aiiiMimr 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



VOL. 27 



MARCH, 1921 



EDITORIAL 



I /*/ 



NO. 327 



Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll^ 



HOUSE COMMITTEE CONSIDERS FORESTRY PROGRAM 



T^HE underlying principles of the forest program in- 

 -" corporated in the so-called Snell forestry bill (H. R. 

 15327) received thorough airing before the House of 

 Representatives Committee on Agriculture the latter part 

 of January. Lack of time unfortunately prevented the 

 presentation of oral arguments covering the entire bill, 

 but briefs on all of the various sections were filed with 

 the Committee for incorporation in the printed report. 

 In the hearing itself only the first two sections, providing 

 for co-operation between the Federal Government and 

 the States in forest fire protection and forest renewal, 

 were covered. 



The two fundamental points brought out in the argu- 

 ments presented were that there is urgent need for the 

 immediate adoption of a comprehensive forest policy, 

 and that the problem is a national one in the solution 

 of which the Federal Government must take the lead- 

 ing part. Colonel Greeley, speaking in behalf of the 



Forest Service, pointed out convincingly that the devas- 

 tation of the forests has now reached a point where the 

 future of our timber supplies can not be left entirely to 

 the action of the private owner, whose guiding motive 

 is naturally financial gain, and where some degree of 

 public control over fire protection and methods of cutting 

 is essential for the public welfare. The Snell bill pro- 

 poses leaving such public control to the individual States, 

 working in co-operation with and assisted by the Federal 

 Government. Now that the Committee to which the 

 bill has been referred has heard both the pros and cons 

 of this proposal it is to be hoped that rapid progress can 

 be made in agreeing upon a practical program of legis- 

 lation. Certainly one of the first things which the special 

 session of Congress should take up is the consideration 

 of measures to safeguard the future timber supply of 

 the country. 



THE REDWOODS A NATIONAL POSSESSION 



TVTEXT in instant need to the saving of our National 

 *- ' Parks and Monuments from the determined effort to 

 invade them which commercial interests are now making 

 in Congress is that of holding back from the busy ax 

 examples of the remnants still remaining of the mag- 

 nificent redwood forests of the Pacific Coast. Both 

 National Parks and redwood forests are unique in the 

 whole world of nature. Both are necessary to the record 

 which it is this nation's great privilege to hand down 

 to the world's posterity. Both have extreme importance 

 to the science of today and especially of tomorrow. Both 

 are items of first importance in this nation's unique ex- 

 hibit to civilization. Already the practical results of 

 American nature conservation are the envy and the 

 model of sister nations in two hemispheres. 



The purpose of this editorial is to proclaim the fact 

 that the California redwoods are Californian only in 

 location and name. Essentially they are a priceless 

 national possession, as national as Yellowstone Lake, the 

 Washington Monument, the Grand Canyon or the Nation- 

 al Capitol. The movement to save them must be as 

 national as that mighty protest which is rolling up from 

 every State in these United States against the violation 

 of our National Parks. 



There is this important difference between the im- 



perilled situations of the National Parks and of the 

 remaining fragments of the redwood forests, that the 

 National Parks already are the possession of the nation 

 and the redwood forests are owned by lumber interests 

 which even now are wielding the ax and saw with the 

 utmost vigor. The one is a defensive movement, the 

 other aggressive; these forests must be acquired by pri- 

 vate and public purchase. 



Some day, for one thing, we must have a Redwoods 

 National Park. Director Stephen T. Mather, of the 

 National Park Service, has greatly helped to establish 

 the national character of the movement by his determined 

 work and personal contributions. So have such influential 

 easterners as Madison Grant, president of the New York 

 Zoological Society, and Henry Fairfield Osborn, presi- 

 dent of the American Museum of Natural History. 

 Nearly every State is furnishing its earnest workers. In 

 the far west men like William Kent, who gave the Muir 

 Woods to the nation, himself a lumberman, are giving 

 freely of their time and money. Mr. Kent's personal 

 contribution, like Mr. Mather's, was $15,000. 



But it is not proposed that private individuals should 

 contribute all the money needed for these purchases, 

 which may require a million or more before enough of 

 these lands are acquired. Californian counties adjoining 



