260 UNITED STATES FOREST POLICY 



Some of the appeals made in Congress in behalf of the "settlers" 

 were so maudlin as to be even highly ridiculous. Representative 

 Johnson of Washington once read a letter in the House purporting 

 to be from one of these settlers : "Brother Johnson, while we are slowly 

 starving to death the work of conservation goes on. We have no 

 Christmas, we have no New Years, and are getting old before our time 

 because of no money and no way of getting employment to earn money. 

 We have no hope. We have nothing to look forward to but the visit of 

 the forest ranger."^ 



Although the charge has been made repeatedly that the Forest 

 Service has been hostile to settlers within the national forests, and 

 has tried to put unnecessary impediments in the way of settlement, it 

 seems doubtful if this has often been true. A Federal bureau would 

 naturally be slow in its action upon claims and would perhaps require 

 considerable "red tape" in applications. A few of the officials have 

 been arbitrary, some have been ignorant of local conditions and needs, 

 but there is no reason why the Forest Service should be generally 

 hostile to settlers in the reserves. Settlers on or near a national forest, 

 under a proper administrative policy, help both its protection and 

 development. The greatest single task of the government is to prevent 

 forest fires, and the force organized for this purpose is recruited 

 largely from those living in or near the forest. Settlers are also a help 

 in locating fires, and by means of telephone connections are able to 

 report quickly to the forest officers.* 



THE QUESTION OF RANGER STATIONS 

 The charge has often been made that the Forest Service uses con- 

 siderable areas of valuable agricultural lands for ranger stations. 

 Senator Heyburn was particularly bitter about this, and on sundry 

 occasions voiced his sentiments in no uncertain terms. Representative 



7 Cong. Bee, Mar. 10, 1914, 4637. 



8 On agricultural lands in the forest reserves, see H. R. 18960; 62 Cong. 2 sess.: 

 Stat. 34, 233; 37, 287, 842; 38, 429, 1099; 39, 460: Am. Forestry, Aug., 1912, 527, 

 536; Sept., 1912, 585: Report, Sec. of Agr., 1909, 377; 1911, 352; 1912, 481; 1916, 

 160: Report, Forester, 1914, 2, 3, 4: Report, Land Office, 1906, 43; 1907, 21: Agr. 

 Yearbook, 1914, 70 et seq. See also H. R. 14053; 58 Cong. 2 sess.: S. 519; 60 Cong. 

 1 sess.: H. J. Res. 54; 62 Cong. 1 sess.: S. 7203;' 62 Cong. 2 sess. For opposition to 

 the national forests in Arkansas, see H. R. 18889, H. R. 20683, H. R. 20684, H. Res. 

 314, H. Res. 332, H. Res. 491; 61 Cong. 2 sess.: H. R. 6149; 63 Cong. 1 sess.: 64 

 Cong. 1 sess.. Appendix, pp. 893 et seq.: S. Doc. 783; 62 Cong. 2 sess. 



1 



