652 JOURNAI, OF' FORESTRY 



connection with the forest-school curriculum than that of other univer- 

 sity departments. 



(2) That the colleges of engineering and agriculture and the depart- 

 ments of botany, chemistry, physics, etc., that have tried to enter these 

 fields have made a comparative failure of it, unless the work was han- 

 dled by persons properly trained in forestry.'' 



(3) That, taken collectively, the forest schools are not properly ful- 

 filling all their functions unless they oflfer the same opportunities for 

 specialization in the so-called "allied fields," under conditions making 

 for the same high standard of instruction, as in silvicultural practice 

 and forest management. 



(4) That if the forest schools will train their students so as to cover 

 the field as outlined in (i) above, there is no danger of overcrowding 

 the profession for many years to come. In fact, there is a crying need 

 for specialists along various lines which it will take many years to fill. 



(5) That the term "forestry" has been too closely hedged in by its 

 literal meaning. The technical specialists of high standard developed 

 in the minor fields by the Forest Service and the forest schools are a 

 distinct product of the development of forestry in this country and 

 worthy of being recognized as professional foresters. 



(6) That the graduate schools of forestry have not as yet reached 

 the same standard as those of recognized high standing in other pro- 

 fessions, and that they will not until a clear differentiation between the 

 undergraduate and graduate work has been established. 



' The writer desires to emphasize that he does not include here institutions 

 like Cornell and California, where the work in forestry, although grouped under 

 the College of Agriculture, has been organized as distinct departments or divi- 

 sions under the direction of foresters of recognized high professional standing. 



