7 4

I

.3X8/13 

A 7*/ 

^bb'?~

*

IN T E R IO R N O M I N A T I O N ^

V

GOVERNMENT

Storage

H E A R IN G

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTER IOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

EIGH TY -N IN TH CONG RESS

•ft J ' ’ »L • >)} *» 5iZ ’ ‘I l *

SECOND SESSION

ON

TH E NO MINATIO N OF RO BE RT LaFO LL ET TE BE NN ET T, OF 

ALASKA, TO BE CO MM ISS ION ER OF INDIAN AFF AIR S

Cl 204

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1966
asi ’.8 XC. 

> 'A

COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSU LAR AFFAI RS

HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington, Ch air ma n

CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico

ALAN BIBLE, Nevada

FRANK CHURCH, Idaho

ERNEST GRUENING, Alaska

FRANK E. MOSS, Utah

QUENTIN N. BURDICK, North Dakota

CARL HAYDEN. Arizona

GEORGE McGOVERN, South Dakota

GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin

LEE METCALF, Montana

THOMAS H. KUCHEL, California

GORDON ALLOTT, Colorado

LEN B. JORDAN, Idaho

MILWARD L. SIMPSON, Wyoming

PAUL J. FANN IN, Arizona

n

Jerry T. Verkler, St aff Direc to r

Stewart French, Ch ief Counsel
NOMINATION OF ROBERT L. BENNETT TO BE COMMISSIONER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

F R ID A Y , A P R IL 1, 19 66

U.S. Senate,

Committee on I nterior and Insular Affairs,

W ashing ton, D.C.

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in room 3110, Senate 

Office Building, Senator Henry M. Jackson (chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Henry M. Jackson, of Washington; Clinton P. 

Anderson, of New Mexico; Alan Bible, of Nevada; Frank Church, of 

Idaho; Ernest Gruening, of Alaska; Quentin N. Burdick, of North 

Dakota; George McGovern, of South Dakota; Gaylord Nelson, of 

Wisconsin; Lee Metcalf, of Montana; Milward L. Simpson, of Wyoming; and Paul J. Fann in, of Arizona.

Also prese nt: Senators Bartlett and Mundt, and Congressman Reifel.

Also present: Stew art French, chief counsel; James FI. Gamble, 

professional staff member; and E. Lewis Reid, minority counsel.

The Chairman. The committee will come to order.

This morning the full committee is meeting for the purpose of considering the nomination submitted by the President of Robert L. 

Bennett to be Commissioner of Indian Affairs. I believe most members of this committee are acquainted with Mr. Bennett, who has 

served in the Bureau for many years.

On March 29, 1 announced in the Congressional Record that this 

hearing would be held. I also included a biographical sketch 

Commissioner-designate, and a copy is before each mei ' 

committee. I order that it also be placed in the hearing fecord 

this point.

(The document referred to follows:)

Robert L. Benn ett

Born November 16, 1912, on the Oneida Indian Reservation

EDUCATION

Attended public and parochial schools in Wisconsin. Was graduated in 1931 

from Haskell Institu te (Indian school) at Lawrence, Kans., where he specialized 

in business administration. Holds degree of LL.B. from Southeastern University School of Law.

OCCUPATION AL BACKGROUND

1933-38: Served with the Bureau of Indian Affairs agency a t the Ute Reservation in Utah. Also served in various capacities with the Ute Tribal Council 

and as trea sure r of three Indian livestock associations in the area.

1938-45: Assigned to Washington office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, as specialist 

in realty a ffa irs; late r tran sferred to Navy agency.

1944-45 : Pfc., Marine Corps.

1
2 INTERIOR NOMINATION

1946-48: Directed training program for World War II Indian veterans as 

member of staff of Phoenix, Ariz., office, Veterans’ Administration.

1949-51: Rejoined Bureau of Indian Affairs in capacity of Job Placement 

Office, Aberdeen Area, serving Indian groups in the Dakotas.

1951-54: Reassigned to Washington, D.C., office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

to assist in tribal development programs.

1954-56: Superintendent of Consolidated Ute Indian Agency, Ignacio, Colo.

1956-62: Reassigned to Aberdeen Area Office and appointed Assistant Area 

Director.

1962-65: Appointed Area Director of Indian Affairs for the Alaska region, 

with headquarters in Juneau.

1966: Appointed Deputy Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C.

ORGA NIZATION AF FILIAT IONS

American Academy of Political Social Science;

American Society for Public Administration ;

National Congress of American India ns;

Member of the National Advisory Committee for Indian Youth;

Board of directors, Arrow, Inc .; and

Rotary International.

FA MILY DATA

Married to former Mrs. Cleota Minor Brayboy of Baltimore, Md., a social 

worker. Six children: John, a Navy veteran now living in Phoenix, Ariz.; 

William, a Navy veteran now living in Livermore, Calif.; Leo, a Marine veteran 

living in Phoenix ; and Joanne, David, and Robert, living at home.

The Chairman. We have received a number of communications endorsing Mr. Bennett, and they, too, will be included in the record at 

the end of the oral testimony.

We have also received a communication from the All-Ind ian Council, 

from Albuquerque, N. Mex. That will be included in the record also.

I understand that the nominee this morning will be introduced by 

the Assistant Secretary, Hariy’ R. Anderson.

Before doing that, however, I would like to call on Senator Ba rtlett and Congressman Reifel, of South Dakota, who have asked to appear here at the outset of the hearing.

First of all, I will ask Senator Bartlett to make a statement.

STATEMENT OF HON. E. L. BARTLETT, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE 

STATE OF ALASKA

Senator Bartlett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee; I appear before you to submit a letter directed to me, protesting confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Bennett. This letter is 

written and signed by Mr. F red W. Grant, Jr., president of the H yda ­

burg, Alaska, Cooperative Association.

(The letter referred to follows:)

Hydaburg, Alaska, March 11, 1966. Senator E. L. Bartlett,

Congress of the United States,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator: Attached hereto are statements presented to Mr. Newton 

Edwards, Department of the Interior representative conducting hearings on the 

■closure of operations at the cannery owned by members of the Hydaburg Cooperative Association. Also a few le tters are attached th at we thought may be of 

interest to you.

I want to suggest tha t you work against the confirmation of Mr. Robert L. 

Bennett’s appointment as Commissioner of Indian Affairs. We feel he has
INTERIOR NOMINATION 3

delibera tely twisted the tru th in our case to justify his actions. This should 

disqualify the man to hold such an important post. He along w ith Mr. Wright 

and Mr. Walk er, BIA officials at Jun eau , Alaska, should be tra ns ferred to 

positions they a re better qualified to handle.

Than k you for your help in making the hea ring possible, thus affording us a 

chance to make our grievances known.

Best regards.

Very tr uly yours,

Fred W. Grant, Jr.,

President, Hydaburg Cooperative Association.

Senator Bartlett. I also submit, in case it has not already been 

directed to you, a communication from the Metlakatla Indian Community, Henry S. Littlefield, mayor, endorsing Mr. Bennett.

(The document referred to follows:)

Metlakatla, Alaska, March 30,1966.

Hon. E. L. Bartlett,

Senate Building, Washington, D.C.:

We would like to endorse the appointment of Hon. Robert L. Be nnett for the 

post of Commissioner of Indian Affairs. We have had excellent rela tions with 

Mr. Be nnett and know he has the ability and the background for a high execu tive 

office in the BIA. Again we commend the choice of Mr. Benne tt for Commissioner.

T he Metlakatla I ndian Community, 

Henry S. Littlefield, Mayor.

Senator Bartlett. Likewise, I should like to call to the attention of 

the committee Senate Resolution No. 13 of the Alaska S tate Legislature, signed by Robert J. McNealy, president of the senate, passed by 

the Senate of Alaska on March 25, 1966, endorsing Mr. Bennett’s 

appointment.

(The document referred to follow s:)

Received March 31, 1966, in the Senate, by the local government comm ittee:

Senate Resolution No. 13 in the Legislature of the State of Alaska Fourth

Legislature, Second Session

EXTENDING CONGRATULATIONS TO THE HONORABLE ROBERT L. BENNETT

Be it resolved by th e senate:

Whereas the prog rams of the Departme nt of the Interio r executed through 

the Burea u of Ind ian Affairs are of vital int ere st to Alask a; and

Whe reas Alaskans have a continuing int ere st in appointments to the post of 

Commissioner of Ind ian Affa irs ; and

Whe reas the Pre sid ent has nominated the H onorable Robert L. Benne tt to the 

post of Comm issioner; and

Whereas the Honorable Robert L. B enn ett served with distinction as the Alaska are a director, Burea u of Indian Affairs ; and be it

Resolved by the senate, Th at c ong ratu lations and best wishes for a productive 

administration are extended to the Honorable Robert L. B ennett on his nomination f or the post of Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

Copies of thi s reso lution shall be sent to the Honorable Lyndon B. Johnson. 

President of the United Sta te s; the Honorable Ste wa rt L. Udall, Secretary of 

the In terio r; the Honorable Hen ry M. Jackson, chairman, Senate Inter ior and 

Insular Affairs Committe e; and to the Honorable E. L. Bartle tt and the Honorable Ernest Gruening, U.S. Senators and the Honorable Ralph J. Rivers, U.S. 

Representative, Members of the Alaska delegation in Congress.

Senator Bartlett. Personally, I appear before you supporting this 

nomination. I should like to speak a few words, if I may, concerning 

the communications from Hydaburg. This relates to a dispute tha t
4 INTERIOR NOMINATION

is going on between Hyd aburg and Klawock, another Indian community, as to whether one or both co-op canneries should be operated this 

year. It is a vexing, knotty problem, not easy of solution.

My estimate is th at Mr. Bennett had little, if anything, to do with 

the final determination, which, I guess, has not yet been made because, 

not long since, Secretary Udall sent a special member of his staff to 

Hydaburg so that the people there might voice their opinions and express themselves relating to the continued operation of their cannery.

Fo r my own pa rt, Mr. Chairman, I merely want to say that I first 

became acquainted with Mr. Bennett when he was named as area director for the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Alaska. He came there confron ting many problems. I am not here to tell you that he solved 

them all. No man can. And he will not solve all those tha t will face 

him in his new position as Commissioner of Indian Affairs. This is 

beyond the capacity of any one man or any small group of men, even.

It is a continuing proposition, one which will have to be worked out 

slowly. From my experience of his activities in Alaska, and I sought 

to keep in very close touch, I should say tha t Mr. Bennett has the 

dedication, the devotion, the intelligence, and the ability to handle the 

position for which he has now been nominated by President Johnson 

exceedingly well, and I hope his nomination will be confirmed.

Thank you.

The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Bartlett. Tha t is a fine statement and we appreciate your coming this morning.

Senator Gruening, would you care to make a statement or a comment at this time ?

STATEMENT OF HON. ERNEST GRUENING, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF ALASKA

Senator Gruening. Yes; I would be glad to comment. Somewhat 

later I hope to have the opportunity of discussing some of the problems which the new Commissioner will face in Alaska. I have known 

Bob Bennett now fo r the several years th at he has been area director. 

I have known all the area directors for the last 30 years, ever since 

I first came to Alaska in 1936.

I would say tha t Bob Bennett seems to me to have been by far the 

ablest and the most dedicated of these area directors. I consider his 

choice for the commissionership an excellent one. I shall be glad to 

support it.

However, he will face a number of problems as Commissioner which 

he did not face as area director, and they are among the most difficult 

and almost the most insoluble problems th at we and he have to face. 

1 am hopeful that he will tackle them with th e enthusiasm and dedication which we have seen him display in his previous position, and 

tha t he will realize their great importance to the futu re not only of 

the native people of Alaska but to the whole State of Alaska. Tackling these problems, if they are to be solved, will involve changes of 

policy and greater concern than the BIA has hitherto displayed.

The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Gruening.

Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman ?

The Chairman. Senator Nelson.
INTE RIOR NOMINATION O

I believe you have a historical claim, Senator.

STA TEM ENT OF GAYLORD NELSON, A U.S. SENATOR FROM TH E 

STA TE OF WIS CONSI N

Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased with the nomination of Mr. Bennett by the President. He was born in the State of 

Wisconsin, a t Oneida, Wis. He has almost a 30-year record of distinguished service in the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I thin k it was an 

excellent appointment and tha t Mr. Bennett will make a very tine 

record. We in Wisconsin are very proud to have his nomination from 

the President of the United States. I certainly shall support it.

The Chairman. Than k you, Senator Nelson.

Senator McGovern has a statement.

STA TEM ENT BY HON. GEORGE S. McGOVERN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

TH E STA TE OF SOUTH DAKOTA

Senator McGovern. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to endorse the 

nomination of Robert Lafollette Bennett as U.S. Indian Commissioner. Mr. Bennett has had a long and distinguished career with 

the Indian Bureau—7 years of which were served with the area office 

in Aberdeen, S. Dak. During tha t period of time, I have found him 

to lie a thoughtful, resorceful, and reliable public servant.

He is assuming one of the most difficult tasks in the country—the 

leadership of Indian affairs. I think we have not made sufficient 

progress in this field. Indeed, unless we can demonstrate greater 

success in the years ahead, I think we will have to give serious consideration to assigning the functions of the Indian Bureau to other 

more effective departm ents of the Government. There is obviously 

something fundamentally lacking in efforts to date to achieve an 

adequate role in our society for Indian citizens.

I believe Mr. Bennett shares our desire for more effective progress 

in Indian affairs and that he will not be satisfied with an Indian 

Bureau tha t simply perpetuates the problems of the past.

I am pleased that my South Dakota colleagues, Senator Mundt 

and Congressman Reifel, are here to support Mr. Bennett’s nomination before the committee.

Congressman Reifel was the distinguished former supervisor of Mr. 

Bennett at Aberdeen and is admirably suited to pass judgment on 

his qualifications.

I believe tha t our fellow South Dakotans share the high regard 

which our congressional delegation holds for Mr. Bennett.

The Chairman. Senator Mundt ?

STA TEM ENT OF HON. KA RL E. MUNDT, A U.S. SENATOR FROM TH E 

STA TE OF SOUTH DAKOTA

Senator Mundt. Than k you; Mr. Chairman, and members of the 

committee, my statement will be brief but sincere and to the point.

I am very proud to come here supporting the nomination, and I will 

supp ort the confirmation, of Bob Bennett for the high position of 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs. I think it is a real remarkable indication of the fact tha t in our country, in the bureaus, people can
6 INTERIOR NOMINATION

gro w up and matur e an d develop and lea rn, and ul tim ately achieve 

the hi gh position at the top of a burea u whi ch they have fa ithf ul ly 

served.

We see th at ill us tra tio n in several other rec ent a pp ointmen ts and I 

ap plau d it whe never it occurs. I ap plau d it esp ecially in Bob’s case 

because he him sel f is an In di an , and I th in k it is very ap pr op riat e and 

pr op er th at on occasion we sho uld hav e an In dia n serving as the 

Com mis sioner of the Office of In di an Affair s. But even more im ­

po rtan t is th e fact th at he comes well trained for the job, h av ing grown 

up th ro ug h various steps and stages of burea u activ ity so he un de rsta nd s the problems of the reg ion al office by exp erie nce , he un de rsta nd s the problems of res erv ation life bv experience, he un de rst an ds 

the pro blems, and there are v ery real problems, of th e nonrese rvation 

In dia n who is t ry in g to bre ak a way from res ervatio n lif e an d fit himself into society g enera lly b ut ru ns across pro blems w hic h m ust be met 

sy mp ath eti cally by th e Gov ernment.

So in all those ram ificatio ns he comes to us as a profe ssional. We 

are especially ha pp y because part of his trai ni ng was in th e gr ea t 

St ate of So uth Dakota. li e has trod on the goo d ea rth of So uth 

Da kota. He h as m et the good people , the warmhe arted folks of So uth 

Da ko ta. He ha s breathed the good air of South D akota .

Here is a man tra in ed , the n, no t only by origi n, no t only by his 

experience, bu t by ha ving lived in a loc ality where we hav e many 

thou sand s of w onderfu lly fine, w arm -hearte d Sio ux In dian s, qu alif ied 

him f or th e job. It is a p lea sure fo r me to say here is a good man, th e 

ri ght m an, for the ri gh t job.

Th e Chairman. Tha nk you, Se na tor Mun dt. We ap prec iate ha ving yo ur state ment.

Se na tor Mundt. Th an k you.

Th e Chairm an. Congr essman Reifel?

We are delighte d to hav e you with us th is mo rni ng, Congres sman, 

and we would appre cia te h av ing you r comments.

STA TEMENT 0E HON. BEN REI FE L, A RE PR ES EN TA TIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM TH E STA TE OF SOUTH DAKOTA

Mr. Reif el. Tha nk you, Mr. Ch airma n.

Mr. Ch air man a nd mem bers of th e com mittee, you have ex ten ded to 

me a rar e privileg e in g iving me th is o pp or tuni ty to app ea r befo re you. 

I s hall be bri ef. Ro bert LaF ol lette B ennett, who has been nominated 

by th e Pr esiden t to be Comm issio ner of In dian Af fai rs is a lifelo ng 

fri en d. I f he is favo rably recommen ded by th is disti ng uish ed commi ttee and his ap po intm en t is confirm ed by th e Senate, he will be the 

firs t Com mission er of In di an b lood since 1871. Tha t he is my friend 

and th at he is th e second In di an to be appo int ed to thi s hi gh office in the 

long histo ry of the B IA , while it is perso nally gra tify in g t o me, are 

no t the reason s why I asked to ap pe ar b efore you.

I commen d Mr. Be nn ett t o you fo r fav orable conside ration because 

I belie ve him to be em ine ntly qua lified fo r this most difficult ass ign ­

ment,. Like my self, he was reared in an In di an co mm unity ; re ­

spo nded to the influe nce of wh ite mis sion arie s. He was enc ourage d 

by his wh ite neigh bors to improve him self. He educate d him sel f 

wi th th e help and counsel of the employees of th e Bu reau of In di an 

Aff airs.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 7

Independent of each other we decided over 30 years ago to repay 

some of our debt to our country and the Indian people by helping the 

Bureau of In dian Affairs to aid others as we have been assisted to find 

a meaningful place in our dominant society.

In 1956, Mr. Bennett was assistant area director and I was area 

director in the Aberdeen, S. Dak., area office of the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs. We worked together for 4 years. lie went on to greater 

things in his dedication to the Indian people, area director of the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs in Alaska, late r Deputy Commissioner of 

Indian Affairs, and now he stands on the threshold of the office of 

Commissioner. Of course, in my case, in 1960, I became a dropout 

and went into politics.

In our long association I know Mr. Bennett to be highly sensitive 

and sympathetically understanding of the needs, the aspirations, and 

hopes of all of our India ns, Alaska natives, and Eskimos from Poin t 

Barrow, to Florida, from Philadelphia, to Mississippi, to the coast of 

the State of Washington.

He has worked with many of them and visited with every tribe and 

band in his nearly 30 years in th e service. Mr. Bennett is a tireless 

worker. He is an imaginative and creative administrator esteemed 

amongst his employees and associates at all levels, and he has the respect of Indian leaders in all areas of the country.

I do not need to tell you knowledgeable members of this committee 

about the enormity of the task of the Commissioner, the dogged determination required, the leadership necessary, the patience called for, 

and the creativity demanded in order that our Nation’s Government 

may help meet the peculiar needs of the Indians to enable them to 

find hope, not despair; opportunity, not discouragement; sharpened 

aspirations, not continued frustration. Pu t simply, just to have a 

chance and an effective chance.

Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall is providing a receptive 

climate in his Department for a dynamic and yet understanding In ­

dian administration. Mr. Bennett is capable of providing tha t leadership.

Aside from this, that he happens to be an Indian will give added 

inspiration to the young people of this country.

Thank you.

The Chairman. Thank you, Congressman. We appreciate your 

coming over to make that statement in behalf of Commissioner 

Bennett.

Secretary Anderson, we will be delighted to have you present Mr. 

Bennett to the committee.

STATEMENT 0E HON. HARRY R. ANDERSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERI OR

Mr. Anderson. Mr. Chairman and members of this committee, I 

am the Assistant Secretary in the Department of the Interior having 

general responsibility for the Bureau of Indian Affairs. It is my 

pleasure as a representative of the Secretary of the Interior, Stewart L. 

Udall, to present to the committee the President’s nominee for the 

position of Commissioner of Indian Affairs.
8 INTE RIOR NOMINATION

Mr. Be nn ett h as held im po rtan t positions in the B ur ea u at all levels 

of op eration and being an In di an him self ha s an in sigh t and un de rstan di ng o f the people.

We feel t hat Mr. Be nn ett can give t he B ureau of In dia n A ffa irs th e 

lead ership which it need s to help the In di an people accelerate th ei r 

tran sitio n process.

H is fa m ili arity w ith the opera tions a nd organiz ati on of the Bu reau 

sho uld be he lpful as he mak es tho se changes in th at organizatio n so 

th at it can carry ou t its mission w ith grea ter efficiency.

Mr. Be nnett has a repu tatio n in the De pa rtm en t of th e In te rior fo r 

being an idea man an d this, cou pled with his ad minist rativ e ab ility, 

should make it possible fo r h im to proceed with his task with ima gin atio n an d speed .

I expec t to work with him an d su pp ort him. D ur in g the sh ort t im e 

he ha s been here , we hav e developed a good sp irit of coo peratio n between his office and mine.

Tha nk you, M r. C hairm an.

Th e C hairman. Th an k you, Secre tar y A nde rson.

Mr. Be nnett , we are delighte d to welcome yo u to th e com mittee th is 

mo rni ng. Would you like to make a gen era l statem ent to the m embers 

of the comm ittee at th is time?

STATEMENT OP ROBERT L. BENNETT, COMMISSIONER OF IND IAN 

APFA IRS-D ESIGNEE

Mr. Benn ett. Yes, t ha nk you .

Mr. Ch air ma n and mem bers of this c om mittee: My nam e is Ro bert 

L. Be nnett . I was bo m on th e On eid a In di an Re ser vation in W isconsin on Novem ber 16 ,191 2, educa ted in p aro chial , pu blic , and Bureau 

schools, comp leting high school and busin ess at Ha sk ell In st itute in 

Lawrenc e, K ans .

My 30 yea rs wi th the Governm ent have encompassed work at the 

res erv ation, are a an d W ash ington office levels. W hil e wo rking in 

W ashing ton, I com pleted req uirem ent s fo r a law degree.

I have some kno wle dge of In di an people and th ei r situatio ns by 

vi rtue o f my work experie nce s in t he State s of Ar izo na , New Mexico, 

Colorado , Uta h, N ebras ka, Nor th D akota , So uth Da ko ta, and Al aska , 

visits to oth er In dia n com munities in Minnesota, Ne vada, Wisconsin, Montan a, Fl or id a, a nd N or th C aro lin a an d in my b road acquai ntsliip with Ind ia n peo ple throug ho ut th e country.

These experiences nave led me to certa in conclusions about In di an 

people, th ei r needs, hopes, and desires. Th e destr uctiv e effects of 

pa ternalism mu st be overcome. Fa ilur e exp ectanc y mu st be reduce d 

to a min imu m. Obstac les to th ei r mo tivation must be eliminated. 

Th ey need the op po rtu ni ty of res ponding to exp ect ations which need 

to be placed on them. The ir fa ith and confidence in them selves mu st 

become more positive fac tor s. An atm osp here of fre e choice m ust be 

created.

Th ey need to face up to th ei r consequences of th ei r choice. Th ey 

need to have th e ex peri ence of m ak ing those decisions wh ich affect th ei r 

every day life. Th ey need to deve lop a rea lis tic an d fu tu ristic attit ud e a bout th ei r pl ace in th e world.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 9

Indian leadership must be developed as a positive force in bringing 

about changes. These are the intangible factors which determine success or failure of programs. These are the factors with which we need 

to deal on a daily basis.

I hope, with your help to have the opportunity to see if I can encourage Indian people to develop th eir capabilities to the fullest and 

thereby enrich our lives with their contribution. They have much 

to offer and we have much to offer them. The way must be found to 

bring us together.

Thank you.

The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Bennett.

According to the press account in the Washington Post dated March 

22 of this year, the Bureau of Ind ian Affairs is to be reorganized 

and enter a new period in its history. Can you tell us your plans in 

this regard ?

Mr. Bennett. Well, Mr. Chairman, the plans under consideration 

are a realinement of the Bureau organization so that it can become 

more responsive to the needs of the people, i t can make more timely 

decisions, and become more flexible to adju st to changing situations.

The Bureau at the Washington level has over 20 branches. This 

kind of functional organization has caused some slowdown in the 

processing and development of programs and decisions. It is hoped to 

set up the organization on a more streamlined basis so that the decisions 

can come quicker, so tha t all problems will not be approached on a 

strictly functional basis, but also on a project basis. We then can give 

those projects demanding our immediate attention the kind of attention they deserve, ra ther th an have them sift through the present kind 

of organization.

There is no change contemplated in the line organization of Commissioner, area director, and superintendent.

The Chairman. What will happen as far as the number of employees are concerned here in the Washington office?

Mr. Bennett. This question will have to be met when we have 

agreement and approval of the organization tha t we are planning. 

We cannot contemplate at this time either on the present staff we 

have or, for instance, in attempts to bring in so-called new blood in the 

leadership of the organization until the form of organization we are 

considering has been finally approved. At tha t time this problem will 

be given consideration.

The Chairman. Mr. Bennett, a number of Senators have expressed 

concern about the Indian situation and the direction it seems to have 

taken over the past several years. I have asked the staff to prepare 

for us the annual appropriation figures for the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, for the Indian Health Service, going back several years, together with some inform ation about the number of employees in 

these two branches.

I thin k it is plain to see that the two bureaus have grown very 

substantially in recent times, and tha t the funds available to them 

have reached a new high with each passing year.

For example, in fiscal year 1967 the Bureau of Indian Affairs is 

asking for $238,500,000, and the Indian Health Division for almost 

$88 million, which together total a little over one-third of a billion 

dollars.
10 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Moreover, it is estimated th at about 1,200 additional employees will 

be hired so tha t we will have about 22,000 people looking after 380,000 

Indians. Within the past couple of weeks, two Indian articles were 

published in the Washington Post and the New York Times, one of 

which is captioned “Fo r the India ns—Squalor in the Great Society,” 

and the other one, “Degradation Behind the War Paint.”

I find it amazing tha t after all these years of supervision and the 

expenditure of $1.5 billion since 1961, tha t conditions described in 

these articles could exist on the reservations. They raise the question 

whether we are pursuing and have been pursuing a course th at is the 

correct policy.

According to a news release of Jul y 10, 1964, the Secretary of the 

Interior instructed superintendents of Indian reservations to submit 

reports of 10-year plans to raise the standard of living on Indian 

reservations.

I wonder if you could tell the committee is this a part, of the reorganization planning, and the long-term thinking about Indian reservations ? Can you give us some idea of w hat costs would be involved 

in it?

Mr. Bennett. Following a general meeting of the Bureau of In ­

dian Affairs in Santa Fe, N. Mex., approximately 2 years ago, the 

Secretary asked tha t superintendents and area directors put down 

their ideas and goals on paper and project this over a 10-year period. 

He wanted to know from the key people in the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs just what directions they felt the Bureau should move in their 

programs as they affected their p articular reservations, just what the 

possibilities were, and how they planned to go about achieving these 

objectives.

