TRENDS AND POLICIES 217 



More than 27,000 men are employed permanently or temporarily 

 in our State Forest organizations, of whom only about 350 are tech- 

 nically trained foresters. It is possible that gradually more trained 

 personnel will be employed. Pennsylvania has more than 4000; North 

 Carolina, about 4000; Tennessee, about 4000; New York, 3000; Vir- 

 ginia, 1400; West Virginia, 9000; Washington, 386 men in their for- 

 estry organizations, a very large proportion of whom are part-time 

 men engaged principally on forest-fire protection. 



4. TRENDS AND POLICIES 



Within recent years there has been a noteworthy expansion in the 

 acquisition of State Forests and Parks, in better systems of fire and 

 pest control, and in the reforestation of idle, burned, or submarginal 

 lands. Facilities for recreation which include hunting and fishing have 

 also been largely extended. The Civilian Conservation Corps pro- 

 gram has greatly stimulated several of these activities. In order to 

 obtain some of these 200-men camps, it was necessary for the states 

 to own the lands on which these men were worked. Since the organi- 

 zation of the Corps over 600,000 acres have been added to State Parks 

 alone, and many hundred thousand acres have been added to the 

 area of State Forests. 



Many states contain both Federal and State Forests, among them 

 Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Vermont, New Hamp- 

 shire, Idaho, Colorado, Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas. In some 

 states, local authorities are opposed to further extension of National 

 Forests within their boundaries. Generally, however, various states 

 have welcomed the purchase and establishment of federal forests. 

 From a broad viewpoint, the Federal Government should acquire the 

 more remote, inaccessible, poorer, and mountain lands for interstate 

 watershed and water-flow protection, whereas the smaller units, the 

 more accessible and better forest lands, should be acquired by the 

 states. Some foresters think that a very large share of our forest 

 lands should be owned and managed by such federal agencies as the 

 Forest Service, National Park Service, and Indian Service. Others 

 contend that a proper balance should be maintained between federal 

 and state ownership. Still others believe that the further extension 

 of federal ownership is undesirable within some states. The question 

 of federal versus state rights is involved. Where both State and 

 National Forests are found within a single state, there should be a 

 coordination of policies and objectives. This is usually and happily 

 the case, as both agencies are seeking the same common good and 

 welfare of the people. 



