for recreational purposes and of the proposal of the Bureau of Land Management to declare that the black gabbro material is not a valuable mineral deposit within the meaning of the mining laws and to find that the mining claim is void, and that possibly the claim would be called invalid. Upon advice of counsel that estimated legal fees and expenses in connection with an administrative contest and subsequent court litigation could be expected to run into four figures, my company concluded that it could not afford to formally resist the Bureau of Land Management's proposal.

(The letter referred to appears on p. 31.)

My company's onyx mining claims are situated on Forest Service land. After nearly a year of investigation, the Forest Service finally advised me on May 19, 1965, that the claims would be considered valid because the materials would not be classified as building stone. We still have not received written confirmation of these verbal

assurances.

The onyx was being used in the paint, chemical, and glass industries and, as such, they ruled that the claim would be considered valid. Mr. Manchester came over and was very cooperative on this, and he did make the statement when he was there that as far as the building stone part of it was concerned, that it couldn't pass, but that because of these other uses, it could be considered valid mining claims.

Present uncertainty as to the character of the deposit of black and gold limestone has caused us to defer developmental work. We understand that if we request a lease from the Forest Service competitive bidding will follow and that any lease will be issued on a 10-year maximum basis and reevaluated and put up for rebid for the succeeding period. Because of the cost of constructing roads to the deposit, mine developmental expenses, and market development expenses, my company would not feel justified in operating the property on a lease basis and a bid basis for so short a term and with the prospect of having to compete with other bidders for a renewal of the lease at the end of the initial term. If a deposit were located as a mining claim, there is no assurance that the validity of the claim would not be assailed in proceedings brought by the Bureau of Land Management under Public Law 167 and their administrative regulations construing the statutory language "common variety."

The dilemma in which my company is placed is that which faces every prospector for valuable nonmetallic stone of exotic colors or unusual physical characteristics. It is essential that the law and the administrative regulations thereunder be clarified. As it now stands the final decision on determining "common variety" can only come from court action brought by the defendants. This creates an extreme financial hardship on the prospector and the many small operators.

Senator GRUENING. Mr. Larison, this is a very valuable contribution to our discussion. It raises a number of interesting problems, and one of them which I think is basic is the difficulty that occurs when an administrative decision is made and the "victim"- -as we may call ourselves-has no recourse but going to court, and finds that the cost of going to court, where the verdict will ultimately be favorable or unfavorable to him, will be prohibitive. Therefore, he is, in effect, ruled out by executive fiat, and that is a very important issue, and one that I think concerns us very much.

Now, here, if I understand the situation, the Bureau of Land Management claims that this particular material was not applicable under the mining laws; is that correct, Mr. Larison?

Mr. LARISON. That's correct.

Senator GRUENING. But then, later, the Forest Service declared that it was; is that correct?

Mr. LARISON. I talked about several things here. As far as the black gabbro is concerned-the black basalt which Mr. Sahinen says is extremely rare, and I don't think there is another known depositthe Bureau of Land Management is withdrawing 160 acres for recreational purposes.

Now, the purpose of this withdrawal-I may be corrected, but as I understand it in the summons we received-is to preserve this material because it is so unusual; but they are saying our mining claim is invalid because it is a "common variety." I am speaking of the black gabbro, if that is the one you were talking about.

Senator GRUENING. Let me ask: What is black gabbro used for industrially or commercially? What would be its value?

Mr. LARISON. We have been mining this for 2 years and have been selling it as an exposed aggregate. It has very unusual blue lights, as Mr. Sahinen calls them. It has peacock colors in it, and it's very exotic as a building material on the exposed aggregate of a building. Panels are made of the material in large pieces or in small pieces. We have had, at great expense, polished panels made which would be used for the interiors of office buildings and it is very unusual. There is no rock like it.

Senator GRUENING. And, because of its rarity, is it very valuable? Mr. LARISON. Because it is unusual. Here is the procedure, sir, in this business: You take a stone of unusual, exotic colors and you make panels out of it. You cut samples and put them in the hands of architects and people who are building buildings, then you may sit around for a year until someone puts up a building and they will look at one of these panels, and they will say, "This is beautiful, this is what we want on our building." From that point you will then get an order for 200 or 300 tons of material to be put to this use. That is the essential use of that material. It is very unusual in its physical characteristics.