This was not a full-scale program or plan, as such, but more or less 

general ideas and goals. They were to be discussed with the Indian 

people.

This was done, and these plans, with goals, are now under consideration here in our Washington office. These goals related to the overall 

goals for Indian people and were not necessarily limited by the Bureau’s contribution, but had in mind the contribution which other 

Federal agencies and State agencies might offer.

These are still under consideration; they are still being evaluated. 

They are being, you m ight say, revised on the basis of criteria which 

have been since developed by the Washington office.

The approximate amount of what these programs would cost has 

not been finalized or completed because, as I indicated, they involve 

contributions which may come from other agencies tha t have programs 

tha t are operating on Indian reservations as well as the Bureau itself. 

I am not prepared to give any figure at this time.

The Chairman. I think we need to have more information from 

you in response to that question. I would just like to point out tha t 

with all the programs that we have available within the Federal structure dealing with education, social welfare, and so on, it seems to me 

tha t we should be able to do better by the Indians than what we have 

been doing.

These news stories are rather revealing. It seems to me th at either 

the Bureau is not doing its job within its own organization, or they 

are not calling upon the other departments of Government to assist.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 11

In education, for example, with the massive effort we are making now, 

there is no excuse in the world for the lack of opportunity tha t exists 

in the field of education.

Would you agree with that?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. I think it is important, if you are to be the Commissioner, that you see to it that, where your programs do not fit in, 

the other Federal programs come into the picture, and if you need 

legislation, come up here and ask for it.

We have a massive antipoverty program underway, but to see these 

stories appearing about massive poverty in certain areas of the Indian 

community, I think, makes us all ashamed. It does me. There is no 

excuse for it.

I just wondered what you planned to undertake, insofar as these 

other agencies are concerned w ithin the Federal Government, to see 

to it tha t they are brought in where your programs do not cover the 

situation.

I want to make clear I do not think the Indian Bureau of the Department of the In terior ought to be in on all of these other programs. I 

think, a fter all, the Indians are full-fledged citizens. They should be 

entitled to participate in programs where the need fits as well as any 

other person in this country.

I think the tendency is th at it all has to go through the Bureau of 

Ind ian Affairs. So they are denied opportunities to participate. I 

think i t would be be tter for the Indians and b etter for all of us if they 

were just treated like the rest of us once in a while.

I would like to have your comments.

Mr. Bennett. Air. Chairm an, at the Washington level we are 

proposing a liaison officer to be attached to my office whose business it 

will be to contact the other agencies of Government. We already know 

some, like in the fields of public housing and the Office of Economic 

Opportunity, which have programs relating to Indian people—and it 

will be the responsibility of this liaison man to contact all agencies of 

the Federal Government to see tha t their programs are brought to 

bear on the Indian problems.

We also feel that this is one of the changing roles of the superintendent on Indi an agencies. Rather than to administer the reservations as a closed corporation, one of his responsibilities will be to see 

that at the local level all of the programs are brou ght to Ind ian 

reservations and coordinated together toward a common goal.

The Chairman. What instructions have been given the superintendents in the area offices with reference to advising the Indians of 

programs that are outside the Bureau jurisdiction ? I would be curious 

to know whether, if an Indian goes into a superintendent's office, he can 

get information about all of these other programs.

They write to us fo r information and it makes me wonder what kind 

of an educational job is being done insofar as the representatives of the 

Bureau in the field are concerned.

I want you to understand you have not become Commissioner yet, 

and you are not responsible for things th at may be in existence at the 

moment, but I hope you will understand how strongly we feel about 

some of these matters.

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir. As the inform ation is made available to 

us relating to the programs of other agencies th at are available, we
12 INTERIOR NOMINATION

pass this information out throu gh the area directors and the superintendents. Some have been very good at coordinating and getting 

the Indian people and these various programs together. Others have 

not done such a good job.

When I was in the Aberdeen area. I developed brochures for the 

Indian people listing all the agencies and a short synopsis of their 

programs and provided wide distribution of this among the Indian 

people.

When I was in the State of Alaska, I cooperated with the project of 

the State where they had a man from the University of Washington 

up there who, likewise, prepared a brochure listing Federal and State 

programs, and a short statement as to their purposes, which was also 

given wide distribution. 1 believe the Indian people have to become 

acquainted more than they are with the other agencies.

The Chairman. My point is, I think the Indians need special attention in this regard because other groups within our society have a more 

ready access to this information. The Indians, however, have been 

brought up to look to the superintendents or to the area office, and 

unless he gives them the right guidance, they just don't know about 

these things.

It seems to me that the superintendents and area officers should bring 

in representatives from the other agencies from time to time so that 

the leaders of the tribes in question may have an opportunity to be 

brought up to date and advised of what opportunities are available to 

them. I hope you will ride herd on this because I am convinced that, 

throu gh departmental jealousy, and so on, no real effort is being made 

to advise the Indians of what can be done for them under a certain 

set of circumstances. I would like to see you really push this.

I have a lot of other questions, but in view of the shortness of time, 

I would like to defer to my colleagues.

Senator Jord an ?

Senator J ordan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciated your coming to my office the other day, Air. Bennett 

I enjoyed our visit together, and 1 am going to vote fo r your confirmation, but I do have grave apprehension about the Bureau of India n 

Affairs and the course that has been pursued throughout the years. 

I expressed those to you.

I am concerned that the present rate of spending for the Bureau 

of Ind ian Affairs, whose budget calls for the per capita expenditure 

of about $900 per Indian—isn’t tha t approximately correct—in the 

1967 request?

Mr. Bennett. I believe tha t is correct, sir.

Senator J ordan. I don’t believe we are getting much fo r our money. 

I think we have to improve on tha t substantially, and I hope th at you 

will direct your efforts in that regard.

I wonder, under the circumstances, why you would really want to 

be Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Mr. Bennett. I did not aspire to the job, but when the job was 

offered me I was in no position to decline it. I felt it was a challenge 

and an opportunity to try to do something for the Indian people.

Senator J ordan. Do you think you can improve the present situation substantially ?
INTE RIOR NOMINATION 13

Mr. Bennett. I am going to give i t a good try. I certainly hope 

I can. It will take the cooperation and support of the Department 

and certainly of the Congress.

Senator J ordan. Do you believe tha t if we can make these various 

health and welfare, education, and other programs available to the 

Indians on the reservations, as the chairman suggested, tha t sometime in the foreseeable future we can look toward termination of 

the Federal stewardship in this area?

Mr. Bennett. I believe the basic objective of the Federal Government in the whole concept of training and development of Indian 

people has been toward this goal.

Senator J ordan. Wh at is your personal feeling toward setting a 

targ et date for termination ?

Mr. Bennett. I thin k the difficulty with setting a targ et date for 

termination is the inability to forecast or project over too long a 

period of time wh at changes in the economy and other changes in situation will occur.

For instance, a tribe may have very little in resources and forecasts 

a very long period of development because of the lack of these resources, and in a year or two, as has been the case, they accumulate 

their resources through oil and gas, claims settlements, or something 

like this, this could change the picture considerably. So it is very 

difficult to forecast a time.

Senator J ordan. We both agree that no single target date can be 

set for the termination of all tribes which would be applicable in 

every instance, but would you not agree that Indians with a per capita 

wealth of $350,000 m ight perhaps be terminated without any great 

repercussions or injury?

Mr. Bennett. I would say, if they could manage this money, yes.

Senator J ordan. Wh at if they can’t manage it? Maybe some of 

the rest of us don’t manage very well.

Mr. Bennett. Of course, there are many ways of looking at this. 

We are now considering, and I think we should, the use of this money 

that some of the tribes have for capital investments under management 

pl&ns, rather than reposing it in the Treasury at 4 percent. I think 

there is opportunity for Indian people by placing these funds in investments with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior which can 

increase these earnings to the people, which can make them a p art of 

the business community and in this sense they would be really taking 

their place more than they are now in the regula r economy and business 

affairs of the country. I think there is opportunity for this.

Senator J ordan. I cherish the right to go broke, too, along with 

several other rights.

I will not ask any more questions, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Jordan.

Senator Anderson ?

Senator Anderson. I was very much interested in what Senator 

Jordan was asking about termination. Would you tell us what you 

think about the situation in the Colville Tribe? They asked to be 

terminated. The Senate passed a bill saving they could be terminated 

when they wanted, and the Bureau of Ind ian Affairs stopped the 

whole action. Wh at would you do ?
14 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Mr. Bennett. I would support the Department’s position, which 

favored the termination legislation with the provision for a refe rendum, which I believe the tribe has already held.

There is another element, Senator, in this, and that is the specific 

request and decision of the trib al council, and of the tribe. I think we 

need to honor and carry out any decisions tha t are made by the 

people of the tribe, whether or not this may be in agreement or disagreement with what may happen to be the particular policy of the 

Bureau and of the Department.

Senator A nderson. That is fine theory. The tribe actually wanted 

to be terminated. The Bureau of Indian Affairs thought it would 

lose some employees, so they have tried to defeat it in the House. 

They put up all sorts of things against it. Wha t would you do about 

it?

Mr. Bennett. I would support the position of the Department and 

the position of the tribe.

Senator Anderson. The position of the Department was not developed by the Secretary, apparently. It was a separate institution, 

as far as the tribe was concerned, by someone further down the list. 

Would you take the leadership in grantin g the Colvilles termination?

Mr. Bennett. I don’t know where the legislation is at the moment. 

Is the legislation before the House?

Senator Anderson. It is.

Mr. Bennett. If the legislation is before the House, when they 

hold a hearing on it I will be there to support the position of the 

Department and the tribe, which favored enactment of the legislation.

Senator Anderson. You spoke a minute ago about having financial 

resources. What about the Palm Springs Indians?

Mr. Bennett. I understand they have excellent resources.

Senator Anderson. I would say they do, about $350,000 per capita, 

or something like that. That should be enough, should it not ?

Mr. Bennett. It should be; yes.

Senator Anderson. Has the Department at any time tried to terminate them?

Mr. Bennett. I believe, as I recall, th at there has been some legislation pending before the Congress and attempted in the past in connection with the termination of the Palm Springs people. I don’t 

know what the present status of that, is at the moment. I believe it 

has been or is under consideration in the Congress.

Senator Anderson. Are you a member of the National Congress of 

American Indians?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

Senator Anderson. Wh at is the position of that organization ?

Mr. Bennett. I have no position.

Senator Anderson. Do you mean they have no position on termination?

Mr. Bennett. I thought you meant what my position was in the 

organization.

Senator Anderson. The organization is bitterly opposed to te rmination, isn’t it?

Mr. Bennett. Yes.

Senator Anderson. Where do you stand, as a member of tho 

organization ?
INTERIOR NOMINATION 15

Mr. Bennett. I carry a card in the organization and pay my dues. 

But I have no office and at this time no influence, either, in the 

organization.

Senator Anderson. We have had some difficulty with the heirship 

problem. Senator Church assisted in one of the finest pieces of work 

done in this committee on the heirship bill. It passed the Senate, b ut 

it couldn’t get through the House.

Are you aware of what the position of the Bureau of Indian Affairs 

was on the heirship bill?

Mr. Bennett. 1 es, sir. I attended one of the hearings. As I recall 

the testimony of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, it was that it favored the 

enactment of heirship legislation, suggesting certain amendments to 

the House bill, and also calling the attention of the committee to the 

approach of the Senate committee and the Senate on the heirship bills, 

suggesting the consideration of tha t bill by tha t committee with certain amendments, and also presenting two other proposals.

My thinking on this heirship bill is tha t with the different situa ­

tions on the different reservations, possibly rath er than just one approach, we can have a bill which will have some alternatives, because 

there is more than just one way to solve this problem.

Senator Anderson. I thin k the Bureau has enough alternatives. 

They wanted to beat the bill and they got it done th at way. I have 

praised in public and private, every way I could, what Senator Church 

did. It is tragic for a man to do th at much work and have it beaten 

by the bureaucrats downtown.

In talking about education, have you worked out the plan of arrangements for education yet ?

Mr. Bennett. No, sir. Since education is such a large pa rt of the 

Bureau program, and its most important effort, we hope to attract 

somebody to the position which would be at a very high level in the 

Commissioner’s office so tha t we can bring into this job an outstanding 

man in the field of education.

Several people througho ut the country have been contacted and 

interviews are now going on. It is hoped tha t we can bring to the 

education program of the Bureau of Indian Affairs a recognized 

auth ority in the field of education in this country.

Senator Anderson. Haven’t you selected him?

Mr. Bennett. No, he has not been selected. The individuals are being interviewed at this time.

Senator Anderson. Do you recommend accelerated efforts for economic development on Indian reservations? What has been that program ’s progress ?

Mr. Bennett. The progress has been much slower than we would 

like, but with the advent of the light industries, we feel tha t there is 

greater o pportunity because one of the important factors is tha t isolation and transportation are lessened specifically.

I refer specifically to the electronics industries. Of course, at the 

same time there should be encouragement of Ind ian people to take iobs 

around the reservations and they should also be encouraged to develop 

their communities on the reservations like other communities thro ughout the country so that they can be in a favorable position to attrac t 

industry.

61 -2 04 — 61 •3
16 INTERIOR NOMINATION

I thin k they are in a more favorable situation than they have been 

before because of the availability of the light kinds of industries where 

transportation is not a big factor.

Senator A nderson. The Government has an agency known as Economic Development Administration. Does the Bureau of India n A ffairs work with that?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir. We have a liaison relationship with the 

Economic Development Administration, and we work with organizations and tribal groups and others in helping them perfect proposals 

to submit to that Administration is an effort to develop the economy.

Senator Anderson. How about on the big Navajo sawmill? Did 

they go to the Economic Development Administration for guidance?

Mr. Bennett. I don’t know how they financed that mill, sir.

Senator Anderson. Are there any projects now being discussed that 

will go to the Economic Development Administration for guidance?

Mr. Bennett. Some of the projects under discussion are the further 

development of the Colorado River lands.

Senator Anderson. Tha t is a question of whether they farm it themselves or rent it out on shares. That doesn’t take a great genius, does 

it?

Mr. Bennett. At the present time they are putting it out on improvement leases to get the land in shape to raise crops.

Senator Anderson. Hasn’t the Bureau been doing th at for 25 or 50 

years?

Mr. Bennett. I think they have been doing it to the extent of keeping up with the project as additional construction of the irrigation 

project is carried out. What accelerated the development was, as I 

understand it, the decision of the Supreme Court over the water in the 

Arizona-California water suit.

Senator Anderson. What proportion of the lands of the Colorado 

India ns along the Colorado River is still farmed by the Colorado In ­

dians, and how much bv the whites?

Mr. Bennett. I can't give you tha t figure, but I believe there is considerably more out under development leases than operated by Indians 

on the Colorado Reservation.

Senator Anderson. Would it have been wrong for the Bureau of In ­

dian Affairs to have a program for these people to do their own farming?

Air. Bennett. No, sir. This was the original attem pt made by the 

Bureau of Indian Aff airs.

Senator Anderson. To get to one other field, there was an earthquake in Alaska. You were area director. Did you take any active 

part in reconstruction work ?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir. When the earthquake happened, our ship, 

the North Star, operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs to carry supplies to the remote communities of western Alaska, was ready to depart. 

I instructed them to return to their port, at which they took on several 

hundred thousand dollars’ worth of food, oil, field kitchen units, tents, 

cots, and things of this kind, which they lashed to the top of the deck 

and delivered to the areas of native villages hardest h it by the earthquake.

Senator Anderson. Did you attend a meeting a t Anchorage of the 

committee?
INTERIOR NOMINATION 17

Mr. Bennett. I attended several of the meetings of various committees. We were represented on your committee, Senator, by Mr. 

Burke Riley, the Coordinator for the Interior Department.

Senator Anderson. You let someone from the I nte rior Department 

represent the Indians, didn't you ?

Mr. Bennett. I worked with the subcommittees. I was not a member of the fu ll committee. The D epartment of the Interior was represented by Mr. Burke Riley. But I worked with him in day-by-day 

contact and on several of the subcommittees.

Senator Anderson. We have had a discussion about the schools in 

my part of the country. There have been some schools designed to 

be built on the Navajo reservation. Have you any figures to show the 

percentage of graduates from BIA schools who go to college and finish college, compared to what happens in public schools? How many 

students tha t go to exclusively B IA high schools go on to college?

Mr. Bennett. I don't have those figures, Senator.

Senator Anderson. Don't you think they would be an interesting 

thin g to procure ?

Mr. Bennett. I certainly do.

Senator Anderson. I have tried to get the figures on them, but nobody cares. They have a high school there and if they want to go to 

college, fine. But in the white schools they try to lead their boys into 

college and to give them a better education. Does the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs think it important to send the students on to college?

Mr. Bennett. I certainly think it is important that they go on to 

college. This is the basis and justification for the programs that we 

have for post-high-school training. One is the adult vocational tra ining program and the other is the scholarship assistance program, 

where we assist high school graduates by supplementing their educational costs if they don’t have sufficient money themselves or can’t obtain it from other sources.

Senator Anderson. Wouldn’t you like to know what happens with 

that sort of program ?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

Senator Anderson. Nobody judges what does happen, as to who 

goes to college, how long they stay, and how many drop out. Nobody 

has figures on it.

Mr. Bennett. I don't have any. We may have them in the Bureau.

Senator Anderson. If you do think of it, will you try to get them?

Mr. Bennett. I will.

Senator Anderson. Thank you.

The Chairman. Mr. B ennett, I think what we are concerned about 

in part here is tha t when the Bureau says they are for the heirsh ip 

bills or for termination bills, th at they do not give them vigorous support. I think to a man on this committee we feel there has been more 

lipservice tha n action.

In other words, someone will come up with a letter saying they are 

in favor of the bill, and yet all around the country, in the field, the 

representatives of the Bureau are opposing these things. It is tha t 

kind of attitude tha t I think causes a great deal of the trouble.

Senator Anderson. They said, “We favor the Colville termination 

bi ll; however” ; and for 14 solid pages they gutted it. Th at is the 

trouble.
18 INTERIOR NOMINATION

The Chairman. I hope you will give vigorous leadership, Mr. Bennett, to these measures that come up from time to time and not tolerate 

people in the field or elsewhere sabotaging the program tha t you have 

approved.

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. Senator Simpson?

Senator Simpson. Thank you, Air. Chairman.

Bob, you have certainly been facing a ba rrage of questions, and you 

have been giving good answers.

You are taking over a bureau tha t you know will be no picnic.

I am sure you understand that. I am one who believes very strongly 

tha t the Department can be successfully reorganized. Unless my 

figures are entirely wrong, there is 1 employee in the Government 

service to every 14 Indians. The number has been increasing rapidly, 

at a rate much higher than some other departments. The chairman 

read this morning that we have 2,000 more in the upcoming programs, 

I believe.

The Chairman. 1,200.

Senator Simpson. I hope you reduce that, Air. Bennett. I know 

the situation vexes those on the reservation because every once in a 

while the bureaucrats get concerned about it.

I certainly want you to be warned again to apply your own ingenuity and insist there be no sabotage in the ranks.

I was on Senator Church’s committee, and I never saw a more dedicated person tryin g to help the Indians. We gave it all we had, but 

we d idn’t get very far. I am pessimistic about the future. I hope 

I am wrong. You have a lot o f people telling you about their ability 

to handle things, but you shouldn’t fall for it. Step out and let your 

own personality shine through. You have a job to do, and personally 

I am very pessimistic about many accomplishments being made because of the redtape th at is involved.

I will vote for your confirmation, of course.

Tha nk you.

The Chairman. Senator Bible.

Senator Bible. Air. Chairman.

It is obvious to me, Mr. Bennett, if you are confirmed, as I believe 

you will be, that you have your work cut out for you. Nevada shares 

the same concern as many of these other States. We don’t have as 

many Indians. We have about the same proportion of Federal employees within the Bureau of Indian Affairs as the nationwide norm, 

about 14 to 1. I think th at should be improved; it could be improved, 

and it must be improved.

I think you keynote one of our great concerns. The chairman and 

others have keynoted it, when they have expressed the attitude of the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs. I note tha t in my relationships in the years 

I have been in AVashington, when I go back to the field office, the attitude of the Federal employees leaves a g reat deal to be desired.

I suppose it would be too much, it would be a miracle, to expect to 

find overnight a change in that attitude. It is one of the most distressing attitudes I have ever seen. You were kind enough to come 

by and talk about some of our Nevada problems.

I want to ask you three specific questions. I thin k the first one has 

not been asked of you, or may not have been.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 19

You have been in Nevada. We have a number of Indian colonies 

within the corporate limits of some of our major cities, one within 

the corporate limits of the city of Reno, one within the corporate limits 

of the city of Las Vegas, one within the corporate limits of the city 

of Winnemucca, and one within the corporate limits of the city of 

Elkton.

Each, trut hfully, is a national disgrace. We have poured money 

in there year after year, trying to upgrade them and provide sanitation. I return periodically and take a look at the Indian colony, which 

is held in trust. It has run down again. I have talked to your pre decessors, I have talked to your Assistant Secretaries in charge of the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs. I have talked to Secretary Udall time and 

time again. But nothing ever happens, except it runs down more and 

more and more.

I should think this would be a comparatively minor problem where 

the Indian people within this trust area would be integrated into the 

community, where they could have homes the same as anybody else 

has, where they could own their own home and have pride of ownership and become a going member of each one of these communities. 

Do you have any thoughts on this? I know you know the problem 

because you have visited there.

Mr. Bf.nnett. During the 1930’s, they were found to be living in 

these areas under trag ic conditions, and I believe the Government 

sought to obtain this land for these people. However, they did not 

take the step which was necessary, and that is fo r the people in these 

colonies to own their lots like anybody else.

I think these areas need to be subdivided and put into lots so 

tha t the people who are residing there can have an opportunity to 

acquire ownership. Once having acquired ownership, I think many 

of them will take some pride in the place they are living in and feel 

they are doing this for themselves rather than fixing up a house which 

is on community-owned property.

Senator Bible. That may be a very fine solution. I will not belabor the point. Are you prepared to come up with a recommendation of this kind ?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, Senator. I am prepared, first of all, to take 

the recommendation to the people, because th ere must be some consensus on this thing.

Senator Bible. This is where I always get bogged down.

You say we have to take it back to the people in these various 

colonies and get their consensus. I can’t even find out who belongs 

to those colonies. I will t alk with you people here and talk with my 

people out in Nevada, and it ends up in the same way. They say they 

j ust kind of like it the way it is.

I hope you pay attention to this and you take a look at it. It seems 

to me this is a comparatively small facet of a larger problem, but 

I can’t for the life of me understand why I cannot crack this one and 

I certainly cannot. It has gone downhill evey single year since 

I have been here, notwithstanding the fact that as a member of the 

Appropriation s Committee I have been successful in obtaining money 

to try to improve it. This is very distressing.

The second question: Our valley tribes will be the beneficiaries of 

some rath er large money judgments in the near future. There will
20 INTERIOR NOMINATION

be bills coming before ns to authorize the distribution of this money. 

I th ink specifically in my State it goes to several Paiute Indian Tribes.

Do you have a recommendation as to what should be done with these 

many millions of dollars that will come to the Paiu te people of mv 

State?

Mr. Bennett. No, sir. I am not into the problem of the claims 

of th e Paiu te people yet. I expect to get into it. I believe that the 

programs for the judgment funds should not be the same kind of 

programs for reservation a fter reservation.

I believe th at each reservation or group of In dian people has a d ifferent. kind of a situation and any kind of programs developed must be 

in relation to their specific problems and not a program tha t comes 

in that they feel they can get approval for.

Senator Bible. The thing th at disturbs me is th at with these many 

millions of dollars tha t are going to my people, and we have comparatively a limited number of Indians, 3,670 reservation Indians and 

498 off-reservation Indians based on 1962 figures, not being a large 

group, the thing I am interested in is what type of guidance will you 

give to the Indian tribes, the reservation India ns as well as the nonreservation Indians, as to what should be done with this money ?

Will it just be dissipated and then will we be right back where we 

were before ? Wh at is your thinking about it ?

Mr. Bennett. I thin k we should not retain to ourselves in the 

Bureau exclusively the function of giving guidance to the people in 

the use of their money. I think there are other people, businessmen, 

bankers, and many other kinds of people who could work with the 

tribe at their request in providing guidance to them.

I am a firm believer of investment of th e principal. I believe that, 

the Indian people need to have opportunity to have the experience of 

handling sums of money. After meeting some basic immediate needs 

this would be on the earnings of their principal funds and to carry out 

their day-to-day kinds of operations. I don’t believe tha t principal 

funds should be expended for day-to-day tribal operations.

Senator Bible. I don’t know t ha t this is responsive to what I am 

trying to delve into. Maybe I can reword it a little differently.

If I am correctly advised, the Indian Claims Commission handed 

down judgments of something in the neighborhood of $65 million in 

the last calendar year. How can tha t money best be spent to bring 

along termination, to treat the Indian people as just regular citizens 

in our communities and States ? This is a large sum of money. What 

type of guidance in shop with your 20,500 employees will you be able 

to give to see that this money does accomplish the purpose of bringing 

them more and more nearly into the communities of our respective 

States ?

Mr. Bennett. I believe there should be some spent to meet their 

immediate needs, for housing and this kind of thing, and the principal 

invested in long-term investments.

Senator Bible. Thank you, Mr. Bennett. I will be visiting with you 

from time to time. You can see the expression of interest of this committee. We do have difficult problems.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Following through on the well-taken points made 

by Senator Bible, we passed the Indian Claims Commission Act in
INTERIOR NOMINATION 21

1946. I was a coauthor of it with Senator O’Mahoney. The Bureau 

of Indian Affairs was on notice that there would be judgm ents for thcoming and th at they should be in a position to administer these funds 

properly.

We find in case afte r case judgments are rendered, the money is left 

in the Treasury and there is no program to administer the funds available to the Indians.

My understanding is tha t the California Indians got $29 million 

several years ago. The judgment is sitting there. There is no program available to make it possible for the Indian s to either have these 

funds p ut in trust or an allocation of funds to them if they are capable 

of handling them.

Do you see how bad this is ? The point is that the Bureau has been 

on notice since 1946 tha t funds would be forthcoming for proper administration. This is really disgusting.

I might mention in another case they received an award, I think, of 

$2,700,000. The Bureau never paid any attention to them until they 

got some money. Then they just moved in like locusts. They had all 

the sociologists, the economic experts, what have you, figuring out how 

they could tie them forever to the reservation.

We worked out with the attorney fo r tha t particular tribe a program 

tha t involves investment of the proceeds, a portion of them, and the 

trust, so that they can provide for education of th eir Indian children. 

We sent a resolution to the D epartment over a year ago, and we have 

never heard a thing on it.

This is pre tty sad.

You have your work cut out.

Senator Anderson. If they took the $29 million and did something 

with it, there would be no reason in the world to have the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs in California. That is why they didn't do anything 

with it. You would lose your customers.

Senator Bible. To finish my own thinkin g on this, Mr. Chairman, 

this is just the type of a problem th at we are coming into in Nevada.

I hope that now t ha t you have notice, certainly you will come up 

with something of A, B, C, and D, insofar as a program is concerned.

You are on notice right now th at this money will be coming to the 

tribes of my State in a very short time, and at the same time let’s 

have a program to do some good.

