Senator NEUBERGER. I also wish to emphasize that our invitations to testify were sent without regard to political affiliation, to the size of the economic unit which is cutting timber, and so forth. We expressly requested all views regardless of what they are or whether they agree with our own or not.

We have a long list of witnesses and desire to hear everyone who has something to say. Therefore, it will be helpful to me if statements are confined to the subject matter under consideration. In the event any witness does not have sufficient time to complete his presentation, he will be afforded every opportunity to submit his views in writing before the hearing record is closed.

I believe that we should begin by hearing from the Management Specialists, Mr. Tom Watters and Mr. Eugene Favell; and, following their presentation, I will call upon members of the Klamath Tribe, beginning with representatives from the tribal council.

Mr. Watters, I think it would be helpful if you would give the committee a résumé of the activities of your group over the past year with particular emphasis on the status of the appraisal of tribal assets and the proposed plans for the management of the residual tribal property after the election has taken place by which the Klamaths will decide whether to withdraw from membership, or remain in the tribe. Mr. Watters, I understand that Mr. Favell is in the hospital. Mr. WATTERS. That is correct, Senator.

Senator NEUBERGER. I would like to say before you begin to testify that all of us--and I know I speak for Senator Murray and others from our very pleasant personal association with Mr. Favell-wish him a very complete and early recovery, and I hope you will transmit that message to him.

Mr. WATTERS. I certainly will.

Senator NEUBERGER. I want to say this before you commence presentation of your statement. As chairman of the Indian Affairs Subcommittee, and prior to that as a member, I have been very favorably impressed by the conscientious manner in which you and Mr. Favell have approached this very great problem. I regretted very much when some members of the House Indian Affairs Subcommittee made against you and Mr. Favell earlier this year what I regard as a very unfair personal attack.

We are very pleased to have you here today and we welcome the presentation of your views.

STATEMENT OF T. B. WATTERS, CHAIRMAN, MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS

Mr. WATTERS. Thank you very much, Senator. Since we presented our position on what we thought should be done to correct the deficiencies as we saw them in the original Public Law 587, we presented our thinking to you a year ago at your committee meeting here, and since that time we have seen no reason to change our minds on the position we took at that time, and, therefore, this document that I am submitting has nothing to do with the policy of amendments. It is simply a progress report to bring you up to date.

The primary purpose of this report is to outline the recent progress that has been made in the execution of our duties under provisions

of section 5 of the Klamath Termination Act. A complete statement of our activities prior to May of 1957 is contained in our letter of May 14, 1957, addressed to Chairman Clair Engle of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Inasmuch as that letter has been printed in the official record of the hearings held by the House subcommittee during February and March of 1957, we do not intend, at this time, to make a detailed statement concerning the activities which have been covered in that letter. However, the letter contained several facts which should be emphasized by restatement. These are as follows:

1. Although we have suggested ways in which we believe the Klamath termination law can be amended in order to better protect the interests of both the Klamath Indian people and the community in which most of them shall continue to live, we have not deliberately delayed, in any way, the execution of our primary responsibilities required by the statute and by our contract with the Secretary of the Interior.

2. The execution of the provisions of the law is not nearly as simple as it might appear to be to those who are not closely in contact with the actual administration of those provisions.

3. Most of the work which we have undertaken to date has had no established precedent that could be used as a pattern. The very fact that our work establishes such a pattern that may be followed in the terminal programs for other timbered reservations makes it even more obligatory that errors in procedure be discovered and eliminated. The failure of our present work, either from a conservation or from a social viewpoint, might well turn the tide of public opinion against the entire Indian termination program.

4. Any faults in the basic provisions of the law, or in the execution of those basic provisions, will be regarded by the Klamath Indian people as a breach of the Federal Government's trust responsibility. Members of the tribe have told this committee at previous hearings that: "The United States makes a mistake and gives the Indian another bad break *** it will be possible to sue Uncle Sam." It is apparent that great care must be exercised before any major steps are taken. Even then it will only be possible to minimize the chances of future litigation.

