on, who have lost the abilities their forefathers had 20 or 30 or 40 years ago.

I am no authority on the legal procedures here, Senator, but from what I hear, and I have quite a bit to do with the State game officials and with Federal game officials and with other people in this community, it seems to me that pretty nearly everybody agrees that the range about which we are talking would be a very good thing for the future of Alaska. I personally find this belief is generally true except with people interested and employed in oil and mining. They naturally have other interests in their hearts. It seems to me that part of the political play there if a reserve would be established is to argue as to who would run it. Would the State run it, or would the Federal Government run it? I also think that quite a few of the people employed by the State would be for it if they could have some hand in its operation.

The whole Brooks Range and the Arctic Shelf is not a very populated area; very few people live there, with the exception of the people of Anaktuvuk Pass. For the time being, in my personal opinion, there is no danger of extinction of animals.

To answer the question, you propounded on Saturday to one of the witnesses, "Would you prefer having a range 100 miles north of Fairbanks?" Senator, I think this was taken into consideration because you find conditions there which I would say you wouldn't find in any other part of Alaska. You find the Brooks Range coming right to the coast of the Arctic Ocean, but close to Fairbanks, you wouldn't find these conditions. There you wouldn't find these conditions which combine mountain, Arctic Shelf and the Coastal Range of the Arctic Ocean. So, that is probably the reason why this would be an ideal site for the Arctic Wildlife Range.

This country, in the Brooks Range, from my personal observation, is a very beautiful country. It is one of the reasons why I am here. I came there a complete stranger in 1955, with nothing else than a desire to see the north country. There I learned to appreciate and to love this country of Alaska and I make my livelihood right here now, and this is now my home.

In summertime, you have temperatures up to 100, 102°. I know Switzerland quite well, and Alaska reminds me of some of the most beautiful country in Europe, or one of the most beautiful ones-of Switzerland. But people have to realize, too, that if this range would be established that it wouldn't be used by tourists from September or October to May, because during this time temperatures may drop down to 75 below zero. It's not disagreeably cold as you would think. The winds can become uncomfortable as they reach 40 to 70 miles per hour.

One thing should be considered: Alaska needs everything possible to develop their economy. What I am concerned with, and where I know what I am talking about is in the tourist and big game hunting trade. This year, 1959, we had quite a number of people from Mexico, Argentina, England, Switzerland, Germany, big game hunters who more or less are interested in trophy hunting, and who, in my opinion, offer no danger to the extinction of animals. They bring in quite a bit of money to Alaska. May I say that from my opinion, in our line of business and from talking with other business people, that the tourist business this year was, even considering the strikes, was

one of the best tourist businesses Alaska has ever had. The outlook for the next 1 or 2 years looks extremely well.

It is my opinion that Alaska has a duty to the other 49 States to preserve a part of this wilderness. It is probably not too much of a rush problem, right now, because there it is not a matter of life and death. An expert in this field probably will explain to you, better than I can, that it would take a long, long time to establish an Arctic Wildlife Range. If we don't start right now, it may be too late, as it is not only the extinction of animals but the disturbance of the country which could endanger the setting up of this range.

I personally think that the presentation to the public and I am one of the public-was not too well done, in regards to this bill. Many people with whom I talked don't know too much about this proposal. And you know, in the newspaper columns there has not been much publicity about this. I mean the outside newspapers.

I wonder if the committee has considered talking to people who know more than most people in this room about this country-people who live there all the while. I mention only a few names, like Bud Helmericks, who, from my personal observation, lived for 11 or 12 years in the Brooks Range, and still is living there; the bush pilots, like Andy Anderson, and flying veterans, who probably know more about the country better than anybody else living around here. I personally would like to see this whole Arctic Wildlife Range question taken away from the question of who is supposed to run it, the Federal or the State. If it is decided to estabilsh a range, let the one run it who is best equipped to do the best job away from any personal pressure. There are probably quite a few questions about the funds about which I am not 100 percent oriented. But I think that, moneywise, Alaska would not lose in the long run and, in my opinion, money should not play too important a part or role in setting up this wildlife range. We have here in Alaska the last of the wilderness and frontier of the United States. You will not find it in any other part of the United States. It brought me here and I like and love this country. I would like to quote the famous explorer, Dr. Stefansson, who called this country, which is my home from now on, the "Friendly Arctic."

