366 



CONSERVATION 



line of thought that the public must be edu- 

 cated to in conservation. It is unfair to ask 

 the individual to take on and carry any 

 scheme of practical conservation as an in- 

 dividual proposition. While it is eminently 

 fair that the individual should contribute 

 his fair share as an individual, the com- 

 munity must also contribute its share. This 

 one thought, it seems to me, if persistently 

 brought to the public mind, will crystallize 

 public thought so that they will be willing 

 to adopt some practical scheme of conserva- 

 tion. I am of the opinion that any national 

 law affecting conservation that would affect 

 the individual owners of forest areas alike, 

 would find more advocates among the indi- 

 vidual forest owners than would oppose it. 

 The community would, of course, be com- 

 pelled to contribute its share by paying the 

 increased cost of production. 



CONSERVATION appreciates the com- 

 pliment the writer pays by frankly de- 

 scribing the situation as he sees it. As 

 in the second editorial referred to, this 

 publication has uniformly held and 

 taught that the responsibility for forest 

 destruction rests chiefly not on the in- 

 dividual but on the community, and 

 that a condition which a daily growing 

 number is coming to deplore is trace- 

 able chiefly not to the "greed" of the 

 one, but to the ignorance and indiffer- 

 ence of the many. 



CONSERVATION recognizes that no 

 one better knows the nature and needs 

 of the woods than does the lumberman, 

 and that many of the more progressive 



lumbermen are ready and eager to 

 apply to their holdings those well- 

 established principles of forestry which, 

 in the long run, are best not only for 

 the people as a whole, but also for the 

 woods and for those whose business it 

 is to harvest the woods. This publica- 

 tion is aware, however, that in a large 

 class of cases those who would thus 

 apply these principles are restrained 

 from so doing partly by competitors 

 who are not ready to do likewise and 

 partly by a public which will not re- 

 quire lumbermen in general to improve 

 their methods. 



It is a hopeful sign that, notwith- 

 standing these embarrassments, there 

 is on record a large number of cases in 

 which lumber concerns have sought 

 advice in the matter of better methods, 

 while a smaller number have actually 

 acted upon this advice. Yet, by the 

 best testimony available there remain, 

 under present policies, but some thirty- 

 three years of life to the timber supply 

 of the United States. In view of this 

 fact and of the consequences which 

 must flow therefrom, CONSERVATION 

 earnestly invites expressions of opinion 

 from lumbermen as to the actual, prac- 

 tical solution. The problem is before 

 us ; what shall we do about it ? 



