248 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



of paper products offers an opportunitv 

 for adaptation of the raw material 

 which our manufacturers have not suf- 

 ficiently availed themselves of. Therein 

 also lies a reason for the failure of some 

 of the fibres that have been proposed 

 as a substitute for wood as a base for 

 paper making. They have not been 

 rightly applied. We believe that there 

 is here a wide field for economy of the 

 forests by the use of annual plants of 

 rapid growth and that close study of 

 its possibilities will be of advant- 

 age to paper makers and to the country 

 in this age of disappearing forests. The 

 late Edward Atkinson, the well-known 

 Boston economist, instituted and was 

 conducting at the time of his death ex- 

 periments in the use for paper making 

 of the tall grasses that are now grown 

 wholly for ornamental purposes. Mr. 

 Atkinson believed that he had found an 

 easily grown new paper material, and 

 he was one whose imagination always 

 confined itself closely to the narrow path 

 between the hedgerows of close-clipped 

 facts. Since his death we have heard 

 of no continuance of those experiments, 

 but they were certainly worth while. 

 Perhaps our resourceful Department of 

 Agriculture might take them up. 



Mr' i« % 



A Western View 



TN TWEPuchlo (Colorado) Chieftain 

 1 we find a notably fair and intelligent 

 discussion of the question of conserva- 

 tion of western resources, which is en- 

 titled to careful consideration for it un- 

 doubtedly represents one of the best 

 western points of view, while it comes 

 from a part of the country from which 

 we hear much intemperate and utterly 

 prejudiced ranting against forestry and 

 conservation. The article begins as 

 follows : 



The true friends of conservation in the 

 west realize that they are confronted with 

 danger on hoth sides. The opponents of 

 the conservation policy in the western states 

 are,' for the most part, either men that seek 

 to gain a selfish profit through a continu- 

 ation of the policy of spoliation and monop- 

 oly, or men that are striving to score a 



partisan point against the administration and 

 the party in power. 



On the other side, many of the advocates 

 of conservation in the eastern states and some 

 of those that are participating as officials 

 in the institution of the conservation policy, 

 have an avowed purpose to establish and 

 maintain a great national domain which is 

 to be administered for the benefit of the 

 federal treasury and not for the individual 

 benefit of the citizens of the states in which 

 the national lands are situated. 



With respect to the latter paragraph 

 it may be suggested that the great 

 national estate or domain already exists, 

 and has existed since the Louisiana pur- 

 chase and the Mexican cession, that it 

 is the property of the whole people and 

 that for reasons which the article we 

 are quoting calls attention to in suc- 

 ceeding paragraphs, it should be ad- 

 ministered for the benefit, not indeed of 

 the federal treasury, but of the people 

 of the United States. And this admin- 

 istration for the people of the United 

 States will inure most directly to the 

 benefit of the people of the western 

 states in which this domain is located. 

 The Chieftain continues : 



Under such conditions it is important to 

 recall what was the original purpose of the 

 land laws, what have been their degrees of 

 success, and in what particulars they have 

 proved to be faulty or opposed to the public 

 interests. The main purpose of the land 

 laws was the disposition of the national re- 

 sources, and primarily the agricultural lands, 

 among individual holders. It was not re- 

 garded as good judgment to build up a 

 great system of tenantry or to hold title to 

 the national lands in the nation. The ideal 

 condition was thought to be that of an agri- 

 cultural population owning their own lands. 

 That purpose is just as important now as it 

 ever was, and no modification should be tol- 

 erated that tends to build up a great perma- 

 nent national estate in mines, in forests or 

 in agricultural lands. 



With the main idea of this statement 

 we are in cordial agreement, but in par- 

 ticulars it requires modification. It is 

 perfectly true that there should be no 

 building up of great national holdings 

 of agricultural lands. It is for the in- 

 terest of the nation, both cast and west, 

 that its agricultural lands should be di- 

 vided in small holdings among individ- 

 ual resident owners. With regard to 

 forest land, however, conditions are en- 



