316 THE IRRIGA TION A GE. 



Opposition developed to the bill because of its sweeping character 

 and because of the opinion by many well informed citizens that if en- 

 acted it would be inoperative because of fatal legal defects. An at- 

 tempt was made to modify it and still retain its material features as 

 to sheep grazing, but because of active opposition and lack of time it 

 failed of passage. I am heartily in accord with the cattlemen in their 

 contention against the migratory grazing of sheep upon the southern 

 ranges, but it seems to me equally unjust that the cattlemen should 

 seek to destroy the sheep industry upon its natural grazing ground 

 in the northern counties. My own solution of this vexatious problem 

 is the leasing of the lands under territorial control which would not 

 only provide a considerable income and reduce taxation, but would 

 enable the proper authorities to establish boundaries and protect each 

 class of industry within its leased limits. This, however, is incidental 

 to the subjects of this paper and only bears indirectly upon the forest 

 reserve and water question. The attempted legislation, however, 

 was the beginning of an organized attempt by the cattlemen to pro- 

 tect themselves against the sheep. The same legislature, which was 

 largely democratic, adopted a memorial, council memorial No. 2 (the 

 council was two-thirds democratic), worded in the strongest and most 

 explicit language, requesting that live stock be permitted to graze 

 within the forest reserves without any restrictions whatever. The 

 memorial was adopted without division, it not being considered in any 

 sense a political question. About this time strong opposition com- 

 menced to develop to grazing within the forest reserves and it was 

 asserted by scientists and others that grazing destroyed tree growth 

 because sheep ate the young sprouting trees, underbrush and grass, 

 and their presence meant gradual destruction to tiie forests. No dis- 

 crimination was made at the time between cattle and sheep, although 

 there were but very few cattle in that neighborhood. As a natural 

 consequence cattlemen joined issues with the forestry preservation 

 people and as the agitation continued, the settlers of the Salt River 

 valley became alarmed at what they were led to believe was a serious 

 menace to their water supply. Lines have now been drawn between 

 the cattlemen of central Arizona, farmers and some of the friends of 

 forestry preservation on one side and the sheepmen of northern 

 Arizona on the other (the cattlemen of the northern counties in some 

 instances would like to have the sheep excluded, providing cattle are 

 not). Many arguments have been presented by both sides to the con- 

 troversy and the most painstaking investigations have been made by 

 the secretary of the interior and the commissioner of the general land 

 office. The first superintendent of forest reserves, Mr. Benedict, 

 recommended that live stock be permitted to graze within the re- 

 serves, and his successor, Mr. Buntain, made the same recommenda- 

 tion in stronger terms, but notwithstanding their reports, the depart- 



