On line 24, after 3 (a) should be inserted "and (c)". In other words, that provides for the application to those sections. That, I believe, is satisfactory. Mr. LAZARUS. Yes, that is satisfactory. In the discussions with the Bureau after this section was printed, we have also come up with one other clarifying phrase which will help make the section's intent more readily ascertainable. Over on page 15, line 6, after the word "rights" should be inserted "on its own behalf". Mr. HART. We have no objection, sir. Mr. ASPINALL. Are we blaming the printer for the capital "A" that follows the colon? Mr. WITMER. That is correct. Mr. ASPINALL. That is correct? I do not see that. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. HALEY. Mr. Lazarus, why should this language be added: "on its own behalf"? Mr. LAZARUS. This has always been the intent, Mr. Chairman. What this deals with, there are certain rights in this section to salvage and take timber and so on that are granted to the nation and to individuals. It is provided that if the individuals do not exercise their rights within a specified period of time that the nation may exercise those rights. Then it was questioned whether the nation, in exercising its rights, exercises them for the individual or exercises the rights for itself, and it was always intended that if the individual did not exercise them or waived them that the nation would be exercising them on its own behalf, so we suggest the insertion of that language. Mr. HALEY. Section 9. Mr. HART. Section 9, in substance, provides that the Seneca Nation would have the right to use and occupy the taking area of the reservoir project within the Allegany Reservation for all purposes not inconsistent with the interests in land acquired by the United States. I would go into this since the question was raised before. It also provides their right to farm, lease, graze, and issue permits for hunting and fishing and the right to regulate access to the shoreline of the reservoir subject to two provisos: Provided, That public access to the shoreline shall be provided and no charge shall be made to the public therefor: And provided further, That the use by the public of the water areas of the Allegheny Reservoir project shall be pursuant to such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Army may prescribe. To my knowledge, I think the parties are in agreement on this provision and the Army is satisfied with it as it stands. Mr. HALEY. You are satisfied with it, Mr. Lazarus? Mr. LAZARUS. This is one of the concessions I had to make; yes. Mr. HOLMES. Yes. Mr. HALEY. Section 10 of this bill, I think, we must rewrite, because undoubtedly that section would be subject to a point of order. Is that substantially correct? Mr. WITMER. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think it is. I think amendment 32 makes it automatically subject to a point of order. Mr. HART. The Department of the Army has no objection to this provision in substance in that it does not come out of the project funds, so we defer to the Department of the Interior and the nation. 20-289-64- -29 Mr. HALEY. Mr. Lazarus and Mr. Holmes, are you in agreement on that? Mr. LAZARUS. Yes. Mr. HALEY. Mr. Witmer, I do not know how we are going to cure that particular thing. Mr. WITMER. I think your only problem, Mr. Chairman, is amendment 32. If amendment 32 comes out, then it will conform with what the committee has done and the Congress has done in previous bills and I do not think we will have this problem. Mr. HALEY. I am sure the language in amendment 32 would be subject to a point of order. Mr. LAZARUS. We had intended that this section 10 conform to the like section in all previous bills. If by amendment 32 instead of conforming we brought it into nonconformity, we would like to switch it back. We always wanted to do what has been done before. Mr. HALEY. Any disagreement on section 11? Mr. HART. No, sir, there is no disagreement so far as the Army is concerned on section 11. We would like to make a correction, if we may, on page 17, line 9, insert after "United States" the word "Army" and strike the "s" on "Engineers" so that it would read "United States Army Engineer District". Mr. HALEY. Any disagreement on this section, Mr. Lazarus? Mr. HALEY. Mr. Holmes? Mr. HOLMES. There is one provision down here, I believe section (c). Section (c) says: For the purposes of this section, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized 'to represent any individual Seneca Indian entitled to payment who is a minor, or under any other legal disability, or who cannot be located after a reasonable and diligent search. We interpret that to mean that is for the purpose of receiving pay ment. Mr. HALEY. I Would presume so. The Secretary has that responsibility in general law anyway, does he not? Mr. HOLMES. The Secretary has the responsibility in other places in the bill to approve the schedules of what the individuals will receive, so he will have passed on the amount in the approval of the schedule. So we assume what this means is that the Secretary may receive the funds. This is related to section 12(d) and I will explain it further when we get to that. Or I might go ahead and explain our position at this time. Mr. HALEY. All right. Mr. HOLMES. Section 12 (d) is this: For the purposes of this section, any individual Seneca Indian eligible to file suit, who is a minor or under any other legal disability, shall be represented by his legal guardian or, if no guardian has been appointed, by the Secretary of the Interior. We think that this section places a burden on the Secretary which he will find difficult if not impossible to carry out. This requires the Secretary to go into court as an attorney and become an advocate on behalf of the Seneca individual. The Secretary has already approved or disapproved the schedule. We do not mind serving as guardian or as trustee, but to place the Bureau or its attorney in the position of becoming an advocate against the United States and the Seneca Tribe, in effect, we think places us in an untenable position. We would like to amend section 12(d) by striking out beginning on line 10 with the word "the", strike out "the Secretary of the Interior" and substitute therefor "an attorney appointed by the Federal district court". Do not repeat the "by". "So that a guardian may be appointed and the guardian can employ an attorney to bring suit for the purpose of representing this individual in court. There is a procedure for the appointment of a guardian ad litem and the court will appoint a guardian ad litem in the district court in which the case is being