Hon. JAMES F. BYRNES, UNITED STATES SENATE, August 12, 1937. Chairman, Reorganization Committee, United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR: In the matter of S. 2700, under consideration by your committee, I beg leave to submit to you an amendment to section 404 of said bill, as follows: On page 37, after subdivision 3, add: "(4) Assist State and regional planning agencies through assignment of personnel or grants-in-aid under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Board." The President in his message on the reorganization bill, of which this is a part, definitely recommended not only the creation of a national planning board, but also Federal aid to State planning boards. This is of the utmost importance for the purpose of coordinating the work of the State boards with that of the National Board. Necessarily, much of the work of planning within any State has a very definite relationship to the work being carried on by a number of Federal agencies. Both because of the necessity of cooperation and coordination, and also because of the value of the service the State planning boards shall be able to render, not only should there be a tie-up in personnel between the National Board and the State boards, but also, in recognition of such services, grants-in-aid to the State planning boards. Subsection 2 of section 404 of the bill may possibly intend such assistance to State boards. However, it is open to question. In order to make it definitely certain that it is the intention of Congress that such assistance be rendered to the State boards, the amendment is offered to clarify the situation; and if such amendment is agreed to, it would make certain that the recommendation of the President as to the assistance to State planning boards be carried out. Many of the State chairmen of the State planning boards have the impression that in order to make this assistance definite and certain, this amendment should be agreed to. Respectfully yours, HERBERT E. HITCHCOCK. REORGANIZATION OF THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES FRIDAY, AUGUST 6, 1937 SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON Washington, D. C. The committee met, Senator James F. Byrnes presiding. STATEMENT OF JAMES G. K. McCLURE, JR., AMERICAN FORESTRY ASSOCIATION The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McClure, you desire to be heard with reference to one phase of this bill. We will be glad to have you make any statement you desire to at this time. First, state whether you are connected with any organization, and if so give the name of that organization. Mr. MCCLURE. Mr. Chairman, I am president of the American Forestry Association. I am also the president and general manager of the Farmers' Federation, a cooperative organization of the mountain farmers in North Carolina. The American Forestry Association is a voluntary organization of people all over the United States who are interested in preserving and maintaining the natural resources of this country. It was started 61 years ago, and since it originated it has had something over 150,000 members. The members of this association are voluntary members. They pay dues, and our association is supported in that way. Our directors, and myself, contribute our time to this organization, and expenses. The association is intensely interested in forests, parks, and all natural resources. In fact, the American Forestry Association was formed before there were any national forests and started the movement to obtain national forests. It developed the initial movement to get forest-experiment stations, to develop laws to prevent forest fires, and so forth. It has been a very constructive influence all through the years along the line of conserving our natural resources. Senator TOWNSEND. How many people do you have in the organization? Mr. McCLURE. We have about 15,000 members, active members, paying dues at present. Senator TOWNSEND. Scattered over how many States? Mr. McCLURE. All over the United States. We get out a monthly paper called the American Forests that goes to all of our members, and we also publish a summary of conservation news called Conservation. We publish that every 4 months. It is a nonpolitical, noncommercial organization of people who are interested in forestry. We also have an endowment which is being contributed by people interested in forestry. We are as interested in the national parks as in the national forests. That is all part of our conservation program. In fact when we started there were no national parks, in the sense in which we now consider national parks. The Yellowstone Park had been set aside and was being operated by the Army at that time, and our forestry movement has been one of the great forces behind the acquisition of parks which are administered by the Department of the Interior, and the acquisition of forest lands administered by the Department of Agriculture. Now, the particular reason that the directors of the Association wanted me to appear this morning was that in connection with this reorganization bill they feared that the word "conservation", as used to denote a new department, is confusing, and we wanted to have the opportunity to explain that a little bit. The idea of conservation is one that we all believe in. The Department of Conservation sounds, right off, just swell, it sounds like something we all believe in, but if you commence to think about it and analyze it, and see how these different departments are built, we are afraid that there is a danger there that cannot be brought out unless it is brought clearly out, and that is that the Department of Agriculture at present administers the Forest Service. Under the Department of Conservation there is some likelihood that the Forest Service will be transferred to the new department. Well, it is like a piece of machinery. If a piece of an automobile, like a piston, or something, is taken out, that machine just does not operate as well, and the Department of Agriculture has the various bureaus, such as Soil Conservation, Pathology, the study of tree diseases, and various departments, all of which are in the Department of Agriculture. Now, personally, I am a farmer and manager of a farmer's cooperative. We have, I believe, the only cooperative which has a forest products department, designed to find a market for the products of the farmer's wood lot. The farmer's wood lot, down in our part of the country, is more than one-half of his farm. In the State of North Carolina we have 30,000,000 acres, and 20,000,000 acres of that land is in forests, but of that 20,000,000 acres in forests 65 percent is owned by the farmer. The majority of forest land in North Carolina is owned by the farmers as part of their farms. Senator TOWNSEND. You say 65 percent of the 20,000,000 acres is owned by the farmers? Mr. MCCLURE. Yes; 65 percent of our forest land in North Carolina is farm land, farm woodland. I think I am correct in stating that in the Southeastern States more than 50 percent of the forest land is farm land. Senator TOWNSEND. I am rather surprised to know that that is so. I thought that the large tracts in that section were operated by commercial institutions, and also by the Government. Mr. McCLURE. Senator Townsend, it may be that in the last 2 or 3 months there has been some change, because there has been a great influx of pulp mills down in South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia, but they have not bought enough land to make an appreciable difference. It might be 62 percent now that is owned by farmers. The figures that I gave, as it happens, I got from the State Extension Forestry yesterday. