of the United States; and, except in the case of a lease, no payment shall be made by the United States for any such area until title thereto is satisfactory to the Attorney General.

SEC. 4. That the existence of a right-of-way easement or other reservation or exception in respect of such area shall not be a bar to its acquisition (1) if the Secretary of Agriculture determines that any such reservation or exception will in no manner interfere with the use of the area for the purposes of this act, or (2) if in the deed or other conveyance it is stipulated that any reservation or exception in respect of such area, in favor of the person from whom the United States receives title, shall be subject to regulations prescribed under authority of this act.

SEC. 5. That no person shall take, injure, or disturb any bird, or nest or egg thereof, or injure or destroy any notice, signboard, fence, dike, ditch, dam, spillway, improvement, or other property of the United States on any area acquired or received under this act, or remove therefrom or cut, burn, injure, or destroy any grass or other natural growth thereon, or enter, use, or occupy the refuge for any purpose, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture.

SEC. 6. (a) Any employee of the Department of Agricusure authorized by the Secretary of Agriculture to enforce the provisions of this act (1) shall have power, without warrant, to arrest any person committing in the presence of such employee a violation of this act or of any regulation made pursuant thereto, and to take such person immediately for examination or trial before an officer or court of competent jurisdiction, and (2) shall have power to execute any warrant or other process issued by an officer or court of competent jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this act or regulations made pursuant thereto. Any judge of a court of established under the laws of the United States, or any United States commissioner may, within his respective jurisdiction, upon proper oath or affirmation showing probable cause, issue warrants in all such cases.

(b) All birds or animals, or parts thereof, captured, injured, or killed, and all grass and other natural growths, and nests and eggs of birds removed contrary to the provisions of this act or any regulation made pursuant thereto, shall, when found by such employee or by any marshal or deputy marshal, be summarily seized by him, and upon conviction of the offender or upon judgment of a court of the United States that the same were captured, killed, taken, or removed contrary to the provisions of this act or of any regulation made pursuant thereto, shall be forfeited to the United States and disposed of as directed by the court having jurisdiction.

SEC. 7. That the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to make such expenditures for construction, equipment, maintenance, repairs, and improvements, including necessary investigations, and expenditures for personal services and office expenses at the seat of government and elsewhere, and to employ such means as may be necessary to execute the functions imposed upon him by this act and as may be provided for by Congress from time to time.

SEC. 8. That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated to be available until expended, the sum of $350,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary to effectuate the provisions of this act.

SEC. 9. That any person who shall violate or fail to comply with any provision of, or any regulation made pursuant to, this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $500 or be imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

SEC. 10. That as used in this act the term "person" includes an individual, partnership, association, or corporation.

The CHAIRMAN. We have a bill here introduced by Mr. Colton (H. R. 10473), and we will now hear Mr. Colton on it briefly.

STATEMENT OF HON. DON B. COLTON, REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF UTAH

Mr. COLTON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee: The bill which I have introduced, H. R. 10473, provides for the establishment of a migratory bird refuge, Bear River, Utah, an arm of Great Salt Lake in Utah.

Mr. SWANK. Is that the same kind of a bill that Mr. Hope has? Mr. COLTON. Well, it is very much the same kind of bill.

The CHAIRMAN. I believe the department representatives stated the other day that this was part of the program that the department had mapped out.

Mr. JUMP. The amount is $350,000 as carried in the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. How many stations did you suggest? Mr. Hope has one and Mr. Colton has one.

Mr. JUMP. Now you are asking a question as to the whole chain, and Mr. Henderson can answer that. Mr. Henderson has all the facts.

Mr. KINCHELOE. How do they know that will cost $350,000?

Mr. COLTON. I think I can answer that in a minute. In this particular case, a careful survey has been made; the land is mostly. owned by the Government. These lands are located at the mouth of the Bear River, and in seasons when the fresh water is plentiful we do not have much trouble with the loss of ducks. The ducks are there in great numbers. They have been using these lands as a breeding place, a place of refuge and of feeding and resting from time immemorial. But whenever we have a dry season and the fresh water recedes, it leaves in its place the briny, brackish water of the lake and the marshes; and whenever that occurs the loss of ducks there is something tremendous. It is planned to dike out the salt water and create ponds of fresh water. It has been estimated that in the last few years as many as 7,000,000 ducks have perished there due to this brackish water. Gentlemen, it is one of the most natural feeding places, I presume, in the United States, for these wild birds, and ordinarily it is an ideal refuge for them. But, as I say, whenever they are compelled to go into this salt water, or brackish water, they die by the millions. You would be surprised if I said to you that a few years ago, when we had a dry season out there, after they had been in this brackish water for a few weeks, the waves washed the dead ducks upon the shores of the lake, and they were along the shores of the lake like windrows of hay. It seemed a perfect shame to note the number of birds that had perished by reason of this brackish water. Fresh water will cure the sick ducks in a few days. Mr. KINCHELOE. What do you mean by "brackish water?"

