for maintenance in 1962 is about 20 percent. The lower rate of increase in maintenance funds is possible because of decreases in unit maintenance costs.

In many of the O. & C. areas close adherence to a maintenance schedule is essential to prevent subgrade deterioration and consequent costly loss of road segments. Replacement costs of "washout" portions can be materially greater than initial construction and often entails considerable relocations of adjacent undamaged segments of the affected road. An economic side effect is the hardship worked on timber purchasers in their inability to replenish their depleted mill log inventory during the critical spring months.

In addition to maintenance performed with appropriated funds, fees for road maintenance are paid by purchasers of Government timber as a condition of timber sale contracts and by timber haulers using the roads under permits.

Nominal requirements for maintenance of recreation facilities also are included.

EXPLANATION RELATING to approprIATION LANGUAGE

The proposed addition to the language is necessary to accomplish two purposes. First, it will clarify authority for construction and operation and maintenance of access roads on rights-of-way acquired from private parties on lands adjacent to the O. & C. lands. The present language provides for acquisition of rights-of-way adjacent to the O. & C. lands and implies but does not specifically provide for construction, operation and maintenance of access roads on such acquired rightsof-way. Second, it would broaden present authority regarding construction, operation and maintenance of access roads, reforestation and other improvements on the O. & C. lands by authorizing such activities on other Federal lands in the O. & C. land-grant counties of Oregon. The broader authority is desired by the Association of O. & C. counties.

The proposed deletion of the last proviso is made as it is no longer necessary. The unexpended balances involved have been merged with this appropriation and, consequently, this provision in the language has served its purpose.

Does this decrease in the amount of $3 million in the estimated construction of access roads indicate that the road system is becoming more easily adequate?

Mr. LANDSTROM. I will have to ask Mr. Beirne to comment on that. Mr. BEIRNE. The House cut us $200,000 for recreational facilities. Senator MAGNUSON. What about access roads?

Mr. BEIRNE. There was no cut in the access program. The $2,980,000 is not a reduction by the House but a lessening of the amount carried over as an unobligated balance from the previous year.

Senator MAGNUSON. Do you recommend that be put in?

Mr. BEIRNE. It will have been obligated, Senator. It is not a case of reduction. This particular appropriation is based upon 25 percent of the estimated receipts. There is no reduction by the House at all. Senator MAGNUSON. But you still have authority to do what you want with that?

Mr. BEIRNE. That is correct.

Senator MAGNUSON. Senator Hayden has been very interested in that matter for a long time.

Chairman HAYDEN. I have been trying to keep that thing straight. Mr. LANDSTROM. I am satisfied that the amount requested will be the full amount available from this source.

RECEIPTS FROM SALE OF PUBLIC TIMBER

Senator MAGNUSON. Then your estimate of $41 million for next year is correct in the public sale of timber?

Mr. LANDSTROM. That is the receipts you are speaking of, Senator?
Senator MAGNUSON. Yes, your estimate.

Mr. LANDSTROM. Yes, sir; that is correct.
Senator MAGNUSON. Fiscal 1962, that is?

Mr. LANDSTROM. Yes, sir. To summarize, Mr. Chairman, for the Bureau of Land Management program the receipts for the fiscal year 1960 were $371,068,000, a new record high, having increased over 1959, by $234 million.

Chairman HAYDEN. Was that mostly from oil?

Mr. LANDSTROM. Yes, sir, the bulk of it is from the oil and gas leasing, including the Outer Continental Shelf which is a big money maker for the United States and will be even more so in the future, we are satisfied.

ACTIVITY IN OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF

Of the receipts of 1960, $52 million was paid to States and counties in lieu of taxes, shall we say. For 1961, the present year, we estimate the receipts of our operations to amount to $217.5 million. For the year which we are discussing, 1962, they will be $279.177 million. You might notice this is a slight decrease a rather substantial decrease from 1960. The reduction is due to the variance in the activity in the Outer Continental Shelf.

We think, however, in future years, this will go up. So we have here, therefore, an activity which is a large moneymaker for the Treasury. It is partly on that basis that we urge your attention to our request for restoration of the funds.

Senator MUNDT. You say the reduction is caused by producing less oil on the Outer Continental Shelf?

Mr. LANDSTROM. Sir, it is actually fewer lease sales that have been scheduled this year than a year ago. The largest receipts thus far have been from the sales of the right to take leases at public auction. Those have not been quite at the level that they were earlier.

Senator MUNDT. That is because of the sort of depressed condition of the oil industry?

Mr. LANDSTROM. That is true in part; yes, sir.

Senator MUNDT. Who is your weed man?

Mr. LANDSTROM. That is Mr. Kerr here, Chief of Range Management.

TREATMENT OF AREAS INFECTED WITH NOXIOUS WEEDS

Senator MUNDT. I would like to ask Mr. Kerr, if I could, or you, this question. You are asking for $109,000 more to intensify treatment of areas infected with halogeton, medusa and other noxious weeds. I am interested in the other noxious weeds because we are having great difficulty in getting money from the Federal Government for other noxious weeds which we have in South Dakota which don't seem to be halogeton or medusa, but are equally deleterious. We are having very much trouble because of the public domain land, particularly Indian reservations, which blow the weeds all over the State. I wonder if you could give me any encouragement if these elusive words "other noxious weeds" might offer some hope for us in that connection.

Mr. KERR. The program that the Bureau is carrying out under the weed appropriation is intensified in the large public land area. That is one thing.

Senator MUNDT. When you consider public land area, do you include Indian reservations?

Mr. LANDSTROM. No, sir.

