806 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



waters of navigable rivers or interstate 

 streams. The Government is now 

 purchasing lands in the East on head- 

 waters of navigable rivers because of 

 the disastrous results to the public 

 which are following abuse under private 

 ownership. It certainly should not 

 part with title to the same class of 

 lands which it now owns in the West. 

 Every interstate stream presents prob- 

 lems which can be properly handled 

 only through the Federal Government. 

 The Government can not permit the 

 citizens of one State to be damaged by 

 the action or failure to act of citizens 

 of another State. It is of vital im- 

 portance for this reason alone that 

 property at the headwaters of inter- 

 state streams be retained under Gov- 

 ernment administration. 



4. Not only are the interests of the 

 individual States and communities now 

 fully protected, but in many ways far 

 more is being done for local communi- 

 ties than would be possible under State 

 ownership. In the long run, as the 

 timber and other resources are brought 

 into use with improving markets, the 

 States will receive from the 25 per cent 

 of the gross receipts now allowed them 

 and the additional 10 per cent appro- 

 priated for road improvements a larger 

 amount than would come in from local 

 taxes under private ownership. 



5. The States are not as well pre- 

 pared, financially or otherwise, to 

 handle the National Forests as is the 

 Federal Government. If the Forests 

 were owned by the States and handled 

 in the real interests of the public, there 

 would be substantially the same system 

 of administration as today, at a greater 

 aggregate cost for supervision by a 

 considerable number of independent 

 State staffs of technical men. The 

 financial burden would be far too great 

 for the individual States to assume. 

 The result would be either poor ad- 

 ministration and lack of protection, or 

 a sacrifice of the public interests in 

 order to secure revenue to meet the 

 financial needs. 



6. The successful application of for- 

 estry demands a stable administrative 

 policy for long periods. This can be 

 secured far better under National than 

 under State control. 



7. A much higher standard of con- 

 structive and technical efficiency is 

 possible under National than under 

 State administration. The value of the 

 Forests to the public depends directly 

 on the skill with which scientific knowl- 

 edge is applied to the task of develop- 

 ing their highest productiveness. Both 

 in ability to carry on the research work 

 required for practical ends and in ability 

 to command professional services of 

 the first order the Government possesses 

 a striking advantage. 



8. As largely undeveloped property 

 the Forests need heavy investments of 

 capital for their improvement. Their 

 full productiveness can be secured in 

 no other way. The Government is now 

 investing yearly in the Forests a con- 

 siderable part of the appropriation 

 made for them. Even if the States did 

 not seek to make them sources of im- 

 mediate revenue, at whatever sacrifice 

 of their future possibilities, they would 

 be reluctant to expend much for their 

 development. 



9. The States both lack the civil 

 service system and standards of the 

 National Government and are exposed 

 to greater danger of being swayed by 

 private interests. In the hands of 

 spoilsmen demoralization would quickly 

 succeed the present high standards of 

 the Forest Service, while the intimate 

 relation of the Forests to the welfare 

 of greater numbers of individuals 

 would tend to make their administrative 

 control a highly coveted political prize. 

 At the same time the value of their 

 resources would certainly arouse a 

 cupidity which would be exceedingly 

 difficult to control. Scandalous malad- 

 ministration might easily follow. The 

 Federal Government is better watched, 

 farther removed from local influence, 

 more stable, and better equipped with 

 a non-political system and machinery. 



The underlying purpose of the pro- 

 posed transfer of the National Forests 

 to the States is really not to substitute 

 State for Federal control but rather to 

 substitute individual for public control. 

 Its most earnest advocates are the very 

 interests which wish to secure such 

 control. The object of the whole States 

 Rights movement as it affects the Na- 

 tional Forests is to transfer to private 



