on the work it has so far done through its Forestry Committee and 

 through the Chief Forester of the Commission, who deserves unstinted 

 praise for his active push, persistency and efficiency. 



The Commission has to its credit, first of all, the inauguration 

 of most thorough control over forest fires along railways, which was 

 brought about through co-operation with the Railway Commission 

 and with Provincial and Dominion authorities. In this connection, 

 it has to its credit the publication of some three volumes of discussion 

 on means of suppressing fires and has successfully stimulated private 

 endeavour in this direction. 



In this connection, also, the Commission has made an extensive 

 study and demonstration of the result of cutting and subsequent 

 fires on cut-over lands with regard to reproduction. This study 

 was made on a 2,000 square mile sample, the Trent watershed, 

 and a similar investigation has been made in British Columbia, 

 showing that our optimistic anticipations of natural replacement 

 of the valuable timber without human assistance are largely doomed 

 to disappointment. 



The Commission was very properly engaged early in ascertaining 

 the status of our forest resources and has completed and published 

 exhaustive forest surveys of two provinces. Nova Scotia and British 

 Columbia, and has surveyed part of a third, Saskatchewan. It has 

 been also instrumental in bringing about, encouraging and aiding 

 stock-taking in a fourth province. New Brunswick. 



These are all legitimate and praiseworthy activities of the 

 Commission, whose functions are largely educative. But I would 

 have particularly applauded the latest development of the Commis- 

 sion's forestry work, namely, the establishment of permanent sample 

 plots to study in detail the results in reproduction and growth and 

 different treatment and logging of our pulpwoods. This work has 

 been conducted by Dr. Howe, in co-operation with several paper 

 companies. The readiness with which this co-operation (financial 

 and otherwise) was secured is proof of the practical value of this 

 investigation. Indeed, this is the first systematic attempt to lay 

 a basis for silvicultural practice, without which the forester is helpless, 

 and the Commission is the best agency for securing this fundamental 

 knowledge, as could be readily argued. 



That this work of the Commission is done largely in co-operation 

 with the staff and students of the Faculty of Forestry of Toronto 

 University is, of course, specially gratifying to me. 



There is one more important political direction in which the 

 Commission, in my opinion, should exert itself, namely, the transfer 

 (){ the forest resources of the Middle Provinces to those provinces. 

 Such transfer would undoubtedly lead to the exploitation of these 

 resources. Forestry is provision for the future, and such provision 

 means present curtailment of revenue or present outlay for the sake 

 of future revenue. Will and can the provinces afford such a financial 

 policy? 



Wishing >'()U a successful meeting, 



Sincerely yours, 



B. E. Fernow 



