We have a panel of forest experts who will, I hope, further clarify this provision during our hearings this morning. This is an important part of the legislation.

I would digress a moment to point to the seeming paradox between the response of our Federal Government to a natural disaster and to the less dramatic but no less real economic disaster of some areas of the Nation. When a natural disaster strikes-a tornado or hurricane or flood or earthquake-the Government moves in within a matter of hours.

Yet the economic disasters of widespread and chronic unemployment and lag in economic growth require almost endless study and hearings and debate.

We have a disparity between the rate of economic growth for the Nation as a whole and the Appalachian region. This pending bill, which would authorize $1,077 million, would provide Federal assistance for this region. I think that it will be an important first step to eliminate the disparity between the area and the general economic strength of the Nation.

The Appalachian program, I remind you, is the product of 4 years of study, and exhaustive thought and planning at the local, State, and the Federal levels. It was not conceived in the mind of a bureaucrat-and that would not make it wrong per se-but by the Conference of Appalachian Governors. These were the leaders who sought and received the assistance of the late and great President John Kennedy for the establishment of what has been known as the President's Appalachian Regional Commission.

This Commission presented its report to President Lyndon Johnson early in 1964, and President Johnson has repeatedly urged the enactment of this program. It is one of his first legislative recommendations for 1965.

I think that this bill embodies the hopes, in a sense the dreams, and certainly the aspirations of more than 15 million Americans who live in the Appalachian region. These people have dreams, and these people have visions. We in the Congress can help to bring these aspirations closer to fulfillment by enactment of this legislation. Extraneous considerations, I hope, will not impede the early and affirmative action in the Congress on this measure.

I note the presence of Representative Ken Hechler, of the 4th District of West Virginia. I am grateful, Ken, for your presence, and I know that you will be active in the enactment of this legislation by the House of Representatives.

Our first witness is John Sweeney, chairman of the Federal Development Planning Committee for Appalachia, but before inviting him to the witness table, I believe my distinguished colleague and cosponsor of S. 3, Senator John Sherman Cooper, may desire to make an opening statement.

Senator COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I speak as the ranking Republican member on the committee, and I want to say that Senator Randolph has given a very comprehensive survey of the background and the purposes of this bill.

I also want to express my own interest in the early enactment of this legislation, and I want to say that I was glad to join with the

distinguished Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Randolph, and with many others in the Senate, in cosponsoring this bill.

I think it is worthwhile to recall that last year, after comprehensive hearings held under the leadership of Senator Randolph, the bill was reported to the Senate and was passed by the Senate by a majority of those voting on both the Democratic side and the Republican side. I thought that this gave evidence of the national character of the bill, showing that it is in the national interest rather than just the local interest, and I have no doubt that we will see early enactment of this bill this year.

I would like to tell you that my conception of this bill is that it will provide for this area of our country certain prerequisites for development of its resources, along with encouragement for investment. These prerequisites include, as Senator Randolph has indicated, the development of an adequate road system, improvement of the land, assurance of better protection for timber, conservation of water resources, better flood protection, development of local facilities for water and sewage, and the availability of centers for training and education. Finally, I would not fail to mention the provision of essential health facilities throughout the area.

For various reasons, particularly the isolation of its people and communities, the technological changes that have occurred in the chief industry of mining, and the low tax base resulting from the low income level, this great area of the United States has not been able to keep pace with the economic growth of other areas of the Nation. I might say also that long before there was widespread public interest in these matters, the abundance of coal, timber, gas, and oil led to exploitation of these great resources, without full attention to future needs of the region.

I believe that this program will provide the means to bring this area toward the same degree of advancement that other areas of the country have enjoyed in the march of progress. I hope it will be considered in this way, as a national bill, in the national interest, rather than one just in the local interest.

I would not fail to mention also that, for one who lives in this area and has traveled often throughout eastern Kentucky and other parts of the region, this program holds great social hope for the region. I can remember years ago, when I first traveled this area, there was a certain amount of what we might call affluence in the area, but most of the people lived at a similar relatively modest economic level. In the last 15 or 20 years I have noted a change. The affluent have become more affluent, and those at the other end have steadily grown poorer.

Unfortunately, you can see today in that area, unless something like this is done, the possible growth of a very bad social problem which actually might become a class system. For all of these reasons, thinking both of the economic progress of the area and also of its social progress, I feel very strongly that this bill should be enacted.

Senator RANDOLPH. If I may supplement what you said about the conditions within the area, I would remark that in November of 1964, it was my privilege to turn the faucet, as it were, on a complex of a waterworks system for 10 West Virginia communities. These

communities had never had hot and cold running water, and when we turned that faucet, 660 families and small business units had running water for the first time.

I don't want to belabor this point, but I remember a woman 63 years of age who had tears in her eyes as she said, "Senator Randolph, I have never been privileged to take a bath in a bathtub in my life."

These are the conditions that we find within a few miles of the affluent society which may exist in a county seat town, or city in West Virginia, or Kentucky, or in other sections of the country. This was a program that came about through accelerated public works. I hope this program will be continued by the Congress of the United States.

Thank you very much.

Senator Fong, do you have any comment?

Senator FONG. No, Mr. Chairman, 1 do not have any comment. Coming from a noncontiguous State to Appalachia, I will follow this hearing with very, very deep interest.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you very much. Senator Montoya? Senator MONTOYA. I have no comment at this time, Mr. Chairman. Senator RANDOLPH. John Sweeney, will you open the hearing at this time?

STATEMENT OF JOHN L. SWEENEY, CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR APPALACHIA

Mr. SWEENEY. I am John L. Sweeney, Chairman of the Federal Development Planning Committee for Appalachia. That Committee was established by Executive Order No. 11186 of the President on October 25, 1964, and it was charged with the responsibility of carrying on the joint planning effort which had previously marked the relationships between the Appalachian States and the Federal Government.

