12 



HARDWOOD RECORD 



val woodlands of tliat region were rich and varied, and they covered 

 every part of the area. There were no prairies and no vacant places. 

 Even the wild Indians seem to have had few corn fields and pumpkin 

 ]iatches tiere. and the woods had never been extensively burned l)y 

 tlie savages, as was the case further east, south and west. Early 

 travelers, especially Peter Kalni and John Bartram, have left descrip- 

 tions of the splendid Pennsylvania forests jirevailing in their time. 



One hundred and si-\ty-five years have passed since then, and the 

 state's population has increased from two hundred thousand to seven 

 million, and the woods are still sufficient to supply a large part of 

 the people 's wants. The cover picture whicli illustrates this number 

 of Hardwood Becord is a Pennsylvania forest scene on the waters 

 of Allegheny river about one hundred miles northeast from Pitts- 

 burgh, and near the village of Nebraska. It is practically a primeval 

 forest, but a little culling has lieen done. There are hardwoods and 

 needle-leaf trees, internii.\ed as nature jilauted tlie:n. The hardwoods 

 include twenty or more species, with oak. beech, birch, and ma]ile ])re- 

 vailing. The soft woods consist |irinci|ially. perhaps wholly, of white 

 pihe and hemlock. 



Anything like accurate figures of annual lumber cut in Pennsyl- 

 vania have been kept only about sixteen years. Before that time ther-e 

 were a few estimates and many guesses. In 1880, according to gov- 

 ernment figures. Pennsylvania supjilied more lumber than any other 

 state, except Michigan, whicli was then at the zenith of its white pine 

 production. It is not improbable that if the whole period of the 

 country's history is considered. Pennsylvania has produced more lum- 

 ber than any other state. Lumbering has been a business there for 

 t^^" Inmilred years, and the end is not in sight. 



False Economy in Forestry 



AN ARAB VOKES A CAMIOL and a cow to a cart, but it is not a 

 good team, though it m.'iy be the best the bedouin can do with his 

 iunited resources. 



Some of the states in llicir attemjits to jirovide for their forests 

 are imitating the Arab. They harness a fore.ster to a game warden 

 »nd put the leading-rein on the warden. In spite of all good inten- 

 tions, it is not a team likely to do effective work. A number of states 

 have done this and have lived to repent it; yet. in spite of failures, 

 others are still trying to do it. 



Rfforts to conserve the state's forest resources are commendable; 

 enthusiasm in the cause is commendable; stejis taken with a sincere 

 purpose of accomplishing something arc connnendable; but when any 

 State supposes that it is jirovlding an efficient forestry department by 

 affixing a forester to the game warden 's office, it is laboring under a 

 delusion. It is a case of mistaken judgment, and failure will follow. 

 A forester's place is higher than a game warden's. The larger 

 field to be covered, the Jjreater responsibilities, the wider vision 

 re(|uired, the more complicated jiroblems to be worked (int. the more 

 com)ilete store of basic information demanded, all combine to jdace 

 upon a forester a line of duty whicii the game warden knows not of. 

 To place the forester in the subordinate place, and to curb his free- 

 dom of action and to discourage his initiative, amount to no less than 

 dooming his efforts to failure before he has taken his first step. 



The argument advanced by legislators in favor of having game and 

 forests uniler a single conunission and ])ractically under the same 

 man, is that one commission or one department is more economical 

 than two. Politicians shy from new jobs. They wish to avoid the 

 a]ipearance of multiplying commissions or positions, lest they are 

 accused of extravagance. They know the forests ought to be cared 

 for. The people have asked that steps be taken along that line. So 

 the legislature, with good intentions but with little information as to 

 results, attaches a forest service to the game warden's job. That 

 has been tried often enough and long enough, and there ought no 

 longer be any doubt of the outcome; yet the lesson has not been 

 learned. Kcoiuimy can be so cloi-e that it strangles what it is meant 

 to help. Experience has shown that only in rare instances has a 

 game wanlen or a game commission ever done anything to help 

 forestry. These men arc not hostile, but they do not have the proper 

 viewpoint, and they do not know how. They over-value the importance 

 iif wild game, iuid ffiil to .'ipiirei-iate the worth of the forests. That 



is natural from their tiaining .•md the consecpient rh:nnicl of 

 thought. 



