tions that are now cooperating in this program could cause Siltcoos Outlet to sand down, thereby flooding or waterlogging the farmland in this area, also Highway 101 could be covered with sand as the sand has moved to within 150 feet of it now. In a very few years it will cover the highway if not controlled.

We also feel that the establishment of the Sand Dunes Park would seriously affect the economy of the area. We would like to insert at this point an excerpt from the report of Systems Operations of Central Lincoln People's Utility District under the date of April 30, 1959, which reads as follows:

Home construction is continuing at a fair pace. In the Newport area and in the Reedsport area considerable construction is in process. In the Florence area while some construction is underway at the present time the prospect of a national sand dune park has had a dampening effect on construction developments in the area. There is a feeling of uncertainty among many of the people in the area as to just what they should do. It is almost a foregone conclusion that little if any construction will be started around the two lakes which are being considered for inclusion in the proposed park.

Of the 26 miles of ocean frontage being considered for inclusion in the dunes park only 210 miles are privately owned, the rest belongs to the Federal Government. The U.S. Forest Service has camps and parks developed in this area with several more planned for development when the traffic warrants.

We sincerely believe that the majority of the people prefer the multi-purpose development of the Forest Service in preference to the ironclad single use program as administered by the National Park Service.

Certainly, we prefer the freedom from regulations that goes with the National Forest board of recreation as compared to the National Park System. We are about as real "outdoorsman" as can be found in the country. We would rather have the kind of outdoor recreation we have here now than to see our area slicked up and currycombed for the tourists we are promised so many of.

The very name itself is misleading, giving the impression that nothing but the sand dunes are being considered. No mention is made of the valuable homes that would be taken. They are not just summer cottages, either.

Anyone who will study the lay of the land and soil conditions must realize that the territory around Woahink and Siltcoos Lakes is the best residential district in western Lane County. This would be true even if the lakes were not there. We can't afford to tie up such good land for homes in the National Park area. There isn't enough of it in this part of the county.

We were well pleased with Governor Hatfield's stand on the park and the report of his committee. They have been on the ground and gave it thorough study and they have seen the cooperation of all the Federal agencies and the progress that is being made. They realize that it would be almost impossible for the airtight, single purpose development plan of the National Park Service to carry on and accomplish what must be done in the very near future.

In summing this up, we feel that controlling the shifting sands is too important to our area to make a change now. The taking of valuable residential area and residences would seriously affect the economy of the area and the taxes for support of the schools.

We feel that the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the State of Oregon will adequately preserve this area for future generations.

We also feel the 51⁄2 miles of shoreline of Woahink Lake in the boundaries of Honeyman State Park and approximately 1,000 feet of shoreline belonging to the State Highway Commission is assurance that the shores will never be closed to the public, as was brought out at the Senate hearings.

We feel that Governor Hatfield's committee realized that development as now planned is superior to the single purpose plan of the National Park Service.

Madam Chairman, being a farmer, maybe I started at the wrong end of this. But I am Millard F. Martin, and I live at Ada Route, Gardiner, Oreg.

My wife and I own and operate a dairy farm out in that area. We were within the original suggested boundaries of the park. Therefore, I would like to read you my statement and have it included in the record.

There are several things I have mentioned in here I would like to tell all of you about.

In presenting my opposition to the National Seashore Area, I would like to say that we may have this coming to us, as it is similar to the treatment we gave the Indians years ago and we thought they should like it, but they didn't.

When the competition became too strong, they took whatever weapons they had and eliminated some of it; in this day and age we aren't allowed to do that, unfortunately.

We can't blame the park people for promulgating these plans of confiscating people's homes, and destroying the economy of the area; if they didn't do things like this, they would soon lose their easy jobs and be forced to work for a living like the rest of us.

We voted for our Senators and Representatives in good faith, thinking they would protect us from these marauding bands, but as brought out at the Senate hearing, some of them are taking part with these bands against the very people that elected them to office.

At the Senate hearing in Reedsport there was very little testimony in favor of the park as planned; almost every favorable paper was with restrictions that they stay west of Highway 101 or that they don't include any private property within the park boundaries.

