•
NATIONAL RECLAMAiION ASSOCIATION 29Th ANNUAL MEEiING BAKERSFIELD, CALIFCRNIA - 1960
FOR RELEASE WHEN READ November 17, 1960
ANNUAL REPORT OF
WATER USERS COMMITTEE Committee Representation
At the 1959 Convention a Constitutional Amendment was adopted which removed the limitation on membership on the Water Users Committee of the National Reclama-tion AssociaReclama-tion. Thereafter, President Coles requested from each State Director the recommendation of an Tpropriate person to serve on the Committee. This resulted in appointffert of 14 State representatives and the Committee Chairman. Kansas, New Mexico and South Dakota have not yet nominated their members.
Meetings
The Committee met in Denver, Colorado on Mcv 31, 1960; in Salt Lake City, Utah on September 2., 1960 and Bakersfield, California on November 16, 1960.
MATTERS CONSIDERED BY THE COMMITTEE Subject:—Resolution No. 15 cf 1959
Background for Consideration:—
In 1959 the Water Users Committee sponsored a proposed resolution calling for correction of practices by certain Federal agencies whose programs, in
some States, resulted in interference with prior existing water rights. The resolution, with certain amendmnts, was adopted by the
1959
Convention and resolved ". . . that . . . we direct attention ta. The activities and grograms of the Bureau of Land Management, Soil Conservation Service and/or Agricultural Conservation Program which are • . • disregarding existing law and thereby
By the.language of Resolution #15, we directed the attention to the disregard of law and, as a result thereof, the interference with prior water rights. The concerned Federal agencies were duly notified of the NRA action and each answered that, to their knowledge, there had been no disregard nor violation of State laws. During the past year the 1,ater Users Committee has made every possible effort to find specific cases wherein there has been a disregard or violation of laws within the 17 Western States. None have been forthcoming. In some of the States the construction of water impounding structures can be accomplished without violating or disregarding the water laws of those States. Therefore, it is possible to create interference with existing water rights and, in the process add to the cost and complexity of stream administration by the States.
Conclusions:--Thorough consideration of the problems created by continuation of the
several federal agency programs resulted in the following Committee conclusions: 1. NRA should continue its position of insistence on federal agency
compliance with the water laws of the several States.
2. We should emphasize the imperative need for federal agency poli-cies and criteria which are sufficiently flexible for application to use under the variable water laws and variable administrative requirements of the several States.
3.
We should insist that the federal agencies clear their planned andintended activities with the appropriate water administration agency of each State in advance of federal financing or construction.
Recommended Action:—
The Water Users Committee recommends the adoption of a resolution in 1960 restating the concern of NRA over the results of these federally spon-sored and conducted programs and setting forth the positions stated within the Committee conclusions.
Subject: Proposed aPesticide Bill" Background for
Consideration:--In the 86th Congress there was introduced H. R. 12419 providing for advance consultation with Fish and Wildlife Service and with State wildlife agencies before the beginning of ary Federal program involving the use of pesticides or other chemicals designed for mass biological controls.
In spite of the use of the title "Pesticide", the act specifically
refers to use of". . . any chemical insecticide, herbicide, fungicide, roden-ticide, or other chemical for the purpose of eradicating or controlling animal or plant pests . . ." It provides that no agency of the Federal Government may initiate or provide assistance for any program involving use of such chemi-cals without advance clearance from Fish and Uildlife Service and, through such Service, from the head of the agency administering fish or wildlife
resources of each State affected.
Conclusions:--The proposed legislation is dangerous because it extends excessive veto power to wildlife interests and because it could seriously hamper the opera-tion and maintenance procedures of many projects in the 'West which are
operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. Recommended Action:—
The Committee conclusions were forwarded to the Secretary-Manager of NRA and to the Chairman of the Legislative Committee with the request that this or similar legislation be strongly opposed.
Subject: Financial Credit and Technical Assistance Background for
Consideration:--Two primary problems are frequently faced by settlers on new reclamation projects or by new operators on the older projects. First, credit needs of
these farmers cannot always be served by the types of commercial credit avail-able to settIrs of a new area. Secondly, technical aid for on-farm engineer-ing and agricultural plannengineer-ing is furnished only to the extent that such services can be provided through local soil conservation districts.
Credit needs have been partially, but not adequately, covered by the Farmers Home Administration. Thus far, the allocation of funds to fulfill the purpose has been made on a joint estimate basis by F.H.A. and the U.S.B.R.
The special technical assistance reeds have been considered by the Depart-ments of Agriculture and Interior and by the concerned appropriation
subcommittee of the House and Senate. Opinion is divided between direct appropriation of monies for technical aid and some type of repayment from the farmers receiving the services.
Conclusions:--Since the two classes of need exist under a number of projects and may vary to a considerable degree, the Water Users Committee concluded that appropriate and eqiitable formulae should be wprked out by the people of the concerned States in cooperation with the Departments of Agriculture and Interior.
Recommended
Action:--The Committee understands that the following projects, listed by States, represent the areas primarily concerned:
Arizona -- Gila Project Nebraska -- Bostwick
Farewell
Frenchman-Cambridge Ainsworth
Washington -- Columbia Basin Wyoming -- Seedskadee
Idaho -- Minidoka-No. Side Pump Div.
Kansas Kirwin
I'vebster Cedar Bluff Bostwick Montana -- Last Bench
Whenever the concerned States and Federal agencies agree upon reason-able and workreason-able formulae for solution of the credit and technical assistance problems, NRA should support such appropriate legislation as may arise there-from.
Subject: Noxious Weeds
Background for Consideration:—
For several years NRA adopted resolutions relating to noxious weed control. In 1959 Resolution 19 contained the clause ". . . provide for the control and eradication of noxious weeds on federally controlled lands."
In the 86th Congress S.861 was introduced and provided for the application of State weed-control programs to Federal lands. It would authorize the States to destroy noxious plants on Federal lands, in the same manner as is required
on private lands, if the agency having jurisdiction of the lands consents thereto. The States would be reimbursed for expenses incurred by them to the extent that Congress sees fit to appropriate funds for that purpose.
Conclusions:--The Committee is af the opinion that legislation such as provided by S. 861 would be a step in the right direction. Some shortcomings are apparent:
(1) States with no weed control statutes would probably gain nothing from such legislation;
(2) Control of noxious plants is limited by the appropriation of monies therefor and any Federal agency having jurisdiction could not, of course, consent to a State program unless monies were available.
(3) Inability of a Federal agency to cooperate with a State program might, under some circumstances, limit the effectiveness of the State's awn program.
Recommended
Action:--NRA should urge the appropriation of funds by Congress for the control of noxious weeds on Federally controlled land and also, urge Federal assistance for reclamation projects if the local operating agencies request Federal Partici-pation in noxious weed control on project lands.
Subject: Reimbursement for 0. & M. Expenses Background for Consideration:—
A number of the older reclamation projects, operated by districts and/or water user organizations, have become involved in performance of 0. & M. services other than those contemplated at the time the projects were authorized and
constructed. The problem arises where flood control, recreation or fish and wildlife uses, not originally contemplated, have become required through the pressures for those uses.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Because of the complexities and policies involved in the subject matter, it is the consensus of the committee that joint consideration should be given to this subject by the Water Users and Water Policy Committees during the regular meeting of all committees in Washington early in 1961.
