improved management of natural resources in the public interest for more than 60 years.

The Institute is very pleased to join with conservationists throughout the country once again in supporting the establishment of the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area. I say once again, because in looking back through our files, I find that the Institute has supported the conferral of special management status on this superb area on several occasions before this and the House committee. The natural and scenic features of the Oregon Dunes have been recognized for years, and the bills in earlier Congresses, if having served no other purpose, have helped to focus attention on the size and scope of the national recreation area that should logically be established.

Some of the land that would be included within the national recreation area under the bill before the committee has not escaped the hand of man. Parts of it have been used for commercial and non-commercial purposes for years. And the need for accommodating uses that are not inconsistent with the long-range objectives of the recreation area should be recognized and accepted as an inescapable "price of admission" in a settled area. It is believed that H.R. 8763 makes satisfactory provision for these existing and largely compatible uses.

As I have indicated, the Institute endorses and supports the objectives of this proposal. My additional comments are offered in the hope of contributing to the drafting of the best possible kind of a bill. While it is realized that local conditions have an important bearing on the language that is incorporated into an enactment of this kind, it is believed that certain uniformity should flow through all of the national recreation area laws as to the way the areas are acquired and administered. We think that such uniformity is necessary for the proper administration of the areas as well as for public understanding of their purpose and role. A lack of uniformity is found in Section 12 that would establish an advisory council for the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area consisting of local, state, and national members. The benefits that would accrue from such an advisory board, in our opinion, would offset its disadvantages, and improved understanding of the local, state and national purposes of the project should result. Unlike in other previous seashore and recreation area Acts, however, the Oregon Dunes advisory council apparently would go on forever.

The advisory board created by the Cape Cod Act has a life span of 10 years. The Ozark Rivers Act has a similar provision. The Padre Island and the Point Reyes Acts make no provision for advisory boards. We believe that such advisory groups may be beneficial in the initial year of a new project, but that they serve their purpose within the first 10 years. We would urge, in the case of H.R. 8763, that the advisory board not have a life in excess of 10 years.

It is believed that the provisions of Section 9 pertaining to hunting and fishing in the recreation area in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon, at such times and places as the Secretary shall designate, are in keeping with the broad objectives of recreation area concepts. They also are in keeping with the overall philosophy expressed by the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. The Section could be improved by adding authority for the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into cooperative agreements with the State and other agencies for the improvement of fish and wildlife resources. Such authority was included in appropriate sections of the Cape Cod, Point Reyes, and Ozark Rivers Acts.

The language in the Point Reyes Act is most adequate. It states, in Section 7(b) The Secretary may permit hunting and fishing on lands and waters under his jurisdiction within the seashore in such areas and under such regulations as he may prescribe during the open seasons prescribed by applicable local, State and Federal law. The Secretary shall consult with officials of the State of California and any political subdivisions thereof who have jurisdiction of hunting and fishing prior to the issuance of any such regulations, and the Secretary is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements with such officials regarding such hunting and fishing as he may deem desirable."

While it may be the sponsors' intention to have it added at a later time, I also want to point out that H.R. 8763 lacks the standard language authorizing the appropriation of such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of the

Act.

We sincerely hope that this Congress will approve the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area. We commend the author of this bill, the gentleman from Oregon, for the diligent and persistent manner in which he has sought to develop a suitable and acceptable bill that will help save a representative part of the superb Oregon Dunes for the benefit of this and succeeding generations. We fully realize

and understand that some accommodation must be reached with private and commercial interests in order to gain the worthwhile objectives of this proposal. It is believed that H.R. 8763 responds to this necessity in a forthright manner and that its enactment will assure the protection of the maximum public interest in the Oregon Dunes Area.

STATEMENT OF W. D. HAGENSTEIN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, INDUSTRIAL

FORESTRY ASSOCIATION, PORTLAND, OREG.

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, my name is W. D. Hagenstein and I reside in Portland, Oregon. I am a professional forester and a registered professional engineer in the State of Washington and Oregon. I am executive vice president of the Industrial Forestry Association which has been working for a permanent timber supply for the forest industry of the Douglas Fir Region in Western Oregon and Western Washington for 37 years.

Industrial Forestry Association consists of 108 companies and individuals in the business of growing and harvesting timber and manufacturing lumber, pulp and paper, plywood and veneer, shingles and shakes, hard and soft boards, poles and piling, doors, furniture and other forest products. Our members operate more than 400 wood processing plants and conduct more than 200 different logging operations in our Region. They employ about 85,000 people in this Region. The annual payroll of their employees exceeds $600 million.