Senator GRUENING. Well, what is your understanding of the purpose of setting this aside as a recreational area and to preserve this mineral; it would still be underground, wouldn't it? Would anybody have a chance to look at it and appraise its beauty and its unique qualities?

Mr. LARISON. It has a unique quality and has been known as "ringing rocks." If you can find a piece that is standing free, you can hit it with a hammer and it rings like a bell. As far as 160 acres for a recreational area, as far as anyone taking their family up there for a picnic, it's rather remote, and we have difficulty rebuilding the road every year. The purpose, as I understand it, is because it is unique, but if someone wants to go up and find a piece that is standing free, he can hit it with a hammer and it will ring.

Senator GRUENING. Well, would it be the idea of this recreational area that this would be set up so anybody could go and hit it with a hammer and enjoy the ringing?

Mr. LARISON. To my knowledge that is the purpose of it.

Senator GRUENING. Well, I think this is a very interesting point, and I wonder if Mr. Florance would enlighten us on the subject. This is, as far as I am concerned, a unique and an unprecedented situation-it may not be, but I certainly never heard of it-where a mineral was so rare that those who have a claim on it can't mine it, so it is set aside as a part of a recreational area. Conceivably, this might be a very useful piece of conservation, but I would be interested in knowing just how this is to work out, and I wonder if the Bureau of Land Management representative here would enlighten us on it? Mr. Shafer?

Mr. SHAFER. I am not familiar with this particular situation, Senator Gruening, but we have some other people from our Montana office here who may be.

Senator GRUENING. Well, while we are on this subject, if there is anybody from this office who could enlighten us, I think this would be very interesting. I have never heard of anything like this before, have you, Senator Metcalf?

STATEMENT OF NORMAN ROGERS, HELENA, MONT.

Mr. ROGERS. Senators, I am the party of the first part hereSenator GRUENING. Give your name, please?

Mr. ROGERS. Norman Rogers. I am from Helena, Mont., and it was I who located this claim, and when they came up there and started saying the claim was invalid, why, that's when they decided to go to this recreational area to get me out of there anyhow. Now, there isn't anyone going to go up there and use that

Senator GRUENING. I think it would be useful if you would come up to the table here so we could hear you distinctly.

Mr. ROGERS. This is a pile of boulders that was pushed up by

nature.

Senator GRUENING. It is up above the ground?

Mr. ROGERS. Yes, sir. It is just like you went out to Pipestone, then saw the boulders up there. They look like any other boulder, however, they do have a kind of a brown coating over them, either from weatherization or the process of natural development. Sahinen has written an article about them and, as the man suggested, you will get a copy of the article and it will explain it. But why the Bureau of Land Management? We built 7 miles of road in there to this property. Now, all at once, they want it.

Senator GRUENING. Did the Department of the Interior pay for this road?

Mr. ROGERS. Oh, no, no, no. It came out of this pocket (indicating own pocket), right here my own left-hand pocket.

Now, why are they so insistent on having a recreational area up there? Even the natives down there can't figure it out. There is no water up there. There are very few trees there, and when the lightning hits up there, you had better make arrangements to get yourself off of there, because it's hitting up there all the time. I have been up there on several occasions, and you can go up there and look at any one of the big fir trees and they have a strip of bark right off of the side of them where lightning has stripped it. Well, if anyone was up there with his family and that lightning began to hit around up there, he would have to leave. The material, according

to Sahinen and also the Bureau of Land Management, is rare and they put a piece in The Standard themselves saying it is very rare. The only other place it comes from is in Scotland. That is what they said. They just couldn't scoop me off of there by saying that the claim was invalid, so they have to have a recreational area up there, and no one knows what for.

Senator GRUENING. Well, now, I would like to ask either Mr. Hankins, the regional attorney of the Forest Service, or Mr. Shafer, or Mr. Florance, to give us a little light on this. This is an unusuaĺ situation.

If I understand correctly, here's a man who has a claim there, discovers something unique and unusual, and because of its unique and unusual character the Government moves in and takes it away from him.

Mr. ROGERS. Yes.

Senator GRUENING. Is that a fair résumé of the situation?

