« ZurückWeiter »
although you may be only speaking personally to one member of the Indian Affairs Subcommittee, you will be talking through the record to all the members of the subcommittee, to all the members of the Senate Interior Committee, and to all the Members of the United States Senate.
These hearings will be printed and they will be made available to all Members of the Senate and to the general public. They will be present and available when the Senate Indian Affairs Subcommittee considers this bill, when the Senate Interior Committee considers this bill, and should it reach the floor of the United States Senate, which is at least my hope, all the Members of the Senate will have these hearings available. So anything that you say on either side of this issue, or even if you are neutral on the issue, is certainly going to have a very profound impact on the decision which is reached by the Congress of the United States.
I wish to point out that we have had what in my estimation has been a very useful and valuable hearing at Klamath Falls. The chairman of the subcommittee separated the hearings at Klamath Falls and at Portland for one very important reason. We felt that at Klamath Falls we had an opportunity to afford a full chance for expression and discussion to the Indian tribal members of the Klamath Tribe and to the general community at Klamath Falls who, of course, are profoundly affected by what happens in this situation.
However, there is, in addition, a statewide interest in this question, and we felt it might be of greater convenience to those people who have a statewide interest if we held 1 day of hearings at Portland, which is more nearly accessible to the people at the State Capitol and the people who belong to statewide organizations which generally have their headquarters either in Salem or in Portland.
I just wish to comment briefly on one aspect of the full-day hearing which was held in Klamath Falls. At least so far as the chairman of the subcommittee is concerned, the information which surprised me the most, and I am sure it will surprise my colleagues the most, was essentially this: We had testimony from a representative of leaders in the Klamath Falls business and commercial community, that they actually did not know what was in the bill which became Public Law 587 at the time that that bill reached final passage in the Congress and was signed by the President.
These people pointed out to our subcommittee, and for the record, that when the bill reached final passage, it was in a form different than that on which hearings had been held in Washington and in the Klamath Falls community. They said that had they been aware of the contents of the bill at that time, they would have opposed it. This was in answer to questions from the Chair as to why they had not either opposed the bill in the Congress or urged its veto by the President when it reached the White House.
For example, I should just like to read again for the record two paragraphs from page 4 of the testimony submitted to us on behalf of the Klamath County Chamber of Commerce. I am going to read these paragraphs because to me they are profoundly significant, and I am sure that they will be significant to be repeated for the record and to the people who are today in the hearing room in Portland. I shall now read these two paragraphs:
Unfortunately, the bill which was passed by Congress bore little resemblance, insofar as the disposition of the tribal assets was concerned, with Senate bill 2745 upon which hearing was held in Klamath County and which was studied and discussed by the chamber and by the people of this county.
The Congress substituted for section 5 of Senate bill 2745, the present section 5 of Public Law 587 which eliminated the period of further study and planning, and substituted a crash program for the sale of tribal assets. This was done without the knowledge of the people of Klamath County. In fact, the Klamath County Chamber of Commerce was unaware that this amendment had been made until after the bill had been enacted and signed by the President. There was absolutely no advance warning ever given the people of this county that Congress intended to make this change and radically depart from the bill upon which hearing had been held in this county.
Testimony of a very parallel nature, although not in writing so I can repeat it here, came from the representatives of the Indians. In fact, the spokesman for the Indians said to us that they were so profoundly disappointed in certain aspects of Public Law 587 that, should the Federal purchase bill fail, it was their hope that the termination law could be repealed. However, the Chair wishes to say that while he is not a legal or constitutional expert, he realizes that certain very grave legal and constitutional difficulties would impose themselves to any such solution.
It is entirely possible that certain rights have vested and, therefore, it is to all intents and purposes impossible to repeal termination. In other words an egg, having been broken, cannot be put back in the shell. Therefore, we are confining ourselves today to S. 2047, to any support of it, to any opposition to it, and to any suggestions for changes in it.
S. 2047, I have repeated earlier, is the bill introduced by me for Senator Morse and myself on May 9, 1957, to provide for acquisition by the Federal Government of the tribal lands of the Klamath Tribe of Indians.
