| OCR Text |
Show Cottam: Resource Problems of Utah 63 the complete interrelatedness of nature. If the vegetation is de stroyed, animals perish, floods occur, the soil erodes and stratum for- subsequent vegetation is gone forever. It IS said that a person is really intoxicated when he sees one thing as two. One can marvel at the state of sobriety the politician was in when the numerous departments of resource management were. ereated. te su,.. Your conservation committee is persuaded that a consolida departments concerned with the management of land resource into a single, nonpolitical department of conservation is not only wise, but necessary. Such a department would serve not only to unify the conservation ef forts of our state departments that seek to administer 30% of Utah tion and coordination of our various state land, but would be an organization suited for the coordination of the various federal agencies that control 70% of the total area of our state. Consider for a moment how our state departments as now constituted function, or rather fail to function. The Fish and Game Department, for example, is an dedicated to the task of furnishing for recreational organization purposes a maximum num her of gme animals that depend on food in the main that is pro duced on land under federal control. To cite one example: In 1927 there were 5,009 deer estimated on the Pine Valley division of the Dixie National Forest. Through the establishment of game preserves and other causes, the number of deer on this range increased by 1932 to 13,000 and by 1936 to 17,700. With the number of livestock during this period kept at a near con stant figure, it is not difficult to understand the tragic depletion of the forage of these ranges, nor the threat that this damage holds to the livestock industry and to the economic life of the communities in this area. In certain sections of the state, for reasons of appeasement, the Fish and Game Department has purchased private land seri ously damaged by deer. Once acquired, this land comes under the jurisdiction of the State Land Board and no machinery exists either in the State Land Office or in the Fish and Game Depart ment especially designed to cope with the rehabilitation measures which these areas so urgently need. Does it not seem a bit incongruous that the water resources of our state should be administered by-two rather independent state agencies? And does it not seem desirable that the im pounding of waters or the drainage of other areas should be closely coordinated with wild life planning, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Fish and Game Department? And con versely, should not the silting of streams as a of over grazing by both livestock and big game be consequence of vital concern to |
