Mr. DENTON. I have some questions I would like to ask. First, we will hear from Mr. Kirwan who has been chairman of this committee for many years.

Mike, do you have some questions?

RELOCATION OF SALINE WATER OFFICE

Mr. KIRWAN. I am grateful again, Mr. Chairman, to be sitting around the table here with you and the rest of the subcommittee listening to the Secretary of Interior. I was wondering, Mr. Secretary, if you have relocated the Saline Water Office on 16th Street?

Secretary UDALL. Mr. Chairman, we moved the Saline Water Office into the Interior Department Building. The last year we moved the Indian Bureau into this building right next door, moved them out of the building, and we moved Saline Water into the Department. Mr. KIRWAN. It is not up there any more?

Secretary UDALL. That is right.

Mr. KIRWAN. I am glad to hear that.

Secretary UDALL. Yes, indeed. It is a very good development.

GRAZING FEES

Mr. KIRWAN. Another item I wanted to ask you about was the present status of grazing fees. Some years ago we raised them a little bit, is that correct?

Secretary UDALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. KIRWAN. I wonder if it wouldn't be appropriate to raise them again. I believe the grazing fees in the public domain lands are still only about 1 cent a day, considerably less, for example, than the Forest Service charges on its lands. We are spending great sums to improve and maintain these ranges and I believe the cattlemen should be willing to pay more adequate fees especially during these times of Federal deficits. We face a serious and costly situation in Vietnam and I feel everyone on the home front, must do his share, whether it is industry, labor, or agriculture.

I was chairman of the Finance Committee of the city of Youngstown in 1932. We did not have a dime. We had to pay in script that had no value outside of the city of Youngstown. When Roosevelt came into office, all he could spend on WPA was $3 billion with a national debt of only $27 billion. They called him a spendthrift. Yet we now have a $328 billion debt and we are going to incur more deficits this year and next. So we should all make greater sacrifices, especially when we have a costly war to fight and our military forces are making such great sacrifices for us at home.

I am in favor of everything you are proposing this morning to develop this country as contrasted to spending billions all around the world. I am in favor of what you are recommending, the development of America. I only wanted to make the point that I am thoroughly convinced now that we must all make a greater sacrifice at home and perhaps realize even more how terrible war is, what we are asking our boys to do, and the necessity for peace around the world.

SALINE WATER RESEARCH

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for letting me make these comments. It was thoughtful of you to recognize me as a former chairman. I would just like to comment on one more item. I put in as chairman of this subcommittee, your first appropriations for saline water research. As you know, there were efforts to slow this valuable program down the following year, but I am glad we were able over the years to fund an expansion of this research until it is now at about the $23 million level this year, is it not?

Secretary UDALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. KIRWAN. You are asking for an increase of about $8 million, is that right?

Secretary UDALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. KIRWAN. I am glad that we have supported this program because the last year proved all over the country the serious shortage of water and the urgency of doing something about the problem.

Secretary UDALL. Mr. Chairman, I think that you have demonstrated by the type of project that you supported, 100 times over, the wisdom of some of these investments in natural resources, research and development.

I think they pay back 10 times, 20 times, over what we have invested in the long run. In fact, I tend more and more, the longer I am around, to the feeling that one of the great successes in the United States is that we have known how to invest our use of people and our use of resources and money in the future. We have not done foolish short-term things. We have always looked ahead to the issues.

Mr. KIRWAN. I was reading, before I came over here, a book by the Corps of Engineers concerning the building of a reservoir in my district in 1942. The cost was $7 million. The head of Youngstown Sheet & Tube said that when this dam was only half constructed it held back the water from going within 2 inches of all the open hearths. We were at war and if they had been flooded out we would have suffered a great delay in our vital steel production program.

This is a dam that cost $7 million and by 1964 it had prevented flood damage totaling over $76 million. That is 10 times its cost. Of all the projects that have been built in the United States, all except one or two has stood the acid test. Every dollar we invest on these projects comes back manifold.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DENTON. We thank you, Mr. Kirwan. You can certainly be proud of the projects that were inaugurated when you were chairman of this committee. We are certainly very pleased to have the comments that you just made.

GENERAL POLICY FOLLOWED IN DEVELOPING 1967 BUDGET

Mr. Secretary, please describe for the committee the general policy that you followed in developing the 1967 budget estimates which you are presenting today.

