UTAH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 49 
FOREST TAXATION. 
While taxation does not affect the government forests 
it is important in private forestry. A fundamental dif- 
ference between forestry and most other business is the 
fact of long delayed returns. One hundred or two hundred 
years must elapse before the crop is mature. Now to tax 
a forest annually on the basis of the growing crop merely 
spurs the desire to get immediate returns by lumbering 
before the crop is mature and to cut over the ground more 
completely. The forest is slaughtered to cut down the 
burden of a yearly taxation. With an equitable tax on 
the basis of productivity at the time the crop is harvested 
there would not be the temptation, or in some cases the 
necessity, of realizing immediate returns, nor would the 
cut need to be so complete. The stands would be left to 
grow to their full value at maturity and would then be cut 
in such a manner as to keep the yield of the forest at the 
maximum. The state would not lose but in the long run 
would gain by the increased wealth made possible. The 
only change would be the time of collection which is ad- 
justed to the needs of forestry and its involved time ele- 
ment. 
Although the National Forests are not directly taxed, 
such a system is really in operation through the 25 per 
cent of proceeds paid the state. This is, of course, paid 
only when the crop is harvested and on the basis of the 
actual yield. 
The present incongruous system of taxation and the 
fire menace are the two greatest drawbacks to private 
forestry. With a just system of taxation in application, 
much may be expected of private forestry. 
THE GRAZING QUESTION. 
If a forest were fully stocked and uniform over its 
area there would, of course, be no grazing to consider. In 
humid regions in the east, particularly the north, the den- 
sity of the stand and absence of forage makes grazing im- 
possible. But with the scattered open stands of the inter- 
mountain country, grazing within the forest limits is ex- 
