AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN NATIONAL 



FORESTS 



An Address by Forester Henry S. Graves to the Denver Real 

 Estate Exchange, August 3 



THE object of my present visit to Col- 

 orado is two-fold. First, to inspect per- 

 sonally certain forests which I have not in 

 the past had an opportunity to visit, and to 

 meet as many of the people using these for- 

 ests as possible. Second, to investigate the 

 charges that the administration of the na- 

 tional forests is retarding, agricultural set- 

 tlement in Colorado. 



The statement has been repeatedly made 

 that there are in the national forests of 

 Colorado large areas of land suitable for 

 cultivation, and that the Forest Service is 

 withholding these lands from settlement. 

 During the past year the specific charge has 

 been reiterated in Congress, in public meet- 

 ings, and in the press that there are hun- 

 dreds of thousands of acres of agricultural 

 land in the national forests of this state 

 withheld from settlement. 



These charges have been so persistent and, 

 if true, are of such a serious nature, that 1 

 have considered it necessary to investigate 

 personally whether there are facts to justify 

 them. A trip was accordingly planned to 

 enable me to visit certain forests where it is 

 claimed that the largest areas of agricultural 

 lands exist. 



The Colorado Stock Growers' Association, 

 at its recent meeting at Grand Junction, ap- 

 pointed a committee to assist me in this 

 matter and advised local associations to ap- 

 point similar committees. On July 21 I at- 

 tended the Gunnison County Stock Growers' 

 Association at Gunnison and met two mem- 

 bers of the committee of the state association 

 and the full committee of the local county 

 association. Two men, Mr. T. W. Gray and 

 Mr. William Hartman of Gunnison, were des- 

 ignated to accompany me in the Gunnison 

 forest and show me the conditions, espe- 

 cially certain areas about whose administra- 

 tion by the Forest Service there has been 

 public criticism. 



The areas in the Gunnison forest about 

 which there has been public comment are 

 certain open parks in the interior of the 

 forest, notably Union and Taylor parks. It 

 specially was desired that 1 should see these 

 two parks. 



Union Park comprises some 3,000 acres, 

 and is situated at an elevation of over 9,900 

 feet. There are two classes of land — the 

 560 



bottom lands skirting the streams, and the 

 intervening rolling sage-brush land. At a 

 guess, I would say that the former occupies 

 about one-fourth of the area. The bottom, 

 lands are practically all patented under placer 

 claims, and the nearby water apparently all 

 controlled. I do not know that any one ever 

 expressed a desire to settle on the rolling 

 sage-brush lands under the existing condi- 

 tions. 



Taylor Park, situated at a still higher ele- 

 vation, comprises probably ten or twelve 

 thousand acres. Like Union Park, there are 

 the two classes of land — those readily irri- 

 gable, and the higher, rough, rolling sage- 

 brush areas. I would roughly estimate the 

 former to occupy some twenty per cent. That 

 portion of the park which covers the lands 

 presenting the best possibilities for hay farms 

 has been withdrawn as a reservoir site for 

 the Reclamation Service. It has been claimed 

 that the Forest Service has taken the position 

 that areas at this high elevation would not be 

 listed under the Homestead Act, on the 

 ground that the climate is too rigorous for 

 agriculture. 



There have been only two applications for 

 homesteads in Taylor Park. Both have been 

 reported favorably to the forest officers and 

 would have been opened to entry if they had 

 not conflicted with the existing withdrawal 

 for the Reclamation Service project. These 

 applications were, of course, rejected, and I 

 am informed that they are the only applica- 

 tions rejected in the Gunnison forest. 



My itinerary took me next through the 

 Sopris forest, over Taylor Pass, and Castle 

 Creek down to Aspen. In this forest, as 

 elsewhere, there are occasional restricted 

 areas of unquestioned agricultural value. Bot- 

 toms along the narrow valleys, flats at the 

 confluence of streams, and small benches near 

 water, offer opportunities for farming. The 

 best of these have been appropriated, and the 

 others are being taken up under the Forest 

 Homestead Act, as they are desired by set- 

 tlers. These areas, in the aggregate, arc not 

 large because of the rough topography of the 

 country, but settlers are not being excluded 

 from homesteading on such as exist. 



One of the forests about which there has 

 been the greatest criticism is the White River 

 forest. The trip through this forest was 



