14 



It would mean that the valley of the Big Horn would remain a wilder- 

 ness while the waters conserved upon the mountains of Wyoming- and 

 gathered together in the valley of that stream would be used to reclaim' 

 the lands belonging to private individuals in western Dakota. 



In the light of legislation of this character; in the light of opinions like 

 these held by the authorities at Washington; in the light of the hostility of 

 the agricultural east to the rapid development of the agricultural west, I 

 think we ought carefully to consider before we favor transferring the control 

 of our development to Washington and to the domination of such adverse 

 influences. 



REASONS FOR FAVORING STATE CONTROL. 



1 am in favor of the transfer of the control of these lauds ^ind the entire 

 solution of this problem to the several States. I am in favor of it because 

 each one of the arid States has already assumed and exercised its control 

 over the most complex and difficult part cf this question, the management 

 of the water supply. I am in favor of it because it involves no disturbance 

 of existing rights to such water supply but rather affords the State the 

 means and opportunity to extend needed aid in the improvement of the 

 water supply, and to render the protection of existing rights more efficient 

 than is possible at the present time. I am in favor of it because it enables 

 each Slate to modify a general plan, which may be prepared by congress, to 

 suit local conditions. This cannot be done under any national system.. 

 The requirements of Wyoming and California are too diverse to be harmon- 

 ized. The difference in climatic conditions should be recognized by a cor- 

 responding difference in laws. The owner of three hundred and twenty 

 acres of land in southern California is a nabob. The productive value of 

 twenty acres is greater than six hundred and forty acres in certain portions 

 of Wyoming. If we are to have a national irrigation system, California 

 will urge, and properly from their standpoint, that the limit to a homestead, 

 should be twenty acres, so will Arizona, and if they should succeed in 

 placing that limit upon the disposal of lands in this State, then California 

 and Arizona uonld get all the settlers and the condition of Wyoming 

 would be worse than it is at present. One arid land law will no more meet 

 the requirements of this region, so vast in extent, so diverse in conditions,, 

 than will one coat fit all men. 



THE GRAZING LANDS. 



The disposal and management of grazing binds is of no consequence 

 whatever in California; it is oue of the greatest problems with which this- 

 State has to deal. The grazing interert of this State has been the leading 

 interest and will always continue to be one of the leading interests, because 

 of the high elevation of a large part of ibis State, because a l.^rge part of 

 this State i.i and will be remote from markets. The water of a large 

 number of our streams can only be profitably utilized, the lands can only be 

 profitably reclaimed, when used in connection with the grazing lands 

 which adjoin them. The failure of the present laud law to recognize this- 

 fact is working great hardship to many of the small settlers on the streams 

 remote from markets. They can only make their irrigable lauds profitable 

 by using them in connection with the grazing lands adjoining. As it is 

 now, they have no means of controlling or protecting these grazing 'ands.. 



