332 REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS OF 



assume that if the State acquires any more woodlands in northern New York, such 

 area must, without any exception, be placed in the Preserve, no matter how great the 

 need for other purposes, would seem like a narrow and technical interpretation of the 

 law. It would forbid the Legislature buying any land whatever in the Adirondacks 

 except for one specific purpose. This provision could be evaded by the passage of an 

 act authorizing the purchase of some tract in which the owners would be allowed to 

 reserve a timber right. But such evasion, as well as any narrow-minded inter- 

 pretation of the constitutional provision, would not become the dignity of the 

 State or the meritorious character of the proposed enterprise. It would be better 

 if the Legislature were to enact some law carrying a special appropriation for 

 the purchase of the land, and providing for its especial use as a forestry experiment 

 station. 



The land thus acquired and dedicated could, while under the general supervision 

 of the Forestry Department, be placed under the management of skilled, professional 

 foresters. The experiment to be made would consist in the demand that these men, 

 having a primitive forest given them free of interest account, should so manage the 

 property that the State would derive an annual income from it over and above the cost 

 of management and any sums that might be advanced to inaugurate the work If 

 they fail to do this, any further advice about scientific work and improved methods as 

 applied to our woodlands would seem gratuitous. 



The experiment would not imply that the State must go into the lumber business, 

 or undertake any logging operations, or advance money for teams, wages and 

 materials. The matured trees designated by the foresters could be sold to the highest 

 bidder, leaving the removal of the timber to the purchaser, whose work of tree felling, 

 trimming, log cutting and road building must be done under the direction of the 

 forester and according to written contract. A part of the surplus revenue left after 

 paying the foresters and other expenses could be devoted to forest improvement, a 

 class of work in which the technical knowledge of the professional forester would 

 be available and valuable. But these are matters of detail which need not be 

 discussed now. 



The State can make no mistake in such a purchase. The property becomes an 

 asset convertible into cash at any time, which cannot be said of other public expendi- 

 tures. And as long as the State sees fit to hold the property, the yearly forest 

 revenue would make it an interest-bearing investment. Whenever it ceases to be 

 such, sell the property and abandon the experiment ; the State will be none the 

 poorer for the trial. 



In view of the facts set forth and the suggestions respectfully submitted here for 

 your honorable consideration, might it not be well for the Commission to prepare a 