Our youngest daughter, Mrs. Donna J. Trotter, has been employed as a lifeguard at the Cleowax swimming area in Honeyman State Park for the past two seasons, and in her chats with tourists it was mentioned many times that this park was superior to the national parks. One lady said, "Don't ever let the National Park Service take this over as it is much better maintained than any of the national parks and I have been in most of them."

At the Reedsport hearing, Senator Neuberger read a lengthy telegram from Dr. Cooper of the Minnesota State College having been here for a month or two during his life and claiming to be an authority on sand dunes. He recommended the establishment of a park to save them. Mr. Thos. J. Flippin, soil conservationist for 11 years and almost living in the sand dunes and to me more of an authority than the doctor from Minnesota, says we don't need the park to save them.

I had the privilege of attending the dedication of The Dalles Dam on October 10th this year and was very much impressed by the speech of Vice President Richard M. Nixon and his comparisons of Russia and the United States and especially when he said that the United States couldn't come and take your home unless you were willing to give it up.

I wondered if he shouldn't be informed of the plans in this area; I have a friend that was living in the Jackson Hole country in Wyoming when the National Park was established there and the same kind of promises were made there as has been made here. As soon as the park was established, things began to change and before 10 years were up, most of the old residents were gone. They couldn't stand the dictatorship of the park rangers.

Most of them were paid a very small percentage of what their property was worth.

I would like to enumerate a few things the Park Service has planned that is not in the present plan:

1. To evict people from their homes or cause them to pay rent on their own homes and live with the park ranger looking down their necks the rest of their lives.

2. To slow up and eventually stop the increasing economy of the

area.

3. To completely destroy the present tax structure for the maintenance of our schools and tax districts.

4. To eliminate hunting in the park or at least seriously curtail it. 5. To stop water skiing or at least to control power and speed of boats.

6. To control access to the lakes by acquiring the entire shoreline. 7. To lock up the sand dunes water supply for industrial use. 8. To force the relocation of Highway 101 outside the park through extremely rough country and some of the most difficult land in Oregon on which to maintain a road.

The fabulous amounts of money to be spent in the area as published by the Park Service is for a period of 2) to 30 years and actually is probably less than what will be spent in that length of time under the present plan. The present plan does not require that any be spent buying people's homes, or state the millions that will be wasted to relocate Highway 101 so there will be a private road through the park. I would like to call your attention to the Jensen economic report that has been published telling us how many tourists will come here, and how much extra money they will spend in this area if the park is established. I would like to mention that the total gross income listed from agriculture, for all the farms in the original park area is less than half the gross income in our own little dairy farm.

The Jensen report fails to recognize the unique type of agriculture followed in this area. The designation of "cultivated land, grassland" does not apply. Practically all is in grass, which is marketed through dairy cows. Our grassland rates were the most productive and most valuable in America.

On the basis of this report, all the farmers in this territory are starved out and don't know it. It is impressively written and has a nice cover. After reading the section on agriculture, I wonder whether the whole thing is worth the ink and paper they used.

I would presume that he probably wrote this report sitting in an easy chair in his office, but somebody apparently has told him he made a mistake, because on Saturday, October 24, he came out to our dairy and told me that he had read about our milking parlor in Mr. Hayes' report and thought he would come out and see what we had. This proves to me that he has never been in this area before.

Mr. Jensen tells me now that we aren't in the park area, but we were when this report came out.

I feel that the benefits to this area because of the park are greatly exaggerated. This report should be weighed against the facts before giving it any consideration.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am trusting to your good judgment, and I wish to thank you very sincerely for the privilege of speaking to you and this group of wonderful people.

Thank you very much.

Mrs. PrOST. Thank you very much, Mr. Martin.
Now, we would like to hear from Mrs. Dowell.

STATEMENT OF MRS. OVERTON DOWELL, JR., LANE COUNTY, OREG.

Mrs. DOWELL. I am Mrs. Overton Dowell, Jr. My address is Florence, Oreg., and I live at Mercer Lake, and I am hoping after they get through fighting over these other lakes, they won't try to come up and take my lake. I have lived there 50 years.

