The Glenwood post., 1907-04-13

TO secure a permanent supply of wood
and water for the people of the West,
while allowing to all of them ON equal
terms the freest use of all national
forests that is consistent with that
object. This is in accordance with
the grant by the constitution to con
gress of power over the public lands
and is wise exercise of the Trustee
ship to which you refer.
| '6-The United States is. at great
expense, preserving permanent sup
ply of wood and water for the people
OF the state and county, and is not
charging enough in fees to pay the
cost Of such preservation. Out of
these fees one-tenth is nevertheless
generously given for roads and schools
n the counties where national forests
are situated. For this, among other
resaens, it should not pay taxes to
the state of Colorado or to Garfield
county. 1t is an elementary princi-
pie that the measures of the govern
ment for the welfare of all the people
should not be hampered by local taxa.
| ton
The courts are open to those
who believe that it is illegal for the
forest service to charge for the ex
elusive use of the national forest land
The attorney general has given his
opinion that such charges are lawful,
and this has never been denied by any
court. Some question has been raised
whether persons who Craze stock on
national forests without such payment
as the regulations require, may be
restrained only by injunction or other
civil action or may also be punished
criminally. Congress has specI tically
provided for such criminal punish
ment, and though some judges have
considered this an overstepping of the
limitations upon the power of con
gress, the later decisions uphold its
power and sustain the criminal pro-
visions of the law and the regulations
Such was the decision of Judge De
Haven at San Francisco on Oct >,
1906, of Judge Beatty at Boise on
March A. 1907, and of the supreme
court of Arizona in an earlier case
In a civil case the United States cir
cult court of appeals at San Francisco
on March ?. 1903. upheld the statute
and the regulations, aud Judge Hunt
did the same at Helena on March lS,
users of the national forests will be so
foolish as to forfeit the preference to
which their former use entities them,
n the face of such strong legal au-
tnority in support of the position of
the forest service in this matter.
"S-The right of the forest service
to take money from those who are
given special privileges in the forests
to the exclusion of others, has been
sufficiently set forth in my ieply to
the preceding questions In doing so
it is standing for the rights of all the
Western people and exemplifying
Lincoln s words. which you quote, a
government of the people, for the
people and by the people.
20 Those who attribute to me
purpose of imposing fees for the use of
water flowing oft the national forests
do so without authority. The appro-
priation of water is subject only to
state laws, but the forest service, by
maintaining the forest cover, fur
nishes a regular ti,w W of water instead
Of alternate floods and droughts, and
1t also furnishes the fall which
makes the production of power pos
sible. For these it may properly
make a reasonable charge to permitees
who are given the exclusive use of
national forest land for commercial
gested that the amount OF the charge
may be measured by the amount of
power developed. There has been no
thought of charging those who do not
occupy national forest land, nor even
of charging non commercial occu-
pants, such as associations of farmers
for irrigation and those who use water
for domestic purposes though their
use of national forest land is, so far
as it goes, exclusive; nor has it been
finally determined that the charge to
commercial power companies will be
based upon the amount of power they
develop.
Very truly yours,
CLIFFORD PINCHHOT,
Forester. -