Subject: Transfer of Title to Project Works Background for
Consideration:--The transfer of title to districts or water user organizations after full repayment under Reclamation Law has been considered by water user groups and NRA for a number of years.
Conclusions:--The Committee recognizes that title transfer may be advantageous and desirable to some districts or water user organizations and less advantageous to, and
Recommendation:—
If NRA is to support any proposed legislation on title transfer, such legislation should be permissive in nature. The choice of requesting transfer
or non-transfer should be left to the operating water user entity and the terms of transfer should be the subject of negotiation between the requesting organi-zation and the United States.
Subject: Right-of-way acquisition by State and Federal agencies Background for consideration
Several reclamation projects have encountered substantial reduction in the acreage of numerous farm units through expanding programs of state and federal highway construction. As the problem increases, there appears to be need for some means of adjustment to the contracting districts or water user organizations obligated for project repayment. This was recognized by adoption of Resolution No. 14 of 1959.
Conclusion and Recommendation
The Water Users Committee requested the Division of Irrigation & Land Use of USBR to furnish a report to the NRA Secretary-Manager setting forth the extent of the problem and any suggested solution. Pending the receipt of full informa-tion from the Secretary-Manager, no recommendainforma-tion is added to the content of Resolution No. 14.
Subject: An Operating Program for the Water Users Committee
Following the enlargement in membership on the Water Users Committee, a general program of operation was discussed at the May meeting, subsequently out-lined in written form and its adoption was recommended at the Salt Lake City
meeting in September.
Attached hereto is a program under which the Water Users Committee hopes to TAKE NRA TO THE WATER USERS!
R. J. McMullin Karl Powers
Arizona Wyoming
William Alexander Darrell Maxwell
California Oregon
Chas. Neill Leo P. Harvey
Colorado Utah 0. A. Bergeson J. R. Barkley Montana Stanley A. Matzke Nebraska John Hannifan Nevada Chairman P. 0. Box 117 Loveland, Colorado
WATER USLRS COMMITTEE PROGRAM "Take NRA To The Water Users"
Section 11 (f) of the National Reclamation Association's Constitution
authorizes the appointment of a Water Users Committee and defines its general scope of activity as follows:
"During the annual meeting, or during the interim between meetings, the President may appoint a Water Users Committee, and shall designate the Chairman thereof. Members of the Committee shall be water users, or their duly appointed representatives, and shall be representative of the various areas of the reclamation states. Such Committee may be authorized to study and report upon any problem, or problems, that affect water users; provided, however, that in order to avoid duplicA-tion of effort and to insure effective acduplicA-tion, the Committee shall coordinate its activities with those of the Secretary-Manager under the direction of the President."'
Quite
obviously the direct participation in Committee functions is largely carried on by "duly appointed representatives" of water user groups. This is true simpl,y because the 17 Western State area is too large for general mass participa-tion by its many thousands of individual water users.It is also recognized that there is great variability in the problems and interests of water users from one area of the West to another. Nevertheless, all users of water have numerous matters of common concern and it is, after all, the commonness of interest which leads to the participation of their representatives in the affairs of the National Reclamation Association.
The real concern of the Water Users Committee is how best to serve the great number of water users who do not or cannot, as individuals, be participants in Water User Committee meetings or attendants at the annual convention of the
Association. Since the mass of water users cannot come to NRA, perhaps the primary aim of the Water Users Committee should be - - "TAKE NRA TO THE WATER USERS."
Proposed Program Pattern Participation by States
Most, if not all, of the 17 Western States have state-wide reclamation associ-ations or other state water user organizassoci-ations. Within many of the States the users have further organized in smaller groups to cover the local problems and
interests within watersheds, districts or other physical and political subdivisions. In the other direction, there are organizations of inter-state nature where the problems and interests are common, i.e., the Colorado River Water Users Association, the Four-States Irrigation Council, etc. Thus, a variety or organizations already exist as forums fpr the consideration of the "grass-root" irrigator's problems.
Therefore, if the National Reclamation Association's Water Users Committee can eventually be composed of a representative from each of the 17 Western States and if each State representative can participate in the organized groups within his awn State, the Association will have acquired the means for determining the problems and interests which deserve the attention of the national organization.
Conversely, each Water User Committeeman can create an opportunity to "Take NRA To The Water Users" by
arranging:--(1) Participation of his State's NRA Director, the Association's Secretary-Manager or the Chairman of an NRA standing committee in the meetings of his own State's organized groups.
(2) Submission of periodic reports to his State and local organiza-tions on the activities of NRA in matters of particular concern to those groups.
(3) Organization of localized tours in which individual water users may participate and have opportunity to exchange thoughts on problems and interests which they find in common.
(4) Demonstrations of newly developed equipment, materials, chemicals or operational methods. Here each State Committeeman can take advantage of the research services afforded through the state and federal agencies, the State educational institutions and private
corporations.
(5) The establishment, in his State, of a centralized clearing house for collection and dissemination of information and data of interest
to water users.
Certainly, with an active Water Users Committee member in each of the 17 Western States, the NRA should have no difficulty in obtaining a wide variety of problems
originating directly from the water users and which deserve consideration and pos-sible action by the Association. Likewise, the National Reclamation Association, through the activity of the Water Users Committee, can render a real servide to the West if it will "Take NRA to the Water Users."
Water Users Committee Meetings
In order to function in the role suggested for the Water Users Committee, it seems obvious that more than one or two meetings per year would be required of the whole Committee. Further, the appointment of sub-committees might be appropriate whenever the Congress is considering matters of particular import to the entire West or whenever the Committee as a whole deems it necessary.
It is suggested that regular meetings of the Water Users Committee be scheduled as follows:
In Washington, D. C., during the week in January that is chosen for the NRA Board and other Committees.
At such location in the West as is chosen for the late spring meeting of the NRA Board and other Committees.
(3) At such location as may be chosen by the Water Users Committee for a meeting near the close of the irrigating season.
(4) At the NRA annual convention.
For the meetings listed as (1) and (2) it is recommended that the Chairman of each NRA committee submit a meeting agenda to the Secretary-Manager of the Association. It is further recommended that this be done well in advance of the meeting dates so that the Secretary-Manager may furnish the Board and all Committee Chairmen with an itemized list of matters to be considered by the various committees. This procedure will permit, when it appears appropriate, the joint consideration of such items as may be of interest to two or more committees. Also, it may pre-clude some duplication of effort when it seems proper to limit the consideration of a given matter to a single committee.
Convention Participation
It is recognized that the NRA Board of Directors is responsible for the approval of the annual convention program. For the past several years a half of one day of program time has been allotted to the Water Users Committee for presentation of appropriate items. It is suggested that two or three section meetings on various subjects be simultaneously programmed. This will allow administrative people, members of boards of directors, operators, attorneys, maintenance people and others the choice of a meeting which has on its schedule the subject matter of greatest interest.
29th Annual Convention NATIONAL RECLAMATION ASSOCIATION
Bakersfield, California
PROGRAM
November 16, 17, 18, 1960
GENERAL SESSIONS
BAKERSFIELD INN--Palm Room WEDNESDAY FORENOON--November 16 9:00 A.M. -- General Sessions
LaSelle E. Coles, Presiding
President, National Reclamation Association Prineville, Oregon
R
bola. .. c
. *ea..
