Arizona republican., 1912-12-16

public will receive it's share of the profits which the permittee may make over and above that which is a necessary and reasonable inducement for his investment"
 The present law, he asserts, neither promotes development nor protects the public interest in an effective manner and he attributes this prin cipally to the fact that a permit is
 'revocable .at any time and without specific reason" He calls it 'seri- ous and unjustfiable obstacle to the
 development and utilization of one
 of the nations greatest natural re- sources" He declares that conditions and limitations should be defined by
 statute on which permits should be
 issued, and only for breach of which
 they should be cancelled.
 As to federal as against state con-
 trol of water power concessions on
 streams which are not navigable, the
 secretary says: The suggestion is
 made frequently by those who are in
 one way or another representing
 either present or future investment in
 water power development that such
 power sites and their control should
 be turned over to the respective
 states in which they are located It is interesting to note, however that the ordinary citizens of these states are not at all concerned over federal usurpation or unjust treatment
 They suspect that the real pur-
 pose of those who urge the turning | over of the federal domain to the cto ic | longer and the stronger arm of the 1 federal government and may take ad- vantage of the more limited resources and governmental facilities of the in | dividua1 states.
 1 While some states undoubtedly have wisely conserved certain of the | lands and natural resources turned
 over to them by the nation, the story | has too often been the acquisition of 1 these lands and resources by spe- 1 cial interests or individuals without
 adequate recognition of the public in | terest There is no policy which it | would be wise for any state to adopt
 with respect to these matters in the adoption and enforcement of which it | cannot be supplemented and assisted 1 rather than retarded by the retention l
 the property now held by the nation
 It is precisely this policy of practical
 cooperation which should be put into effect. There is no real conflict be-
 tween the nation and the states upon
 the subject.
 Tn general all of the streams which i, are susceptible of water power de- velopment are also of great import < and for navigation. All of them de- pend to some degree upon protec- tion and aid of some kind and from some source for one or more of these uses Increasingly that source tends
 to be the nation and not the states. Some of the individual states are developing effective policies of water conservation, but it is the federal government after all which is called upon to make the chief expenditures for the development of navigation and for the protection of the forest cover around the sources and along the wa tersheds of both navigable and non navigable streams"
 The secretary emphasizes the { recommendation made in his annual ] report last year for the need of a } CO1npFeHonSlNe ldflO cldSSlIlcdIlOn dfu { ! of administration based thereon. The existing statutes, he says; attempt tc ! recognize in a very general and in- effective way the fundamental differ ences between the different classes o ! agricultural lands still remaining 1T ] the public domain. The present sys- ] tenn is not flexible enough to recOg- { nize the differences, he declares; an( greater difficulties are found in tht . present laws or lack of laws with re-
 gard to other parts of the public do main especially our timber lands, oul l grazing lands, our water power an( reservoir sites and our lands contain
 ing coal, gas, asphalt, potash nj