AN AUSTRALIAN FOREST PRODUCTS LABORATORY. 
A further method of co-operation very successfully carried out at 
Madison is the establishment of classes for men engaged in industries 
such as seasoning, glue work, box design, &¢. Short courses for opera- 
tors are very popular and useful. 
It may be objected that closer co-operation would result if the labora- 
tory were in one of the industrial centres. This is‘not necessarily the 
ease. ‘The laboratories at Dehra and Madison are not in industrial 
centres; the former is hundreds of miles from any large town. The 
laboratory cannot be everywhere, and must, wherever it is, maintain 
its connexion with industries by means of field officers. This is the 
plan adopted in other places, and it has proved very: successful there. 
Tur Nerp ror Propacanpa. 
There is need for « generous measure of propaganda among the 
industries, and the public generally, to bring home the value of research 
into forest products. The best results will, of course, be obtained by 
the achievements of the laboratory; but even these need to be well adver- 
tised, or they will not be recognised. 
A research laboratory needs large sums of money. ‘To get money, 2 
public sentiment must be aroused. Newspaper and magazine articles 
will do something, and a publicity section must be established for this 
purpose. Much can also be done by means of cinema films illustrating 
various activities of the laboratory. These methods and others are 
widely used in America. 
-A model of the box-testing plant is shown in operation at exhibitions, 
country shows, &e. <A concrete result of these methods was the solid 
support for the Madison Laboratory when its grant was recently threat- 
ened. The time and energy spent in propaganda were well repaid at 
that time. 
Tim Lasoratory anp tHE Fores, Scoot. 
I have frequently heard suggestions that the Forest Products Labora- 
tory should be worked in conjunction with the Forestry School. There 
seems at first sight to be some advantages in this, but I am sure the 
disadvantages more than outweigh them. In America there is a certain 
amount of research work done at the forest schools: For example, in San 
Francisco, at Berkeley University, the staff of the Forest School only — 
work two semesters, and the other half of the year is free for research. 
The research, however, is mainly into forestry proper. At the Seattle 
School there is a good deal of work on such problems as seasoning, 
preservation, waste utilization, &c. It was found, however, advisable to 
remove the research from the teaching. In India, the Research Institute 
was associated with schools for rangers and provincial forest officers, 
but it is now to be separated, and the laboratory will be moved several 
miles away, and all connexion severed. 
It is a good thing for teachers to be engaged on some research, and 
there should always be such provision in a school as allows of this. 
It is bad, however, for a research officer fo be required to teach. Experi- 
ence shows that, if both are required of the same staff, the research work 
suffers. When, owing to lack of funds or any other cause, there is pres- 
sure on the time of the staff, the teaching work has to go on. It is not 
a bad idea for a research officer to give an occasional course of lectures 
on his specialty, but he should mot be in any way responsible for the 
teaching work. I am, therefore, strongly opposed to the union of these 
two institutions. They serve separate needs, and must stand apart. 
307 
