SD 118 
 .T7 
 Copy 1 
 
 rhe Tri-State Forestry 
 Conference 
 
 Ohio, Illinois and Indiana 
 
 October 22 and 23, 1919 
 
 Manafement of 
 
 The Department of Conservation 
 
 State of Indiana 
 
THE DEPARTMENT 
 OF CONSERVATION 
 
 STATE OF INDIANA 
 
 W. A. GUTHRIE, Chairman 
 STANLEY COULTER 
 JOHN W. HOLTZMAN 
 RICHARD M. HOLMAN, Secretary 
 
 Publication No. 10 
 
 RICHARD LIEBER, DIRECTOR 
 
The Tri-State Forestry Conference 
 
 OHIO, ILLINOIS, INDIANA 
 
 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 
 
 CLAYPOOL HOTEL 
 OCTOBER 22 and 23. 1919 
 
 MANAGEMENT 
 
 V,- >.■ -1 . -CA. OF 
 
 THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION 
 STATE OF INDIANA 
 
 FORT WAYNE PRINTING COMPANY 
 
 CONTRACTORS FOR INDIANA STATE PRINTING AND BINDING 
 
 FORT WAYNE, INDIANA 
 
 1920 
 
1\ 
 
 THE TRI-STATE FORESTRY CONFERENCE 
 
 October 22 and 23, 1919 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Wednesday Morning Session .' 5-19 
 
 Hon. W. A. Guthrie 5 
 
 Mr. Evans Woollen 6 
 
 Hon. James P. Goodrich 6-7 
 
 Mr. Edmund Secrest 7-11 
 
 Mr. R. B. Miller 11-16 
 
 Mr. Charles C. Deam 16-19 
 
 Wednesday Afternoon Session 19-43 
 
 Mr. Charles G. Sauers 19-22 
 
 Lt.-Col. Henry S. Graves 23-33 
 
 Mr. J. G. Peters 34-40 
 
 Discussion 40-43 
 
 Wednesday Evening, Banquet Session 43-64 
 
 Mr. Charles Bookwalter 44-45 
 
 Mr. P. S. Ridsdale 45-46 
 
 Mr. Charles Bookwalter 46-47 
 
 Prof. H. H. Chapman 47-56 
 
 Mr. Wilson Compton 56-63 
 
 Discussion 63-64 
 
 Thursday Morning Session 64 
 
 Mr. Edmund Secrest 64-68 
 
 Dr. F. W. Shepardson 68-71 
 
 Mr. Richard Lieber 71-75 
 
 Mr. Marcus Schaff 75-79 
 
 Mr. I. C. Williams 79-84 
 
 Discussion 84 
 
 Thursday Afternoon Session 85 
 
 Discussion 85-87 
 
 Prof. Stanley Coulter 87-92 
 
 Mr. P. S. Ridsale 92 
 
 Mr. Findlay Torrence 92-96 
 
 Mr. Harry Scarce 96-100 
 
 Report of Resolutions Committee 100-103 
 
 fs. •t B. 
 
THE TRI-STATE FORESTRY CONFERENCE 
 
 October 22 and 23, 1919 
 WEDNESDAY MORNING SESSION OCT. 22, 1919. 
 
 The meetiBg was called to order at 10:00 a. m., with Hon. W. A. 
 Guthrie presiding. 
 
 HON. W. A. GUTHRIE : Fellow citizens, we welcome you here today. 
 It is quite fitting that the Tri-State Forestry Conference should be called 
 here in the center of what has been the finest hardwood forest of the 
 United States. 
 
 We are now entering upon an era which will witness a great advance 
 in the reforestation which should produce and conserve our timber. The 
 shortage of timber is a source of concern to many wood working plants 
 and to plan for the future will give forth much for you gentlemen to work 
 out. Our States have produced some of the best and most valuable timber 
 of the nation. We have had such an abundance of timber that we have 
 overlooked the rapidity with which we have been using it, and now we 
 are unable to supply the demand. 
 
 Ohio, Illinois and Indiana are three of the seven states whose sup- 
 plies feed the world. We are in the lead in live stock, agriculture and 
 manufacturing. 
 
 Many of our sister states are ahead of us in the reforestation and are 
 appropriating more money for this work. Pennsylvania appropriates 
 $315,000.00 each year and has a holding of over six or eight million dollars. 
 New York $288,000.00, Michigan $115,000.00 and many of the states from 
 $25,000.00 to $75,000.00. Indiana has only been appropriating $7,400.00 for 
 all purposes. Many foreign countries control their forests by handling 
 scientifically and they are able to pay a revenue of three or more per cent, 
 at the same time keep their forest intact. 
 
 Statistics show before the war that Belgium had a population of 652 
 to the square mile and yet had 18% in timber. Switzerland 235 population 
 to the square mile with 23% in timber. France 190 to the square mile 
 with 23% in timber. Germany 25%, Austria 35%, yet in Indiana with 
 only 75 population we have less than 10% in timber. 
 
 The future of the timber problems of the three states are similar and 
 it is for this reason that the three states have met here for this conference. 
 If the timber supply for the future is to be assured then the wood using 
 industries of the states must understand better how to control the influ- 
 ences which are now at work destroying the supply. 
 
 The public must take an immediate interest in the timber lands and see 
 that legislation is enacted which will make for the use of permanent mill, 
 forest development, place timber on the market only as needed, give 
 adequate forest fir^ protection and assure renewal after logging. 
 
We have with us today some very able and distinguished gentlemeii, 
 men who are authority along different lines, so we know that much good 
 should come out of this convention and that we should work out some plan 
 which will bring about better forestry development. We had arranged 
 today for your chairman, a man who had been foremost in forestry, who 
 is President of the American Forestry Association, — Mr. Charles Lathrop 
 Pack — but who was taken seriously sick and sent this telegram last night: 
 "Mr. Richard Lieber, Indianapolis : I am disappointed not to be able to 
 be in Indianapolis tomorrow. I am confined to my room with a hard 
 cold in my throat. My doctor forbids my going out of doors. Wish the 
 conference every success and send best greetings. Charles Lathrop Pack." 
 
 Indianapolis always has been ready to take the place if one falls out 
 and we have invited one of our leading citizens who is the head of one of 
 our largest financial houses, whose name stands out for honesty, integrity 
 and ability and who was the fuel director of the State during the war. 
 It gives me great pleasure to introduce to you Mr. Evans Woollen of this 
 city. (Applause) 
 
 MR. EVANS WOOLLEN: I have protested to Senator Guthrie that 
 there is no appropriateness in his invitation. Perhaps an excuse for it 
 and for my acceptance of it may be found in the fact that during my 
 service as Federal Fuel Administrator for Indiana, I came to some 
 measure of appreciation of the importance of the conservation of fuel sup- 
 plies and this realization was confirmed later during a meeting in Wash- 
 ington of the coal dealers when they were talking of substituting wood 
 for coal. However, whether appropriately here or inappropriately, I am 
 glad to have the privilege of greeting you and presenting to you Hon. 
 James P. Goodrich, Governor of Indiana. (Applause) 
 
 HON. JAMES P. GOODRICH: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the 
 conference, I am glad to add a word of welcome to you and to thank you 
 for coming here today. 
 
