Bozeman avant courier. [volume] (Bozeman, Mont.) 1872-1882, 1878-03-21

010d Of . No Fence Law. Cattle
Growing ana Sheep. Raising
Compared.-Our Dairy ana
Other Interests.

: There is a strong probability that Il
!. farmers of Montana will soon demand
no-sance law, a law that will enable the
to,raise their crops without fences. Ii
nothing more than right. Such law Is
existence IN many countries where Il
necessity for it is not SO great as it is her
There Is an immense amount Of good SO
In Montana that would be In cultivation Il
day had it not been for the first expens
of fencing, an expense that many are nc
able to stand. A law that would favor tn
farmers as this one, would soon brin
, more industri| rs laboring people to u
than all the narrow-gauge railroads W
could build for them. 1t would save a
enormous expense now thrown on tn
farmers Of the country and benefit ever.
lone.
Now what are the inducements held on
tor the improvement Of our cattle? W.
would make far better use Of our pastur
age. and through the progeny OF our s''
pelior breeds Of cattle, receive larger re
turns from our bunch grass and be entitled
to larger annual revenue Of greenbacks
The progeny of inferior cattle introduced
in Montana do not sell well. and we arr
compelled to buy them with our OWL
money and eat them ourselves. For home
consumption is not the only reason why
we should raise good cattle in Montana; a
stronger reason is found in the fact that
we need to raise cattle that will stand ship.
ping. and thus bring back to us some Of
the outsiders greenbacks to replace what
we are compelled to send off to purchase
such things as are not produced In Mon
tana.
If our Legislature in an early day had
used its influence against the wholesale in
PRODUCTION of Texas cattle and encouraged
the introduction Of short-horns in place.
the produce of our bunch grass alone
would to-day be sufficient security to en-
able us to build all the railroad we are in
need of. 1t could have been very easily
done. for it was with our gold dust that
we introduced Texas cattle into Montana
and ruined our prices. We could just as
we'll, through valuable property, have re-
tanned the wealth Of our placer mines in
the country, and to-day be receiving the
benefit Of it.
have few remarks to make in regard
to sheep. Although am not sheep
grower. believe that the introducers of
breed of sheep into our country
deserve a great amount Of credit; also
that their right to a portion Of our ranges
is incontestible. Still I shall be reserved
in expressing some of my thoughts on
his subject. There is general expecta-
ion that great numbers of sheep will ere
ong be introduced into Montana. The
general representation to outsiders is that
Montana contains extensive and vacant
angcs of superior quality" Ranges of
superior quality yes. Extensive and va
ant; no. This last statement is mis-
axe or Misrepresentation. for Montana is
small country, and every corner is alrea-
" filed with stock. If it were not for
he outlets the Yellowstone and Muscle
hell valleys afford we could not fairly
Import all the cattle belonging to the pro-
rietors residing on this side of the noun
lin ranges. Ii
We should be prudent about encourag-
e the introduction of sheep into Monta-
a. Too many of them would be more
etrimextal than profitable to the coun- 4
y. =
We must remember that cattle cannot
'mpete with sheep: they rim right away , t.
ON sheep ranges; and should our cattle Fl
i've to give up the best ranges to sheep, h
e would be by great odds the losers, for t,
title are by far the most profitable prop t,
ty. We have proof of this in the expe- $:
ence of other countries, and, besides, it
matter Of which we can judge for our Il
Ives. d
In any Of the older settled countries, "
eep ranges are generally limited to the Il
asst suitable ranges for cattle, and the cat n
generally occupy the best vallies, ard fe
here there is easy access to water. al
1t is fact that wool-growing is a great t.
terest, and of great value to the coun- 81
Y, and it is to our interest to have as &
any sheep Of good quality as Montana ii
n fairly support without interfering too
lch with cattle-growing, unless 1t should re
proven that sheep are more valuable to te
E owners and country than cattle; then
e people being willing to make of this a B
eep country, it would be very easy for S,
to dispose of their interests re
d engage in sheep-raising. &C
The people of Southern California would I
< for nothing better than the opportuni- to
to supply Montana with sheep, for they r
. obliged to kill their surplus for the lie
It's and tallow, thus realizing bnt fifty re
Its per head. Sheep-growing is a valu- bt
e industry. the mutton being al object NJ
well as the wool, but when, by the ac- Ia
of these animals in the coun- III
the market for mutton is overstocked tc
there is no demand for the carcass, the tr,
lual crop OF wool alone will hardly mi
a justifiable revenue for the destruction 81,
our ranges. dc
According to the calculations of expert hi
ed sheep-growers, the annual product ce
m flock of ordinary quality is about sp
. dollar per head. We could not expect w
; better than this here, but at these fig Sc
8, in view Of our present record on i'm pc
think sheep Of ordinary quail &c,
would be more profitable for us; but ne
his connection We must take into con- try
,ration the low prices Of wool that pre- fire
ed during 1876 and 1877. when it is like fol
hat the entire fleece Of Montan. 1lid mt vo
,g to us more than fifty cents per head. Sex
, difference in pasturing in the States of
We sheen tor one steer h,,f I think this ne,