67 



timbermen s organizations that the really vicious pres 

 sures and antagonisms have come. Year after year the 

 National Lumber Manufacturers Association representative 

 used to appear before Congress to oppose funds for timber 

 access roads, arguing that the operators could do the 

 job better and cheaper, ignoring the fact that their 

 program would lessen competition in bidding by eliminating 

 the small operator who hadn 1 t enough capital to build 

 roads. Actually this seemed to be one of their purposes. 



This same organization has stubbornly opposed 

 acquisition of forest land by the Forest Service. It 

 opposed the multiple use bill until wiser counsel within 

 its ranks prevailed. It tried to organize community 

 groups to turn the heat on the Forest Service to offer 

 more timber for sale, but this effort was almost entirely 

 a failure. In these and other ways it has tried to in 

 fluence Congress and the Secretaries of Agriculture to 

 curb or hamper or reverse the Forest Service, but has 

 almost always failed. 



At present the NLMA, through its public relations 

 affiliate, American Forest Products Industries, is 

 trying to get the states to withdraw consent to national 

 forest acquisition under the Weeks Law, which is the 

 general authority under which the Forest Service 