 Conservation is looked upon with a sort of mild tolerance. It was 
 just about ten years ago that we started to think about it at all. We are 
 just beginning to realize how prodigal had been our waste of the great 
 basic resources of our country. AVe are just beginning to awaken to the 
 fact that we have wasted them in an almost criminal way, I have lived 
 my whole life in Indiana. I was born at a time when the forest land far 
 exceeded the clear land and I have seen millions of feet of walnut and 
 poplar and the best white oak that ever grew out of the ground wasted 
 in this State. We are now having to get our supply from the south and 
 southwest to keep our factories going. It is a tremendous difliculty, because 
 with the increasing freight rate, it becomes more and more difficult to 
 get it. 
 
 And so we need to look out for the waste lands of these three States 
 and begin to regrow the forests that we have wasted to undo the mistakes 
 of the past as nearly as we possibly can. We have hundreds of thous- 
 ands of acres of land in Indiana that can't be devoted to agriculture 
 that could be used to raise timber. We must remember that we are not 
 engaging in this work for the immediate future, it is more for the far 
 distant future. The trees that we plant today will not come into com- 
 
mercial use until our grandchildren are running this country. It is 
 the work for tomorrow and for the future of our country. I take it that 
 the trees that are planted as a result of this meeting which will come 
 to their full growth perhaps in a hundred years from now will be the 
 breathing spots and play grounds. We are not spending very much money, 
 but we are getting results, buying up small tracts of forests, putting state 
 parks here and there over the State. 
 
 I am glad to have you here. I congratulate you upon the great work 
 in which you are engaged because of what it means to the future of our 
 country. It is a public question. But you can't afford to grow forests 
 on land worth two or three hundred dollars an acre. It don't pay and 
 private owners can't do it. 
 
 I really know so little of this question and some of you men here are 
 so much better able to speak upon the subject than I am so I am going 
 to give you a chance to talk. I thank you. (Applause) 
 
 MR. WOOLLEN : Governor Cox and Governor Lowden have found it 
 impossible to be present. We will now have the satisfaction of listening 
 to Mr. Edmund Secrest, Forester of Ohio. (Applause) 
 
 MR. EDMUND SECREST: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the con- 
 vention, I am certainly glad to be with you this morning to tell you some- 
 thing of forestry conditions in Ohio. 
 
 Ohio is a state of relatively small farms, the average of which is 
 eighty-eight acres. The lands in farms or forest tracts aggregate twenty- 
 six million acres and of this area approximately one million, three hun- 
 dred thousand acres, or five per cent, could be utilized in some form of 
 agricultural development. There are three million, five hundred thousand 
 acres of woodland in the State of which some five hundred thousand 
 acres are in large buildings, other than farm lands in southeast Ohio. 
 The average farm woodland is twelve acres in extent. The composition 
 of the native forest is predominantly hardwood with occasional sporadic 
 coniferous areas in the Ohio river countries. 
 
 The farm woodlands on eighty per cent, of the State's area are on 
 land of considerable agricultural value. These tracts are being encroached 
 upon directly by clearing for tillage or pasturage, and indirectly by live 
 stock grazing. It may be expected as a matter of course that woodlands 
 on lands of high productive value will gradually lessen in extent, with 
 more intensive agricultural practices superinduced by a greater demand 
 for farm products, and the decreasing size of farms. The woodlands of this 
 type were representative of the most valuable hardwood forests of the 
 country. It is from them that much of the raw material for the wood 
 using industries is obtained for they contain the great bulk of the remain- 
 ing original forests of the State. First quality white oak, red oak, yellow 
 poplar, white ash, black walnut and elm came from the most productive 
 soils, and strange though it may seem, the farm woodlands of central and 
 northern Ohio contain the original stands, while those of the inherent tim- 
 ber soils of southern Ohio passed over a half century ago. A logical land 
 classification would place this class of farm woodlands within the zone 
 of agricultural production. On the other hand, their passing will require 
 time for there are many landowners who cannot be persuaded to part with 
 
their woodlands even though they exist upon land of high value. Probably 
 
 their numbei- will increase ; certainly there has been a decided change in 
 attitude and sentiment during the past decade in favor of vi'oodland main- 
 tenance. Nevertheless we cannot escape the conviction that woodlands 
 on land worth from one hundred to three hundred dollars per acre need 
 not be considered a dependable future resource. Economically these 
 acres represent in the aggregate a considerable loss to the commonwealth. 
 The mere fact that they occupy lands of high value even though they be 
 productive forests would in itself constitute misutilization. Through the 
 deterioiating influence of grazing these detached bodies of native forest 
 for the most part are cumberers of the ground with the original trees 
 mature, or culls, the young growth lacking or of inferior composition, the 
 shade too dense for the growth of nutritious grasses, these tracts are 
 neither good forest nor good pasture. It is true that many of them can 
 be rehabilitated. In fact by proper protection and management, regenera- 
 tion by natural seeding is most satisfactory. 
 
 There is a field for farm forestry within the regions mentioned — the 
 steep slopes along streams, overflow lands, ravines, etc., which could be 
 given over more profitably to timber growing than other purposes. The 
 farmer's interest in this phase is fortified by the direct benefits accruing 
 from the small woodland. From it he would have available for farm use 
 material for construction, posts, fuel, etc. He will appreciate more and 
 more the value of shelter belts, both for protection and utility. It may 
 be expected that such forestry can be promoted with moderate success 
 in the better agricultural sections, and some progress has been made in 
 this direction. 
 
 Before leaving this phase of the discussion it may be well to state that 
 hundreds of farmers are attempting in greater or less degree to maintain 
 and manage their small woodlands in accordance with recognized prin- 
 ciples of forestry, without regard for the value of the land on which 
 they exist. From this fact, however, there can be no outgrowth of estab- 
 lished policy vrith reference to such tracts, nor even vsdll there be any 
 assurance that the successors to the property of these men will continue 
 their practices. 
 
 The unglaciated hill lands of the southeast quarter of Ohio are the 
 inherent timber areas of the state. A million acres could be devoted to this 
 purpose without infringing on agricultural development. The woodlands 
 in this section are in holdings of from two hundred to twenty thousand 
 acres, small portions of which are utilized for desultory farm operations. 
 Surface land values range from two dollars to twenty-five dollars^ per 
 acre. During the early part of the last century, the original forest was 
 taken up in large holdings by furnace companies, which led to the develop- 
 ment of the charcoal iron industry. The timber was converted into char- 
 coal which was utilized in the reduction of the local ore. Up to the time 
 of the collapse of this industry in the early seventies, not only the original 
 forest but oftentimes second growth and even third growth was used. 
 The successive cuttings affected the composition of forest, but the most 
 deleterious results occurred through the conversion of high forest to 
 coppice, and the weakening of the reproductive capacity with each cut- 
 
ting. Following this period the surface lands were almost abandoned, 
 excepting that such portions which could be tilled were cleared and 
 farmed. As the woodland developed it was again cut over principally 
 for tie timber. The promiscuous clearing for tillage has complicated the 
 problems involved in rehabilitating these areas, converting steep hill sides 
 into fields has always been a common practice. Lack of soil fertility or 
 indifference as well as difficulties in maintaining the fertility leads to the 
 abandonment of tlie land resulting in a reversion to the old field type 
 of forest. This type is difficult to deal with because it is so inferior in 
 composition and stand, resulting oftentimes in mere weed growth. 
 
