Mr. RIVERS. That is what you said, is it not?

Mr. DIFANI. 5.2 percent.

Mr. RIVERS. How did that acreage get to be designated as "wilderness"?

Mr. DIFANI. I believe by executive decision.

Mr. RIVERS. Would that be under the forest management or Forest Service management?

Mr. DIFANI. Areas under forest control.

Mr. RIVERS. And that was done by administrative determination, was it not?

Mr. DIFANI. Yes.

Mr. RIVERS. Do you want more than the amount of wilderness that is already so designated to be designated?

Mr. DIFANI. Mr. Rivers, I believe under this bill, if it passes in its present form as it passed the Senate, the Congress and the President and the people of the country will have an opportunity, at least in this State and in Idaho, to reassess the present primitive areas. I am of the opinion that possibly some of the now primitive areas in the 10-year period may become available to timber harvest or other uses. Mr. RIVERS. Does not the Forest Service already have the authority to reassess and reevaluate and modify and redefine the boundaries? Mr. DIFANI. Yes. They have done that in California. They have done that in Idaho also.

Mr. RIVERS. I am trying to understand whether you want more wilderness in California or whether you want to protect that which has already been designated. That is what I am wondering about.

Mr. DIFANI. That would be a little hard to answer. Personally I would answer that by saying we have a sizable area in wilderness in California at the present time, and I think our group would want to take a good look at any additional areas if they were presented for wilderness, particularly if they would restrict hunting and fishing. Mr. RIVERS. That is all, Madam Chairman.

Mrs. Prost. Are there further questions?

Thank you, Mr. Difani.

Mr. DIFANI. Thank you.

Mrs. PrOST. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mrs. PrOST. Our next witness is Mr. Gordon K. Van Vleck, president of the California Cattlemen's Association.

You may proceed, Mr. Van Vleck.

STATEMENT OF GORDON VAN VLECK, PRESIDENT, CALIFORNIA CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.

Mr. VAN VLECK. My name is Gordon Van Vleck. I own and operate a commercial cattle ranch in Sacramento and El Dorado Counties, Calif. I am a permittee on the El Dorado National Forest and my range borders on a wilderness area. I am president of the California Cattlemen's Association for which I speak today.

The California Cattlemen's Association whose headquarters are 659 Monadnock Building, 681 Market Street, San Francisco, represents 2,614 cattlemen comprised of beef cattle producers and beef cattle

feeders. It was established in 1917 for the purpose of promoting principles of breeding, raising, feeding, and marketing cattle.

We appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to express the thinking of the members of our association on legislation to establish wilderness areas in our national forests and parks. Before commenting on such legislation, I would like first to give a brief background of the cattle industry in California.

CALIFORNIA LEADS NATION IN FARM PRODUCTION

California led the Nation in more than 30 of the 70 major agricultural crops last year. The State's $3.2 billion agricultural income for all crops in 1960 was well above the nearest competitor, Iowa, which cashed in on a little more than $2 billion worth of crops.

CALIFORNIA RANKS SEVENTH IN CATTLE ON FARMS

California ranks seventh in the Nation in the production of all cattle and calves, with 4,203,000 head on farms and ranches on January 1, 1961, valued at $638,856,000. California ranks eighth in the Nation in beef cattle production with 2,702,000 head on farms and ranches on January 1, 1961.

Cattle and calves in California were the highest cash commodity in 1960. A breakdown for cash receipts from farm marketings in California in 1960 showed that all livestock, poultry and related products accounted for a little more than $1.2 billion of the $3.2 billion for all agricultural products. Cash receipts for cattle and calves reached an alltime record of $514,721,000.

CALIFORNIA IMPORTANT MARKET FOR REPLACEMENTS

California is one of the important markets in the Nation for stocker and feeder cattle. In 1960, around 1,435,000 head of stocker and feeder cattle and 450,000 head of cattle and calves for immediate slaughter were shipped into the State. Texas was the largest shipper of stockers and feeders with 528,000 head followed by Arizona with 512.000. Arizona led the other States in cattle for immediate slaughter with 264,000 head.

