In the past, construction of many water development projects has been established 

 under the assumption that the Forest Service, or other responsible agency, would be able 

 to stop all but "natural erosion" immediately to assure maximum benefits from such 

 projects. IsTiile such an assumption is not inconsistent with the desires of the Forest 

 Service, such control is very difficult and rarely has been achieved. This general 

 lack of control stems from several reasons and their economic implications are impor- 

 tant and point to one fact: water development projects are more expensive in the long 

 run when the normal erosion and sedimentation rate is not achieved. 



In the first place, the extremely complex patterns of land use and their attendant 

 socio-economic institutions have often resulted in damaging use of watershed resources. 

 Changing these patterns so that they are compatible with environmental and biological 

 constraints of the watershed is a slow and most difficult task. In many cases, communi- 

 ties have developed far beyond the capacity of the land and resources to sustain them. 



In addition, greater public interest in environmental quality and resource pro- 

 tection is being expressed today; however, there remains a real lack of understanding 

 by the public of the environment-resource use relationship as it applies to watersheds. 

 Unfortunately, it is only when the public understands these relationships that they are 

 willing to finance needed watershed work. The willingness to finance depends on the 

 value seen in such work, but the simple fact is that value is a social expression and 

 water has value in relation to a watershed only to the extent that society understands 

 such relationships. Because the concepts of value in relation to environment are only 

 now beginning to materialize, they cannot be adequately considered in feasibility 

 analyses of watershed improvement opportunities. 



Somewhat related to the two situations mentioned above, there seems to be a general 

 lack of knowledge about the capacity of watersheds to withstand use. Such information 

 is basic to the determination of watershed use level, rehabilitation needs and oppor- 

 tunities, techniques, and probable success. Again, the lack of public understanding 

 has seriously limited the financing of the research necessary for managers to learn how 

 to deal with watershed problems. 



The fourth factor, land ownership patterns, makes control of watershed conditions 

 difficult if not impossible. Seldom is all the land on a large watershed under the 

 jurisdiction of a single government agency. More commonly, private land is intermingled 

 with public lands administered by one or more federal agencies. Adequate and coordi- 

 nated watershed management and .use is hard to achieve under this situation. 



All generations face decisions involving consumption of certain resources in favor 

 of economic growth. They must either set resource use limits or define a desired 

 economic growth rate. If the present course is continued with regard to watersheds, it 

 is doubtful that this generation will look any better to its descendants than do our 

 ancestors to us. UTiile all generations are willing to make some sacrifices in the 

 name of resource protection, they do look for some indication of parity between genera- 

 tions so that no one generation becomes unduly burdened because of the mistakes or 

 foolishness of their predecessors. 



This resource-decision dilemma leads to two kinds of economic considerations-- 

 economic efficiency for the current generation and some kind of economic resource ethic 

 for the next. The current generation can do its part in support of parity by doing 

 foolish things with our resources less frequently and by being more efficient in 

 achieving our own shortrun desires. As far as water development projects are concerned, 

 the last sites available [such as Grand .Canyon and Yosemite Park) will cost dearly in 

 terms of other things that will have to be given up. Therefore, taking steps to assure 

 some longevity to current and future water projects is imperative. 



2 



