42 GAME KEFUGES. 



The law practically directs us to regulate the grazing on the pre- 

 serves, without having any opportunity to express our opinion as 

 to the proper lines which should he covered. This question comes 

 up every year and it is embarrassing to us. As I say, we are fre- 

 quently called on to throw a lot of sheep out in order to protect the 

 game. The stock men protest against it vigorously and we appre- 

 ciate their situation because they go in there to make a living. On 

 the other hand, the game men want the sheep thrown out. 



Mr. Reilly. Is the game growing so rapidly that it encroaches on 

 the land of the stock growers ? 



Mr. Barnes. The stock business is growing so rapidly that it is 

 encroaching on the game land. We are holding to-day, closed to all 

 grazing in the national forests more than three million acres of land 

 most of which could be and would be occupied by the stock of the 

 settlers. I have in mind one area lying north of the Yellowstone 

 Park. I have spent two years going over the area and investigating 

 that question. We threw out 20,000 sheep at the demand of the 

 game men which I considered a little unreasonable, but the public 

 sentiment was so strong that finally we prohibited the grazing. 



Mr. Reilly. Do I understand that land available for grazing 

 purposes should be devoted to game preserves ? 



Mr. Barnes. That is the policy. 



Mr. Reilly. The doctor's statement was that there are millions 

 of acres of land not available for grazing which should be used for 

 these sanctuaries ? 



Mr. Barnes. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Reilly. Why should the department compel the stock men 

 to move for the purpose of putting on elk when you yourself made 

 the statement that it is not profitable ? 



Mr. Barnes. There are two sides to it. We try in all fairness to 

 give each side a reasonable amount of range. 



Dr. Hornaday. Mr. Barnes is talking about State preserves, not 

 the national forests ? 



Mr. Reilly. The Agricultural Department is supposed to control 

 the national forests not as the States want them but according to 

 the economic view as advanced by the United States Government, 

 and I do not believe that the Agricultural Department is justified 

 in throwing the stock men off of grazing and pasture land and putting 

 on elk which, according to your statement, is not economical and is 

 unprofitable. 



Mr. Barnes. You must admit that there is a big sentiment for the 

 preservation of the game and that we must recognize it. 



Mr. Reilly. I think that the preserves should be located where 

 the land is not economically valuable for grazing. 



Mr. Barnes. I can not agree with you. The game must eat. Elk 

 and deer and animals of that kind must eat and they have to have 

 the same food, to a certain extent, as sheep and cattle. 



Mi*. Reilly. You made the statement at the last meeting that the 

 wild game should be on the land not available for grazing purposes, 

 according to my recollection. 



Mr. Barnes. There is an immense amount of inaccessible range in 

 the West which is not occupied by stock, and that is where the game 

 preserves should be located if they would exercise good judgment in 

 laying them out. I have in mind a case where the State spread the 



