Senator CORDON. More like the forests in southern California, perhaps.

Senator ANDERSON. It is scrawny in spots. Many people have obtained permits to go out there and build homes. All I say is that I think a man ought to have a permit to build a home so that he knows it will be his forever.

Secondly, it ought to go on the tax rolls when he gets it finished. And the revenue from the sale of that city lot might very well come to the city or to the area, probably, in the case of surburban development.

Senator JACKSON. The land you are talking about adjacent to the cities that you are interested in making available should be turned over to the State; and then the State, through appropriate action, can determine how it will be made available for sale and for entry by the surburban dwellers who will be moving in.

Senator ANDERSON. That is now proposed, both in the bill which the Senate worked on previously and the bill which the house has worked

on now.

Senator JACKSON. But you would not make it available by this bill directly to the city?

Senator ANDERSON. No, I would not. Just exactly what you say. Senator CORDON. Does anyone know, have we any information, how much land surrounding what cities should be made available?

Senator ANDERSON. No. I think the State can do it. That is why the grant in the bill is to the State.

Senator CORDON. I understand, but there has to be a grant, and there cannot be a grant without definite identity of the land granted. That is what I am getting at. Where is there information that will aid this committee in either itself indicating how big an area should be around a given city or municipality, or, if we are not to do that, what yardsticks, if any, shall we place with regard to a general grant to the State?

Definitely we must define the land granted, or there is no grant. Senator ANDERSON. We said in section 25-this is very similar to what we had in the previous Senate bill-at the bottom of page 36:

For the purpose of furthering the development of and expansion of communities, there is hereby granted to the State of Alaska from the national forests in the State not to exceed four hundred thousand acres of land, and from the vacant, unappropriated, and unreserved public lands in the State not to exceed another four hundred thousand acres of land, which shall be adjacent to established communities or suitable for prospective community centers and recreational areas. The lands so granted shall be selected by the State of Alaska with the approval of the Secretary of Agriculture as to national-forest lands and with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior as to public-domain lands.

Senator JACKSON. Does that confine the land to be made available to public lands adjacent to cities, and exclude timberlands in national forests?

Senator ANDERSON. It gives 400,000 acres from the forests and 400,000 acres from the other public lands. That is all there is up there. It is either forest land or other vacant land.

Senator JACKSON. The land in the forests is not limited as to specific area, but the land from the public domain is limited, "which shall be adjacent to established communities or suitable for prospective community centers and recreational areas."

Senator ANDERSON. They are both limited to that. Both grants are limited to areas which are adjacent to established communities or suitable for prospective community centers. We had maps brought in in the hearing in the 81st Congress to show what might be done around these various areas.

Senator CORDON. Are those maps available?

Mr. COULTER. Some of them were published in the 1950 hearings. Senator JACKSON. I think there is a question in the language of that section.

Mr. SLAUGHTER. It is due to a House amendment. They changed the language. Originally it said all of this, which is probably what it should be.

Senator JACKSON. It is in the conjunctive form, but there is a question as to the first conjunction. It starts out by saying that from the national forests not to exceed 400,000 acres shall be available. Then when they talk about public lands, it is then limited to "established communities or suitable for prospective community centers and recreational areas."

I invite the attention of the committee to that fact. I think it should be clarified.

Senator SMATHERS. I suggest adding right there on line 25, "all of which shall be adjacent to established communities * * *"

Senator JACKSON. That would take care of it.

Senator KUCHEL. Might I ask, Senator Anderson, does this language accomplish the purposes to which you were just addressing yourself?

Senator ANDERSON. Yes, the first part of it. The granting of additional lands for the development of towns is part of the problem up there, and when that land is put on the tax rolls it is used. Then you move into this area of reservations. As we point out here, this map opposite page 424 shows the extent of the reservations.

Senator CORDON. Let's stay with this for a minute. Are there any vacant, unappropriated, and unreserved public lands adjacent to any of these communities or prospective communities?

Senator ANDERSON. Yes.

Senator CORDON. Is there enough?