In conclusion, I want to express my very deep appreciation to everybody who has cooperated in these hearings and particularly to the legislative interim committee created by the Oregon State legislative session of 1957 to deal with Indian problems confronting the State of Oregon. This committee consists of members of both the senate and house of the State legislature and members from the general public appointed by the Honorable Robert D. Holmes, Governor of the State of Oregon. The majority of the members of the interim committee attended our session in Klamath Falls and then went with us on October 3 for a very valuable and very informative tour of the Klamath Indian Reservation.
In company with the State of Oregon legislative interim committee, we saw some of the vast virgin stands of ponderosa pine belonging to the Indians. We saw examples of both prudent and imprudent cutting which had occurred in the past on Indian lands, and we saw the very extensive marsh belonging to the tribe on which waterfowl nest and breed and rest on their very inspiring flight along the Pacific flyway between the Canadian arctic and the Tropics, and this tour which lasted from early in the morning until late in the day impressed upon us the very great responsibility which is ours.
So I am extremely grateful to the legislative interim committee for the time they have taken and the interest they have shown, and
we are going to have a representative of the interim committee present a brief statement later in this hearing here at Portland,
The people who are participating with the chairman of the subcommittee today are on my left, Mr. James H. Gamble, chief clerk of the Indian Affairs Subcommittee of the United States Senate, which is a subcommittee of the Senate Interior Committee; and on my right, Mr. Robert Wolf, who is forester with the Indian Affairs Subcommittee and is on loan to the Senate Interior Committee from the General Accounting Office. We also have asked to sit with us as a guest an individual who has been extremely helpful and valuable to us, Mr. Earle Wilcox, who is the forester associated with the Management Specialists. The Management Specialists are the group of custodians of tribal assets who are charged with the liquidation of these assets under Public Law 587, who were appointed by Secretary of the Interior McKay to handle this very important matter.
I wish to thank the Management Specialists for the very fine degree of assistance and cooperation which we have had from them, and I wish particularly to thank Mr. Wilcox for arranging the tour of the Klamath Reservation, which I know was most useful to the subcommittee chairman and the members of the legislative interim committee.
Our first witness today will be Mr. Charles Brooks, who is the assistant to the Honorable Wayne Morse, senior Senator from Oregon, in charge of Senator Morse's Oregon office, and Mr. Brooks will present a statement today on behalf of Senator Morse. Mr. Brooks, we are very pleased to hear from you at this time.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES BROOKS, ASSISTANT TO HON. WAYNE MORSE, UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
Mr. CHARLES Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Morse appreciates the courtesy of the chairman in allowing me to present. the statement for him. He regrets that he is unable to be here in person. I will proceed to read his statement into the record.
“The opportunity to appear before you during this hearing on the Klamath termination legislation is most welcome because the subject is of great importance to the Klamath people and the people of the State and Nation. My remarks shall be brief in order that the people of Oregon may have ample opportunities to present their views to this committee.
“I am privileged to be a cosponsor of my colleague's bill, S. 2047. I say "privileged' with the highest sincerity because I am proud that Senator Neuberger has, in a few short years of service in the Senate, established an enviable reputation in the field of conservation, naturalresource development, and in the welfare of our Indians which is known throughout the Nation. When an important issue, such as the future of the Klamath Reservation under the existing Termination Act, comes under study many of us in the Senate will look to Senator Neuberger for guidance and counsel. We know he has remarkable wisdom and foresight on such matters. We know that the public interest is his chief consideration.
“I joined in S. 2047 in order to help put before the people a solid proposal in a quest for a sound solution to the problem posed by
Public Law 587. We have two duties that we must perform in deciding upon the changes that are needed in the existing law and these obligations provide the criteria that we must use. One of these relates to the Indians themselves; the other to the natural resource heritage which we owe future generations.
“With respect to the Klamath people, the solution we reach should provide them with justice and equitable treatment. Those who wish to withdraw must receive the fair value for their share of the property, and those who elect to join together in the management of their property must be given a plan which assures its success.