It is very difficult to follow any description of the Appalachian region such as that just given by Senators Randolph and Cooper, and I won't attempt to do it. I just want to say it is a pleasure for me to be given this opportunity to discuss with you this act, and what we believe are its implications for both the Appalachian region and for the entire Nation.

I think there has been adequately described here this morning the concern which two Presidents have exhibited toward this problem. I think that the facts and statistics which have been gathered over a number of years, and which were presented in the report of the President's Appalachian Commission, are never quite enough to describe the problems which this region faces.

I think it was the President's visit to Appalachia last spring on two occasions that gave him the direct evidence of what the problems are in this region, and what the solutions might possibly be.

The bill before you obviously represents the clear and determined interest of the President to provide the means by which the Appalachian people can begin to move themselves toward the better economic future which they obviously desire.

Now, this committee has made a substantial and valuable contribution to the body of knowledge which now exists about the problems and the needs of Appalachia. I would like to just quote one passage from the report which this committee sent to the floor of the Senate to accompany S. 2782 last year.

Such legislation is long overduc, although it is by no means too late to bring Appalachia into a condition of economic parity with other regions of America. The achievement of such a goal will be to the ultimate enrichment of all America.

With your permission, Senator, I would like to embellish on your remarks as to the changes which have been made this year in this act, so that we might anticipate some of the questions which the committee might have.

Senator RANDOLPH. That would be helpful, sir.

Mr. SWEENEY. These will be brief, and I would like to emphasize what you said: that the major thrust of this year's bill is an attempt to clarify the Federal-State relationships which we hope will emerge through the creation of the Appalachian Regional Commission.

Secondly, we hope to emphasize within the bill what we believe is the only effective strategy for the Appalachian region; namely, an effort to determine the best course of growth for the several subregions of Appalachia, and to pattern the investments, which the bill provides, to best realize that potential.

As a consequence, the statement of purposes of the bill has been changed to emphasize, and I quote—

that the public investments made in the region will be concentrated in areas: where there is a significant potential for future growth, and where the expected return on public dollars invested will be the greatest.

We have made a determined effort to emphasize the Federal-State relationships which will exist, which is to say that the primary responsibility for determining programs and projects will rest with the States. No project may be approved by the Appalachian Commission which has not received the approval of the States.

It has been our belief, working for 18 months with the States in the Appalachian region, that they do have a far better knowledge about the problems facing their part of the country and are much more informed as to what reasonable solutions might be. We intend to insure that the Federal participation in this would be limited primarily to insuring that the traditional charges of pork barrel cannot be leveled against this program.

I think that really is the sole Federal responsibility. The States are in a better position to determine what programs can solve the individual problems in their communities, and we hope to rely on their advice and counsel to the greatest degree possible.

Now, as you have pointed out, Senator Randolph, we did increase the access road mileage within this bill without increasing the total dollars. This comes primarily from a better realization on the part of all people involved as to what the costs of these access roads might be. We had orginally premised our dollar total on the fact that these roads would cost $100,000 per mile. They would be high-type secondary roads. As it turns out, most of the States have plans for far less expensive construction. For example, they are talking about using this mileage within their State forests to increase the timber cut

there. They are planning to build unpaved roads out to various commercial sites or out to various recreational sites which can increase the use of the land on which those projects will be built. These, too, will not be anywhere near the $100,000 cost.

It is our best judgment at this time that these roads will probably average about $50,000 a mile, and as a consequence, it will virtually double the mileage without increasing the dollars to be spent.

I might add that while the development highway system, the major primary roads which will go with this bill, are exciting to the States, we found a tremendous enthusiasm for the access road concept, because they realize that there is so little land in Appalachia which is capable of development, and one of the keys to making it developable is to link it up with the major highway system. That is what these roads will obviously do.

Again, Senator, as you pointed out, we have made an effort to change the emphasis in the pasture program, the land improvement program. There is really little change in substance, but last year we found, as did everyone associated with this measure, that there was an undue emphasis on livestock production. Neither in last year's bill nor in this year's bill were there any funds specifically set aside for the purchase of livestock or for the increasing herds. All of the funds in this year's bill, as in last year's bill, were to be used for pasture improvement, for the liming of the land, plowing of it, and in some cases fencing of it.

Within the normal program of the Federal Government, primarily through the Farmers Home Administration's loan program, the farmers will have available some loans to increase their herds or put new feeder calf operations into these pastures. But this program contained in S. 3 is primarily patterned after the Great Plains conservation program which helped achieve, in that broad region of the country, the water resource and land treatment improvement that so desperately is needed within the Appalachian region.

In the timber development section, Senator Randolph has again pointed out, the major change is that the organizations which will be formed to improve the return from timber on small holdings in Appalachia are required to be nonprofit corporations. This is something which has made good sense to both the States and to the Federal Government. We obviously don't want to create a force that has a profitmaking capacity to compete with the industry that already exists in the region. This is a thriving industry, and capable of realizing the potential benefits of Appalachian timber.

This is solely a means by which the small holdings can be consolidated for management purposes to provide better timber stands. Now, as I have stated before, the other main change, the change we regard as major, is the complete locking in, in this bill, of the State responsibility, the State authority to approve projects as a prerequisite to approval by the Appalachian Commission.

I would like to emphasize, in addition to the changes in the bill, the fact that the Appalachian Regional Development Act does not contain all of the programs for which funds will be made available during fiscal years 1966 and 1967. This bill contains only those programs that require new authorizations or modification of existing authorizations. The funds to carry out the entire Appalachian program, in