WHAT WE WANT. 



BY DR. B. E. FERNOW, DEAN OF THE FACULTY OF FORESTRY, UNIVERSITY OF 



TORONTO. 



More than half a century ago a few farseeing men warned the Canadian 

 people that their timber wealth was not inexhaustible. Among them was 

 James Little, a lumberman, a man who knew the woods and knew what he 

 was talking about. 



More than a quarter century ago the first public meeting was held in 

 Canada for the distinct purpose of arousing the Canadian people to a realiza- 

 tion of this fact, and to stimulate a reform looking toward better treatment of 

 their forest resources. I refer to the meeting at Montreal of the American 

 Forestry Congress in 1882, when I had the honour for the first time of 

 addressing a Canadian audience. What with that meeting and with the 

 subsequent propaganda work the names of William Little, the son of the 

 venerable James, then still living, of A. T. Drummond, of Dr. Saunders and 

 many others, but above all, of our lately deceased beloved friend, Joly de 

 Lotbiniere', are intimately connected. For two decades these men worked 

 under the aegis of the Continental American Forestry Association. 



Almost a decade ago the Canadian Forestry Association was formed, to 

 join together in a separate organization, in order to secure a more united 

 effort and action for their own country, all Canadians who had been educated 

 to consider the need of a conservative forest policy. 



Two years ago a notable convention was called to the capital by the 

 Premier of the Dominion, to discuss ways and means of inaugurating such 

 a policy. Besides these specially organized agencies of propaganda, news- 

 papers and magazines have abounded in perorations on the necessity of forest 

 preservation, and lately a wave of enthusiasm in regard to the conservation 

 of all resources on paper seems to have taken hold of public attention over 

 the whole continent. 



It would now be pertinent to ask, what results has all this long con- 

 tinued effort produced, and, should the answer fall out unsatisfactory, it 

 would be still more pertinent to ask why the sought-for reform has lagged, 

 and what means may be devised to advance it more effectively? 



In making these inquiries I do not wish to appear as a critic, but merely 

 as a dispassionate analyst, and I hope you will believe me most appreciative, 

 not only of the achievements, but of the difficulties in the way of reform, 

 being well aware that in popular government, progress in such reforms must 

 always be slow. It took nearly a century and a bloody war in the end to 

 secure the abolishment of slavery in the United States. It took 30 years of 

 persistent propaganda to advance forestry interests in the United States so 

 far as to secure for them at least a respectful hearing, and if it had not been 

 for the accident of a wealthy, independent idealist, and a fearless, inde- 

 pendent, idealistic President coming together to Washington, the remark- 

 ably rapid progress made there during the last ten years in governmental 

 forest administration would very likely not have occurred. 



Perhaps before discussing results, it may be desirable, first, once more 

 to formulate, what precisely it is, that forestry reformers in Canada want. 



[1] 



