I2S4 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



It strikes me that the plan to enter the various states 

 under a co-operative agreement upon a fifty-fifty basis 

 other than for educational purposes and for what may 

 be distinctly of national value in the protection of 

 streams affecting several states, is unwise. 



I also consider it extremely unwise to create an or- 

 ganization such as would be created under item No. 7 

 of principles of legislation. Each state forestry asso- 

 ciation would necessarily be under obligations to the 

 national officials. 



It strikes me that the most important service the na- 

 tional government can render in the national program 

 of forestry is to act as a clearing house for the various 

 activities of the states and to keep all of the foresters 

 informed as to national and local conditions, so that the 

 officials of each state may have at hand information 

 which may be of value in avoiding errors and in taking 

 advantage of methods which have proved to be success- 

 ful, and to continue such investigations as it is impossible 

 for any state to continue by itself. 



CONTROL OF GROWING FORESTS 

 BY ALFRED GASKILL, STATE FORESTER OF NEW JERSEY 



BEYOND all question there is need for serious con- 

 sideration of the forest situation in this country. 

 Though that situation is in no essential way dif- 

 ferent from what it has been for years, the necessity 

 for effective action is accentuated by the evidence, now 

 clear to every observer, that there is an insufficient re- 

 placement of the waning store of timber in this country. 



What should be done cannot be decided offhand, or 

 by any man. A full discussion of the conditions, oppor- 

 tunities, and needs in each section of the country must 

 precede the formulation of a policy. 



A policy to be truly national must have in mind the 

 necessities of the nation as a whole, yet with full recog- 

 nition of the facts that the greater part of the forest 

 lands in this country are in private possession and under 

 state, not federal, control. 



The discussion of the problem thus far has seemed 

 to confuse the situation as represented by the stumpage 

 holders, chiefly in the West and South, who are over- 

 loaded, and as represented by the public interest in grow- 

 ing, as distinguished from mature, forests. The first 

 condition should be resolved by economic, chiefly finan- 

 cial, measures ; the second demands the best thought of 

 every forester, to the end that the next generation shall 

 have enough lumber. 



And I cannot agree with some foresters that the lum- 

 bermen have no interest in the question. That their 

 interest is largely, or solely, financial is a fact, but present 

 conditions must change radically before lumbering can 

 become localized and permanent. So long as virgin 

 timber remains it will be an attraction to exploiters, and 

 I can see no escape from the conclusion that we must 

 suffer the exploitation of most of our virgin stands 

 before silviculture finds opportunity to take hold. 1 

 have never believed, and do not now believe, that for- 



estry can play any large part in lumbering operations 

 dealing with virgin timber. 



The proposal lately made that forest owners be com- 

 pelled to handle their properties under the advice of 

 foresters is of doubtful wisdom. Desirable as it is to 

 make the nation's stock of high grade lumber last longer 

 than it now promises to last, there seems to be no argu- 

 ment to support the proposition that property interests 

 in standing timber shall be sacrificed to a hope rather 

 than a promise, much less a guarantee, that what is 

 spared now can be realized on after a while. 



If this view is radical it springs from a conviction 

 that there must be a greater assurance than there now 

 is in any part of the country that an investment in grow- 

 ing timber — not mature timber, is a safe investment. 

 Before we can approach the owners of timber lands with 

 any chance of securing results, before we can hope to 

 impress legislatures and publicists with the reasonable- 

 ness of our program, three things must be established ; 

 first, the fitness of a given area for continued use 

 (through one rotation at least) as forest; second, security 

 against destruction ; and third, assurance of the total, or 

 ultimate, tax levy. 



The situation is critical but not hopeless by any means ; 

 a constructive policy probably can be based upon en- 

 couragement to woodland owners by the Federal Gov- 

 ernment and by the states ; upon active instruction and 

 help to the smaller woodland owners — similar to that 

 furnished farmers ; upon fire protection; and upon a 

 modified tax practice ; all of which will tend to establish 

 an insurable interest in growing forests. 



I emphasize tTie phrase "growing forests." To my 

 mind the key of the situation is there — not in control 

 over forests already mature, and which under every sil- 

 vicultural law should fall to the ax as speedily as pos- 

 sible. 



r F , HELP in meeting war needs, the United States 

 •*■ Forest Service in 1918 continued its efforts to secure 

 full utilization of the forage resources of the National 

 Forests. In 1917, because of the war, 23,000 more cattle 

 and 71,000 more sheep were placed on the National For- 

 ests of California than had ever been grazed on them 

 previously. In 1918 the numbers were still further in- 

 creased by 18,000 cattle and 114,000 sheep. 



'T'HE tallest trees of the United States, says the Canad- 

 ■*- ian Forestry Journal, are the California redwoods or 

 the Douglas fir. Both claim the distinction of being the 

 tallest, and it is an even match between them. A maxi- 

 mum of about 350 feet is the greatest, though a little 

 more than that has been claimed. There is no question 

 that in trunk diameter the redwood, that species known 

 as sequoia, is the champion. 