 Artificial reforestation by private individuals of the old field where the 
 typical growth prevails in impracticable in many instances because of 
 the excessive costs of formation and subsequent cleaning. The native 
 forests under a system of management will be a valuable asset to the 
 state for they are considerable, and are an inherent part of that section. 
 Protection against fires is needed but damage of consequence is limited 
 to a few counties where wild Ij^nds are in the hands of absentee land 
 lords. Many owners are exercising vigilence in respect to this feature, but 
 a sytem of state and national aid is needed. The generally prevailing in- 
 difference in attitude toward the proper maintenance of the forsets in this 
 section is a factor which must be considered in this discussion. There are 
 a few large tracts held for the value of the second growth alone. A con- 
 siderable portion of southeast Ohio is underlaid by the coal measures, 
 and many of the furnace tracts. are in the hands of coal operators. They 
 own the surface along with the mineral rights in most instances. Their 
 business is to mine coal and the surface to them is of consideration only 
 as it affects their mining operations. They value the woodland insofar as 
 it contributes timber to supply the needs of the mines until they are worked 
 out. Beyond that they have no immediate interest, for they are not 
 in the timber business. However much they may be censured for neglecting 
 their woodlands, there are obstacles in the way of forestry practices. 
 There are no markets for inferior timber. Coal and gas have practically 
 driven fire wood out of the market. Charcoal production barely more 
 than pays for cutting the wood and burning the coal. In fact, many 
 tracts are turned over to burners to coal for the price of the wood. The 
 stumpage paid for pit props is so small that transactions are never based 
 on that product. Tie timber is virtually the first product from second 
 growth forests for which there is ready sale. Inability to dispose of the 
 lower grades of timber is a discouraging feature, and is certainly a 
 deterrent in the practice of forestry by private owners. 
 
 The present State Forestry Department was organized by legislative 
 act in 1906. It was placed under jurisdiction of the Board of Control of 
 the Agricultural Experiment Station. Broad power was given the Board 
 along investigational and demonstration lines, but there was no provision 
 for forest protection. In 1914 by special enactment the Board was author- 
 ized to purchase lands for state forests. The work of the Department 
 has been substantially along the following lines. 
 
 (1) At the outset a preliminary forest survey of the State was made 
 with the detailed surveys of certain counties. This was done to determine 
 the conditions, the needs, and the lines of work required. 
 
10 
 
 (2) Assistance to private owners, state, municipal and private insti- 
 tutions in the management of their woodlands and in reforestation projects. 
 
 (3) The station has maintained nurseries for the propagation and 
 distribution of planting stock for reforestation. Heretofore the distri- 
 bution of stock has been limited largely to experimental and demonstration 
 work. 
 
 (4) Forest arboretums have been established on a number of public 
 and quasi public institutions. 
 
 (5) Three municipal forests and forest parks have been established 
 under the direction of the Department, one of which is primarily for the 
 protection of the potable water supply. 
 
 (6) Two state forests have been purchased and these areas are used 
 for experimental and demonstration purposes. 
 
 (7) A survey of the important drainage basins made in 1913, follow- 
 ing the unprecedented flood of that year. 
 
 (8) During the past five years more attention has been given to 
 problems of forest utilization. This phase in fact has grown to one of 
 most importance. It is felt that the Department can be of real help to 
 the woodland owner, and the wood user. The average owner has little con- 
 ception of timber values, but has to proceed in marketing his products. 
 He has great difficulty in finding markets for many classes of timber. In 
 these matters we have been able to render assistance of considerable 
 consequence. 
 
 It has also been possible to locate and to secure for wood users certain 
 classes of timber which they desire and to cause mature or over-mature 
 timber to be placed on the market. The effect of such work on the whole 
 as we view it, is that it tends to create or to stimulate stagnant markets 
 for the various classes of woodland products. The time of two of our men 
 is largely given to this work, one of whom has had some years of practical 
 experience in the timber business. 
 
 It was found at the outset that land owners were seeking information 
 regarding the lasting qualities of the several kinds of post timbers. The 
 Department undertook to investigate this matter with the result that 
 data were obtained on some ten of the most common timbers. This work 
 embraced the examination of three hundred fifty fences containing over 
 forty thousand posts, the fences ranging in ages from four to fifty years. 
 These data brought out many interesting facts, chief of which being that 
 there is considerable variation in the durability of different wood of the 
 same species, and that the relative scale is based not upon the length of 
 life of one or several posts of a given species, but upon the average of p-eat 
 numbers. Data has been collected on the average stands per acre by 
 counties of the different commercial tree species of the State. The results 
 of this work is now on press and it will give fairly accurate data to wood 
 users and others on the amounts and distribution of the available com- 
 mercial timber. 
 
 (9) Cities have from time to time requested assistance in the plant- 
 ing and care of shade trees. Since they contribute indirectly to the sup- 
 port of the Department it was felt that they were entitled to such assist- 
 ance. Shade tree surveys are therefore made upon request, and consid- 
 
11 
 
 erable interest has developed in this respect. The need of such work Is 
 so evident in the average city, that it scarcely merits comment. It has 
 resulted indirectly in much good to the Department, chiefly in securing 
 wider moral and financial support. 
 
 (10) From the outset it has been the conviction that experimentation 
 and research was vitally necessary for the development of forestry under 
 Ohio conditions. We in fact have assumed the attitude that such work 
 is fundamental in the working out of a stable forest policy for Ohio. It 
 Is hardly to be conceived how best results can be obtained without definite 
 knoweldge of many facts we do not have. We need to have these facta 
 before we can answer many questions now pending, and it is to be regretted 
 that it is going to take so long to learn them. It is to be our policy, how- 
 ever, to understand more work of this character than it has been possible 
 to do in the past. (Applause) 
 
 MR. WOOLLEN: The meeting wil'. now be addressed by Mr. R. B. 
 Miller, Forester of Illinois. (Applause) 
 
 MR. R. B. MILLER : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, it is the intention 
 in this paper to discuss very briefly those forest influences and problems 
 in Illinois which are vital to a forestry policy, which are also common 
 to Indiana and Ohio and which will furnish a committee from this con- 
 ference some definite basis upon which to work when they summarize its 
 findings. 
 
 You have only to look at some of the topographic sheets which the 
 United States Geological Survey and the State Geological Survey are 
 making in Illinois to assure yourself that it is not entirely a prairie State. 
 According to Professor J. G. Mosier, of the Soil Survey of Illinois, In 
 the sixty-two counties covered by the survey prior to 1917 there are 3,434,- 
 625 acres of broken and hilly land which should be in timber. Going over 
 the remaining forty counties, for which reports have not been finished 
 and results compiled, and comparing the amount of rough land there with 
 adjacent counties surveyed, he believes we can add to this 2,321,000 acres 
 more, making a total for the state of about 5,750,000 acres, almost one- 
 sixth of its total area of thirty-six million acres. This area, whose out- 
 lines are almost identical with the limits of the yellow silt loam soil as 
 mapped by soil experts, varies in the different counties from .18 to eighty 
 per cent, and if cultivated is subject to serious and destructive erosion. 
 
 What is being done to keep this land which is potential forest soil 
 permanently in timber? A few figures from some of the members of the 
 Illinois Academy of Sciences who have been working on some of these 
 counties for several years will help to answer the question. Dr. Pepoon 
 of Chicago says that Jo Daviess county, credited with sixty-two and four- 
 tenths per cent, of this class of land was originally a forest land. Now 
 there is only about five per cent, of merchantable timber in solid blocks 
 used mainly for posts and fuel, while about fifteen per cent, may be 
 classed as heavily culled. In La Salle county, according to Dr. George D. 
 Fuller, of Chicago University, out of 35,220 acres examined only 6,530 
 acres, or two and three-tenths per cent, of the area covered by the survey 
 is forested, this being in ravines or along the larger rivers. 
 
