The Meeker herald. [volume] (Meeker, Colo.) 1885-current, 1900-02-10
Against the Arid Land Billss


protesting against the leasing of GOV
ernment lands for grazing purp0s.
They will be sent to our senators and
representatives at Washington:
We notice by the public press thas q
bill Or bills have been introduced IN
congress to lease the public lands tcr
grazing purposes; and. believing t1At
such would be detrimental to the inter-
ests of parties most interested-vix: tne
inhabitants of the lands in questions
we ask you to use every effort for the
defeat of any such measure.
Much evidence has been offered. -
doubtless manv petitions will be -
sented, favoring such action. but. ''tego
behind the returns" all such effort ID
made by large capitalists and by otees
who are induced to lend countenanc1 to
it by specious representations.
We realize that inasmuch 40 4 p
somewhat to the interest of tho Aafe
government, we have 1t to contend With
as we'll as the public press, . large 1or-
ton Of which do not realize the nle,is
of the various sections, but we ufee ron
to present to congress the other side Of
the question. and we will try brtaay TO
call your attention to few of the svils
lease system you'd entail upon ~.
The stock INDUSTRY has been for years
drifting out ofIthe hands of the large
companies aud the ranges have been
covered with he ranches Of men who
own small heids. This condition has
been beneficial In increasing the taxes
and building Up the country generally.
The lease system would put the bsasi-'
ness back into large holdings again and
materially injure the country, as it
would be to their interest to have in as
wild state as possible.
The theory introduced BY the advo-
Gates of the lease system, that It would
tend to improve the grass upon tbs pub
lie domain, we believe Is erroneous, foF
the following reasons: Who're q party
leases pasture, to make 4 p1aatable
d must ksep u stoekAd ~ 81 A ~ a.
|pacity, thus giving tho range no rsst.
While under tho present ssstem. in
years when the. stock business is I'M
profitable. men allow their holdings to
decrease, thus giving the ranges spas
mOdic rests.
The plan to limit the number OF acres
to be leased to each man sounds well In
theory. In practice it would be worth
less, as it is an easy matter for coIprora-
tions to procure the use Of any number
of names.
In the mountain districts at least one
half of the land is waste land, and usu-
ally the ranches are located in the low
or bad lands, and are surrounded by the
poorest of land. so that the plan to allow
each ranchman to lease the land adjoin-
ing his ranch would be impracticable.
They would want pastures many miles
from their ranches on the summer
ranges. We do not see how this high
summer range could be fairly distrib-
uted. If at uniform price per acre
the favorites would get all the desirable
spots. If to the highest bidder this con-
dition would exist: A ranchman would
not be liable to bid but on one tract
Should he be outbid by parties bidding
on larger tract, ;fhd it is evident that
they could outbid small owner, as
large tract is much cheaper to fence per
acre than small one, he would find
himself with his stock and ranch on his
hands but no pasture. This would force
him to close out his stock and his ranch
would be valueless to him If deprived of
a pasture.
The advocates Of the lease system pro-
pose to allow the homestead law to re-
main in force. A homestead within a.
large pasture leased to another for a
long term Of years would be of very
little value.
The leasing of the public domain
would lead to constant quarrels be-
tween the lessee and parties having
ranches within their pastures.