Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE
✓ COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

CLARENCE CANNON, Missouri, Chairman JOHN H. KERR, North Carolina

JOHN TABER, New York GEORGE H. MAHON, Texas

RICHARD B. WIGGLESWORTH, Massachusetts HARRY R. SHEPPARD, California

KARL STEFAN, Nebraska ALBERT THOMAS, Texas

BEN F. JENSEN, Iowa MICHAEL J. KIRWAN, Ohio

H. CARL ANDERSEN, Minnesota W. F. NORRELL, Arkansas

WALT HORAN, Washington ALBERT GORE, Tennessee

GORDON CANFIELD, New Jersey JAMIE L. WHITTEN, Mississippi

IVOR D. FENTON, Pennsylvania GEORGE W. ANDREWS, Alabama

LOWELL STOCKMAN, Oregon JOHN J. ROONEY, New York

JOHN PHILLIPS, California J. VAUGHAN GARY, Virginia

ERRETT P, SCRIVNER, Kansas JOE B, BATES, Kentucky

FREDERIC R. COUDERT, JR., New York JOHN E. FOGARTY, Rhode Island

CLIFF CLEVENGER, Ohio HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington

EARL WILSON, Indiana ROBERT L. F. SIKES, Florida

NORRIS COTTON, New Hampshire ANTONIO M. FERNANDEZ, New Mexico GLENN R. DAVIS, Wisconsin WILLIAM G. STIGLER, Oklahoma

BENJAMIN F. JAMES, Pennsylvania E. H. HEDRICK, West Virginia

GERALD R, FORD, JR., Michigan PRINCE H. PRESTON, JR., Georgia

FRED E. BUSBEY, Illinois
OTTO E. PASSMAN, Louisiana

GEORGE B. SCHWABE, Oklahoma
LOUIS C. RABAUT, Michigan
DANIEL J. FLOOD, Pennsylvania
CHRISTOPHER C. MCGRATH, New York
SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois
FOSTER FURCOLO, Massachusetts
FRED MARSHALL, Minnesota
WINFIELD K. DENTON, Indiana
JOHN J. RILEY, South Carolina
ALFRED D. SIEMINSKI, New Jersey

GEORGE ¥. HARVEY, Clerk

4 니

2 26

THE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION BILL FOR 1952

33

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATIONS

MICHAEL J. KIRWAN, Ohio, Chairman
W. F. NORRELL, Arkansas

BEN F. JENSEN, Iowa
HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington IVOR D. FENTON, Pennsylvania
FOSTER FURCOLO, Massachusetts

TUESDAY, MAY 29, 1951.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

CONTROL OF HALOGETON WEED IN WESTERN STATES

WITNESSES

WILLIAM J. ENDERSBEE, SOIL CONSERVATIONIST

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

MARION CLAWSON, DIRECTOR
DEPUE FALCK, CHIEF, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION
JAMES P. BEIRNE, BUDGET AND FINANCE OFFICER
GERALD M. KERR, CHIEF, DIVISION OF RANGE MANAGEMENT

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
ERVIN J. UTZ, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
EVAN L. FLORY, CHIEF, SOIL AND MOISTURE CONSERVATION

BRANCH
W. BARTON GREENWOOD, EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Mr. KIRWAN. This morning we take up two supplemental items in
House Document No. 139, one for the Bureau of Land Management in
the amount of $2,000,000, and the other for the Bureau of Indian
Affairs in the amount of $300,000.

Without objection, the pertinent parts of the House document will be inserted in the record at this point, and also we will insert the justifications for both items in the record at this point.

(The excerpt referred to from H. Doc. 139, 82d Cong., 1st sess., is as follows:)

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

2

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

ptia

MANAGEMENT OF LANDS AND RESOURCES

For an additional amount for "Management of lands and resources," $2,000,000.

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
For an additional amount for "Resources management," $300,000.

(1)

These proposed supplemental appropriations are to provide for the control of halogeton, a poisonous weed, which has infested a large area of Federal range and Indian lands in several Western States. This weed is a serious killer of livestock. Control consists of reseeding to perennial grasses and limited chemical spraying of infested areas where reseeding is not practicable.

The rapid spread of halogeton and resulting livestock losses emphasizes the need for undertaking a control program as soon as possible. Some of the Western States have already interested themselves in the problem and to the extent possible the control measures will be undertaken on a cooperative basis. Sufficient information on control methods has been developed to begin a control program at this time.

(The justification notes referred to are as follows:) BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT OF LANDS AND RESOURCES

Funds are requested to begin a program of control and eradication of poisonous weeds on the western range lands under the juridsiction of the Bureau of Land Management. Regular estimate 1952..

$7, 850, 000 Supplemental estimate 1952.