12 
 
 In Cook County, according to Dr. Waterman, of Northwestern Uni- 
 versity, Department of Botany, out of 5,760 acres surveyed, only seven hun- 
 dred acres still bear original forest growth and of this only eighty acres 
 is virgin forest. The Cook County Forest Preserve Board, however, is 
 doing much to save these scattered bits of native forest for the people 
 of Cook County as a recreation ground and now has over 17,500 acres of 
 such forest under its jurisdiction. 
 
 Forest Influences. Among the forest influences or forest reactions 
 which should be considered in Illinois are the effects of the removal of 
 the forest cover in causing irregularity of stream flow due to the drying up 
 of streams and springs, with destructive floods. Dr. Fernow says that the 
 stopping of floods is an engineering problem but that forests can be de- 
 pended upon to render the flow of water throughout the year more uniform. 
 Illustrations from remote regions lose their effect but we might take a 
 specific one from Jo Daviess County. One flood in a stream only five- 
 miles long destroyed a stone mill dam and wrecked the large flouring mill. 
 Some fifteen feet of silt was deposited on the bed of the mill pond after 
 the flood had subsided, representing as Dr. Pepoon says, "one foot of 
 eroded soil from four acres of farm land." 
 
 Another marked result of deforestation in this same county has been 
 the drying up of springs and brooks and the lowering of the water table. 
 This is quite in conformity with evidence cited by Greve, by McGee, Tourney 
 and Mead. Where originally there were six minor brooks and fifteen 
 springs in a certain map area, today none remain and the ground water has 
 been lowered from eight to twelve feet below its former level. This is not 
 the opinion of a casual visitor to the region but the observation of one 
 who has studied the same region for years. 
 
 Erosion. It is stated on good authority that leaf mould will absorb 
 from two to four times its weight in water. Due to this large absorptive 
 capacity, measurements made in France show that surface run-off from 
 wooded slopes is only one-half of that from deforested slopes. Reduction 
 of run-off prevents erosion, so that one of the main remedies for badly 
 eroded and gullied land, according to the Illinois Soil Survey, is "to put 
 them back into forests as rapidly as possible." Their reports abound 
 with instances of where soil abandonment is taking place, but more espe- 
 cially in the seven southern counties and in those adjoining the Wabash, 
 Mississippi and Illinois rivers. The Illinois Geological Survey speaks of 
 deforestation as one of the agencies in causing erosion, with the attendant 
 evils of gullying and sheet washing. 
 
 Let us take some specific examples. Dr. Fuller says of LaSalle county, 
 in the upper Illinois valley region, that "along many of the stream valleys 
 are slopes of such a character that the removal of the forest cover will 
 cause, and in some cases has already caused rather extensive gullying." 
 
 In Union county, where the Dongola topographic sheet is being prepared, 
 many fields were seen, especially in yellow silt loam soil, where gullies 
 were forming and the owners of the farms were making unsuccessful 
 efforts to stop them with brush and straw. According to the older resi- 
 dents, these slopes had years ago been covered with a forest of tulip, white 
 Q^}£ &nd ^^ed P§Hr P^4 PaH ^>^4 sycamore sp§dli|^gs, ^lo»g with sass^f^'^^ 
 
13 
 
 and inferior species, can now be found getting a foothold in some of them, 
 showing that with a little assistance they might again become forested. In 
 some fields seed had come in from the lower bottomland woods ; in many 
 cases it would be a question of planting. 
 
 Dr. Pepoon says that in Jo Daviess county cutting away the forests 
 has resulted in erosion, "with all of its attendant evils." The Illinois 
 Geological Survey in dealing with the Galena and Elizabeth Quadrangles, 
 there says, under recommendations about erosion that if light pasturing 
 and getting the land back into grass are not sufficient to stop the wash, 
 rapidly growing trees, like the cottonwood and locust, can be planted, 
 and the fields gradually brought back into timber land. Then later, by 
 judicious cutting and replanting, the land may be made to yield a revenue 
 from timber, instead of producing scantier and scantier crops until they 
 become so small as to have no value. 
 
 Competent authority says that leaf-litter should not be grazed or 
 burned over in order to have the maximum effect in preventing surface 
 run-off, and this brings us to the subjects of grazing and fire protection. 
 Suppose we take first the question of grazing and the problem of what 
 may be called woodland pasture. 
 
 Grazing and the Woodland Pasture. Dr. George D. Fuller, of the Uni- 
 versity of Chicago Department of Botany, who has worked two summers 
 In LaSalle county and knows thoroughly the character of the woods in that 
 county, says that "grazing is so universally practiced that not over 5% of 
 the oak and bottom land forests show reproduction in progress at the 
 present time." From a strip estimate made in September of this year 
 in a 100 acre woodland and pasture of the open park type, classed by Dr. 
 Fuller as an "oak-hickory forest," we find as a consequence of grazing of 
 cattle and hogs that there is less than one tree per acre of the three-inch 
 diameter dass of any species. Most of the trees are over 50 years of age, 
 showing that there is no future crop of young trees coming on. The trees 
 are very short holed, and while diameter growth was found to be rapid in 
 these trees there are only 46 trees per acre and a stand of 1881 board feet 
 per acre, so that the increment in volume on an acre would be very small. 
 
 In other forests of LaSalle county, where for some reason grazing had 
 been lighter, we found the number of two and three inch trees had in- 
 creased to 62 per aci'e, the total number of trees standing on an acre to 
 348, and the stand per acre to 4,625 board feet. While this disparity was 
 in part due to differences in site, we can attribute a large part to the fact 
 that trees of the smaller diameter classes had not been destroyed by graz- 
 ing, but had grown up to healthy, middle-sized trees making up the bulk 
 of the forest and offering some chance of financial profit to the owner. 
 
 In the ravines of some of these pastured forests in LaSalle county, 
 where moisture conditions were better, there were more trees of the 
 smaller diameter classes again and fermination conditions were so good 
 and acorns so numerous on the ground that with a little care in excluding 
 Stock a good growth of young trees of r^d oak and other rapidly-growing 
 spcces would have resulted. 
 
 Some of these poorly-stocked, struggling white oak forests on rather 
 poor upland forest soils above Indian Creek Ua^ ip less t^h^ii 75 ye^rs pyg? 
 ^Hced the foUpwiRg crop per ^gf^ 1 
 
14 
 
 116 — 8-foot fence posts. 
 36 — 25-foot piling, with a top diameter of 6 Inches, 
 
 212 — 7-foot mine props. 
 2042 — 5-foot mine props. 
 Counting the pasture worth from three to four dollars per acre, it is a 
 question as to whether the land was not worth more for timber growing 
 than it will be for pasture or farm land when cut off. Besides, it will be 
 subject to severe gullying due to ravines which run through It, which 
 will extend themselves farther back each year it lies as stump land. 
 
 G^^azing — Jo Daviess County. This county is situated in the north- 
 western part of the State, and has escaped glaciation. Speaking of an 
 imgrazed forest in Jo Daviess County, which from the enumeration of many 
 rare herbaceous plants must be a paradise for the botanist, Dr. Pepoon, of 
 Chicago, says : "A very striking feature of this woodland is the very 
 large number of young oak, ash and hard maple, and to a lesser extent 
 hickery, elm, basswood and ironwood trees, many of which have reached 
 a height of 6 to 8 feet, and are evidently well started in a successful 
 struggle to reach maturity. This shows better than any other fact the 
 benefit to reproduction of keeping out cattle, sheep and hogs. From this 
 we may say that any forest land in this area will be able to perpetuate 
 itself if properly protected from grazing animals." 
 
