114 Bulletin No. 34. 



rocks and to hold back the rains and melting snows until they 

 sink into the earth to appear later as perennial springs and give 

 constant flow to the rivers from which practically all water is 

 drawn for irrigation purposes. 



The agriculturists of the Territory contend that grazing, more 

 particularly sheep grazing, on the watersheds of the irrigating 

 streams has gradually shortened the time of flow of the streams and 

 rendered them more irregular. 



During the oast several years sheep grazing has extended 

 over large portions of all the watersheds from which our longer 

 streams are fed and the smaller growth is each year becoming less 

 and less. 



In recent years four forest reserves have been segregated from 

 the public domain in Arizona. Of these reserves, two, viz: the 

 San Francisco and the Black Mesa include portions of the highest 

 and most valuable watersheds in Arizona. They are the feeders 

 to the most important tributaries of the Salt River, the most valu- 

 able stream in Arizona. The ostensible purpose in segregating 

 these reserves was to protect the watershed of the Salt River. The 

 timber consideration was only secondary. 



The question at controversy is as to whether these reserves 

 should be thrown open to be grazed without restriction and as to 

 whether it is advisable to graze sheep upon them at all. This is 

 purely an economical question and should be decided upon its 

 merits. 



In a sense there are three crops which can be harvested from 

 these reserves, viz: timber, grazing and water. Each of these has 

 a market value and taking one year with another can be repre- 

 sented by a definite sum. It stands to reason that the crop from 

 any of these forest reserves which brings to the people of the Ter- 

 ritory the greatest annual income without lessening or destroying 

 the possibility of continuing this income from year to year, is the 

 crop which should be protected, and so far as the others interfere 

 with it they should be eliminated. If it can be shown that the 

 returns from grazing, taking one year with another, are greater 

 than the returns from increased agricultural operations, resulting 

 from a larger or more constant water supply arising from the non- 

 pastured watershed, grazing should not be prohibited or restrict- 