9:10 A.M. -- INTRODUCTION OF THE PRESIDENT OF NATIONAL RECLAMATION ASSOCIATION Bert L. Smith, Director, NRA
San Francisco, California PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE LaSelle E. Coles 9:40 A.M. -- "ADDRESS" Floyd E. Dominy Commissioner of Reclamation Washington, D. C. 10:05 A.M. -- "ADDRESS"
Harvey O. Banks, Director
Department of Water Resources, California
and President, Association of Western State Engineers Sacramento, California
10:30 A.M. -- ADJOURNMENT FOR STATE CAUCUSES IN ROOMS AS DESIGNATED
WEDNESDAY NOON 12:15 P.M. -- LUNCHEON - Palm Room
LaSelle E. Coles, Presiding Prineville, Oregon
TOASTMASTER
George L. Henderson, Chairman
NRA Agricultural Research Committee Bakersfield, California
INVOCATION
WEDNESDAY NOON (Cont'd)
INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS
"People 4. Problems = Opportunity"
Stary Gange, Special Consultant, Southern California Gas Company and President, Pacific Olive Company
Visalia, California
WEDNESDAN AFTERNOON 2:00 P.M. -- GENERAL SESSIONS
LaSelle E, Coles, ?residing REPORT OF SECRETARY-MANAGER NATIONAL RECLAMATICN ASSOCIATION '‘WzfliaterV- Vieksh'`
Washirgton ) D. C. 2:10 P.M. -- ADDRESS
Lieut. General E. Co ltschner, Chief Corps of Engineers
Washington, D, C.
2:40 P.M. -- CAUCUS REPCRTS - STATE CAUCUS SECRETARIES 3:20 P.M. --,REPORT
Codification Committee Clifford E. Fix, Chalrman Twin Falls, Idaho
3:40 P.M. -- REPORT
Limitatior Committee Mark Anirews, Chairman Mapleton, North Dakota
4:00 P.M. -- COLOR FILM -- "Water and You"
Sponsored by Feather River Educational & Research Association California
WEDNESDAY EVENING 7:00 P.M. -- BUFFET SUPPER AND ENTERTAINMENT
Palm Room, Bakersfield Inn Fiesta Room, Hacienda Motel
THURSDAY FORENOON 9:00 A.M. -- GENERAL SESSIONS
Hugh A. Shamberger, Presiding
First Vice President and Nevada Director National Reclamation Association
THURSDAY FORENOON (Cont'd) COLOR FILM - "California's Golden Empire
Kern County Board of Trade 9:30 A.M. -- "ADDRESS"
Donald A. Williams, Administrator Soil Conservation Service
Washingtor, D. C
10:00 A.M. -- PANEL DISCUSSION - 'Project Justification" Theodore Schai, Moderator
Executive Staf Director
Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources Washingtor, D. C,
Professor Emery N. Castle
Department of Agricultural Economics Oregon State College
Corvallis, Oregon James vain Loben Sels
Land Department, Southern Pacific Company San Francisco, California
Dr. ElRoy Nelson, Vice President and Economist First Security Corporation
Salt Lake City, Utah James K. Carr, Chairman California Water Commission Sacramento, California
THURSDAY NOON 12:00 NOON -- Men board buses for Hacienda motel 12:15 P.M. -- NEN'S LUNCHEON
LaSelle E, Coles, Presiding TOASTMASTER
A. B. Newby, Kern Division Manager Southern California Gas Company Oildale, California
INVOCATION
Monsignor Patrick J. Leddy, Pastor Saint Francis Church
Bakersfield, California ADDRESS
Hon. Wallace F. Bennett United States Senator Utah
THURSDAY AFTERNOON 2:15 P.M. -- GENERAL SESSIONS - PALM ROOM
Harold H. Christy, Presiding
Second Vice President and Colorado Director National Reclamation Association
Pueblo, Colorado "ADDRESS"
Burnham Enersen
Prominent Water Lawyer San Francisco, California
2:45 P.M. --REPORT LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE
J. H. Moeur, Chairman Phoenix, Arizona
3:05 P.M. -- REPORT - SMALL PROJECTS COMMITTEE Doyle Boen, Chairman
Hemet, California
3:25 P.M. -- "BOATERS, SWIMMERS, ANGLERS - ENEMMES OR FRIENDS?" Marshall N. Dana, First President
National Reclamation Association Portland, Oregon
3:55 P.M. -- 'REPORT - WATER POLICY COMMITTEE Bert L. Smith, Chairman
San Francisco California 4:15 P.M. -- ADJOURNMENT
THURSDAY EVENING
6:30 P.M. -- Board Buses for transportation to All-States Banquet 7:00 P.M. -- ALL-STATES BANQUET
Albert Goode Auditorium LaSelle E. Coles, Presiding TOASTMASTER
Gilbert Jertberg
Circuit United States Judge Fresno, California
INVOCATION
Rev. Glenn D. Puder, Minister First Presbyterian Church Bakersfield, California
INTRODUCTION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND LIFE MEMBERS LaSelle E. Coles
INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS AT HEAD TABLE "I LIKE AMERICA"
The Rev. Alec D. Nichols, Pastor First Methodist Church
FRIDAY FORENOON
8:45 A.M. -- GENERAL SESSIONS - Palm Room, Bakersfield Inn LaSelie E. Coles, Presiding
COLOR FILM - "Bridge to the Future" International Harvestor Company
9:15 A.M. --REPORT - AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COMMITTEE George L. Henderson, Chairman
Bakersfield, California 9:30 A.M. --"ADDRESS"
Elmer B. Staats, Deputy Director United States Bureau of the Budget Washington, D. C.
10:30 A.M. -- STATE CAUCUSES (IN ROOMS AS DESIGNATED) 12:00 NOON -- MEN'S LUNCHEON - Palm Room, Bakersfield Inn
TOASTMASTER Bert L Smith INVOCATION
Rabbi David Daro
B ff nai Jacob Congregation Bakersfield, California
"ADDRESS" - (to be announced)
FRIDAY AFTERNOON
2:00 P.M. -- BUSINESS SESSIONS - Palm Room, Bakersfield Inn LaSelle E. Coles, Presiding
APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE REPORTS , AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COMMITTEE
George L. Henderson, Chairman Bakersfield, California
CODIFICATION COMMITTEE Clifford E. Fix, Chairman Twin Falls, Idaho
, LAND LIMITATION COMMITTEE Mark Andrews, Chairman Mapleton, North Dakota
AEGISLATIVE
COMMITTEEJ. Ho Moeur, Chairman Phoenix, Arizona
FRIDAY AFTERNOON ' SMALL PROJECTS COMMITTEE
Doyle Boen
Hemet, California v/WATER POLICY COMMITTEE
Bert L. Smith, Chairman San Francisco, California WATER USERS COtN1TTEE
R, Barkley Loveland, Co1orado RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE J. D. Mansfield, Chairman Yuma, Arizona
SELECTION OF CONVENTION CITY FOR 1961 ANY OTHER BUSINESS WHICH MAY PROPERLY .COME BEFORE THE CONvENTION
c• • (7- • A! , C 4! „f-e, 7--e* «, • , ^ • ce" * erojee"—a,
-n'...„2".(:::"
41-. . e aa,..1."--49P49 -• -„ C )'Mr 11,111WWW11,11.11.1•11,1,1, ---e " • ' "`" 77- 10"1....*" ,;‘ • 6„, ." ' • " . kol* • at,. .6 7 . -.-" -"":;&,•; .1 /7 -. _ --e /,"" -• / ". Gar-kr ace,' 2 -' --e-- - ' /2 ,.., &...-0,-Z-0-e-e-e-0.-.... ,____.--- --,--,--,-,---e.--...._----(..‹...04.-<-__ __ .
