pace, so to speak, with the expanded program by appropriating more money, reaching approximately $1,700,000 in 1933.

There has been great expansion during these years, particularly in the last year or two because of the Roosevelt C.C.C. program. In Florida the area under protection expanded rapidly during the past year.

In this day when most of the activities of Government are being curtailed, it is a fact that in the forestry work it is expanding, that there is an increased need for funds in forestry, more than in any Government activity with which I am familiar.

The lumbermen in their codes are assuming the responsibility of placing their lands under protection in a way that they never have before, which has resulted in increased acreage in my State, and which I believe is going to represent greatly increased acreage within the next year.

The Federal Government has recognized its responsibility up to 25 percent of the cost of the total expenditures, up until last year, when they impounded about $400,000. The States have kept faith with the program as outlined originally in the Clarke-McNary Law, by gradually increasing their funds. At this time Florida is in need of more money to take care of increased acreage rather than less, and we feel it particularly important that the appropriation be left where it was before the funds were impounded.

In closing, I would like to call to your attention the fact that the appropriations made for the protection and creation of resources are actually investments, because these resources are the foundation of all social and industrial prosperity. When Government invests in schools, roads, and other worthy things, such expenditures do not result in more revenue. But when we create on these idle lands through fire protection greater timber resources we are providing the basic material that backs up industry. I hope that this committee can think of this Clarke-McNary appropriation as an investment upon which there will be large returns, which is not realized from many other appropriations.

Some of the State forestry departments were created because of the Clarke-McNary Law. I can say that in Florida my department would probably not have been created if it had not been for this law which offered a specific program, a specific suggestion to the States as to what could be accomplished. It also stimulated expansion in many States.

Now, at this time, when forestry is expanding more than all other Governmental activities that I know of, it is particularly important that we at least keep the appropriation where it was last year before the funds were impounded.

COOPERATIVE FOREST-FIRE PROTECTION

FURTHER STATEMENT OF CHARLES S. COWAN, REPRESENTING THE DIVISION OF FORESTRY, STATE OF WASHINGTON

Mr. CowAN. Mr. Chairman, our position generally is this: That the Clarke-McNary Law set out, in effect, a contractual obligation whereby the States were to do certain definite things, and whereby the Federal Government would also do its share, and that was continued throughout the years, until last year.

Now, we all recognize the need for economy. We practice it, sometimes rather harshly, on ourselves, but there is this situation which the Congressman from Idaho brought out, that in times of depression, we get incendiary fires which are set to gain employment. It is in times of depression that we cannot afford to decrease our forestprotection efforts.

There are two seasons in the year when we must be particularly watchful if we are to keep up that protection of our second-growth land, and one of them is the early spring of the year when the vegetation is dry, and weather conditions arise so that a match or a spark will start a fire which will run over large territories and which apparently may not do any damage, but those fires are the fires that do the damage to our seedling crop coming in. Such fires do little or no damage to the green standing timber, particularly in the West.

Now, the only place we can cut, if we must cut in our protection work, is in the spring when we know the ground is wet, after the winter rains and snows, and the thing we will have to sacrifice is the second crop which is coming along in these cut-over areas, and the protection of cut-over areas is the whole objective of the ClarkeMcNary money. It is not to protect the owners of green timber, but it was set out in the Clarke-McNary Law that second-growth and cut-over land shall get at least the same measure of protection as green timber does, and that is what the States have done.

Now, there is one thing we have always been short of, and that is leaders of fire crews. We have always been short of them, long before the C.C.C. came into existence, and when the C.CC. came along to our fires we were still shorter of leaders, because these boys lacked trained firefighting leaders and most of the boys never had any experience in the woods.

So, the point I want to make here is this, that we have, in effect, a contract with the States which was in force, but when the break came in the contract we had already expended our preseason fire money. We were notified in July or August, and we had spent our preseason's money early in May, June, and July.

