desirability of a more comprehensive survey than was originally anticipated. It has requested me to present these views for your consideration. We trust that your committee will approve H. R. 2001. Mr. GRANGER. Thank you for your fine statement.

We will hear now from the gentleman from Texas, a Member of Congress who has been very interested in this whole program, and who has been very cooperative with the committee in condensing some of the material that we have here so we will probably be able to get through the hearing today. The committee is really grateful for that service to us.

The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Pickett.

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM PICKETT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. PICKETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It is my privilege to represent the Seventh Congressional District of Texas. The district contains a large lumber industry that has developed as a result of a wealth of pine and hardwood timber. My interest in the proposals now under consideration arises not only because of concern for local development but also because the same problem confronting us in east Texas is a major one in all timber regions of the Nation.

The natural resources of the United States are being depleted. That is particularly true of our commercial timber. The demands of the last war necessitated the cutting of timber far faster than normal, natural replacement. But the greatest causes of depletion are profligate use and carelessness.

Our problem is the preservation of the timber resources that still remain, and the restoration of that part which has been destroyed. In order to achieve our purpose, we must have a well-rounded national policy with those objects in view. The principles involved in the four proposals under consideration are directed to the accomplishment of that purpose. Enactment of the proposals into law would be the greatest step taken in a number of years and would be the answer to the problem.

The four proposals are:

1. Increased authorization for forest fire protection.

2. Increased authorization for tree planting.

3. Enlargement of educational facilities through increased authorization for the Extension Service.

4. Increased technical aid and assistance to private landowners. None of the four proposals is a new departure and all are based on the principle of cooperative effort between the Federal Government, on the one hand, and the States and private owners, on the other. The problem of protection from fire is universal. It can be aptly illustrated by the experience of the past few years in east Texas. Facts assimilated by the Texas Forestry Service reveal the following data:

Those statistics apply to east Texas alone and illustrate the need for increased funds for fire protection. What is true of that region is also true of other timber-growing areas in the Nation.

The proposed legislation increases the authorization for, and broadens the scope of, the program for tree planting. In the United States there are 62,000,000 idle acres of privately owned forest lands that need to be planted to restore productivity. Most of that acreage is in the hands of approximately 4 million people in small tracts. Those small owners will plant their idle land if trees are made available at a reasonable cost. The lack of supply of planting stock under the present publicly sponsored program has reduced replanting to about 45,000 acres annually. A reasonable goal is to plant 20,000,000 acres in 20 years. Unless the present program is stepped up considerably we can expect nothing better than continued depletion of our timber resources.

Since the problems of education and practical assistance in the pursuit of better forestry practices are interlocking, I shall discuss the question of broadening of the Extension Service and technical aid and assistance to private owners, that is farm forestry, together.

We must rely, for the most part, on privately owned forests for our timber supply since a vast majority of commercial forest land in this country is privately owned. Major dependence must be on small forest owners since 76 percent of the private forest acreage is in the hands of approximately 44 million small owners. Only 4 percent of that small acreage is now managed with the view of producing reasonably adequate future timber crops. Therefore, the small woodland is the real crux of our forestry problem. We have toyed with the problem for about a quarter of a century. We know what to do and how to accomplish the purpose but our present efforts nowhere nearly match the size of the job.

Therefore, what is needed is a double-barreled program that will produce:

(1) Competent instruction in the techniques of timber growing. (2) Practical assistance to individual landowners in getting started. State Forestry Departments and State Extension Services provide that kind of assistance on a small scale at the present time. Forty States are now employing 176 State foresters, who last year assisted some 14,000 small forest owners put 1.4 billion acres in a more productive condition. To do a thorough job in 20 years will reuqire approximately 2,000 such foresters. Sixty-five Extension foresters in 46 States are now struggling with the educational part of the program. Their number should be increased to about 1,000.

As stated heretofore, the approach to answer the problem confronting us is not a new one. We have been engaged in this work on a small scale for a number of years. We cannot hope to achieve a wellrounded program of conservation and restoration to productivity without increasing the expenditure of money. Experience has demonstrated that increased expenditure of Federal funds results in a proportionate increase on the part of the States and others who are interested. The question always asked is "What will it cost?" The following table shows what the States and the Federal Government are now spending per year and what is proposed to be spent by the Federal Government under the principles now under consideration:

There is no question but that the increase in expenditures of Federal funds, as illustrated in the above table, will result in a proportionate increase in expenditures by the States and private owners. Thus, by 1955, as the proposed legislation is enacted into law and is implemented by authorized appropriations, we will have taken the first real steps in the preservation of our timber resources now remaining, and the restoration to productivity of that which we have destroyed, our principal purpose.

Mr. Chairman, I have one illustration that occurred to me as we proceeded in the discussion here. A very substantial businessman and landowner in one of my east Texas towns was offered the sum of $22,000 plus for the timber on a tract of land that he owned. He great consideration to selling it with no restriction on the cutting of the timber on the land.

gave

The purported transaction was heard of by one of the Federal foresters who suggested to him that he seek the advice of one gentleman who was in a position to give it to him in the State forestry service, and let the State forestry service advise with him as to what would be the better thing to do, to sell it en bloc or to cruise his land and sell and cut it selectedly.

He followed the advice of the man to whom he went, and he realized a total of more than $18,000 from the sale of his timber cut selectedly with a stand left that he can mark again, according to the estimates, for an equal or greater sum within the next 8 to 10 years. He still has the stand on his land.

That man, having been converted by a brief little educational talk, and a half day's work by a man now engaged in forestry, is one of the most avid and ardent supporters of the forestry movement. He has seen first-hand what can be done and what is being done by selective cutting with a view to producing s sustained yield. He is endeavoring to convert others.

That one illustration, I think, is very apt in view of the proposals here to extend the authorization for Federal appropriation of funds for educational purposes and for technical on-the-ground assistance to the people who own the private forest lands in this country.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks in reference to my own viewpoint on this subject. I would like, with the permission of the chairman and the committee, to insert in the record statements from some of our colleagues who have left them in my hands. They were unable to be here in person for reasons necessary to themselves. Mr. GRANGER. Without objection, they may be inserted.