Legislation and Judicial 

 Interpretation to 19GO 



The following review covers the period up 

 to the passage of the Multiple Use-Sustained 

 Yield Act of 1960. Obviously, the account of 

 the legislation cannot be exhaustive, but every 

 effort has been made to consider significant 

 elements in detail. 



Early Legislation 



The early settlers of our country consid- 

 ered the forest an. obstacle to economic devel- 

 opment (Gates 1968). Destruction of the for- 

 ests continued well into the 19th century, in 

 spite of the efforts made to conserve and pro- 

 tect certain specific forest areas. Such protec- 

 tive action generally covered strategic materi- 

 als such as naval stores of live oak, red cedar, 

 and later white pine. In most areas, efforts 

 were made to prevent trespass on the timber- 

 growing public lands. Westerners generally 

 viewed forest resources as valueless unless 

 they were put to use in the improvement and 

 development of the land, which meant clear- 

 ing, fencing, building, draining, roadbuilding, 

 and establishing social facilities. Moreover, a 

 large-scale private industry had developed that 

 tended to view timber on public lands as open 

 to their saws, and millions of acres of timber 

 were cut in this process. Such attempts as 

 were made to prevent timber trespass were in- 

 effective. Moreover, efforts by the Depart- 

 ment of Interior and the General Land Office 

 were hindered by three measures adopted in 

 the 45th and 46th Congresses (1878-1879). 

 The first, an amendment to a budget deficien- 

 cy bill, stated in part, 



Where wood and timber lands in the Terri- 

 tories of the United States are not sur- 

 veyed and offered for sale in proper subdi- 

 visions convenient of access, no money 

 herein appropriated shall be used to col- 

 lect and charge for wood or timber cut on 

 the public lands in the Territories . . . for 

 the use of actual settlers in the Terri- 

 tories, and not for export from the Terri- 

 tories . . . where the timber grew. If any 

 timber cut on the public lands shall be 



exported from the Territories it shall be 

 liable to seizure. 7 



The second measure, the Timber and Stone 

 Act" of 1878 (20 Stat. 89) provided that un- 

 offered public lands valuable chiefly for tim- 

 ber (or stone) could be purchased at the mini- 

 mum price of $2.50 per acre, in quantities up 

 to 160 acres. Although this law was originally 

 applicable only to the public lands of Cali- 

 fornia, Oregon, Nevada, and Washington Ter- 

 ritory, Congress extended its provisions to all 

 the public land states in 1892 (27 Stat. 348). 

 Virtually all historians consider the Timber 

 and Stone Act an unmitigated disaster, prob- 

 ably with good reason. Nevertheless, the act 

 may represent an important philosophical 

 turning point. As pointed out by Vaux (per- 

 sonal communication 1971), 



The act recognized for the first time that there 

 was such a thing as land chiefly valuable for 

 FOREST. For the preceding century, and with 

 the exception of Naval Reserves and mineral 

 values, the public policy was premised on the 

 assumption that all land was potentially agri- 

 cultural land. In adopting the Timber and Stone 

 Act, Congress should be credited . . . with final- 

 ly recognizing that there was such a thing as 

 forest land, distinct from agricultural land cur- 

 rently supporting a forest, even though it acted 

 unwisely on its recognition. 



The third measure, passed on the same day 

 as the Timber and Stone Act, was the so-called 

 Free Timber or Timber Cutting Act (20 Stat. 

 88). This law permitted the free cutting of 

 timber for "agricultural, mining, or other 

 domestic uses" on lands classified to be chief- 

 ly valuable for mining and mineral resources. 

 Very little land was so classified, but lumber- 

 men used the act as warrant for their cutting 

 activities by taking a very liberal view of what 

 ought to be interpreted to be mineral land 

 (Hibbard 1965, p. 463-470). 



These three measures, taken together with 

 many other obstacles thrown up against pro- 

 tection of the public timber lands, illustrate 

 the problems confronting those who worked 

 toward scientific management and preserva- 

 tion of the nation's valuable timber reserves. 

 As Gates (1968, p. 561) observes, 



7 Act of April 30, 1878, 20 Stat. 46; for discussion 

 of this and the following statutes, see Gates (1968), 

 p. 550 ff. 



12 



