Arizona republican., 1915-04-05

ate, referred to it's committee on public lands. and reported by that committee without amendment; hut failed of passage at the last session of congress.
 Under this biii the secretary of the interior is authorized to designate as stock raising lands those lands which are of such character that GAO acres are reasonably required for the sup port of family" and the entryman is required to make permanent im- provements on the land of not less than s1.25 per acre; it also provides that those parties who have already acquired land under other land laws may increase their holdings up to $40 acres.
 This bill was prepared by the in terror department; it's purpose is to secure the establishment of perma- nent homes for bona fide entrymen, and it is designed to apply only to land that possesses agriculture DOS abilities for raising forage crops, as well as having a grazing value. The advocates of the measure claim that all the government land on which l man can make a living on 160 or 320 acres has been exhausted, and that larger allotment is now neces- sary to encourage the homesteader to take up a claim. Some of it's sup porters assert that many of those who filed on 320 acre hOmesteads, in certain parts of the semi arid west. could not exist on that amount of land. This is lamentably true, and might further add that on the vast majority of the remaining public domain a homesteader cannot make living on GAO acres In fact there are millions of acres of government. land in the west on which it would take a most experienced stockma n with considerable capital to succeed on five or even ten sections.
 The theory of the bill is most commendable, viz, to provide a graz ing homestead on which a man could make a living. I wish, however, to impress upon congress that this bill,
 
 solution of the question of the nigh est and most beneficial use of the remaining public domain.
 There are now approximately 300.- 000,000 acres of unappropriated nnre- served public lands outside of the na- tional forests. Only small fraction thereof has any agriculture possibil- hn tary of the interior shall not desis nate for entry land of which, owing to it's general character or general conditions, in his opinion, GAO acres clearly will not support a family" Ir my judgment it is not likely that more than 20,000,O00 acres ever will come under the provisions of this bill than per cent of the remaining public domain.
 Our association should support this bill and, so far as lies in our power we should assist the secretary of the interior in the very difficult task of designating those lands where GIG acres will support a family. It is not
  homesteader; nor do we want any legislation that will in any wise abridge or interefer with his rights Any land in the west with agricul- tural possibilities should always re. main open to settlement. It is my opinion that this bill will dispose o1 | all the land that under the present nfh hT1c tural land. The remainder will ht strictly grazing land, which we be- lieve should be controlled along sim. liar lines as the administration ol grazing on national forests Such i. the intent of the Kent bill.
 Federal regulation of the ope! | range does not mean permanent die. position of it. A law providing fo, such regulation by lease or otherwis, 1 can be modified or repealed if con. gress should finally decide to oper | the land to entry in ? to 19 section ! tracts. Until that time comes tn. most beneficial use of it would re suit from temporary federal admin istration through lease or otherwise The question of federal control O the open range is also of paramoun | interest to the feeders of live stocl l in the corn belt and to all consumer: of meat products. Cattle, sheep, ant lambs can be raised cheaper on th, breeding grounds in the range coun tries than on the high priced agri cultural lands in the middle west l no nv,1vy sIoI. .l1
 adequate supply of feeder stock il in the range country.
 The production of beef in the set tied farming districts might be in creased, as suggested by Secrets r. Houston in his annual report, bu that field does not promise as prac tical an avenue for economical prod uction of young cattle and sheep a the range breeding countries.
 In my annual address last year stated:
 For may years the American peo pie have been supplied with choic meat at a very low price, and par of the time at less than the aetna cost of production. The advance t a higher level in the past few year. along with the increase in the eos of other foods. has provoked a vas amount of theorizing on the cause and remedy. The price of live stoc and meats will never again be a low as in former years, and the puh lie may as well become reconciled t that fact now. There are now fewe cattle in this country per capita tha
 in former years. The reason is tha the business of raising and maturin them has not been So profitable c stable as other branches of agricu' ,ture or trade. Our capacity for tn