Secretary UDALL. I think with regard to general policies, I would say this: Our general instructions from the Director of the Bureau of

the Budget and from the President were to tighten up where we could in terms of old programs, existing programs, and to stretch our money as far as we could, and to phase down or eliminate obsolete programs. The President as you know takes a great deal of interest in the details of the budget and he is someone who knows the budget process well. He reaches down in and takes more interest in individual items and it surprises you sometimes.

On the other hand, there was a directive that the better the job we did in that direction, the more we could enhance the opportunity of getting additional funds for new programs.

This was the general framework within which we worked. Necessarily, all of us in the Federal establishment worked within the framework of an escalating budget for the Vietnam war and I think one can characterize the overall budget as in the main a hold-the-line budget. There are some increases. These are I think calculated to be in the area where they are needed most.

As far as an increase is concerned, as I commented earlier, this budget is much more of a hold-the-line budget than any that I have presented over the past 5 years.

Mr. DENTON. The various divisions submit their budget estimates for the ensuing year? Who reviews those requests?

Secretary UDALL. The procedure that we follow is that the bureaus get up their initial requests. This goes to the Secretariat. Secretary Carver and his team reviewed these estimates this year before they ever went to the Bureau of the Budget. They then go over to the Bureau of the Budget. The Bureau of the Budget this year, and I think quite wisely, indicated in order to develop the different options for the President, that we develop two or three different levels of budgets so that the President in making the final decisions could have options before him.

We reviewed all of these at two or three different stages. We developed alternative budgets and ultimately the final decisions were made, in culmination of the best judgment that we had, by the Budget Bureau director and the White House.

Mr. DENTON. You pursued these policies which were very largely slanted to a hold-the-line budget?

Secretary UDALL. This was the context, yes, Mr. Chairman.

ADEQUACY OF 1967 BUDGET ESTIMATE

Mr. DENTON. As I mentioned earlier, many of the 1967 budget estimates for the agencies in your Department indicate a decrease below the 1966 funding level. The committee is always glad to see reductions effected in nonessential activities. But can you assure the committee that all of the agencies in your Department will have sufficient funds on the basis of the 1967 budget estimates, to fully carry out and administer all of their duties and obligations as prescribed by law?

Secretary UDALL. Mr. Chairman, this was one of the hard decisions that we had to make. We approached it just as your question approaches it. Could we carry out our existing responsibilities and functions? I think that I can assure you that in our judgment we can do that under this budget.

Mr. DENTON. In last night's Washington Star, there was an article in which the reporter commented on the budget for the Interior Department. Did you read it?

Secretary UDALL. Yes, sir; that was called to my attention.

Mr. DENTON. He intimated the budget was cut much more than it should have been. I realize that it is your duty to support the budget you present, but do you care to make any comment on the article? Secretary UDALL. Mr. Chairman, I don't know the gentleman. It seemed to me that there were some points that he made that perhaps had some validity. There were many points that I would disagree with. Beyond that I would not care to comment on it in detail.

Mr. DENTON. Mr. Secretary, I have several questions which I will take up in detail with the individual bureaus when they appear. I would like to have any comment on them that you would like to make, from a general point of view at this time.

INDIAN PARTICIPATION IN THE POVERTY PROGRAM

First, I would like to ask you what your observations are with regard to Indian participation in the poverty program.

Secretary UDALL. Mr. Chairman, of course, the President indicated in the beginning 22 years ago that he felt the Indian people should be in the forefront of the poverty program.

As you know, there are six or seven main poverty programs. Naturally, the Indian people line up. They get in the line at the Office of Economic Opportunity along with everybody else. We help, when it comes to participiating in Head Start or VISTA, or Community Development or whatever it is.

I think you should question the Indian Bureau people very closely as to whether or not we have done a good enough job in terms of getting the Indians out front in the poverty program. These programs in a sense supplement what we are doing in our regular programs. I would have the overall feeling, myself, that we have done a pretty good job.

I am not satisfied that we have done the best job that we can do and I think there is room for improvement. I think any prodding you can do on that front would be appreciated. I want to be frank with you about this.

Mr. DENTON. I am on another committee that deals with the appropriation of that agency. I would think that the neighborhood youth corps, community action program, and the work study program, would be especially applicable to the Indians.

Secretary UDALL. I would certainly agree, Mr. Chairman. I am sure that you can help us in your other role. I hope that you will.

OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FUNDS FOR INDIANS

Mr. REIFEL. I want to make an observation. I have had the impression, in talking to some of the Bureau people and others interested outside the Bureau, that there is a tendency on the part of the OEO leadership not to get too involved with the Bureau of Indian Affairs on the reservations, that if they had done a good job in the first place there would not be need for OEO on the reservations.

58-900-66-pt. 1--4