 Wesley Bradfield, speaking of the northern Illinois river region, says, 
 that the most important consideration is that forest land should be devoted 
 solely to raising trees and should not be used as pasture land. "Forest land 
 should have the advantage of an unbroken ground cover of leaf mulch, 
 a soil which is not being constantly trampled by stock so that it will 
 remain loose and porous and a solid stand of trees, whether of new seed- 
 lings or trees which are nearly mature and ready to harvest." 
 
 Dr. Waterman, in speaking of the tracts of forest in Cook county says 
 that the worst things are picnicing and pasturage ; while Dr. Vestal, 
 speaking of Cumberland county, says pasturage is general and erosion has 
 resulted in many places. This connection between pasturage and gullying 
 of the land is mentioned by the Illinois Geological Survey, deforestation 
 and grazing being discussed as two important factors in erosion of man's 
 introduction. "The hoofs of cattle have cut the sod and over-grazing has 
 killed the grass in places, so that the soil has been laid bare, to be washed 
 by rains and blown by winds. These slopes in Fox valley might have been 
 kept in a more productive state by more restricted grazing, or by letting 
 them remain in timber." 
 
 Fwest Taxation. Prof. Chapman will discuss the modern methods of 
 taxation as applied to timberlands, so it is only necessary to mention 
 the known facts about taxation of timber land in Illinois. From personal 
 interviews with owners one learns that they are not cutting off the timber 
 because taxation is excessive but through a desire to benefit the pasture, 
 combined with ignorance of the true stumpage value of the timber and 
 the desire to get rid of it quickly and easily. This they do by selling it 
 for a lump sum to contractors dealing in mine props, posts and piling, 
 who have no interest in the tract other than financial profit. This is largely 
 a matter for educatioa of the public after it has been found out what thQ 
 
15 
 
 relative returas are from timber and farm crops on the same type of soil, 
 taking into consideration the expense for getting each crop, at compound 
 interest. 
 
 The main changes to be made would seem to be the adoption of more 
 uniform methods of valuation for timber land by the county assessors. 
 According to Wesley Bradfield, who investigated the methods of taxation 
 in about 15 counties of the State in 1908, these methods very greatly 
 among the following: Taking the value of the land for cultivation when 
 cleared ; assessing a certain per cent, of the value of timber on the land ; 
 taking the value of timber land as unimproved land only ; value with 
 reference to its location to easily accessible markets ; the value of the 
 land when used for pasture; and often simply an arbitrary determination 
 of the fair cash value of the property by the assessor. 
 
 There is a provision for a bounty to be offered by the Board of County 
 Commissioners to any person who shall plant one or more acres of land 
 with forest trees and properly cultviate the same for three years. This 
 bounty amounts to $10.00 per acre per annum for three years for each 
 acre planted, trees not being spaced a greater distance than ten feet 
 apart each way. Judging from the effect of bounty laws in other States, 
 this law has had little effect in stimulating general planting. 
 
 Fire Protection. So far as we have ascertained, there are no state 
 organizations for the protection of timber from fire in Illinois, except 
 such as may come under the jurisdiction of county forest preserve boards. 
 Fortunately, most of the timber is in small tracts, usually completely 
 surrounded by roads, which greatly decreases the fire hazard. 
 
 According to data compiled from reports sent in to Dr. Forbes in 1915 
 by the several county crop reporters, some counties had no fires and those 
 reported were most commonly caused by railroads, brush burning and 
 campers. In Perry county it was mentioned that fall and early winter 
 fires were started by coon hunters and in Union county we were told that 
 it was a common occurrence in some parts for these men to burn over 
 the woods at night to make travel through the woods easier for dogs. 
 There have been a few cases of incendiarism reported but this is punish- 
 able under Section 18 of the Criminal Code with a fine of from $5.00 to 
 $100.00 for wilfully starting brush or grass fires. 
 
 Railroads are made responsible for fires started by their engines and 
 there is a law requiring them to keep their rights of way clear of weeds, 
 grass and inflammable material. 
 
 Summarizing, we have shown that almost six million acres of land in 
 Illinois, on account of topogi-aphy and soil, are better fitted for growing 
 timber than for any other purpose ; that our stands of virgin timber are dis- 
 appearing rapidly through cutting or are being replaced by those of poor 
 growth capacity through grazing and occasional fires ; that this removal 
 of the forests, as evidenced by reliable investigators in several counties 
 and as shown by the reports of the Illinois Soil Survey and Illinois Geolog- 
 ical Survey, is bringing about the usual results — disastrous floods, the 
 drying up of springs and brooks and the lowering of the level of the ground 
 water ; that by the gullying of the lighter soils due to the removal of the 
 forest cover by unwise cutting and the pasturing of stock, much land is 
 
u 
 
 being rendered unfit for agriculture and offers a cliance for reforestation ; 
 and tliat minor changes may be necessary in methods of valuation of tim- 
 berlands and in fire protection. 
 
 The question remains, then, as to what steps the State should take, in 
 the interests of her citizens, not only to assume her share of responsibility 
 in the national program for increasing the available timber supply of the 
 country but to safeguard those remnants of the original forest which not 
 only contributed largely to the development of the State and her industries, 
 but by whose destruction the balance of Nature's forces have been seriously 
 disturbed. 
 
 Just as we will owe this conference a debt of gratitude for presenting 
 these facts to the public in a new light, so we look to it for valuable 
 assistance in working out a solution of this vital economic question. 
 (Applause) 
 
 MR. WOOLLEN: I now introduce the forester of Indiana, Mr. Charles 
 C. Deam. (Applause) 
 
 MR. CHARLES C. DEAM: Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, the 
 subject of my paper is "Forest Conditions in Indiana." 
 
 The area of Indiana is 22,403,502 acres. Practically the whole of the 
 State was formerly covered with one of the best hardwood forests of the 
 world. The wooded area has steadily decreased since active settlement 
 began about one hundred years ago. In 1880 the forest area has dwindled 
 down to 4,355,191 acres of first-class timberland. In 1917 the timberland 
 area of Indiana is given as 1,664,047 acres, or about seven per cent, of the 
 whole area. Virgin forests have become so scarce that only a few isolated 
 tracts remain. Turkey Run State Park, the largest of these, containing 
 less than three hundred acres, was recently purchased by some patriotic 
 citizens, and turned over to the State as a relic of the grandeur and 
 wealth of Indiana's primeval forests. 
 
 In 1910 statistics rank Indiana third in the amount and value of its 
 improved land, exceeded only by Iowa and Illinois. These statistics show 
 that Indiana is essentially an agricultural State, and that it will always 
 remain so, is implied by its geographical location. The geographical situa- 
 tion of Indiana favors agriculture, including both grazing and horticulture. 
 It is traversed by trunk line railroads in all directions with nearby term- 
 inals such as Chicago, with an estimated population of over three millions ; 
 Milwaukee with 504,707; Detroit and Cleveland with 936,000 each and 
 Cincinnati with 472,668. Indiana is the nearest source of supply to the 
 cities enumerated, for certain agricultural and horticultural products. 
 It also serves many smaller cities such as Louisville and others that 
 could be named. 
 
