314 JOURNAL OF E'ORESTRY 



"back up foresters who, often single-handed, have had to meet the most 

 powerful opposition in their struggle for the public welfare. 



The officers of the Association are of course right in their theory 

 that it is their duty to educate the public to an interest in trees and 

 forests, by a popular magazine and by other means of publicity. But 

 this should be only one function. There has been a deep-seated criti- 

 cism of the Association among foresters, not because of disapproval 

 of its publicity work, but because it has ceased to be an efifective fight- 

 ing force in the various public issues, National and State, and because 

 in their efforts the foresters have not had it back of them with the 

 power of organized public sentiment to aid them in carrying on. These 

 men, who had a right to vigorous support of the Association, have seen 

 its officers stand aside in the big issues, refuse to fight, remaining 

 neutral in vital crises, negative as an influence when a public contro- 

 versy was involved. 



A few years ago the big issue was whether the National Forests 

 should be turned over to the States and the whole system broken 

 down. Where was the American Forestry Association? Its President 

 refused to take a stand on that issue. We won the fight, but with no 

 help from the Association. Today the big issue is whether the public 

 will exercise over private timberlands the control and regulation neces- 

 sary to prevent permanent injury to the interests of State and Nation. 

 For months the Association declined to take a stand on the proposals 

 of the Forest Service. It is now backing the Snell Bill which is drawn 

 in such adroit language as to be capable of more than one interpre- 

 tation. I interpret it as a bill calling for definite public regulation. I 

 understand that others do not see in it any regulation of private tim- 

 berlands except perhaps in connection with fire protection. Certainly 

 some of the backers of the Snell Bill are on record as against any 

 mandatory legislation except in fire protection. I do not know where 

 the Association stands on this issue, for it has avoided taking a clear- 

 cut stand. These are but two national issues in which it has failed. 

 An enumeration of others would be a list of the forest struggles during 

 the last few years in which foresters have stood for principles, often 

 to the sacrifice of good will and position, and without any real backing 

 from the American Forestry Association. 



A new step has now been taken. The Board of Directors has 

 deliberately taken action to change the democratic and representative 

 character of the organization. It voted for a change of by-laws that 