‘
.77-VP- --‘," CLe . ,i71)-2,47 71€7.--/f-eP --1(1: 4
•ti ' -"" 1 „C! ) • /4okr-4:::•,„„ ,
• ;
Cg./e4G,4,4
••• •••• yr w•-•ff ••• v•-• •rm- er-mr-mr•ww-Nir mr-4.-44- w-mr •IP 1,11MIFTWWW11,11.1r1,
C%-t-( .4"""
C
izt) er>‹-t,„eiet,xe_
4 _tr
oril‘ -^-4:eer_ 4.71,t 7/7
/-Zo/
• • 4 /'2 -t-7.") ;
„ae
v=w2e_e,vd6:7-ee--•
_
a
•
-7 • c:2-/ 6" ;1511—,--•ir—e4—e-t)
e„.
ejXe 4
`cr
ae-e a Yerf
e e.7e-4
4Su7gested Resolution for 1960 to Replace Resolution No. 15 of 1959
(17 Sept. 1960) STANDARD POLICIES AND CRITERIA FOR INTROVEMENT
OF CERTAIN F-DERAL ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES IN WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
WEEREAS, the National Reclamation Association at its Twenty-Eighth Annual Meeting in Denver, Colorado, on October 30, 1959, adopted Resolution No. 15 which directed attention to the activities and programs of certain Federal agencies in the field of water control and water use; and
WHEREAS, the Bureau of Land Management, the Soil Conservation Service, the Forest Service, and the Agricultural Conservation Program Service continue their activities in the field of water control and water use under programs designated as flood preven-tion or soil, forest, and water conservapreven-tion; and
WHEREAS, such activities and programs continue to add to the development of a large number of small water impoundments and water retardation structures in all of the
Western States; and
WHEREAS, coordination of the Federal programs and activities with the water admin-istrative agencies of the several States is essential to the prevention of interference and conflict with prior existing water rights and, further, is essential to the orderly development and use of the water resources of the several States;
NOW, THERE.bORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the National Reclamation Association hereby records a re-statement of its concern over the results of these federally conducted and sponsored activities and directs the attention of the President, the Congress and
appropriate Congressional committees to:
(a) The activities and programs of the Bureau of Land Management, Soil Conservation Service, Forest Service and Agricultural Conservation Program Service which are, in some areas and under some circumstances,
causing interference and conflict with prior rights to the use of water.
(b) The urgent need for development of general policies and standard
criteria by the Federal agencies involved, which policies and criteria must be of such flexibility as will permit their application to use under the variable water laws and administrative requirements of the several States in which these Federal activities are carried on. (c) The need for clearance of works planned by the Federal agencies
through the appropriate water administrative agency of the State in which such works are contemplated. Clearance with the States in advance of financing and construction of federally planned works is the only way by which all interested parties may be advised of the work contemplated and the anticipated results thereof.
&or/sea/;01m
OFFICE OF SECRETARY-MANAGER • WM. E. WELSH • 897 NATIONAL PRESS BLDG. • WASHINGTON 4. D. C.
December 30, 1960
Mr. J. R. Barkley, Chairman NRA Water Users Committee P. O. Box 117
Loveland, Colorado Dear Bob:
President L. E. Coles, in a telephone conversation, has suggested that the Water Users Committee should remain the same as last year. How-ever, in a letter from Bert L. Smith this morning he says, "Under the organization of the Water Users, with one from each state, maybe William Alexander should be appointed the member from California for he is anxious to continue. His district will continue to sponsor his participation. Robert Carter could be designated 'alternate' to keep Imperial tied into the program."
As we have the list here, there would still be three states nut rep-resented. Attached is a list of the committee as we have it.
I know that you are giving some consideration to having your com-mittee meet in Washington, D. C., at the same time that the Board of Directors is here. The Board meetings are scheduled for Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, February 13, 14 and 15. The Legislative Committee will meet on Friday, February 10. We thought that if you are planning a meet-ing here at that time, you should have your list of committee members as approved by President Coles immediately, even though the other committee appointments have not yet been finalized.
Since a number of new committee members are being appointed this year, we thought it advisable to send out to all committee members a copy of a letter relating to NRA p3licy regarding payment of committee members ex-penses. Accordingly," we are sending you sufficient copies so that you will have one for each member of your committee.
WEW:mmt Enclosures
Cc: L. E. Coles, H. H. Christy H. A. Shamberger
OFFICERS Guy C. Jackson, Jr., President L.E. Coles, First Vice-President H.H. Christy, Second Vice-President
J.H. Moeur, Phoenix, Arizona Charles L. Kaupke, Fresno, California Harold H. Christy, Pueblo, Colorado
Sincerely,
William E. Welsh Secretary-Manager
DIRECTORS
C. Petrus Peterson, Lincoln, Nebraska Hugh A. Shamberger, Carson City, Nevada I. J. Coury, Farmington, New Mexico
Arthur Svendby, Lemmon, South Dalcota Guy C. Jackson, Jr., Anahuac, Texas H.T. Godfrey, Murray, Utah
OFFICE OF SECRETARY-MANAGER • WM. E. WELSH • 897 NATIONAL PRESS BLDG. • WASHINGTON 41. D. C.
December 1, 1960
TO: NRA COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Particularly for the benefit of NRA members who are serving on committees for the first Lime, we thought it advisable that the following information regarding expenses of committee members shculd be made available to you.
For some time, it has been the policy of the National Reclamation Association, as established by the Board of Directors, not to pay the expenses of committee members to committee meetings, but to pay only the expenses of a committee chairman or some member designated by the committee, with the approval of the President, to perform additional services or to attend special meetings. The following is an ex-cerpt from a report of the Budget and Finance Committee which was adopted by the Board of Directors a few years ago:
"That the Association does not pay the expenses of any committee members to attend committee meetings, it being the opinion of the Board that the state organizations should pay such expenses, but that the Association will pay only the expenses of committee chairmen or some member designated by the committee to perform additional services or special tasks approved by the President on behalf of the Association."
Of course, it is generally recognized that no member of the Association should be expected to pay his own expenses to a committee meeting, but it is assumed that his expenses will be paid either by the state, state association or organization, or by the local organization which he represents.
With approximately 80 members of the Association serving on various important committees, it will be recognized immediately that to pay the expenses of such a large number of committee members would exceed the financial ability of the Associa-tion. Most states and local organizations consider it an advantage to have a
member serving on an NRA committee and are more than glad to meet the expenses. We sincerely hope that your state or local organization will understand the situation and take care of your expenses and that you will be able to accept the assignment which President Coles has given you as a committee member.
