The Civilian Conservation Corps in Nevada: From Boys to Men

Chapter 5. Rehabilitating the Public Domain: The Grazing Service CCC Program

The Civilian Conservation Corps operated fifty-nine main camps in Nevada , many simultaneously. While some programs were short-lived, others such as Camps Muddy River and Newlands operated seasonally or yearround for most of the CCC’s nine-year existence. The placement and longevity of each camp was generally influenced by the needs of a particular region as well as the political agendas of the advisory boards and federal agencies. The nature of the work was shaped by the natural and affected environment. Work plans were developed by the Division of Grazing and local advisory boards. For example, with the lack of surface water near Battle Mountain, Camp Mill Creek concentrated on building windmills and sinking wells so that formerly unusable land could be grazed. Elsewhere, camps at Tuscarora west of the Independence Range and Hubbard Ranch east of Jarbidge Wilderness were bordered by high mountains. Here, attention was focused on building earthen dams and reservoirs to store snowmelt for the dry summer months. The government agencies that supervised CCC projects varied from state to states. In Nevada, the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI) served as the umbrella agency for the following departments and bureaus: Department of Grazing/Grazing Service (now the Bureau of Land Management), Bureau of Reclamation, the National Park Service, and Biological Survey/ Fish and Wildlife Service. Division of Grazing/Grazing Service The Division of Grazing (Grazing Service as of 1939) operated the greatest number of CCC programs in the state. There were several reasons for this. First of all, Nevada has the largest public domain (nonallocated federal acreage ) of any of the forty-eight contiguous states. With little trouble, Nevada ’s elected officials and stockmen easily persuaded national CCC officials Rehabilitating the Public Domain The Grazing Service CCC Program 5 54 The CCC in Nevada to approve requests for several new grazing camps, notwithstanding national CCC program budget cuts. Second, following passage of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, a large workforce was needed to implement its ambitious provisions. Even with CCC assistance, the amount of work needing to be accomplished was unparalleled. With the federal mandate and a free CCC workforce, there was no time to waste. Secretary of Interior Harold Ickes acknowledged that decades of overgrazing largely contributed to the progressive deterioration of the land. More palatable forage plants were being displaced by species of little worth. Without protection, Ickes feared that grassy rangelands would be replaced by acres of desert land.1 Essentially, the Division of Grazing was created to administer the Taylor Grazing Act. Secretary Ickes laid out the main programs mandated by the act: extensive water development to permit an even distribution of livestock , eradication of rodents that compete for feed resources, construction of drift fences to allow for more effective range management, construction of truck trails to deliver feed or water to stock in distress or to transport stock between ranges, eradication of noxious weeds, and erosion control.2 The Taylor Grazing Act was designed to salvage both the livestock industry and the environment. Despite its good intentions, the grazing program was not immediately embraced and created its share of controversy. As intended , not all stockmen would gain from its provisions. Itinerant ranchers were put out of business, whereas those with established ties to the land received grazing permits. Permitted stockmen were charged a per-head fee dedicated to range improvements. Of the new fee, 50 percent went to the state grazing boards and 25 percent was returned to local grazing boards.3 Frequently, both state and local fees were earmarked for supplies and materials for CCC projects. This proved to be a win-win situation, as ranchers reaped the benefit of free CCC labor and enrollees received a small wage, technical training, shelter, and three meals a day. The amount of CCC work on Nevada’s public domain was impressive by any standard. In Nevada alone, CCC officials estimated that $13,392,000 was expended on the grazing program during its first five years.4 By the end of the program in 1942, the CCC Grazing Service’s program had constructed 15 miles of pipelines for spring development, 26 large impounding or diversion dams, 260 miles of fence, 60 cattle guards, almost 2,000 miles of truck trails, and 800 permanent and temporary check dams. In addition, CCC Map of Nevada Camps. Courtesy Bob Estes 56 The CCC in Nevada...