LUMBEEMEN AND FOKESTKY 269 



"That the Conservation Commission may require land owners to dispose 

 of their slashings as the Commission 'may direct.' ' 



If this is not done after it has been ordered the Commission may have 

 the work done, and the expense "shall be a lien upon the land on which they 

 are situated, enforceable as liens for the improvement of real estate are 

 enforced." 



THE LUMBERMEN'S ATTITUDE 



Were such legislation as this to pass the results might be extremely 

 burdensome to the lumberman. These sections put so much power in the 

 hands of the state and leave so little to the individuals and corporations 

 owning timber land that it seems under some circumstances the state would 

 be directing and managing the entire woodlands department of a business, 

 and this would be possible in every case if the state cared to exercise its 

 rights. Lumber and pulp interests have opposed this legislation on the ground 

 that it is unconstitutional since it takes away property without due process 

 of law. A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin upholds this 

 position. 



Eight along this line it is interesting to find that lumbermen, not know- 

 ing about these proposed New York State measures, suggest as a good 

 method of conserving the forests that laws should be made regulating the 

 cutting of timber by lumbermen, because the lumbermen are in the best 

 position to bring about practical reforestation. The objectionable features 

 are, however, to be eliminated by special tax so that the lumberman can carry 

 his lands and not be at serious expense, and a bonus is to be paid lumbermen 

 producing timber up to a certain size. 



REFORESTATION APPROVED 



Your Committee is in hearty accord with any regulations which will 

 bring about reforestation: We believe in state regulation of cutting where 

 it does not take away any element of value or take the control of directing 

 the policies of the woods department out of the hands of the lumbermen. 

 We believe that men who have spent their lives in the woods studying methods 

 of operation are better equipped to handle this than are the Government 

 officials no matter how well they may be trained. We do approve of 

 cooperation between operators and State and Federal officials so that best 

 methods may be adopted, but believe a property owner should be entitled to 

 look after his own property. The subject of state control of private cutting 

 is a large one and will no doubt come up again. In this limited space we 

 cannot deal with it further. 



Canada, in dealing with her lumbermen, is very different from the United 

 States. Her policy is to keep the forest land intact with the exception of 

 burned-over lands. The timber on these burned lands is sold to operators, 