We have emphasized the foregoing facts because they must be recognized and thoroughly understood in order to properly evaluate the progress that has been made under the law.

Our activities since the early part of May 1957 have been related principally to three of our major duties. These are, first, the review of the appraisal report for the Klamath tribal property; second, the completion of the initial draft and the first revision of the tentative plan of management for tribal members who elect to remain in a management program; and, third, preparatory work necessary for the conduct of the tribal election. Because of the importance of each of these activities we will elaborate on the recent progress that has been made on each.

The complete appraisal report, prepared under contract by the Western Timber Services, was not available for review until May 13, 1957. Prior to that time, however, parts of the report had been

98089-57- -2

received and, in fact, certain corrections had already been completed by that time.

The initial review of the appraisal report would have been a formidable undertaking had our office tried to conduct it alone. The complete report is contained in 5 separate volumes with a total of some 1,150 pages. The information contained therein is supported by statistical data which has required approximately 3,500 standard-size IBM sheets to reproduce.

Because of the size of the review project, it was conducted as a joint project by the Portland area office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and personnel of our office. Additional help was furnished by employees of the Klamath Indian Agency. Altogether over 150 man-days were spent in making the initial review of the appraisal, and at least that much time has been devoted to subsequent checks of items contained in the appraisal.

As might be expected in an appraisal of such magnitude, numerous errors were discovered which would need to be corrected before the appraisal could be used for its intended purpose. Accordingly, acting with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Interior, the appraisal report, in its entirety, was returned to the appraisers for the necessary corrections.

Unfortunately, some of the errors which were discovered in the appraisal had been made in the basic data and in the fundamental procedures used in the report. In order to correct these errors it was necessary for the appraisers to rewrite almost the entire document. Thus, the correction of the appraisal became a lengthy, time-consuming process which had not been anticipated in the earlier planning of the work to be performed.

During the time that the appraisers were making the necessary corrections, Public Law 85-132 was enacted, extending the period of time in which the sales of economic units for withdrawing members would be accomplished. Because of the extended sales priod it was considered necessary to obtain a revision in the appraised values to reflect those values if the property were to be sold during the longer period of time than had previously been considered available for the sales. In order to obtain this revision in values, an additional work order was executed after obtaining the advance approval of the Secretary of the Interior. The additional work order calls for the completion of the revisions by October 21, 1957.

Immediately before starting our work on the initial review of the appraisal report we had completed the first draft of the tentative plan of management for the members of the Klamath Tribe who were to elect to remain under a management program. An advance copy of this plan was transmitted to the Secretary of the Interior on May 9, 1957. Then, in order to expedite the completion of an acceptable plan, our staff forester spent the week of May 20 to 24 in a review of the tentative plan with personnel of the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Washington, D. C. This review, and subsequent informal discussions with departmental representatives, have resulted in the making of several changes in the tentative plan. These changes were completed and copies of the first revision of the tentative plan were transmitted to the Secretary of the Interior on August 31, 1957. At the same time, the proposed tentative plan was made available for the

study of tribal members. We have been advised that the tentative plan will not be formally approved by the Secretary of the Interior until tribal members have had sufficient opportunity to thoroughly study it and to suggest changes which they consider to be desirable. Another of the principal duties which we are required to perform under provisions of section 5 of the statute is the conduct of the election of tribal mmebers to determine those who wish to withdraw from the tribe. Already much work has been as the basis for the conduct of an orderly election. In this respect, both the appraisal of tribal property and the preparation of the management plan must be considered as basic requirements for the conduct of the election. A general knowledge of both are essential in order for tribal members to understand the merits of each of the two possible choices which they may make.

In addition to the time that we have spent on the appraisal and on the preparation of the management plan, we have devoted much time to studying the mechanics to be followed in conducting the election. Although the general procedures of the election have been outlined in a letter of instructions from the Secretary of the Interior, the detailed implementation of those instructions will require intensive preparatory work. Also, in order to furnish the electors with as much advance information as is currently available, a relatively detailed information bulletin has been prepared. A copy of this bulletin will be mailed to each eligible elector as soon as it has been approved for distribution by the Secretary of the Interior.