 The surface of the greater part of Indiana is level and is contained 
 in the glaciated region. This area has great agricultural possibilities, 
 about ninety-five per cent, of it being already well improved. It is 
 predicted that the forests of this area will gradually disappear and that 
 the only forest tree growth will be in the form of windbreaks. There are, 
 however, about twenty-three counties in the southern part of the State 
 that have a rough topography. This area is a series of hills and fertile 
 valleys of varying width and length. The hills vary in height from one 
 
17 
 
 hundred to two hundred feet. The slopes also vary from gentle to precip- 
 itous. The greater part of the slopes are gentle to steep. The soil of the 
 greater part of the area is limestone and will support a good stand of 
 blue grass. Parts of about ten cotinties have a residual soil composed of 
 decomposed sandstone, knobstone or knobstone shale which will not 
 support a good stand of blue grass, and which are regarded as our 
 poorest agricultural and forestal lands. This hill area may- be roughly 
 divided into forestal and agricultural lands. There is, however, a wide 
 divergance of opinion as to the definition of each in Indiana. The for- 
 ester tells us that all lands that will not support a permanent and profitable 
 agriculture should be classed as forest land. He calls attention to areas 
 that have already been cleared and farmed successfully for a few years, 
 but having become washed and eroded, have been abandoned. He says : 
 "Such lands should not have been cleared." The Agricultural Experimental 
 Station expert tells us that the washing and erosion is the result of poor 
 farming, and that practically any slope in Indiana might be cleared and 
 farmed or grazed successfully. The land owner will tell you he can 
 clear a rugged slope and grow tobacco on it a year or two and receive 
 an income from five to one hundred times the value of the land, but he 
 fails to tell you that after a few years the soil on their farmed slopes will 
 be washed away. We should, therefore, not be surprised to find thou- 
 sands of acres of hill land that have been farmed for a year or two and 
 then abandoned, or left to "go to pasture or grow up" to use the vernacular 
 of the hill country. 
 
 Today there are thousands of acres of cleared land in the southern 
 part of the State which are not now farmed because they have washed 
 or eroded so that they cannot be farmed or are too unprofitable to be 
 farmed. They are growing up in poverty grass, weeds, briars, sassafras, 
 persimmon, etc. These washed areas usually occur in small tracts of a few 
 acres in extent. Yet the agricultural expert tells us all of these areas 
 can be redeemed and be made profitable for agriculture and grazing. 
 
 Is this hill country forestal or agricultural lands? Let us consult 
 statistics and also note the activities of the present population. In 1915 
 ninety-two per cent, of Indiana was listed as farm land. Of twenty of 
 the hilliest counties of the State, eleven reported more than ninety-two 
 per cent, of their county as farm land. In 1917 the average sized farm in 
 Indiana was one hundred three acres, yet in eleven of the roughest counties 
 of the State, the average farm contained only ninety-six acres. The 
 average rural population in Indiana in 1916 was forty-three per square 
 mile. Yet Crawford, Orange and Perry counties which are regarded as 
 among the roughest counties of the State had an average of forty. The 
 average forty-three for the State represents an inflated figure, since the 
 large rural coal mine and suburban populations are included in the State 
 average. It is reasonable to believe that agriculture today in the counties 
 just named is supporting as large and contented a population as the 
 average county. 
 
 It is a fact that the forests are disappearing' most rapidly in the 
 hilliest counties. Why is this? The following may be offered in answer. 
 The land owner has no notion of the annual increment value of an acre of 
 
18 
 
 forest land. The writer has asked scores of land owners at what they esti- 
 mated the value of the growth of an acre of woodland, and not one has 
 had the knowledge or even the courage to venture an answer. He does 
 not know the potential value of a forest, but he does know that a forest 
 crop is a long time investment, and that his economic conditions demand an 
 investment of short duration. The hilly or forestal land of Indiana is 
 surrounded by abundant coal fields, and the slash of a forest crop has 
 little or no commercial value. In most instances after all of the mer- 
 chantable timber has been removed, the slash would not pay for clearing 
 of the land. Coal can be bought for what it costs to cut wood and many 
 farmers who have wood rotting in their forest, take produce to market 
 and return with a load of coal. The time required to cut wood can be 
 spent at more remunerative employment or the bitter winter days of wood 
 cutting can be turned into a rabbit hunt. In the hilly counties there is no 
 outlet for surplus labor such as in the northern counties. In the north, 
 witness each morning the thousands of laborers, especially girls, on 
 the interurban cars going to the cities to work. As a consequence the 
 farmer of the hill country is compelled to use the surplus man-power on 
 his farm, which in the aggregate is eight per cent, smaller than the farm of 
 the north. To do this, he sets to clearing more land, and grows tobacco, 
 which requires about ten times more man-power to grow than corn. Or, 
 he will grow tomatoes, strawberries or other bush fruits or vegetables. As 
 an example of this form of intensive agriculture may be cited the growing 
 of strawberries on the "knobs" in the vicinity of Borden where as high 
 as five car loads have been shipped in one day. The greatest inroad on our 
 forest area has been made by the recent development of the dairy business. 
 The introduction and wide use of the silo ; our recent knowledge of certain 
 forage plants, such as alfalfa ; and our greater facilities for marketing 
 milk and cream, such as improved roads, auto trucks, etc., have been 
 extremely favorable to the development of the dairy business. The high 
 price of food products has advanced the price of butter fat to the point 
 where the hill farmer will tell you that the income from his cows is equal 
 to that of his farm. In order to get more grazing land, every available 
 nook and corner and forest land is taken, and the remaining forest land 
 is being fenced. It is now rare to see open forest land, or a fenced forest 
 that is not pastured. It is a well known fact that pasturage will stop 
 all reproduction in a hardwood forest, and if there is not a change in the 
 management of the forest area in the hill country, there will be no forests 
 after the maturity of the present crop. 
 
 The fire hazard in Indiana is not a serious barrier to maintaining our 
 forest area. Forests are usually open, small and separated by numerous 
 public roads. In any event fire would not burn over any great area if 
 any organized effort was made to stop it. As a rule, owners do not care 
 if their forests are burned over, in fact many burn their forests over 
 each year to keep reproduction down, and to burn up the leaves so the 
 grass will get a start. When a fire is started in a forest there is little 
 effort made to stop it except when it threatens a fence, haystack or build- 
 ings. 
 
 Our present tax system is an important factor in encouraging land 
 
19 
 
 owners to clear land. There is a widespreafl belief that forests should 
 be exempt from taxation, basing the claim on the communal benefit of the 
 forest. 
 
 To summarize : 
 
 Indiana is essentially an agricultural State. 
 
 It is divided into small farms, averaging one hundred three acres, all 
 of which are in the hands of private ownership. 
 
 An average of ninety-two per cent, of all these farms is improved, 
 leaving less than ninety-one acres of forest land to each farm. 
 
 The economic conditions confronting the owners ; the high price of 
 farm products and nearness to the markets which make farm land worth 
 more than forest land ; and the ignorance of the owner of forest manage- 
 ment, combine to cause the neglect of the practice of forestry in Indiana. 
 
 I have interviewed many land owners and all agree that something 
 should be done to provide a future supply of timber for Indiana. They 
 claim that they cannot afford to practice forestry on their small hold- 
 ings under the present economic conditions, and that the State should 
 own the forest land. 
 
 Since the condition of the public mind is in favor of State owned forests, 
 I would recommend that the State at once purchase a sufficient area to 
 provide for the future supply of timber, and that the same be paid for by 
 a bond issue to mature in from fifty to one hundred years. (Applause) 
 
 Some announcements were made by the Secretary. 
 