If you have any questions, I would be very glad to attempt to answer them, Senator.

Senator BARTLETT. An excellent statement, Mr. Bading, on which I am sure will be read by many committee members who are not here, and by others.

I believe you spoke about the need to preserve such an area, free of man incursions and excursions and disturbances. Did I read you right on that?

Mr. BADING. Not quite, Senator. If you want to have people from the other States of the United States to see it, we may have to slightly disturb Mother Nature, but the main issue of preservation shouldn't be forgotten. I don't see how we can set up a range like this without having roads. It will be an expensive undertaking, right at the moment, because the bush pilots flying you from these points I mentioned before are quite expensive. So, something would have to be done to develop the area to enable you to reach it at less expense.

You probably would have to have a few roads within the area.

Senator BARTLETT. Do you believe that the proposal made by the Secretary of the Interior for enactment of this particular bill, so as to permit a greater degree of mining than otherwise would be the case, is desirable?

Mr. BADING. Could you phrase this question again, Senator?

Senator BARTLETT. Yes. I will put it in these terms: The Secretary of the Interior does not have to come to the Congress for this bill in order to create this wildlife range. He could do so right now with existing administrative authority.

Mr. BADING. That's right.

Senator BARTLETT. He has offered the bill with the suggestion that its passage and signing would permit him to do that which he otherwise could not do; that is to say, to permit more mining. Is this good, or is it bad for the purposes of the wildlife range?

As I un

In

Mr. BADING. It is quite a lot of country, 9 million acres. derstand, this bill contains a paragraph that mining, up to a certain degree, would be allowed the same as hunting would be allowed if it is controlled. This control should be by people who know how to preserve this park. It wouldn't harm the whole wilderness area. my opinion, if it is done by somebody who has only the interest of mining or oil drilling at heart, and doesn't know how to develop these minerals and oil without disturbing nature, then it is no good; that is my personal opinion.

Senator BARTLETT. Did I understand you correctly to say that you have actually been in this region?

Mr. BADING. That's right, sir.

Senator BARTLETT. What is the character, Mr. Bading, of the country, geographically? I know that you gave a certain description, but is it all mountainous?

Mr. BADING. No, it's not all mountainous. The Indians call the Brooks Range the Land of the Little Trees. In order to build a few log cabins, have enough firewood, I and my wife cut down quite a few hundred trees. You find trees which are about 200, or 250 years old, which are not larger in circumference than this (indicating)-than 1 foot. It is a rough country in wintertime, but it is a friendly country, too. You find vegetation, floral life, especially in the very short months in the summertime, 4, 5-4 months, where you have nearly 24 hours of sunlight, things grow so rapidly that we more or less believe that we see the growth. The seasons change overnight, from summer to fall, it takes only a day or two, where it takes maybe a few weeks here. From fall to wintertime-one day it starts snowing, and it doesn't end for 3 days or so. You had a fall countryside a few days before, and now you have a complete winter countryside. The freezeup of the lakes can happen in about 3 or 4 hours. Walker Lake, where I stayed, is a 20-mile long lake and 5 miles wide. We stood there, amazed, as in 2 or 3 hours we saw a lake freezing over. This country, in itself, has quite a bit of underbrush. The timberline, as you probably know, goes down to the Alaska-Canadian border, quite high up, quite close to the coast of the Arctic Ocean.

When you leave the Brooks Range and come to the Arctic Shelf, you find more or less what is called arctic tundra; you find brushes and undergrowth on the rivers, but you don't find any trees.

Talking about the animals, the caribou live most of the time, in the summertime, on the arctic tundra, and when the winter starts they

move a few hundred miles south. I was lucky enough to see, for 3 weeks, part of the caribou migration going through Walker Lake and through the passes. I have seen hundreds, thousands of animals there, which amazed me so, that even though I needed the food, as we lived off of the country, I couldn't shoot for 3 or 4 hours, only looking at this wonderful play of nature there.

The living conditions on the coast of the Arctic Ocean, Colville River Delta, are quite different. I personally would like to live there for a few years, because you have howling winds most of the time, but it's a very interesting country, too. That's one reason why I believe that this part of the range there is ideal; you can find all three or four conditions that you will meet in the entire arctic together in this one

area.

Senator BARTLETT. How long were you there?

Mr. BADING. 13 months. I started out-1212 months. May 1955 to May-the end of May 1956.