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McClure, may I make a statement in that connection? We have had several witnesses appear with reference to the same phase of this bill to which you desire to address yourself. Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. This committee, for your information, I will say has not considered any proposal to transfer Forestry, or any bureau, to any place. Therefore, although we have listened to several witnesses going into the details of the work of the Agriculture Department and the Interior Department, this committee will make no decision as to that matter at all. The only provision in this bill is the power of the President, not only as to Forestry but as to any executive bureau, to make a transfer. Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Now, as I understand your position, you do not want the Congress to give the President that power because you fear that in the exercise of that power he might, among other things, transfer Forestry now under Agriculture to Interior. Is that correct? Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. That is the story everybody who shares your views presents to us, and we know, from our long experience with the committees of Congress, particularly those on this committee who serve on the Appropriations Committee, the power of the Department of Agriculture, its functions, how much money that Department has, and all of those facts. Mr. MCCLURE. You probably know that a great deal better than I do, Senator. The CHAIRMAN. The only question is whether or not the Congress itself should undertake to merge bureaus here, and whether we should give the power to the I resident. This bill does not propose for Congress to merge them but gives the power to the President. I would be glad to hear your views on that question. Mr. McCLURE. Senator, what we should like to request is that paragraph 4, section 2, be amended to read: "that nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the President to abolish or transfer to any other agency any of the functions exercised by the Forest Service, the Bureau of Biological Survey, or the Soil Conservation Service of the Department of Agriculture." The CHAIRMAN. Of course, I know the reason for that. You oppose it being transferred from the Department of Agriculture, but if such an amendment were placed in the bill it would meet your objections? Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. That particular phrase is all we would like to insert in there. We have also an amendment in reference to one or two other departments or bureaus, you know. The CHAIRMAN. The Mississippi River Commission and the engineers are specified. You would like to have the engineer corps, or the Mississippi River Commission. Mr. McCLURE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. You would like to have a specific provision that the President should not have the power to transfer Forestry, or the Biological Survey from the Department of Agriculture, is that right? Mr. McCLURE. Yes; Mr. Senator, I hope you realize that we do not have any personal ax to grind at all. It is just an association of people who chip in their money. Our membership fee is $4 a year all over the United States, purely because they are interested in preserving the forests. I would like to say this at this time: I think the Forest Service has done a swell job of administration of the national forests in this country, just as I think the National Park Service has done a grand job of administering the national parks. We are interested in both of these departments. The CHAIRMAN. I know your interest is purely an impersonal one. You come here because of your interest in forestry. Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Of course the controversy between the two departments has gone along, to my certain knowledge, for 25 years. Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. You and I are familiar with it. Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. As I understand it, your only fear is that if the President were given the power he might exercise it in transferring the Forestry and Biological Survey to the Interior, and you do not think it would be to the best interests of the country. Mr. MCCLURE. That is it, Mr. Chairman, which we have been so jealous about, contributing our time and money to it. The CHAIRMAN. You have the same view as to soil conservation? Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. Soil conservation I cannot but feel belongs right in the Department of Agriculture, because most of the soil conservation in this country must be done on the farm. I know you are familiar with our condition in the Southeastern States, where soil conservation is perhaps the most important program that we have in order to build up the people in the southeastern part of the United States. The CHAIRMAN. Of course you recall that in 1933 the President was given the power, under the amendment to the so-called Economy Act, to transfer the bureaus and he could have transferred Forestry from Agriculture to the Interior, but he did not do it. Mr. MCCLURE. Yes. We are only coming in because we are jealous about the natural resources of this country. For 61 years our organization has been trying to develop them, and we just want to go on record as to our viewpoint on this matter and we would like to have your committee give it the fullest consideration. The CHAIRMAN. We assure you that we will do so. I hope, if you have a memorandum prepared, that you will present it to us, so that we can print it in full. Mr. MCCLURE. I will do that. The CHAIRMAN. If you have any statement to make in addition to what you have said, we will be glad to hear it. Mr. MCCLURE. Those are the main things. I think our forests must, more and more, be considered as a crop. I know in the Southeastern States we are trying to develop that idea. I just came from a meeting of our National Forestry Association held in conjunction with the State farm departments, because with the pulp industry moving into the South, opening a wonderful market for pulpwood, there is the danger that the farmer will clean-cut his land and lose his birthright, whereas if he cut the thinnings and the right trees and has a sustained yield, he will have an income all the years of his life, and will be able to hand down something to his children. It conserves the soil. The way the thing is set up at present, we have 44 extension foresters in the country, men working with the land-grant colleges, and it is also well hooked up with the Department of Agricul |