The Chairman. I have talked with Senator Metcalf, chairman of 

the Indian Affairs Subcommittee, requesting him, in behalf of all the 

members of our committee, to make a thorough review of the Bureau’s 

activities, its policies, and its programs. This has never been done. 

Senator Metcalf has agreed to do this. He will work with you. 

We are not going to try to make your job difficult. We are not try ing 

to investigate the Bureau. We want to see these programs that have 

been adopted over the years to try to help the Indians implemented 

and carried out to the best, interests of the Indians.

Mr. Bennett. I can promise you my full cooperation, Senator.

The Chairman. I appreciate that, and I know you will cooperate. 

I am sure tha t Senator Metcalf, who has h ad long experience in this, 

will do a good job. To my knowledge, there has never been a fullscale review of the programs, policies, and so on, of the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs. Our objective is not to h urt th e Indians, b ut to help
22 INTERIOR NOMINATION

the Indians, to let the India ns know about their rights so th at they 

can be given a decent break.

Senator Fannin ?

Senator Fannin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to commend you fo r your fine statement, Mr. Bennett. The 

goals you expressed are goals that I think are common with the members of this committee.

I will say?

 unfortunately, what I have observed in Arizona has not 

been indicative of those goals being carried through. As I talked with 

you yesterday about it, I am vitally concerned, and I know you are, 

too, about education and jobs, as well as economic development.

I would like to pose some questions to you from the standpoint 

of how can we best carry through to these goals that we all have. 

In discussing education with you I did indicate tha t several of the 

tribes have been discussing getting under the Health, Education, and 

Welfare program and out from under the BIA in that field.

You, of course, said that there would be studies made as to what 

changes will be made. You stated you were looking for a professional 

educator to be the top person to head out the program. Do you 

think it would be better to go ahead and do like you did in public 

health, as far as the health and sanitation is concerned, and turn to 

an agency that is prepared, that is taking care of perhaps 99 percent 

of the eductional program in the country, and that it would be better 

for them to take over the other, which is very important to all o f us?

Mr. Bennett. The Office of Education, as you know, Senator, is 

not an operating agency. They are an agency t hat operates with the 

State grant and contribution program for education. We are encouraging and do have on the Navajo Reservation some public school 

districts and these public school districts become eligible for the same 

aids and help of the Office of Education as do other public school 

districts.

I would like to see more public school d istricts on Indian reservations, with their elementary schools operated the same way as other 

citizens of the States operate thei r school systems.

Senator Fannin. That is my point. I realize that HE W works 

with the State programs. We do have schools in Arizona on reservations in some instances. Of course, there is one that is operating 

now which has had a problem, to a minor degree, in duplication. I 

would think it would be f ar more advantageous to have a complete 

program through the same facilities tha t we now have for other 

citizens.

I would hope t ha t you would work toward that end as time goes 

along, as it is proven to you that th is would be the most advantageous.

The other point is the question of developing industries on reservations, and taking advantage of their land programs. I talked with 

you about some of those programs yesterday. We have a problem in 

the Par ker area where this land is being developed to be leased to 

non-Indians. We had a program a few years ago where the India ns 

did take over the lands and had plot developments but this was 

dropped.

Do you plan to accelerate this program and see if we can’t do 

more to get our Indian citizens to manage the lands and to produce 

the crops and profit thereby, and furnish jobs for the other Indian 

citizens in those communities ?
INTERIOR NOMINATION 23

Mr. Bennett. We hope tha t the I ndia n people themselves can find 

the investment capital for the development of the ir lands and develop 

it themselves rather th an to continue the program of long-term development leases which puts the land out from under thei r control for 

many years under the leases.

Senator Fannin. But they are going forward in these other programs. I know there are new developments, they are drilling new 

wells, with the lands to be leased to non-Indians. So that is not the 

program th at we are discussing.

Do you feel tha t this could be changed, tha t you can bring these 

lands back under Indian supervision and it would be possible to have 

the Indian people develop and grow their own crops ?

Mr. Bennett. This should be true where there is agricultural land. 

On the other hand, particularly in Arizona on reservations near some 

of the larger urban centers, I believe that the most feasible method for 

industrial development as industrial parks, and so forth, may be the 

investment of outside capital rath er than the Indian people tryi ng to 

develop it themselves.

Senator F annin. We know that transportation is a serious ba rrier, 

both from the standpoint of education and from the standpoint of 

industrial development, or jobs for the Indian people. Tha t has been 

illustrated at Chandler, Ariz., where they have a diamond cutting and 

polishing plant, which we discussed, which you are familiar with. 

They want to develop tha t to a greater extent than it has been developed. They hope eventually to have as many as 500 employees in 

the State of Arizona. There are more Indian citizens living in Arizona 

than in any other State, including two of your fine sons. I know you 

are vitally interested in them from the family standpoint.

But isn’t there something we can do to foster community centers to a 

greater extent or to bring the people from these widely separated areas 

where they do not have any advantages? Can’t they, in some way, 

be influenced to get into areas where they could be more concentrated, 

where they could have plants such as we discussed? The Motorola 

people are interested in putting a plant on a reservation, but there is 

the great problem of tran sporting the workers to that plant.

Th at is the fac t at Chandler, tha t the workers are so widely scattered 

that industrial plants do not help them. Isn ’t there some way you 

can get them to come into areas where you can offer them opportunities ?

Mr. Bennett. I thin k we have to expand our within-State training 

as well as transporting them to other States or to metropolitan areas. 

We also have a local committee appointed involving tribal participation on the Navajo Reservation to make a recommendation as to how1

these large communities can develop and be prepared to attract industry and offer them good places for their executive and supervisory 

personnel as well as make the community attractive, so that those who 

are interested in employment will come into the community. I hope 

we can make some rap id strides in this direction because these Indian 

reservation communities are in competition with other communities 

and they must be made attractive to Bring other industry in.

Senator Fannin. You recall discussing these programs with Pete 

Homer? You know Pete Homer, do you not?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, very well. He is with the Bureau of Ind ian 

Affairs in Phoenix, Ariz.

61-204—66------4
24 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Senator Fannin. He formerly was chief of the tribe; the Colorado 

River Indian Tribe.

Mr. Bennett. Yes. He was chairman.

Senator Fannin. He was in moving pictures quite a bit. I can remember his talking about his experiences. He said they have the same 

problem in the tribe as anywhere else, where they have all chiefs but 

no Indians. Here we are talking about an Indian reservation. How 

do you give these people the incentive to get involved in these programs ?

Do you have plans to try to develop the areas and to bring the In ­

dians into more central locations in order to bring in outside industries ?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, Senator.

Senator Fannin. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I have here a statement I made before the Education 

Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 

at their hearing on April 1, 1966, on S. 3046, to make Federal Indian 

schools eligible for assistance under provisions of Public Law 89-10, 

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Because it 

is pertinent to the project we have been discussing, I would like to 

have it included in this hearing, if I may.

The Chairman. With out objection it will be included.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Sta tem ent by Sen at or P aul F a n n in to t h e E du ca tion S ubcom m it te e, 

Sen ate Co m m it tee on L abor an d P ubli c W el fa re

Mr. Ch air ma n, th e princ iple th a t In di an ch ild ren sho uld receiv e conside rat ion 

un de r Fe de ra l aid to education prog rams equal to th at of ot he r dis ad va ntag ed 

minority gro ups is one which I s tro ng ly endorse.

In fact, a stron g argu men t can be made th at the educatio n nee ds of ou r In di an 

citi zen s, ad ul ts and children , have a pr io r and more com pell ing claim th an tho se 

of any o ther group in o ur society.

If th e sole aim of S. 3046 is to exten d the assis tan ce pro vid ed in Pu blic Law 

89-10 to India ns, the n it merits our serio us atten tio n. Indee d, the fa ct th at 

aft er dec ade s of Fe de ral pa tern alism some 400.000 Am eric an In dian citize ns 

remain tra pp ed in a web of ill ite racy and pover ty cle arl y deser ves top pr iority 

in all Fe de ral porgram s designed to com bat social pro blems an d imp rov e the 

qu al ity of hum an life.

It is un fo rtu na tely true th at th e fir st A mericans of ye ste rday ar e the forgott en 

Am ericans of toda y.

We sho uld not deceive ourselv es, how ever, th at th e ad ditio na l assis tanc e fo r 

In di an education conte mp lated in this bill will solve the pro blem by itse lf. At 

bes t, it will pro vid e only a pa rtia l rem edy f or th e m any defects w hich b eset edu catio na l ac tiv iti es on t he re servati on s.

Those defic iencies ar e pa rtic ul ar ly ac ute on the rese rv ations with in my St ate 

of Arizo na, which ha s th e la rg es t numb er of In di an citize ns of all the Sta tes .

Impro ved educ ati on al op po rtu nity and school facil ities, alo ng with inc rea sed 

econ omic develop men t, ar e the two most obvious nee ds of In di an s which dema nd 

Fe de ral action. They ar e the keys th at can u nlock the door to equ al oppo rtu nit y 

fo r In di an s in Am eric an life.

How ever, with pa rt ic ul ar referenc e to In dian edu cat ion , I am conc erned th at 

th e Fe de ral Gover nm ent is no t moving forw ard with enough diligence and 

resources to dis ch arge its lo ng-standin g and un questio nable obligation to India ns.

We ar e not even keeping p ace with the populat ion gro wth on the res erva tio ns, 

muc h less ma kin g notab le prog ress tow ard impro vin g th e qu ality of In di an 

education.

Ou r lo ng- range goal pe rsu ma bly is to g et all In dian child ren eventua lly e nro lled 

in th e pub lic schools. Whe the r the Bu reau of In dian Affairs stil l sh ares th is 

goal. I’m n ot sure.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 25

Some progress admittedly has been made in this direction, but the fact remains 

tha t about 40 percent of the Indian children now being educated are in Federal 

schools operated by the BIA.

Financial support for Indian education almost defies comprehension. It is a 

crazy quilt pattern of Johnson-O’Malley Act funds, so-called Federal impacted 

area funds, antipoverty funds, and, in the States, from non-Indian tax sources. 

Now it is proposed to tack another patch onto this quilt in the form of funds 

under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 19G5.

I certainly don’t question the legitimacy of the Indian need, and I hope I 

have made that clear. But I do fear tha t we might well be piling on another 

layer of bureaucratic confusion tha t has encrusted Indian education for too 

many decades.

We are confronted here with a problem t hat is clearly Federal. The respective States cannot and should not be expected to assume any larger portion of 

the burden than they already carry; for tha t matte r, it can be argued tha t the 

financial responsibility for the reservation school districts should be totally 

Federal.

But the truth is tha t in many States, local taxpayers are contributing proportionately more toward the cost of educating Indians in public schools than is 

the Federal Government.

The real property taxpayers in my State of Arizona, for example, currently 

are paying up to $200 for each Indian student in average daily attendance in 

the public schools.

A small portion of this, up to a maximum of $17.50, is reimbursed to the 

counties from Johnson-O’Malley funds. But the $182.50 State ADA allotment is 

not reimbursable and constitutes a direct burden on the already strained resources of non-Indian taxpayers.

The same situation is true in varying degrees in other States with Indian 

populations.

Nobody would seriously contend that less money should be spent on Indian 

education; just the opposite is true. But I do argue that it is unfa ir to expect 

the States to assume any more of a load tha t is originally and essentially a 

Federal responsibility.

Furthermore, if the past record is any criteria, any objective look at Indian 

education calls into question the competence of the Bureau of Indian Affairs 

to handle the job.

, This is conceded by Secretary Udall in his recent announcement of an impending reorganization of the Bureau.

In my opinion, a thorough, professional study of Indian education by a qualified independent agency is long overdue. Jus t such a study was authorized during the Slid Congress by Public Law 702, but unfortunately, no funds have ever 

been appropriated to activate the project.

As a constructive first step, I believe Congress should give serious consideration to divesting the Bureau of Indian Affairs of its responsibility for Indian 

education. This function should be transferred to the Office of Education in 

the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare where it more logically 

belongs.

This agency already has the responsibility for administering Federal aid 

to education programs for all but one-half of 1 percent of our population and, 

in my judgment, is better qualified to coordinate and speed progress on programs 

to improve Indian education.

Hopefully, the same kind of improvement would result from this tran sfer as 

resulted when responsibility for Indian health was taken from the BIA and 

given to the U.S. Public Health Service in HEW.

Finally, Mr. Chairman. I want to state my conviction tha t by treaty, by law, 

and by the moral commandments of our heritage, we owe Indian Americans an 

opportunity to share in the material and spiritual blessings of freedom.

Both flic administration and the Congress must recognize that commitment 

and move with all possible speed to meet it.

The Chairman. Senator Church, we want to express our appre ciation to you. You served as chairman o f the Subcommittee on In dian 

Affairs for a long time. You did an outstanding job under trying and 

difficult circumstances.

Senator Church. Thank you.
26 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Mr. Bennett, during tha t period of time I became well acquainted 

with what I would call the Indian establishment in this country. It 

consists of some very interesting components. Let me say, at the ou tset, tha t these components, for the most pa rt, are filled with the best 

intentioned people. Whatever criticism I have of the establishment 

is not related to the people or to their motives, but to the consequences 

that are so clearly visible a fter 115 years or more of Federal stewardship over Indian affairs.

Par t of the establishment, of course, is the In dian Bureau. I have 

no doubt but what the employees in the Indian Bureau are sincerely 

concerned about the welfare of Indian people. But it is in the n ature 

of their work tha t they should conclude th at the best interests of the 

Indians will be best safeguarded by continued Federal management 

of Indian affairs. So their efforts are directed toward this end.

Another component of this establishment consists of citizens groups 

which are generously motivated. They feel a guilt complex about 

what was done to the I ndia n people in the last century when we seized 

the continent from them. They believe tha t Indian welfare now is 

best served by a generous endowment of public moneys in given 

troubled situations.

Another component of this establishment is the Congress, which 

seek to serve Indians by remembering them periodically through 

appropriations which are often divided up on a per capita basis and 

the money sinks like water into the sand.

We have even gone a step farther in the establishment of the Indian 

Claims Commission and are trying now to make up for what we did 

in the last century by awarding damages to the various tribes.

All these components, as I have said, have the objective of serving Indian needs. But where are we with this establishment 115 

years later? The Indian people are, without a question, the chief 

victims. As a whole they are suffering greater poverty, living in conditions of greater backwardness than any other minority group in 

America.

It is hard to face that fact, but I think it must be faced. It is a 

shocking indictment of the system.

You have said that, as a matter of basic policy, you believe th at 

the eventual goal in the termination of Federal stewardship over 

Ind ian affairs. Th at has been official policy ever since the Congress 

passed House Concurrent Resolution 108. That resolution reads in 

pa rt tha t—

It is the policy of Congress as rapidly as possible to make the Indians within 

the terr itor ial limits of the United States subject to the same laws and entitled 

to the same privileges and responsibilities as are applicable to other citizens of 

the United States, to end their status as wards of the United States, and to 

grant them all of the rights and prerogatives pertaining to American citizenship. 

Indians within the te rritoria l limits of the United States should assume their full 

responsibilities as American citizens.

Mr. Bennett, in recent years there has been virtually no legislation 

recommended by the Department of th e Inte rior to provide for withdrawal of In dian tribes pursuant to the terms of this resolution.

If you would refer to House Report 2680 of the 83d Congress, on

f

age 3, you will find there a list of tribes tha t were found by the 

ndian Bureau, itself, as being qualified for the full management of
INTERIOR NOMINATION 27

the ir own affairs, tha t is to say, for termination of further Federal 

control over them.

The House committee stated that administrative steps should be 

taken to effect discontinuance of further operations of the Bureau on 

these specified reservations. That was 12 or 13 years ago and almost 

nothing has been done. Even where this committee has specifically 

requested legislation tha t would bring about orderly termination in 

given cases, where it was felt, that all of the prerequisites were present, 

we have been unable to get significant su pport from the Bureau.

I point to three acts of the 88th Congress affecting the Pawnees, the 

Kalispels, and the Flandreaux Sante Sioux. In each case, the committee’s report sa id:

It is the sense of the committee that the trib e should be moved toward ter mination of F ede ral supervision.

The Burea u of Ind ian Affairs is requested to recommend at the earliest time 

legislation to accomplish this purpose.

Nothing has been done, nothing at all.

We have an established public policy tha t is the law of the land. 

You have said tha t you are in agreement with the basic objective. I 

would like to know what your position would be, then, with respect 

to these particu lar tribes, and generally with respect to House Concurrent Resolution 108.

What do you propose to do about this ?

You see, we have a petrified forest in Idaho, and in the years tha t 

I have had service on the Subcommittee of Indian Affairs th at forest 

has grown as much as the list of tribes tha t have been prepared for

termination.

Mr. Bennett. Senator, I can only speak from my experience. There 

was an act of Congress passed relating to the partition and termination of the mixed blood Ute people of Utah. With two of the members 

of the tribe, leaders of the tribe, and myself, we developed and worked 

this program out. I spent many weeks out there with the people 

working on this particu lar program which was finally approved in a 

general council meeting, and the tribal attorneys prepared the legislation and it was approved by the Congress.

During my tenure in the Aberdeen area as assistant area director I 

worked with the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska, holding meetings with 

them, the county commissioners, the State people, and was the architect for the termination plan of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska, which 

I believe is the only termination, plan approved in the last few years 

by the Congress.

This is also true of the Paiutes of Utah. While I was Supe rintendent. of the Consolidated Ute Agency, the Southern Ute Tribe there, 

in connection with the planning of their programs for the use of judgment money, we held consistent long conversations and discussions 

about their eventual participation in society.

I have never been fearful in talking with people about these plans, 

and I intend to keep on doing it. It will depend, of course, on the 

tribal situation, but this has to be the eventual goal.

Senator Church. Do you believe in self-determination for th e'I ndian people; tha t is to say, where a majority of the members d f an 

Indian tribe, whether they now live on or off the reservation, in a

I96r
28 INTERIOR NOMINATION

referendum that includes them all to vote for term inating the Federal 

stewardship ?

In that situation, do you believe that the Indian Bureau sliould lend 

full support to the development of an equitable termination plan ?

Mr. Bennett. Yes; we certainly should sit down w ith the people 

and come up with a good terminal plan and also should have some 

consultations with the staffs of both committees of Congress so tha t 

we can all be prepared to support a termination plan, which I think 

has to have two basic characteristics: One is the protection of the 

resource in such a way that it can be managed, and the other is to overcome in any part the fear of Indian people that by this process they 

are no longer Indians, because of their strong identity and identification.

Senator Ciiurcii. Certainly. This is often brought up by citizens 

groups that have become interested in Indians and in their culture. 

It is often said, “We ought not to try to stamp out that culture.” I 

couldn’t agree more. We have a very large group of Basque people 

in our State. They are among our finest citizens. They have preserved the ir culture. They have a fierce pride in it, in their songs, 

their dances, their social relationships.

But if anyone indicated to them that, in order to protect their culture, the Government ought to take them out on a separate reservation 

and establish trusteeship control of their property, I wouldn’t want 

to face them and their reaction to such a suggestion.

Indian culture will be preserved by the pride tha t Indian people 

take in it. It will not be preserved by Government control, direction, 

or management of India n affairs, and the two ought not to l>e confused. 

The best intentioned people are doing a grave disservice to the Indians, 

in my judgment. The proof is in the kind of living standards tha t 

exist on most Indian reservations today.

In the Colville situation, we had every indication that the majority 

of the Indians wranted termination. I haven’t seen much enthusiasm 

on the p art of the Indian Bureau to see that through. What will be 

your attitude toward it? The bill is now in the House. Are you 

going to le t it languish there, or are you going to undertake to do what 

you can, as the Director of the Indian Bureau, to see this termination 

brought about?

Mr. Bennett. I would certainly be happy to go to the committee 

and talk to them about this Colville termination bill. As I indicated 

earlier, T have absolutely no hesitancy about wading into this situation, to discuss it with Indian people. When I have been connected 

with them I have never had any hesitancy on this particula r situation 

where it happens to be the wish of the tribe.

I believe the time has come when Indian people make decisions that 

we should accept and be ready to live with the consequences of their 

decisions whenever they are made.

Senator Church. I thin k that, too. I think the principle of selfdetermination is sound for Indian people as well as for other people. 

But in the process of self-determination, are we going to exclude the 

Indians in the tribe th at have chosen to live off the reservation ?

Are we going to limit the choice merely to those who remain on the 

reservation ? What is your feeling in connection with that ?
INTERIOR NOMINATION 29

Mr. Bennett. I think all members of the tribe, with the property 

owned by everyone, they should all participate in the decision.

Senator Church. Then we come to the second question that Senator 

Anderson brought up, I think, in the matter oi the Agua Caliente 

Band of Palm Springs Indians. Here is a case of a very rich tribe, 

owning very valuable property, where per capita assets amount to 

something like $350,000 for each member.

I suspect, in this situation, tha t there is very little sentiment among 

these very fortunately situated India ns for termination, because this 

would mean that the ir tax exemption would be eliminated. They 

■would have to pay taxes on their property the same as other citizens do.

What is your view toward the responsibility tha t the Indian Bureau 

has in further ing the policy of Congress toward termination in this 

situation? I)o you think that, regardless of how rich India ns may 

become in a given situation that the ir tax exemption should continue 

until such time as they choose to relinquish it voluntarily?

Mr. Bennett. With respect to the situation at Palm Springs, I 

believe there was some legislation relative to their situation already 

approved by Congress. I would first want to study the legislative 

history on this pa rticular bill. I understand that at the present time 

they are under two sets of guardians, the guardians that manage their 

property, and whatever they do must have our approval, the contracts 

must have our approval.

Senator Church. To respond to my question, I don’t know of any 

proposal pending tha t has to do with termination of this tribe or 

its tax-exempt status. Here is a situation where you have a very rich 

tribe, a very small tribe, very fortunately situated, but not likely to 

voluntarily petition for the removal of is special tax exemptions.

Yet by every rationale, fai r and generally equitable standard, it is 

in a position to assume full and equal responsibility with the rest of 

the community. In that kind of a situation, what is your view?

Mr. Bennett. There are two elements in the question. One is a philosophical view which I have, that everybody should pay their taxes, 

as I have to pay mine, and the second one is whether in this situation, 

though I am not familiar with it, the tax exemption is a matter of 

right.

If it is a matter of right, then the question is, How is this distinguished ? If it is a matter of privilege, then the ways of extinguishing 

this tax exemption would be different.

Senator Church. The tax exemption derives from the fact that the 

property is held in tru st by the Government. Do you thin k it ought 

to continue indefinitely to be held in trust by the Government?

Mr. Bennett. No, sir. As I said earlier in the testimony, we have to 

come to a time when we reach the goals th at I think we are all agreed 

on, that should be reached. In this case, then, the tax-exempt status 

would not continue indefinitely. But I think in future approaches 

to this, the termination bill should relate to removing the tax immunity 

rath er than directing the States to ta x the land. I think th is is one of 

the approaches which concern the Indian people. They wish be 

allowed to sit down with whomever the taxing authorities will be 

and work out arrangements ra ther than to go from, say, nontaxation to 

complete 100 percent taxation from one day to the next.
30 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Senator Church. Would you review the facts concerning this pa rticular tribe and recommend to this committee a course of action that 

in your judgment would be proper in light of our exchange this 

morning?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

Senator Church. Now let’s turn to the matter of heirship. When 

Secretary Udall was before this committee f or confirmation, I raised 

the question of the fractionated ownership of Indian lands.

I said:

I think that the great need of the Indians is to solve the land problem satisfactorily and then get on with an economic development program that will lift their 

living standards to the point where they can become full-fledged citizens of 

the country, not continuing to be charges of the Government.

This need is so great and our tendency over the years has been to set it aside 

or to ignore it. So I think this administration has a historic opportunity to 

make very significant progress in this much neglected field.

What is your attitude toward this suggestion?

The Secretary answered:

Senator, I found you stating the problem as I have stated it in the past. 

I think tha t I would be very hopeful tha t we can come up with an answer to 

the fractionated heirship problem. I have seen so many reservations where 

they cite they have economic opportunities to get things rolling, yet you are 

stymied because no one owns the land. You cannot determine the ownership. 

I think we must come up with a solution in th at regard.

Progress? It has been zero in terms of real support for what the 

Secretary himself said was a problem of major importance. That 

was 5 years ago. Then there were 6% million acres in fractionated 

ownership, much of i t going to waste. Now there must be more.

It is shocking, even though no one is willing to admit it. We have 

tried in the Senate. We had a series of hearings. We finally perfected a bill against which no really plausible objections could be 

raised. We secured sizable In dian support for it from Indian tribes 

tha t did their homework and didn’t rest upon the opinion of certain 

hired hands who characteristically object to anything th at is directed 

tow ard a change in the status quo.

That bill is eminently reasonable. It provides for a court quasijudicial procedure, where the owners of a majority interest in any land 

want to secure single ownership, in order to put the land to more effective use.

The bill makes elaborate provision for protecting the Indian inte rests by giving the first rights of purchase to the Indian owners or the 

Indian tribe. The bill even provides public money so tha t Indian 

tribes can then proceed, if they choose, to secure the land.

The bill has nothing whatever to do with termination, but just with 

promoting decent management of Ind ian lands.

It is a scandal which may have to be exposed one day, the present 

state of affairs in the management of Indian lands. Still, the bill has 

been languishing in the House.

I don’t think it is sufficient to say, “There are other ways we m ight 

go,” or “other courses we might take,” when we are not taking any of 

these courses. We are just lettin g the problem get worse.

If you become Indian Commissioner, what do you propose to do 

about getting on with the solution of this problem ? There is a bill, 

and you ought to be familiar with its provisions. Are you going to
INTERIOR NOMINATION 31

push for its enactment, or are you going to let the matter rest in its 

present stalemate?

Air. Bennett. Senator, I would certainly be happy to meet with 

the committee and the stall of the House committee and, if they call 

the bill up for us to testify, we will testify in support of the bill 

as we did when it was before the Senate.

Senator Church. I think it was your predecessor who made the 

comment, I am told, the Department would handle the heirship problem with computers.

Senator Anderson. You are using computers right now, aren ’t you ?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

Senator Church. And that it would be necessary, really, to clean 

up the ownership and put an end to this spreading fractionation. 

Aren’t you the owner of a fractionated interest in some Indian lands?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

Senator Church. What is it, one one hundred and thirty-seventh?

Air. Bennett. One-fourteenth, I believe, in a small lot, and, about, 

I believe it is sixteen sixty-thirds in another small lot. I think the 

total value of my estate is $300.

Senator Church. Do you think, for yourself and others situated as 

you are, tha t the solution is to engage computers so we can get these 

fractions worked out quickly and not have to hire so many 

bookkeepers ?

Is tha t your concept of how we should solve the heirship problem ?

Air. Bennett. No, sir; it certainly is not. It is not going to solve 

the basic problem. All it does is keep better records of it and more 

accurate records, but it does not solve the heirship problem because 

as long as lands are in this condition it is very difficult for them to 

make a productive contribution to the economy, these small interests.

Senator Church. Of course; and, again, the Indians are the victims.

Senator Anderson. AVill the Senator yield?

Senator Church. Yes.

Senator Anderson. li e expressed a philosophy. It is more important to keep track of their shares than to give them money. If 

the computer said they had 15 cents coming, if they sold it they would 

have dollars coming, but hold the computers and keep clerks a t work, 

don’t sell the land.