We are now facing another year, and we ask you to look upon this as a contract with us, which it actually is, a signed contract, and if we, the various States, with our poorer resources are trying our best to keep up our side of it we feel that you here should at least try to keep up your side of the contract, and that is what the argument of Mr. Cronemiller was.

Now, I mentioned the C.C.C., and I would like to point out with Mr. Cronemiller that I am not offering any apology for them, because I have worked with them just as he has, and I know what they can do. They are splendid. The Clarke-McNary Law is the basis of a prevention force. These are the men who go on the job ahead of fires. It is said that the difference between a big fire and a little fire is 5 minutes. If we can get these prevention men to do the patrolling and other work we won't have to call men in for suppression. Then there may not be any need for roads and trails driven through just at this time. There has always been a reason for roads and trails in the woods country. We have a problem and the C.C.C. men are coming to our help splendidly, but that is an investment which must be made normally by the States as they get to these jobs as their money accrues, but the need for this, as Mr. Crenem iller says, is not

so strong in the lower lands and the areas there, of travel by roads to a large extent; it is in the national forests where they have real need for it.

Now, those roads have been one of our troubles for years past. The people who travel by automobile are careless with cigars and cigarettes, even to the extent of 70 percent of the responsibility for our fire origin. Mr. CANNON. I would like to get that clear. The general public is responsible to what extent?

Mr. COWAN. About 70 percent.

Mr. SANDLIN. Can you give an estimation on the other 30 percent? Mr. CowAN. The 30 percent may come from railroads and land clearers, or lightning, or miscellaneous causes that may arise. Logging in the West was, at one time, responsible for as high as 9.7 percent, but in late years it has been under 2 percent. Here is a distinct improvement.

Mr. Baker mentioned the lumbermen taking up fire prevention in their codes, putting in a provision that is based upon the fact that the lumberman is asked to assume full responsibility for leaving logged-off land in condition to encourage a recurring forest crop, but he cannot be asked to assume the responsibility for the public's fires; he is going to carry his own responsibilities. That is his duty, and the law makes it so, but he cannot carry his own losses, his own fire costs, and carry the public's too.

Now, that is our case. We have representatives here from practically every State in the Union, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and California. There is no use in going over the same story again. We can all tell you the same story, but we want to ask you to please listen to us and put the Budget back to the figure shown in the 1932 Budget, an increase of the $400,000, or a total of $1,700,000.

Mr. SINCLAIR. What portion of your lookout force or inspectors, or whatever you call them are cut down with this appropriation left out? Mr. COWAN. We figure about 32 percent.

Mr. SINCLAIR. About 32 percent?

Mr. COWAN. Yes.

Mr. SINCLAIR. And that does not leave you then a sufficiently adequate force to prevent fires when they originate?

Mr. COWAN. I would like to make myself clear there as to that 32 percent. What we have to do is to cut down employing the men in the spring, when we should put them on, in order to conserve our money, but figuring it over the year it means an actual reduction of man-power expenditure of 32 percent.

Mr. SINCLAIR. One third of your force then is out of employment? Mr. COWAN. Yes.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Of course, you need a greater force in the fire season than you do the rest of the year.

Mr. COWAN. Yes.

Mr. SINCLAIR. That is true, isn't it?

Mr. COWAN. Yes, sir. We have to save because we know we can save without losing the green timber, but we should protect our second growth, too, if we are to conserve for the future crop.

Mr. SANDLIN. I am very glad to have heard you gentlemen. If you can file a statement showing us where we can get some more money, you can put that in, too.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1934.

COOPERATIVE FOREST-FIRE PROTECTION

STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN F. SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I merely wish to present to the committee for its consideration the following telegram which I have received from the governor of my State in behalf of Clarke-McNary forest protection cooperative allotments:

MARTIN F. SMITH,

Representative, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.:

OLYMPIA, WASH.