Mr. COLTON. Salt water and water standing in those marshes. Under this bill, it is provided that the department shall build great dikes and hold fresh water in the places where it can be used by these birds.

Mr. SWANK. How much land does the Government own there? Mr. COLTON. It owns practically all of the land involved, except the railroad lands.

Mr. SWANK. How much?

Mr. COLTON. It owns more land than will be used for this purpose. Mr. SWANK. I mean in this project.

Mr. HENDERSON. Forty-four thousand acres are included in this project.

Mr. ADKINS. This is a construction proposition.

Mr. COLTON. Yes; it is intended to cover 44,000 acres.

Mr. THOMPSON. You mean after the dikes are completed, it will

cover 44,000 acres?

Mr. COLTON. Yes.

Mr. MENGES. And that land is owned by the Government?

Mr. COLTON. That land is owned mostly by the Government, there is some railroad land. And this has two purposes-to provide this game refuge, and to conserve game life; because we are actually losing them, and have lost during the last half dozen years many millions of birds; the department estimated in its letter that the number was as high as 7,000,000 of these birds.

Mr. ASWELL. Does the Bureau of the Budget approve that?
Mr. COLTON. Yes.

Mr. ASWELL. Did they ask you to pay 20 per cent of the cost? [Laughter.]

Mr. COLTON. I will just say, in answer to the question of the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Aswell] that my State has passed a resolution offering to cooperate in every way possible.

Mr. ADKINS. Mr. Colton, I suppose you got a communication similar to one that I received; I do not recall now whom it was from. But some man or organization out in that country wrote me proposing an amendment to this bill, and as I remember, he was protesting against the right of having a game preserve out there, and having those feeding grounds for the game and then slaughtering the birds; and he wanted an amendment added to your bill. Did you receive such a communication?

Mr. COLTON. I did not. I had not heard of that.

Mr. ADKINS. He called attention to the fact that this bill ought to be amended, so as to prohibit feeding and slaughtering the birds wholesale; he said that there should be a limitation; he proposed that as an amendment to your bill.

Mr. COLTON. As I understand it, this will become a refuge entirely under the control of the department.

Mr. ASWELL. It is so stated.

Mr. ADKINS. I do not see how the amendment would be germane to this bill.

Mr. HOPE. There would be no shooting at all on the game preserve, unless with the permission of the Department of Agriculture. Mr. SWANK. A man who was authorized could kill the game.

Mr. COLTON. Yes; that is a matter of administration. Mr. Chairman, I first introduced H. R. 8609, and later the department proposed certain changes that, if the bill is passed, will be needed for administrative purposes; and therefore I introduce a new bill, incorporating those suggestions in H. R. 10473; and I ask that the committee consider H. R. 10473, instead of the other bill.

The CHAIRMAN. The bill H. R. 10473 will be read.

(The clerk read the bill.)

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I want to ask Mr. Colton a question. I understood him to say that this land is already owned by the Government; and yet the first section of the bill provides that the Government can acquire by purchase private land. How do you explain that?

Mr. COLTON. Well, I probably should have modified that. The Southern Pacific owns a part of this land. There may be some few small tracts also which are privately owned; but I am sure the value is small. The department officials are here, and could answer that question.

Mr. ASWELL. Have they investigated that question?

Mr. COLTON. Yes.

Mr. HENDERSON. A survey of that has been made by the engineers of the department.

Mr. ASWELL. How much private land is in that area?

Mr. HENDERSON. The actual acreage of that was not estimated. There are some extensive holdings of the Southern Pacific Railroad lands, which come within the project, which have just been surveyed this past year. The total acreage is large, but the value of the land is not very high, because it is largely barren flats near the edge of the lake; and has been used for practically nothing except by the birds. Mr. ASWELL. If this bill were passed, it would be high-priced land, would it not?