Senator Church. It is this process that has led us to the point where 

we have 1 administrator for every 15 India ns and the Indians are 

still living in poverty.

Well, Air. Commissioner, when you assume your duties I would 

hope you would vigorously pursue the goals that we have discussed.

You have indicated you are not opposed to these goals, but, rather, 

you favor them. On tha t account, I am going to support your 

nomination. But I am going to do what I can on this committee to 

ride herd on these problems in the hope tha t some progress can be 

made.

I feel very strongly tha t the needs of the India n people require 

movement in these directions, and I hope we shall have your full cooperation.

Air. Bennett. Thank you, sir.

Senator Anderson (presidin g). Senator Gruening.
32 INTERIOR NOMIN ATION

Senator Giubning. Air. Bennett, you have been in Alaska for 5 

years as area director, and you are familiar with its problems. You 

know tha t we have perhaps a larger proportion of people who are 

subject to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, perhaps one-fifth of our 

population, which could be estimated at perhaps 50,000.

Legislatively, Eskimos and Aleuts are also considered as Indians. 

The ir problems in Alaska, as you know, are quite different from those 

in what we call the lower 48. We haven't had a reservation system 

as in the other States, although there are a few reservations in Alaska. 

But they are not typical. Most of the Indians and Eskimos live entirely free of any reservation control.

You know we have very grea t problems. When we met yesterday 

with Secretary Udall, I quoted as pertinent to the situation a statement which appears in the report of the President's Review Committee on Planning for Alaska headed by Mr. Joseph H. Fitzgerald, an 

extremely competent individual. In it appears this sentence:

W es te rn Alask a, th e land w es t of Anc ho rage an d F air banks, an d nort h fro m 

B rist ol Bay to th e A rc tic is th e ho me of the Aleu ts, Es kimos , an d In dia ns. Thi s 

is a la nd w ith ou t a f<x>thold in th e 20tli ce nt ur y, w hile oth er are as of Alask a no t 

in ha bi te d by In di an s an d Es kim os ha ve moved ah ea d.

It is the opinion of this man, who knows Alaska well, who has lived 

there for many years, who has worked there, that they are back in the 

last century, ami maybe earlier.

It is rather an interesting coincidence th at just about the time this 

report appeared, which I read with much interest, I received a letter 

from a young woman who had come from (hat region, western Alaska, 

an Indian, and who had been working fo r 10 years in Los Angeles.

She returned to the area where she had been born and had spent her 

childhood. She wrote me as follows:

I ha ve re ce nt ly re tu rn ed f ro m a 2-w eeks’ va ca tion in A lask a. A fter an ab se nc e 

of 10 y ea rs , I tind th e cult ure is 100 yea rs be hind .

It is rather a striking coincidence that these two widely separated 

views should so coincide.

She goes on to say: “The Indians still try to tr ap for a living, but 

there are no animals or fish in the summertime.”

The subsistence livelihood which Alaska’s natives enjoyed threequarters of a century ago, before the gold rush, before the coming of 

the white man, when the total population of Alaska was 30,000 and 

was almost wholly aboriginal—Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts—has now 

grown so fast that this method of livelihood is no longer possible.

There is just not enough game. The Indian population, itself, has 

nearly doubled. These people in (he interior are desperate. They 

have no education to speak of. They can’t find jobs. They live miserably. Much of their housing is unspeakable. They are at the very 

bottom of our economic totem pole.

This is the most serious problem that Alaska faces. It is not just an 

Indian problem; it is an Alaska problem. Nothing tha t we can do 

in other fields to improve our economy, to progress according to conventional terms of what progress means, can quickly cope with this 

problem because of its long neglect, and because of its special character.

I wonder whether you have any suggestions or solutions for this 

situation. Some of these people are bitter, and understandably so; 

they are unhappy, and they have a right to be.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 33

You have been up there for 4 or 5 years now. Wha t do you think 

should be done about them ?

Mr. Bennett. This situation develops as people change from one 

economy to another economy. They are now going from, as you said, 

the subsistence economy of hunting and fishing to a wage or a cash 

economy. •

In this kind of change, how fast they can change is necessarily determined by the opportunities that are there. Along this line we 

have followed the basic economic development of the State of Alaska 

so that, in the area where they are now opening the mining industry, 

we, together with the Employment Service people of the State, 

canvassed all of the communities and villages of the area to determine 

the work force, their skills and qualifications, and we worked with the 

company and the university in developing training courses for the 

people.

We have expanded to a considerable degree the training and placement within the State of native people. We have set up training 

programs in some of our own schools and we take adult people 

there so that they can go back and take jobs in operating and m aintaining the sophisticated kind of equipment we are gettin g into our installations.

Through the North Sta r we have brought equipment that we lease 

to these villages fo r loading and unloading operations under contract 

which we make with the villages.

These are some of the kinds of efforts which indicate what we are 

tryin g to do. But when a group of people is making a transformation, 

forced upon them by natural conditions from one kind of economy to 

another, this has necessarily to be limited by the employment opportunities available.

Senator Gruening. Some of these villages, in their despair, have 

been advised by lawyers and others who are concerned to try and seek 

large areas of land set aside for them. Fo r example, there is one village of 200 people—Minto, not far from Fairbanks. We have talked 

to the chief, who is a very line man and is very much concerned about 

this. He thinks the problem might be solved if somehow they could 

get 300,000 acres.

You were present in my office with Under Secretary Carver when we 

discussed this question several days ago. Mr. Carver felt, as many of 

us do, th at this would be no solution to their problem. What would 

they do with this land which will no longer support the game it once 

did when there were fewer people to harvest the wildlife?

In the meanwhile, when there are these claims, the Bureau of In ­

dian Affairs in Alaska for 4 years has interposed a stop order which 

prevents this land being usefully used. This policy benefits no one.

Under the act, the State has the r ight to select 103 million acres of 

land, 27 percent of the total land area. A lot of the land is not available because it is set aside for other reservations. There are 9 million 

acres of Arctic wildlife range. But it comes to the sum total of over 

65 million acres.

Then there is a lot of land that is of no use, such as mountainous 

areas.
34 INTERIOR NOMINATION

The question is: I)o you thin k th at reserving large tracts of land for 

each native village would he a prop er solution, assuming that there was 

a legal basis for their securing this land, and tha t Congress would so 

act to make it available? Do you think that this would be a solution ?

Mr. Bennett. 1 don’t think land in and of itself is a solution to the 

problems of the native people. I so publicly stated at a meeting of 

the public people about 3 or 4 years ago.

Senator Gruening. The important thing, of course, is that it will 

not lie possible to change the way of life of the elderly people. But 

the youngsters deserve a better chance. They need better education to 

prepare them for wider opportunities. I cannot be but somewhat 

critical of the way the educational program has been carried on. This 

has not been your responsibility.

Tt. was going on long before you came to Alaska. Tn the first place, 

it is an entirely segregated system. Those of us who have observed its 

performance feel tha t the dictum of the Supreme Court in the Brown

case in 1954, that separate facilities even if equal were discriminatory, 

I think applies to the segregation that exists in Alaska.

Even though its origin was entirely different, in tha t it was a benevolently conceived segregation, it is discrimination. It arose 70 or 80 

years ago when the Bureau of In dian Affairs was the first agency to do 

anything about education in Alaska.

The assumption was, and quite properly and quite naturally at that 

time, that they were a primitive people and had to have different kinds 

of education, a different standard of education.

But it would seem to me that afte r 80 years that time has long since 

passed, and we should desegregate the system up there, and allow the 

native boys and girls to mingle with white boys and girls as p art of 

their entrance into our society.

Politically, the native people have full ('quality. We have elected 

them to our legislatures, where they have served with dedication.

Do you know that the first president of our State senate was an 

Eskimo and a splendid presiding officer—William Beltz. He served in 

the territo rial legislature before that. When he unfortunately died of 

a brain tumor he was succeeded as president of the senate by an In ­

dian—Frank Peratrovich—who was an outstanding citizen. lie was 

the first, vice president of the constitutional convention. He was a 

great parliamentarian, a man of wide experience, widely respected. 

He could probably be elected Governor of Alaska if he wanted to run.

There are others in the legislature, Eskimos and Indians, who have 

been making our laws. And yet the natives as a whole are not socially 

and economically integrated. They should be.

I feel that one of the difficulties stems from the ir st art in a segregated 

system of education. How do you feel about that?

Tf you become Commissioner, are you going to do something to 

desegregate the system ?

Mr. Bennett. In relation to this basic question the Bureau and the 

Governor of Alaska agreed to develop a committee on rural education. 

I'liis committee on rural education has made certain basic recommendations, one of which is the eventual integration of the educational system.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 35

We attempted to accelerate this in the Anchorage area, but, unfortunately, the earthquake caused some postponement of this. We are 

constructing our schools in these areas to the standards of the local 

school system because as these schools are built they are being turned 

over to the local school districts.

The vocational or comprehensive school system being developed for 

the State of Alaska envisions the utilization of the Nome school for 

western Alaska, the Kodiak school for central Alaska, and the remaining school for southeast Alaska.

Senator Gruening. Let me inte rrupt you to say that the Mount 

Edgecombe School, where there is a dropout rate of about 50 percent, 

the only high school for natives we have had until very recently, has 

accommodations for only one-third of the applicants. One-third of the 

applicants are sent out to Chemawa, in Oregon, and one-third just don’t 

get any high school education at all. Th at compels them to live in 

ignorance and to have no opportunity for the training and skills necessary if they want to be employed today.

I don’t know of a more pressing problem than that. If you are going to prepare these people to go into the mainstream of our life, then 

they must have the opportunty to get an education.

1 don’t want to take too much time. I have just one other thing. 

We could discuss this at great length and we will.

This will follow the question th at Senator Bible raised, the question 

of how to dispose of a substantial sum of money which you know is 

coming for some of the Indians. The Indians in southeast Alaska 

will be getting it because the Federal Government took the lands of 

Indians for the Tongass National Forest, where they had lived and had 

been in pretty desperate straits. While Alaska was a territory, our 

fisheries suffered the mismanagement, of the Federal agency, the Fish 

and Wildlife Service, which paid scant attention to the grea ter knowledgeability of Alaskans, and under its mismanagement this once great 

natural resource, the Pacific salmon, declined from a high of approximately 7 million cases, when this agency took over in 1940, to the 

lowest point in GO years, when it dropped to a million and a h alf cases 

at the end of Federal control.

The principal victims have been the Indians of southeastern Alaska. 

I recall seeing those villages when I first came to Alaska in the middle 

1930’s and they were prosperous because of their fishing economy. T 

saw those villages throughout the decline of the fifties and, at the end of 

the territorial period, at the end of the period of Federal mismanagement, they were in a terribly depressed state.

Now the S tate is gradually rebuilding those fisheries, but they have 

not reached the levels they once had and probably won’t. In addition, 

there are far more people. I doubt whether the fisheries can support 

the natives of southeastern Alaska to the extent they did before.

Wha t has been done to prepare a plan for distributing this large 

amount of money ?

Mr. Bennett. When I arrived in Alaska and found tha t the Court 

of Claims had rendered a favorable decision on the claim of the people 

but had not set a value, I felt th at the time for planning was now.

As a consequence of that, a planning committee was organized, made 

up of representatives of the various communities, and they, in turn ,
36 INTERIOR NOMINATION

appointed subcommittees which have met together and met periodically, and then also met with the full planning committee over the 

course of 3 or 4 years in anticipation of this judgment, coming up with 

a plan to be supported by the Tlinget and Haida people for the use 

of this money when the evaluation is determined.

This process has been going on in the neighborhood of at least 3 

years, planning in anticipation of this judgment, so th at the planning 

will be pretty much completed by the time the money award is made.

Senator Gruening. In carrying out this plan of distribution of these 

funds when they are finally made available, are you going to respect 

the wishes of the recipients, or do you plan to have the Bureau hand 

them a plan which they must follow?

Mr. Bennett. So far we haven’t been invited to all of their planning 

meetings, so T anticipate that this planning will be a great deal of their 

own thinking. I think they have already come before this Congress 

and secured an amendment of their act so tha t any plans they develop 

must be submitted to the Congress under the provisions of that 

amendment.

Senator Gruening. I won’t take up more time of the committee. 

I feel I have taken more time than I should, but T merely wish 

to say tha t I think the problem of our natives in Alaska poses the most 

important, most serious problem. They are in a very desperate plight 

and we have to do something about it and soon. We have to educate 

their youngsters. We have to give them a viable economy. We have to 

give them something better than a subsistence dole and dependence on 

the dwindling hunting and fishing resource upon which they have 

depended in the past.

I think th at is a major assignment for you and for all of us who are 

concerned with this problem. Let us work together on it.

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

Senator Gruening. Thank you.

Senator Bible (presiding). The Senator from Wyoming has some 

additional questions, I believe.

Senator Simpson. T just have one observation, Mr. Chairman, and 

one request.

The observation is tha t Bob has something working for him in the 

light of the Secretary's recent announcement of reorganization of the 

Bureau and his desire to clean up this situation, which he knows is bad.

You have that in your behalf.

You also have in your behalf the willingness of this committee and 

of the Congress to cooperate with you in bringing about the necessary 

developments visualized.

The request that I have is simply this: Would you furnish for the 

record the number, not names or anything, of employees in the Bureau 

in Washington as opposed to those in the field, and furnish the field 

numbers, too ?

Mr. Bennett. Yes, sir.

Senator Simpson. That is all.

(The information requested is as follows:)
INTERIOR NO MINA TIO N 37

Departm en t of th e I nteri or,

Bure au of I ndian Aff air s, 

Washington, D.C., April 1, 1966.

lion. H enr y M. J ac kson, 

f/.S . Senate, 'Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator J ackso n : D uring th e co ur se of my hea ri ng th is m or ni ng on my 

no m in atio n fo r th e po st o f Com mission er of In dia n A ffai rs I w as a sk ed to su bm it 

in fo rm at io n on em pl oy m en t in th e B ure au o f In dia n Affa irs .

I her ew ith sub mit, th e fo llo wing re port , as of Ja n u a ry 31, 19 60:

Pe rm an en t Other t han Tot al

Wash ington, D .C ., metro po lit an a re a-------------- ------ ------------ 378 2 380

Ou tsi de W ash ing ton , D.C ., metro po lit an a rea---------------------- 12,983 1,792 14,775

T o t a l 13,301 1,794 15,155

Sh ou ld an y fu rth e r in fo rm at io n he re quir ed I will be ha pp y to fu rn is h it. 

Sin ce re ly y ou rs,

R obert L. B en ne tt,

Acting Commissioner.

Se na tor Bible. Ar e there fu rther questio ns of the nominee?

I f n ot, th an k you very much, Mr. Bennett. You have been a very 

pa tie nt man. I believe you know the inter est of the members in the 

problems th at you face.

Se na tor Fa nn in has asked th at there lie inserted into th e rec ord 

copies of l etters received from I). R. Ian ne lla , v ocational reh ab ilitat ion 

spe cialist, an d C. F. Robbe loth , of the West ern Am erican Mort gage 

Co.

W ith ou t objection, the y will be placed in the rec ord with the oth er 

com mu nicatio ns supp lie d at the end of o ral testim ony .

Se na tor Gru en ing has asked th at the re be inserted into the reco rd a 

telegram received fro m the M etl ak atl a Indian Comm unity, a nd a commu nic ation received fro m the Alask a Nat ive 1 >rot herho od, Camp No. 2, 

Ju ne au , Alask a.

W ith ou t objection, both item s will ap pe ar in the record with the 

othe r com municatio ns.

We will now pro cee d to executive session.

I th in k it might be well that, you stan d by, Mr. Be nnett, in case 

the re might be que stio ns th at mem bers of the com mittee might wa nt 

to ask you in executive session. I do n’t know th at the re will be, bu t 

would you keep yoursel f ava ilab le?

Mr. Benne tt. Yes, sir.

Se na tor Bible. Th e com mittee will sta nd adjou rned and go into 

executive session.

(W hereu pon, at 12:17 p.m. the com mittee recessed to proceed int o 

executive session.)

(U nd er autho rity previou sly g rant ed th e fol low ing co mm unications 

were o rde red pr in te d: )

West ern American Mortgage Co.,

Phoenix, Ariz., March 29, 1966.

Hon. P au l J. F a n n in ,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator F a n n in : A pr il 1, 1966, th e Com m ittee on In te ri o r an d In su la r 

A ffai rs will co ns id er th e no m in at io n of Rob er t L. B en net t as Com m ission er of 

In d ia n Affa irs .
38 INTERIOR NOMINATION

I have known Mr. Benne tt for almost the entire 20 yea rs I have been in 

Arizona. We worked together as con trac t officers and traini ng officers for the 

Vete rans’ Administration regional office in Phoenix. He is a man of good 

intelligence, exp ert knowledge of Indian affairs, excellent cha rac ter and tru e 

dedication to his country. Several adult members of his family make their 

home in Arizona. lie has firsthand knowledge of Ind ian affairs throughout 

our country and, p articularly, in Arizona.

I solicit your wholehearted supi»ort of Mr. Bennett’s nomination as Commissioner of Ind ian Affairs.

Very tru ly yours,

C. F. Robbeloth.

P hoenix, Ariz., March 24, 1966.

Senator Paul F ann in,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator F an nin : Mr. Robert L. Bennett is being considered for the 

position of U.S. Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

He is a talented man of Ind ian heritag e who has distin guished himself by 

his service to his country in the armed services, and as a career civil servan t 

with th e Veteran s’ Administration and Indian affairs.

It was my pleasure to know and work with Mr. Benne tt while he was employed with the Veteran s’ Administration. He was admired and respe cted by 

his associates.

From personal experience and association with him I can sincerely sta te th at 

he is intelligent, indu strious, and honorable. Ilis knowledge of Indian affa irs 

and his ability to resolve their problems has been insp iring and exemplary.

He is a man of high caliber; a man th at will continue to distinguish himself 

wherever he is asked to serve.

Yours truly,

D. R. Iannella,

Vocational Rehabilitation Specialist, Veterans' Administration.

[In the Senate— By the Local Government Committee]

Senate R esolution No. 13

I n The Legislature of th e State of Alaska, F ourth Legislature, Second

Session

Extending congratulations to the Honorable Rob ert L. Bennett

Be It Resolved by the Senate:

Whereas the programs of the Departm ent of the Interio r executed thro ugh the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs are of vita l inte rest to Alaska ; and

Whereas Alaskans have a contin uing interest in appointments to the post of 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs; and

Whereas the President has nominated the Honorable Robert L. Benne tt to the 

l>ost of Commissioner; and

Whereas the Honorable Robert L. Benne tt served with distinction as the 

Alaska Area Director, B urea u of Indian Affa irs ; and be it

Resolved by the Senate, Th at co ngratulations and best wishes for a productive 

adm inistration are extended to the Honorable Robert L. Bennett on his nomination for the post of Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

Copies of this resolution shall be sent to the Honorable Lyndon B. Johnson, 

President, of the United State s; the Honorable Stew art L. Udall, Secretary of 

the Interio r; the Honorable Henry M. Jackson, chairman, Senate Interio r and 

Insul ar Affairs Committee; and to the H onorable E. L. Ba rtlett and the Honorable Ern est Gruening, U.S. Sen ators; and the Honorable Ralph J. Rivers, U.S. 

represen tative, members of the Alaska delegation in Congress.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 39

San Anselmo, Calif., March 28, 1966. Hon. Henry M. J ackson,

Sen ate Committee on In ter ior and Ins ula r A ffairs,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Sir : I write as a concerned United Pre sby terian seminary student who 

is deeply disturbed with the series of unjus t even ts that have recently been 

allowed to occur in sou theast Alaska. I write specifically in regard to the 

inhumane way in which the people of Hydaburg, Alaska, are being dealt in their 

need of work in their cannery, and the investigation which your Senate comm ittee is making of Mr. Robert L. Benne tt as the nominated appointee as Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

Inform ation brough t forw ard a t the March 11, 19GC, hearing held in H ydaburg, 

and facts recorded in oth er statem ents and lette rs reveal marked tendencies of 

inju stice being heaped on the people of Hydaburg. I have reviewed the evidence 

given by Mr. Benne tt concerning the Hyd aburg and Klawock canneries and th at 

presented by the Hydaburg Cooperative Association Council; glaring inconsistencies have evidenced the abundan t distortion of fac tua l ma terial which Mr. 

Benne tt has seen fit to present.

If his biased position is allowed to become th e view accepted by your comm ittee and the Bureau of Ind ian Affairs, the Hydaburg cannery will be forced 

closed a nd the Hyd abu rg community hard pressed to survive.

I ask th at yours be a fa ir and ju st decision to all concerned. I ask th at you 

preven t the era sure of Hydaburg from the map which will surely come if the 

political graft is allowed to continue it s c utthroat d istortion of documented fac ts 

and human relations. I trus t your investigation of Mr. B enne tt and the can neries 

will be made imp arti ally . Tha nk you.

Sincerely,

George Whit e.

P hoenix, Ariz., March 29, 1966. Hon. Henry M. J ackson,

Chairman of S enate Interior and Insula r Affairs Committee,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Sir : I would like you to consider the speedy acceptanc e of Mr. Robert 

Ben nett as U.S. Commissioner of Ind ian Affairs.

From my experience, I have found Mr. Bennett to be very considerate of each 

and every individual he met. And, most of all, I am sure he is very much concerned with the social, economic, and education al needs of our Ind ian population.

I would again like to ask you to speedily consider the appointment of Mr. 

Robert B ennett a s U.S. Commission of In dian Affairs, and give him y our approval. 

Yours very truly,

Robert L. Pavatea.

Alaska Native Brotherhood,

Camp No. 2,

Juneau, Alaska, March 22, 1966. Hon. Ernest Gruening,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.:

ANB Camp 2 having been asociated with Mr. Ben nett during the pa st few 

years he was are a director, have come to know and respect him. Therefore, we 

earnestly urge th at Mr. Benne tt be appointed Commissioner of Bureau of Ind ian 

Affairs to till the vacancy c rea ted by the resignation of Mr. Nash.

Sincerely,

Amos Wallace, President.

P. & O. Orient Lines, 

Oriana, March 28, 1966.

Dear Senator J ackson : Hav e ju st learned th at the President has nominated 

Robert Ben nett to head the Bureau of Ind ian Affairs.

I have known Bob for 18 years. He is dedicated, competent, loyal, and an 

outstanding civil servant. He is worthy of your suppo rt.

Sincerely,

Clint J ohnson.
40 IN TERIO R NO M IN ATI ON

Arrow Nation al H eadq uarters,

Washington, D.C., March 28, 1966.

Hon H enr y M. J ac kson,

Chairman, Sta te Interior Committee, Senate Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

D ear Senator J ackson : Pl ea se ac ce pt th is pe rs on al en do rs em en t of Rob er t L. 

B ennett wh o has be en no m in at ed fo r th e po sitio n of Com mission er of In dia n

Affa irs . ,, , , , . .

Mr. B en net t’s ex pe rien ce in w or ki ng direc tly w ith In dia n tr ib a l le ad er s, his

unders ta ndin g of th e ir prob lem s, an d his kn ow led ge of Gov ernm en t will be

o f g re a t v al ue and a ss is ta nce to t h a t Office. 

Res pe ctfu lly, E. T ho ma s Colo simo.

Scottsdale, Ariz., March 27, 1966.

Ho n. H enr y M. J ac kson,

Chairman of Senate Inte rior and Insular Affairs Committee,

Washington, D.C.

D ear Si r : I wo uld like to give yo u som e of my im pr es sion s of Mr. Rob er t 

B ennett and to ur ge yo u to act sp ee dily on hi s ap pro val an d ac ce pt an ce as 

th e U.S . Com miss ione r of In dia n Affa irs .

F o r th e p ast 20 or mor e ye ar s, Mr . B ennett h as been co nn ec ted w ith th e 

F edera l service . In th e ea rl y years of his se rv ic e he w as w ith th e V et er an s’ 

A dm in is tr at io n, th en he w en t in to th e In dia n service .

F ro m his ba ck gr ou nd of ex pe rien ce w ith th e vete ra ns of ou r Nation, th e 

In dia n se rv ices all ov er th e U ni te d S ta te s; an d m os t of all, him se lf an In di an , 

I be lie ve h im to be ex ce pt io na lly qu alified to kn ow th e socia l, eco nomic, an d ed ucati onal ne ed s o f o ur In dia n p op ulat ion.

I al so be lie ve him to be ve ry popula r w ith th e In dia n le ad ers of th e va riou s 

tr ib es an d th a t th ey wou ld co op er at e w ith him in ev ery way to move fo rw ar d 

and b ecom e a n ac tive p a rt o f m od em c ul tu re .

I wou ld ag ai n lik e to ur ge you to fa vo ra bl y an d sp ee di ly ac ce pt th e appoin t 

m en t of Mr. Rob er t Ben ne tt, as U.S . Co mmiss ione r of In dia n Affa irs .

You rs ve ry tr uly ,

Zacku r Moser.

I ndian Rig hts Asso cia tio n,

Philadelphia, Pa., March 28,1966.

Ho n. H enry M. J ac kson,

Chairman, Comm ittee on Interior and I nsu lar Affairs,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator J ackso n : T hi s le tt e r is in su pport o f th e co nf irm at io n of Rob er t 

L. B en net t to be Com miss ione r of In dia n A ffa irs .

The re sp on sibi lities of th e Com m ission er co ve r an ex te ns iv e ra ng e from th e 

adm in is tr ati on of la rg e pro per ty in te re st s of th e In dia ns th ro ugh al l ph as es of 

hu m an re la tionsh ip an d prob lems. U nd ou bted ly th e outs ta ndin g ne ed is t o dra w 

th e In d ia n peop le mor e an d mor e in to pla ns an d pro gr am s affe ctin g th eir own 

aff air s so th a t they may re ac h th e po sition w he re a ny s pe ci al g ov er nm en ta l su per ­

vision is un ne ce ss ar y.

W e ha ve kn ow n Mr. B en ne tt and hi s wor k th ro ugho ut his care er in th e In dia n 

se rv ice. Ove r th es e year s he has he ld in cr ea sing ly re sp on sibl e an d dif ficult as ­

sign m en ts. A t al l tim es he has pr ov en hi s ab ility, his in te gri ty , an d hi s sy m pa ­

th eti c u nders ta ndin g of th e I ndia n i>eople.

W e are ha pp y to reco mmen d pro m pt co nf irm at io n of his ap po in tm en t. 

Since re ly y ou rs,

L awren ce E. Lindl ey,

General Secretary.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 41

R oosevelt, Uta h, Mar ch SO, 1066.

Hon. Henry M. J ac kson,

Cha irman , Senate C om m itte e on In te ri o r an d In su la r A ffair s, U.S . Senate

Bui ld in g, W as hi ng to n, D. C.:

W e reco mmen d co nf irm ation of Rob er t L. B en net t as a Com mission er of In dia n 

A ffai rs as a care er In dia n se rv ice man wh o is in tim at el y ac quai nte d w ith pr ob ­

lems of In dia n trib es . We feel th a t Mr. B ennett is well qu alified by pr ev io us 

ex pe rien ce to m ak e an outs ta ndin g contr ib ution to th e In dia ns of th e U ni ted 

S ta te s.

F ra nc is Wya sk et ,

Cha irman of Ute Tri ba l B us in es s Com mitt ee .

Albuquerque, N. Mex., March 2-b, 1966.

