000 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



thorough!) demonstrated in the case of the buffalo, have 

 led to the widespread consideration of practical measures 

 for protection. 



This first took the form of game laws limiting the 

 hunting seasons, restricting the size of the bag, and for- 

 bidding commercial trafficking in game animals and birds. 

 I'.ut with the growing army of hunters, the restriction of 

 the native ranges, and the continued inefficacy of admin- 

 istration, animal and bird life continued to shrink at an 

 appalling rate. Lately a new and more promising line 

 of effort has been inaugurated, in the form of refuges or 

 sanctuaries, where the harried remnant of our wild 

 creatures may grow and multiply, secure in the protec- 

 tion of their overlords, who hold for them the power of 

 life or death. 



The greatest of these refuges is that established in 

 and surrounding the Yellowstone National Park, where 

 the American elk, largest of our deer species, may be seen 

 in herds numbering thousands. 



One of the most remarkable phenomena of these 

 refuges is the swift adaptation shown by the wild crea- 

 tures, and the almost complete disappearance of that 

 timidity upon which they formerly depended for their 

 very existence. Even the wild fowl, mallards and geese, 

 retaining their wariness during migration, learn that they 

 are safe in certain places and permit the approach of 

 their human enemies on protected lakes. 



The administration of these refuges for big grazing 

 animals like the elk demands constant and intelligent 



supervision. With the destruction of predatory carnivo- 

 rous animals, the elk soon increase, even to the point 

 where there is insufficient forage and starvation thins the 

 herds. Winter grazing is impossible on high slopes, and 

 the carrying capacity is limited to the number which can 

 survive the winter on such low lands or valleys as are 

 still open to them. Here they conflict with the encroach- 

 ing settlers on agricultural lands, and it is -now necessary 

 for the Government to purchase hay to preserve some 

 herds from extermination during this period. The elk. 

 of course, consume forage that would otherwise be avail- 

 able for sheep and cattle. 



Elk grazing, then, becomes as much of a science as 

 the raising of sheep, and any attempt to overlook this 

 fact will result in repeated tragedies. The overlords must 

 care for their subjects, who can shift for themselves only 

 within the inexorable laws of food supply imposed by 

 natural conditions. 



There is but one efficient method of administering so 

 vital and complex a problem. The National Government, 

 upon whose lands, park and forest these game refuges 

 for elk have been established, should have complete con- 

 trol of the herds, determine their grazing limits, the 

 number which may annually be killed from the natural 

 increase, and supervise the activities of hunters. The' 

 illegal activities of tusk hunters must cease. The states 

 must unite, for the common good, in permitting the 

 nation to exercise unrestricted control over national 

 game refuges. 



INDIANA'S NEED A TRAINED STATE FORESTER 



Till, time has gone by in this country when state 

 forestry work requiring trained supervision can 

 be successfully directed by persons appointed for 

 political reasons and lacking the training requisite to 

 fitness for the office. Indiana alone of all the Eastern 

 States still adheres to this plan. The present state for- 



r had no education in his subject at a professional for- 



cbool, and his acquaintance with his duties is such as 

 he has been able to absorb after his appointment. This 

 means education at the expense of the state. Even with 

 the best intentions on the part of the forester, such a sys- 

 tem cannot recommend itself to the taxpayers of Indiana, 

 and should the incumbent prove indifferent to his responsi- 

 bilities and regard his salary as a reward for political ser- 



- previously given, rather than payment for duty to be 

 performed, the system breaks down completely. 



Minnesota, which permits the State Forestry Board 

 10 ppoint its iiwn executive forester, secured a graduate 

 of the State Forestry College and has retained him ever 

 since 1911. Wisconsin has had a trained forester since 

 1904. Michigan state forestry work has been in the hands 

 of .i trained man since 1899, the present state forester 

 being a graduate of a forest school. 



Kentucky in establishing its State Forestry Depart- 

 ment in 1012 prescribed in the law that the forester must 



be a technically trained man. A graduate of a forest 

 school was appointed and has been recently reappointed 

 for four years. 



Six Southern States have established forestry depart- 

 ments and in every instance have insisted upon the 

 appointment of trained men as state foresters. Forest 

 school graduates are in charge of the State work in Ver- 

 mont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York, New 

 Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Practically all states which 

 have forestry departments at all have insisted that tor- 

 esters shall be employed by the state instead of politicians 

 to run the department. 



The State Forestry Board of Indiana was created in 

 1903, but the law which established the Board made it 

 impossible for the Board ever to do effective work by 

 depriving it of the power to appoint its secretary or 

 state forester. 



As a result not a single appointee to this office in the 

 last fourteen years has had any technical equipment for his 

 work, and the system is a failure. Indiana must change 

 her forestry law and give to the State Forestry Board 

 the power to appoint a technically trained and scientifically 

 equipped state forester. A continuance of the present 

 l>olicy means lack of progress in forestry in the State. 