Mr. HENDERSON. I think not. I saw the land agent of the railroad in San Francisco, and he expressed an interest in the refuge, and said they would do everything they could to make the project a

success.

Mr. KINCHELOE. Have you any options on that land?

Mr. HENDERSON. No, sir, we have had no authority to spend any money. We were able to make this survey by private contributions from sportsmen and others interested.

Mr. KINCHELOE. What good would the survey do, then?

Mr. HENDERSON. We have a very complete report, showing what improvements would be necessary such as dikes and ditches, how they should be constructed and their cost.

Mr. KINCHELOE. Well, how much is in it? Government have to buy?

How much would the

Mr. HENDERSON. We have not any statement here as to how much land the Government would have to buy. The land lies within the limits of the grant to the Southern Pacific Railroad and when surveyed by the general land office alternate sections belong to the railroad. The field survey was completed last year, but it has not yet been approved.

Mr. KINCHELOE. Well, the Government has evidently got to buy some private land there. And you say you have a survey made, and you can not tell us the number of acres. What did you make the survey for?

Mr. HENDERSON. The survey was made primarily to secure information in regard to the practicability of the project from an engineering standpoint. Our engineers' survey included an estimate of the quantity of land that would have to be acquired but does not give the exact acreage of private lands.

Mr. KINCHELOE. Well, have you any idea how many acres are in it?

Mr. CLARKE. Is it 500 acres, or 1,000 acres?

Mr. HENDERSON. I should think it might amount to 20,000 acres. Mr. KINCHELOE. It would not be more than that?

Mr. HENDERSON. It might be more, though much of the area is Government and State land.

Mr. KINCHELOE. Now, is that survey accurate?

Mr. HENDERSON. The survey of our engineers is very accurate. Mr. KINCHELOE. And yet you can not tell the committee how many acres of private lands there are. I was wondering what you had the survey made for.

Mr. HENDERSON. The principal purpose of our engineer's survey was to determine where the dikes would be located and the cost of their construction. His was principally an engineering job.

Mr. KINCHELOE. They could not give the committee any information as to how much private land the Government ought to buy? Mr. COLTON. I can supply that information, I feel sure.

Mr. ASWELL. I suggest that we lay the bill aside until we can find the amount of those lands and their values.

Mr. COLTON. I can put it in the record to-day. I would hate to see the matter delayed.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you want to put in any limitation?
Mr. ASWELL. Well, we should find out.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean for the purchase of the land. How much would it require?

Mr. COLTON. For the purchase of the land?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. COLTON. I am sure that that land is not worth more than $5 an acre, and I am sure most of it can be purchased for much less than that.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you be in favor of an amendment to limit the amount available for the purchase of land to, say, $10,000 or whatever it might be?

Mr. COLTON. I would rather an amendment were put in that it should not exceed so much an acre.

The CHAIRMAN. Not exceeding $10,000. Is that agreeable to the committee?

Mr. KETCHAM. Are the figures available as to the cost of the construction of the dikes, etc.? The $350,000 authorization evidently covers that, as well as the cost of the lands. I wonder if they have the details as to that.

Mr. HENDERSON. Yes, we have that detailed information. I have not gone into it, because the chairman asked me to be brief, but I will say this: The department could easily use $500,000. But it is just a matter of extending the dikes. We feel that $350,000 would be sufficient to take care of the situation for the present, at least.

Mr. KETCHAM. This will meet your requirements for the construction of the dikes, and the purchase of the land is merely incidental? Mr. HENDERSON. Yes; that is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the pleasure of the committee about this? Mr. ASWELL. I would like to know more about it than we have learned to-day.

Mr. ADKINS. I move that there be an amendment that the purchase of lands should not exceed $10,000.

(The motion was duly seconded and unanimously adopted.)

The CHAIRMAN. The question now comes up on reporting the bill. (On motion duly made and seconded, it was ordered that the bill be favorably reported.)

[H. R. 10763, Seventieth Congress, first session]

A BILL Relating to investigation of new uses of cotton

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of Agriculture is hereby authorized to engage in technical and scientific research in American-grown cotton and its by-products and their present and potential uses, including new and additional commercial and scientific uses for cotton and its by-products,