The CHAIRMAN. What is the total forest area, commercial and reserve?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Around 600,000,000 acres.

The CHAIRMAN. What was the forest area in the United States

100 years ago?

Mr. SHANKLIN. I think that that was close to 1,100,000,000, but I would have to check that figure.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, will you check it?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any figures upon the areas which once were forest lands which are not now producing timber?

Mr. SHANKLIN. That can be obtained for the record, sir.

Senator CORDON. Would you show in that how much of those lands are now producing agriculture so that we can get the whole picture? Mr. SHANKLIN. Yes.

(The statement requested is as follows:)

TABLE III.-Continental United States exclusive of Alaska

Estimated area of original forest land cleared for agriculture_

Senator CORDON. Most of the upper Mississippi

timbered until the white folks came.

225, 000, 000

Valley was

The CHAIRMAN. Of course many a homestead was built in the forest. There is no doubt about that.

Mr. CHAPMAN. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. I want also to know if you have any information with respect to the areas which have not been settled, which have not been turned into cities or into farms or into manufacturing, but are still capable of growing trees which are not growing trees, I mean areas which once did, if there are any such areas.

Senator CORDON. There are.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you give us the acreage on that?

Mr. SHANKLIN. We will try, sir. I am a little bit doubtful whether that particular figure can be obtained readily, but I will try, sir. (The statement requested is as follows:)

It is estimated that 163,000,000 acres of forest land are now denuded or only poorly stocked with seedlings.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, then, are there any areas under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior which are regarded as forest lands but which have not and do not now grow trees?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Well, that would only be such areas that may have been covered by fire that are not restocking naturally.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any information upon the area of forest land which has been made nonproductive and remains nonproductive by reason of fire or other disaster?

Mr. SHANKLIN. We have just recently been trying to obtain statistics for the Forest Service for reforestation purposes, and I believe that shows around 260,000 acres of Interior lands which are not restocking naturally and should be replanted.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, now, what is the area in the United States that is available for replanting which has not been replanted?

Senator CORDON. May I inquire, Senator, if you mean under the administration of the Interior?

The CHAIRMAN. No; I mean the whole thing.

Mr. SHANKLIN. That would have to be obtained from the Forest Service, sir, but I will try to obtain it for the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Perhaps this committee may desire to invite the Forest Service to testify on this general subject. I think it is of very great importance.

I know, for example, that in my own State there are larger areas which were included in the original forest withdrawals which at that time had never grown a tree, and which are still not growing trees but which are used for grazing and not for growing timber.

I think the plan at the time that the forest reserves were originally created was to include large areas which could be planted to make a larger original source of timber. Do you know whether that is the fact or not?

Mr. SHANKLIN. I can't answer that, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. If you get the answers to those questions, we will put them in the record.

Mr. CHAPMAN. We can get those figures for the record, Senator. (The figures requested are as follows:)

Estimated at 75,000,000 acres.

Senator CORDON. Mr. Chapman, is it true that the sometimescondemned Eightieth Congress provided legislation for the Interior Department permitting the application of sustained-yield forestry to the unappropriated public-domain lands under the Department?

Mr. CHAPMAN. That is true, we have authority for that and it is a very good law to have. The Forest Service has had such authority for a considerable time.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you happen to introduce that bill?

Mr. CHAPMAN. Mr. Shanklin says that it needs to be more adequately augmented with appropriations which we haven't received. Senator CORDON. You also got appropriations.

Mr. CHAPMAN. We did but they are not sufficient for a real program. Senator CORDON. Well, it got as much money as it could spend. That problem will be with us in the Eighty-first Congress.

Mr. CHAPMAN. We will be back for an increased appropriation for this activity.

Senator BUTLER. The Eightieth Congress also passed a law that would unlock the door of opportunity to develop Alaska with reference to its Forest Service.

Mr. CHAPMAN. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I don't know why those gentlemen are so touchy about the Eightieth Congress.

