Mountain Home Republican. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1915-1946, 1923-03-31
SHEEP MEN
MEET IN OGDEN
Proposed Changes in Manual
Would Spell Disaster To
Stock Industry

est Office.
Mr.. f. S. Gedney and Mr.. Worth
Lee of Mountain Home were in the
Idaho representation, and report thai
questions of far reaching importance
were discussed.
Certain changes were proposed by
the Forest Office and questions were
propounded to the convention Gov
ering these proposed changes in or
der to determine the attitude of the
stockmen regarding them.
The resolutions in the form OF
queries by the forest service officials
and replies by the stockmen were as
follows:
l. Revision of the Manual-What
should it contain; broad regulations
or definite, detailed Instructions.
Instructions.
Reply-We favor broad regula-
tions and general instructions in the
grazing manual rather than specific
and definite regulations and detail
| ed instructions.
2. Range Improvement Il Policy
governing construction and needed
changes in regulations to accomplish
/ it,; how shall cost of maintenance
be met; how far should fencing of
ranges and small allotments, lamb
! ing pastures, ETC., be carried?
Reply-We are opposed to the re-
tirement of existing range improve
ments constructed by grazing per-
mittees now on the national forest.
/ AS to construction of future improve
ments, local conditions should rule
matters in this connection. We be-
lieve that this question can be hand
led satisfactorily only by localities.
Concerning the last section of the
query, we believe that local condi-
lions also affect this matter, so that
it can be decided only by localities.
8. Stock Driveways and Crossing
Permits-Should we charge for cross
ing permits - under what circum-
stances and on what basis? Service
policy as to stock driveways in re-
lating to overgrazing and damage to
forest reduction.
Reply-In our opinion, stock drive
ways across national forests should
be provided where they fit in with
the economic needs of the sections
concerned. Under such eircumstan-
ces, we do not favor any charges for
crossing privileges.
4. Grazing Fees-Principles which
should govern their establishment
and payment; is permanent divi-
sion of payments desirable?
Reply-As to the grazing fees, we
do not believe that under any condi-
ton the establishment of grazing
fees on a basis in excess of rate per
head to mean a reasonable cost of
grazing administration is warranted.
AS to division of payments, we be-
believe that a permanent division is
desirable, to apply to all classes and
periods of permits, and in this con-
nection we suggest July 1 and Dec
ember 1 as the dates for payment.
5. Annual Term Permits Why
have terms permits not been more
used and satisfactory; adj
and disadvantages of term
permits in administration; for what
period should they be issued; how
should they be modified with view
to establishing range use?
Reply In our judgment, term
permits have not been more gener-
ally nsed, because they have not been
attractive. We consider
long term permits as essential to the
financing, stability and
welfare of our business and recon-
mend that these be established for
a term not less than ten years. Also
that there should be no limit restric-
ton as to the numbers for which
term permits will be granted.
6. Qualifications of Applicants:
Use and nature of commensurability
standards.
Reply - Commensurability stan
iards should be based on the custom
md requirement of localities. We
believe that dependency should be
based on whether or not the property
is of such character as to
require a connection with the range
n order to be successfully operated.
Qualifications as far as property
5 concerned should depend on de-
and commensurability
md should not depend on number of
took owned.
z. Preferences II Their value to
should they accrue to
he individual, the stock, or the
anch; should they be transferable
s regular assets. :
Reply-In our opinion, the econo
nci welfare demands that grazing !
accrue to the dependent !.
nd commensurate property upon