Report on the lands of the arid region of the United States, with a more detailed account of the lands of Utah

by John Wesley Powell; Willis Drummond; Clarence E. Dutton; Grove Karl Gilbert; A. H. Thompson

THE LANDS SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED.

Such a system of disposing of the public lands in the Arid Region will necessitate an authoritative classification of the same. The largest amount of land that it is possible to redeem by irrigation, excepting those tracts watered by lone springs, brooks, and the small branches, should be classed as irrigable lands, to give the greatest possible development to this industry. The limit of the timber lands should be clearly defined, to prevent the fraudulent acquirement of these lands as pasturage lands. The irrigable and timber lands are of small extent, and their boundaries can easily be fixed. All of the lands falling without these boundaries would be relegated to the greater class designated as pasturage lands. It is true that all such lands will not be of value for pasturage purposes, but in general it would be difficult to draw a line between absolutely desert lands and pasturage lands, and no practical purposes would be subserved thereby. Fix the boundaries of the timber lands that they may be acquired by proper methods; fix the boundaries of the irrigable lands that they may also be acquired by proper methods, and then permit the remaining lands to be acquired by settlers as pasturage lands, to the extent that they may be made available, and there will be no fear of settlers encroaching on the desert or valueless lands.

Heretofore we have been considering only three great classes of lands—namely, irrigable, timber, and pasturage lands, although practically and under the laws there are two other classes of lands to be recognized—namely, mineral lands, i. e., lands bearing lodes or placers of gold, silver, cinnabar, etc., and coal lands. Under the law these lands are made special. Mineral lands are withheld from general sale, and titles to the mines are acquired by the investment of labor and capital to an amount specified in the law. Coal lands are sold for $20 per acre. The mineral lands proper, though widely scattered, are of small extent. Where the mines are lodes, the lands lie along the mountains, and are to a greater or less extent valueless for all other purposes. Where the mines are placers, they may also be agricultural lands, but their extent is very limited. To withhold these lands from purchase and settlement as irrigable, timber, and pasturage lands will in no material way affect the interests of the industries connected with the last mentioned lands. The General Government cannot reasonably engage in the research necessary to determine the mineral lands, but this is practically done by the miners themselves. Thousands of hardy, skilful men are vigorously engaged in this work, and as mines are discovered mining districts are organized, and on the proper representation of these interested parties the mineral lands are withheld from general sale by the Land Department. Thus, proper provision is already made for this branch of the work of classification.

In many parts of the Arid Region there are extensive deposits of coal. These coal fields are inexhaustible by any population which the country can support for any length of time that human prevision can contemplate. To withhold from general settlement the entire area of the workable coal fields would be absurd. Only a small fraction will be needed for the next century. Only those lands should be classed as coal lands that contain beds of coal easily accessible, and where there is a possibility of their being used as such within the next generation or two. To designate or set apart these lands will require the highest geological skill; a thorough geological survey is necessary.

In providing for a general classification of the lands of the Arid Region, it will, then, be necessary to recognize the following classes, namely: mineral lands, coal lands, irrigable lands, timber lands, and pasturage lands. The mineral lands are practically classified by the miners themselves, and for this no further legal provision is necessary. The coal lands must be determined by geological survey. The work of determining the areas which should be relegated to the other classes—namely, irrigable, timber, and pasturage lands—will be comparatively inexpensive.

CHAPTER III.
THE RAINFALL OF THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

The Smithsonian Institution conducted for a number of years an extensive system of measurements of rainfall in the United States, and at the same time diligently collected pluvial records from every possible source. The accumulated data thus collected were placed in the hands of Mr. Charles A. Schott for reduction and discussion, and he prepared the “Smithsonian Tables of Precipitation in Rain and Snow”, which appeared in 1868. Since that time much additional material has been acquired by the continuation of the work to the present time, and also by a great increase in the number of observation stations, and so valuable is this new material that it has been determined to recompile the tables and issue a second edition. By the time the present report was called for, the preliminary computations for the tables had developed an important body of facts bearing on the climate of the Arid Region, and through the courtesy of Prof. Joseph Henry, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, and of Mr. Schott, they were placed at my disposal. Mr. Schott also made such a change in the order of computation as to give precedence to the states and territories which form the subject of this investigation, and by this timely favor made it possible to base the following discussion on the very latest determinations of rainfall.

The results thus made available exhibit the mean precipitation at each station of observation west of the Mississippi River for each month, for each season, and for the year. A number of other data are also tabulated, including the latitude, longitude, and altitude of each station, and the extent of each series of observations in years and months. In selecting material for the present purpose the shorter records were ignored. The variations from year to year are so great that an isolated record of a single year is of no value as an indication of the average rainfall. The mean of two or three years is almost equally liable to mislead, and only a long series of observations can afford accurate results. In the following tables no stations are included (with one exception) which show records of less than five years’ extent.