Mr. COULTER. I would think in central Alaska there would be. In the southeast it is almost all forest.

Senator ANDERSON. The point is that you are going to have to take practically all of the 400,000 acres in the southeast, because those towns. are located within the forest. When you get to Fairbanks and to Anchorage, you begin dealing with the public lands, and you take it from there. It does not say you have to take equally for any one community.

Senator JACKSON. How many acres in the Tongass National Forest? Senator ANDERSON. It runs into the millions.

Senator JACKSON. Mr. Chairman, I think maybe we should go a wee bit further than just to confine it to community expansion. I do think that some proportion of the Forest Service timber, may be somewhat comparable to the percentage arrangement in Oregon and Washington at the time they came in, should be made available to the State. In other words, I am not so sure that it ought to be confined just to community development.

I am thinking of building up a reserve that they can use, for instance, to assist their schools, as we have previously granted to other States when they came into the Union.

Senator SMATHERS. It is conceivable that with population growth there may be new cities that should be started.

Senator ANDERSON. You realize that we have granted in the original Senate bill, and now in the House bill, an additional 1212 percent above the 25 percent that they would normally get, so we get 3712 percent of forest reserves.

Senator CORDON. You mean receipts?

Senator ANDERSON. Receipts.

Senator JACKSON. How much did you say?

Senator ANDERSON. Thirty-seven and a half percent as against 25 percent.

Senator JACKSON. You have increased it 1212 percent?

Senator ANDERSON. Yes, because so much of the good land is in forests.

Mr. COULTER. Regarding the acreage of the forests, I have something here which says the national forests constitute 20 million acres. That would include both the Tongass and the Chugach.

Senator CORDON. May I ask you how many of the committee can stay on here until noon.

Senator KUCHEL. I have to leave at about 20 minutes to 12.

Senator CORDON. I thought perhaps Delegate Bartlett could be helpful because of his knowledge of the terrain, and so forth. I thought we would call him if we are to continue in session. Otherwise we will wait until tomorrow.

Senator JACKSON. I think on this forest matter, Mr. Chairman, we can have the Forest Service people.

Senator CORDON. Let's do that. We are going to have to have the national parks people here, and when they come we would like to have everything they have that could help us visually. If they have taken pictures of this thing, we want to see the pictures of it.

Senator JACKSON. Mr. Chairman, I would also suggest that, in addition to the requested information from Interior on public lands, of the Forest Service on Forest Service timber, that we have a representative from the Fish and Wildlife Service to submit the views of the Department with reference to what facilities and properties should be turned over to the State in the administration of the fisheries. I think also we ought to find out from the Fish and Wildlife Service whether the turning over of the fisheries should be accomplished in 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 5 years, whatever it should be.

I mention this because the fisheries are the largest resource in Alaska. I believe they should be turned over to the State, but there is a question in my mind whether that should be accomplished all at once, or whether it ought to be turned over in an orderly fashion.

In that same connection, we have the Pribilofs, which involve the administration of the seals. We have a special statute with reference to the disposition of those funds.

I think, in short, that we should have someone from the Department to submit their views in connection with the matters I have mentioned, and any other suggestions.

Senator CORDON. The Chair will undertake to ask the Departments. to come up in some orderly shape. There is no need to have all of

them here when we know we can hear from only 1 or 2. They probably have some other things they can do in the interim. We will endeavor to bring them up in an orderly fashion so that one after another we can pick their brains.

Senator ANDERSON. I have to leave. May I say one thing before I go?

On the forest matter, there is only one man who ought to be here, and that is the present Governor of Alaska. Governor Heintzleman knows those forests like the palm of his hand, where the areas are. He has not been too enthusiastic about statehood, but just the same I think he ought to be here, if at all possible to get him here, because nobody knows the forest area as does Frank Heintzleman.

Senator CORDON. He has a pretty big job up there. Let's see who is down here. Unless there is someone here equally informed, I think we ought to have him come down.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. Chairman, Governor Heintzleman is either in the city now or will be within the next few days.

