112 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



" In no case, as far as the writer is aware, is there any 

 infection of sufficient magnitude to destioy a stand of 

 white pine of any appreciable size. * * * In most cases 

 the trees (infected) were growing in abnormal conditions 

 and were equally unhealthy from an unfavorable environ- 

 ment and were infested with all the other diseases and 

 insect enemies common to their kind. * * * Plantations 

 of native stock are practically free from the disease * * * 

 More harm than good has been dene by the unnecessary 

 agitation in the publicity campaign so systematically car- 

 ried on at a great expense exciting people over a subject 

 about which enough is not yet known by experts them- 

 selves. * * * We have millions of trees in our nurseries 

 ready to go out, and all at once under the guise of public- 

 spirited cooperation, and before there has been sufficient 

 evidence, a campaign is set in motion to discourage and 

 thwart all our laudable reforestation endeavors. * * * 

 It is to be hoped that the average citizen will go ahead 

 planting white pine as enthusiastically as ever." 



This same official, after attending the first conference 

 in 1909 in New York to consider the suppression of the 

 blister disease, not only failed to warn the public of the 

 danger, but in a bulletin issued in 1910 included a list of 

 European nurserymen from whom white pines could be 

 imported, heading this list with the name of J. Heins 

 Sonne (Sons), Halstenbeck, Germany, the very firm whose 

 diseased stock had given occasion for calling the confer- 



ence. And the state which has suffered the most and has 

 apparently been the center of infection for surrounding 

 states, is the one whose citizens received this guidance 

 and advice, and who are now urged to continue enthusi- 

 astically planting white pine, and "to leave the problem 

 of its protection from diseases and insects to be looked 

 after by technically trained officials." 



State foresters who have been technically trained in for- 

 estry have in every instance met the situation courage- 

 ously and wisely. They realize that until the nation and 

 the states affected have shown the possibility of control- 

 ling this disease, that the planting of white pine is at- 

 tended with extreme risk, and they are willing to sacri- 

 fice a few thousand or million white pines in nursery stock 

 rather than run the risk of reproach at a future period for 

 neglect to warn the prospective tree planter. The wiiite 

 pine, while our best, is not our only northern pine. Until 

 this menace is removed, safety can only be secured by 

 mixing red or Norway pine with the white pine in planta- 

 tions, or discontinuing its planting altogether. 



Meanwhile, the efforts of the American Forestry As- 

 sociation will be continued, and it is hoped that all friends 

 of forestry will unite in an endeavor to secure from Con- 

 gress an adequate appropriation, and from the states the 

 necessary legislation and financial aid in overcoming this 

 disease and preserving to our American civilization the 

 white pine, the noblest tree in all our eastern woodlands. 



SHALL WE CHEAPEN OUR NATIONAL PARKS? 



THIRTEEN bills are before Congress for the creation 

 of thirteen new National Parks, most of them from 

 areas already under administration as National 

 Forests. Some of these projects, notably that of Mount 

 Whitney in Alaska, are worthy of adoption. But unless 

 Congress is guided in this legislation by something more 

 than the passing whim of some congressman or his con- 

 stituents, and acts upon clearly defined principles, lasting 

 harm may be done to the cause of National Parks in 

 the west. 



Park uses satisfy the needs of but one side of human 

 nature the demand for recreation. Forest areas supply 

 equally important and vital needs, for shelter, clothing, 

 food, light and power, through the development and use 

 of the timber, grazing and waterpowers. 



The older civilized countries cannot afford and do not 

 attempt to exclude these commercial uses from large 

 tracts of productive forest land, in order that the aesthetic 

 sense alone may be gratified. To do this would mean an 

 economic waste which would take visible form in lack of 

 employment, poverty and hunger and the forced emigra- 

 tion of a considerable portion of the local population. 



But these communities do not ignore the finer sensi- 

 bilities of their people, nor overlook the recreational possi- 

 bilities of their forests. On the contrary, the public 

 woodlands are developed into extensive pleasure grounds 

 by paths and roads. Rest houses are provided for the 

 tourist, and every spot of exceptional beauty or interest 

 is carefully protected and made if possible more attractive. 



Our National Forests are devoted primarily to similar 

 economic ends. And what is true in Europe has already 



been demonstrated in their management that recreational 

 uses can be protected and developed on the same areas, 

 by the preservation of strips of timber along water courses, 

 lakes, roads and trails. In this way the highest possible 

 use is made of all portions of the area. Such a policy 

 means stability and permanence. 



But what about our National Parks ? Will our people, 

 educated by more than a generation of administration 

 for the Yellowstone, the Yosemite, and the Sequoia with 

 its grand trees, abandon the ideal which they have formed 

 of vast spaces untouched by commercial greed, and permit 

 the utilization of the forests, the grazing of the forage by 

 sheep and cattle, and the harnessing of these waterpowers, 

 in these last remnants of our national heritage, the once 

 boundless western wilds? Such a policy is unheard of. 

 As a nation, we intend to hold these parks as they are, 

 and woe betide the influences which may seek to invade 

 them. In the words of Frederick Law Olmsted, one of 

 our foremost landscape architects, "The National Parks 

 are set apart primarily in order to preserve to the people 

 for all time the opportunity of a peculiar kind of enjoy- 

 ment and recreation not measurable in economic units, 

 and to be obtained only from the remarkable scenery 

 which they contain scenery of those primeval types 

 which are in most parts of the world rapidly vanishing 

 for all eternity before the increased thoroughness of the 

 economic use of the land. " 



The ideal here set forth rings true to our national 

 conceptions. It is going to be physically impossible, and 

 wholly undesirable, to attempt to segregate all of our 

 recreational areas as parks. There is not one of our 



