||36 IS UTAH SAHARA BOUND? insufficient stocking of streams? A public that fails to temper emotion with reason deserves the type of game management it receives. 5. The need for new legislation. As a remedial measure in a program of plant resource improvement, legislation is considered last not because it is least important or least urgent, but because new laws must follow rather than precede a public awakening. The guiding theme throughout this paper is the complete interrelationship of nature. The land resources of water, soil, vegetation and animal life are but vital aspects of an intricate whole. When vegetation is destroyed, soil erodes, floods occur, animals perish, and the power of the land to support plant life progressively diminishes. In the light of these basic facts of nature, the political administration of the various aspects of the land resource as separate, un-integrated departments is as stupid as it is illogical. The federal land of Utah totaling 72 percent of the total area is administered by the Forest Service, the Grazing Service, the Soil Conservation Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Reclamation Service, the Park Service and the Fish and Wild Life Service. All of these agencies manage lands and biological resources without interservice correlation. For example, the proper utilization of the forage resources of Utah demands a close correlation in numbers and in seasonal use of the livestock of both mountains and deserts. Yet despite the long experience by the Forest Service in grazing management and in organization, a new federal agency was created in 1934 to manage the desert grazing lands, leaving the mountain ranges under Forest Service control. In our state government there exists a similar illogical and uncorrected departmentalization of the land resources. Conservation problems here are further accentuated by an uncorrelated and unnatural division of public land jurisdiction between the state and federal governments. The state lands are in general unconsolidated sections scattered like ineffectual pawns over a vast chess board. And as in chess, such a distribution makes a losing game. For state lands of Utah are in general poor as well as scattered. In 1896, when Utah was admitted into the Union, four scattered sections in each township (sections 2, 16, 32, and 36) were allotted to the public schools. At this time all of the better lands of the state had been patented. Thus the larger consolidated blocks of land given in lieu of those sections already pre-empted are also of inferior quality. Nearly all state lands are adaptable chiefly for grazing use. Thus we have in Utah the anomaly of a land limited by nature to resource uses highly interdependent but administered by a host of unrelated federal, state and private agencies. Last summer a fire on private ranges adjacent to the Deer Creek Reservoir was allowed to burn itself out simply because the one agency equipped to cope with such emergencies, the Forest Service, considered that the fire held no danger to the forest lands higher on the mountainside. The conflagration was too big for private efforts to control and no state or other federal agency was prepared for the contingency.