SENATE. 67TH CONGRESS, 2d Session. { REPORT No. 337. GRANTING CERTAIN LANDS TO ALABAMA FOR USE OF SEARCY HOSPITAL. DECEMBER 6, 1921.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. LENROOT, from the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, submitted the following REPORT. [To accompany H. R. 6961.] The Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6961) granting certain lands to the State of Alabama for the use of the Searcy Hospital for the Colored Insane, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with the recommendation that the bill do pass without amendment. The advisability of this legislation is fully set forth in House Report No. 327, this Congress, in the following language: [House of Representatives. Report No. 327. Sixty-seventh Congress, first session.] The Committee on the Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6961) granting certain lands to the State of Alabama for the use of the Searcy Hospital for the Colored Insane, having considered the same, report it herewith, with the recommendation that the bill do pass with the following amendment: Page 1, line 5, after the words "range one west," insert the words "St. Stephen's meridian." The bill was referred to the Secretary of the Interior, and copy of his report is as follows: Hon. N. J. SINNOTT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Chairman Committee on the Public Lands, House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. SINNOTT: Your letter of July 6, 1921, transmitted a copy of H. R. 6061, entitled "A bill granting certain lands to the State of Alabama for the use of the Searcy Hospital for the Colored Insane," and requested report thereon. The said bill provides as follows: "That the following described lands contiguous to the Searcy Hospital for the Colored Insane, to wit, all of fractional section one, township one north, range one west, south of Cedar Creek and west of John Chastang's private land grant, containing one hundred and eighty-one and forty-one one hundredths acres, be, and the same is hereby, granted to the State of Alabama for the use of the said hospital, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby directed to issue a patent to said State for the same: Provided, That the said State shall not have the right to sell or convey the lands herein granted, or any part thereof, or to devote the same to any other purpoce than as hereinbefore described, and in the event of the attempted alienation or failure to use said lands for the purpose hereinbefore described, the same shall revert to the United States." It appears from the records of the General Land Office that March 10, 1830, the President of the United States reserved, in accordance with the provisions of the act of May 24, 1828 (4 Stat., 304), certain lands including all of sec. 1, T. 1 N., R. 1 W., for a site for an arsenal. A portion of said reservation was included in the private land claim of John Chastang and by letter of March 2, 1903, the Secretary of War informed this department that the War Department had decided to abandon, without further contention, all that portion of said reservation lying south of Cedar Creek. The act of March 1, 1895 (28 Stat., 701), granted to the State of Alabama, for public purposes, all of the lands belonging to the Mount Vernon Barracks Reservation, then the property of the United States, and in accordance therewith, March 13, 1895, the Secretary of War executed a deed conveying with other lands all that portion of sec. 1, T. 1 N., R. 1 W., which lies north of Cedar Creek. That portion of the former Mount Vernon Barracks Reservation lying south of Cedar Creek, and west of said patented private land claim, and not included in the quitclaim deed executed by the Secretary of War, is an abandoned military reservation and subject to disposal in accordance with the provisions of the act of July 5, 1884 (23 Stat., 103), and is also subject to disposal under special acts of Congress. It has been found from an examination of the plats of survey on file in the General Land Office that there has been no supplemental Government survey of the tract proposed to be granted and that the exact area thereof is not known. Inasmuch as the boundaries of said tract are definitely described in the proposed bill now under consideration, there can be no doubt as to the limits of the grant. It is suggested that this bill be amended, on page 1, line 5, by inserting, after the words "range one west," "St. Stephen's meridian." With this change, no reason appears why the bill should not be enacted. I, therefore, recommend its passage. 67TH CONGRESS, SENATE. 2d Session. { REPORT No. 338. ESTABLISHING SHOOTING GROUNDS, GAME REFUGES, AND BREEDING GROUNDS FOR PROTECTING MIGRATORY BIRDS. DECEMBER 6, 1921.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. POINDEXTER, from the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, submitted the following REPORT. [To accompany S. 1452.] The Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, to whom was referred the bill (S. 1452) providing for establishing shooting grounds for the public, for establishing game refuges and breeding grounds, for protecting migratory birds, and requiring a Federal license to hunt them, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with the recommendation that the bill do pass without amendment. The bill was referred to the Department of Agriculture, and the Secretary of that department furnished the committee with the following report thereon: Hon. REED SMOOT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTure, Chairman Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR SMOOT: Your letter of June 16, inclosing a copy of Senate bill 1452, providing for establishing shooting grounds for the public, for establishing game refuges and breeding grounds, for protecting migratory birds, and requiring a Federal license to hunt them, and requesting my consideration of it, has been received. I have recently reported to the chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture on a bill, H. R. 5823, which carries the same terms and proposes to accomplish the same objects as the Senate bill now submitted. In my report upon it I have gone into considerable detail in regard to the bill and it appears opportune to supply you with the same information. According