solidations should not necessitate increased appropriations for the purpose of carrying on these functions; but I cannot say, either, that it is going to make any appreciable change to the point that we could recommend any decreased expenditures. Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. I note here a long list of items. Rather than to ask you about each one specifically, let me ask you one question. Have the Indians approved all these items? Mr. FICKINGER. These have been requested by the Indians themselves. In other words, the Indians themselves are interested in the problem of consolidating their landholdings, buying up fractionated tracts, and using their own money for that purpose; and that is the intent of this particular item. Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. I see you have slipped in one little proviso at the bottom, that 10 percent of the foregoing amount shall be available interchangeably. Why do you make that provision? Mr. FICKINGER. In presenting this item to the Bureau of the Budget we presented it as a consolidated estimate, without specifically earmarking these individual items. We set it up as a separate schedule to be followed, but not specifically earmarked as such. The Bureau of the Budget insisted upon setting out each such purchase, and therefore was agreeable to providing a 10-percent interchange, because it is very difficult to know whether or not a tract of land may cost us an even $20,000 or, say, $20,100. If we did not have that interchange language we would be stymied in making the purchase. Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. Let me say before we pass from this matter that I have felt for years that the proviso allowing you 10 percent interchange, is prone to invite you to juggle your funds; 5 percent would undoubtedly be adequate for your real needs. INDUSTRIAL ASSISTANCE AND ADVANCEMENT FORESTRY ITEM-CONSOLIDATION Now, I see another consolidation in this next item. We have a black-out on page 20, and you are proposing to consolidate it with some other item. Mr. FICKINGER. That is our forestry item. Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. What is the advantage of the proposed change? This committee wants to be helpful. If you can show that it would be to the advantage of the service or enhance the efficiency or economy of the Service, this committee will be sympathetic. Mr. FICKINGER. Mr. Chairman, you will recall that in our hearings last year the committee raised a question as to the number of different forestry items, all of which had certain language included that would permit the use of the money for fire-fighting purposes. We agreed at that time that it was a poor presentation and we agreed with the committee that something should be done. We, therefore, have consolidated the forestry items into this one item which will greatly facilitate the administration of the forestry, grazing, and range work. Mr. NORRELL. What is the increase in these items? You have consolidated them. What is the additional amount of money that you are asking for? Where do we find the item of $504,000? Mr. FICKINGER. On page 34 of the justification, Mr. Norrell, there is a statement showing the composition of this item. Five hundred and four thousand dollars was appropriated in 1945 for forestry administration. Then there is included by transfer from fire protection of forests, forest industries, and strategic facilities $117.800 for fire fighting. There is also an item that we formerly carried covering the expense of sale of timber, in the amount of $175,000, making the total available for 1945 of $796,800. There will be a decrease of $120,943 for overtime. Mr. NORRELL. Of course that will come on a little later, I presume. At least you are hoping so. Mr. FICKINGER. Yes. Mr. NORRELL. I believe you have discussed those increases, have you not? Mr. FICKINGER. No, sir; we have not gotten into the increases yet. Mr. NORRELL. I should think it might be discussed at this point. Mr. FICKINGER. The increase in this item represents several things. The sum of $3,023 of the proposed increase is for Ramspeck promotions. Mr. NORRELL. What page is that on? Mr. FICKINGER. That is on page 53-$3.023 with which to meet the compulsory annual promotions. Then there is an item of $11,620 to cover the cooperative sustained yield organization. I would like, if I may, to have Mr. Arnold, who is our Director of Forestry, discuss briefly the sustained-yield item. It is based on a law that was passed by Congress last spring. SUSTAINED-YIELD ITEM Mr. ARNOLD. The sustained-yield item is to furnish personnel to make studies of proposed sustained-yield units which may be established under the act of March 29, 1944. These sustained-yield units may consist entirely of Indian lands, or they may consist of Indian lands and other lands under Federal jurisdiction, and also State and private lands. But before these units can be established it is necessary that a careful study be made of the forest resources on Indian lands and also of the forest resources in other ownerships which may be involved, before the sustained-yield capacity of the entire unit can be established. There are many other factors which must also be carefully investigated. PURPOSE OF THE LAW The primary purposes of this law are to stabilize forestry enterprises and communities that are now established and to promote sustained-yield forest management. Where adequate forest resources are available the application of this act should assist in preventing a town dependent on a lumbering enterprise from becoming more or less a ghost town. This entails work that we are not in position to do at this time, and for this reason we need the personnel requested. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES Mr. NORRELL. How many employees do you have under this item? Mr. FICKINGER. One forester at $3,800; another at $3,200; clerkstenographer at $1.620. Travel expenses for those two employees of $1,000 each and one automobile at an estimated cost of $1,000. Mr. NORRELL. As to these people that own the private lands, what would they pay? Mr. ARNOLD. They would do their own work. We would go over their data and plans with them before we enter into an agreement with them. These agreements can be enforced in Federal courts. Therefore we must be very sure that an agreement does not contain conditions that might be unfavorable to the Indians. Mr. NORRELL. How much money would they put up for this work? Mr. ARNOLD. We work only on our lands; they work on their own. Mr. NORRELL. You said this might cover cooperative enterprises and might include other Federal lands. What did you say about State and privately owned lands? Mr. ARNOLD. Each ownership would be obliged to work out its own plans for its own particular ownership. However, in formulating a unified program we would be obliged to work with men employed by these other agencies. PURCHASE OF FIRE-FIGHTING EQUIPMENT Mr. NORRELL. I notice that you have an item of $19,500 here. Mr. FICKINGER. That