336 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLIV. No. 1132 



chiefly in the time required for the crop 

 to mature. Why should we not have state, 

 county and town institutes that impart 

 public instruction in forestry as well as in 

 agriculture? Why should we not have in- 

 struction in forestry in certain high schools 

 and other institutions as we now have in 

 agriculture ? Why should we not have field 

 demonstrations for the public in forestry 

 as well as in agriculture? Not only have 

 we, in our heroic efforts to erect many pro- 

 fessional forest schools, been negligent in 

 supplying the educational machinery for 

 educating the public in the scientific treat- 

 ment of woodlands, but we have been 

 equally negligent in supplying the machin- 

 ery for vocational training. Although more 

 than fifty institutions in the United States 

 have within the past fifteen years devel- 

 oped more or less work in forestry educa- 

 tion below the grade of full professional 

 training, it has largely been without defi- 

 nite aim and has been poorly suited to the 

 real needs of the country. Very little of it 

 even approaches the requirements of the 

 ideal vocational school. As reported by 

 the committee on forestry education at the 

 Fifth National Conservation Congress: 



The vocational forest school should bear the 

 same relation to professional training that the 

 woodshop bears to research in technology or the 

 business school to university instruction in eco- 

 nomics and commerce. It is analogous to the 

 trade schools or a system of apprentice training 

 whereby men are equipped for the skilled trades. 

 The vocational school must, therefore, aim to 

 teach the art or trade of forest practise, not the 

 science of forestry. 



In order best to serve the purposes of for- 

 estry education in the United States at 

 least two thirds of the money now expended 

 on professional training could be better 

 spent in the instruction of the public 

 through the organization of institutes, field 

 demonstrations and similar methods that 

 have been found so effective in agriculture, 



and in the organization of vocational schools 

 for the training of young men in the art of 

 forestry practise. 



What does the experience of the United 

 States in forest conservation and in the 

 development of forestry education teach 

 that can be useful to her sister republics? 

 The writer believes that it teaches the fol- 

 lowing fundamental truths: 



1. The possibility of forest conservation 

 in any republic which has for its founda- 

 tion the orderly development of forest prop- 

 erty and a sustained yield rests squarely 

 upon organized propaganda which has for 

 its purpose the creation of public opinion 

 favorable to forestry — a public opinion that 

 is willing to make present expenditures for 

 future welfare. 



2. The keystone in organized propaganda 

 must be centralized in public ownership, 

 i. e., absolute forest lands must, so far as 

 present economic conditions permit, be 

 owned by the public and managed by and 

 for the public. 



3. Organized propaganda must continue 

 as an indispensable part of forestry educa- 

 tion, even after the beginning of forest 

 conservation has been effected through pub- 

 lic ownership. A strong public sentiment 

 favorable to forest conservation is the only 

 effective weapon for keeping public forests 

 from exploitation by those who consider 

 public property their just prey and await 

 every opportunity to pounce upon it. 



4. Forestry education beyond that at- 

 tainable by organized propaganda for the 

 purpose of molding public opinion should 

 result in putting the actual practise of 

 forestry into operation upon both public 

 and private forests to the fullest degree 

 consistent with economic conditions. It can 

 attain this end only by welding together 

 and giving emphasis to each of the follow- 

 ing: (a) Forestry education when the 

 training is secondary to other work. (6) 