Senator CORDON. That is fine.

Senator JACKSON. If he is here, I think we probably will want to call him in.

Senator SMATHERS. Somebody earlier made the suggestion that we ought to hear from the Statehood Commission as to just what it is that they think they ought to have. It seems to me that that ought to be about the starting ground so they can tell us how much they think they ought to have. We can then hear from the departments as to whether or not they would be willing to give to those statehood people that which they think they need.

Senator CORDON. That raises the question of what study the Statehood Commission itself has made in the premises. I am a little bit afraid that we will find that it is not too much. Like most statehood commissions, their chief interest is in getting statehood and not getting rid of statehood.

Senator SMATHERS. That could well be.

Senator CORDON. That is human nature again.

Senator SMATHERS. It is your feeling we have to look after the prospective State even more vigorously than the Statehood Commission itself would do on these matters.

Senator CORDON. Frankly, that is my view, particularly with reference to this area which is so completely undeveloped, which brings to us potentialities in the place of accomplished facts or conditions. Senator KUCHEL. May I ask a question on another subject? Senator CORDON. Yes, Senator.

Senator KUCHEL. With respect to the language on page 31, in line 7, I raise the question whether the subcommittee would look with favor on some paraphrasing of that language with the language relative to the description of Hawaii on page 2. I recognize the deletions in the decision of the committee on Hawaiian territory, but presumptively you have exactly the same problems on the chain of the Aleutian Islands. You talk about 1 marine league here, which you do not do in Hawaii.

We made a great point of territorial waters as the means of keeping the status quo in Hawaii, and I raise the question whether that should not be accomplished also with respect to the Territory of Alaska, So

if the subcommittee were agreeable to the extent that we could use similar language, it would be just a matter of drafting.

Senator CORDON. Without question we are going to have to go into that matter. I have not studied it yet, so I do not have any opinion at all.

As to the sufficiency of the language here, I just do not know.

Senator JACKSON. Do I understand that the language incorporated in the bill before us with reference to the boundary description is substantially the boundary description contained in the grant by Russia to the United States?

Mr. SLAUGHTER. The effect is that, Senator. Of course, the description is not the same.

Senator JACKSON. I do not mean identical language.

Mr. SLAUGHTER. It refers to the Territory of Alaska, which embraces the area that was ceded by Russia to the United States under the treaty, which prescribed the boundaries.

Senator JACKSON. Mr. Slaughter, is there any territory left to the Federal Government on the outer boundaries in this description? Mr. SLAUGHTER. No.

Senator JACKSON. In substance, it is essentially the territory granted previously.

Senator CORDON. All the land that we got from Russia will be within the jurisdiction of the new State.

Senator SMATHERS. On that point, as I recollect some of the testimony 2 years ago, did not some of those proponents of statehood for Alaska say that they would be willing to take a lesser area than that which is now included in the whole Territory of Alaska? In other words, there is a more valuable part south of the middle line there, and they said that would be the profitable area and they would not mind leaving that vast expanse of tundra in the north in the hands of the Federal Government.

Senator CORDON. Assuming that is correct-and I do not knowwould we not then have the perhaps unfortunate result that there would be an area almost wholly unpopulated except with natives, where again we would have to set up a Territorial government and all the machinery of it, when those people with their own government and with slight addition to it could do the same job?

Senator SMATHERS. You are right.

Senator JACKSON. George, I will say that the northern portion of Alaska, essentially the top tier of area, is now an oil reserve. Mr. COULTER. It is about here [indicating].

Senator JACKSON. It runs all the way to Canada.

Mr. COULTER. This is naval [indicating].

Senator CORDON. Let's get the information. Let's get beyond thinking and know what we are talking about.

Senator JACKSON. The middle area is naval, and the western and eastern portions of the top tier are under Public Land Order No. 82. Senator CORDON. They should have some civil jurisdiction, because you have to have laws there. You have to have the machinery of justice.

Senator JACKSON. Point Barrow and some other places are right in the middle of that area. It would be better that they are all within the State.