Many years Mr. Dowell and I spent in the lighthouse watching these sand dunes and sea lions, and various other facets of wildlife. I want to sustain Mr. Hayes' statement that the matter of this park dropped as a bomb in our midst; we knew nothing about it. It came to us through the newspaper and immediately the farm group got busy on this and the Grangers.

That is where the protest first started and it has been taken up to the State Grange and it is going to be taken to the National Grange next month-in November-in California.

This is the statement I have, Mr. Dowell and myself. Mr. Dowell is a boy who came into this neighborhood at the age of 12 from Portland and grew up and lived all of these years with the exception of service in the lighthouse and some of Government work at Mercer Lake, and he still insists he has to have a few cattle to manage.

As taxpayers and longtime residents of Lane County, Oreg., and members of the Oregon State Grange, the Citizen's Information Group, and the Western Lane Taxpayer's Association, we wish to state that we heartily endorse the action these groups have taken, in opposing the creation of the Sand Dunes Area Park, in Western Lane and Douglas Counties, as introduced and supported by Senator Richard L. Neuberger and cosupported by Representative Charles O. Porter. Also, we endorse the action taken by Gov. Mark Hatfield of Oregon and his advisory committee in opposing these park bills.

Oregon now has a very large number of large and medium-sized parks well operated by the State, counties, and the Forest Service, all of which can be further developed. Honeyman Park has a nationwide reputation. Farther north in Lane County is Neptune and Cummings State Parks, 400 acres or more, about 2 miles in length with the State Highway 101 passing through the entire distance, with sev

48573-60- -9

eral accesses to the ocean beach. In all, between the north Lane County line and the Siuslaw River, there are 11 State, county, and Forest Service parks with access to the seashore. South of the Siuslaw River are numerous large and small parks and picnic areas. In the proposed area, as wanted by Senator Neuberger's bills, so much uncertainty of boundaries, conditions, and restrictions are included that we wonder what will be the outcome; Senator Neuberger is now asking for additional areas to be included. Will there be any stopping with such actions? In his letter, "Washington Calling," of September and October 1959, he says, "Why the frenzy over 35,000 acres more?" These are the acreages within the national park system in each of the three States of the Pacific coast:

Question: Mr. Mackenzie, will the 35,000 acres of our proposed Oregon National Dunes National Seashore unduly burden Oregon's total?

He doesn't state that already 51.03 percent of the total area of Oregon is under Federal control.

Did California and Washington willingly give up the vast tracts in their State? No. They are opposing such actions and trying to prevent further aggression.

The Park Service states they do not want the sand dunes unless they can have the adjacent lakes and farmlands. Much valuable farmland, modern dairies, and many expensive year-round homes are included in this area. Here people have lived for 50 or more years, feeling secure in their homes and rights as American people.

The tax program of this area will be badly disrupted, our school district, local hospital district, and rural fire district have outstanding bonds that we are pledged to pay.

Senator Neuberger compares our parks with those in Eastern States. This is inconsistent as conditions are far different.

We who live here know weather conditions and the treacherous conditions of quicksand, drifting sands, and holes around dead trees, and quick incoming fogs. A playground to be used only a short period of the year is a costly thing.

I might say you visiting people have had a very lovely day, but they are not all like this at this time of the year.

The park bureau states these parks, roads, and payments to landowners may not be made for a period of 2 to 5 more years. Then where is the money coming from, in a nation whose debt is growing all the time? Must we just wait, with all these uncertainties hanging, like the fabled sword of Damocles, over our heads? Do we need these parks, are we only a nation who wants more playgrounds when the whole world is facing a serious unknown future?

Why say the Park Service wishes the preservation of the sand dunes? Are the local people destroying them? For over 50 years, we have known and been watching these sand dunes, and know their conditions, some beautiful and some repulsive in their changing conditions of drift and dusty aspect.

A much-loved and well-known poem ends "Only God can make a tree." Eons of time ago, a great Power called God, by many, created our sand dunes and only He can destroy them.