represents a requested increase to cover the purchase of certain very urgently needed equipment in connection with fire fighting. Mr. ARNOLD. Trucks, automobiles, and heavy equipment, such as tractors. NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES INCLUDED Mr. NORRELL. How many automobiles are included? Mr. ARNOLD. Twenty-eight. Mr. FICKINGER. I think Mr. Arnold is giving you figures of all types of equipment needed, which run into many thousands of dollars. But this increase is intended largely to cover fire-fighting equipment. Mr. ARNOLD. I want to correct that statement. It is for trucks primarily and for tractors. Mr. NORRELL. How many trucks? Do you know how many would be included? Mr. ARNOLD. $7,500 is the amount set up for trucks, and $12,500 for tractors, pumps, hose, and hand tools. Mr. FICKINGER. These are fire-fighting trucks. FIRE PROBLEM Mr. ARNOLD. I would like to present to you our fire problem. We have a very difficult situation. Our equipment is badly worn and we have not been able to replace much of it. As a matter of fact, when the Civilian Conservation Corps was eliminated much of the equipment used by that organization was transferred to the Army and Navy and Civil Aeronautics Authority. This transfer left us with little equipment for fire protection. Much of this equipment cannot now be depended upon to give satisfactory service. The fire situation during the coming year will probably be very serious. We have received reports from the United States Forest Service and other organizations that the coming fire season will prob ably be very bad because of the lack of snow and rainfall this winter. May I speak off the record? Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. Yes; if your statement is not too lengthy. DEFERRED PROJECTS Mr. NORRELL. I believe the next item of increase is an item of $181,200? Mr. FICKINGER. Yes. That represents some more of those deferred projects which we discussed yesterday. NEW POSITIONS TEMPORARY LABOR Mr. NORRELL. How many new positions are included? Mr. NORRELL. What is the range of salaries? Mr. FICKINGER. From $4,600 down to $1,620, I believe. Mr. NORRELL. You have an increase of $86,490, noted under subsection (b), page 62 of your estimates. What is that for? Mr. FICKINGER. That represents a request for additional personnel and other expenses in connection with the general administration of the forest and range program; $40,816 is for additional personnel, representing 19 positions ranging from foresters at $3,800 down to clerkstenographers at $1,440. There is another item of $6,000 for temporary labor for use in assisting in the field in the making of investigations and surveys; $10,774 for travel purposes; $16,600 for equipment of various types; and $12,300 for other types of expense, such as transportation of things, communications, contractual services, supplies, and materials. Mr. NORRELL. I suppose that both of these go together? Mr. FICKINGER. That is correct. Mr. NORRELL. I believe that is the last increase you have here; is that right? Mr. FICKINGER. Yes, sir. Mr. NORRELL. That is all. Mr. ROONEY. No questions. EXPENDITURE ON A WARTIME BASIS Mr. DWORSHAK. I understood that this budget was predicated upon the assumption that funds would be expended in wartime on a wartime basis. Is that right? Mr. FICKINGER. That is my understanding of the way the Budget Bureau approved it. Mr. DWORSHAK. Where do you propose to get the 40 new employees for the positions you are proposing to create under this particular item on page 22? Mr. ARNOLD. Wherever they are available. We hope that they can be employed. Mr. DWORSHAK. You would not imagine that if any draft-labor legislation is enacted by Congress, which is still pending, you would be able to go on to the farms of the country, where food production is essential, or into our war industries and grab those men and put them out on public projects for the Indian Service, employed in the post-war period? Is that a reasonable assumption? Mr. ARNOLD. We have no intention of taking men from those sources. Mr. DWORSHAK. Where are you going to get them? I am not directing my questions to you necessarily. I do not know that you are responsible for this particular planning item. Mr. ARNOLD. We hope that at least a part of the war will be over by 1946, or at least during that year. Mr. DwORSHAK. The committee was told that this was a war budget. The war cannot be in progress and be over concurrently, and we cannot have at the same time a war budget and a peace budget. What are we doing? Mr. FICKINGER. Mr. Dworshak, does not this go back to the basic philosophy of the necessity of making certain appropriations for the peacetime program? Mr. DWORSHAK. I am in accord with that, and I am assuming that when some of these boys are discharged from the service, many of them probably former employees of your Service, we can reemploy them and that there is not much justification for going out on a limb completely at this time and visualizing a lot of projects when we have not yet won the war. Every day Congress is besieged by demands that we allocate our available manpower to enable us to prosecute this war to a successful termination, and yet these bureaus come in here asking for more employees. I am sympathetic to what you intend to do, but I am questioning whether now is the time to do it. Mr. FICKINGER. I think you have considered items of this kind, have you not, in other bureaus of the Department? Mr. DWORSHAK. I think it has been more obvious in the Interior Department. Every agency has come in here asking us for new personnel. My previous experience on appropriation subcommittees in this session is restricted to agencies that have almost insurmountable recruitment problems, and they are satisfied to get along in the best possible way under the wartime conditions. Yet the Interior Department agencies are coming and asking for a diversion of manpower in order to accomplish something that may be a good objective, but I cannot personally understand where they are going to get men, when they are telling us that we cannot win the war, because we cannot furish 900,000 more persons for induction during the first 6 months of this year and 700,000 more for employment in war industries. I am submitting the question to you, because if you have the answer you should take Congress into your confidence so that we will be able to solve some of these bewildering problems. Mr. FICKINGER. To answer your question specifically, frankly we do not know where we can get the personnel. Mr. DWORSHAK. You are "passing the buck" to the committee, then. Mr. FICKINGER. We hope that we will be able to get them. There are some discharges from the Army, and we have a number of foresters that have been returned to us. Of course, how rapidly such return. will be we have no way of knowing. Mr. NORRELL. The items on page 58 I believe are just regular items of appropriation such as we had in the bill last year, are they not? Mr. FICKINGER. That is right, sir. |