46 BULLETIN 1264, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



investment in every sense of the word. The Government will 

 recover its original investment with a good rate of interest, while the 

 public will benefit through the production of valuable timber and 

 ideal watershed protection. 



It is obviously the present duty of the Government to expend the 

 money appropriated for forest planting where the best returns are 

 to be had, in those regions where timber can be most rapidly and 

 easily grown. There are really no areas in the intermountain region 

 falling clearly in this category, for in the few cases where results 

 would undoubtedly be satisfactory from a timber production stand- 

 point, as on high-altitude burns, the cost would be excessive on 

 account of the inaccessibility and small size of the areas, and the 

 high overhead expenses. Therefore, it is evident that general plant- 

 ing in the intermountain region will be deferred until other regions 

 giving better returns are fully stocked, unless the value of forest 

 growth on watersheds is shown to be sufficiently high for planting to 

 be done with this prime object in view. 



Forecasting very far into the future is dangerous. For example, 

 the cost of planting trees is almost entirely an investment of labor, 

 while the value of the final crop is due to supply and demand in the 

 lumber markets. It is quite possible for one of these to vary inde- 

 pendently of the other. Any factor tending to increase the difference 

 between the two, giving a larger margin of profit to forest growing, 

 will tend to throw the limit of economically plantable areas farther 

 and farther toward the poorer sites. As soon as this economic 

 process goes far enough the better sites of the intermountain region 

 should be planted on the basis of commercial timber values alone. 



It is impossible to reforest mountain areas for commercial timber 

 production without receiving in addition the indirect benefits of 

 watershed protection; and the reverse is also generally true, for the 

 two benefits are virtually inseparable. It is therefore not strictly 

 correct to speak of forest planting for commercial returns and for 

 watershed protection as two separate and distinct activities. When, 

 however, the monetary return from the forest crop fails to pay 

 expenses and a fair rate of interest on the investment it must be con- 

 sidered that plantations made under such conditions are primarily 

 for watershed protection. 



In the intermountain region, especially the Great Basin, watershed 

 protection and water conservation through the equalization of the 

 flow of streams are the primary objects to be achieved, while timber 

 production on a commercial scale is secondary, and will undoubtedly 

 remain so for a relatively long period of years. The permanent 

 wealth of Utah and southern Idaho depends upon the agricultural 

 production of the valleys. While dry farming can be practiced in 

 some localities, agriculture is primarily dependent upon irrigation 

 water, derived almost entirely from watersheds within the national 

 forests. Agricultural investigations are teaching how to use this 

 water to the best advantage, and arc putting a premium upon late 

 water and a well-sustained flow; all of which has its effect upon the 

 management of watersheds and points more and more clearly to the 

 monetary value of water conservation in the mountains, as well as 

 to its necessity. 



Coniferous timber cover is the ideal protection for watersheds. On 

 the lover mountain slopes, summer precipitation is light, and the 