S en at or Clin ton P. Anders on,

Senate Office Bui ld in g,

W as hing ton, D. C.:

The al l- In dia n Pu eb lo Co un cil of Ne w Me xic o has auth ori ze d me as it s ch air ­

m an to co nt ac t yo u w ith re gard to th e Sen at e co nf irm at io n of Mr. Rob er t L. Ben ­

n ett as Com m ission er of In dia n Affa irs . I t is our op inion th a t P re si dent Jo h n ­

so n’s se lectio n of Mr. B en net t, an On eid a In dia n fr om W isc on sin , is a w ise an d 

ju dic io us choic e of a m an wh o has dem onst ra te d ex ce pt io na l abi lity in In dia n 

aff air s ad m in is tr ati on. We sinc er el y so lici t your a ct iv e su pport o f Mr. B ennett ’s 

co nf irm at io n by th e U.S. Sen at e as Com mission er of In dia n Affa irs .

Si nc er ely yo ur s,

Domingo Montoya, 

Cha irm an o f th e A ll-I ndia n Co un cil.

Metla ka tla, Ala sk a, Mar ch 30, 1966.

Ho n. Henr y M. J ac kson,

Sen ate Bui ld in g, W as hi ng to n, D.C.:

W e wou ld like to en do rs e th e ap poin tm en t of Hon . R ober t L. B ennett fo r th e 

po st of Com mission er of In dia n Affa irs . W e ha ve had ex ce llen t re la ti ons w ith 

Mr. B en net t an d kn ow h e has th e a bility an d t he ba ck gr ou nd fo r a high ex ec ut iv e 

office in th e BI A. Aga in we co mmen d th e ch oice of Mr. B en net t fo r 

Com miss ione r.

Metl akatla I ndian Com m unit y, 

H enry S. Littl ef ield , May or.

C hicago, III. , M ar ch 30, 1696.

Sena tor H enry M. J ac ks on ,

In te ri o r an d In su la r Affair s,

U.S. Se na te , W as hi ng to n, D.C.:

Ros eb ud Siou x T ribe of So uth D ak ot a en do rs es a ppoin tm en t of Rob er t B en ne tt 

a s Com mission er of In dia n Affai rs be ca us e of his kn ow ledg e of F edera l an d 

In d ia n aff air s th ro ughout N ation.

Cato W. Vala ndra, 

Pre side nt , Ros eb ud Sio ux Tr ibe.

Wind ow R ock, Ariz., March 30, 1966.

S en at or H enr y M. J ac kson ,

Sta ndin g Su bc om m itte e, Sen ate Com m itte e on In te ri or an d In su la r A ffair s,

Sen ate Office Bui ld in g, W as hi ng to n, D.C.:

Wou ld appre cia te y our po stpo ni ng th e hea ri ng se t fo r April 1. 1966, bef or e th e 

Su bc om mitt ee on In te ri o r an d In su la r A ffai rs co nc er ni ng co nf irm ation of Ro be rt E. B en net t as Com mission er of In dia n Affa irs , unti l a ft e r E ast er. The 

Adv isor y Com m itt ee of th e N av aj o T ri bal Co un cil wou ld lik e to se nd re pre se nta ­

tive s to th is hea ri ng in ord er to pose que stio ns to Mr . B en ne tt. T here is no 

in te ntion of op po sin g his ap po in tm en t, but we wou ld lik e to kn ow an d fe el th a t 

th e co m m itt ee sh ou ld kn ow his in te ntions co nc er ni ng ce rt ain m att ers . The 

ad vi so ry co mm itt ee di d not ha ve an opp ort unity t o co ns id er th is m att er at its 

la st mee tin g sinc e th e date of th e heari ng w as not kn ow n unti l th e da y a fte r we
42 INTERIOR NOMINATION

adjo urned. The nex t meeting of the advisory committee will convene April 4, 

1966. We respectfully request this postponement in order to give us and any 

other Ind ian tribes, who may wish to do so, sufficient tim e to consider the ma tte r 

and a uth orize represe ntatives to attend the hearing.

Mrs. Annie D. Wauneka,

Navajo Tribal Councilwoman and Advisory Committee Member.

Tempe, Ariz., March SO, 1966.

Hon. Henry J ackson,

Chairman, Senate Comm ittee on Interi or and Ins ula r Affairs,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:

Enthu siastically endorse Robert L. Bennett as Commissioner of Indian Affairs 

as former official on councilman for Ute Ind ian Tribe. Have known Mr. Bennett 

as high ly affirmative of persons endowed with creative and imaginative ideas 

and who has und erstanding and sympathy for American Indians. Appointment 

will be beneficial to all Americans.

Francis McKinley,

Director, Ind ian Educatio nal Center, Arizo na Sta te University.

J uneau, Alaska, March 22, 1966.

U.S. Sen ator Henry M. J ackson,

Chairman, Interior and Ins ula r Affa irs Committee, Sena te Office Building, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator J ackson : Knowledgeable Alaskans feel the program of the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs will advance the native peoples a full decade furth er 

into the 20th century under Rob ert L. Benne tt’s direction. Bob Bennett is th e 

best adminis trator our region ever had. He is a great American. I wholehea rted ly endorse his candidacy for top position in the B ureau of Ind ian Affairs. 

Sincerely,

J almar M. Kbrttula,

Democratic S tate Central Com mittee Chairman.

P hoenix, Ariz., March 23, 1966.

Sen ator Henry M. J ackson,

Chairman, Sena te Interior and Ins ula r Affairs Committee,

Old Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:

Request favo rable consideration of appointment of Robert L. Bennett as 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs—have known 19 years, consider well qualified 

on record.

Thomas It. Campbell.

Anchorage, Alaska, March IS, 1966.

Sen ator Henry M. Jackson,

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Ins ula r Affairs, Washington, D.C.:

Please add our enthusiastic endorsement to the list of those who sup port

Rob ert Ben nett for Commissioner of Indian Affairs. This is not a casual endorsement but reflects the feelings of eVery member of the Moquawkie Reservation, Alaska, and it is based on o ur personal acqu aintanceship with Mr. Bennett. 

His refreshingly forward looking and thinking concerning Indian people will 

revolutionize the Fed era l approach to Indian problems which will clearly be 

our gain.

Respectfully,

Alrert S. Kaloa, Jr., 

President of Tyonek Village Council.

Phoenix, Ariz., March 22, 1966.

Sen ator Henry M. J ackson,

Chairman, Senate Interior and Insul ar Committee,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator J ackson : It is our und erstanding th at Robert F. Bennett, 

who is of Indian descent, has been recommended as the nex t Commissioner of
INTE RIOR NOMINATION 43

Indian Affairs. We would like to encourage you and others concerned with 

the appointment to grant favorable action to Mr. Bennett’s appointment.

Sincerely yours,

Mr. and Mrs. James D. Wallace.

Phoenix, Ariz., March 25,1966.

Senator Henry M. J ackson,

Chairman, Senate Interior and Insular Committee,

W ashington, D.C.

Dear Sirs : I understand your committee is responsible for ratifying the appointment of Mr. Robert Bennett as Commissioner of Indian Affairs. I hope 

the committee will give a favorable response to this matter since there is no 

doubt tha t what it will make the work of the Bureau more effective if it is 

headed by one who is himself Indian.

Sincerely,

Mrs. Robert Phillips,

736 Encanto Drive SE.

San Anselmo, Calif., March 28, 1966.

Hon. Henry M. J ackson,

Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

Washington, D.C.

Mr. J ackson : I have studied several items tha t relate to the Hydaburg cannery situation and find tha t I must urge your investigation of Robert L. Bennett’s 

proposed appointment as Commissioner of Indian Affairs in the Hydaburg, 

Alaska, area. From the evidence th at I have seen, it is evident th at Mr. Bennett 

is not qualified for this position. The people of Hydaburg are entitled to the 

support of their industry. Their past correspondence and presentation of their 

case to you and others show tha t these people deserve the continuation of their 

cannery. They also deserve a qualified administrator. Thank you for your 

attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Howard J. Abbott.

M.arch 18,1966.

Hon. Henry M. J ackson,

Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

Washington, D.C.

Mr. Jackson : We would request you to investigate Robert L. Bennett in relation to his appointment as Commissioner of Indian Affairs. We would recommend tha t he not be given this position. In his past dealings with us when he 

was Alaska area director and recently through correspondence, he has shown 

that he is not tru thf ul or a qualified administrator.

We are fighting for the operation of our cannery and have been asking specific 

questions to all parties as to why our plant is not operating. In two letters, 

one to Senator E. L. Bartle tt on February 14, 1966, and the other to Sylvester 

Peele, Sr., on February 18, 1966, he misconstrued many facts which neither 

answered the pertinent questions or presented a jus t view of the situation. 

Thoroughly study the enclosed letter to Mr. Peele and see Mr. Bartlett for a 

copy of the one sent to him. Also study our enclosed statements regarding these 

letters.

We would appreciate it if our views are heard openly, in both hearings and 

investigations, in this matte r.

Respectfully,

Hydaburg Cooperative Association

Council,

Fred Grant, Jr., President.

Sylvester P eele, Sr.,

Vice President.

Robert Sanderson, Secretary.

Clarence Peele, Sr.,Treasurer.

Glenn Douglas, Member.

Francis Guthrie, Member.

Ed Sanderson, Member.
44 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Hydaburg, Alaska, March 19,1966. Mr. Owen Morken,

Area Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Juneau, Alaska.

Dear Mr. Morken : As a result of the facts brou ght out in the hearing of 

March II, 1966, held here in Hydaburg, we request the tra ns fer of Mr. Wr igh t 

and Mr. Walker into jobs they can handle and their replacement by competent, 

tru stw orthy men.

The reasons for thi s request are the numerous fau lty fac ts th at they have 

app are ntly passed on to the Deputy Commissioner, Robert Bennett. Ex am ple s: 

(1) Our boiler was condemned and would requ ire in excess of $25,000 to rep air. 

(“The re is one plugged tube. Before this boiler can ope rate again , the tube 

must be replaced and the boiler fully cleaned and a hydro static test made on it. 

At the present time the boiler has only one safety valve. Before operation, a 

second valve m ust be installed,” from the official inspection made August 23, 1965, 

by C. S. Hall.) (2) The comparisons of unp arallel statistics. ($92,500 “independent survey ” with a $51,000 budget found to be for different things.) (3) The 

misquotation of facts. (The production costs per case. This misq uotation 

transform ed an advanta ge for H ydaburg into one for Klaw ock.)

Any one of these errors (there were more) would be excusable, b ut all of them 

at once and in one case would not be and isn’t. The decisions, which the information was used to make, were important ones and have great influences over 

many people. Such error s cannot be pe rmitted to continue.

In the case that they did not provide Mr. Ben nett with this information, 

please notify us so we might take fu rthe r action.

If in fact they are guilty of these e rrors as it now appe ars, it would be difficult 

for us to place any t ru st in decisions they help make. We would thu s be forced to 

agree with BIA decisions only af ter a g rea t deal o f resistance has been overcome. 

Sincerely,

Hydaburg Cooperative Association

Council,

Fred W. Grant, Jr., President.

Sylvester Peele, Sr.,

Vice President.

Robert Sanderson, Secretary.

Clarence Peele, Treasurer.

Ed Sanderson, Councilman.

Francis Gutiirie, Councilman.

U.S. Department of the I nterior,

Bureau of I ndian Affairs, 

Washington, D.C., February 18, 1966. Through Area Director, Jun eau , Alaska.

Mr. Sylvester Peele, Sr.,

Hydaburg Cooperative Association,

Hydaburg, Alaska.

Dear Mr. Peele: We have received your let ter of Febru ary 7, 1966. enclosing 

copy of a petition of Febru ary 2 to the Secretary of the Int erior. We are glad 

to explain the reasons for the decision to combine operations of the Hydaburg 

and Klawock cann eries in 1966, w ith Klawock as the operating cannery.

We received a lette r of May 1, 1965, signed by Mr. Fre d Grant, Jr., and fou r 

members of the Hydaburg Council rega rdin g the decision to combine operations 

of the Klawock and Hydaburg canneries in 1965 w ith Klawock as the operating 

cannery. We replied to this lette r in detail on May 25. 1965. explainin g why it 

was not possible to advise the council ear lier of the decision. Copy is enclosed 

for convenient reference.

Financ ing of the native salmon canneries and allie d operations constitutes the 

Burea u’s most perplexin g credit program. At June 30. 1965. the fou r villages 

with a population of less tha n one-half of 1 perc ent of the total Indian population eligible for loans from the Bu rau’s revolving fund were indebted for loans 

totaling $5.54 million, or about 23.4 pe rcen t of the t ota l loans outstan ding from 

the revolving fund for loans. The fund is presently depleted. Other Ind ian 

groups in need of financing are unable to obtain loans. They are critical th at 

such a large percentage of the fund has been frozen in large loans to these fou r
INTERIOR NOMINATION 45

small villages. Tlie problem is compounded by the f act that the cann ery loans are in very poor condition, and the G overnment will suffer larg e losses on them. Over 77 perce nt of the Burea u’s to tal rese rve for potential losses on loans from the revolving fun d was estab lished to take car e of potential losses on the can­ nery loans. The liab ilities of these four villages exceeded their ass ets by more 

tha n $2.15 million a t th e close of the last fiscal year. The canneries have lost money most years. In order to keep them ope rating, the Government has been obliged to make add itio nal loans to the villages almost annually We are now dependent uix>n repa yment of loans previously made for fund s to make add itio nal loans. Repayments con stitute the only source now 

available for fur ther financing of th e canneries. Results in 1965 have fully justified the decision to ope rate only one cannery and to operate a t Klawock. The 1965 season was poor from a production sta nd ­ point in sou theastern Alaska, and had the operations of the c ann erie s not been combined it is now clear th at the results would have been disastrous. In 1964, operating independently, the two ca nneries packed 78,533 cases and suffered a loss of $250,601 to March 31, 1965, the close of the fiscal year. In 1965, th e combined pack was 57,029 cases or 27 perc ent less tha n the 1964 pack._ As a result of the combination, however, the loss was cut from $250,601 to $57,407. Ilad as larg e a loss as was suffered in 1964 again been suffered in 1965, funds would not be 

available to operate either cannery in 1966. Hydaburg has 15 boats and Klawock 14. Neither organiza tion has sufficient productio n to operate cannery independently. The Klawock boats, however, out­ produce the Hyd abu rg boats. The average Hydaburg productio n in 1965 was 

31,262 fish. The average Klawock boat produced 38,597. When it is necessary to combine the operatings of canneries as in this instance, it is difficult to decide which cannery will be operated and which one will be closed. One village is bound to be disappointed. At one time operations were altern ate d between Klawock and Hydaburg. This, however, is expensive and wasteful, and requires duplicate improvement and rep air expenditures. The decision th at Klawock would be the ope rating cannery in 1966 was made because it is believed Klawock has a better chance tha n Hydaburg f or a success­ ful operation, and because the amount of fund s requ ired to operate Klawock is less. Although the Hydaburg cann ery is newe r tha n the Klawock cann ery, it would cost more to place it in shap e to operate tha n the Klawock cannery. An independent survey of the Hydaburg cannery in 1964, as mentioned in our lette r of May 25, 1965, to Mr. G rant, showed th at in o rder to hand le more volume, addi­ tions and repla cements of $92,500 would be requ ired in 1965; $45,000 in 1966; and $13,000 in 1967. In addition, Hyda burg’s boiler was condemned in 1965. Cost of a new boiler and boilerroom foun dation has not been definitely ascerta ined , b ut 

would run in excess of $25,000. Hydaburg does not have an adequa te fresh wa ter supply. There have been times in the past when it has been necessary to div ert fish to o ther cann eries for processing. La st summ er Hyd abu rg experienced a wa ter shortag e which pre­ vented the m anufa cturing of ice in the cold storage plant for some time. A large wa ter storage tank is essential to a successful cannery operation. Presumably a high wind has caused the larg e warehou se and cold storage building to lean toward the cannery building. This would entail add itional expense.

Klawock’s cost of production are lower t han Hydab urg’s. One other facto r tha t influenced the decision to oi>erate at Klawock was the con­ fidence t ha t the Klawock people dem onstrate in their cann ery manager, and the man ner in which they supp ort him. Hydaburg fired a very capable manager at the close of its successful 1961 season. The Klawock c anne ry has efficient m an­ agement, and it probably would tak e any manag er considerable time to bring the Hyd abu rg cannery up to the same sta ndard if it were to be operated. The decision again to combine operation s with Klawock as the operating can ­ nery w as not an easy one to make. We know it must be a disappointm ent to the Hydaburg people. We hope conditions in the ind ust ry will improve to the point 

where both can neries can a gain be operated.

Sincerely yours,

Robert L. Bennett, 

Deputy Commissioner.

P.S.—It is our und erstanding that the Department is considering holding a hearing at Hyd abu rg regarding this matter . The date and details are as yet 

undetermined.
46 INTERIOR NOMINATION

March 17, 1966. New ton E dwards,

Department of the Interior,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Edwards : We wish to thank you for coming to Hydaburg and conducting the hearing. The council was impressed with the manner in which you 

tried to seek the truth. This lette r represents an official statement of the Hydaburg Cooperative Association. We are writing you this letter so that you will 

have an idea of our impressions and feelings concerning the hearing you conducted in Hydaburg. The council believes th at the statements in this letter will 

show why our arguments might, in some instances, appear to lack the validity 

we attribute to them.

Fir st of all, we feel the Bureau of Indian Affairs did not provide us with all the 

evidence we requested for the hearing. The council felt tha t officials from the 

BIA should have been at the hearing. Many points in the correspondence between the Bureau and the council could have been clarified on the spot. As it 

turned out the burden of interpreting the dialog between the Bureau and ourselves fell upon your shoulders. We feel that this was unfa ir to you and the 

council.

In our efforts to obtain information prior to the hearing we contacted the 

BIA and asked them to send all audits, council minutes, and correspondence pertaining to the cannery. We requested all the above-mentioned information from 

the year 1938 to the present. This request was made necessary because of a 

fire in 1959 which destroyed all of our records. Since that time the Bureau has 

not replaced our records. At the present time, 5 months of council minutes from 

the year 1960 are missing. Other pertinent information th at we recently requested 

from the BIA has been sent to us only in part. The council feels that it was impossible for them to present the strongest possible argument at the hearing because of a lack of information. We feel that the Bureau has not been truly cooperative with us in our efforts to obtain all the information necessary to formulate 

the most accurate argument in our own behalf.

We felt that the Bureau should have made all the records of both the Hydaburg and Klawock Associations available to the Hydaburg Council. Since both 

organizations are supported by public funds, we feel tha t we should have been 

allowed the right to inspect the records of both companies. The Bureau argues 

that trade secrets might be given to our competitors, but we feel t ha t this argument has no validity. The Bureau requests tha t we join Klawock in a combined 

business venture, yet it refuses to allow us the right to see if our partner will 

benefit our own interest. If we had the opportunity to compare our business 

records with those of Klawock’s, we could have presented a much stronger argument in our own behalf at the hearing. The 1964 independent study which we 

requested was never made available to us until the hearing. This allowed us no 

time to use it in our own behalf. We felt t hat a survey made about our business 

should have been provided us. This should still be sent to us.

A final factor, and jus t another of many, was the attitude the BIA took when 

the council sent two official representatives to Juneau to inspect the business 

records of the Hydaburg Cooperative Association. The reason our representatives had to make the trip all the way to Juneau is because of the fact tha t BIA 

officials told us that there was too much material for them to s ift through, and 

tha t they did not know exactly what material we needed. First of all we 

requested all records, and under such a statement, it was easy for them to know 

exactly what we needed. Secondly, upon arrival at the Juneau office we found 

a small stack of incomplete records waiting for our inspection. It would appear 

from the waiting stack tha t the BIA knew exactly what we wanted. While we 

were inspecting our business records, we were not allowed to make copies of 

certain letters in our files, because we were told that these letters came from 

the Washington office. These letters of correspondence were found in our business files and would have been proved valuable in the presentation a t the hearing. 

Yet we were not allowed to take this correspondence from our files.

All the information concerning the Bureau relates to the hearing in the following m ann er:

1. Reasons for closing the Hydaburg cannery by the BIA could not be entirely 

refuted by the council because we were never given sufficient information by the 

Bureau to establish a complete argument a t the hearing.

2. Information which you helped us obtain from the Bureau was presented 

only at the hearing and could not be used by us before the hearing in order to 

analyze and use as p art of our argument.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 47

Thus, we feel th at because of the BIA’s lack of cooperation in making all 

pertin ent info rmation available to us before the hearing , our honest efforts to 

present the strongest case possible at the hea ring was made impossible.

We would next like to turn to the “ex pert” advice which both you rself and 

the council had to rely upon. We are speaking of Mr. Giss, the Er ns t & Ernst 

accountant, and Mr. Nerland, th e can nery m anager.

Mr. Nerland was forced upon us by the BIA and was never officially accepted 

by the Hydaburg Council as its m anager. Mr. Nerland, as our present unofficial 

manager, has split loyalties. He is employed by both the Klawock and the 

Hydaburg Councils and the BIA. We doubt if Mr. Nerland can make fra nk 

stateme nts, even if he wan ted to do so. It should also be pointed out th at Mr. 

Nerland has nev er opera ted the Hydaburg cannery. Yet both you and the council 

were forced to tak e his opinions as the only official “exper t” opinion at our 

hearing. We felt th at Mr. Nerland could not represent us at the hea ring becaus e of the man y pressures exerted upon him by his many employers.

If we had our own manager, who worked solely for our council, had operated 

our cannery, and was fami lia r with it, as Mr. Nerland is not, we would have 

been properly and effectively represented by an “expert.” We feel, however, th at 

Mr. Nerland did not and could not represe nt Hyd abu rg as its cannery manager. 

Instead, we had a man who has not operated both pla nts and who owes a split 

loyalty to Klawock, Hydaburg, and the all-powerful BIA. Thus, we do not 

feel that his comments could be tota lly valid, concise, or pointed under the 

circum stances.

Finally, we are dissatisfied with the testim ony Mr. Giss gave at the hearing. 

The comparative productio n cost ana lysis between the Klawock and Hydaburg 

pla nts was only for the 19G4 season. We would like to have had a com parative 

ana lysis made for the last 10 years. We feel that thi s would have reflected 

con sistent trends in each sep ara te business. Mr. Giss also was involved in 

the independent survey of 1964 which projecte d costs for the years 1965, 1966, 

and 1967. We question the $92,000 estimated for 1965. The council feels th at 

many of these “improvements” are not essential and th at Mr. Giss did not give 

us sufficient tim e to question them in a thorough manner.

Finally, both Mr. Giss and Mr. Nerland do not represe nt us as much as they 

represent the BIA. As the “1962 Rep ort to the Secretary of the Interio r by the 

Task Force on Alaska Native Affairs” sta tes on page 80, “Because the village 

councils sha re with Burea u personnel and with the cann ery man agers the responsibility for maintaining the canneries, their members should particip ate in 

adopting procedures and decisionmaking. Bureau personnel in the Juneau office 

have app arently bypassed the councils in dealing directly with the cannery 

managers.”

This quote holds tru e today. Therefore, we feel th at because Mr. Nerland 

and Mr. Giss answer direc tly to the B ureau instead of the council, o ur side of the 

story was not fairl y represented by the only “exper t” advice which both of us 

had to rely upon at the h earing. Therefore, we ask you to tak e into consideration the fac t th at we felt all pertin ent material was not provided us. We also 

felt th at all “expert” advice was not totally impartia l because of split loyalitie s 

caused by the BIA ’s policy of bypassing our opinion and hiring whom it pleases 

again st our b etter judgm ent.

The purpose of thi s letter, then, is to add these opinions and feelin gs of the 

council to your file. We feel th at this extra information may aid you in obtaining a fair and impartial decision. We think you for your splendid efforts in 

try ing to uncover the tr ut h in this m att er which affects th e livelihood of our small 

community.

Sincerely,

H ydaburg Cooperative Asso cia tio n Cou nc il, 

F red Grant, Jr., President,

Sylvester P ee le, Sr., Vice President,

R obert Sand erson, S ecreta ry,

Clarenc e P eel e, Sr., Treasurer,

Gle nn Douglas, Member,

F ra nc is Guthrie , Member,

E d Sander son, Member.
48 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Statement to: Mr. Knute Edwards, U.S. Departm ent of the Interior.

Statement by : Robert W. Fry e II, inte rn pastor, United Pre sby terian Church, 

U.S.A., Hydaburg. Alaska.

Sir : In making thi s stateme nt, I would like to begin by covering or uncovering 

a few inconsistencies that I find in l ett ers from Robert Bennett and Jo hn O. Crow, 

Deputy Commissioners. Next I would like to present my views on the conte nts 

on a news story in the F ebr uar y 11, 1966 issue of the Tund ra Times, a Fairbanks 

paper. This would be followed by comments on ‘‘a com parative cost analysis 

for the 1961 season between Klawock and Hydaburg prepared by Ernst & E rnst.” 

In closing I would refer to a rei>ort to the Secretary of the Interio r by the Task 

Force on Alaska Native Affairs, made in December of 1962. Along with this 1 

would make my own personal comments and recommendations.

Robert Ben nett’s lette r to Senator E. L. B artle tt on F ebruary 14, 1966:

“It is believed Klawock has a better chance tha n Hydaburg for a successful 

operation, and because th e amount of funds required to operate Klawock is less.”

“I t” is a pre tty abstr act person to pin down. Who believes Klawock has a 

better chance at a successful operation? Give definite compara tive reasons 

why. Who’s the autho rity in knowing the funds needed in both operation s? Is 

it possible to assume that Klawock is cheaper to operate because the Hydaburg 

plant has laid idle for almost 2 years?

Mr. Benne tt says t ha t the 1965 season favors one operation. This we have no 

argument with, but we wonder why the Klawock plant is being favored, both 

las t y ear and this.

“Hydaburg h as 15 boats and Klawock 14 * * *. The Klawock boats, however, 

outproduced the H ydaburg boats.”

Mr. Ben nett forgets we are tal kin g canneries, not boats. Ju st because the 

Klawock boats catch more fish than our does not mean that the ir plant is better 

tha n this one. I shall retur n to this later.

“The Klawock cannery has efficient management.”

This seems to imply th at Hydaburg has not had efficient management. I 

doubt this, when I know th at H ydaburg’s total indebtness is less tha n Klawock’s. 

I know of yea rs for Hydaburg profit. IIow does Klawock compare here. Now 

if this statem ent is referring to the present, Mr. Norland is manager over both 

plants, but he has never managed a single operation here in Hydaburg. His 

prime autho rity or knowledge is of the Klawock plan t, not this one. I contend 

that Hydaburg will never be considered “efficient” as long as pa rtial views such 

as this ar e in the foreground.

“One village is bound to be disappo inted .”

Definitely, when it is a ma tter of survival, which is all too prom inen t in this 

land and in this world today, too many people are slighted, cut off, or segregated witho ut the Government legalizing this, as South Africa and Rhodesia 

have done on a la rge r scale.

Mr. Benne tt refers to the inadequacy of Hydaburg’s wa ter supply.

He said th at we had a wa ter shortag e here last summer which prevented the 

continual operation of our ice plant. Very true , but he fail s to note that this 

was not an act of nature, but planned rep airs made on dam and waterline. 

