The Conservation Congress and National 



Forest Conservation 



A reply by Ex-President Henry Sturgis Drinker to President Pack's article on this subject in the June number of 



American Forestry. 



TO the Editor of American Forestry : 

 I recently received from our esteemed Presi- 

 dent. Mr. Charles Lathrop Tack, a letter under 

 date of June 19, in which he said: "You have seen my 

 article in regard to the national forests from the national 

 point of view, in the June number of American For- 

 estry. I think it would be a good idea if you felt that 

 you could publish something in the next number; and I 

 am sure that Mr. Ridsdale would be glad to afford you 

 an opportunity." 



I had not seen Mr. Pack's article at the time I received 

 his above letter. The June number of American For- 

 estry was not then out. I wish I had seen the article 

 before its publication so that I might have placed at 

 Mr. Pack's service the information on the same matter, 

 that, pursuant to his request, I now place at the disposal 

 of American Forestry. After seeing Mr. Pack's article 

 I wrote him that I would act on his suggestion, and in 

 replying he wrote me (June 22), "I hope you will write 

 an article for American Forestry as you have indicated. 

 It ought to be of help to the good cause," and this article 

 is published only after its submission to Mr. Pack, and 

 as the result of my conference with him. 



Mr. Pack's article in June Forestry was apparently 

 based on a feeling that the resolution on public lands 

 quoted by him from the resolutions adopted by 

 the recent conference of the Conservation Congress held 

 in Washington May 2 to 4, was, as Mr. Pack expressed 

 it, "diametrically opposed to the policy of National For- 

 ests, and in favor of their dissolution." This is a mis- 

 conception. The resolution does not refer in words, nor 

 was it intended by the Committee on Resolutions to refer 

 by implication, in any way, to the National Forests. 



It is in fact merely a repetition of the resolution in the 

 same words recommended by the Resolutions Committee 

 of the Conservation Congress held at Washington in No- 

 vember, 1913, of which committee, Capt. J. 15. White, ex- 

 president of the Congress, was chairman, and was 

 adopted with the other resolutions of that Congress at 

 its final session held November 20, 1913, and published 

 with the other resolutions of that Congress, after its 

 adjournment. That it was the same resolution is shown 

 by the following from the records : 



United States with respect to 

 the disposition of its unap- 

 propriated public lands is op- 

 posed to the making of a direct 

 revenue thereby beyond the 

 expense incident to the sur- 

 veying, classification and dis- 

 posing of such lands, but on the 

 contrary that said policy is in- 

 tended to encourage and pro- 

 mote the settlement and devel- 

 opment thereof, and that any 

 act of Congress, or any admin- 

 istrative construction thereof, 

 which is not in harmony with 

 this policy, does an injustice 

 to the new States by placing 

 them on an unequal footing 

 with the original States and 

 by discouraging and prevent- 

 ing the settlement of such new 

 States and the development of 

 their resources." 



Resolution on Land* as 

 adopted by the Fifth National 

 Conservation Congress in No- 

 vember. 1913. 



"That the established, tradi- 

 tional, and sound policy of the 



430 



Resolution on Lands as 

 adopted by the recent Confer- 

 ence of the National Conser- 

 vation Congress on May 4, 

 1916. 



"The established, tradi- 

 tional, ami sound policy of the 



United States with respect to 

 the disposition of its unap- 

 propriated public lands is op- 

 posed to the making of a direct 

 revenue thereby beyond the 

 expense incident to the sur- 

 veying, classification and dis- 

 posing of such lands; on the 

 contrary, said policy is in- 

 tended to encourage and pro- 

 mote the settlement and devel- 

 opment thereof, and any 

 act of Congress, or any admin- 

 istrative construction thereof, 

 which is not in harmony with 

 this policy, does an injustice 

 to the new States by placing 

 them on an unequal footing 

 with the original States and 

 by discouraging and prevent- 

 ing the settlement of such new 

 States and the development of 

 their resources." 



It will be seen that the resolutions are identical. A 

 careful reading of this resolution shows that it contains 

 no reference to the National Forests, which have been 

 duly "appropriated" and set aside by the Government 

 as such. The resolution relates wholly and in specific 

 terms only to "unappropriated" public lands of the 

 United States, and was intended, as it says, solely to 

 endorse a policy to encourage the settlement and devel- 

 opment of such unappropriated or unseated lands. 



The resolutions on our "Public Lands" adopted by 

 the Conservation Conference at Washington in May last 

 were offered by Samuel Herrick, Esq., a delegate to the 

 Conference or Congress of May, 1916, from South Da- 

 kota. Mr. Herrick was also a delegate from South 

 Dakota to the Congress of November, 1913. 



He was a member of the Committee on Resolutions of 

 both Congresses, and at that of 1913, he was appointed 

 by Capt. J. P>. White, chairman of the Committee on 

 Resolutions, a member of the Subcommittee on Lands, of 

 which subcommittee the late Henry C. Wallace, past 

 president of the Conservation Congress, was chairman. 

 Mr. Herrick prepared the resolution in question, and he 

 states that it was adopted in 1913 by the subcommittee, 

 and subsequently by the full Committee on Resolutions, 

 of which a large number were foresters, without dissent, 

 and the record shows that it was adopted by the Congress 

 on its presentation with the other resolutions at the final 

 session of the Congress of 1!)13. Mr. Herrick offered 

 this resolution anew in the Committee on Resolutions of 

 the Conference of the Conservation Congress held in 

 May last, deeming it well to have it reaffirmed, just as 

 the resolution recommending the taxation of growing 



