The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1924-02-19
Utah LAND GRAB.
|SCHARGED BY !.
TLEN|EN
Congressional Probe May Re-
suit From Transfer Of Co.,
900 Acres by y. s.

10000 acres Of the finest grazing
lands in the West, efforts on the
part of water users Of the Straw.
berry Valley reclamation project in
Utah to secure transfer Of title. it
Is said, may lead to another Con-
gresslonal investigation.
The land Is valued at upwards Of
| $1,000 900.
It was formerly part Of the
Indian reservations.
It was taken over by the Govern.
nent at $1.26 an acre.
Since the reclamation project was
organized It has returned in rentals
$4,000. This IL 100000 more than
the Government paid the Indians
for the title.
The tract is surrounded by fores-
try reservations on three sides and
ts accepted by representatives Of
the Agricultural Department. the
Forestry service, and settlers Of the
district as: constituting an integral
part OF the watershed supplying the
S,00O-acre reservoir with water.
Its incorporation in the first place
as part OF the reclamation project is
declared the only instance Of the
kind in the history Of Government
reclamation work where a land
bonus" was awarded an activity Of
this character:
Titles Claimed by Farmers.
Title to the $4,000 acres is claimed
by the Strawberry. Water Users
Association, Of Utah county. Utah.
This Is an organization Of farmers
settled In the formerly arid section
of the county, supplied with irriga.
ton by the project. Their lands are
~ miles distant from the reclama-
ton development which Is In the
adjoining county Of Wasatch. The
two counties are separated by
high mountain range. The former
ts strictly an agricultural district,
the latter IL occupied exclusively by
cattlemen. Eaeh represents DIFF.
ferent financial interests.
Title to the land, it is declared.
Is sought through the interpreta.
ton Of a 'joker" in the bill passed
by Congress authorizing the develop
ment Of the project. This Joker
clause provides that when the
RAS A"S OSOh p1lU LOE Dy TIE
water users title shall pass to them.
when authorized by Congress.
Carrying out Of this provision of
the bill Is being fought by the
cattle interests on the ground that
there vas no valid reason why the
$4,000 acres Of the finest grazing
lands on the Wasatch county ranges
should have been included in the
land set aside by the Government
when the project was undertaken
It is the first time in the history
Of such Government activities they
declare. that such policy. has been
adopted and they want to know
why such an exception was made.
and who the real beneficiaries of
the LAND grab" are.
Land Was Under Lease.
Since the project was started IN
1906 the $4,000 acres Of grazing
land has been under lease. Aue
leases have been held by varying
interests. The last lease was exc.
cuted some four years ago and
runs for another year. The rental
paid under 1t is $16,50O a year.
Under Its terms releasing is per.
mitted. The subleasors are the
cattlemen who are charged, they
claim, prohibitive rentals fer the
use Of the land. The lease holding
company is known as the Straw
berry Valley Highland Canal Com
pany. 1t is declared to be affiliated
with the Water Users Association
and to represent identical interests.
Under the lease cattlemen are
being forced to pay a rental graz
ing charge on cattle Of So a head
and on sheep Of 80 cents a head.
Previous to the authorization Of
the reclamation project the range
included in the tract could be
grazed at nominal charge. What
the cattlemen declare to be q gross
Injustice is the levy thus laid on
them for the benefit of interests
located In another county, forty
miles distant, which have already
received as the result Of the re.
clamation project ADVANTAGES
valued at millions which have been
largely paid for out Of the rentals
obtained for use Of the grazing
lands.
Senator Reed Smoot, is q resi-
dent OF Provo, q town located in
the immediate neighborhood Of the
reclamation development. The Sem
ate bill authorizing the project was
not introduced by him but by his
associate, former Senator George
Sutherland, Of Utah, now Associate
Justice of the United States Su-
preme Court.
Is SmOOt Interested?
Has Senator Smoot direct or in.
direct interests which will profit by
the passing of title to the land to
the interests seeking 1t under act
by Congress transferring title in
accordance with the provision pro-
viding for 1t in the bill authoriS-
ing the reclamation project? This
question Is being asked by cattle
interests. There is nothing in the
congressional records or those Of
the Department of the Interior to
show such an interest exists.
A Dill Is now pending in Con-
gress, introduced by Congressman
Don G. Cotton, Utah, which pro-
woes Tor the transfer of the 10000
acres of land to the forestry re.
serve. Under management of the
latter equitable grazing rentals are
assured the cattlemen. 1t is con-
tended that the lay Of the land
In connection with the watershed
providing the reclamation reservoir
with water Is an integral part of
the latter. II it's use under the
present rental charges is continued
overgrazi1g Of the land is ineV-
liable to make leasing it profitable
to the cattlemen. This In turn will
destroy its value as protection
to the watershed on which the
reclamation project depends. The
tract involved occupies the very
heart OF the valley in which the
reclamation rana,.r,nih L. lnnnAod