A few years ago at a conservation nu^eting in Washington, T>. C, 

 a game warden of a southern state, who was also ex-officio forester, 

 delivered a pyrotechnic oration, on the glories of forestry, and declared 

 that his overpowering enthusiasm for the science Avas due to the fact 

 that forests shelter foxes, and fox hunting is the grandest gentle- 

 man 's sport in the world. That was a i)retty accurate exposition of 

 the ordinary game warden 's conception of forestry. It may not run 

 to fox hvmting. but it is apt to h<ild that game is the chief thing and 

 forests are supplementary only. It is into hands of men with such 

 inade(piate conceptions of the question that some states are willing 

 to place the present and future of their forest resources with the 

 attendant complex problems. 



Some states, after regrettable mistakes and ex|)ensive experiments, 

 have found their bearings and have divorced forestry from game 

 wardens ; but others are willing to continue experiments along the 

 biick tracks of states which have discovered their errors and turned 

 from them. The legislatures of » nundier of states which possess 

 vast forest wealth and possibilities, continue to labor iimler the delu- 

 sion that the forest problem is of so little import.incc that some 

 man who is not a fore.st-er and probably not even a lumberman, can 

 handle it as a side line. Railroads arc in charge of railroad men; 

 agriculture is in the hands of farmers; colleges are managed by 

 educators, politics by ])oliticians, churches by preachers, and forestry 

 ought to be ir. the hands of foresters. 



Hardly an Ideal Patriotism 



SO.MK OF OUR KK1I';.\D« across the bordci- on the North seem 

 to get a good measure of satisfaction from having )^ut one over 

 on the shrewil Yankee, The imposition of the 7 to ]ier cent war tax, 

 (and it certainly is an imjiosition on the exporter of American lum- 

 ber to be comjielled to either absorb the tax or pass up the .sales), 

 presents quite a serious difliculty to ex))orters of American hardwoods 

 who have counted more or less on the Canadian markets .-is a ))artial 

 outlet for their lumber. 



Ostensibly the tax is lor the purpose of assisting in financing the 

 war moves of England, ami iniismuch as Canadians and not .Amer- 

 icans are directly interested in giving this assistance, it would seem 

 at least a part of logical patriotism for them to raise no objection to 

 absorbing the tjix themselves. It is illogical and tmreasoliable to ex- 

 ]iect the American ex|iorters to further detract from the narrow mar- 

 gin of profit" from hardwood lumber at present by forcing them to 

 deduct a tax from the charges, thereby cutting the profit on the car to 

 the vanishing point. It is not at all likely that this is the general 

 practice, but the issue has been raised by certain Canadian concerns 

 who have made purchases of American hardwood lumber, and in one 

 case the charge amounted to $45 on a single carload, making the sale 

 jjractically a losing jirojiosition. This firm has since ])i'actically given 

 up all efforts to secure Canailian business. 



Patriotism as considered in the terms of vocal ability is one thing, 

 and patriotism as considered in the terms of dollars ami cents is 

 another. Evidently in those instances where the Canadian importer 

 has insisted upon the American exporter absorbing his (the Can- 

 adian's) share in the burden of war, the former type of patriotism 

 has beeii much more attractive than the latter. This way of looking 

 at the matter from the Canadian side is fortunately not at ;ill the 

 general viewpoint, in fact, it can be said that these exanqdes are in- 

 frequent. However, the spectacle presented by even one such instance 

 cannot be looked uiion as at all flattering. 



H.MiDwooD Recoud is not at all famili;ir with the comlitions sur- 

 rounding the imposition of tax, nor does it know whether or not 

 these conditions make any provision for the tax being collected auto- 

 matically from the exporter. Regardless of this, howevei', even if 

 such provision were part of the enactment, it would really be a very 

 simple matter to make some private arrangement whereby the Can- 

 adians would insist iqmn the American, who shonhl have nothing to 

 do with tax whatever, being relieved of any a<'tual obligations. This 

 course would seem but the part of ordinary patriotism and fair 

 dealing. 



