A NATIONAL FOREST POLICY 



1283 



the Weeks Law, coupled with such additional measures 

 as may seem best in the different States to reduce the 

 fire hazard and afford opportunity for natural reproduc- 

 tion. The States can go a long way in fire control and 

 the mandatory principle can be applied here much more 

 successfully than it can be applied to either cutting or 

 reforesting operations on private lands. 



Fourth : The acquirement of a reserve supply of mer- 

 chantable timber in the West through the outright pur- 

 chase of timberland financed by the issuing of timber 



bonds or perhaps the carrying of a reserve supply in 

 private ownership through some form of co-operation 

 with the State and national governments. 



I am just as strongly in favor of a great increase in 

 the area of publicly owned timberland (national, State 

 or municipal) and an increase in the scope and effective- 

 ness of fire prevention measures as I am opposed to 

 either Government operation of saw mills or the placing 

 of compulsion upon the private owner to grow timber 

 upon his land in case he is not so disposed. 



PENNSYLVANIA'S OPINION 



BY GEORGE H. WIRT 



CHIEF FOREST FIRE WARDEN OF PENNSYLVANIA 



"WE HAVE VISED THIS REPLY. APPROVE IT. AND HAVE DIRECTED THAT IT SHALL REPRESENT THE ATTITUDE OF THE 

 PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY.'— ROBERT S. CONKLIN, COMMISSIONER OF FORESTRY. 



rT^HERE is no question in my mind as to the necessity 



\ for a national forestry program, and I see no reason 

 why such a program should not be worked out im- 

 mediately. This program should be preceded by a short 

 and concise statement, setting forth just what is neces- 

 sary to be accomplished in order to provide the economic 

 factors which can be obtained only by a rational hand- 

 ling of the forest areas of the country, and reasons why 

 these things must be provided for as indicated by the 

 present demands for forest products and the present 

 inability to have these demands satisfied. 



Necessarily, the methods by which the end in view may 

 be accomplished will differ in different states and in 

 different forest regions. In the first place I believe that 

 the most essential factor in the national program must 

 continue to be the educational work. I cannot endorse 

 your statement to the effect that the education of the last 

 twenty years is practically without result. We have had 

 forestry education in Pennsylvania since 1870, and I am 

 convinced that the results are more than commensurate 

 with the efforts put forth. If any fault is to be found it 

 is with the lack of method, organization, and persistency 

 in educational activities and with the inappropriateness 

 and generality of the material used by national, state, 

 association, and private forces. 



My first suggestion, therefore, in the national program 

 is for a co-operative scheme by reason of which the 

 national, state, association, and private educational ac- 

 tivities may be made effective and kept continuously so. 

 The foresters of the country do not need to be persuaded, 

 because of the facts which they have at hand and with 

 which they are familiar. When the facts which we have 

 are made common knowledge, there will be little or no 

 question as to the outcome. 



Along with the educational campaign, the state and 

 nation must collect exact information in order to back 

 Up the claim for a continued forestry activity. We must 

 have more complete and definite information as to the 

 actual amount of timber available and the amount of 

 timber growing or capable of being grown in the 

 country. There must, also, be continued researches 



which will lead to the conservation of present supplies 

 and the bringing of wood growers and wood users to- 

 gether satisfactorily. 



Both state and nation may continue as fast as their 

 educational campaign will produce means, to extend 

 public forests and to manage them properly. They must 

 also recognize the community interest in the protection 

 of forests and work out to the best possible advantage 

 necessary means for helping the timber owners to protect 

 the forests from fire and destructive agencies. The tax 

 question also must be solved. 



This leads directly to the matter of legislation. There 

 must be some law, and, while it is possible in some cases 

 to obtain satisfactory laws without the support of a 

 public understanding the necessity for the law, yet such 

 cases are rare and where such law is obtained its enforce- 

 ment is very unsatisfactory. So in each part of a na- 

 tional program we are brought back to the necessity for 

 an educational campaign, not for a short period of time 

 but continuously. 



I cannot say that I endorse a program which implies 

 upon the part of the national government anything more 

 than what may be necessary to assist the states to do 

 their work satisfactorily. The present co-operation un- 

 der the Weeks Law might be extended for the protection 

 of forests from fire. I can see no reason for national 

 legislation working to the control of timber cutting 

 within the states, nor do I see any necessity for the 

 national government spending money within any of the 

 states in connection with farm woodlands, except that 

 it might be specifically stated within an amendment to 

 the Smith-Lever Act that the state colleges which receive 

 national funds under this act must assist the farmers in 

 the management of the same as a part of the general 

 farm education required. 



With respect to compensation of forest owners for 

 what are distinctly protection forests, I would say that 

 this ought to come under the forest purchase laws either 

 of state or nation and such lands should be bought out- 

 right under the right of eminent domain, if necessary, 

 without necessitating the review of private operations. 



