BONDING NATIONAL FORESTS 



61 



In short, a business statement would 

 be prepared which would demonstrate 

 the desirability and soundness of the 

 proposed expenditures and their justifi- 

 cation from the standpoint of the 

 National Forest resources as a security. 

 It is not unlikely that Congress would 

 be unwilling to make such advances as 

 are proposed on the basis of general 

 estimates of cost. It is probable, 

 therefore, that the first appropriation 

 for public works in a given county would 

 be for surveys and estimates with a. 

 view to making a final appropriation 

 after the completion of the surveys by 

 the road engineers. 



The plan contemplates further that 

 the actual work of construction of 

 roads and other improvements would be 

 under the direction of the Government 

 engineers. The Department of Agri- 

 culture is well equipped for such work in 

 its Office of Public Roads. The purpose 

 of this provision would be to guarantee 

 to Congress that the work would be 

 carried on in accordance with con- 

 sistent engineering methods and stand- 

 ards and with the highest possible 

 efficiency and economy. 



One of the first questions that will be 

 asked is how a beginning is to be made 

 in setting this plan into motion. Prob- 

 ably the best plan would be to request 

 general authority for the Secretary of 

 Agriculture to report to Congress from 

 time to time, with necessary surveys and 

 estimates of cost, his recommendations 

 concerning the construction of public 

 works in the National Forest counties 

 where, in his judgment, the public need 

 requires it and there are resources 

 within the National Forests lying with- 

 in the counties sufficient ultimately to 

 repay the cost of such improvements. 

 With such authority the Secretary of 

 Agriculture, through the Forest Service, 

 could take the initiative in recommend- 

 ing legislation. If such general author- 

 ity were granted, it would necessarily 

 carry a recognition of the fact that ap- 

 propriations would be made only upon 

 a showing by the Secretary of Agri- 

 culture of their justification and need. 

 Such a procedure would be an effective 

 guarantee against the initiation of ill- 

 advised projects and would result in 



the most urgent cases being considered 

 in the order of their importance. 



The first objection which will be 

 urged against the plan is that there 

 would immediately develop a competi- 

 tion among different counties for ad- 

 vances from the federal government for 

 road building and that there would be 

 danger of sectionalism developing, and 

 perhaps such a condition as is claimed 

 to exist in connection with the Rivers 

 and Harbors Bill. 



It should be remembered, however, 

 that the present plan is very different 

 from the Rivers and Harbors problem. 

 In that case there is a direct contribu- 

 tion by the Government. In the 

 present proposal, there is merely an 

 advance by the Government, in urgent 

 cases, of moneys which later on will be 

 returned to the Treasury from the 

 resources, held and fully controlled by 

 the Government itself, and a portion of 

 which Congress has already decreed 

 shall ultimately be appropriated for 

 these very purposes. Handled as a 

 proposition of public business, with the 

 expenditures guaranteed by existing 

 resources, and with the certification of 

 the Secretary of Agriculture as to the 

 public need and as to the engineering 

 features, there should be ample safe- 

 guard against unwise projects being 

 undertaken. 



SOME ILLUSTRATIONS. 



It is evident that the plan would not 

 be applicable by any means to all of the 

 National Forest counties. Many of 

 the National Forests are already being 

 developed and used to such an extent 

 that the receipts are now bringing into 

 the counties very substantial sums, in 

 some instances fully as great as would 

 be received if the lands were under 

 taxation, and these are receipts which 

 will be constantly growing for an 

 indefinite period. Examples of Forests 

 yielding large revenue are the Kaniksu of 

 Idaho, 'with a gross revenue of $54,000, 

 the Kootenai of Montana, with a gross 

 revenue of $41,000, the Deerlodge of 

 Montana, $80,000, the Coconino of 

 Arizona, $100,000, the Whitman of 

 Oregon, $72,000, the Lolo of Montana, 

 $40,000, the Sierra of California, $22,- 



