TENURE AND USE OF ARID GRAZING LANDS. 41 



Fences. — The best control is that afforded by properly arranged 

 fences, though this method of obtaining control involves a heavy 

 expense. Yet many, if not most, of the stockmen are ready to begin 

 the work of building long strings of fences that will outline the major 

 subdivisions of the range' country just as soon as they can obtain 

 legal authority to do so. 



With nothing more than the legal recognition of the right of a 

 particular man to use a given area for a limited time, the existing 

 laws will stop trespassing at once, because the precedents are already 

 established in the region by experience in the national forests. And 

 with legal tenure assured, the building of fences can go on as rapidly 

 or as slowly as individuals may choose. 



Fencing need not prevent entrymen from homesteading agricultural 

 land, nor prevent prospecting for minerals. It merely protects the 

 equity of the user of the range and makes it necessary for the would-be 

 entryman to take expert judgment as to the proper classification of 

 the land. As already pointed out, it has been demonstrated many 

 times that fencing in proper sized areas is not only practicable 

 economically but is highly remunerative. The increased returns 

 from a fenced area in a very short time pay for the fence. Even on 

 a range of relatively low grazing capacity, the protection which a 

 fence affords makes it a profitable investment. 



Advantages to the general public. — Benefits which would accrue to 

 the State as the result of controlled ranges are, (1) an increase in the 

 taxes derived from the stock business because of the value of per- 

 manent improvements like fences, corrals, watering places, and other 

 "developments" which will be made as soon as men can be sure 

 they will profit by what they may do; (2) increased taxes because 

 of more accurate counts of live stock that are possible on inclosed 

 areas ; (3) increased rentals from State lands which men will have to 

 pay whenever they inclose such State lands in their pastures. 



Objection has been made to Federal regulation of the grazing lands 

 because it was assumed that the State would not get the right to 

 tax such lands. This has been advanced as an argument in favor of a 

 law that would either put the land under the control of the State or 

 assign it to private ownership so that the State might tax the owners. 

 Any sort of managerial supervision will result in the charging of 

 some kind of fee for the use of the land. The policy of sharing 

 receipts of a similar character between the Federal and State Gov- 

 ernments is already established in the administration of the national 

 forests. Hence an extension of such a practice is to be expected 

 with relation to grazing lands if they were placed under Federal 

 management. 



In a more general, though not less sure way, the people at large 

 benefit by such range control. The resulting increase in production 



