EDWARD S. MASON 161 



regulating the use of natural resources in the interests of conservation. 

 These statutes fairly firmly identify conservation as the avoidance of 

 waste — any kind of waste. In the words of the Texas oil and gas con- 

 servation laws, "The production, storage or transportation of crude 

 petroleum oil or natural gas in such a manner, in such amount, or 

 under such conditions as to constitute waste is hereby declared to be 

 unlawful and is prohibited." ^ 



If, however, we push this notion of waste avoidance to its ultimate 

 conclusion the concept of conservation becomes very broad indeed. 

 To conserve would mean to economize and the theory of conservation 

 becomes the theory of ideal output. Or rather, since methods of pro- 

 duction as well as quantities of output are at issue, it becomes the 

 theory of ideal inputs with its central concern an optimum allocation 

 of resources among various uses. If the term is to be used this way it 

 may properly be asked why conservation has any particular relevance 

 to natural resource problems. 



Considerations of this sort have led economists to favor a much 

 narrower definition of conservation, one that is solely concerned with 

 the time pattern of resource use. One of the leading economic authori- 

 ties, Ciriacy Wantrup, defines conservation as a "redistribution of use 

 in the direction of the future." Its opposite, depletion, he defines as re- 

 distribution "in the direction of the present." ^ If this definition is 

 accepted, it is clear that a decision to conserve, i.e., to orient con- 

 sumption toward the future, may be wasteful and that a decision to 

 deplete may be economical. A shift in use rates in the direction of the 

 future could increase costs, either private or social, by more than 

 benefits are increased, and a shift in use rates toward the present could 

 do the reverse. Ciriacy says as much: "The concepts 'conservation,' 

 'depletion,' and 'state of conservation' carry no connotation of effi- 

 ciency or waste." ^ 



This is a perfectly defensible use of terms. But to me it does vio- 

 lence to the ordinary usage of language. Conservation, outside as well 

 as within the conservation movement, is a "good thing." It involves 

 choosing the better course of action and rejecting the worse. As I shall 



5 Acts 1934, 44th Legislature, Laws of Texas, Chap. 76, Sec. 2, Article 6014. 

 ^S. V. Ciriacy Wantrup, op. cit., p. 51. 

 7 Ibid., p. 53. 