[Table I] shows the precipitation of the Sub-humid Region; [Table II], of the Arid Region; [Table III], of the San Francisco Region; and [Table IV], of the Region of the Lower Columbia. The limits of each region have been given in a former chapter, and need not be repeated. In each table the first column contains the names of the stations of observation; the second, their latitudes; the third, their longitudes (west from Greenwich); and the fourth, their altitudes in feet above the level of the sea. The next four columns show for each season of the year the mean observed rainfall in inches, and their sum appears in the following column as the mean yearly rainfall. In the last column the extent of each series of observations is given in years and months. In [Table I] the stations are arranged by latitudes, in [Tables II], [III], and [IV], alphabetically.

Table I.—Precipitation of Sub-humid Region.

Station.	Latitude.	Longitude.	Height.	Mean precipitation, in inches.					Extent of record.
				Spring.	Summer.	Autumn.	Winter.	Year.
	° ´	° ´	Feet.						Y. M.
Pembina, Dak	48 57	97 03	768	4.02	7.24	2.71	1.53	15.50	4 8
Fort Totten, Dak	47 56	99 16	1,480	5.18	7.17	2.50	1.59	16.44	5 5
Fort Abercrombie, Dak	46 27	96 21	—	4.80	8.67	3.46	1.85	18.78	13 6
Fort Wadsworth, Dak	45 43	97 10	1,650	7.00	10.25	3.98	2.92	24.15	6 5
Omaha Agency, Nebr	42 07	96 22	—	8.21	8.70	5.77	2.90	25.58	5 2
Fort Kearney, Nebr	0 38	98 57	2,360	7.81	11.13	4.83	1.45	25.22	14 4
Fort Riley, Kans	39 03	96 35	1,300	5.49	10.48	5.92	2.63	24.52	20 10
Fort Hays, Kans	38 59	99 20	2,107	6.93	6.23	5.77	3.77	22.70	6 11
Fort Larned, Kans	38 10	98 57	1,932	5.17	9.63	4.95	1.67	21.42	10 9
Fort Belknap, Tex	33 08	98 46	1,600	6.41	9.44	8.34	3.86	28.05	5 10
Fort Griffin, Tex	32 54	99 14	—	4.95	6.25	6.14	4.17	21.51	5 3
Fort Chadbourne, Tex	31 58	100 15	2,020	5.77	6.53	7.06	3.52	22.88	8 7
Fort McKavett, Tex	30 48	100 08	2,060	5.21	6.71	7.81	4.22	23.95	9 7
New Braunfels, Tex	29 42	98 15	720	7.60	6.90	8.83	4.25	27.58	5 1
Fort Clark, Tex	29 17	100 25	1,000	4.14	7.57	6.55	4.35	22.61	12 5
Fort Inge, Tex	29 10	99 50	845	5.38	9.67	6.88	3.53	25.46	7 4
Fort Duncan, Tex	28 39	100 30	1,460	3.56	8.60	6.54	2.63	21.33	11 7
Fort Brown, Tex	25 50	97 37	50	3.18	7.64	13.02	4.04	27.88	15 0

Table II.—Precipitation of the Arid Region.