Committee on Agricultural Appropriations meets Tuesday, February 6, to consider Clarke-McNary forest protection cooperative allotment to the several States. Urgent this appropriation should be kept to 1932 level. These funds used for fire prevention work and are matched on contractual basis by State and private forest land owners. Success of forest consrevation depends upon fire prevention. Please do your utmost to protect interests of this State.

CLARENCE D. MARTIN, Governor.

THURSDAY, JANUARY 25, 1934.

RESTORATION OF CERTAIN ACTIVITIES IN BUREAU OF BIOLOGICAL

SURVEY

Mr. SANDLIN. We will hear your constituent now, Mr. Blanchard.

STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE W. BLANCHARD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN

Mr. BLANCHARD. Mr. Grange, of Wisconsin, desires to be heard in connection with the Division of Food Habits of Birds and Animals of the Bureau of Biological Survey.

Mr. SANDLIN. Very well; you may proceed, Mr. Grange, with your statement.

STATEMENT OF WALLACE GRANGE, DIVISION OF FOOD HABITS RESEARCH, BUREAU OF BIOLOGICAL SURVEY

Mr. GRANGE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, in the proposed appropriations for the Bureau of Biological Survey there are several entire eliminations of activities upon which the States depend and lean very strongly.

In connection with the proposed use of submarginal lands in ways that do not conflict with agricultural uses, the importance of adequate information, particularly on game species, is tremendous, and if such a division as the Food Habits Division of the Biological Survey, which received in 1934 an appropriation of $71,000, is to be eliminated. No provision is made for that service.

Another activity of very great importance is the disease investigations of wild life, conducted in cooperation with several State universities and conservation departments; and a third activity is the migratory bird studies of the Bureau.

If I may thank the committee first for its permission to appear here, and then go on with a little discussion of why these activities are important, I would greatly appreciate the privilege.

I would like to run over for just a moment some of the activities in which the Food Habits Division of the Biological Survey has been engaged during the last 2 years.

In cooperation with the Oklahoma Game and Fish Department, two demonstration experimental areas on quail management have been set up. Those have for their purpose the determination of methods of producing a game crop on lands which are not strictly of use for ordinary agriculture.

A second project in Oklahoma, also in cooperation with the State department, was an experimental prairie chicken management project covering some hundred thousand acres in northwestern Oklahoma.

In cooperation with the Arkansas Game and Fish Department, two projects on quail management have been set up; one also in cooperation with the Indiana Game and Fish Department; and two private projects in South and North Carolina.

As far away as Tucson, Ariz., in connection with the Gamble quail on the range, the Food Habits Division has likewise set up experimental work to determine ways and means of producing a game crop on submarginal lands.

In the university activities in connection with wild life we very frequently are called on for analyses of bird stomachs, particularly in cases of alleged damage by wild birds and animals. There is only one place in the entire world where such information can be obtained, and that is in the Food Habits Division of the Biological Survey.

Five thousand stomach examinations were made by this division in the last year, and cooperation was afforded to the States of Virginia, New York, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, and in connection with a number of other private requests from all over the country. Very good cooperation was given with the 25-year conservation program of the Iowa Conservation Commission, of which Mr. Darling is a member; and much information that led to the development of proper control methods, with proper safeguards, was developed by this division.

The suitability of waterfowl areas for refuge purposes, particularly from the food habits standpoint, is another prominent activity of this division. When the Federal Government selects an area for the propagation and production of wild geese, brant and ducks, one of the first things that we must know is the type and quantity of food that is available upon such areas. That is a matter for technical analysis. Mr. SINCLAIR. You said a moment ago that there is only one place in the world where that information can be obtained, and that is at the Biological Survey?

Mr. GRANGE. On the stomach examination; yes, sir. There is only one place that is competent.

I may say that the collections and the methods in use in the analysis of stomachs have been developed over a period of not less than 40 years in the Bureau.

Mr. SINCLAIR. And with this appropriation cut out, would that work stop and the information not be available thereafter?

Mr. GRANGE. That is correct. It would be terminated entirely, with no provision made for any substitute.