174 REPORT OF THE FORESTRY COMMITTEE 



2. "The curriculum of the ranger school should be very diflferent from a 

 school giving full technical training. There should be a certain amount of lec- 

 ture work or school work in Dendrology, Forest Mensuration, Forest Engineering 

 and Elementary Silviculture. With this work should go constant attention to 

 the use of the English language and elementary forms of business law. In the 

 field the men should live and work as woodsmen, understanding the use of woods' 

 tools thoroughly, and should be given the attitude of the workman. That is, they 

 should understand what a day's work in the woods means and how to handle men. 

 I think the trouble with some of our ranger courses has been that as the simplest 

 solution instructors have given too technical courses and have carried on too little 

 field application of these courses. 



3. "The candidate should be at least nineteen years of age, in good sound 

 physical condition, and should come well recommended. 



4. "The present status of the profession justifies a course of but one year. 

 Field work should take up a considerable part of the year; that is, as much of 

 the teaching as possible should be done in the woods and while actual operations 

 are being carried out. 



5. "I believe ranger schools should be located in the forest and the work 

 given independently of technical institutions. My knowledge of the situation in 

 Mont Alto and our experience in the State Ranger School here lead me to believe 

 that it is a mistake to attempt to mix the two classes of students. 



6. "The instructors in ranger schools should be foresters in charge of forest 

 property, so far as possible. 



7. "I believe there is use for a few ranger schools in the United States. I 

 think that one or two in the East and perhaps two or three in the West should 

 supply all the men needed for the next ten years." 



Hugh P. Baker. 



"It is a pleasure to make some suggestions in reply to your list of questions, 

 and I have made my answers correspond with the numbers you have used : 



1. "In the first place, we cannot have a national ranger school without having 

 a national forest school for higher forest training. I have discussed this matter 

 with Mr. Zon, and he feels that, in this country, the poor and good schools are 

 training men for any position that the graduates can attain through their own 

 personal efforts. In other words, the school does not determine the sphere of 

 activity which the man may assume. Consequently, Mr. Zon feels that we should 

 lay particular emphasis on the kind of man who should be admitted to the ranger 

 school rather than on the kind of training he should receive. In other words, 

 the type of man to which the school should cater should be given very careful 

 consideration, and there should be a more clear-cut distinction between schools 

 for higher training and schools for ranger positions. 



2. "The curriculum should be along the same lines as that of the higher 

 technical forest school, but should be simplified and contain less advance technical 

 material. 



3. "I believe the requirements for admittance should be made as simple as 

 possible and should be based on the affirmative answers to an ordinary high school 

 education. 



4. "Under present conditions, one year should be ample to complete the 

 training. Later, the requirements must be made more extensive. A national 

 ranger school, it seems to me, should include no apprentice work in the ordinary 

 curriculum. This would not apply to a State school such as is maintained in 

 Pennsylvania, which caters to its own needs. 



5. "On account of the absolute necessity for field work, I believe that ranger 

 schools should be located on or very near forests where practical field work can 



