EDUCATION IN FORESTRY. 27 



year course unless heavily overloaded excludes not only a desirable propor- 

 tion of the vitally necessary subjects of economics, English, history, and lan- 

 guages, but that elementary business subjects such as accounting and additional 

 work in mathematics are impossible, while in engineering, mechanics is omitted. 

 Conformity to a single standard is not desirable, but recognition of the general 

 training of a forester as distinct from specialized training calls for a course 

 based if possible on five years following closely the lines indicated. 



H. H. CHAPMAN, Chairman. 



FILIBERT ROTH. 



S. N. SPRING. 



C. D. HOWE. 



P. T. COOLIDGE. 



MEMORANDUM FROM REPRESENTATIVES OF WESTERN FOREST 



SCHOOLS. 



Following the reading of the committee report by Prof. Chapman a memo- 

 randum from representatives of a number of the forest schools situated in the 

 States west of the Mississippi, sent to this conference with the request that it 

 be incorporated in its proceedings, was submitted. The memorandum follows: 



DECEMBER 6, 1920. 



At a meeting of representatives of western forest schools held here in Spokane 

 to-day certain topics to be discussed at the proposed educational conference in 

 New Haven were considered. We desire to forward to this conference the fol- 

 lowing statement of our position on certain specific questions : 



1. While we believe that a better training in forestry can unquestionably 

 be given in five or six years than can be compressed into four, yet on the basis 

 of our experience and of that of parallel courses in similar fields which have 

 come under our observation, we emphatically believe that the regular four- 

 year course leading to the bachelor of science or bachelor of science in forestry 

 degree must include all the essential subjects of a forestry curriculum, so that 

 the graduates therefrom may be considered fitted to commence their pro- 

 fessional career. A longer course will not attract the best type of man in the 

 long run, and hence may even result in the turning out of an inferior product. 



2. Modern^ forestry is a field with such variegated and specialized oppor- 

 tunities for work on the part of the forest school graduate that the training 

 given in these schools should not be crystallized into any one fairly rigid cur- 

 riculum. Instead, a system of controlled electives, commencing at least as 

 early as the junior year, should permit a student to prepare himself specifically 

 for positions in the United States or State forest services, or the lumber indus- 

 try in any of its branches. The type of specialization to be developed at each 

 school is of course largely a local matter. 



DONALD BRUCE, University of California. 

 HUGO WINKENWERDER, University of Washington. 

 DAVID T. MASON, University of California. 

 FRANK G. MILLER, University of Idaho. 

 THORNTON T. MUNGER, University of Montana. 

 THOS. C. SPAULDING, University of Montana. 



DISCUSSION 



Following the Report of the Committee on a Course Leading to the Master's 



Degree in Forestry. 



Prof. Tourney said that he thought the plan presented might be accepted by 

 the conference as an ideal scheme, but that each school must necessarily deviate 

 from it, depending on where that school is located and upon what the demands 



