SECOND BIENNIAL STATEMENT 73 



agriculture the President of the United States is hereby authorized, 

 upon recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture and with the 

 approval of the governors of the States in which the respective 

 national forests are located, to establish, by public proclamation, 

 certain specified areas within said forests as game sanctuaries or 

 refuges which shall be devoted to the increase of game of all kinds 

 naturally adapted thereto, but it is not intended that the lands in- 

 cluded in such game sanctuaries or refuges shall cease to be part 

 of the national forests wherein they are located, and the establish- 

 ment of such game sanctuaries or refuges shall not prevent the 

 Secretary of Agriculture from allowing grazing on these areas of 

 cattle, sheep and other domestic animals or allowing other uses 

 thereof under and in conformity with the laws and the rules and 

 regulations applicable to the national forests, so far as such use may 

 be consistent with the purposes for which such game sanctuaries 

 or refuges are authorized to be established. 



The House of Representatives now has before it, as No. 

 363 on the Union Calendar, the Hayden bill, which origin- 

 ally was identical with the Chamberlain bill, but now con- 

 tains an alteration. To satisfy Representative Mondell of 

 Wyoming, who is a stickler for "state rights," the House 

 Committee on Agriculture struck out the words "with the 

 approval of the governors of the states," etc., and inserted, 

 "with the approval of the respective states by a joint reso- 

 lution of the legislatures thereof," etc. With that change, 

 putting the power of state approval or veto, of each sanc- 

 tuary proposed, in the hands of his state legislature, Mr. 

 Mondell ivas satisfied, and so expressed himself on the floor 

 of the House on February 2, 1917. 



What more could the most rabid state-righter have de- 

 manded, or received? 



[Many times in the course of our efforts in behalf of wild 

 life, our campaigns have received at critical moments un- 

 expected accessions of strength. The decision of the United 

 States Supreme Court in the Utah power case, rendered on 

 March 19, and set forth elsewhere, is a crushing answer to 

 the new advocates of state sovereignty on the public do- 

 main. The Nation, as a large landed proprietor, does not 

 propose to be stripped of the rights that are freely granted, 

 both by the nation and by the states, to even the humblest 

 citizen owner of real estate. It is to be hoped that both in 

 Wyoming and in Washington the legislative atmosphere now 

 is somewhat clarified.] 