 ADJOURNMENT. 
 
 WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The meeting was called to order at 2 :00 p. m., with Dr. F. W. Shepard- 
 son presiding. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: The convention will please come to order. The 
 gentleman who presided this morning has been obliged to fill another 
 engagement and the committee in charge has asked me to assume the chair 
 this afternoon. I am going to ask Mr. Sauers to read us a letter that he 
 received from Mr. B. A. Johnson. 
 
 MR. CHARLES G. SAUERS: (Reading letter) 
 
 "When Charles G. Sauers, wi-iting for Richard Lieber, Director of 
 Conservation of the State of Indiana, addressed me a letter on September 
 28th, he expressed himself in the last paragraph of his communication in 
 a heartfelt and direct manner which has led me to believe that he meant 
 it, and which furnished me a text for the shortest possible communication 
 that I can write you on this subject. 
 
 "Mr. Sauers said : 'Will you address this conference upon the subject 
 of Co-operation Between the Lumberman and the Forester?' We realize 
 that it is possibly a rather delicate subject but know that you have the 
 situation well in mind and believe that you can handle it to the best 
 advantage. Will you make this address and will you also arrange your 
 plans to be at the conference throughout the two days? Questions will 
 be constantly coming up which you will be best able to answer and your 
 presence will be of great aid. We cannot take no for an answer because 
 you are needed.* 
 
20 
 
 "I do not consider that this matter of a discussion of the relations 
 between the lumberman and the forester is a delicate subject. I am 
 much of the opinion that there has been altogether too much diplomacy 
 and preservation of ethics, and altogether too much of an endeavor upon 
 the part of both sides of this discussion to handle the subject vpith wool 
 lined and heavy gloves — rather than going at the matter with hammer and 
 saw and ax. 
 
 "We have all hedged about this affair with an altogether too nice, and 
 lady-like an attitude to get very far with such a subject. 
 
 "The forester, being a man of the schools cleverly and fully educated, 
 desiring more to see his formulas worked out and his ethics paramount 
 than coiild be described by 'money in the till' as measuring the result 
 of work well done, being a man of a profession which never contemplated 
 the amassing of money as denoting success in life, has failed to recognize 
 the very opposite attributes of the lumberman. Of course this is not true 
 of all foresters and neither does it matter whether it is true or not, provid- 
 ing the forester has deported himself in such a surface way as to carry 
 a conviction of this attitude to the mind of the lumberman. 
 
 "I maintain that this Is the basic cause for the lumberman's opposition 
 to the forester, whether the forester has been able to see the condition or 
 not. The forester is highly specialized in his grasp of forestry and all it 
 means to him, but he is not highly specialized and has a very extremely 
 marked lack of information as to the effect his attitude naturally must 
 have upon the lumberman. 
 
 "This statement of mine is carefully thought out and deliberately made 
 with no desire to be 'delicate' and with only a desire to 'know the truth' 
 because the Bible says 'the truth shall set ye free' ; and the query I want to 
 make is, 'do we not wish above all things, freedom?' 
 
 "In any reference I make to lumbermen and their attitude toward for- 
 esters, I do not refer to lumbermen as a class, but to the majority of 
 lumbermen, to the very large and overwhelming majority of lumbermen, 
 for there are many lumbermen, of course, who have butted their way 
 through '!ootball wedges and conscientiously worked their way through 
 university courses, whether approaching them from the necessity of 
 doing janitor work to pay for their matriculation or from the 'Gold 
 Coast' of some opulent eastern university, riding to their class rooms in 
 foreign-born runabouts. 
 
 "Now the majority of lumbermen do not lumber out of books, and have 
 a clean cut inherited opinion of the rights of property as set down in 
 the constitution of the United States. His trees belong to him to have 
 and to hold and to cut as he pleases. While it is altogether probable that 
 the great public has something to say about all this thing of 'a national 
 timberland policy for the United States' the majority of lumbermen have 
 not considered the great public as having anything to do with their busi- 
 ness any more than they have an interest in the great public's business 
 and very naturally, resent anybody telling them what they shall do with 
 their trees quite as much as any man would resent public interference with 
 the amount of money he should use for his personal pleasure or what 
 style of car he should drive or where he should bapU W§ ffon^y OF Wfi{^t 
 type of woman he should choose for hU wife, 
 
 1 
 
21 
 
 "Up to within a very few years, and even up to within a very few 
 months, the majority of the lumbermen of the land have not known or 
 cared much or believed much concerning the, possible will of the people, 
 as discussed in soviet and Bolshevik proganda, either academically or 
 in fact. 
 
 "The great majority of lumbermen have not very seriously considered 
 that the base of their property is something emanating from the public 
 domain and that theirs is a so-called 'wasting industry.' 
 
 "The majority of the lumbermen of the United States realize that they 
 are misunderstood and brow beaten by the public press, by bureaucratic 
 Washington, by government and by public opinion, and they resent it 
 and they have never yet been able to organize a machine to fight it and 
 they never will. 
 
 "I could name one hundred fifty lumbermen, giving their initials and 
 home addresses, without misspelling a name or giving a wrong location 
 where those lumbermen might be found ordinarily, which list when it 
 had been compiled, would contain the names and addresses of practically 
 all of the high class lumbermen in the United States who had ever 
 made a call of courtesy or one of business in a voluntary way on the 
 Forest Service in Washington, or who had any knowledge or any care 
 for the wonderful institution that the Forest Service is, as it is now 
 housed and now functions in the Atlantic Building in our national Capitol. 
 
 "Lumbermen generally, that is the majority of lumbermen, know a 
 great deal more about the Forest Products Laboratory at Madison than 
 they do about the Forest Service at Washington, but they have no real 
 patience with scientific affairs as a whole. They are not interested in 
 effciency diagram, or especially in statistics, but are deeply and partic- 
 ularly interested in the advancement in public favor of the particular 
 wood which is in the till at the end of the year. 
 
 "This attitude does not under any circumstances establish the fact 
 that the lumberman is ignorant, far from it. He is like Barney Fagan's 
 'high born lady' — born that way. 
 
 "Yes, I know the above statement needs explanation for it is a state- 
 ment and not an argument, a statement of facts, a hurdle set up in your 
 way, all ye organizers wherever ye are dispersed. 
 
 "God never made any two trees alike and he made many species of 
 trees — all the varieties of fir and hemlock, pine and hardwoods, each with 
 its special attribute and never any common denominator of value, .but 
 the false and fiated denominator of the 'so much per thousand feet' ; 
 and there never was any one thousand foot pile of lumber which had 
 the same exact value of any other one thousand foot pile of lumber, even 
 if it all came out of the same tree and same log and all was cut to one 
 particular dimension ; and therein are the differences that beset any man 
 who endeavors to make the lumbermen of the United States all of a sim- 
 ilar opinion upon any subject. 
 
 "Manufacturing methods differ in great measure with each species of 
 wood manufactured and one locality with another. For this reason there 
 is no nationally or internationally known unit of value in lumber. 
 