"When the Klamath bill was proposed by the administration and enacted by the 83d Congress, I am sure that it was the thought of the Congress that the Klamath people would organize into some sort of an entity and continue the sustained-yield forest operation which the Indian Bureau started some 40 years ago. I am sure that the Congress did not believe that a last minute amendment to the bill made in the House, which changed it so that members who desired to withdraw can demand that the reservation property be sold to satisfy their desires, would so change the bill as to destroy its purpose. Recent studies show that as many as three-quarters of the Klamath people will elect a course which will require the liquidation of this reservation and its great timber resource, thus the problem facing the executive branch and the Congress is substantially different than that which was originally contemplated. This law if carried out will convert trees into dollars in a way that may do great damage to the Klamath people and the great resource which is a heritage for all.
“To avert this catastrophe Senator Neuberger and I introduced S. 2047. We did so because it is generally agreed that if this reservation is put on the block' we are running the risk of depreciating the proceeds the Klamath people expect, ruining a natural resource, promoting a boom and bust for Klamath County and economic dislocation in the entire western pine lumber industry. I would like to add here that according to advice given to the subcommittee, the Western Pine Association has not chosen to come forth at these hearings to express its views on the serious problem that they face. If this is true it is a great disappointment to me.
"The Klamath Reservation exists because of a treaty between the Klamath peoples and the Federal Government. When the Federal Government goes about changing the method of operation for this area of almost 1 million acres I believe it has the responsibility to consider the impact on all the affected people and upon the great natural resources these lands provide. We know, for example, that there is no law, State or Federal, that requires the practice of sustained-yield forestry on private lands. We know that the timber industry has resisted with every means at its command legislation to accomplish this goal. We know that the Federal Government has practiced a very high type of sustained-yield forestry on the national forests and other forest lands under its jurisdiction. We know that the Bureau of Indian Affairs has done an outstanding job on the Klamath Reservation in our State. If we now permit this reservation to be sold as required by Public Law 587, we know that a substantial amount of the timber will be cut off without adequate regard for the growth of a new crop and for sustained-yield operation. The rapid cutting of this timber would have adverse effect on our water and soil resources in Klamath County and valuable flyways used by migratory birds may be destroyed.
"Because this reservation is mainly timberland I respectfully suggest to the committee that it gather information on the logging practices on adjacent private and Federal lands. I am confident that the publicly owned lands which are under sustained yield will all show the results of good management. I am also confident that the situation on private lands will prove spotty and that an objective evaluation will show that cutting practices are falling short of permitting sustained yield. In every State in our Union there is stark evidence that the timber industry has cut billions of feet of timber with little concern for the future. I am advised that today we may have a problem of this sort developing in the Coos Bay area of our great State. Before the Federal Government decides to open this timber up to the private lumber industry, it should be assured that this reservation will not be treated as so many millions of acres have been.
"I want to emphasize that the problem before us is a federally created problem. It is the Federal Government which made the treaty, which has managed this reservation, and which has carried the responsibility for the special programs for the Indians. For my own part it would be unthinkable for the Federal Government to walk off this reservation at this juncture under the misguided notion that there is some sort of a homegrown variety, or what some people call a local problem. I join with my colleague in telling the people of my State that they are being called upon to meet a challenge in the conservation of human and natural resources. I pledge my efforts to insuring that the Federal Government discharge its responsibilities. I also join with Senator Neuberger in warning that the leaders of our State must be prepared to consider what they must do if the Congress and the administration fail to adjust Public Law 587 to provide the protection that the Klamath people and the people of this State deserve. I want to assure the chairman of this subcommittee, Senator Neuberger, who is also my warm and close personal friend, that I shall look to him for guidance on the course of action that we should ultimately follow and to assure him of my complete cooperation."
Senator NEUBERGER. Thank you very much, Mr. Brooks. I appreciate the statement you have made and I appreciate Senator Morse's overly generous references to me. With his characteristic vigor, Senator Morse has proved of constant value to us on the Indian Affairs Subcommittee in trying to reach some fair solution to this very difficult problem. I want to say for the record that if it had not been for the help of Senator Morse and his valuable assistance in passing the termination-postponement bill, S. 469 of this year, we would
not be here today holding these hearings because we would have been denied the time and elbowroom to try to work out some orderly solution.
So I hope you will express to Senator Morse our appreciation for his efforts in the past and for his assurance of his continued cooperation in the future. And I want to say that I am particularly pleased that Senator Morse's statement carried with it at the conclusion, when you presented it, a warning to the leaders of our State that should Congress and the President not bring forth some solution to