CALIFORNIA LEADS NATION IN CATTLE SLAUGHTER

Commercial slaughtering plants in California slaughtered more cattle than any other State; 1960 was the eleventh consecutive year in which California led in the slaughter of cattle. California slaughtered more cattle and calves combined than any other State in 1960.

CALIFORNIA IMPORTANT CATTLE FEEDING STATE

California subsequent to World War II became the leading western cattle feeding State. It is estimated that the 559 feedlots in the State fed an alltime high of 1.6 million head of cattle during 1960. Besides finishing cattle in feedlots, California has made great strides in finishing cattle on irrigated pastures and supplemental feeding on meadows and open ranges.

CALIFORNIA AN IMPORTANT PUBLIC LANDS STATE

California is one of the 12 principal public lands States in the Nation. The State has a land area of a little over 100 million acres, of which almost one-half is public lands. Of this total land area, 10 percent is used for cultivated crops, 31 percent for pasture and nonforest rangeland, 45 percent for forest rangeland and timber, and 14 percent for miscellaneous purposes such as cities, highways, airports and railways and including desert areas.

STOCKMEN FAVOR MULTIPLE-USE POLICY ON PUBLIC LANDS

Cattlemen believe that the resources of our public lands are for productive use. They believe that public lands should continue to be administered on the basis of multiple use. They should be shared for such uses as wildlife, grazing, water conservation and development and the vacationing public. The multiple use of our public lands is beneficial to the people, the land, and the resources of these lands. When restricted to a single use, only a few people benefit.

WILDERNESS PROPOSALS FAVOR SINGLE USE OF LANDS

Wilderness measures such as S. 174 strike at the very heart of the multiple-use policy of our national forests. Passage of this bill by the Senate is to some degree a departure from the Federal Government's public land policies which originally were established for productive use.

Proponents of wilderness legislation which would return vast areas of our valuable lands to a wilderness status, are promoting class legislation and stand in the way of the dynamic economic and social growth of our Western States. They would lead the public to believe that such legislation is needed in the interest of more recreation. Wilderness legislation itself does little for the overall problem of recreation for the general public.

MULTIPLE USE PROTECTS OUR PUBLIC LANDS

The multiple use of public lands protects these lands as well as other surrounding public and private lands from destruction by fire. Fire protection without adequate roads and trails is practically impossible and the brush and undergrowth that will thrive in these closed areas will become a menace to the economy of the people of our States as well as the Nation. This debris and undergrowth, when ignited under such conditions, would create uncontrollable fires destroying everything in their path, laying waste natural resources such as valuable forage, timber, and wildlife, and the adjoining property of our citizens.

CALIFORNIA FOUNDERING IN ITS POPULATION GROWTH

California is in danger of foundering in its population growth. Population has been increasing in the State more than twice as rapidly as in the United States as a whole. In 1940, California's population was 7 million. On July 1, 1961, California's population was estimated to be nearly 16.4 million, expanding at an average daily rate of 1,500 persons.

Projections based on current trends place the State's population in 1965 at 18.7 million and the population in 1970 at 22.1 million people. State and local planning agencies predict that there will be a State population of more than 24 million people by 1975, with 95 percent of it jammed into towns and cities and today's expanding suburbs.

ALMOST TWO-THIRDS OF POPULATION IN TWO AREAS

Sixty-one percent of the people in California are concentrated in the two major metropolitan areas of Los Angeles and San FranciscoOakland. Twenty-four percent live in seven other urban areas scattered throughout the State. The remaining 15 percent of these people are distributed among all other cities, towns and rural areas of the State.

POPULATION DRIVING RANCHERS OFF FERTILE LAND

California's agriculture is gradually being relocated in response to the pressure of increasing population. California's farmers are being driven off the more fertile land into the poorer valley basin lands and

terraces.

