114 



VO PROFESSIONALS 



Congress. Why don t you lead your 

 industry out of the wilderness? 



Christopher M. Granger 



Mr. Orell s Reply 



Dear Chris: 



Your letter of July 2, 1965, re 

 garding the so-called industry oppo 

 sition to Forest Service land acqui 

 sition and exchange has been on my 

 desk for some time now. The delay 

 has been due to my wanting to be 

 able to detail the background of the 

 Minnesota situation with which I 

 was not familiar and which has the 

 genesis of the Secretary s remarks 

 regarding industry attitude. 



While your frankness is certainly 

 appreciated, I must confess consid 

 erable surprise at your assumption 

 that the industry is opposed to For 

 est Service land acquisition as such 

 and even more particularly that it 

 opposes land exchange. 



There is also surprise on my part 

 at your suggestion that the industry 

 has not advanced any constructive 

 suggestions relating to the national 

 forests apart from their own inter 

 ests. If you will again read com 

 pletely the Secretary s comments be 

 fore the NLMA meeting in Wash 

 ington in May, you will find he has 

 detailed constructive steps being 

 taken by the industry jointly with 

 the Forest Service. One cannot help 

 but obtain from the total talk an 

 overall appreciation of improved re 

 lationships with the industry due to 

 its constructive approach in recent 





years. Ed Cliff would verify this. 



As to the specific charge that the 

 industry is opposed to government 

 land acquisition and exchange, the 

 Secretary had been misled and this 

 also appears to be the case in your 

 own instance. 



On the matter of land acquisi 

 tion, it is the attitude of the major 

 portion of private forest industry 

 management and foresters that the 

 present federal acreage Forest 

 Service and other which comprises 

 more than one-third of the total 

 land area of the country, should not 

 and must not be expanded. Indus 

 try feels very strongly that a total 

 expansion of major proportions in 

 the acreage held by government 

 would not be in the national inter 

 est. This is not, however, a stand 

 against acquisition for specific pur 

 poses. Any acquisition must be con 

 sidered in the light of the total land 

 pattern in the immediate areas and 

 in the country as a whole. To put it 

 succinctly, the forest industries in 

 tend to work towards the limiting 

 of acquisition by all agencies of the 

 federal government to those in 

 stances of specific and demonstrable 

 national interest. Where public ac 

 quisition is necessary for local pur 

 poses it should be by the states. 



As a corollary to this approach, it 

 is also the intention of industry to 

 encourage industry, state and fed 

 eral agencies to consolidate present 

 ownerships through the promotion 

 of intelligent and expeditious ex 

 change policies. This, too, is in the 



Bernard L. Orel! 

 Weyerhaeuser Company 



public interest and in this instance 

 the public agencies must take the 

 lead. 



As a further corollary, recogniz 

 ing that exchange will not handle 

 all of the problems of private in- 

 holdings in the national forests, the 

 forest industry would go along with 

 acquisition of some of these inhold- 

 ings, provided there was also statu 

 tory authority and action in disposal 

 of isolated outholdings held by the 

 Forest Service and other federal 

 agencies. The industry will be work 

 ing toward this legislative goal, but 

 again its accomplishment would be 

 enhanced a great deal by Forest 

 Service recognition of the need 

 for such a program. This is also in 

 the public interest. 



With regard to the Weeks Act, as 

 you know, the original purpose 

 when it was passed was to provide 

 for the protection of watersheds ant. 

 production of timber. Required 

 was state enabling legislation be 

 fore becoming effective in the var 

 ious states. In one form or another 

 most of the states exceptions in 

 clude my own State of Washington- 

 have passed Weeks Act enabling leg 

 islation. At the present time, there 

 fore, in all but a few of the contig 

 uous forested states the Weeks Act 

 provides a blanket authority for ac 

 quisition by the Forest Service, pro 

 vided funds are available. The 

 Land and Water Conservation 

 Fund Act is expected to provide ex 

 tensive funds. 



(Turn to page 60) 



I A M II A D V 



