Semi-weekly herald., 1916-12-11


secretary of agriculture, David T..
Houston, that the department pro
poses to raise the present fees for
took grazing in the national fores'
approximately 100 per cent, the first
advance to go into effect on March
J, 1917, the second year later an
he third in 1919.
In letter to the secretary of
American National Livestock associa-
ton, Secretary Houston sets forth
the National Forests side of the
question as follows:
During the past two years the
Forester has been giving very care
ful consideration to the question of
N advance in the rates charged for
sra2ing livestock upon the National
crest ranges from the very moder-
lie charges now made to an amount
which would more clearly represent
he real market value of the pas
.urage.
One of the leading criticisms of
the management of the National
Forests is that they are not self
supporting and are a burden upon the
national treasury. 1t is often assert
I'd that while the timber and other
resources of the Forests are being
disposed of at market prices under
commercial methods, and at com
petitive prices, the grazing is being
sold to stockmen at extremely low
prices.
Another point frequently raised
g that the grazing capacity Of the
Forests is limited and that the mum
Der Of stock which can be provided
or is far less than the demand 70
srazing privileges. 1t is claimed tn
those stockmen who are being grant
ID permits to the exclusion of OF
ers who cannot secure them have
become and actually are considered
by their less fortunate neighbors as
being highly favored individuals who
are receiving substantial benefits
from their occupancy of public lands
while belonging to the whole people
cannot be SO divided in their use to
permit each individual stockman to
share them. Therefore, the argument
is advanced that stockmen who use
Forest ranges have an undue finan-
cial advantage over those who must
oil ht,t lot xrrI,i ,iol,
to Craze their stock.
That the permittees using Ma
tional Forest ranges are enjoying
special advantages is readily estab-
lished by the well-known fact that
in the sale of livestock using Ma
tional Forest grazing ranges, if the
sale involves waiver of the owners
grazing privileges an advance in the
price Of the animals is freely paid
by the purchaser as a bonus or pre-
MUM over and above the actual mar
ket value of the stock. In numer-
Gus trespass suits in western courts
and in many cases where estates have
been settled thru probate courts the
records have shown that such ad-
vances have been as much as $1.50
and over per head for sheep and as
high as $1,000 per head for cattle.
The cheapness of the forage Sc
cured under the permit is undoubt-
edly large factor in determining
this bonus, and these values are so
well established that loans from
banks and other financial sources are
secured much easier on stock cover
ed by grazing permit than for out
side stock which is not so protect
ed.
Under congressional enactment, 25
per cent of all National Forest re-
ceipts are paid to the several states
in which the Forests are located.
Complaint has been made by munich
pal organizations Interested in the
matter that owing to the exceeding
ly low grazing fees these receipts
are not as large as they should be
and that the stockmen are being fa.
vored to the disadvantage Of the citi-
zens of the state as whole.
Att the time the present grazing
fees were established no attempt
was made to secure more than nom-
inal return that would represent a
fair share of the cost of administra-
tion and the protection Of the Ma
tionsl Forests, which should BE-