Even while carrying out the duties required by the law we have been aware that the full execution of those duties may eventually result in serious injury to the economy of the upper Klamath Basin. We have also been aware that the present law jeopardizes the longterm welfare of many of the Klamath Indian people, most of whom have indicated a desire to remain in the local community. The social implications of the law alone should warrant positive steps being taken to prevent the law from being carried out as it is now written. We have believed that it was our responsibility to bring the possible detrimental effects of the law to the attention of the Subcommittees on Indian Affairs. We have believed, further, that in doing so we should suggest amendments to the law that would provide adequate safeguards. We have recommended Federal purchase of the Klamath tribal property as being the best means for providing such safeguards. Although our original proposal for Federal purchase of the Klamath tribal property was first discussed publicly as long ago as the hearing conducted by this Senate subcommittee on May 18, 1956, we still believe that Federal acquisition of the Klamath tribal property presents the only method by which it will be possible to accomplish termination without jeopardizing, to some extent, either the interests of the Klamath people or those of the community.

In conclusion we restate what we have included in our letter of May 14, 1957, to Chairman Clair Engle of the House Interior Committee. We believe that our primary responsibilities, as required by the statute, have been accomplished as rapidly as possible to be accomplished in an orderly manner under existing conditions. In carrying out these responsibilities we became convinced that the sales program required by the law may prove to be detrimental to the long

term interests of the Klamath Indians and the local community. Had we allowed these to develop without bringing them to the attention of the Subcommittees on Indian Affairs, then we rightfully could have been accused of neglect of our responsibilities-not only our responsibilities as management specialists, but also our responsibilities as citizens of the United States.

Senator NEUBERGER. Thank you very much, Mr. Watters, we appreciate your statement. There are several questions I would like to ask you because you have been chairman, as I understand it, of the Management Specialists since their formation; is that correct?

Mr. WATTERS. That is correct.

Senator NEUBERGER. From what date would that stem?

Mr. WATTERS. May 10, I think.

Senator NEUBERGER. Of what year?

Mr. WATTERS. Of—I think it was 1955.

Senator NEUBERGER. In other words, you have now been chairman of the Management Specialists nearly 22 years. The meat of the coconut seems to me to be this question: From your experience during that period with this very grave and urgent problem, do you see any feasible alternative to Federal purchase?

Mr. WATTERS. Well, we have discussed it with everybody that was willing to discuss it with us, or wanted to discuss it with us. We have made the statement that we are still in favor of free enterprise, and if anyone can show us where this job can be done under free enterprise and the Indians still get their fair share, we will be forever thankful. We have no one who has been able to do that, or even attempted to do it.

Senator NEUBERGER. In other words, and I return to this question because I want you to know that your answers are going to be studied very carefully by members of the Senate Interior Committee, and in fact by all the Members of the United States Senate if this legislation reaches the floor of the Senate: Has there been presented to you during that period and in the discussions which you have mentioned, any reasonable or feasible alternative to Federal purchase?

Mr. WATTERS. Well, no. There have been discussions, but no plan that I recall right now.

Senator NEBUERGER. Thank you, Mr. Watters. I want to ask you several other questions regarding the procedures in Public Law 587. As presently written, Public Law 587 provides a very limited time for you and your associates to dispose of this vast supply of timber; is that correct?

Mr. WATTERS. The 2-year extension?

Senaor NEUBERGER. No, I mean under Public Law 587 you have a very limited time in which to dispose of the timber.

Mr. WATTERS. Well, yes. The original law would not have pro

vided sufficient time.

Senator NEUBERGER. There would not have been enough time?
Mr. WATTERS. No. That is, it was impossible.

Senator NEUBERGER. Now, even under the extension which we were very fortunate to get through Congress, as you know from your own visits there, even under the extension, the time in which to dispose of these timber assets is very limited; is that correct?

Mr. WATTERS. That is correct.