2, 000, 000

THE PROBLEM

Halogeton, an introduced poisonous weed, is spreading on western range lands and rapidly becoming a damgerous threat to the range livestock industry. The plant produces oxalates in the form of sodium and potassium salts that precipitate insoluble crystals in the kidneys of animals which feed upon it. Spectacular livestock losses through halogeton poisoning have resulted in Nation-wide recognition of the dangers of this new range pest and locally affected livestock operators have organized control groups seeking to obtain ways and means of combatting this menace.

In at least one major winter sheep-range area, the Raft River Valley in Idaho, operators have had to abandon the winter use of the area because of halogeton. This is especially serious during this period when demands are being made for increased production of meat, wool, and hides.

EXTENT OF INFESTATION

Presently known infestations of halogeton occur largely on range lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, and the Bureau has been subjected to considerable criticism because of its failure to take action on initiating an adequate control program:

Although its presence in this country had been known since 1935, its lethal properties were not recognized until recent years. From a single known point of infestation at Wells, Nev., halogeton has spread over large areas of California, Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, and Utah. Lesser areas of infestation occur in other Western States. From what is known of its growth requirements, there is reason to believe that if it is not controlled it could spread over the entire western half of the United States. Approximately 640,000 acres of BLM lands are known to be infested, and surveys undoubtedly would extend this area substantially. These areas of infestation are scattered over a gross area of 50 million acres.

Halogeton aggressively invades areas of disturbed or denuded soil, but it is a very weak competitor with perennial vegetation, particularly range grasses. The prevalence of halogeton along highway rights-of-way indicates that its rapid longdistance spread has been assisted by highway traffic.

INTEREST BY OTHERS

The seriousness of the investation is recognized by the States, several of which have appropriated funds in support of research and control programs. Paced principally by the Universities of Idaho and Nevada, western colleges have been studying halogeton in an effort to devise means of controlling or eradicating the weed. The Bureau has been and will continue to cooperate with these schools in solving a mutual problem,

Weed-control programs are functioning either directly under State supervision or at the county or district level. However, as the work of the programs is restricted to State or private lands, their efforts are in part nullified by reinfestation due to the failure of the Bureau to keep pace on public lands.

THE SOLUTION Authorities are agreed that the only practical method now known of preventing the spread of halogeton is through reseeding the range to hardy, drought-resisting grasses. It not only furnishes the best-known method of control, but protects the land from reinfestation.

Control trials, in cooperation with State colleges and local organizations, have shown that halogeton can be killed with chemical sprays. This method is not practical for large-scale application because of the high cost occasioned by the necessity for retreatment and the further fact that the treated area would be exposed to reinfestation unless immediate steps are taken to reseed with strongly competing vegetation. However, chemical control has a definite place in an organized control program to delay further spread by reducing seed production along highway rights-of-way; in eradicating isolated infestations too small for efficient reseeding work; controlling the spread on soils unsuited to successful reseeding; and eradicating infestation on sites suitable for reseeding.

THE PROGRAM To successfully cope with the halogeton menace will require an annual contro program large enough to hold the growth within known infested areas and to prevent the spread to adjacent lands. Inadequate control will allow the plant to spread faster than it is killed, prolonging the campaign at considerably greater final cost. Effective control requires an immediate, concerted attack on all fronts.

During the first year areas will be reseeded within the limits of available seed and other supplies; chemical control will be employed to delay spread and reduce seed production along highways; and equipment secured for future operations.

The supplemental appropriation of $2,000,000 for 1952 fiscal year is requested to finance the following major program phases:

Distribution of program costs by major items 1. Surveys.

$100, 000 2. Highway control (2,000 miles)

60, 000 3. Fall reseeding (90,000 acres)

890, 000 4. Spring land preparation (75,000 acres)

200, 000 5. Cooperation.

200, 000 6. Equipment (project)..

410, 000 7. General administration (including office equipment)

140, 000 Total.---

2,000,000 A. Cooperative efforts

1. Conduct surveys in cooperation with the States, counties, weed-control districts, other Federal agencies and individuals, to delineate the halogeton infestations on Bureau lands.

2. Cooperate with State highway departments, county and district weedcontrol programs, to secure control along highways and scattered tracts of public land.

State control committees organized in Utah, Nevada, Idaho, and other States will correlate the activities of the various groups engaged in control or research. They will be especially helpful in the organization of surveys to determine the location and extent of infestations and in serving as clearinghouses for all other available information.

Cooperation on actual control operations will be developed through State and local weed-control agencies, depending upon the type of organization having responsibility in each of the several States. Idaho has county weed-control programs authorized by State law and administered by the county boards of commissioners. Each county has a weed-control supervisor, crews, equipment and other facilities for controlling weeds. They are not authorized, however, to use county weed-control funds on Federal lands but through Bureau cooperation their facilities can be utilized in controlling halogeton on such lands.

« PreviousContinue »