760 A NATIONAL PLAN FOR AMERICAN FORESTRY 



timber in accordance with the methods of forestry but also from those 

 who wished it done. For, as foresters were quick to point out, the 

 plans for utilizing the timber ran quite contrary to sound principles 

 of forestry practice. The Forest Commission made the mistake of 

 trying to devise and put into effect plans for timber growing and 

 harvesting without technical experience or outside advice. The 

 State had not succeeded in creating an organization meriting public 

 confidence either in its competence to apply practices of forestry 

 wisely or in its ability to maintain high standards of integrity. Imme- 

 diately after the constitutional amendment was adopted Garden 

 and Forest (a publication conducted by Prof. Charles S. Sargent) 

 said in comment: 



No doubt the adoption of this amendment was made easier by the revelation 

 of corruption in the administration of the forest lands which had been made during 

 the week by the comptroller of the State. These revelations show that there 

 has been fraud and bribery in the transfer of lands and much cutting of timber 

 in the State forests which was not only illegal but the result of conspiracy between 

 trespassers and public officers. The adoption of this amendment certainly 

 demonstrates an increased interest in the subject of forestry, and it may relieve 

 the forests from some danger. Nevertheless, we consider it a misfortune that 

 such a provision should be imbedded as a principle in the fundamental law of the 

 State. It assumes (1) that there is no such thing as rational and conservative 

 forestry, or (2) that a civilized American community cannot be trusted to 

 organize and develop any such a system of forest practice, either because our 

 people lack the intelligence to do this in a scientific way, or because they lack the 

 moral fiber to administer such a trust without official knavery and peculation. 



FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF FOREST ADMINISTRATION IN NEW 



YORK, TO 1915 



But the people of the State of New York had still to learn that a 

 legislative decree, even when clothed with supreme authority through 

 its embodiment in a constitutional amendment, is not self -enforcing. 

 That public sentiment throughout the State was whole-heartedly in 

 favor of saving the Adirondack Forest and building up a great con- 

 solidated State park for public use is unquestionable. Practically 

 the entire press of the State backed the policy. It was not the 

 absence of public interest, but the presence of private interest, that 

 made the outcome uncertain. 



Public property of any kind that is worth getting hold of inevitably 

 invites predatory attack, as honey draws bees. Because the people 

 of New York felt that they could not safely leave the destinies of the 

 State park within the power of the legislature to determine and 

 modify, they set up the powerful safeguard of the constitutional 

 amendment. To bring about its passage by the Constitutional 

 Convention of 1894, and subsequently to watch over its observance, 

 influential organizations had entered the field. Among these was 

 the Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks. The fifth 

 annual report of this association, covering the year 1905, set forth the 

 results of an investigation initiated by the governor in view of certain 

 findings which the association had laid before him. The report said : 



As the official investigation progressed, the facts already gathered by the 

 association's assistant secretary in his personal visit to the woods were more than 

 confirmed. It was found that between 15 million and 16 million board feet of 

 timber had been removed unlawfully from State land during the preceding year 

 with the knowledge of the authorities whose duty it was to prevent it, and that 

 it was done under a well-understood system of friendly cooperation by which the 

 trespassers were permitted to go through a form of confessing judgment and 