The town was then not completely without water as a gas-operated pump took 

wa ter from the creek for town use. The dam and waterlines are now in very 

good shape. Perhap s bette r tha n Klawock’s as I und erstand from Theodore 

Roberts, Sr., wa ter manager, th at they have been having problems lately. Mr. 

Benne tt goes on to say th at w hat we “mu st” have is a wa ter storage tan k at the 

cannery. I would not say th at it would be considered a “must” item, but this 

pla nt has one. He speaks of fish being diverted to oth er canneries, but this only 

occurred one year, 1961. I will refe r to this year la ter.

Mr. Benne tt tries to make an asset out of a liab ility when he argu es for the 

use of small freighters or barges to pack fish from Klawock.

Insura nce costs are high er on small freigh ters as I und erstand it, hu t they 

may be transp orted faste r and more often tha n by large freighters. Hydaburg 

actually has an a dvantage in th at with the deeper channel here wTe may transport 

by eit her barge or large Alaska steam freighter.

Mr. Ben nett better doublecheck figures before he states them. Of the 16 figures given in this com parative list. 4 are wrong and 6 were not able to be 

checked.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 49

K la w ock H y d a b u rg

1961:

C as es __________________. 34,86 7 

i $16. 34

31 ,60 9 

» $18. 26 C o st__________________

1962:

C as es ____ . . . . . . _ ’ 31 ,99 8 

’ $21. 24

24, 092 

$21. 44 C o st________________ _ . . . . .

1963:

C as es _______ ____ ________________ ’ 48 ,195 

’ $ 18.92

35 ,17 0 

$19.04 C o st______ __________ . . .

1964:

C as es .......... . . . . ___________ ’ 44,9 46 

’ $18. 62

*33,5 87 

»$18. 77 C o st_____ __________________________

1

 $17.84 co rr ec te d figu re .

2

 $16.60 c or re ct ed fig ur e. 

’ N o t ch ee ke d.

4

 33.644 co rr ec te d fig ur e. 

8

 $17.89 co rr ec te d f ig ur e.

“Hydaburg received appropriate credit” when Klawock took supplies and materi al for the combined operation last year.

What’s appropriate? We lose now when we need it for an operation. We 

received a secondhand price for which now we need to buy new material. Did 

this association sell them this material or did the BIA merely take it, paying 

them a price they felt fair?

Mr. Bennett says th at Klawock is fully behind their manager.

I believe I would be fully behind my manager too, if I knew he had power in 

helping to keep Klawock operating and me with a job. But I would pose this 

question, Does he have the full support of the council, the boatowners, and the 

lieople? I would say he does not.

Mr. Bennett says tha t Hydaburg fired Mr. Grimes aft er the successful 1961 

season.

He implies that we were stupid to fire a good manager, but he fails to mention 

that in the past Klawock too had fired him.

The following is taken from Robert Bennett’s lette r to Sylvester Peele, Sr., 

dated February 18, 1966.

“Canneries have lost money most years.”

This is a general statement which applies to no one, yet everyone. It is more 

or less assumed t ha t canneries will lose money each year. Why cannot measures 

be taken to alleviate this? When the Government forces the repayment of loans 

when there is always a loss, sounds like the debtor prisons of old.

“Results in 1965 have fully justified the decision to operate at Klawock.”

How? This gives no reasons. We agree one oiieration is better, but why is 

Klawock cannery the one to operate.

“The average Hydaburg production in 1965 was 31,262 fish. The average 

Klawock boat produced 38,597.”

These figures do not tell the whole story. Why this vast difference? Where 

does Klawock get her fish? I would like to give an account of four boats in this 

fleet last summer. The Minker and the Gladys were rigged for trolling and not 

seining. It was only during the last several weeks tha t the Gladys changed over and produced for our fleet. The Violet F spent much of her time in port due to 

repairs. The Dinna Jo had a 2- or 3-week delay because of the death of its captain and the absence of its crew. With this explanation you may see how our 

overall average was affected.

“At one time operations were alternated between Klawock and Hydaburg.”

We had not heard of any change from this agreement until our complaint was 

registered.

“* * * amount of funds required to operate Klawock is less.”

Says who, and w hat exactly does this statement mean? Is it because we have 

laid idle for almost 2 years and much of our material was moved to Klawock? 

I referred to th is in his first letter.

“An independent survey of Hydaburg cannery in 1964 * * *”

Who made the survey, and do we have access to it? If it concerns our wellbeing we should have it.

“Klawock’s costs of production are lower than Hydaburg’s.”

Overall? Would like to see comparative figures?
50 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Mr. Bennett says tha t Hydaburg would need $92,500 its first year, $45,400 its 

second, and $13,000 its third year to bring it up to the same standards as 

Klawock.

The association does not know why it will take so long to bring this cannery 

up to certain standards. They also feel these figures are high.

“Presumably a high wind has caused the large warehouse and cold storage 

building to lean toward the cannery building. This would entail additional 

expense.”

This seems to be a rather ridiculous argument or fact to bring up. It makes no 

difference in plant operation, and I see no reason why it need entail any expense.

The following is taken from a letter to Fred Grant, Jr. from John O. Crow, 

dated May 25, 1965.

Mr. Crow says that short-termed loans were made to canneries. Hydaburg 

still owes $19,134 of $170,000 advanced to them. Klawock has paid off in full.

Nothing is mentioned to the fact tha t Hydaburg’s total indebtedness is not 

as great as Klawock’s by about $1 million and that this cannery has made profits 

where Klawock’s hasn’t.

Hydaburg is said to have lost over $100,000 on their 1964 pack. How does this 

compare with Klawock’s? It is not stated.

“We are entirely dependent upon repayments on loans previously made for 

funds to make additional loans.”

I assume tha t this refers to short-termed loans. Then this is the primary 

reason we are not operating, but declared in default, because of our $19,134 debt.

“Other factors being equal, Hydaburg should have been the operating cannery.”

Because one cannery outproduced another when both ran independently, hinges 

on the strength of one’s fleet, not operability of one’s plant.

“Klawock * * * has access to ample housing facilities for transient workers * *

This implies that Hydaburg does not have ample facilities along this line. 

Give comparative figures. How do the facilities compare as to quality? Have 

the facilities here at Hydaburg been ample in the past? I believe they have been.

“* * * it (Klawock) has greater warehousing and cooling space and greater 

retort capacity * *

What are figures comparing warehousing and cooling areas? Is the maximum 

space ever used? Compare retort capacities and their qualities?

“Klawock’s cost of production per case the past 3 years has been less than 

that of Hydaburg’s.”

In 1962 Hydaburg was 20 cents more per case, and in 1963 it was only 12 cents 

more. But in 1964 Hydaburg was less by 72 cents per case.

“♦ * * (Klawock) is more centrally located to the fishing grounds.”

What does this statement mean? Specifically, where are the fishing grounds? 

Fish are wherever they happen to be, not where man wants them to be. Here in 

southeastern Alaska runs are h ard to predict ahead of time for a particular place.

“The prices Klawock has received for pink salmon have generally exceeded 

those received by Hydaburg.”

This is no place to speak in generalities. Why is this so, because of managers 

or plant? Is he implying tha t our fish have been taken illegally? Do Klawock 

boats get any special privileges or bonuses which Hydaburg boats do not?

“You express fear tha t the combined operation will result in the ‘disintegration of Hydaburg’s fishing fleet.’ ”

This was not Mr. Grant’s fear, but tha t this slighting of Hydaburg in favor 

of Klawock would be the straw that would break the camel’s back. Justice for 

all in this situation seems to entail an alternate year operation.

“If the consolidation suffers another large loss, it will be very difficult to 

justify future financing.”

This I take as a threat, “to do this or else.” It is in two or three places in this 

letter. The BIA is set up to help the Indian, not to threaten him or strangle 

him.

Chilling tanks and a condensor were said to be a necessity la st year for e ither 

operation.

If I remember correctly from Bennett’s lette r to Bartlett, $24,000 was set aside 

last year for this installment at Klawock. However, if my information is correct. they were not installed. So both would have this same expense this year, 

depending upon who operates.

Hydaburg is said to need $92,500 its first year of operation, $45,400 its second 

year, and $15,000 its third year.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 51

Mr. Crow and Mr. Ben nett better get together on the ir figures. For the thi rd 

ye ar Mr. Be nne tt gives $13,000.

Mr. Crow holds up our financial condition to us, but how does ours compare 

to th at of Klawock?

“The association has incurre d a cannery operating loss 9 of the past 11 years .” 

This statem ent seems directly con trad icto ry to t ha t made in th e Tundra Times, 

where it said Hydaburg had made profits in the years 1957-02.

“It is self-evident th at the indebtedness cannot be permitted to increase indefinitely.”

I fully agree. I do not believe th at the BIA is living up to its purpose of 

existence. As 1 understand it, it is to be tra ini ng the Indian to tak e over for 

himself. Bu t bureaucrac y hates to work itse lf out of a job. You are in the 

dri ver’s seat, where are we going? Bu t let us not get overly involved in statistical tables and forget ab out the human element.

Here the following information is taken from the Tun dra Times, in the issue 

dated Friday , F ebr uar y 11,1966.

“Mr. W alker said the decision to close Hydaburg was based on opinions of the 

Washington office, the credit office in Jun eau , and Ernst & Ernst.”

This statement, however, does not give us their reasons, and we have never 

received any concrete or valid ones. Although the ir action does seem to present 

one thing for sure, they have overlooked the human side and the particular 

situ atio n here.

When Mr. Wa lker was asked if the people were consulted prior to a decision, 

he avoided a dire ct answer saying th at na turally both communities wanted to 

operate.

The fact is th at the people here were n ot consulted here be fore the final edict 

was given to them. I do not know about Klawock. Hyd aburg demanded, in 

essence, the operation, stressin g justice and fairplay under the alt ernate yea r 

agreement. Klawock must have other reasons.

Mr. Walker said the managers of both canneries were given opportunity to 

present budgets and presenta tions.

Fir st, the re is only one m anager for both p lants, and he has managed the jo int 

operation s 1 year. In previous yea rs lie was sole manager for the Klawock 

cannery, so he would natur all y be m ore fam iliar with that operation than this. 

Hydaburg had no feeling or loud voice when these views were presented.

Mr. Udall’s 1962 tas k force rep ort sta tes th at boats and the gea r of the 

Hydaburg pla nt were superior to those of Klawock, but th at both canneries 

were deficient in the number of larg e boa ts which are able to fish in deeper 

water.

Wh at would the statem ent be regarding both of the above statem ents today? 

Referring to the second part : If one is in the fishing business and much of 

the catch may come from deeper water, why are not more adequa te boats provided? To supply second-class boats or material, means second-class output.

I would now like to refer to a compara tive cost analysis prepared by Ernst 

& Ernst for the 1961 season between Klawock and Hydaburg. “Hydaburg’s net 

profit aggre gated $184,466.04 on its own net pack of 31,609 cases and Klawock’s 

$148,727.89 on 34,867 cases.” It should be pointed out here that the tota l pack 

for Hydaburg was 55,438 cases, while Klawock processed 68,110 cases. Remember 

th at this was the year th at Hyd abu rg had wa ter problems and had to divert 

fish, thu s limiting wh at could have been a much larger pack. Also noted here 

should be the follo wing: “Mr. Norland stated to the writer (Sargo Giss) on 

several occasions th at each plant could have perh aps increased its respective 

production to 80,000 cases if each was sa tisfac torily equipped.”

I have alread y pointed out th at Hyd aburg had a $35,733.15 more net income 

than Klawock, even though it had a smaller pack. Perha ps more important to 

point out is the com parative total cost of production, which shows Hydaburg 

approximately $100,000 less expense. The figures show Hydaburg $524,913.14, 

Klawock $621,966.18. Within this productio n report two individual item s I 

would bring to your atte ntio n. The first is the difference in th e overhead, 

which shows the Hydab urg cost at $113,632.60 or $2.05 per case, and Klawock 

at $176,301.41 or $2.59 per case. The other I would presen t is the difference 

in maintenance cost at both plants. Hydaburg’s was $13,855.84, a nd Klaw ock’s 

was $37,402.27.

Mr. Edw ards. 1 would suggest you study this report, if you are not alread y 

fam iliar with it. Notice that here and elsewhere a stro ng argument favoring
52 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Klawock is their larger pack or production of their boats. This would have no bearing if both canneries were combining operations. However, on the oth er hand, the lower overhead and production cost of the Hydaburg pla nt does hav e bearing on the worth of this operation.

I would now like to tur n to the Report to the Secretary of the I nterior by the Task Fo rce on Alaska Native Affairs, December 28,1962.

“Testim ony at its hearings in the cann ery villages convinced the tas k force th at the Indians have very litt le to say about the operatio n of their cann eries at prese nt. There is unquestionably a lack of communication between Burea u credit ixirsonnel and the councils. This evidently is not a new condition. Cor­ respondence on file in the Washington office reveals th at in 1960, the area credit officer did not visit the villages of Angoon, Kake, and Klawock, and visited Hydaburg only once for a period of 4 days. In that same year, the are a credit officer, his ass ista nt, and two other employees—all of whom devoted most of th eir working hours to cannery ma tters—spent more time in Sea ttle than they did iu the villages” (p. 76).

We are not treated as frie nds or business partn ers but more as slaves to the arbitra ry action and whims of the BIA. The BIA tells us ju st what they wan t us to know, and when specific questions are sought, only vague generalities are the answer. This type of rela tionship and dialog brings on noth ing but hatred, pessimism, fru stration, discouragement, lack of trust, and an underlying feeling of second-class citizenship. None of these are desirable qua litie s to bring out in any people. Even in trying to obtain fac ts and ma terial pertinent to our case, we were subjected to abuses.

“The tas k force also noted considerable ‘buckpassing’ in accounting for com­ mun ication breakdowns and inefficient cannery management. Cannery man­ agers blamed the Washington office for taking too much time in approving their budgets. Juneau office c redit personnel held both the cannery man agers and the Washington office responsible for the delays. Washington employees contended that the Jun eau staff and the cannery managers were delinque nt in submitting budgets for the ir approval.” (P. 76f.) This association has noticed this in past dealings.

One of the recommendations o r suggestions th at I believe of utmost importance that needs consideration in the fut ure is the treatm ent or lack of trea tment given by the Jun eau office toward the cann ery council. “Because the village councils share with Bureau personnel and with the cannery managers the responsibility for maintaining the canneries, the ir members should partic ipa te in adopting pro­ cedures and decisionmaking * * *. The task force suggests th at the B urea u add to its credit staff in J uneau someone experienced in c anne ry operations, who can work dire ctly with the councils * * * this kind of communication is esse ntial.” (P. 80.) Dictation is not the answer in helping the Indian grow to maturity. Someone within the Jun eau staff needs to have the ability to be able to work with people.

The way it seems to me is that the alt erna te year operation al plan, when con­ ditio ns merit, should be retur ned too. For economic reasons i t may seem be tter to consolidate the two into one plant but in the realm of human relationships, this plan in doomed to failu re. Lack of justice for either operation will mean lack of cooperation and support of the nonoperating cannery and its fleet. The two fleets are the instrum ent which make a single, combined operation successful, so withou t one fleet, death of the operation is apparent. If an a lte rnate yea r opera­ tion, when conditions merit, should be adopted, perhaps a wise suggestion would be to have funds allocated for needed improvements and main tenance at the non­ operating cannery in its off year. With this there would not be needed any “crash preseason improvement program s.” It will also be added insurance for the fu tur e of each cannery and community.

On page 80 the task force points out the need for dece ntralization in the man­ agement of the cannery program. “The Washington office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs has through the years made most of the cruc ial decisions affecting the canneries. It has sometimes had to do so without complete information. There app ears to have been a definite lack of confidence at the Wash ington level in the area office credit personnel and the cann ery managers. If necessary, the Jun eau credit office should be reorganized and staffed with personnel capble of managing the cannery operation. It should have full decisionmaking autho rity for the Bureau, inso far as this is possible.” Earlier in this statem ent and this hearing you have seen how the Wash ington Department does not know what is going on. The suggestion about the reorganiza tion and staffing of the Juneau office sounds like a good one, too.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 53

Mr. Bennett referred to the newer and more modern plant here at Hydaburg, yet his recomm endations are inconsistent with this. For your own background and fut ure recomm endations, Mr. Edwards, I should thin k that along with this hearing there be a viewing or physical comparison between the two plants. If this cannery is to be closed for an indefinite period of time I would suggest that a road be approved and built into Hydaburg, and that some industry or means of income be established with and between the people and anoth er party. I see too much graft and greed in the realm of politics within this State, which if not overcome means the death of this innocent community. If any kind of joint operatio n is to be carried out, I feel that both par ties should have full access to annual audits. Also, if the two plants operate singu­ larly, with an agreement to altern ate year operatio ns when conditions merit, I would suggest th at a comparable cost analysis be prep ared . This way future savin gs and success may be seen and stu died by all concerned.

Statem ent of Mrs. Clara Natkong

I am a cannery worker. There are 55 canne ry workers in the town of Hyda­ burg. Out of this 55, there are 28 mothers, 14 stud ents, and 10 local men who 

depend on this seasonal work. If the cannery lays idle ano ther year, the h ard ship is going to be g rea t for all families. Especially since, during the winter months, there is no employment 

for anyone. Students who depend on this seasonal summer w ork will suffer also. True, the Bureau of Ind ian Affairs provides boarding schools in Alaska and other States but we do have many studen ts who att end private schools. Another instance 

which should show our need of a cannery op eration here. Last summer w hile the ca nnery lay idle here, the 16- through 21-year-olds were able to earn money und er the Youth Corps program. Now we have received the news th at the program will not continue here at Hydaburg due to lack of funds. We have three here that were notified th at they could not work anym ore because each person was supposed to work ju st 6 months. So even if the pro­ gram were to be continued sometime in the futu re, not very many would be able to work. Th at leaves the res t of the Hyd abu rg youth withou t jobs. Another 

reason fo r cann ery operation here. Now the 28 mothers who are on the cannery workers list play an imp ortant pa rt in th e fa mily with their earnings. They help to buy clothing for th e children 

15 years of age and under. This is because, figures on the gross earn ings of boatow ners look big, but af ter they pay out on boat interest, personal bills, et cetera, they bring home a small paycheck. This is where the women help. The need of a cannery operation 

here is very im portant to us. So. with our pra yer s and hard work, we hope th at the problems the cannery council, the VISTA workers, our minister, the cannery workers, the youth of 

Hydaburg and the members of the Hyd abu rg Cooperative Association, have presented will be clea r enough so th at you, Mr. Edwards, and your departm ent will come to the decision th at the cannery at Hydab urg will operate in the 1966 

season.

Statement of Virginia Morrison

I am Virginia Morrison. I have worked at the Hydaburg Cooperative Can­ nery for approximately 12 y ears, as timekeeper a nd relie f woman. I am going to use myself as an example, but it applies to all of the women in the village. I wish to tell you how the closure of our cannery h as affected, not only t he women, but a t times, a whole family. These figures a re based on the 1964 season. There are app roxima tely 54 women th at are employed by the cannery, 38 of whom work in the cannery proper, processing the fish. All of these women are 18 yea rs old and over. The rem aind er of these workers are 16-18. who work in the warehou se casing the cans of salmon. These women received a tota l 

of $32,625 n et pay. When our men leave home to go fishing during the summer season, we do not know if they will catch enough salmon to bring home a paycheck. There are many lean years. A few times my husband, as well as the res t of the fishermen, have come home, af ter a ha rd season, with a red slip. At oth er times he made
54 INTERIOR NOMINATION

only $200 or $300. It is a well-known fact tha t one child cannot be fed and 

clothed on this amount of money. There are very few people here tha t only 

have one child to consider.

This is where the employment of the women helps. The summers before my 

girls were of age to work in the cannery, I have come home with a blank paycheck, for the simple reason tha t I had to pay for our groceries tha t we used 

during the summer and purchase clothing for the children so they would be able 

to retu rn to school in proper dress. A lot of the women hire babbysitters who 

are too young for cannery work to take care of their younger children. This aids 

a younger child to be self-sustaining in buying his clothing. The girls 16-18 

aid their families by working. They are proud in earning enough money to 

retu rn to school, being able to clothe themselves in up-to-date fashions, and having a few extra dollars to purchase needed little extra s that their parents are 

not able to afford.

As you can see we ar e all proud people, we do not live in squalor. We try to 

live up to the standards of the white man. Our living is not anything fine or 

fancy, ju st comfortable.

Some of these women th at work a re either widows, divorcees, or their husbands 

are not able to work. They depend on their summer earnings to sustain themselves and possibly supplement social security pensions.

A lot of these people who have not been able to work during the summer to 

earn money for themselves and their families have had to rely on welfare. No 

red-blooded American is proud of the fact tha t they have had to obtain welfare. 

We want to work for our money, not sit back and let Uncle Sam give us a measly 

$50 a month.

One of my girls, who is going to school in Chemawa, Oreg., does not want to 

come home this summer if the cannery does not 0]>erate, for the simple reason 

tha t she will not be able to earn any money to return to school in the fall. This 

is the feeling of many of our children. It is alienating our children from us.

Maybe some of you are wondering why I keep referring to our children returning to school. We do not have a high school in the village, so our children 

have to leave home at an early age, 12 to 13 years old. We only have them 

home with us 3 months out of the year, and we all look forward to them 

returning in the summer. This reunion does us all good, as well as boost the 

strength of the cannery work force.

Therefore, the women of this village want you to realize how essential the 

operation of this cannery is.

Statement of Clarence Peele, Sr.

Mr. Edwards, associates and friends, the decision to operate the Klawock 

cannery under joint operation was put off to the very last possible moment to 

put us in the most unfavorable position.

The decision handed down by the area director was a complete reversal of 

1960 contract made by the Juneau BIA office.

Under that agreement should there be a joint operation Hydaburg was to 

have been the operating cannery.

The facts expressed by the area director for operating the Klawock cannery 

was refuted by figures advanced in their budget.

First. A great deal of argument was advanced both by Mr. Nerland and Juneau 

BIA for advantages of a brine tank to be installed at Klawock cannery for 1965 

season. It was not installed. (Budget for that item $24,000.)

Second. Housing for transient workers. In their budget an item approved 

“Since housing facilities at present is 40 to 50 years old, $4,500 has to be spent 

on it to bring it up to date.” That was not done.

The area director said Klawock cannery was more efficient to run, yet after 

the decision was made, Klawock transported to their cannery from Hydaburg, 

all the coolers, reason being that theirs was older type and rusted badly. 

Allowance was made for a new fish elevator; that was not put in. We have a 

new galvanized elevator at our cannery.

Allowance also was made to replace their fish bins; it was not done for the 

1965 season. That is a major job. We have new bins at the Hydaburg cannery.

Mr. Bennett’s reasoning: Since Klawock owes more money he said the Government should operate the Klawock cannery to recover the loans. This is not 

logical thinking. In order to recover their loan to Klawock the Government 

would have to pump in more money to replace old buildings and equipment. I 

quote the above because as a port engineer since 1946 to 1964 we have had
INTERIOR NOMINATION 0 0

problems aris ing in late 1940’s and early 1950’s experiencing the problems of 

working with old boats und er the Wheeler How ard Act, under the individual 

loan program. It came to the p oint where spending more money on old outdated 

boats to upd atin g them was not to the best interest of the association. So w ith 

the advice of the BIA it was agreed th at to come out ahead, all the old boats 

were not to get refinanced bu t retired and be repla ced with new boats.

I know the broiler problem is not a serio us one. It was done—mean ing condemning i t—in line to bo lster the argument of not operating the canne ry for 1966.

Due to the reversal of the 1960 contrac t, our faith and trus t in Government 

has gone to the lowest possible point. Something has to be done to restore 

th at confidence.

Klawock has refu sed to sign con tracts under sim ilar conditions and nothing 

was done to them.

We only ask for wh at is jus t and right according to contract.

There are 11 men th at make a living in the cannery during summer months 

beside the 52 women.

Mr. Ben nett made a sta tem ent at the mass meeting, at the school, th at he 

could not make jobs for th e number of women mentioned.

What are we supposed to do when th at is the only industry here in our town?

Obj ec tion s to th e K law ock/ H ydabubg Cons olidat ion Agre ement

The proposed agreement does not specifically require the Hydaburg fleet to 

fish for the Klawock cann ery, although it assumes the fleet will do so (the 

last sentence of the second introductory pa ragrap h; par. 1; par. 2, sec. (b) ; 

par. 3, sec. (c )). What is the reason for the absence of a statem ent of specific 

require ment; or, to put it bluntly, is the Hydab urg fleet legally bound to deliver 

its fish to the Klawock cannery ?

Objection to parag rap h 1: If the Hydaburg council can not reveal the contents 

of the Klawock con tracts and agreements to any oth er party, it can never hope 

to gain a consensus of opinion on possible area s of disagreeme nt with all or 

pa rts of those contracts a nd agre eme nts among the Hyd abu rg Cooperative meml>ership—the orga niza tion the Hydaburg council will be representing in the 

proposed consolidation. Gagged, as it is, by the proposed agreement, the Hydaburg council is vir tua lly liquidate d. In effect, the agreem ent states, “The 

Hydaburg council represents the Hydaburg association in thi s agreement, but, 

und er the term s of thi s agreement the Hyd abu rg council may not communicate 

with the Hyd abu rg asso ciation.”

Objection to par agrap h 2, section (b) : W hat is meant by “supervise” ? What 

degree of control does the Klawock manager exercise over the rele ntin g activitie s? To wh at degree is he subject to the control of the Hydaburg council? 

The con tract contains no provisions specifically relating the degree of control 

the Hydaburg council will exercise over the combined operation.

Objection to par agrap h 3: Who determines wh at improvements are major 

and what improvements are not? Can the question be answ ered q uantitatively? 

If so, had not a ceiling sum on minor improvements bette r be set? Wh at control 

does Hyd abu rg retain over the books of its e nterprise to be kept by the Klawock 

acc oun tant? Are these books open at all times to council members?

Objection to paragraph 3, sectio n (d) : The phrase “from time to time,” is 

imprecise. Inform ation on the progress of the operatio n should be available to 

the Hydaburg council on demand, if th at council is to retai n more tha n mere 

nominal control.

Objection to paragraph 3, section (e) : A receipt for Hydaburg’s inventory 

should be held by the Hyd abu rg Council.

E d Sander son,

Member, Hydaburg Cooperative Association Council, Captain MV “Carolyn S.”

Sta te men t of Sylv este r Teele, Sr.

Mr. Newton Edw ards, visitors, members of the associa tio n: I want to report 

the physical conditions of our cannery plant here in Hydaburg. Due to many 

misstatements by some of the BIA officials, we have to report the conditions 

of our pla nt at this hearing, to make Mr. Edw ards fam iliar with the tru e condition of the entire plan t.
56 INTERIOR NOMINATION

The cannery and wareh ouse was built in 1949, after our first cannery was lost 

by tire in 1948. The presen t plant is only 16 years old, and the entire plant is 

solid with no rot anywhere as indicated by Mr. Robert Bennett, in his letter of 

Feb rua ry 18, 1966. An inspection was made of the foun dation of the boiler 

room, and we find the entire foundatio n solid. The piling and timbers and 

flooring are all sound. As for condemnation of our boiler, no one in the association is aware of any test made on it last summer. This would have been 

necessary to determine the condition of the boiler. If it was condemned it 

would not cost $25,000 to replace. The new style high-pressure boilers are not 

as bulky or as heavy as the present one, so the foundatio n und er the present 

one is sufficient to hold any new boiler we might buy to replace the present one. 