Senator BARTLETT. Mr. Bading, if Dr. Buckley will permit me to say this, you should have given all of the testimony for the Interior Department at Washington for quite obviously you know more about this area than anyone in the U.S. Government, and I mean that literally.

Mr. BADING. Thank you, Senator. I have to apologize for one thing: I am quite busy in business here, and I probably didn't do my duty as a citizen, to be prepared, for this as it has only been 3 or 4 days that I really entered into it.

Senator BARTLETT. You made a very good statement now. One further question.

What will be different now, and in the future, if this range is established?

Why do we need an Arctic Wildlife Range, where hunting is going to be permitted, where mining is going to be permitted?

Mr. BADING. Let me answer it this way, Senator: If you bring up children, you try to train them early enough how to behave. If you wait too long, you may never succeed in it. I don't believe that in the next 20 or 30 years, there is a chance that animals will become extinct with today's hunting pressure in the Brooks Range. There is not too much hunting done, not like on the Kenai, or in the other parts. But, in order to preserve something before it is even touched, we should start considering it now.

Senator BARTLETT. I appreciate that; and I know, many, many people will join you in that sentiment. But what I am trying to discover is what actual changes will come about by reason of the establishment of this range? How will all of this be better preserved? Mr. BADING. You more or less want me to stick my neck out, but I am willing to do that. My personal observation-I say I stick my neck out gladly, because I love this country, Senator, and I will do everything that I can to see that the country is preserved. DEW line operations, mining operations, oil exploring operations bring a certain amount of disturbance. This disturbance probably has not yet reached the site of the area that we are talking about. Once it has it reached, if you go with weasel tractors, or anything else, for a season, or more, over certain countryside, it takes the country 20 or 30 years, or more, to recover, and it might not recover at all. Once the animals, grizzly bears move out, or little animals are frightened away from

certain parts of the country, they don't move back into it. As you know, around here, you have to go quite a way in order to hunt Dall sheep. The hunting pressure, civilization has moved in, so the Dall sheep and other animals move a few mountain ranges back.

Senator BARTLETT. Except for the moose, and they move closer; isn't that right?

Mr. BADING. They know we need their meat. [Laughter.]

I am not the authority to tell you, Senator, if it should be or should not be done right now. I am interested that something be done to preserve these things which we now have in the Arctic of Alaska, in the Brooks Range, and which we may not have in another 50 years, if we don't do something about it.

Senator BARTLETT. So am I, so is everyone else; but still, and there is no good reason at all, I think, why I should keep addressing this question to you, because this should be answered by Government witnesses: I fail, to a degree, at least, to comprehend what differences in the preservation of these values will be granted if this range is established. You spoke about mining, you spoke about DEW line operations. Mining will be permitted, under the very proposal made by the Secretary.

Mr. BADING. Controlled mining, Senator?
Senator BARTLETT. Controlled mining.

Mr. BADING. They have to conform with certain regulations.
Senator BARTLETT. Yes, indeed.

You and I know perfectly well that if this range is promulgated, and the Department of Defense goes to the Department of the Interior, and presents a need, for the purposes of national defense, to do this or that, that that request will be granted. So I find difficulty, and I always have, since this subject came up, in ascertaining what actual advantages for the beauties of nature, and for the preservation of game, and so forth, are going to be ours by reason of its creation. Mr. BADING. Under the existing-I would be in trouble with some mining people probably here-under the existing regulations, mining laws, if you have leases you have to follow rules, but more or less you don't take too much into consideration the countryside, nature. Let's put it this way: 9 million acres, Senator, is a too large part of Alaska that we can set it aside and say, "O.K., we will put it in the freezer; we will take it over when we need it again," because Alaska needs everything that it can get in its economic development to make a real good go of being a new State.

So, about mining, I don't know enough about it; but, controlled, you could ask me about big game hunting-if big game hunting was controlled in this area, is still would leave the area open to hunting. If observation by State game department or by the Federal game department, whoever runs it-it doesn't make any difference-would see that certain animals-take, for example, the moose, which range up the coast of the Arctic Ocean-moose are in danger of extinction. O.K., they put a closed season in a certain part of the range, they can control it quite a bit better.

Senator BARTLETT. Mr. Bading, so far as you are aware, personally, as a result of your experience in the area, would you say that there are any commercial values to be found there, actual or potential, other than mining?