Since the advent of World War II, the rich valley lands have more and more been occupied by factories, freeways, home and recreational areas. Irrigated agriculture has shifted more and more to the poorer lands, the grain is planted still further up the slopes, and cattle and sheep graze beyond the grain.

Population pressure since 1942 has appropriated nearly 1 million acres of cultivatable land for nonagricultural uses. Sixteen percent of the total cultivatable land in our State already has been diverted to nonagricultural use.

For each increase of 10 people in the State, 1 acre of land is converted to nonagricultural uses. If the average annual rate of conversion continues, another 1 million acres of cultivatable land would be converted to nonagricultural uses by 1975.

POPULATION GROWTH IN UNITED STATES TO CONTINUE

Government officials and others studying population trends, point out that the population of the United States rose from 132 million in 1940 to 180 million in 1960, a gain of 48 million people. These population officials state that maintenance at this rate of annual increase, is forecast for the next quarter century. The Nation will grow to an estimated 190 million in 1965 and 230 million in 1975.

To feed the predicted 1975 population of 230 million, farm output will have to expand more than 35 percent over the 1956-58 level. Farmers and ranchers will have to produce annually 16 billion pounds more red meat, 47 million pounds more milk, 21 million tons more fruits and vegetables, and 20 billion more eggs.

POPULATION GROWTH MEANS MORE USE OF PUBLIC LANDS

The sheer physical pressure of population will gradually force agriculture, wildlife, and recreation further into the back country which will demand the fullest use of our public lands.

The Nation's grasslands, hay lands and forested rangelands furnish about one-half of the feed for all livestock. Grass is the principal feed for maintaining breeding herds, growing cattle for further finishing in feedlots or preparing them for direct shipment to packing plants. This most important renewable natural resource on public lands is dependent on the livestock owner for orderly harvest and conversion into national wealth.

Spokesmen for the urban areas in California predict that fast growing metropolitan areas may be forced to set up a second layer of local government, a sort of "metropolitan council," to concern itself with such matters as land use, planning and zoning, water supply and big scale recreational facilities.

The recreational problem is already on our doorstep, and the general public's interest in our public lands is recreation. We have the task of educating our people that public lands should furnish both recreational needs and the basic necessities of life.

When the Nation's population grows to 230 million in 1975 and to the more than 300 million predicted for the year 2000, the multiple use concept of our public lands should then be functioning and furnishing maximum economic and social benefits to our people and the Nation.

FOREST SERVICE HAS A WILDERNESS PROGRAM

Proponents of wilderness legislation would lead many to believe that there are no efforts being made to preserve wilderness-type areas on our public lands. To the contrary, the U.S. Forest Service is presently administering a wilderness and wild areas program in many parts of our western country.

These wilderness areas in our national forests alone occupy an area equal to all of New Hampshire, Connecticut, and New Jersey. These areas are established under regulations so worded as to leave no doubt of the intent to keep the areas in their primitive state. These wilderness areas under the present administrators have remained in their natural state over many, many years of proper management.

FEW PEOPLE USING PRESENT WILDERNESS AREAS

Very few people are packing into the wilderness areas for recreation. Last year only a little more than one-half of 1 percent of the total visits to the national forests were made in the wilderness areas. Should the Congress pass a wilderness law, it is doubt ful if any more people would make the effort to hire pack mules, guides and other services to get into the trackless wilderness areas.

A majority of the people who go to the forests or parks for recreation do not have the time or the desire to get away from the easy travel made possible by modern highways. They are mostly families interested in camping near their automobiles, picnicking, and other forms of outdoor activities.

CONGRESS SHOULD RETAIN POWERS OVER WILDERNESS AREAS

Should the Congress in its wisdom approve wilderness legislation such as S. 174, it should retain the power to make changes in the wilderness areas. The subject bill as passed by the Senate provides