14 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



making forest land productive are not given greater consideration than 

 is being given today. One fault all down through the development of 

 forestry in this country so far has been too great indefiniteness too 

 few facts as to how to make forest lands productive and what may be 

 expected of efforts toward productiveness. Twenty years ago we 

 talked of clear-cutting and planting in the eastern forests, ten years 

 ago we were confident that the selection system applied on the basis 

 of a diameter limit was the right practice, today we may be back 

 again where we were twenty years ago in our ideas of what is right 

 silvicultural practice for the Adirondack forests. 



The lumberman who has cut with immediate and satisfactory finan- 

 cial return constantly in view has with very rare exceptions had no 

 idea of any practice except to clear cut and abandon the land to those 

 who might care to follow. In this statement we do not condemn the 

 lumberman of yesterday because we know that he represented a period 

 in the development of the Nation. The miner who left many thou- 

 sands of tons of coal in the ground because it was a bit inaccessible, 

 or the farmer who mined the fertility from his farm in the Eastern 

 States and moved westward to richer lands, are in the same class 

 with the lumberman who cuts with no thought except immediate profit 

 and no idea of responsibility to his neighbor and to his State. 



The foresters of this country during the past decade and more have 

 been somewhat at fault in their attempt to introduce silvicultural 

 methods into the cutting of the forest and into the treatment of cut-over 

 lands. We have been too definite, we have lacked facts, we have not 

 been able to tell the lumberman exactly what might happen under 

 his particular conditions or that he should use a certain method of 

 cutting or should treat his cut-over lands in a certain way. Coupled 

 with our indefiniteness we have been afraid in many instances to give 

 reasons for the faith that is in us. Sometimes it was fear of organiza- 

 tions or groups of men who are interested in recreation only in the 

 forest ; sometimes it was fear that if such facts as we have were told 

 the public without their proper education in the handling of the forest 

 that they might not agree and might cut off support for the work 

 being done. The time is now at hand when we shall go back as a 

 profession and as individuals in the profession if we cannot stand 

 aggressively for the securing of the facts we need and their proper 

 presentation to those concerned. 



It is with the idea that a discussion of the silvicultural treatment 

 of cut-over lands involving as it will a comparing of the experience 

 and knowledge of the individuals making up this gathering, that the 



