FOREST RELATIONS BETWEEN THE EAST AND THE WEST 



1055 



niaiiai,nn,i; large forest resources, Ijut it follows the same 

 general principles. 



It has not Ijeen an easy struggle to reach this broad 

 standpoint. An organization which contains all elements, 

 East and West, contains many viewpoints to reconcile. 

 We are not immune from factional dissensions when such 

 controversial matters as states' right, national control, 

 water-power, and the development of Alaska align our 

 people into different camps who would wish to commit 

 the Association unreservedly to their factional views and 

 are far from satisfied with neutrality. And you must 

 remember that in many Eastern States there is nowhere 

 nearlv the accord between lumbermen and foresters that 

 your organization has brought about on this coast. The 

 old misunderstanding still clogs progress. The old and 

 narrow conception of forestry is not dead, and its ex- 

 ponents have honor and following, and, on the other 

 hand, there are members who are not disposed to be lib- 

 eral to their purel}- nature-loving brethren and who can 

 look on forestry only from a narrow standpoint. The 

 American Forestry Association has, however, insisted 

 for several years, and I hope will permanently do so, 

 that the Association as an institution shall stand with- 

 out timidity for those sane practical improvements in 

 forest conditions that producer and consumer can and 

 must work for to mutual advantage. It recognizes that 

 forestry is an industry limited by economic conditions, 

 and that private owners should be aided and encouraged 

 by investigations, deinonstrations and educational work, 

 since they cannot be expected to practice forestry at a 

 financial loss. It urges forest taxation reform, removing 

 unwise burdens of taxation from owners of growing 

 timber. It believes in closer utilization, in logging and 

 manufacturing without loss to owners, and in aid to lum- 

 bermen to achieve this. It demands ecjual protection to 

 the lumber industry and to public interests in legislation, 

 recognizing that lumbering is as legitimate and necessary 

 as the forests themselves. 



To these ends the Association devotes its publications, 

 its committees, and its other means of influL-nce. lUit it 

 also realizes that to do so intelligently and effectively it 

 must be competently advised. This is why its officials 

 and directors include not only State and federal offfcials 

 and men from forest schools and laboratories and leaders 

 in finance and business, such as C. F. Quincy, of New 

 York, and also such men as Col. E. G. Griggs, of Ta- 

 coma; Capt. J. B. White, of Kansas City; Joseph N. 

 Teal, of Portland; Col. W. R. Brown, of New Hamp- 

 shire; Charles Lathrop Pack, of New Jersey; J. E. 

 Rhodes, of the Southern Pine Association ; E. A. Ster- 

 ling, of the National Lumber Manufacturers, and E. T. 

 Allen, of your organization. And in its advisory board 

 are representatives from the Northern Pine Manufac- 

 turers, the National Box Manufacturers, the National 

 \\'holesale Lumber Dealers and half a dozen similar 

 trade organizations. 



This leads me, after perhaps too long a preamble, back 

 to my title — the relations between Eastern and Western 

 organizations as we hope to see them. By no means is 



the .\mcrican Forestry Association to be considered 

 Eastern. It is not so in spirit. Only accident, which 

 you should remedy, makes it so in proportionate mem- 

 bership. But to the extent that you consider it so because 

 of this membership, let us classify it with Eastern organi- 

 zations who can extend assistance to the West through 

 closer relations. 



As I see it, forestry and forest industry alike and to- 

 gether are in the travail pains of a new birth in public 

 economy. The titles of talks to be made here today, at 

 a forestry meeting, are more significant than anything I 

 can say. Everywhere we see the same urgent need being 

 emphasized — the need first for analysis of a recognized 

 weakness, second for giving this analysis wide publicity, 

 and third for help in applying some new and radical 

 1 emedy. 



If this is true, we must work together. Whether it 

 be in Congress, in individual States, in the public mind, 

 or in the minds of lumbermen and foresters, every move 

 which aft'ects this situation affects forest welfare both 

 East and West. Successful solution of the problem will 

 be hard enough to reach at best. It is beyond hope if the 

 fjublic mind and the legislative mind is confused by 

 counter-claims and accusations purporting to represent 

 consumer against producer, forestry against lumbering, 

 government against industry, State against individual, 

 and East against West. West and East united will be 

 potent in influence and in power for good and by thor- 

 ough nnitual understanding and cooperation we can do 

 much to forward our common interests. 



I have not time to catalogue all specific illustrations, 

 but a few will show what I mean. Take questions of 

 national legislation. I believe it the duty of forestry or- 

 ganizations to teach the fundamentals of forest eco- 

 nomics, to urge a national forest policy which shall make 

 the most of all forest resources, public or private, both 

 as a source of supply to the consumer and as employment 

 for industry. This involves the disposal of public timber, 

 national and State, in competition with private timber; 

 it involves the terms under which the industry may or- 

 ganize to accomplish economical distribution and disposal 

 of product, and, it doubtless involves complicated ques- 

 tions of domestic and over-sea transportation. How can 

 you and we use our respective influence in these matters 

 patriotically, wisely, and to the best eft'ect without closer 

 cooperation than we have today? 



Or take State legislation. The influence of State legis- 

 lation is not confined to the borders of the State enacting 

 it. Eastern State legislation is liable to affect either your 

 business in that State, or it may afford a precedent for 

 legislation in your own State, or in some way have a 

 reflective influence on interests in your State. This is 

 equally true of strictly forestry legislation and of indus- 

 trial legislation 'under whicli forest products are manu- 

 factured or sold. 



Or take the expenditure of public moneys, whether by 

 States or by the nation. Appropriations for the protec- 

 tive work of the Forest Service in the West, or for State 

 protection or the purchase of cut-over lands, are matters- 



