!f llational responsi Jility in forestry ic perfectly 

 clear-cut, ore need "be no contusion with pr. equally clear- 

 cut responsibility of the states. And as to private forestry 

 liotle 01 value has so far been done that has net been an 

 outcome of public action through state or federal agencies, 

 or "both, The national w^rk will always "be the "backbone rf 

 American lorer.tr/, noi trenching or rr interfering with state 

 work or individual efforts but serving as a guarantee that 

 national needs which individual states can not meet will be 

 provided for on a national sc^la. 



"Underlying the forestry problem are !;wc fundamen- 

 tal considerations wnioh should be emphasized and reiterated 

 until thoroughly driven home. One is the public character 

 of forestry. Both in tha matter of a continued supply of 

 forest products and in. that cf the conservation cf water re- 

 sources the public welfare is at st?.ke. Secondly, s'cabil- 

 ity of policy and permanence of ownership are essential to 

 any successful attack on this great conservation problem. 



IT I am frequently asked as I travel about the coun- 

 try whether 1 am going to make important changes in forestry 

 policy. I was asked that very often in 1910, when I first 

 took office. I am asked it often this year- My an sue r 

 is that what 770 are seeking is not changes but the de rr elop- 

 ment of a permanent public enterprise with consistent and 

 stable policies. The nations! forests were set aside in 

 the recognition that the bulk of these le.ndc should be 

 handler permrnontly under piVblic protection rnd control. 