Station.	Latitude.	Longitude.	Height.	Mean precipitation, in inches.					Extent of record.
				Spring.	Summer.	Autumn.	Winter.	Year.
	° ´	° ´	Feet.						Y. M.
Albuquerque, N. Mex	35 06	106 38	5,032	0.83	4.35	2.04	0.89	8.11	12 2
Camp Bowie, Ariz	32 10	109 30	4,872	1.29	7.35	2.03	4.59	15.26	6 8
Camp Douglas, Utah	40 46	111 50	5,024	7.20	2.18	3.24	6.20	18.82	10 3
Camp Grant, Ariz	32 54	110 40	4,833	2.08	6.25	3.27	3.48	15.08	6 10
Camp Halleck, Nev	40 49	115 20	5,790	3.66	1.19	2.31	3.82	10.98	5 8
Camp Harney, Oreg	43 00	119 00	—	2.29	1.09	1.59	3.79	8.76	6 0
Camp Independence, Cal	36 50	118 11	4,800	1.09	0.35	0.62	4.54	6.60	8 2
Camp McDermitt, Nev	41 58	117 40	4,700	3.02	0.72	1.13	3.66	8.53	6 4
Camp McDowell, Ariz	33 46	111 36	—	1.11	4.79	1.73	3.82	11.45	8 2
Camp Mohave, Ariz	35 02	114 36	604	0.81	1.27	0.93	1.64	4.65	9 1
Camp Verde, Ariz	34 34	111 54	3,160	1.25	4.65	2.41	2.54	10.85	6 1
Camp Warner, Oreg	42 28	119 42	—	4.31	1.10	2.53	6.47	14.41	5 3
Camp Whipple, Ariz	34 27	112 20	5,700	3.88	8.07	2.15	5.18	19.28	7 5
Cantonment Burgwin, N. Mex	36 26	105 30	7,900	1.57	2.92	2.42	1.74	8.65	5 9
Drum Barracks, Cal	33 47	118 17	32	2.26	0.26	0.35	5.87	8.74	5 5
Denver, Colo	39 45	105 01	5,250	5.02	3.69	3.16	1.90	13.77	5 1
Fort Bayard, N. Mex	32 46	108 30	4,450	1.54	7.22	2.28	3.28	14.32	7 6
Fort Benton, Mont	47 50	110 39	2,730	5.34	4.48	1.65	1.79	13.26	7 1
Fort Bidwell, Cal	41 50	120 10	4,680	4.95	1.54	3.03	10.71	20.23	8 3
Fort Bliss (El Paso), Tex	31 47	106 30	3,830	0.43	3.49	3.38	1.23	8.53	14 3
Fort Boisé, Idaho	43 40	116 00	1,998	5.16	1.15	2.50	6.67	15.48	9 5
Fort Bridger, Wyo	41 20	110 23	6,656	2.99	2.05	1.68	1.71	8.43	12 10
Fort Buford, Dak	48 01	103 58	1,900	3.76	4.06	2.01	2.01	11.84	7 10
Fort Colville, Wash	48 42	118 02	1,963	3.63	3.04	2.56	4.83	14.06	11 0
Fort Craig, N. Mex	33 38	107 00	4,619	0.70	5.87	3.43	1.06	11.06	15 9
Fort D. A. Russell, Wyo	41 12	104 50	—	4.76	4.56	3.27	1.50	14.09	5 1
Fort Davis, Tex	30 40	104 07	4,700	1.84	8.76	4.72	1.80	17.12	8 11
Fort Defiance, Ariz	35 43	109 10	6,500	2.03	5.91	3.72	2.55	14.21	8 5
Fort Fetterman, Wyo	42 50	105 29	4,973	4.48	4.12	2.99	3.51	15.10	5 7
Fort Fillmore, N. Mex	32 14	106 42	3,937	0.48	4.16	3.02	0.76	8.42	8 3
Fort F. Steele, Wyo	41 47	106 57	6,841	4.57	3.48	3.05	4.28	15.38	5 5
Fort Garland, Colo	37 25	105 40	7,864	3.28	6.70	2.37	2.51	14.86	13 1
Fort Lapwai, Idaho	46 18	116 54	2,000	4.11	2.41	3.38	4.99	14.89	9 8
Fort Laramie, Wyo	42 12	104 31	4,472	5.35	4.40	2.73	1.97	14.45	17 8
Fort Lyon, Colo	38 08	102 05	4,000	4.33	5.44	2.30	0.49	12.56	7 9
Fort Massachusetts, Colo	37 32	105 23	8,365	3.12	5.56	6.28	2.27	17.23	5 1
Fort McPherson, Nebr	41 00	100 30	3,726	6.90	7.56	3.25	1.25	18.96	6 9
Fort McIntosh, Tex	27 35	99 48	806	3.22	6.56	5.38	2.35	17.51	14 7
Fort McRae, N. Mex	33 18	107 03	4,500	2.43	6.15	2.32	0.69	11.59	5 0
Fort Randall, Dak	43 01	98 37	1,245	4.72	6.22	3.40	1.18	15.52	15 6
Fort Rice, Dak	46 32	100 33	—	3.63	4.87	1.54	1.35	11.39	6 1
Fort Sanders, Wyo	41 17	105 36	7,161	3.55	4.15	2.33	1.43	11.46	6 10
Fort Selden, N. Mex	32 23	106 55	—	0.58	4.83	1.86	1.22	8.49	8 5
Fort Shaw, Mont	47 30	111 42	6,000	2.18	2.30	1.34	1.13	6.95	7 3
Fort Stanton, N. Mex	33 29	105 38	5,000	3.03	10.61	4.86	2.44	20.94	7 9
Fort Stevenson, Dak	47 36	101 10	—	3.41	4.97	2.15	1.31	11.84	6 2
Fort Stockton, Tex	30 20	102 30	4,950	1.24	5.66	3.31	1.29	11.50	5 8
Fort Sully, Dak	44 50	100 35	1,672	6.52	7.18	1.70	1.14	16.54	7 8
Fort Union, N. Mex	35 54	104 57	6,670	2.12	11.92	3.79	1.32	19.15	17 5
Fort Walla Walla, Wash	46 03	118 20	800	4.69	2.07	4.98	7.62	19.36	8 8
Fort Wingate, N. Mex	35 29	107 45	6,982	1.96	6.50	3.42	5.44	17.32	9 1
Fort Yuma, Cal	32 44	114 36	200	0.27	1.30	1.36	0.98	3.91	16 6
Ringgold Barracks, Tex	26 23	99 00	521	3.71	7.00	6.31	2.58	19.60	14 2
Salt Lake City, Utah	40 46	111 54	4,534	6.25	6.28	4.71	7.57	24.81	9 2
San Diego, Cal	32 42	117 14	150	1.89	0.36	1.89	5.17	9.31	24 2
Santa Fé, N. Mex	35 41	106 02	6,846	2.17	6.82	3.45	2.47	14.91	19 10