WEWmmt
Cc: Presidents & Secretaries of State Assn's. Members of Board of Directors
OFFICERS L. E. Coles, President
Hugh Shamberger, First Vice-President H. H. Christy, Second Vice-President
J. H. Moeur, Phoenix, Arizona Bert L. Smith, San Francisco Harold H. Christy, Pueblo, Colorado
Sincerely,
William E. Welsh Secretary-Manager
DIRECTORS C. Petrus Peterson, Lincoln, Nebraska Hugh A. Shamberger, Carson City, Nevada I. J. Coury, Farmington, New Mexico
Arthur Svendby, Lemmon, South Dakota Guy C. Jackson, Jr., Anahuac, Texas Leo P. Harvey, Pleasant Grove, Utah
OFFICE OF PRESIDENT AND OREGON STATE DIRECTOR • L. E. COLES • P O. BOX 6 • PRINEVILLE, OREGON
ove-lber 8, 11:4,
rr. gaxwell, "ana7er
rorth rnit Irripation District Yadras, Oregon
Dear Darrell:
I am appointin7 you as Ore7onts member of the :Ater Users
Crnmittee. A3 you KLOW you are taking the placc of Carlos landolph,
whi:% Lac left the country. I am sure you will anloy thc work and
with your experience in the field of agriculture will be able to contritute to the work of. the Comittee. I ar: re you will enjoy mrking the the ahairman, Fob arkley, who has done a fine lob of heading—up the CoTmittee.
Pob has ealle-i a breakfast meeting at ri:CO A. "., 7e(ineTiay, Novemter 16, 196k, ilakdersfield Inn. I hore you Id?? be able to attend this meeting and pet acouainted with the other members If the Couratee. Sincerely %Yours, Coles rrestdent cc: J. R.. rarkley Thish OFFICERS DIRECTORS
L. E. Coles, President J. H. Moeur, Phoenix, Arizona C. Petrus Peterson, Lincoln, Nebraska Hugh Shamberger, First V ice President Bert L. Smith, San Francisco, California Hugh A. Shamberger, Carson City, Nevada H. H. Christy, Second Vice President Harold H. Christy, Pueblo, Colorado I. J. Coury, Farmington, New Mexico
Alex Coleman, St. Anthony, Idaho Milo W. Hoisveen, Bismarck, North Dakota Lorin W. Markham, Treasurer
C. C. Green, Courtland, Kansas Frank Raab, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Wm. E. Welsh, Secretary-Manager
Arthur Sveudby, Lemmon, South Dakota Guy C. Jackson, Jr., Anahuac, Texas Leo P. Harvey, Pleasant Grove, Utah Lorin W. Markham, Spokane, Washingtoo
7-b-eett
"
14('4/./17:47:i
C-ts&s,(1
/9'M
e
44.
7)-7,-ite. it
.*"/0
—;$
e4
.4
.
/, -17 "4
74,4/Ze
-04-001/4e
r-t:eed
,
:frkhfr/r--,
fr",e/
q;;;"4-00:—. 4,
(4'
tieltrZei
476-L.
c-d.`,t-4t-ihef e"t4404 5-;.3-1C2 /4r
: 001 .. .,'/it;' .t:40te'
4:-
'el
fr;,- /41 441
fr ,4 j 444.00V/
(47
;
00/(e
404,
g
ot,
ty,
/"—?;
;
P (2
,
4e1
4( eel
r
t
c,--
!if-tisar
Pre7
:*,, 74
41
.
C..‘k iser; Seeilitoidemo
of teA
,
wittreZei
0, (
‘44..
t
/6,
etc lel f
r'sr f of 105'.• ("1DIRECTORS ROYDEN G. GIRLING LEON A. HOTCHKISS ALAN MODERNiTH CHARLES R. NEILL RAYMOND WHITE HENRY R. SWANSON THOMAS H. WAND NORTH FORK
WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT HOTCHKISS, COLORADO
4 Nov. 1960
Mr. J. rt. Barkley, Chairman,
Water Users Committee, M.A.,
P.O.Box 117,
Loveland, Colo.
Friend Bob:
OFFICERS ROYDEN G. GIRLING PRESIDENT LAZEAR THOMAS H. WAND VICE-PRESIDENT PAONIA CHARLES R. NEILL EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT HOTCHKISSToday I receivea your NOTICE of the -,,ater Users Committee,
to be held in Bakersfield, 76bA.p...k., Wednesday, hov.16th.
It was my understanding at the Salt Lake City meeting that
fhis committee would meet the day before the NRA Convention,
November 16th, that is on November 15th.
I so requested a reservation at Bakersfield, for iv,onday
night, November 14th in order to be on hand for the meeting
Tuesday the 15th. rteservation was confirmed for night of
November 14th.
JoHN R. NEILL SECRETARY-TREASURER
HOTCHKISS
I wonder how many members of the Committee so acted.
I have just checked your report of the 5eptember 12th
meeting.
1st p-ragraph, page
3,
your report of September 24th 196G
reads as follows: "The Committee authorized and directed
the Chairman to call a meetinE of the full Water Users
Com-mittee to be held in Bakersfield, California at least one
day prior to the opening of the Convention on November 16th,
In this regard, the Chairman will draft and forward to you a
tentative outline of the .ater Users Committee report
forthe
year 1960"
Nuff Said.
/ /
STANDARD FORM NO. 64 FOREST SERVICE Washington 25, D. C.
Office Memorandum •
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
2100
TO : All Forest Service Officers DATE: October 28,40960
„40 cC2).
FROM : Richard E. McArdle, Chief suBjEcr: Multiple Use
I usually hesitate to ask you to read speeches, mine or those of anyone else, but I think you should see these two. One is my key-note speech on multiple use for the recent Fifth World Forestry Congress and the other is Ed Cliff's speech later in the Congress. You will note that these two speeches are coordinated; mine is more general, whereas Cliff's is more specific as relates to management of the national forests.
When talking about multiple-use management of national-forest lands we should make sure that certain significant points are emphasized and understood. These have not previously been clarified in Forest Service policy statements, nor do they occur in our regulations or manual instructions.
These prerequisites to multiple use are mentioned in my speech in the five paragraphs on page 6, beginning "An essential of
multiple use is . . .." You will note that multiple-use manage-ment requires that there be more than two major uses, and that there be coordination of uses. Note also the references to time period, size of area, control by one authority, and to basic ob-jectives.
I recently have heard multiple-use management referred to as a concept, as a principle, and as a practice. Obviously it is all three.
If you find here some ideas useful for your own speeches, we shall be delighted to have you make any of our sentences or paragraphs your own.
Fifth WORLD FORESTRY CONGRESS
Cinquieme CONGRES FORESTIER MONDIAL
Quinto CONGRESO MUNDIAL DE SILVICULTURA
Seattle, Washington • August 29-September 10, 1960
GS/P/12-U.S.A.
THE CONCEPT OF MULTIPLE USE OF FOREST AND ASSOCIATED
LANDS - ITS VALUES AND LIMITATIONS
by
Richard E. McArdle Chief, Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture
It is a great honor to address this first general session of the Fifth World Forestry Congress. My subject is the same as the theme of the Congress -- the multiple use of forest lands. This theme is an appro-priate sequel to the Fourth World Forestry Congress at Dehra Dun in 1954. There the theme was the role of forested areas in the land economy and economic development of a country.
