34 



THE FORESTER 



February, 



Opposition to Reservation Policy. 



The National Stock Growers' Con- 

 vention met in Denver, Colo., January 

 26-27. It had been previously announced 

 that the convention would be given an 

 opportunity to put itself on record con- 

 cerning the policy of excluding sheep 

 from the forest reservations. Mr. John 

 C. Mackay, of Utah, brought the subject 

 up for discussion by introducing a reso- 

 lution urging the Department of the 

 Interior to abrogate the rules prohibiting 

 the grazing of sheep on forest reserves. 

 In support of his resolution Mr. Mackay 

 said, in part : 



My observation of twenty years in the moun- 

 tains teaches me that the sheep do not damage 

 any timber that is really valuable for mer- 

 cantile purposes. Their eating of the grass in 

 the timber is a safeguard against forest fires. 

 If the executive orders prohibiting the sheep 

 from ranging in the reserves is enforced the 

 industry will be immeasurably injured. West- 

 ern citizens have just cause for complaint. 

 We should adopt such means as will bring 

 about the desired change. 



A substitute resolution was introduced 

 by Mr. A. R. King, a delegate from 

 Colorado. This substitute was, in effect, 

 a negation of the original resolution and 

 proposed to urge upon the Secretary of 

 the Interior the wisdom and expediency 

 of a strict enforcement of the rules ex- 

 cluding sheep from the reserves. In 

 advocating its adoption Mr. King said : 



The Government of the United S'ates never 

 attacked the interests of any citizen unjustly, 

 nor did the American Forestry Association. 

 For instance, when the Battlement Mesa of 

 Colorado was reserved it was mainly to protect 

 the water supply, upon the request of hundreds 

 of citizens of the counties of Delta and Mesa 

 on the western slope, except the owners of 

 sheep. Those who wanted the protection were 

 fruit growers and also stock raisers to more or 

 less extent. The order of the Department and 

 the law are the result of growth, development 

 of the country and the observation of experts 

 on the effect of herds on the water supply and 

 timber on the public lands. The order did not 

 emanate from the influence of the cattle man 

 as against the sheep man. Sheep raising was 

 pronounced injurious to the water supply and 

 the timber by experts. Evidence showed that 

 re-growth of timber follows forest fires, but 

 never follows sheep grazing. Sheep destroy 



all the young sprouts each year. The sprouts 

 do not come back again until sheep are taken 

 away. 



Take the county of Delta, for instance, 

 where people are engaged in diversified in- 

 dustries. The Government says the good of the 

 many is superior to that of the few. We would 

 as soon be the slave of the cattle king as of the 

 sheep baron. (Applause.) We insist that no 1 5 .000 

 sheep should be driven into our headwaters to 

 pollute our supply first and then destroy it. 

 The cows and steers do not eat out everything, 

 but the sheep do eat out the willow leaves as 

 high as they can reach, they take out the bunch 

 grass and all they can find, and then tramp the 

 soil so solidly that the water rushes off the 

 surface quickly in the spring, whereas if the 

 soil is left in its natural state snow water will 

 percolate and eventually serve for irrigation 

 purposes when water is needed. 



The people of Utah think the same as we do. 

 Take the Uintah reservation. People residing 

 in that community took the position that the 

 sheep destroyed the range and supported their 

 allegations by proof before the Government 

 excluded the sheep to preserve the agricultural 

 interests that were watered by the country 

 included in that reserve. 



Mr. Smith, a delegate from Utah, re- 

 plied to the arguments of Mr. King, de- 

 claring that the statements that sheep 

 destroy the range and the water supply 

 was a theory not substantiated by facts. 

 He declared if the sheep had killed the 

 range the sheep in Utah would not have 

 increased as they have. Continuing, Mr. 

 Smith said : 



They are a benefit to the range. I can show 

 you ranges in Utah where sheep have been 

 pastured for years and it is better now than 

 ever. Years ago where settlers located in Utah 

 on streams and had no water, now they have 

 plenty, hence the sheep could not have exer- 

 cised a deteriorating influence upon it. They 

 have been grazing upon the headwaters of 

 those streams right along. 



There was scarcely a sign of applause 

 for Mr. Smith. It was evident the sheep 

 men had little sympathy from the con- 

 vention. A. J. Bothwell, delegate from 

 New Mexico, briefly attacked the argu- 

 ments of the sheep advocates, saying 

 several witty things at their expense and 

 creating rounds of laughter, adding in 

 conclusion : 



But we must look at the matter in a broad 