Table III.—Precipitation of the San Francisco Region.

Station.	Latitude.	Longitude.	Height.	Mean precipitation, in inches.					Extent of record.
				Spring.	Summer.	Autumn.	Winter.	Year.
	° ´	° ´	Feet.						Y. M.
Alcatraz Island	37 49	122 25	—	2.59	0.01	1.85	12.04	16.49	9 5
Angel Island	37 51	122 26	30	3.52	0.02	2.75	12.29	18.58	5 11
Benicia Barracks	38 03	122 09	64	4.10	0.13	2.28	8.39	14.90	18 3
Fort Miller	37 00	119 40	402	7.25	0.00	2.94	8.81	19.00	6 9
Fort Point	37 48	122 29	27	3.66	0.03	2.28	11.39	17.36	14 11
Monterey	36 37	121 52	40	4.43	0.26	2.24	8.78	15.71	12 3
Sacramento	38 34	121 26	81	5.55	0.09	2.76	10.84	19.24	18 3
San Francisco; Presidio	37 47	122 28	150	4.80	0.49	2.68	12.32	20.29	20 2
San Francisco	37 48	122 25	130	5.03	0.22	3.05	13.19	21.49	24 4

Table IV.—Precipitation of the Region of the Lower Columbia.

Station.	Latitude.	Longitude.	Height.	Mean precipitation, in inches.					Extent of record.
				Spring.	Summer.	Autumn.	Winter.	Year.
	° ´	° ´	Feet.						Y. M.
Astoria, Oreg	46 11	123 48	52	18.90	5.72	18.19	34.80	77.61	22 4
Cape Disappointment, Wash	46 17	124 03	30	14.97	5.97	20.46	29.84	71.24	5 9
Fort Dalles, Oreg	45 33	120 50	350	3.91	1.16	5.78	11.27	22.12	12 8
Camp Gaston, Cal	41 01	123 34	—	14.76	1.15	9.92	31.56	57.39	12 0
Camp Wright, Cal	39 48	123 17	—	8.26	0.27	8.17	27.27	43.97	9 8
Fort Crook, Cal	41 07	121 29	3,390	6.37	0.97	4.55	11.29	23.18	9 0
Fort Hoskins, Oreg	45 06	123 26	—	14.69	2.65	14.88	34.48	66.70	6 9
Fort Humboldt, Cal	40 45	124 10	50	9.36	0.73	6.49	18.73	35.31	11 2
Fort Jones, Cal	41 36	122 52	2,570	5.23	0.91	4.19	11.37	21.70	5 0
Fort Steilacoom, Wash	47 11	122 34	300	8.98	2.81	10.12	17.01	38.92	12 9
Fort Stevens, Oreg	46 12	123 57	—	17.67	7.88	18.21	34.81	78.57	6 5
Fort Umpqua, Oreg	43 42	124 10	8	16.83	2.86	15.64	32.08	67.41	5 10
Fort Vancouver, Wash	45 40	122 30	50	8.70	3.78	9.17	16.72	38.37	16 11
Fort Yamhill, Oreg	45 21	123 15	—	13.10	2.39	13.20	26.90	55.59	9 3
Portland, Oreg	45 30	122 36	45	13.75	2.50	11.31	19.64	47.20	7 0
Port Townsend, Wash	48 07	122 45	8	5.45	4.22	2.31	4.07	16.05	5 6
San Juan Island, Wash	48 28	123 01	150	5.01	4.60	7.89	10.84	28.34	9 4