In reporting on the Fourth World Forestry Congress, the FAO said: "There are few countries in which production in the forest is limited to timber alone. It is in fact by no means certain that specialized single-purpose land use, particularly on a permanent basis, is ideal. In some social and economic environments, sach specialization would certainly not help towards reaching the desired goal of deriving the maximum
yield from the land for the benefit ot the community as a whole. This the Congress implicitly recognized by accepting the principle of 'multiple use' of the forest. "
Multiple use is a familiar term to foresters at the United States. Its meaning was symbolized on this stage in the opening pa{;eant yesterday. Pictured were the five major uses of forest land -- for wood production, use as watersheds, grazing by domestic livestock, the forest as habitat for wild game and fish, and use of the forest for outdoor recreation.
Although "multiple use" may not be a customary term everywhere, the practice of multiple use has been long established in some inten-sively managed forests of other countries. Later in this Congress you will hear papers reviewing multiple use here and in other countries and in various kinds of ownerships. Some of the Congress tours will enable
As FAO noted, management of land to serve as many uses as pos-sible is everywhere becoming more essential. When there is abundance of natural resources and few people, there is little need for multiple-purpose land use. But when increasingly large numbers of people must rely on an unchanging or diminishing resource base, they must make the most effective use of the resources they have. Multiple use of re-newable land resources thus is a necessity born of scarcity of resources and abundance of people who need these resources.
Competition for the use of land is growing throughout the world. This competition will not decrease but will increase as world popula-tions increase. World population is now about 3 billion persons. It has increased as much in the last two decades as was the total growth of
population up to the year 1750. In 1800 my own country had 5 million people. One hundred years later we had 76 million. In the next 50 years our population doubled. The census now being made in the United States indicates an increase in our population from 5 million to 180 million people in 160 years. And U.S. population is expected to nearly double again by the end of this century.
It will not surprise you who come from older countries to hear that in the U.S.A. we are now feeling the impact of a dynamic popula-tion growth on a static land base. Older countries already have had this experience. A few countries represented here today still have abundant natural resources, more than adequate for their present populations. Inevitably, however, as their populations increase, their need for resources will increase, and competition for the use of land in those countries will become more intense.
As the people of the world become city dwellers, they tend to lose sight of their dependence on natural resources. Most of these are prod-ucts of the land. My forefathers and yours lived close to the land. They knew their dependence on the land for food, for clothing, for shelter, and for fuel to warm the shelter.
To these basic necessities of life we must add today our dependence on natural resources for all the raw materials of industry. The history of mankind is the history of man's competition for land, of man's
struggle to obtain adequate natural resources -- and of man's over-utilization of resources.
I realize that these are facts well known to this audience. Foresters are trained to take a long look ahead. We also are required to live close to the land. Thus we understand the dependence of people on natural resources produced by the land. We are aware, too, that our steward-ship of a large part of the earth's surface imposes upon us great re-sponsibility to obtain full productivity of these lands for the benefit of our fellow man, whom we serve. This is why we, the foresters of
many nations, propose to dedicate our discussions at this Congress to sharing our knowledge and experience so that we may improve policies and practices relating to wise use of forest lands.
The wise use of forest lands, however, cannot be considered in a vacuum. It must be considered in relationship to the fullest possible yield of all the products and services that forest land provides for people.
In past years many of us have thought that we had enough land in forest in the U.S.A. to meet all foreseeable needs for wood and other products and services of forest lands. Today we are not so sure. We think our earlier estimates were too conservative. We are now genuinely concerned. Much forest land is being taken for other uses. Competition for land is becoming intense in the United States.
For example, wherever you may travel in this country you will see great expansion of urban areas. This is taking land which heretofore was included in our estimates of available forest area.
Superhighways, new airports, transmission lines for electrical power, oil, and natural gas, and construction of dams and reservoirs are taking many millions of acres of forest land. Forest land will con-tinue to be taken for national-defense purposes.
Large pressures are developing to set aside additional forest lands exclusively for recreational use. Conversion of land from forest to food production, inevitable in the next few decades, will include
sub-stantial portions of our most productive forest land.
The diversion of forest lands to other purposes could, in another 40 years, total about one-fourth of the present U.S. commercial forest land area, equivalent to one-third of our timber-growing capacity.
I do not condemn single use, primary use, one-purpose use, or exclusive use of land for one major purpose by whatever name may be applied. Some of these individual uses are as essential for the benefit of people as is the use of forest land for multiple purposes. For some purposes, superhighways, for example, the land obviously must be de-voted exclusively to that use. There is nothing we can do to make such land serve more than that one purpose.
The consequences, however, of large-scale diversion of forest land to single-use purposes are now so serious in the United States as to justify careful consideration. Every acre of forest land diverted to non-forest use adds to the lands remaining in non-forest an additional burden of
productivity. By the end of this century, a short 40 years away, need for wood in the U.S.A. will be double our requirements today. We will
be hard pressed to meet future wood requirements even if no more of our present forest land is diverted to other uses.
In addition to meeting greatly expanded requirements for wood production, forest land management in the United States faces greatly increased demands for the other products and services which forests provide. For example, exclusive of Alaska, more than one-half of all the water of the western United States originates on the national forests, although these publicly owned forests comprise only one-fifth of the total area in this part of our country. Maintenance of a forest cover on this land protects water quality. Protection alone, however, will not produce the large increases in quantity of water needed by greatly in-creased numbers of people, by agriculture, and by industry. These requirements have doubled in the last 20 years and are expected to double again in another 18. To increase water yield, manipulation of the forest cover is essential. If your tours take you to some of our experimental forests, you will see how the methods used in timber
harvesting can serve also to increase water yield.
Many coniferous U.S. forests and intermingled grasslands are used for grazing of domestic livestock. In this country, as in yours, forests also provide the habitat for many kinds of wild game. These uses are increasing.
Recreational use of national forests has tripled in the past 12 years.
Use of forest land for these several purposes is nothing new. In every country and for centuries forest land has been so used.
What is new is the rapidly growing awareness of the need to apply multiple-use management more widely and more intensively. This comes not only from the obvious need to make forest lands more fully useful to the people but also to lessen the pressures to divert forest lands from a combination of uses to some one exclusive use. In most instances forest land is not fully serving the people if used exclusively for a purpose which could also be achieved in combination with several other uses.
Multiple use of forest lands in the United States did not spring into full flower overnight. While the term has become commonplace only in the last two decades, the practice of multiple use in the United States goes back to the origin of the national forests more than half a century ago. National-forest policies from the very first have emphasized resource use. The first Forest Service manual, significantly termed the "Use Book, " recognized a multiplicity of uses. Even before this, the Forest Service had been instructed by the Secretary of Agriculture that national-forest land was to be devoted to its most productive use
for the permanent good of the whole people, that all of the resources were for use, and that decisions would always be made from the stand-point of the greatest good of the greatest number in the long run. These instructions have constituted Forest Service doctrine from the begin-ning. They are the genesis of multiple use.
