Editorial 



PUBLIC PLAYGROUNDS THREATENED 



IN an editorial published in February, last year, we 

 called attention to a peculiarly vicious bill introduced 

 in the last session of Congress, whose purpose was to 

 rob the people of the West of their title to, and free use 

 of lake shores, camping sites and summer recreation spots, 

 by permitting these lands to be acquired in perpetuity by 

 private owners. Failing of passage at that time, this bill 

 has now been reintroduced and is known as Senate Bill 

 106."i. and Mouse Hill 319, which are identical. The bill 

 provides that any citizen over 20 years of age may file on 

 public lands, whether or not they are part of a National 

 Forest, and acquire absolute title within three years by 

 merely spending a two months' summer vacation each 

 year on the property and investing at least $300 in im- 

 provements. The area which one person can so acquire 

 is ten acres. 



The area of National Forests is some 160,000,000 acres. 

 Throughout this great domain the acreage of lake and 

 siream frontage suitable for summer camps is probably 

 but a small fraction of one per cent. Water is the one 

 indispensable accessory to the summer camp or home. 

 These portions of the public playground are more valua- 

 ble to the people for this purpose than all the remaining 

 area put together. They are the jewels of the public 

 domain. 



Under this bill these choice spots could be rapidly 

 filched from the public and "no trespass" signs would 

 forever bar us and our children's children from the enjoy- 

 ment of lake and stream, except through the medium of 

 the "resort," acquired by the enterprising locator at 

 points of vantage and developed to exploit the seekers for 

 outdoor recreation. 



But it may be asked : Have not all of us an equal chance 

 to secure a choice bit of land of our own, and should not 

 these public lands be given to those who can use them? 

 This is the old doctrine of private appropriation appear- 

 ing this time in bold defiance of the most widely accepted 

 of all public policies that parks are for the people at 

 large and that private encroachment will not be per- 



mitted. As well say that the Yosemite and Yellowstone 

 should be dealt out piecemeal to the most agile applicants 

 as to permit this grab of the remaining public pleasure 

 spots on the National Forests. 



But there is this distinction while the National Parks 

 are kept wholly for the transient tourist and camper, the 

 National Forests may legitimately be opened to the sum- 

 mer resident who wishes to live in a house of his own 

 construction, and this can be done without parting with 

 the title to land or interfering with the rights of the 

 camper. By a law passed in 1915, leases of land for 

 thirty years for this purpose are permitted on National 

 Forests. The size of the area is determined by local 

 factors. Wherever they are needed, areas are set aside 

 solely for camping sites, and withheld from leasing. 

 Under this law, in one locality 581 summer homes have 

 been built on an area of 129 acres. 



By contrast, under the proposed bill, thirteen persons 

 could acquire the entire area and either expel or lease 

 to the remaining 568 occupants. By the terms of this 

 contemplated measure no one could acquire title to land 

 who was unable to spend at least two months each year 

 upon his homestead and as there is no possibility of 

 developing an agricultural living on such small areas, 

 this would mean the practical exclusion of all but those 

 of abundant means who can afford a vacation of this 

 length. Furthermore, this law would sanction the acqui- 

 sition of land anywhere on a National Forest, for any 

 purpose whatever, whether it be for the establishment of 

 undesirable resorts or the blocking of some point of out- 

 let for timber, and no questions may be asked. Two 

 months' residence each year for three years and a pay- 

 ment of $1.25 per acre secures title. 



The sponsors of such legislation may be deceived as to 

 its character and purpose, but the public is keenly alive 

 to dangers threatening possessions so highly prized. The 

 American Forestry Association hangs out the danger 

 signal, and the inscription, equally legible to legislators 

 and to land grabbers, reads "Hands off." 



The Weeks Law Hearing 



OFFICERS of the American Forestry Association, 

 representatives of other forestry and conservation 

 organizations, and delegates from most of the New 

 England and Southern Appalachian States, appeared 

 before the Agricultural Committee of the House at 

 Washington. January 28, and for three hours presented 

 arguments in favor of extending the appropriation for 

 the purchase of forest lands for the protection of the 



112 



headwaters of navigable streams under the provisions of 

 the Weeks law. The committee was deeply interested, 

 and each member asked a number of questions relative 

 to work done under the Weeks law in the past five years, 

 and the necessity for continuing the purchase. 



The presentation of arguments was directed by Per- 

 cival S. Ridsdale, executive secretary of the American 

 Forestry Association, and Governor Locke Craig, of 