Senator CORDON. We are rather proud of it.

Senator ECTON. Mr. Chairman, I wondered if Mr. Chapman could tell us how much the Interior Department has been spending on this reforestation.

Mr. SHANKLIN. Nothing.

Senator ECTON. You haven't spent anything so far?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Well, I am referring to the 1949 fiscal year.

If

you are carrying it back a good many years, that wouldn't be so, but no moneys are presently available for strictly reforestation purposes in the current appropriation.

Senator ECTON. Do you have any idea what the average cost would be per acre, an average over the lands to be reforested?

Mr. SHANKLIN. It is running in the neighborhood of $20 an acre. Senator ECTON. $20 per acre?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Yes, sir.

Senator ECTON. That seems very reasonable from what I know about planting trees.

Mr. CHAPMAN. I wonder if Mr. Shanklin might have some information on the shelter-belt area at which considerable criticism was launched when it was originated.

The report that I saw of the Agriculture Department brought up to date in, I think, 1945-I am not certain of that, Mr. Shanklinshowed that more than 75 percent of it has been successful in development and growth. The shelter belt was established as a soil-conservation belt.

Senator CORDON. It was a marvelous job.

Mr. CHAPMAN. We think it was quite successful and more than justified the time and expense.

Senator BUTLER. The finest examples of that are in the State of Nebraska where they were planted by the farmers 50 or 60 years ago. Mr. CHAPMAN. That is right. If they had kept on planting them instead of allowing them to be cut down by the sawmills, they would still have them. You are fortunate in retaining a small percentage of it.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, then, it seems to be agreed that that is an expenditure which wasn't wasteful.

Mr. CHAPMAN. It was not, I am sure.

Senator WATKINS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire just how extensively the Department is engaged in reforestation?

Mr. CHAPMAN. Mr. Shanklin can tell you how little we have done. Senator WATKINS. I am trying to find out who is doing it, the Forest Department, Agriculture, or the Interior.

Mr. SHANKLIN. Well, we are only concerned with the Department of Interior lands, of course.

Mr. CHAPMAN. That is right.

Senator WATKINS. That is why I would like to know just how extensive the work is in that field.

Mr. SHANKLIN. We have no basic authority to work with private landowners. That is with the Department of Agriculture.

Senator WATKINS. In lands under your jurisdiction, how extensive is your program?

Mr. SHANKLIN. We have no program at the present time because no money is appropriated for reforestation work.

Senator WATKINS. Have you ever presented any plans to the Congress for that?

Mr. CHAPMAN. We have, definitely.

Senator WATKINS. Have you taken lands outside the Oregon area? Mr. CHAPMAN. Have we presented requests for appropriations for forest lands outside the Oregon areas? Yes; we have presented requests for reforestation outside the Oregon lands.

Senator CORDON. When, Mr. Chapman?

Mr. CHAPMAN. I have to speak a little bit from memory, but for the last 10 years we have been presenting such a program. Senator ČORDON. I have never seen it.

Mr. CHAPMAN. It has been in items for appropriations for reforestation.

Senator CORDON. By the way, how many acres of the public domain now carrying forest growth-I don't limit it to saw timber-are there in the United States?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Around 30,000,000 acres.

Senator CORDON. That is in the whole 48 States?

Mr. SHANKLIN. That is exclusive of the O. & C. lands.

Senator CORDON. In the West almost entirely?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Yes; although there is considerable area in the Lake States, in Arkansas, Mississippi, and the Southern States.

Senator CORDON. And this area consists to a very great extent, does it not, of little isolated tracts, 40 acres, 80 acres, 160, and the like.

Mr. SHANKLIN. That is largely true except in the Pacific Northwest. There there are some rather solid holdings within that region, but for the rest of the country it is rather badly scattered, sir.

Senator CORDON. A difficult proposition to administer.
Mr. SHANKLIN. Very difficult.