Full recognition of the multiple-use principle of land management was given by the Congress of the United States about two months ago. The Act of June 12, 1960, directs that the renewable resources of the federally owned national forests, some 181 million acres, shall be managed for sustained yield and multiple use. General legislative au-thority to manage these public properties for use of their watershed, timber, forage, outdoor recreation, andwildlife and fish resources was provided many years ago. The significance of the recent le'jislative enactment is, first, legislative recognition of multiple-use and sus-tained-yield principles of management; second, a clear-cut directive to apply these principles on the national forests; and third, naming the basic renewable resources for which the national forests are established and administered and assuring them equal priority under law.
Although this law applies to only one class of publicly owned lands, the principles involved have wider application. On the federally owned national forests the objective is to meet the needs of all the people. On State lands, the objective would be to best meet the needs of the citizens of that State. On privately owned lands the objective would be to best meet the needs of the owner. He would express those needs in whatever terms he might choose. These private-owner criteria usually tend to be economic ones.
The Act spells out definitions of multiple use and sustained yield as these principles are to be applied to the national forests. Since the general objective is to manage these lands so that they best meet the needs of the American people, the Act and the accompanyin; legisla-tive reports require that the five basic renewable resources shall be utilized in the combination that will best serve the people. Emphasis is on utilization, not preservation.
The legislative definition requires that management decisions are to be based on the relative values of the various resources and not necessarily on economic factors only. Intangible values which are difficult to express accurately in monetary terms also are to be con-sidered. The definition does not require maximum production for all resources or for any one resource.
The legislative history of this Act directs that in making applica-tion of the principle of multiple use to a specific area equal considera-tion is to be given all of the various renewable resource uses, but this does not mean using every acre for all of the various uses. Some areas
will be managed for less than all uses, but multiple-use management requires that there be more than two uses.
An essential of multiple use is positive, affirmative management of the several uses involved. Haphazard occurrence of these uses on some particular tract of land does not constitute multiple-use manage-ment. Multiple use is not a passive practice. On the contrary, it is the deliberate and carefully planned integration of various uses so as to interfere with each other as little as possible and to supplement each other as much as possible. Multiple use is by no means an assemblage of single uses. It requires conscious, coordinated management of the various renewable resources, each with the other, without impairment of the productivity of the land.
Multiple use must be over a period long enough to experience the cycle of the seasons; that is, a year or more. It does not require that all uses involved must be practiced simultaneously at the sarne instant.
Size of area is a key factor in multiple-use management. Applica-tion must be to areas large enough to give sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and conditions. On the national forests we normally think in terms of our smallest administra-tive units, which at present average about 200, 000 acres. On large vate holdings similar acreages might be applicable, but for small pri-vate ownerships the unit areas would, of course, be much smaller. They might be as small as 40 acres.
Multiple-use management of the renewable surface resources ob-viously requires control of all uses on the same land by one authority. Such management is not possible if several coordinate authorities are each trying to direct different uses on the same land. Central decision making is a prerequisite.
In brief, multiple-use management as we practice it on the national forests requires us to consider all of the five basic renewable
re-sources, although on any specific area we may not have all of them in operation at any one time. It obliges us to coordinate these various uses even though doing this results in less than fullest possible produc-tivity of some uses. The requirement for sustained yield applies to all renewable resources and is aimed both at getting a high level of produc-tivity and at preventing over -use of any resource or impairment of pro-ductivity of the land.
Multiple use is not a panacea. It has limitations, but it also has overriding advantages. I am convinced of the distinct advantages of applying multiple-use management to the great bulk of our forest land.
First of all multiple use helps to overcome problems of scarcity. It tends to reduce or resolve conflicts of interest and competition for resources. It promotes balance in resource use. It impedes the ascend-ancy of single-interest pressures. Properly applied, multiple use in-volves consideration of both esthetic and economic criteria in arriving at management decisions. It offers balance between materialistic and nonmaterialistic values.
Multiple use properly understood and properly applied is now, and will continue to be, the best management for most of the publicly owned forest lands of the United States. It will gradually become the best management for many of the large private holdings. It will always have less applicability to smaller private properties, but many of these own-ers will in time find it to their own best interest to practice some
degree of multiple use.
Finally, the overwhelming advantage of multiple use is that through it foresters,can make forest lands contribute their utmost to society.
The basic purpose of forest conservation is a social one -- to satisfy the intangible as well as the materialistic needs of people. In this way, I believe foresters can make a major contribution to human betterment and perhaps even to world peace.
And now a closing word to you as eminent leaders in a respected profession. Multiple-use forest management is a challenge to foresters to broaden their vision. We must be forest land managers instead of primarily timber growers. The thinking of foresters is believed to be preoccupied with timber and dominated by silviculture. To some extent this criticism is justified. But multiple use, when properly applied, eliminates this bias. The future success of foresters and the contribu-tion of the forestry profession to the welfare of our countries may de-pend on our response to the n.eed for a balanced use of forest land re-sources. May we now and always perform in the best interests of the countries we serve.
Nth WORLD FORESTRY CONGRESS
Cinquieme CONGRES FORESTIER MONDIAL
Quinto CONGRESO MUNDIAL DE SILVICULTURA
Seattle, Washington • August 29-September 10, 1960
Gs/P/13/ii-u.s.A.
MULTIPLE-USE MANAGEMENT ON THE NATIONAL FORESTS
OF THE UNITED STATES
by
Edward P. Cliff
Assistant Chief, Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture
My assignment is to discuss the application and opportunities for multiple-use forestry in large publicly owned forests. I shall confine my remarks to the discussion of multiple-use management on the na-tional forests here in the United States. Dr. McArdle, in his keynote address in the First General Session of this Congress, defined multiple use as it is applied by the Forest Service in this country. I shall tell you how these principles are applied in the management of the national forests, outline the planning processes that are involved, and give you examples of how the various resource uses are coordinated on the ground. As a background for this discussion I will give you a brief description of the national-forest system, the major resources, the legal and administrative background for multiple-use management, and the evolutionary development of the management system to the present.
The National Forests
-Their Resources and Use
There are 151 national forests located in 39 States and Puerto Rico. Within the boundaries of these national forests are about 220 million acres of land. Of this area, 181 million acres are federally owned. The other 39 million acres consist of intermingled privately owned lands, which are not controlled or managed by the Federal Gov-ernment. The Forest Service provides fire protection services on much of this privately owned land under cooperative agreement. It also coop-erates with private owners in other ways but the management respon-sibility rests with the owners of the land.
The national forests, as you can well imagine, vary widely in topography and climate and contain a vast variety of vegetation and
the Caribbean and the Coastal Plains of the southern United States to the islands, fiords, and precipitous mountains of southeastern Alaska. They are strategically located on practically all the important water-sheds of this country. They blanket the Sierra Nevada Mountains, the Cascades, and the Rocky Mountains. They are located in the coast ranges of the West, the high plateaus and desert ranges in the Great Basin, in the Black Hills on the western edge of the Great Plains, in the Ozark Mountains of Missouri and Arkansas, in the Appalachians, and in the Lake States. Practically all the major forest types and the commercial tree species found in the United States are represented in these national forests.
Many of you may be surprised to learn that large segments of the national forests are not forested. Substantial areas within the national forests of the southwestern United States are covered with grass and desert shrub vegetation. Those in southern California are vegetated largely with chaparral. The dominant cover of those in Nevada and
parts of Utah is sagebrush, pinyon-juniper, and related plants with commercial timber species growing only at the higher elevations. In many of the national forests are nonforested openings such as meadows, open grasslands, mountain peaks and ridges above timberline, and areas deforested by fire and by efforts to convert some of the land to agricultural use. These nonforested lands were included in the national forests primarily because of their watershed values. They have other values as well, such as important scenic and recreation values and the production of forage for livestock and big-game animals.
