||20 IS UTAH SAHARA BOUND? ability to withstand grazing use, and when more attempts have been made at reseeding to grass the shadscale and other low valley types. However, conservation agencies of the government would do well to investigate more fully the possibility of introducing palatable shrubs rather than grass to these forage depleted desert lands. Extent and Importance of Grazing Utah is a big stateâ€"84,900 square miles of land. Salt deserts and steep rocky summits from which there is little economic return comprise nearly 10 percent of this area. Only 2.6 percent of Utah is used for irrigated agriculture. Discounting the land area occupied by cities and towns, highways, etc., there remains approximately 85 percent of Utah's vast land area to be used in some degree for the grazing of domestic and game animals. Indeed the forage resource constitutes the only direct source of cash income from most of this area. One would therefore assume that the cash income from grazing would rank high in the total income of the state. But actually, according to Dr. J. R. Mahoney17 in the June, 1946 issue of the Utah Economic and Business Review, only 22 percent of Utah's 1945 total cash income of 603.3 million dollars came from the combined agricultural resource and less than 4 percent accrued from the grazing industry. The cash income from grazing amounted to less than 18 percent of the total agricultural income. The receipts from the Bingham Copper Mine alone amounted in 1945 to more than three times the income from the grazing industry. The average layman untrained in the science of economics and uninformed of the vital role that range lands of Utah play in our basic economy could hardly be blamed for drawing some very unwarranted conclusions from these cash income statistics. For no attention is drawn to the fact that agriculture constitutes almost the sole source of income for most of our rural communities, and that the grazing income now as always is an indispensable factor in their future survival. Neither do these figures account for the goods and services of the groceryman and merchant, the dentist, the doctor, the school teacher and many others throughout the state who depend wholly or in part on the agricultural resource. But most of all, these statistics fail to portray adequately the real status of mining itself. They do not show how much of the vast mining wealth of our state flows to the pockets of capitalists residing elsewhere, and how ephemeral after all our mining wealth really is. Would it shock some of us to learn that if the 1945 production of copper and iron were to continue for another 50 years, we should have little of either of these metals left for future generations? But even if we received the capital profits of our mining wealth and could count on a relatively inexhaustible supply of our metals, if we could compensate ourselves for the loss of cash receipts from grazing through more efficient cooperative irrigated agriculture or through new adventures in manufacturing, could we afford or dare we continue to neglect the land resources of our ranges?