21 



The wholesale destruction of public timber on odd sections of public lands within 

 the granted limits of uuconstructed railroads, or of roads which failed to comply with 

 the provisions of their grants, continues to an alarming extent. The delay of Con- 

 gress in declaring the forfeiture of said grants is, in this particular alone, of great 

 detriment to the public interests. Irresponsible parties are rapidly denuding such 

 lands of their valuable timber, rendering the lands, in many instances, barren wastes 

 and utterly worthless. 



To secure proper enforcement of the laws and pnnish willful and persistent viola- 

 tors a force of at least fifty special timber agents, at an annual expense of $150,000, 

 ought to be employed. I have, however, estimated for $125,000 as a minimum, below 

 which a reasonable efficiency in the service can uot be obtained. Vastly more can be 

 accomplished in one year with a sufficient appropriation than can be accomplished in 

 several years with smaller annual appropriations aggregating a larger sum. 



The area of timbered lands in the United States is disappearing at a ratio that ex- 

 cites grave apprehension, while timbered agricultural lands in the puldic States and 

 Territories generally may be regarded as practically exhausted. The necessity for 

 clearing land of its timber preliminary to making a farm is exceptional. It is want 

 of timber and not its surplusage that afifiicts settlers on the public domain. The 

 struggle to accumulate great private fortunes from the forests of the country has re- 

 duced forest areas to a minimum. What is left at the heads of rivers and streams and 

 on mountain sides should be preserved as of infinite importance and value for climatic 

 effect^ the natural regulation of the flow of waters, and to prevent the relapse of large 

 agricultural districts to a desert condition. 



When timber had to be cut and burned as a necessity in clearing land for cultiva- 

 tion there was ho cause for increasing the price of land because there was timber upon 

 it. This is not the present situation. The remaining timber lands, as a rule, are 

 worth little or nothing except for the timber, and their value for timber is being rap- 

 idly enhanced as transportation facilities increase and timber areas decrease. 



The appropriation of $75,000 for the prevention of depredations on the public tim- 

 ber is TOTALLY IXADEQUATE. The vast fields to be covered, stretching from Florida 

 to Alaska, can not be supervised by twenty-five special agents, nor can the determined 

 efforts of timber depredators, many of them corporations with millions of dollars at 

 their command, to despoil the forests of the country, be met by puny attempts to check 

 their unlawful and disastrous acts. The service is more than self-supporting, and 

 draws no money from the Treasury that is not more than returned to it by fines and 

 recoveries. It is no part of an intelligent or defensible policy to make timber depre- 

 dations a source of revenue. The object to be attained is to save the forest lands from 

 unlawful destruction, and if this can he accomplished by appropriating the whole of 

 the receipts derived from trespass prosecutions there should be no hesitancy in allow- 

 ing the administrative department the aid, at least, of the amount it recovers. My 

 estimate for the next fiscal year is $100,000 for this purpose, a modicum only, I must 

 say, of the amount that could be heneficially and profitably expended. 



Three years ago my predecessor recommended an appropriation of $400,000 to pro= 

 tect the public lands from unlawful and fraudulent appropriation. Since that period 

 the need of such protection has increased with the intensified demand for public land 

 holdings for monopolistic and speculative purposes. Yet Congress at the last session 

 allowed but one-fourth of the sum regarded as requisite under the preceding adminis- 

 tration of the Government. 



Both Congress and the Executive, not less than political parties, annually assert an 

 intention that,the public lands shall be preserved for actual settlement. No public 

 demand is greater than that land monopoly shall not be fostered by the Government. 

 Yet at the vital point where these words are to be put into action. Congress fails to 

 place in the hands of the executive branch the means to redeem these x)ublic promises 

 and to prevent the indiscriminate waste and misapprox)riation which has for years 

 dishonored the public-land system, and through which great areas of lands needed for 

 actual settlement pass into the hands of speculators, syndicates, and corporaiJons, 