I might interrupt there, Senator, to say that the Bureau of Land Management in South Dakota is administering about 280,000 acres. This would not include any Indian reservation lands of which you speak. We are very interested, however, in doing a good job on that 280,000. So we will listen very attentively to what you say.

Senator MUNDT. What is the nature of those public lands primarily? Is it forest lands?

Mr. LANDSTROM. No, sir. These are scattered foothill lands below the level of the national forests.

Senator MUNDT. What hope can you offer, recognizing that you don't have the responsibility now for the Indian reservations?

Mr. KERR. I think there has been some reluctance on the part of Congress and Bureau of the Budget to look favorably on the general program because of the extensiveness to which it might go. Every State with farming lands is bothered with weeds. All States don't have public lands from which weed seed can be spread onto private lands. The principal weeds that we are working with are those that are detrimental to livestock for one thing, but they have other detrimental aspects. For example, this white-fly problem that we have in Idaho in our farming areas, where the farm crops are badly affected every year through white-fly infestation.

One season of the life of the insect is spent on native plants, weedsRussian-thistle, for one-pepper plants, mustard, that are found principally on public lands. In our program there we are seeding wheat grass, trying to get a perennial grass, to take over where these annual weeds are now present, and which serve as host plant to these insects.

AREAS INVOLVED IN WEED CONTROL EXPENDITURES

Senator MUNDT. Could you do this and supply it for the record or would this be too laborious? Could you give us your breakdown of where the money was spent for weed control during this last fiscal year?

Mr. KERR. Yes, sir.

Could you

Senator MUNDT. What kind of weeds and what areas. also give me an estimate of the dimensions of the weed problem on public lands in South Dakota as you see it?

Mr. KERR. The part in South Dakota may be a little difficult to do, but we will do the best we can.

Senator MUNDT. It will kind of get South Dakota up in your mind if you have that exercise.

Halogeton is estimated to infest 8 million acres of the above States except Arizona and New Mexico. Medusa head rye infests some 700,000 acres of Idaho and Oregon and has been reported in California. The beet leafhopper problem exists on approximately 500,000 acres in Idaho and Oregon. Maximum efforts have been expended on these three programs, since halogeton which is poisonous to livestock and Medusa head rye which destroys desirable range forage cover spread at an explosive rate and are endangering areas far beyond their present habitat. The beet leafhopper has caused agricultural crop losses up to $2 million in 1 year and has also spread rapidly.

Few

In South Dakota the principal weeds of concern to the livestock and farm industry are cockleburrs, larkspur, leafy spurge, and Russian thistle. These are limited for the most part to poorly drained bottoms and spot infestations. areas of the limited acreage of public domain land in South Dakota are subject to infestation by these species.

BEET LEAF HOPPER PROGRAM IN IDAHO

Senator DwORSHAK. At this point, I might ask, Mr. Landstrom, how much money is in the budget for this beet leaf hopper program in Idaho?

Mr. LANDSTROM. I am told it is approximately $150,000.

Senator DwORSHAK. That is exactly the same as we had in this fiscal year.

Mr. LANDSTROM. Yes, sir.

Senator DWORSHAK. For the benefit of my colleagues on the subcommittee, I might say that the State has provided some funds and that private interests, farming particularly, have cooperated fully and that we have a State commission that helps to supervise this program and help make it successful; is that not correct?

Mr. LANDSTROM. Yes, sir. We appreciate a great deal the cooperation we get from those agencies.

TOTAL ACREAGE RESEEDED

Senator Dworshak. So far in 3 years we have had 112,500 acres reseeded at a cost of about $630,000 at the Federal level. I might rationalize this a little bit to show that we are not the recipients of any preferential treatment because the area which provides the breeding places for the white fly are essentially areas which were used for bombing ranges by the Mountain Home Air Base. Ideal conditions were created for the expansion of the beet leaf hopper which invaded the irrigated areas in the Snake River, particularly in Twin Falls County, where in 1 year we had a loss of about $2 million in the bean crop alone. I want to express my appreciation to the Bureau of Land Management for the fine work that has been done, recalling that it was originally recommended that this be a 10-year program. We have been cutting down gradually but I am happy to note that you are asking for $150,000 this year. It has received Budget Bureau approval.

Mr. LANDSTROM. Yes, sir.

FUNDS FOR HALOGETON PROGRAM

Senator DwORSHAK. In the past we have had difficulty in getting that. It gives us assurances that even though the program has been greatly diminished, it will be continued at levels which eventually will give us some hope of eliminating this beet leaf hopper in that area. How much money is there for halogeton?

Mr. LANDSTROM. For the State of Idaho?

Senator DwORSHAK. For the entire halogeton program. Idaho is only one of several States.

Mr. LANDSTROM. We believe that is about $600,000 for the year 1962.

Senator DWORSHAK. Are we making any appreciable headway or merely holding our own, or are we losing ground?

Mr. LANDSTROM. I can't answer that personally because I have not seen those fields for about 2 years.

Senator DwORSHAK. Would Mr. Kerr be able to give us the infor

mation?

Mr. KERR. I believe we are making headway. There are additional infestations coming up regularly, but within the old stands our seeding operations have been effective in reducing the amount of growth and of more advantage it has produced a forage supply that made it possible for us to relieve grazing on other lands where the halogeton had not made its start yet.

Senator DwORSHAK. That big program was in the area where Utah, Nevada, and Idaho come together in that corner.

Mr. KERR. Yes, sir.

Senator DwORSHAK. That was the original infestation that gave us a lot of trouble.

Mr. KERR. Yes, sir.