Forest Service Revenue and Organization 199 



The Forest Reserve Manual, published in 1903 by the General 

 Land Office, is of interest, and occasionally one sees expressions 

 ,which have even been handed down and incorporated in the 

 Forest Service Use Book and official instructions. For example 

 (p. 29), "a fire which can not be controlled by twenty to forty 

 men will run away from a hundred or even more men ..." 

 This certainly sounds familiar. Another example of progressive 

 work (on paper no doubt) was: "plans for the coming month. 

 Brief statement as to what work will be carried on . . ," (p. 

 57). 



The official description in this Manual regarding the organiza- 

 tion (p. 85 and following), showed that the inspector of Forest 

 Reserves "is superior officer in the field"; that superinten- 

 dents "act as local inspectors" and "he assists by suggestion and 

 advice the central office, as well as the local officers, and consults 

 with the supervisors and helps plan the work on the reserves." 

 According to the Manual, the supervisors were men "well 

 grounded and experienced in forest survey, timber estimating and 

 timber business ..." The head rangers "will act as technical 

 assistants to the forest supervisors . . . and will direct the 

 marking, cutting , . , and will inspect cutting and attend to 

 other Reserve work ; . . . ; they will act as superiors to 

 the ordinary rangers . . . ." Nominally, the forest rangers 

 were divided into three classes ; class one, $90 ; class two, $75 ; 

 class three, $60. But all men connected with this organization 

 had already learned that there was too much authority centralized 

 in Washington. As already emphasized, the Secretary of the 

 Interior went so far as to grant the right to repair local roads and 

 trails. He granted permits for hotels, stores, etc. He granted 

 grazing permits, but curiously enough, according to the Manual, 

 no grazing permits were issued unless it could be shown that no 

 damage would be done to the Reserve and the burden of proof 

 was placed upon the permittee. According to the Manual (p. 9), 

 "the grazing of sheep, goats and horses in herds is generally pro- 

 hibited . . .," but "cattle are generally allowed to graze in 

 all Reserves." How could such a mixture of rules, with the 

 centralized power in Washington, hope to be popular in the 

 West? It is true that a Grazing Association allotted the range, 

 subject to the recommendation of the superior who transmitted 

 the permits for issuance by the Secretary of the Interior; if there 



