Show U U. UA A. A C C. C D FAVORS L PUBLIC DOMAIN nO CONTROL ll I. I Dr G George orge Stewart head of f th the tho department 1 nt of or agronomy at the tile Utah Agricultural ai college an and agronomist for the Utah Experiment Station I favors placing control of f the vast vasi public domain 1 main in iI the the rf hands of or the United States Forest Service According According Ac- Ac 1 cording to Dr Stewart the problem of oC what V shall be done with the public I 0 d domain main is the tho most important Ol one C facing western agri agriculture I The Utah a agronomist o om st is opposed to allowing the public lands to pass into in into into in- in to the private ownership O of stocKmen stocK stocK- men and he lie also poin points out the leasin leasing leasing leas leas- in ing g of qC the public lands to stockmen has not been successful in this country country coun coun- try and that such a practice would prevent tho the administration of oC largo large units i t Dr Stewart offers ten objections to the suggestion that the tho separate states b be given control of of that part of oC the public domain that lies within their boundaries and in doing so he lle I brings out the y of turning turning turn turn- ing lug the tho control to the forest service I 1 State control would create ten tenor tenor tenor or twelve different heads instead of one I I I 2 The Tho state could not work ork oufa out outa outI a correlation between summer and I winter ranges The forest service could do this I j 3 State boundary lines rr lu ul- ul ly h do not define geographic units I 4 Under state control control one sta might graze in ill such a fashion as t 1 i J cause serious sarious erosion and rapid filling filling filling fill fill- ing of oC reservoirs Federal control would enforce one kind of grazing gracing I 5 The state would have no background back back- ground of or experience The forest service has had unlimited expert expert- I d ence ee 6 G. Political appointment rather than the civil service examinations would be the basis of oC appointment j I under the states 7 The states are much more likely to o dissipate the value alue of the lands lauds I This has been heen the experience of or the past 8 State Stale control would l probably stop the expenditure of or federal mono money on oil roads and in reclamation work This money Is now distributed t 11 in pr proportion Pol tion to the area of or public land t 9 o. Tho The conveying g goC of oC the tho information lion tion of oC experience and investigation would bo he fa facilitated d' d under federal federI control 10 The Tho income to lo the state w 10 he d under tinder H United nIt S Stat est e lc co control rol lar-l lar be h a ailse ls ho 9 forest es serl service service- t f tJi ti 1 rk l with th very v if ti Q ni nie e e P g c jl l. l at a f k prospective revenue lo from rom grazing permits Tile The state could rould not Hot P post poi S- S lily bly lydo do the Ule work with an any n entirely j I force V i h U P tl 1 entire r amount an 9 Qt i rii money i li i 1 como come in UI from from- grazing gracing wo would Vf d leave no 10 funds for J l f t tio io r- r al' al Research I i p u ess If were Jere were l i QA appoint a Js A other federal s ag agen agency enc tl than 1 1 the f h service ai Vi co most ost of or tha th- th thes se t 0 V pro would 1 remain remah jin lin l r except cop t ot Or conro o that the public ll yiU cO be administered as ITS one unit I t r r C n 0 |