to the terms of this bill, it proposes to accomplish two main objects: First, The purchase, or rental, and maintenance of marsh and water areas especially suitable for migratory wild fowl, which shall be used as free public shooting grounds in the open hunting season and safeguarded as breeding and resting places for these birds in the closed season. Second. The administration of the migratory bird treaty act in order to more adequately maintain and increase the supply of migratory birds, including not only the ducks, geese, and others classed as game, but the great host of smaller species which are so vitally essential to the agricultural interests of the country through their unceasing war on injurious insects. The bill provides the means for carrying out its purposes through a fund to be created from the proceeds of a Federal hunting license fee of $1 a year, to be paid by each person who hunts migratory game birds. It is not possible to ascertain definitely the number of hunters who would take out Federal licenses for this purpose, but it would probably be between one and two millions. The money to be used for increasing the supply of migratory game birds and perpetuating wild-fowl hunting in the United States would be contributed by the hunters of migratory game birds, the people most directly benefited thereby, thus relieving the Government from appropriating a considerable sum each year, amounting for the fiscal year 1922 to more than $154,900, for the administration of the migratory bird treaty act, the Lacey Act, and the Federal bird reservations. The provisions in this bill whereby the licenses are to be made available to the public through the post offices throughout the country utilize governmental machinery already established, thus avoiding the excessive cost of setting up a new service. This not only provides economy and effectiveness of administration but should be a highly appreciated convenience to the public. The bill also confers the police powers necessary to its enforcement, and the penalty clauses are carefully drawn. It is important that these features of the bill be retained. The birds must be protected on the refuges and the public shooting grounds effectively administered if the desired results are to be obtained. The provisions of the bill along this line are quite similar to those found in the migratory bird treaty act and are well adapted for the vigorous enforcement of a statute of this character. The clauses in the bill providing for investigations and publication of information relative to birds will meet a necessary requirement for intelligent conservation and increase of migratory birds. The present appropriation for the administration of the migratory bird treaty act provides for less than 30 full-time wardens to enforce the law throughout the 48 States and Alaska, an obviously inadequate force to cover such a vast territory. In 1920 the State of New York alone had a force of 145 game wardens, Pennsylvania 110, Michigan 97, and California 78 to enforce their game laws, as against 28 Federal wardens in the entire United States to enforce the migratory bird treaty act. The fund resulting from the establishment of a Federal hunting license, as provided in this bill, would end this embarrassment and enable the department to meet the insistent and growing demand for adequate warden service. Reports received by the department from all parts of the country agree that the alarming decrease of migratory wild fowl which preceded the negotiation of the migratory bird treaty and the passage of the act by Congress for the protection of migratory birds has changed to a marked increase. These reports show a cumulative increase not only in such migratory wild fowl as ducks, geese, and other game birds, but also of many insect-eating birds. Good evidence of the increase of migratory wild fowl under the migratory bird treaty act is contained in the report of the State game warden of Minnesota that during the hunting season of 1919 about 1,800,000 wild ducks were killed in that State. The meat value of these birds undoubtedly exceeded $2.000,000. This indicates the economic advantage to the country at large to be derived in food value alone from the enactment of this bill. It is evident that the carrying out of the proposed conservation program under the Federal hunting license would increase the total value of migratory wild fowl taken by hunters each year in the United States by millions of dollars, in addition to insuring the perpetuation of this valuable natural resource. It is generally acknowledged that even with the inadequate sums available for enforcing the migratory bird treaty act, the successful outcome of this great conservation measure has become apparent more promptly than was anticipated by its friends. Thus, the passage of the migratory bird treaty act constituted the first important step toward insuring the perpetuation of our wild fowl and our wild-fowl hunting. Another step of almost equally vital importance if we are to hold what we have gained remains to be taken. This is provided for in the present bill and consists of the conservation and perpetuation of a sufficient number of small inland lakes, as well as inland and coastal swamp and marsh areas, to provide our migratory wild fowl necessary feeding, resting, and breeding places within the United States. The bill provides for the use of not less than 45 per cent of the funds obtained from Federal hunting licenses for the purchase, or rental, and maintenance of suitable breeding places and feeding grounds for wild fowl to be used as public shooting grounds in the open season. It is absolutely necessary that not only during the breeding season, but during their migrations and in winter, wild fowl have necessary places in which to live. There is no question that vast areas of swamp land in Alaska and northern Canada will in the indefinite future supply abundant breeding places for innumerable wild fowl. The maintenance of suitable homes for these birds while in the United States, owing to activity in draining operations, is becoming more and more precarious and their entire future is seriously threatened. This part of the bill, although primarily intended to increase the number of wild fowl and to perpetuate wild fowl hunting, really involves a number of other important |