COMMENTS. 



In a speech at Yellowstone Park, Walter A. Fisher, Secretary 

 of the Interior, rather clearly stated that it was his conviction that 

 the Forest Service should be in the Department of the Interior. 

 This, coming from a man who is supposed to be friendly to the 

 interest of the Forest Service, leads to rather serious doubts as 

 to whether the position of the Forest Service is as stable in the 

 Government administration as could be wished. If the question of 

 the transfer of the Service is raised at the coming session of Con- 

 gress, it will at least give an opportunity for the opponents of 

 Government forestry to attempt a change, in the hooe that it 

 will be detrimental ; while the friends of the Service may have 

 difficulty in proving that the present organization is a correct one. 

 To all who are familiar with the situation, it is evident that the 

 remarkable development in National Forest work has followed — 

 in part, at least — from its being carried under the Department of 

 Agriculture. On the other hand, this department is fundamen- 

 tally a scientific one whose function is mainly advisory, with little 

 administrative authority outside of its own departmental func- 

 tions. Yet, under it has developed the Forest Service, which has 

 administrative jurisdiction over large areas of public land. In 

 the Department of Interior, on the other hand, is vested the con- 

 trol of most of our public lands, and, theoretically, the Forest 

 Service would logically fall under its jurisdiction. If all our 

 government departments were the smooth-running, well-man- 

 aged organizations they should be, it would make very little dif- 

 ference in our forest policy whether the Forest Service was trans- 

 ferred to the Interior Department. But, unfortunately, the tradi- 

 tions of the Department of the Interior, and particularly the Land 

 Office, are against an able business administration of our public 

 lands such as the Forest Service has inaugurated, and the trans- 

 fer to this department would probably retard the development of 

 a national forest policy to a very great extent. 



The very thoughtful and readable article of Dr. Jentsch, one of 

 the sanest foresters of Germany, made accessible by Mr. Dunlap 

 in this issue, brings home to us the enormous advantage under 