The report on the boiler did not come u ntil late in the summer of 1965, so it had 

no bea ring to keep our cannery closed in the 1965 season.

In Air. Ben nett’s let ter of Feb rua ry 18, 1966, he stated th at in ord er to get 

Hydaburg read y for an operation in 1965, it would have cost $92,500. How so? 

We are completely unaware of wh at these figures represe nt. We have custom 

packed for Nak at Packing Corp., New England, and Columbia Ward in 1961 

successfully with our present facilities , so therefo re I feel th at the figures of 

$92,500 given by Mr. Bennett for getting the Hydaburg plant read y for the 1965 

season is misleading.

Yes; it might be true that for a brief period in t he 1965 season there was an 

inad equ ate water supply, but it was only due to rep airs of the waterline and 

present wa ter reservoir. However, we had a pumping station at the creek in 

the middle of town which could have supplied the cannery had it operated. 

We alwa ys have an adeq uate wa ter supply even in the dri est years. All the 

reasons for which our cann ery was declared inefficient by the BIA in 1965 has 

been or will be refuted in statem ents made by our cannery councilmen.

Comparisons have been made at both Hydaburg and Klawock canneries to 

determine which pla nt is the most efficient to operate. Our present manager 

and BIA officials both made stat ements saying Klawock was in better physical 

condition tha n Hydaburg. We feel this is a misleading statement, because 

Hydaburg is by fa r a newer pla nt and does not need the repair as the older 

Klawock cannery may need. Our fish elevator is made of galvanized metal and 

operates efficiently, while at Klawock their elev ator is made of wood and very 

old and is desperately in need of repair. This is considered a “major” repair.

A statem ent was made by Mr. Nerland and BIA officials saying Klawock 

had more warehouse space tha n Hydaburg’s. If this is true, we have yet to 

see figures of dimensions to sub stantiate the ir case. We have here draw ings of 

the entire cannery pla nt at Hydaburg. The draw ings will give you the exa ct 

floor space we have. We have asked for dimension of the Klawock plant, but 

so f ar we have not received any. Our housing and other facilities for tra nsient 

workers have been adequate in the p ast, so therefo re the claim th at Klawock ha s 

an advantage over Hydaburg for having better and more fac ilities for tra nsien t 

workers is misleading and should not have any bearing on which should be the 

operating cannery. Th eir claim to be better located geographically to fishig 

grounds has no merit, because we all know and are aware of the fac t th at 

salmon run s appear in different localities from time to time.

The statement made by Mr. Nerland and BIA officials saying th at Klawock 

has more people available for cannery work is not true . Hyd aburg has always 

had more available workers tha n needed.

We were greatly dissatisfied in the manner by which the BIA decided against 

Hydaburg in 1965. No mention of plans for the 1965 operation s were made 

known to us until lat e in March or early April. Eve ryth ing or all the plans 

were made and kept secret from us until too late. The are a Directo r and his 

aids came to Hyd aburg to announce the closure of our cannery in a dic tatorial 

manner. Everyth ing we said in our behalf fell on deaf ears. There was no 

consideratio n given to our plans. This is evident by the BIA’s decision to 

ope rate Klawock again in 1966, therefore causing our action in requesting thi s 

hearing.

Mr. Ben nett in his lette r of Febru ary 18, 1966. stated th at high winds had 

caused the large warehouse and cold storage building to lean toward the cannery, which would entail some expense. The warehouse leaning tow ard the 

cann ery, if it is, has no bearing on chances for operation. The wareh ouse could 

be leaning, but this does not hinder in anyway the storage of cases of salmon 

in larg e amounts. As for cooling space we have more tha n adequate space.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 57

Mr. N er la nd an d BIA officia ls sta te d th a t Klawoc k w as m or e eff icient, m or e 

ec on om ical to op er at e. If th is w as so, wh y di d Mr. N er la nd mo ve so muc h of o ur eq ui pm en t to Klawoc k? As a m em be r of th e c an ner y co un cil I wi ll de m an d th a t pilin g, pall et bo ar ds , ll y ste r, and al l oth er eq ui pm en t ta ken to Klawoc k be re tu rn ed a t onc e, so th a t if and whe n th e tim e ari se s agai n to ev alu ate th e effi­ cie nc y of ou r ca nn er y we will be in a pos itio n to co mpa re high ly w ith Klaw oc k or 

an y oth er ca nn er y. The co ns eq ue nc es of th e de cision to le av e our ca nner y id le will be dis ast ro us in th a t it has alr eady ca us ed m an y fa m ilie s hard sh ip by losing th eir on ly inco me in th e 1965 season . Now we a re co nf ro nte d w ith th e sa m e si tu ati on in 1966. O ur s choo l will l>e di re ct ly a ffec ted sinc e th e town is resp on sibl e fo r p a rt o f o pera ­

tio n of the sch ool. O ur on ly c hur ch will be af fected , too. I st ro ng ly be lie ve th a t th e so lu tion to th e unju st de cision by th e BIA could be solved by al lo w in g th e co un cils of ea ch na tiv e-ow ne d ca nnery to ta k e p a rt in pl an s fo r oper at io ns from year to yea r. Thi s is a dem oc ra tic fo rm of do ing bu sine ss, and we wou ld appre cia te it g re atl y if af fo rded su ch an oppo rtun ity. I st ro ng ly be lie ve th a t H yd ab ur g ca nn er y sh ou ld ha ve it s ow n m anager and bo ok ke ep er. The m an ag er sh ou ld be plac ed her e by th e m em be rs hi p o r co un ci l’s choice. O ur m anager will th en be in a po si tion to negoti ate fo r our ow n 

oper at io n. All th e pe op le p re se nt in th is room and ev eryo ne co nn ec ted w it h Klaw oc k ca n­ ne ry are aw are of th e fa ct th a t th ey hav e been in th e tis h ca nnin g bu si ne ss w ith th eir pr es en t pla nt fa r less tim e th an we ha ve be en w ith ou rs. How th en ca n an yo ne ac co un t fo r Klawoc k’s ow ing mor e mo ney th an we do in a sh ort er 

pe riod of tim e? W e hav e a cold st ora ge ca pa bl e of su pp ly in g en ou gh ice fo r al l th e te nders 

ne ce ss ar y to haul fish, and w e h av e th e on ly bri ne ch illed te nder . We h av e a la rg e oil s to ra ge , adequate t o se rv e our ca nn er y an d fle et th ro ughout th e season. We a re b ett er e qu ip pe d in m an y w ay s th an Klaw oc k. All we h av e to do to prov e th is st ate m ent is to ta k e an y im part ia l ob se rv er th ro ugh our pla nt an d th en ta k e th e sa m e p art y th ro ugh th e Klawoc k pla nt. T his p art y I am su re can re ac h a de cis ion in th eir ow n min ds as which ca nnery is th e be st to op er at e. We tr u st , Mr . E dw ar ds , th a t you, as an im part ia l ob se rv er , w ill weigh ou r arg um en ts an d st ate m ents ca re fu lly, and we tr u st th a t a fte r you r own im p art ia l and ca re fu l ob se rv at io n, yo u w ill re port ba ck to th e Sec re ta ry of th e In te ri o r enou gh ev iden ce to in dic at e th a t he sh ou ld re ve rs e th e de cision of th e Co m­ m is si on er o f In dia n Affairs t o oj )e ra te Klawoc k an d allow th e H ydab urg canner y 

to la y idle d uri ng th e 1966 season.

Sta tem ent of F red W. G ra nt, J r.

Mr. New ton E dw ar ds, pe op le of H yd ab urg , an d v is it o rs : W e w ish to ex pre ss our ap pre ci at io n fo r yo ur resp on se in m ak in g th is heari ng po ssible. You r in te r­ est in co ming th e man y mile s invo lved we ho pe will not go un no tice d as we feel 

mu ch good will come abou t as th e re su lt of th is im part ia l he ar in g. We wou ld lik e to st re ss a t th is po in t th a t we feel we do n o t ha ve all th e in fo rm at io n ne ce ss ar y to mak e a co mplete st udy of th e si tu at io n. We ne ed th e in de pe nd en t st udy men tio ne d in Mr. B ennett’s le tt er of F eb ru ary 18, 1966, as w el l as st ati st ic s co nc er ni ng th e Klawoc k ope ra tion . B ea r th is in min d as we 

pre se nt our view s. We feel cert ain th a t a pla n m os t be ne fic ial to bo th Klawoc k an d H ydab urg is th e m os t logi ca l co urs e to follo w. If th is is n’t po ssible an d on e ca nn er y m ust su sp en d oper at io ns th en le t it b e th e one th a t is th e mos t un ec on om ical to o pe ra te . T hi s st ate m ent is pre par ed in co nn ec tio n w ith th e m an ner in which th e are a di re ct or . B ure au of In dia n Affa irs , Ju neau, Alask a, chose to handle th e ca nne ry op er at io n pl an s fo r th e y ear 1965. m or e cl ea rly iden tif ied as Mod ifica tio n No. 10 to Lo an C ontr ac t No. 14 -2 0- 30 0- 88 2; an d to a ve ry si m il ar Mod ifica tio n No. 11, w ith one ex ce ption; th a t is, if we ac ce pt ed Modificatio n No. 11 th e d efa u lt ac tion 

ta ken ag ain st us by a le tt er date d A pr il 16. 1965, fr om are a dir ec to r, R ober t L. 

B en ne tt (n ow D ep uty Com m ission er) wou ld b e w ithdra w n. To re la te th e hap pen in g of ev en ts in proj>er ord er we w ill se ek to show th e 

unus ua l re as on in g in e ac h in st an ce a s w e see it . In Nov em be r 1964, we unders ta nd, th e BIA officia ls al on g w ith W as hi ng to n officia ls he ld a co nf er en ce in S eatt le an d a t th is tim e it w as de finitely de cid ed w hat wou ld ta ke pl ac e as fa r as ca nn er y oper at io nal pla ns fo r H yda burg and Klawoc k w er e co nc erne d. W h at is st ra nge ab out th is ? O ur m an ag er w as in-
58 INTERIOR NOMINATION

structed not to inform us of this decision. This is evidenced in the fact that 

on March 19, 1965, we wrote Mr. Gunderson relativ e to what was developing on 

cann ery operational plans for 1965. No answer. He inform ed us at the March 

29 meeting at Juneau th at he was advised not to tell us anything.

On March 24, 1965, I received a telegram, advising us of a meeting at Jun eau 

regarding cannery operations called f or Monday, March 29,1965. At this meeting 

we were told plan s were made for a combined operation with Klawock cannery 

operating. This d eal is b etter known as Modification No. 10. We object strongly 

to the forceful manne r in which this deal was car ried out for the following 

reas on s:

1. Our manag er was never given an opportu nity to show or present an operational budget for a combined operation. So how could a compara tive analysis 

have been made between two budgets of an operation at Hydaburg or Klawock 

for the purpose of determ ining which of the two was the best?

2. We were never given an opportunity to represe nt our business as is our 

rig ht under its constitu tion and charter. This in our estim ation is a very sorry 

situation inasmuch as our rig hts were denied us.

3. In spite of arguments favorin g Klawock as represented by BIA officials we 

contend our cannery is j us t as good if not b etter; accordingly we refused to sign 

their proposed pla n; instead, on April 5, 1965, the Hydaburg Cooperative Association Council wen t on record to requ est th at we be permitttxl to operate as it was 

our turn based on the history of alter natin g combined operations. On April 6, 

1965, the Klawock council was c onfronted with our requ est but tu rned the request 

down as we were notified in a lette r of April 9, 1965, from the are a director ’s 

office. This clearly points to their attitud e regarding co ope ration; th at is, in my 

humble opinion necessary inasm uch as Hydaburg or Klawock can not each go 

their own way independently.

In view of thi s situ ation it seems to us in order to keep disap pointmen t, arg uments of unfairnes s and lack of cooperation between both places to a minimum, 

a plan of alt ernatin g operations at each pla nt is by fa r the most logical course 

to follow for prolonged success in our efforts. The present course only spells 

doom. If Klawock continues to possess an uncooperative attitude, cut us loose 

from the pre sen t plan and let us be free to explore the field of us engag ing in 

a more appe aling deal from the standp oint of keeping our enterprise operating 

to provide income to the community, and to strive for a plan of operation to 

liqu idate our indebtedness in the most expe dient manner. This is our primary 

objective.

Allow us the r igh t to have a man ager and a bookkeeper as a ny business should 

never be deprived the right to have. They are an essential pa rt of our activity 

and should be instrum ental in seeking other ways and means of carry ing on a 

more desirable plan to benefit members of our association whom are now being 

asked to lay idle for an indefinite period of time as the resu lt of BIA plans.

On April 16, 1965, the area dir ector’s office informed us officially, by let ter, th at 

we were decla red in default on all loans. On May 1, 1965, we appealed the 

decision as plan s outlined in Modification No. 10 were unreasonable as we outlined in our letter. The lette r appealed for an immediate hearing with the 

expressed views of operating Hydaburg cannery over their plan of Klawock 

operation.

In response to our May 1 lette r Mr. Joh n O. Crow. Deputy Commissioner, 

atte mp ts to justify the Bureau's action in h is letter of May 25, 1965. I will quote 

his remarks and follow w ith o ur comments.

Mr. Crow states : “Klawock also has access to ample housing fac ilities for 

tra nsient workers.” However, Mr. Crow intends this remark to mean ; th at is. 

housing for Indians, Filipinos, or whites, we will answer in thi s manner. There 

would not be a need to house native transien t workers as the local labo r force 

of men and women is more than adequate to meet the requirements of a combined 

operation. The housing situ ation for tra nsi ent Filipino and white workers, is this, if he had taken the time to inquire on this subject, he would have found 

in addition to cann ery facilitie s several real nice places are ava ilable at a 

reasonable cost. We never required additional housing when combined operations were ca rrie d on here.

Mr. Crow states : “It. has greater ware housing and cooling space and greater 

retort capacity.” If Mr. Crow and his associates took the time to actually 

take a physical check they then must have measurements to offer as proof of 

this stateme nt. I have demanded via correspondence proof in the form of
INTERIOR NOMINATION 59

signed stat ements subst antiating this statem ent of fact. On Febru ary 28, 1966, 

the are a dir ector requested Mr. Norland to provide this information. This 

exposes again the ir statem ents without proof attitude. Several councilmen 

and other members of our association through comparisons of the ir own say this 

statement is simply absurd and is far from th e tru th. We demand th at the party 

responsibly conducting thi s hea ring check to seek out the truth in this stateme nt, 

and all other statem ents we question to contain un tru ths or cas t even a shadow 

of doubt as m isrepresentation of facts just to support th eir case.

Mr. Crow’ states : “Klawock is more cen tral ly located to the fishing grounds.”

This is one business th at this rule cann ot possibly apply due to the natur e 

and hab its of the raw ma terial sought af te r in the course of any one season 

in rela tion to the other. We are at the mercy of the ele me nts ; n ature decides 

thi s rule and it is safe to say man probably will do well to second guess 

exac tly wh at can be called cen tral ly located when dealing with salmon.

Mr. Crow’ sta tes th a t: “Klawock’s cost of productio n per case the past 3 

yea rs has been less tha n th at of Hydaburg.” We do not have a comparative 

cost summary later tha n for 1961 season in our possession but at the time w’e 

beat Klawock by $1.24 on a per case basis not considering overhead cost which 

would have added 54 c ents more. But if volume were the same I am sure wre would still be the b etter pla nt to produce a lesser cost per case.

Mr. Crow st ate s: “The council’s le tte r causes us to wonder how well inform ed 

the council is of the serious financial condition of th e association.

“1. The association curre ntly is indebted to the United States for loans of 

$1,373,640.36 plus in terest.

“2. The association was indebted to the bank for loans of $313,880. plus interest, a t Febru ary 4. 1965.

“3. At March 31, 1964, the association had a deficit (excess of liabilitie s over 

ass ets) of $314,522.73. This will be increased by the amount of the loss on 1964 

operations, which will run well over $100,000.

“4. The association has incurred a cannery operating loss 9 of the past 11 

years.”

In each of the fou r items above it is safe to say Klawock’s equipment exceeds 

that mentioned in our case. This statem ent only tends to bolster our contention that to ope rate Hydab urg cann ery would net more profits or reduce 

losses whichever the case may be at the end of opera tions each year. Mr. Crow 

will never know exac tly how w’ell aware we are of our indebtedness and we 

would like nothing more than to pay off our loan completely if for no other 

reason tha n to get the Burea u off our backs. An intere st cost of $40,000-plus 

would be realized when and if we pay off our loan.

Mr. Robert L. Ben nett in his lette r of Febru ary 18. 1966. seeks to explain the 

reasons for the decision to combine operation s of the Hydaburg and Klawock 

canneries in 1966, with Klawock as the operating cannery. This proposal is 

more clearly defined as modification No. 11.

We will quote his remarks and follow with my comments.

Mr. Ben nett st ate s: “Results in 1965 have fully justified the decision to operate only one cannery and to operate at Klawock. As a res ult of the combination, however, the loss was cut from $250,601 to $57,407.”

I commented on this last year by projecting an estimated loss of $30,000 if 

conditions in the industry remaine d the same. I can only contend th at if 

Hyd abu rg were the ope rati ng cannery we would have showed a lesser loss. 

This conte ntion is based on o ur willin gness to make certain cannery workers out 

of necessity perform the work of two people. It is highly possible th at the 

Filip ino help could be cut in the most part and perhap s totally. This would 

save on trav el, boa rd and room, maintenance, and repair expense. We would 

seek to have the Bureau arr ange for an imme diate program to tra in machine 

ope rato rs at the Continental Can Co. to operate the Iron Chink, filler, seamer, 

and can loft machinery. Again travel, board and room, main tenance, and repair 

expense would be reduced. A local cook and helper could be emp loyed: as a 

result of the same, savings of travel and allie d expense would be realized. 

Local office help could be utilized. Unnecessary overtime would be stopped. 

Other possible savings in cost would be practiced, ra th er tha n preached. Needless to say, local labor utilized would con trib ute much to individual benefit. 

Fu rth er, to increase our chances of profit we feel that better utilization of outside production such as the Puget Sound fleet offers much to be desired in 

capitalizin g on the loss of production to this competition. They have taken
60 INTERIOR NOMINATION

aw ay a lot of ou r pro ducti on thro ug h co m pe tit ion; es tim ates would be something lik e 50 percent in our case.

Mr. Be nn ett sta te s: “The Klawock boa ts, how ever, outpr od uce th e Hyd aburg 

bo ats.”

In 1905 we did not ha ve th e full pro du cti ve eff ort by th e bo at Viole t F due 

to eng ine tro uble for approx im ate ly 80 pe rcen t of the season. Th e boat M inke r

did no t pro duce at all. If we we re allo wed to pa rtic ip at e in our capacit y as 

directors of th e busin ess we would ha ve ha d this pro du cti ve eff ort with ou t fai l. 

In or de r to ma ke th e com par ison fa ir we could ma ke a libelo us statem en t at 

th is point bu t will no t because of this.

Mr. Ben ne tt st ate s: “When it is necessary to com bine the op erations of canne rie s as in th is instan ce, it is difficult to decide which cann ery will he op erate d 

and wh ich one will be closed. One villag e is bound to he disappointed. At 

one tim e opera tio ns we re al te rn at ed between Kla wock and Hy dabu rg. This, 

how eve r, is exp ens ive an d wastef ul, and requ ire s du pli cate impro vem ent and 

re pai r ex pe nd itu res.”

I sup pos e coldblooded busin ess ca lculations sho uld govern when all facts add 

up to a bad sit ua tio n. In this case let the chips fa ll wh ere they may and let 

us selec t th e best plan t throug h pr op er rea son ing, such as which can produce 

th e be st chance of profits via the lesser cos t of pro duction route . Note Mr. 

Ben ne tt’s la st sta temen t of “ex pen sive and wasteful.” In ou r estim ati on it has 

been qu ite exp ens ive to kee p Kla wock in general good re pa ir and wasteful inasmuc h as Hy da bu rg is a good pl an t alread y and would not nee d much ma int enanc e an d re pa ir work to supp ort a combined ope ration .

Mr. Ben ne tt st at es : “T he decision th at Kla wock would be th e op erating cannery in 1966 wa s ma de bec aus e it is believed Kla wock has a be tter cha nce than 

Hyd ab ur g fo r a suc ces sful opera tio n, an d bec aus e the am ount of fun ds req uir ed 

to op erate Kla wock is less. Although the Hy da bu rg cann ery is newe r than the 

Klawock cannery , it would cost mo re to pla ce it in shape to op erate tha n the 

Kla wo ck cannery . An ind ependent survey of the Hyd ab urg cann ery in 1964. 

as mentioned in our le tter of May 25, 1965, to Mr. Gr an t, show ed th at in order 

to ha nd le more volume, ad ditio ns a nd rep lac em ents of $92,500 would be req uir ed 

in 1964: $45,000 in 1966; and $13,000 in 1967. In additio n, Hyd ab ur g’s boiler 

wa s condem ned in 1965. Cost of a new boiler and boilerroom fo un datio n has 

no t been def initely ascerta ine d, hu t would run in excess of $25,000.”

At th is point w e ar e requ estin g th at on-the-spot com par isons he made to de te rmin e th at this statem en t is accura te : if not. ju st w ha t ma kes the differen ce. 

Th is stat em en t m ust he pro ven to ou r sa tis faction as i t is har d to believe with ou t 

de tails where Kla wock cann ery is $150,900 b et te r th an Hyd ab ur g’s. Th e sur vey 

take n in 1965 th a t includ ed de tails cov ering th e improvem ents wa s held to be 

of a confidential na ture. Fo r th is rea son we we re denie d perm iss ion to hav e a 

copy of said re po rt r eg arding ou r busin ess th us denying us the ri ght to agr ee or 

disagree dep end ing on w ha t was said therein . We must, be presen ted with two 

bu dg et s; one showin g a Kla wock ope ra tion : one showing a Hyd ab urg opera tion 

which wa s nev er done. Ou r la st ma nager. Mr. Fred Gu nde rson, to ou r kno wledge, never pre sente d to us fo r stu dy any such bud get. Th erefore Mr. Be nn ett’s 

remarks of th e am ou nt of fu nd s requ ire d to op erate Kla wock is with ou t pr op er 

compa rativ e bas is. Th e boile r looks good to us from th e ou tw ard appe ara nc e and 

it is unbelievable th at we should be requ ire d to rep lac e the en tir e un it esp ecia lly 

if it can be repa ire d fo r one -ten th or so of quota tio n ma de by Mr. Be nnett. Mr. 

Ben ne tt fu rt her stat es th at the boilerroom foundatio n nee ds to be replaced 

en tirely . If this is an indic ati on of the accuracy of his stu dy in bring ing about 

the dec isio n to op erate Klawock instea d of Hy da bu rg then pe rh ap s all of his 

statem en ts sho uld be che cked fo r accurac y. We checked ou t boilerroom foun da ­

tion and fou nd it to be as good in shap e as the day it was constru cte d. Others 

be tter qua lified will com ment on boiler insp ection.

Mr. Be nn ett sta te s: “H yd ab urg does not have a ad eq ua te f resh water sup ply.”

Th e water lin e wa s rece ntly re pa ired by Pu bli c Hea lth Service and is in real 

good sha pe. Fo r pro tec tio n ag ai ns t accide ntal w ater main tro ub les we hav e the 

follow ing sa fe gua rd s:

1. W at er pum p sta tio n a t cre ek wh ich is exc ellent ly set up f or emerge ncy pu rpose s only.

2. A la rg e w ater sto rage tank . It is not essenti al as Mr. Ben ne tt stat es bu t 

merely set up f or emergency use only.

We h ad b ut 1 accid ent in th e 20-plus ye ar s of ca nn ery op erati on s here w hich is 

an env iab le rec ord bu t Mr. Ben ne tt is tryi ng to down gra de ou r en tir e system 

bec aus e of thi s.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 61

Mr. B ennet t is get ti ng ri dic ulo us in his ar gum ents whe n he sta te s: “Pre su m ­

ab ly a high w in d has ca us ed th e la rg e w ar eh ous e an d co ld-stora ge buildin g to 

le an to w ar d th e ca nne ry bu ild ing. T hi s wou ld enta il ad dit io nal ex pe ns e. ”

The w in d di d ca us e a ve ry sl ig ht bu lge in th e nort h side w al l whe n w in do ws on 

th e so ut h side ga ve way to wind fo rc es th u s th e su dd en fo rc e did ve ry sl ig ht 

da mag e. If yo u w er en ’t to ld abou t th e ac ci den t yo u wou ld ne ve r te ll th is hap ­

pe ne d. T h a t se ct ion w as re in fo rc ed th e y ear it hap pe ne d an d do es not re quir e 

addit io nal ex pe nse. The en ti re bu ildi ng has be en ta xed to ca pa ci ty w ith ca nn ed 

and froz en sa lm on st ora ge sinc e th e ac ci den t and has show n no in dic at io n of 

w ea kn es s as he in fe rs . No oth er bu ildi ng co ul d hav e w iths to od th e wind fo rc es 

of t h a t day which ex ce ed ed upw ar d of 100 m ile s per hour unde r th e sa m e kin d of 

ac ci de nt .

Mr. B en net t sta te s: “K la w oc k's co sts of pr oduc tion are lower th an H yd aburg ’s.” A t th is po in t we sh al l re qu es t Mr. Sar go Giss to m ak e a co m pa ra tive 

an aly si s of th e tw o pla nts fo r a t le ast 10 years ha ck . In a 1001 co m pa ra tive 

an aly si s H ydab urg w as th en ahea d of Klawoc k. G en er al ly sp ea ki ng , th is is 

go ve rned by nu m er ou s fa cto rs re la tivel y th e sa m e a t ea ch p la n t as bo th utilize 

th e sa m e m ac hi ne ry and sa m e m et ho d of pr oc es sing . An y differ en ce is du e to 

co nd iti on of p la n t fa cil it ie s an d ab il it y of m an ag er . So me y ears even th e siz e 

of fish is a re al big fa cto r as to cost. So, if yo u follo w, th is is re all y not a re al 

co nc lusive ar gum ent in co m par at iv e fa ct s.

Mr. B en net t sta te s: “One oth er fa cto r th a t influ en ce d th e de cision to oper at e 

a t Klaw oc k w as th e co nfidence th a t th e Klawoc k peop le dem onst ra te in th eir 

canner y m an ag er , and th e m an ne r in which th ey su pport him, and so fo rt h .” It 

wou ld be in te re st in g to kn ow ju st who co ntr ib ute d th is st ate m en t as we ha ve 

gi ve n our m an ag er al l th e su pport po ssible. H e ag ai n fo rc es our han d by bri ngin g in su ch ar gum en ts and so do ing is bui ld in g up undes ir ab le hum an re la ti ons 

am on g thos e invo lv ed in th is dis put e as we m ust re hut to su ch st ate m ents . One 

bo at, not too long ag o, le ft th e Klawoc k as so ci at io n be ca us e of dis sa ti sf acti on. 

J u s t th is y ear tw o mor e w er e tr yin g to ge t someone else to bu y th em out of 

in de bt ed ne ss fr om Kl aw oc k. T hi s w as told to on e of our mem be rs dir ec tly by 

th e p art ie s se ek ing th is a ct io n. T his to u s do es n ot re pre se nt pe ac e an d ha rm on y. 

