HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE 415 
commend, as a result of this study, those lands for forest reserves which, 
so reserved, will be of greater benetit to the people than if unreserved. 
Mr. Bowrs. Where are these forest-reserve lands, mainly-? 
Mr. Price. They are in the Middle West and on the Pacific coast. 
Mr. Bowrz. Could you give mean estimation of the number and 
the amount? 
Mr. Price. It is about 63,000,000 acres at present. 
Mr. Bowrr. Has the Government any forest reserve in the Blue 
Ridge range of mountains? 
Mr. Price. No, sir; none. There is the proposed forest reserve in 
the Southern Appalachians. 
The Cuarrman. That is not included? 
Mr. Price. No, sir. 
Myr. Henry. You do include the national parks? 
Mr. Price. No, sir; only the reserves. 
Mr. Scorr. There is a forestry division in the Interior Department? 
Mr. Price. Yes, sir. 
Mr. Scorr. And the proposition is now pending to transfer that to 
your Bureau ? 
Mr. Price. Yes, sir. 
Mr. Scorr. If that were done would the added work which is-trans- 
ferred to your Bureau absorb any considerable portion of that $100,000? 
Mr. Price. No, sir; that is making no allowance for reserve work; 
I mean for reserve work that is now handled in the division of forestry 
in the Land Office. 
Mr. Scott. What is that division doing? 
Mr. Price. It is expending, I think, $350,000 a year in the admin- 
istration of the forest reserves. It is conducting no studies in any way; 
it is simply administering the reserves and employing the rangers and 
supervisors. 
Mr. Brooks. It is attending to the Wei protection ? 
Mr. Price. It is charged with that duty. 
Mr. Scorr. If the reserves were transferred to your Bureau they 
would have to carry the appropriations along with them? 
Mr. Price. Yes, sir; they certainly would. 
Mr. Scorr. You think that the work of that Department would 
dovetail into your work so as to make a smaller expenditure by the 
combination ? 
Mr. Pricr. I do not, because they are are two distinct lines of work. 
One is a question of the actual administration of the national forest 
reserves; the other is the study of forest problems which they present 
and which are presented elsewhere. The expenses of the two had, it 
seems to me, better be kept entirely separate. 
Mr. Scorr. If they are separate problems and ought to be kept 
entirely distinct, is it not better that the division should remain where 
it is? 
Mr. Prics. No, sir; because in both cases the problem is one of 
practical forestry. Practical forestry, in my judgment, is necessary 
both to the best administration of the reserves and to the best solution 
of problems there and elsewhere. But I do not think they should 
be handled from the same fund. In India, for example, where there 
is an excellent forest service dealing with forest problems not unlike 
ours, there is one head—one inspector-general of forests—but the 
expenses of forest administration are defrayed from a separate fund. 