Mr. ROGERS. Yes; and not only that, they have me in the courthouse over it, too. Í have got to go to this hearing. In other words, I am going to be harassed here. I have been harassed all last year about it; now I have to fight with my own money now. I have got to dig up some more money to get my lawyers to go down and say, "Hey, now." Then the decision is going to be made down at Billings; we're going to have to go to a hearing, then it's going to be kicked out; and every time I ask one of these fellows about it, I say, "Who said this?" The answer is: "Well, Udall. Udall says that this is a 'common variety'. So it all filters back. It doesn't make any difference whether you talk to the Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management, Mr. Udall seems to be the dictator in this particular

case.

Senator GRUENING. What becomes of the basic right of discovery in a situation of that kind?

Mr. ROGERS. Well, I don't have a valid right of discovery. That is what they are trying to tell me all the time-after I built the road in there, after I have been mining the material ever since I have been up here. I have spent several thousands of dollars up there. Now I am going to be run off. I am going to have to fight for my life, you know, get under the table and dig up some more money for this battle to-the Lord only knows where, I don't.

Senator GRUENING. Well, Mr. Rogers, your company had the claim on this property?

Mr. ROGERS. Yes; that is right. It still does, and we do the work on it. We mine it for American Chemet.

Senator GRUENING. Would you mind giving us a more or less chronological account of this happening? You were on this claim and you were working it; is that right?

Mr. ROGERS. Yes.

Senator GRUENING. And then what happened?

Mr. ROGERS. I have been on there for about 2 years.

Senator GRUENING. Well, when did the Government first move into the picture?

Mr. ROGERS. Oh, after I built the road up there.

Senator GRUENING. You built the road up there, and then at what time did some Government official come into there and put a caveat upon you and say, "This isn't yours any more"?

Mr. ROGERS. I would have to dig up the records.

Senator GRUENING: Well, I mean, approximately; we can get the information furnished later after you have verified it, but for the purpose of this hearing, this is a very interesting occurrence and I think we ought to explore it a little bit while we are all here together. Mr. ROGERS. Do you have the date on that?

Mr. LARISON: I don't know whether I have the date or not.
Senator GRUENING. Well, approximately?

Mr. SAHINEN. I believe it was last September.
Senator GRUENING. This was at a certain time?
Mr. ROGERS. Well, last fall, late last summer.

Senator GRUENING. Who notified you? Was it a representative of the Forest Service or of the Bureau of Land Management?

Mr. ROGERS. The Bureau of Land Management, they are the ones who came. Well, there was a notice in the Butte papers.

Senator GRUENING. There was a notice in the paper?

Mr. ROGERS. That is right. That is the first we knew about it. Senator GRUENING. And what did it say?

Mr. ROGERS. Well, it just said that the Bureau of Land Management was figuring on withholding this 160 acres up in there for recreational purposes. They gave no reason why they decided to do it, except that they hadn't already run me off my place by spooking me out of there, which they have done to all the rest of the little fellows in the country.

Senator GRUENING. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Rogers. You were going to testify a little later and we appreciate your volunteering at this point.

Mr. ROGERS. Well, I tried to clear this up a little bit-how it came about.

Senator GRUENING. I would like to ask Mr. Shafer, Bureau of Land Management, whether he can shed any light on this? Mr. Shafer, could you come up?

Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Chairman, well

Senator GRUENING. You may not be prepared to give us all the answers, but if you have any information we would appreciate your testimony.

Mr. SHAFER. Well, right now, on this particular case, Mr. Chairman, I haven't any of the answers. Mr. Parker Davies from our Billings office is here, and I think he probably could give you a chronology on this case.

Senator GRUENING. Mr. Davies, would you come forward, please? Will you give your name and position to the reporter?

STATEMENT OF PARKER DAVIES, BUREAU OF Land

MANAGEMENT

Mr. DAVIES. My name is Parker Davies. I am the mineral specialist in the Montana State office for the Bureau of Land Management.

Senator GRUENING. Well, tell us what happened.

Mr. DAVIES. Well, Mr. Chairman, we first became aware of this through a report to our office by the Forest Service. This piece of land immediately adjoins the Forest Service on the south-the Forest Service being to the north of this 160 acres.

They told us