I t beho ov es us to arg ue in th is m an ner but th e B ure au elec ts th is ro ute al th ough 

we pre fe r to ke ep th e ar gum ents ba se d on fina nc ia l, ph ys ic al , and fa ir ness re a ­

so ns; no ot he r.

Mr. B en net t s ta te s : “W e ho pe co nd itio ns in th e in d u st ry w ill im pr ov e to th e 

poin t w her e bo th ca nner ie s ca n agai n be oper at ed .” Now’ we u n d ers ta n d th e 

pr ic e of pi nk sa lm on has go ne up to $28 per ca se. O ur pu ck is of th is spec ies 

mos tly . I f th is is tr u e I th in k we sh ou ld be al lo w ed t o oper at e in dep en de nt ly or 

pre fe ra bly st ay w ith an a lt e rn a te year pla n w hi ch re all y is th e be st b u t w ith 

ea ch pla nt ha vi ng th eir ow n m an ag er and bo ok ke ep er w he n not op er at in g.

In years H ydab urg w as th e opera ti ng ca nne ry and Klawoc k w as id le it w as 

not ne ce ss ar y to bo rrow an y of th eir eq ui pm en t. Nor wou ld th is be ne ce ss ar y 

now'. If Klawoc k had to bu y th e fo llo wing fo r th eir oper at io n la st yea r, an d 

th is , th e am oun t of mon ey invo lv ed wou ld hav e ad de d se ve ra l th ousa nd dollar s 

to th eir budget :

1. A pp ro xi m at el y 60 pie ce s of pi ling w as ta ke n. W hi ch th ey pai d $1 per foot 

fo r. W he n it is ne ce ss ar y fo r us to re pl ac e th is dea l we will ha ve to pa y appro xim at el y $4 per fo ot . Mr. M er la nd sh ou ld be co mpe lle d to pa y th e go ing price. 

T his is one of m an y dis ad vanta ges of hav in g on e m an ag er of tw o places.

2. A co ns id er ab le am ount of co ok ing ut en si ls , beds, and be dd ing w as ta ken 

fr om th e bu nk ho us e.

3. P ra cti call y all of th e pall et boa rd s w er e ta ken .

4. Alm os t al l of our co oler s w er e ta ke n.

5. On e H yst er w as ta ke n.

Mr . E dw ar ds, cert ain fa cto rs th a t m ust ha ve weigh ed he av ily in de ciding 

whi ch ca nn er y w as ch os en to be th e oper at in g ca nn er y, ne ed to l>e a sc ert ain ed a t 

th is h eari n g ; th ey a re :

1. L et’s ch ec k and co m pa re H ydab urg an d Klaw oc ks w ar eh ou se sp ac e her e an d 

th er e.

2. L et’s ch ec k an d co m pa re H ydab urg an d K la w oc ks cooling sp ac e here an d 

th er e.

3. L et’s ch ec k H ydaburg and Klaw’ocks re to rt ca pac ity fo r w h at ea ch had in 

1964, her e and t he re .

4. L et’s m ak e a co m pa riso n of au d it s to seek out th e co st of pr od uc tion on a 

ca se ba sis. W hat th e au d it s show from 1964 fo r a t le ast 10 years ba ck . W e
62 INTERIOR NOMINATION

should bear in mind that the more eases produced the smaller the cost per case; 

this is true because of certain fixed costs.

5. Let us together check out the boilerrooin foundation to show how relentless 

Mr. Bennett is in his free-swinging statement of facts. This alone will cast a 

shadow of a doubt on all of his remarks. In view of this statem ent of fact, second 

check of the boiler should be made with one of our experienced boilermen observing. It is unreasonable to replace all of a boiler when minor repairs is all that 

is required.

6. We want you to get a copy of the 1964 survey tha t was conducted on our 

plant, now, before the hearing is over, so together we can review and determine 

what the $150,900 improvement item covered.

7. We demand to see a budget prepared by our last manager, Mr. Fred 

Gunderson, covering the combined operation plan for the season of 1965. We 

can tell you now, Mr. Edwards, no such plan exists, as we were never asked 

to review any such plan prior to the time we were asked to sign Modification 

10 and 11, sight unseen, so to speak. You recognize, Mr. Edwards, we are arguing 

in our behalf at a great disadvantage; we sight the fact our manager and 

bookkeeper were released without our permission. Their abilities and experience would each help beyond all reasonable doubt in this dispute. The ar bitrary 

manner in which they were released lends us to believe this action was deliberately planned to quell our efforts to cause any type of a dispute.

8. Let us all go through each plant together, examining top to bottom, so to 

speak, with Mr. Lars Nerland pointing out all the way along the line the advantages and disadvantages in answer to questions we will ask. This is essential 

in view of fairness.

It has been pointed out certain improvements planned for Klawock such as 

brine chill facilities were never started nor completed for the year 1965. We 

would like to point out here and now tha t any or all improvements tha t we 

budgeted in any year past have always been completed far in advance of operations. This indicates a reliable crew which is essential to lower cost production. 

Suppose last year was a better than average year, Klawock would have been 

exposed to severe criticism because of the failure to complete improvements. 

It was brought to our attentio n a t one time on a f air day 22,000 of 55,000 delivery 

was diverted to another cannery because Klawock could not handle. We can 

safely say our plant can process a like amount in 10 hours with ease. Before 

someone else tells you otherwise we would like to point out now th at these facts 

denote real top processing as these standards go.

To try to illustrate one factor tha t has been played down all too lightly although the word has entered into correspondence and arguments several times 

and it is cooperation. This is something money usually does not buy ; we sight: 

Foreign aid, doled out, we might say, indiscreetly in some cases, yet we do not 

get full cooperation from its recipients. Cooi>eration is an element that only 

fairness can finally bring to its full potential. This being the case we will quietly 

submit to an alternate year plan as for as long as conditions indicate this to be 

of necessity.

In conclusion may I state tha t we respectfully request that Mr. Stewart Udall, 

Secretary of the Interior, Washington, D.C., reverse the decision of the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs to operate Klawock in the 1966 season. Instead, operate Hydaburg. Thence in the futu re should this type of operation become necessary 

again the alternate operation plan be adopted. A decision must be reached by 

April 1,1966.

We remain willing to entertain any proposal which would be of mutual advantage to the two communities, but we are stead fast in our determination not to 

participate in any arrangement which would affect the indefinite closing of the 

Hydaburg cannery and the continuing operation of the cannery at Klawock.

If satisfactory agreements cannot be negotiated with Klaw ock: then give us 

the right to explore the possibility of negotiating operational plans with other 

companies in the same business.

SUGGES TIONS

1. Repair and maintenance work should be conducted on idle year if alternate year plan adopted. One-half of savings on combine plan should be given 

to idle plant for improvements to community.

2. Diversified lines of fish products should be thought about and plans laid to 

experiment with such products as smoked kippered coho salmon and pickled 

colioe. Both could be packed in one-half pint jars. I believe a market would 

be good for these items.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 63

3. Diversified plan s can only be carrie d out with the removal of the Sea ttle 

office, which is an unnecessary expense anyway. Phone answ ering service is 

adequate representatio n there now with modern communication ava ilab le here. 

Le t’s not abandon expensive plants but make them work and cause expa nsion 

instead. People should be relocated here, not awa y to places th at are overcrowded already.

I wish to tha nk all th e good people th at made thi s hearing possible.

I tha nk you.

Statement of Floyd F ran k, Sr.

Mr. Newton Edw ards, associates and friends, I would like to make a brief 

statem ent concerning the boiler at the can nery here at Hydaburg.

To my knowledge the boiler was in good working condition at the end of the 

1964 canning season.

Before th e 1964 canning season, as the fireman salmon cook of th e pla nt, I made 

some repa irs with the help of one of the ca nnery mechanics. Afte r these rep airs 

were made an insj>ection was made by a qualified boiler inspector who issued a 

certificate to the cannery. The certificate s tat es the boiler was in excellent shap e 

at the time of the inspection.

To my knowledge there has been no inspection made of the intern al pa rts of 

the boiler and this ha s to be made to determine safety of the boiler.

Mr. Ben nett’s lette r of Febru ary 18, 1966, indicate s th at the boiler was condemned in the summ er of 1965. This statem ent is un tru e and should have not 

been cited as a reason for the closure of our cannery again in 1966.

We have five r etor ts and the capacity of each retor t is 105 cases,—a total of 

525 cases when all are full. When the cannery is oi>erating at full capacity 

one retort is filled every 20 minutes. The present boiler and ret orts are adeq uate 

to handle any sizable a mount of fish.

With minor rei>airs I know th at this boile r and retor ts will service our needs 

for some time longer. As for the productive ability of the c anning and cooking 

facilities, at the cannery, we are capable of handling appproximately 5,000 fish 

per hour or approxima tely 312 cases per hour. This balances out with retort 

cap acity of 315 cases per hour.

I am gra teful for the opportu nity to present these fac ts and I thank you 

kindly for this privilege.

Statement of Ed Sanderson

A major cause of complaint thro ughout the cannery dispute has been the highhanded and seemingly arbitra ry treatm ent the BI A has accorded the people of 

Hydaburg. As an example of th at treatment. I offer this rep ort of the dismissal 

of Mr. Gunderson. Hydaburg’s cannery man ager until 1965. now maanger of the 

BIA cannery at Kake.

Mr. Gunderson was terminated early in 1965, but no notice of his termination 

was given to the council. Under what section 66. parag rap h 13, of his management contract was he terminated? The only releva nt section is section (c) : 

“The Commissioner may terminate the c ontract at any time with out prior notice 

to the man ager for misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance on the i»art of the 

manager, or for o the r cause which, in th e opinion of the Commissioner, is serious 

enough to make imm edia te term ination necessary.’’ Was the manager guilty of 

misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance? What oth er causes did the Commissioner consider in making his decision to terminate the man’s contrac t?

Mr. Gunderson was selected by the BIA to manage the Kake cannery in 1965 

and again in lfM>6. This fac t leads us to question the reasons for his dism issal 

here. Was he guilty enough of misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance here to 

w’arran t dismissal, yet not guilty enough of misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance to forbid his em ployment at Kake? It is hardly necessary to point out 

th at the term ination here and subsequent employment elsewhere of Mr. Gun derson by the BIA requires a full and satisfactory explana tion to the council. A 

yea r has passed since the termination became effective. No explan ation has been 

made.

If Mr. Gunderson had info rmation of BIA activity relating to a decision affecting the operation of Hydab urg ’s cannery he would have been required, und er 

parag rap h 4, section (h) of his management contrac t, to furnish a rep ort of 

such act ivity to the council when such a rep ort was requested . If the requ est
64 INTERIOR NOMINATION

wa s mad e, an d if Mr. Gunde rso n ha d such inf orm ati on yet faile d to repo rt it, 

he vio lated the ter ms of his c on tra ct. Acc ording to the minutes o f tlie H yd aburg 

Co opera tive Association fo r Marc h 26, 1965, such a requ est wa s mad e: “Requ est 

from cou ncil fo r inform ati on as shown in mi nu tes of Fe br ua ry 9 ha s not been 

rece ived fro m the ma nager of BIA. Council is in the da rk us to developments 

rega rding op erations.” Fu rth ermore, Fred Gr an t, Jr., requested th e sam e in ­

form ation in a le tter to Fred Gun derson da ted Ma rch 19, 1965: “E ver yon e is 

anxio usly waitin g new s con cerning a 1965 ope ration . Keep us posted.”

A le tter fro m Fr ed Gu nde rson to Area Direc tor Be nn ett da te d Fe br ua ry 26, 

1965, is re le va nt here. “I hope Mr. W rig ht will soon get inform ation in Washing ton ab ou t th e 1965 opera tion so th at you will be able to go to th e people in 

Hy da bu rg an d dis cuss th ei r pos itio n and expla in to the m th at in Washin gton ’s 

bes t judg men t I was dir ected not to discus s any inf ormati on th at cam e to me 

with anyone.

“Muc h ag ai ns t my be tte r jud gm ent I have n ot discus sed or w ritte n th e council 

any of the possibilitie s th at the y might be fac ed with f or the co min g sea son .”

“T his pa th etic le tter makes plain no t only the vio lat ion of th e co nt ract Mr. 

Gunde rso n wa s forced into, bu t also th e secre tive and deceptive m eth ods the BIA 

ha s em ployed in its d ealings with the people of Hy dab urg .

Mr. Ro be rt Bennett, Assist an t Com mission er of In di an Aff airs , stat ed in a 

le tte r da ted Fe br ua ry 18, 1966, to the Hy dabu rg C ooperative Assoc iation Council 

th at one of the fac tor s, which decided the jo int cann ery oji eration be held at 

Klawoc k, wa s the confidence the p eople of Kla wock have show n in th ei r cann ery 

ma nager, als o th at Klaw ock had efficient manag ement. How does he ju st ify 

this s ta te m en t a s a fac tor. The imp lication here is th at Mr. Fre d Gunderson, our 

la st man ag er of reco rd, lacked efficiency and did not enj oy th e confidence and 

su pp ort of the Hy dabu rg Coope rative mem bership. Mr. Be nn ett offe rs no proof 

of this in his le tter and it is my conte ntion th at eve ry stat em en t quo ted in suppo rt of the decision to op erate Klawock ove r Hy da bu rg be su bs ta nt ia te d and 

this I subm it cann ot be done, an d sho uld n ot have had any b earin g on this i mp orta nt decision.

Sta teme nt of R obert Sande rson

Mr. Ed wa rds , and assoc iates, visitors and members of ou r vil lag e association, 

this statem en t ha s been pr ep ared to presen t our side of the disp ute with the 

Bu reau of Indian Affairs. Copies of the petition to the Se cretary of th e In terio r, 

with the le tter of tran sm itt al , and copies of correspondence between Mr. John O. 

Crow an d Mr. Ro bert Be nnett, Assist an t Com mission er of In dian Affairs, will be 

referred to.

Fir st of a ll, let me s ta te the case fo r a jo in t o peratio na l plan, al te rn at in g op eratio ns between the villa ges, str essin g fairn es s an d coo per atio n. Kla wock need s 

the pro ducti on of the Hyd aburg fleet to op erat e; we would nee d the product ion 

of the Kla wock fleet. Th e coo per atio n of both pa rtie s mu st be obtained . The 

only wa y coo peratio n can be obtained is by al te rn at in g op erations at each pla nt. 

To do oth erw ise, is to invit e disa ste r. If fo r ins tan ce, the Hyd ab ur g fleet ha d 

ref used to coo perate with Klawock du rin g th e 1965 season, losses would have 

been incu rred which would ta ke ye ar s of jo in t op erati on al savin gs to ma ke up 

fo r the losses. Any pla n th at would conc entra te op erati on s in one pl an t while 

closing down ind eflniately the othe r cannery , with th e re su ltan t im pa ct upon th e 

com munity , can only fail . We m aintain th at we ha ve th e be tter can ne ry a nd set 

up fo r operati on : b ut r ealiz e th at we c an no t ask fo r the operati on each an d eve ry 

year, an d close down Klawock inde finitely . We need th ei r pro duction, the y nee d 

ou r pro ducti on. Cooperation and very definite agreem ents ar e essential for suc ­

cessful op erations of the respec tive canneri es. Only a pla n of opera tion, to be 

con duc ted a t e ach plan t on a lter na te years, can be successful.

Incid en tal ly, we proposed by le tter to th e ar ea dir ector , th a t this pla n of 

operati on be ca rried o u t: Hy dabu rg to have the 1965 opera tion, as it wa s th ei r 

tu r n : Klawock to have the opera tion th e following year, with the un de rstand ing 

th at Hyd ab ur g wou ld fu lly co opera te in this case. Th is al te rn at e pla n of op erations would conti nue un til con dition s cha nge whe reby, both ca nn eries can operat e ind ependentl y of each oth er. We feel th at th is wa s a fa ir and rea sonable 

propos al, bu t th is pro pos al in due cou rse wa s turn ed down by both th e BIA and 

the K law ock council.
INTE RIOR NOMINATION 65

Statements have been made by Mr. Bennett and Mr. Crow purporting to show 

the superiority of the Klawock operation over tha t of Hydaburg, enough apparently, according to them, to reject issues of fairness and cooperation.

The reasons given for the closure of the Hydaburg cannery and the decision to 

combine operations at Klawock are, in our opinion, misleading, inadequate, and 

without foundation. A letter of transmittal to the Secretary of the Interior, 

dated Februa ry 2, 1966, and signed by myself as Secretary of our DA organization, expresses our side of the dispute with the BI A.

First of all, these decisions were made without the knowledge and consesnt of 

the council, who were given no opportunity to present our side of the case. Questions we asked were not answered. Information was deliberately withheld from 

the council. On several occasions, he was asked to give information on the type 

of operation decided upon, or even hints or other knowledge of the probable type 

of operation tha t would take place. Reports and information were to be furnished to the council upon request. This is in the manager’s contract. Evidently, 

it was deemed important enough that the BIA felt it necessary to deliberately 

request the manager to withhold information from the council, even though the 

manager, by so doing would violate his contract with the association. To our 

knowledge, such a request has never been made of the manager before. We 

contend tha t this was done and information deliberately withheld from the 

council, and made known at such a late date, to make futile any efforts by the 

council to rectify the situation. Our managers contract was terminated effective 

the day of the announcement, thus depriving the council of his services to argue 

effectively on our behalf.

This was done as an “economy” measure by the BIA, who then put our cannery enterprise in the hands of the Klawock manager. In another case, however. the Angoon Community Association had no operation in the year 1965, selling their salmon outright to Peter Pan Seafoods. However, they were forced 

to keep th eir manager at $11,000 salary per year, and whose sole function was 

to oversee the boat relending operation payments thereof, a mere bookkeeping 

function, which could have been settled by agreement between the BIA and the 

private operation concerned. Yet the Hydaburg association was deprived of a 

manager, whose responsibilities would be much greater than one at Angoon, 

under the condition described. We were deprived of the services of our own 

manager. Not one point favoring Hydaburg has been mentioned. If we had our 

own manager, he would right now be presenting our case in our behalf on this 

matter. All correspondence points out the supposed superiority of the Klawock 

cannery over that of Hydaburg. There must be some reasons to support a Hydaburg operation. Why are these reasons not presented? Were direct comparisons made? Can they be supported by facts and figures? Mr. John O. Crow, 

Assistant Commissioner of Indian Affairs, gave these reasons for closure of the 

Hydaburg c annery:

Klawock can be more efficiently operated for the following reasons:

1. Central location of the Klawock cannery to the fishing grounds.

2. More space and living quarte rs for trans ient workers.

3. Superior re tort and warehouse capacity of the Klawock cannery.

We contend tha t these reasons are ridiculous and without foundation. We 

challenge the BIA to prove their points, as these reasons were deemed sufficient 

to scrap the plan of alternate year operations and close down the Hydaburg 

cannery. Also, we ask tha t data be provided to show the estimated financial 

savings from the reasons cited above, and why.

In our position, these reasons were refuted and reasons given. A letter was 

subsequently received from Mr. Robert L. Bennett giving reasons for the closure 

of the Hydaburg cannery for the canning season. He does not give facts and 

figures to support the reasons above, but has been trying to dig up other reasons 

to support th eir decision. His letter may be referred to.

First of all, he states tha t events have fully justified the decision to combine 

operations to operate at Klawock. The loss was cut from $250,601 to $57,407 

over that of 1964. A combined operation was probably justified but not necessarily at Klawock. The real saving was the price advance from $18 per case to 

$26-$28 per case on the selling price of canned salmon, making a difference of 

several hundred thousand for the combined operations, although I do not have 

the exact figures in the absence of an audit. Mr. Bennett’* statement is misleading and does not show the full side of the overall picture.

Mr. Bennett states that the Klawock fleet has more production than the 

Hydaburg fleet. Another misleading statement. In a combined operation, the
66 INTERIOR NOMINATION

catch of both fleets are processed together, and the salmon pack would he the 

same, rega rdless of which pla nt is in operation. How would this have a bearing 

on the case? Is there a financial saving because of this?

Mr. Ben nett sta tes that the Klawock cann ery has efficient management, and 

it would tak e any man ager considerable time to bring the Hydaburg cannery 

up to the same standard . Wh at can Mr. Ben nett mean by this? Both the 

cann eries are und er the same management, and the same personnel will be involved, and each should incur practic ally the same costs. If by inference, Mr. 

Benne tt was ref err ing to the form er manager of the Hydab urg cannery, why was 

he immediately assigned to the Kake cannery, and ano ther BIA-sponsored cannery, if his ma nage ment was not up to stan dard?

Mr. Bennett sta tes that it is difficult to decide which cannery will be closed 

as one village is bound to be disappointed. All this can be avoided, if a fair, 

alter natin g plan of operation s were employed, as in past agreeme nts with the 

Klawock association. Mr. Benne tt contends also, th at alt erna te plans of operation are w astefu l and requ ire duplicate improvements and rep air facilitie s. We 

can only surmise, th at i t is the inte nt of the B ureau to close down the H ydab urg 

plant for a number of years and use the savings from joint operation s to build 

up the Klawock cannery. Under the joint operation agreement, Hydaburg is 

responsible for one-half of the rep air and maintenance of the Klawock cannery, 

yet the entire burden of repair and mainten ance of the Hydaburg pla nt will be 

born by the Hydaburg association, if and when it is ever decided to operate the 

Hyd abu rg cannery again. In any case, neglected main tenance and repairs can 

be more expensive in the long run, although, in all fairness, it mu st be sta ted that 

rep airs and main tena nce a t Hyd abu rg would be much less than that of Klawock, 

and a stro ng argument in our favor, contributin g to reduced operational costs 

over th at of the Klawock cannery. The very natur e of the capital improvement 

of the Klawock pla nt for the year 1965 (re pairs of old and overaged equipm ent 

and rep airs to meet the san itation requirements), point to the added costs of 

maintaining and repairing an old cannery. These costs and rep airs seem to be 

incu rred every year. At the end of the year 1958, both cann eries were indebted 

to th e Government as follow s:

Hyd ab urg---------------------------------------------------------------------------- $1, 093, 064

Klawock____________________________________________________ 1, 099, 457

It can be seen tha t both cann eries w ere very close in their indebtness, Klawock 

owing $6,000 more. However, the las t figures th at were ava ilab le to me show 

Klawock owing approximately $600,000 more tha n Hydaburg (Hyda burg owes 

$1.4 million Klawock $2 million.) These figures could be p erhaps corrected and 

brought up to date and the present indebtedness of both cann eries furn ished for 

comparison. Both cann eries have had capable managers up to the present, production has been practically on a par. Klawock even has a slight advantage. 

We can only surm ise th at the gre at increase of indebtedness of the Klawock 

association over th at of Hydaburg was the res ult of renovating, improving, repairing and mainta inin g an old cann ery over th at of a new cannery. This 

should be taken into account, on long range projec tions of operations.

Mr. Benne tt poin ts out the inadequacy of the Hyd aburg wa ter supply and 

points to fai lur es in the past. This has happened once d urin g the h isto ry of the 

cannery operation. A combined joint financing of rep airs of the cannery, State 

ru ral development agency a nd town of H yda burg was undertaken, whereby, 5.000 

feet of new pipeline, a wa ter tan k and a standby pump for emergencies were installed in the spring of 1962. During the y ear 1964-65, the dam was renovated 

and repaired, pipeline and bridges were repa ired or replaced, and exposed pipes 

insulated . Mr. Bennett should be aware of this, as it was his office tha t approved 

the expend iture of can nery funds to assist in this project.

Mr. Benne tt sta tes th at a fac tor in the selection of the Klawock cann ery was 

the confidence they have in their manager. This may be true, as during the last 

7 years, Klawock has operated every year while Hydaburg will have been shut 

down three times. His success in obtaining the operations these years, is the 

largest fac tor in gaining the people’s support. This could chang e though, if they 

had shu t down 3 ye ars and Hydaburg operated each year.

Both canneries are basically one line operations, with the same capa city. The 

bulk of th e costs, if under the same management, would be the same. I pose th is 

question to Mr. Nerland. With the exception of var iation s caused by pact value, 

would operating costs under your management be high er at the Hydaburg plant 

than at the Klawock plant? The BI A contends th at it is. If yo ur answer is yes.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 67

please explain and justi fy you r reasons. State the excessive costs involved in 

altern ation operation s, in general, and also specifically to the Hydaburg 

operation.

In your opinion, would a fair, workable agreem ent between the two p arties concerned be prefera ble to possible noncooperative and bittern ess because of an 

unfair decision with resu ltin g repercussions?

To Mr. Giss: Under the same management and the same personnel, would a 

join t operation conducted at Hydaburg, show a greater loss, and why?

We ha d asked th at BIA personnel be he re to expla in their position and answer 

questions. Regrettably , they have not appeared, as should have Mr. Gunderson, 

our las t manag er of record. This, in effect, limits each party to dispute to mak ­

ing stateme nts, which they will not have to sup port und er questioning.

A state ment by Mr. B enn ett that alte rnate plan s of operation a re expensive and 

wasteful, with the implication th at operations are to be conducted in one pla nt 

on ly: such a statem ent and plan of opera tion would be, in my opinion, the sur est 

way to insu re lack of cooperation, and dis aster for both operations.

A statement th at $96,000 would be needed to make the Hydaburg cannery operational. Who made the indep ende nt survey ref err ed to ? Are these improvements 

absolutely necessary ? Klawock budget calls for approximately $52,000 in capital 

improvement. Is this based on a n “independent survey” ? If Hydab urg had an 

operationa l budget, I am sure t ha t the figures would not coincide with th at of the 

“independent survey.”

Another point of interest, lack of funds is cited for the primary reason to combine operations. Estimated savings approximately $50,000; $25,000 to each association, cap ital improvement to the Klawock association to safegu ard joint 

operation exceed the proposed savings by joint operation. Very little cap ital 

investment would be needed if Hyd aburg op erated by itself.

In conclusion, a very clear-cut und erstandin g of the duties and function of the 

council should be furn ished. If they are to have no voice in the formulation of 

decisions and plans of operation, then there is no need fo r a council, and it should 

be dissolved. The Burea u of Ind ian Affairs has condoned a policy resulting 

in the buildup of one ope ration at the expense of the other. If not corre cted, such 

a policy will res ult in the disintegration of our fishing fleet, cann ing asso ciation 

and eve ntually our community.

We reque st, therefore, th at in the int ere st of fairness, and tak ing into consideration points brought out in our argu men ts, the decision to operate in 

Klawock during the year 1966 be reversed, and the operatio n to be conducted in 

Hydaburg. We also request th at a policy of alt erna te year operations be reinsta ted on a fair, equitable basis. We can not particip ate in any plan keeping 

the operation at one plant, (Klaw ock) and cann ot and will not supp ort an ope ration a t Klawock, und er p resent conditions.

H ydaburg, Ala sk a,

March 19, 1966.

Dear Bro th er: After read ing the enclosed statem ents etc. you will note we 

feel it is worthwhile to oppose Mr. Bennett’s appo intment as Commissioner of 

Ind ian Affairs. His attitud e toward us can easily mean his policies overall will 

affect you too. We urge you to oppose his appointment thro ugh the d irection of 

correspondence to the right people. Our sug gestion to Mr. Morken should also be 

noted.

Best regards,

Sylvester P eele, 

President, Camp No. 6.