Our Association founded the tree farm movement in the United States in 1941 and has continuously used it as a vehicle to encourage private forest owners in our Region to grasp their opportunities in forestry by doing a better job ever since. Tree farming is the backbone of our Region's economy. It is our objective to safeguard its opportunities in every way so that we can fulfil our responsibility of providing a continuous supply of raw material for our Region's principal industry. Our Region, incidentally, provides the people of the United States with about one-fourth of their total building materials, so what we do in forestry on both private and public lands is important to all the people of the United States.

Our Board of Directors has carefully considered H.R. 8763, which would create the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area from a portion of the Siuslaw National Forest, and has directed us to support the Bill with suggestions for appropriate safeguards for the private forest lands which will be affected by the establishment of the Recreation Area.

Under our charge of safeguarding the private property, we would like to raise the same question we did last year before your Subcommittee when it was receiving testimony on H.R. 778 at Florence, Oregon, namely: why should the boundaries of the Siuslaw National Forest be extended to include lands other than those currently within the Siuslaw National Forest, but within the exterior boundaries of the proposed Rercreation Area? It seems to us that extending the boundaries of a national forest around lands not in Federal ownership is tantamount to saying that the intention of the Congress is that the Secretary of Agriculture should acquire lands therein not now owned by the United States. A second question we raised last year before your Subcommittee, and we'd like to ask it again, concerns the proposed Inland Sector of the Recreation Area, which does not comprise lands owned by the United States, but within which the Secretary of Agriculture would be given permission to acquire timberlands under sustained yield management with consent of their owners. H.R. 8763 goes on to provide that such timberlands would be exempt from condemnation as long as the Secretary of Agriculture is satisfied that such lands are being managed at the level of comparable national forest lands, but then has an escape clause which permits the Secretary to acquire such lands without consent of their owners if he determines that they are essential for recreational use or for access to or protection of recreational developments within the purposes of the Act. We respectfully suggest that your Subcommittee make it crystal clear in its Report on H.R. 8763 that the private forest owners, most of whom have owned, protected and managed their lands for many years, be assured the right to continue their tree farming practices, that they have access across public lands to reach, protect and manage their own lands on some mutually acceptable and reciprocal basis with the Department of Agriculture, and that in the event that private tree farm landowners were willing to allow acquisition of their property or any portion thereof for addition to the Recreation Area, that such acquisition be consummated through exchange in kind on an ad valorem basis.

We have a suggestion for rewriting a short portion of Section 7(c) by striking out the words "not less stringent than" in lines 2 and 3 on page 4 and substitut

ing therefore the words "at the same level of intensity as the." This does not change the substance, only states it positively.

Last year before your Subcommittee we suggested that even though the paramount purpose of designating a portion of the Siuslaw National Forest as a National Recreation Area is to provide for public recreational use and enjoyment, that the level of forestry practiced to protect and enhance the recreational features, including scenery, should not overlook the opportunity the Forest Service will have to demonstrate that the practice of intensive forestry itself is a subject which can be interpreted for visitors. This would help achieve the kind of public acceptance of the constructiveness and need for improving forestry on our national forests by actually showing citizens how it is done with the use of the latest forestry knowledge and technology.

We repeat that suggestion now and want to expand on it by recommending that the Subcommittee consider directing the Forest Service to not only use the National Recreation Area as a viable demonstration of intensive forestry, but to explore fully the opportunity to develop cooperatively with the adjoining private tree farmers an outstanding demonstration and interpretation of the compatibility of intensive forestry with recreation of all kinds and other forest uses. We appreciate the opportunity of presenting this Statement to your Subcommittee in support of H.R. 8763, which would establish the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area out of a portion of the Siuslaw National Forest, and to make these few suggestions so that it may be accomplished without adversely affecting the rights of the adjacent private tree farmers and other property owners, the economy of our State and Nation and to take full advantage of the opportunities the Recreational Area's designation will create to show the stockholders of the national forests that intensive forestry is in the best interests of them all.

Mr. TAYLOR. We have a matter which we would like to take up in discussion among ourselves in executive session dealing with the Assateague National Seashore Area. So, we will now go into executive session.

(Whereupon, at 10:20 o'clock a.m., the subcommittee proceeded to executive session.)

О