tried. Mr. HALEY. What have we done in other cases, Mr. Holmes? Mr. HOLMES. In the Fort Berthold taking, the law specifically provided that the Department would provide legal guidance for persons required to go in court. We were required to do that in one case and it happens I was the very attorney required to go into court. We had to go into court representing an individual who refused any negotiation. We were in the position of representing an individual where our appraisers told us the offer was adequate under the terms of the taking. This individual refused and demanded that we represent her in the Federal district court in condemnation proceedings and contest the taking. We found it extremely difficult. As a matter of fact, she finally employed private counsel. Mr. HALEY. In other words, you do not want to be sitting on both sides of the table? Mr. HOLMES. We find that extremely difficult and we do not make anybody happy when we get in that situation. Mr. HALEY. I believe this language could be cleaned up. You would have no objection to that, Mr. Lazarus? Mr. LAZARUS. No. Mr. HOLMES. We have not reached that point yet but I took it up because it is directly related. Mr. HALEY. I understand. Section 12. Mr. HART. Section 12 provides generally for the procedure by which the individual allottee will get into court. All parties have agreed on the language here. This represents the consensus of all opinion and the only question this involves was what was just stated by Mr. Holmes, and we are in accord with that. Mr. HALEY. That is your position, too, Mr. Lazarus? Mr. LAZARUS. Yes, it is. Mr. HALEY. Section 13. We have an agreement on that? Mr. HART. There is an agreement on the part of all parties on that one. Mr. HALEY. Section 14. Mr. HART. This is an amendment we have all agreed to as far as I know. I may say this ties in directly with section 1. You will recall we described the estate being acquired as set forth in section 14, so both are inter-related and section 14, we consider, will be applicable whichever provision the committee inserts. Mr HALEY. You are in agreement with that, Mr. Lazarus? Mr. HALEY. And you, Mr. Holmes? Mr. HOLMES. Yes. Mr. HALEY. Section 15. Are you in agreement on that? Mr. LAZARUS. That is satisfactory. Mr. HALEY. Mr. Holmes? Mr. HOLMES. We are in agreement. Mr. HALEY. Section 16. Mr. HART. There is no disagreement on that. Mr. HALEY. Section 17. Mr. HART. There is no disagreement on that, sir. Mr. HALEY. Section 18. Mr. HART. Mr. Chairman, I might point out on the back of the bill, amendment 43 provides for minor changes in the title of the bill, which I think we keep overlooking because it happens to be at the back and then we do not change the front. Mr. HALEY. The amendment to the title of the bill is something we can take care of. Does anybody have any questions? Gentlemen, I want to thank you for coming here today. Mr. LAZARUS. Mr. Chairman, excuse me for interrupting, but Mr. Saylor asked me a question yesterday and asked that I furnish certain information to the committee. (See p. 409.) With your permission, I would like to answer his question at this point. Mr. HALEY. You may do so. Mr. LAZARUS. Mr. Šaylor asked what rent the Seneca Nation received under oil and gas leases. I replied that I thought the nation received 50 cents an acre, but I would check it. The answer was correct, the nation does receive 50 cents an acre per year under its oil and gas leases. The leases cover a total of 18,175 acres, approximately 10,000 acres of which are in the taking area. Mr. HALEY. Gentlemen, I want to thank each and every one of you. You have undoubtedly done your homework, Mr. Hart, and you are to be commended for defending the Treasury of the United States and the Corps of Army Engineers. You have done an excellent job of presentation here. And you, Mr. Lazarus, have tried to wring all the dough you can get from the taxpayers for your clients which is what lawyers are for. And, Mr. Holmes, I want to thank you for doing your homework. We will get in touch with you later on when we mark up the bill. Colonel de Melker, you have been very patient. You have sat here very courteously and responded when we asked for information. And, Mr. Heron, we hope that out of this bill we will get something that will be acceptable to your tribe. Thank you very much, gentlemen. (Thereupon, at 12:25 p.m. on Friday, November 1, 1963, the subcommittee adjourned.) KINZUA DAM MONDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1963 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 9:45 a.m., in room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. James A. Haley (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. HALEY. The committee will be in order. We will continue hearings on H.R. 1794, H.R. 3343, and H.R. 7354, to authorize the acquisition of and the payment for a flowage easement and rights-of-way over the lands within the Allegany Indian Reservation in New York, and for other purposes. May I say to the witnesses here this morning, I doubt very seriously if we will be able to establish a quorum. I understand that the various interests involved have been discussing with each other some of the problems that we have and in some respects they probably have reached a tentative agreement. I think it would be well at this time if we could have a statement from the Corps of Army Engineers, and also one of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and a statement from the attorney for the tribe to see how close we are together. If that meets with the approval of you gentlemen, if Mr. Hart, Mr. Holmes, and Mr. Lazarus will come up here to the witness table, we will hear you. Is the statement that I just made substantially correct, you gentlemen have been endeavoring to try to work this thing out and get as near to agreement as you possibly can? STATEMENTS OF LONEY W. HART, CHIEF, LEGISLATIVE SERVICES (RE), OFFICE, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS; COL. BERT DeMELKER, DISTRICT ENGINEER, U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, PITTSBURGH, PA.; GRAHAM HOLMES, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR LEGISLATION, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS; AND ARTHUR LAZARUS, ATTORNEY FOR THE SENECA NATION Mr. HART. Yes, Mr. Chairman, that is correct. I will be very happy to give the committee a brief résumé of the status as of today since the date of our last hearings on the 1st of November. Mr. HALEY. You may proceed. We will be happy to hear from you. Mr. HART. As you may recall, sir, during our last hearings we considered all of the various sections under committee print No. 10, and |