Senator CORDON. It is a difficult proposition on a good forestry program because of that.

Mr. SHANKLIN. That is right. It is our toughest problem, to be truthful about the matter.

The CHAIRMAN. What about forests on Indian reservations?

Mr. SHANKLIN. There are around 16,000,000 acres of forest and woodland on Indian reservations. They are being managed on the principles of sustained yield, with around 400,000,000 board feet being removed annually from the Indian forest lands.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there any effort to reseed and expand the forests on the reservations?

Mr. SHANKLIN. We endeavor, of course, in all cases to do our cutting in such a way that nature can reseed naturally. It is only. occasionally we run into a problem of a forest fire which desolates the country to such an extent that it does not reseed naturally and there we are confronted with the problem of trying to reforest artificially.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you encounter this controversy between the small timber cutter and the large lumber company?

Mr. SHANKLIN. In the sale of Indian timber?

The CHAIRMAN. No; in the lease under a sustained-yield program. Mr. SHANKLIN. Well, on Indian reservations, as you know, Mr. Chairman, it is either tribal land or allotted land, and the tribe speaks for all of its lands and then we have to consult with each individual allottee with respect to the sale of timber from the allotted land.

The CHAIRMAN. That is true, but I am talking now about those who are given the right to cut the timber. I have had numerous letters which indicate that small operators, small timber operators feel that they are losing out as compared with the large timber operators. Have you run into that?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Yes; I think that is a perennial problem, so to speak. We arrange our sales in accordance with our forest-management plan and it is almost impossible sometimes to cut up a block of timber into very small holdings because it would mean duplicating

road systems or arrangements between individual contractors for the use of one road system, and it would also increase the costs of administration.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, there you have illustrated again the conflict of big and little business, have you not?

Mr. SHANKLIN. Well, I would call it medium-sized and little business because these lumber companies

The CHAIRMAN. Well, that is relative. I will accept that change, and it is a problem of management of this resource and you, as a representative of the Government as the head of the Department of the Interior, forestry, are concerned with the over-all effective management upon the timber area.

Mr. SHANKLIN. That is corect, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. More so than you are with the effect upon individuals. Have you ever, has the Department ever, considered making any recommendation for legislation to improve this relationship? Mr. SHANKLIN. Not to my knowledge.

Mr. CHAPMAN. Not to my knowledge, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Perhaps this is not the appropriate time to discuss that.

Mr. CHAPMAN. May I bring out one further item in connection with Interior's forests. I will attempt to answer your question of yesterday, Senator Butler, when you asked the Secretary regarding the purpose of the program staff and its effectiveness.

In connection with the question we are discussing I wish to call your attention to the top left-hand corner of the chart and the four dark green shaded areas (chart No. 4). That indicates that the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, all within the Department of the Interior, have responsibilities in the forestry field and would present programs in forestry to the Secretary of the Interior for his approval o consideration.

Now you see how burdensome and difficult a task it would be if the Secretary did not have some point of coordinating those programs and to carry out the many consultations with the various officials of those bureaus in order to bring those programs in focus, as much as possible, before they are presented to him.

That is one of the most vitally important functions of the program staff. It is one that I must say that I have come to appreciate more and more each day. This is a very good example of one of the program staff's functions in the Department and of their importance in it.

Senator WATKINS. May I ask a question at that point with respect to those programs? I notice you have a program of reclamation in the Indian Bureau, and also you have the Reclamation Bureau.

Mr. CHAPMAN. Yes, Senator; they used to be together in the early days, and then they were separated. The Indians themselves felt they wanted someone who devoted themselves and their time strictly to their Indian reservations. They felt that otherwise other interests would be represented. Really the Indians desired it and asked for it. Senator WATKINS. Do you think that is an efficient way to handle that problem?

Mr. CHAPMAN. I think it has been handled about as efficiently as you could handle such a program. We haven't done very much in a