Of the 181 million acres of national-forest land, 84.8 million acres are classed as commercial forests. There are about 55 million acres of noncommercial forest land which support tree growth, but which are principally valuable for watershed protection, scenery, and cover for game animals and birds. The national forests contain some of the most rugged and scenic country in North America; the value of this kind of land for outdoor recreation is great.
Timber
The United States, including coastal Alaska, has 488. 6 million
acres of commercial forest land--land suitable for growing continuous crops of timber of merchantable size and quality and not reserved for some other purpose. These lands now support some 2,056 billion board feet of sawtimber. The 84.8 million acres of commercial forest land in the national forests contain 765 billion board feet of sawtimber—more than one-third of the total sawtimber in this country. (These figures are from the Forest Service Timber Resource Review.) In the western national forests, which were reserved from the public domain, the timber is predominantly old growth. The timber in the national forests east of the Mississippi is predominantly second growth because these
areas were largely acquired by purchase of private lands that had already been cut over.
Forage
About 61 million acres of the national forests, largely in the West, are grazed by livestock. Most of this grazing is permitted on the open grasslands, semidesert lands, mountain meadows, the more open-grown forest types such as ponderosa pine, and in areas above timber-line. Some grazing also occurs in the pine forests in the southeastern States. These forage producing lands are grazed by 6 million head of sheep and cattle including calves and lambs. Grazin.g is permitted
largely during the summer months although some livestock graze year-long on the nation.al forests located in the Southwest.
Water
Virtually every acre in the national-forest system is important as a water-producing area or, as in the more arid regions, to protect streams and reservoirs against sedimentation. To illustrate the im-portance of the national forests as water-yielding lands, the western national forest comprise 21 percent of the area of the 11 western States, receive about 31 percent of the total precipitation, and furnish 53 percent of the annual streamflow. About two-thirds of the water used for irrigation in the West comes from these lands. Nearly all the major hydroelectric developments in the West depend in some degree on water from the national forests. Some 1,800 cities and towns are dependent upon these lands as a source of water for municipal and in-dustrial purposes. The national forests in the East occupy only a small part of the land area. Most of them, however, are in the headwaters of major streams where the amount of precipitation is high and, there-fore, have particular importance as sources of rivers.
Recreation
People visit the national forests for many kinds of recreation--to camp, picnic, hunt, fish, hike, swim, climb mountains, take pictures, study nature, enjoy scenery, ski, play in the snow, and find a cool place to rest. In 1959 there were 81-1/2 million recreation visits to the na-tional forests. Recreana-tional use is increasing very rapidly and it is predicted that by 1975 there will be 230 million visits and 600 million by the year 2000. This recreation use is occurring in all sections of the country and on all kinds of national-forest land. Much of it is water oriented; that is, it is located on or in close proximity to lakes and streams. In the national forests are 81,000 miles of fishing streams and 2.8 million acres of lakes and reservoirs. Hunting and fishing are important and fast-growing kinds of outdoor recreation.
Wildlife
In the United States it is traditional that every citizen has the right to hunt or fish, if he obtains the necessary license and complies with State laws. Fishing and hunting on the national forests are regulated by State laws. The Forest Service and the States have formal agreements that clarify each agency's responsibility in wildlife management and provide for the integration of management objectives and practices. All together the national forests comprise the most important area of land in this country that is available to the public for hunting and fishing.
They provide the habitat for about one-third of all the big-game animals in the United States. This includes four-fifths of the moose, elk, and grizzly bear, and nearly two-thirds of the mule deer, black bear, and bighorn sheep. These forests are also inhabited by many species of smaller animals and birds--both game and nongame.
Minerals
In addition to the renewable natural resources, the national forests contain important mineral resources which are available for exploita-tion and development under laws authorizing the disposal of minerals. The general mining laws apply to metalliferous minerals on national-forest lands created from the public domain. Citizens may locate and enter mining claims on the basis of a valid discovery of a valuable mineral and may develop or patent such mining lands in accordance with the provisions of the mining laws. In 1959 there were some
1,400, 000 mining claims upon the national forests held under the
pro-visions of the general mining laws. The Forest Service has the right or is obtaining the right to manage the surface resources on most of these claims. Several statutes provide for the leasing to individuals and com-panies the right to explore for and exploit such nonmetalliferous min-erals as oil, gas, coal, oil-shale, potassium, sodium, phosphate, and sulphur on national-forest lands. The lessee pays to the Government a rental and royalty as determined by appraisal of the minerals or by competitive bids. The leases generally contain terms which require the lease holder to do everything practicable to protect the surface re-sources and restore those which are damaged. There are now nearly 12, 000 mineral leases on the national forests covering approximately 13 million acres.
Other Uses
Many parts of the national forests are suitable for private uses, which may be authorized by special-use permits if such uses can be justified and do not conflict with uses of greater public importance. Permits specify the terms under which the use is authorized. When land in national forests is used for private or commercial purposes a rental in keeping with the value of the use is charged. Public or
semipublic uses usually are permitted without charge, or for a nominal fee. Approximately 58,500 special-use permits were in force in 1959 covering 3.5 million acres and a wide variety of activities, such as ditches, cultivation, summer homes, rights-of-way for power lines, pipe lines, canals, and roads. Public-service uses as for resorts, hotels, stores, organization sites, ski lifts, and boat docks are also permitted under special requirements as to the type of improvements to be constructed, the kind of service to be offered, and public safety.
Multiple Use in National
-ForestHistory
I have been trying to give you a picture of the vast scope of the national forests, the variety of natural resources they contain, and the uses to which they are put so that you will have an appreciation of the problem of managing these resources and uses in an orderly way. Necessarily I have painted with broad strokes. Actually, there is an infinite variety of combinations of uses and resource values. That is why multiple-use management takes different forms in different places, depending on public needs and the nature and availability of the re-sources in each locality. The general principles of multiple-use man-agement are the same wherever applied on the n.ational forests but in local application the use patterns vary greatly. The mission of the Forest Service is to manage the various renewable surface resources of this vast area of land so that they are utilized in the combination which will best meet the needs of the American people.
"Forest Reserves"
The principles of multiple-use and sustained yield have been inter-woven into the fabric of Forest Service policy, legislative authority, and management programs ever since the establishment of the national forests. The original national forests were established in the western
United States from unreserved and unappropriated public lands com-monly referred to as the public domain. In 1891, Congress passed a law authorizing the President of the United States to set apart "Forest Reservations" from the public domain. Lands were withdrawn from disposition into private ownership but no provision was made for their administration and use. Initially they were under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior. In order to unlock these resources and make them available for public use, the so-called Forest Administra-tion Act of June 4, 1897, was enacted. This Act gave the Secretary of the Interior broad authority to regulate the occupancy and use of what had become popularly known as the "Forest Reserves." It specified that they were established to "improve and protect" the forests "or for the purpose of securing favorable conditions of water flows, and to fur-nish a continuous supply of timber for the use and necessities of citizens of the United States." The law contains specific authority for the sale of