 ♦'A pig Of Irou is a pig of iron at Gary, at JJonglJOiig, on the Thames 
 
22 
 
 embankment;, or In the Gogebic range. A bushel of wheat, with but little 
 difference in grade, is comparable with all other bushels of wheat, whether 
 situated in North Dakota or by the edge of the Black Sea, but one thousand 
 feet of lumber is not like any other one thousand feet of lumber that 
 ever has been or will be, when it comes to giving it a value, and therein 
 is the reason why there are so many manufacturers' associations in the 
 lumber trade, and why those manufacturers' associations have up to date 
 paid vastly more attention to making the lumber consuming world con- 
 scious of the fact that their lumber is better than any other lumber, 
 and have paid so little attention to what any government bureau or any 
 scientific man in the bureau, or out of it, may consider to be the proper 
 treatment of his raw product, whether it be in the pile or in the forest. 
 
 "The analytical forest service man and independent forester and 
 scientific lumberman will get a fundamental truth out of these words 
 without boiling them even to a fever heat, or into an epigram, and yet 
 this is not pessimism, this is only the truth, and I wish you would all 
 try and make the most of it. For, along the lines of truth are the 
 gateways to co-operation, co-ordination, solidarity, and upon no other 
 basis can you figure out a practical national lumber policy for the 
 United States, and you never will figure out such a policy until you 
 learn to jump all these hurdles without tripping. 
 
 "How will you do this thing? Keep your associations of all lumber- 
 men, of all classes, going at even speed ahead. Try and believe that you 
 are all in the same boat, under orders for the same port, and don't rock it. 
 Keep up an everlasting discussion of this subject and bring constructive 
 suggestions to the forum of the Lumber World Review or to any other 
 forum, where free speech and honest thought is tolerated 'in this land of 
 the free and home of the brave' and remember that the student who lives 
 in an apartment and likes it has as much right to an opinion as the man 
 who has several million dollars in the bank ; and probably, sometimes, you 
 will reach a conclusion, but it will not any of it be done that will be 
 worth while unless the rights of all concerned are considered. 
 
 "BoLLiNG Arthur Johnson, 
 
 "Editor and Publisher, 
 "Lumber World Review." 
 
 The Chairman apiwinted the following as the Resolutions Committee : 
 
 Richard Lieber, Chairman, Indianapolis 
 
 E. M. Stotlar, Illinois 
 
 Findlay Torrence, Ohio 
 
 Dr. F. W. Shepardson, Illinois 
 
 W. A. Snyder, Ohio 
 
 J. G. Peters, Washington 
 
 C. H. Kramer, Indiana 
 
 P. S. Ridsale, Washington 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : This morning our thoughts were turned toward 
 the forest situation in these three states. You must have noted with a 
 
28 
 
 marked degree of interest as each man presented a paper looking at the 
 situation from a different angle and each gave us something well worth 
 our consideration and careful thought. 
 
 This afternoon we are to turn away for a while from state lines to 
 consider the subject from a national point of view. Our general subject is 
 "National Forestry Policy". The first speaker is known the country over 
 because of his work in the field. I want to introduce to you Lieutenant- 
 Colonel Henry S. Graves, Forester of the United States, who will talk 
 upon the forestry situation. (Applause) 
 
 LT.-COL. HENRY S. GRAVES: Ladies and gentlemen, thev forest 
 situation is of peculiar interest to Indiana, Illinois, and Ohio. All three 
 states have a pressing problem in the production of home grown forests. 
 They are also vitally concerned in the forest situation in other parts of 
 the country, for they are large consumers of lumber and other wood prod- 
 ucts and already the greater part of what they use is brought in from 
 other states. 
 
 At this time public attention is focused on the forest question as never 
 before. This is due partly to the lessons of the war, which have empha- 
 sizd the national importance of all of our natural resources ; it is due 
 also to the very high prices of lumber and of articles manufactured from 
 wood, to difliculties in obtaining certain raw products in adequate quan- 
 tities, and to local consequences of forest destruction that are making 
 themselves felt in an increasing degree. 
 
 This conference is very significant, for it represents, to my mind, an 
 inquiry on the part of the public as to how our forests are being 
 handled — whether they are being safeguarded and perpetuated, and if 
 not, what constructive plans are in contemplation to meet the situation. 
 
 Tlie Service of Forest. Forests render an indispensable service in three 
 ways: 
 
 (a) In the production of materials for construction and for the man- 
 ufacture of a multitude of articles essential in the industries and in our 
 every-day life. 
 
 (b) In the utilization of land that would otherwise be idle, thus 
 making possible the maintenance of local industries and the building 
 up of communities. 
 
 (c) In the protection of mountain slopes, the conservation of sources 
 of water, and the provision of other general public benefits. 
 
 The central states are interested in forests and forestry in all three of 
 these aspects. In some ways the problems of forestry are more pressing 
 in this region than in some other sections, and if the citizens of these 
 states wish their various industrial needs to be met, it is essential that they 
 interest themselves in our forest problems in both their local and national 
 phases. 
 
 Conditions in the Central States. Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, together 
 with the neighboring portions of Michigan and Wisconsin, constitute 
 the most important center of wood manufacturing industries in the 
 country, that is the industries making vehicles, furniture, railway cars, 
 tools, planing-mill products, and the like. About one-third of the total 
 capital invested and about one-third of the wage earners in the wood- 
 
24 
 
 manufacturing industries of the country are in this section. And the 
 lumber consumed amounts to five and one-half billion feet a year, or about 
 a quarter of the aggregate used in this country for such enterprises. 
 
 Of the approximately three and one-third billion feet of material that 
 goes into the wood-using manufactures of Illinois, Indiana and Ohio 
 alone, nearly one and one-half billion feet are in the form of hardwoods 
 native to and formerly abundant in these states. In fact, it was the 
 large supply of superior oals, hickory, maple, ash, yellow poplar, and 
 walnut that led to the establishment of many of the wood manufactures 
 in the early days. 
 
 Twenty years ago Indiana led all the states in the quantity of hard- 
 wood lumber cut. At that time the state produced more lumber than 
 it used. Since then the forests have been rapidly cut away to supply 
 the industries and to make way for agriculture, so that the annual cut is 
 now only about a quarter of what it was then. 
 
 About half of the wood material now used by the Indiana industries 
 comes from species native to the State, but about two-thirds of this 
 hardwood material is imported from other states. As long ago as 1911 
 only about twenty per cent of the walnut used in Indiana came from its 
 own forests, about a quarter of the yellow poplar and hickory, a third of 
 the basswood, forty per cent of the hard maple and forty-three per cent 
 of the oak. The showing today would be still more unfavorable. 
 
 In Illinois the wood-using industries use about one and three-fourths 
 billion feet of lumber, of which about one-third is hardwood of species 
 native to the State. The industries, however, have to import over ninety 
 per cent, of this hardwood material. Ohio is somewhat better off than 
 Illinois, being able to produce about a quarter of the hardwoods used 
 in her wood manufacturing industries. 
 
 Dependence on Other States. The situation in hardwoods, however, 
 constitutes only one phase of the problem. These states within the hard- 
 wood belt of the country and their production of softwoods is and always 
 was relatively small. For general construction lumber they must look 
 to other sources of supply. And here we have a demand not only from the 
 wood manufacturing industries, but also from all other consumers who 
 use lumber for various general purposes, including the great number of 
 shippers who need material for boxes, crates, and other containers. 
 
 Among the consumers of lumber, too, are representatives of the greatest 
 wood consuming group in the country — the farmers. Though the farms in 
 the central states have better and more adequate buildings than those 
 in many other regions, nevertheless the needs for building material, now 
 and in the future, of the farmers in Indiana, Illinois and Ohio must be 
 borne in mind in considering either a local or a national policy of forestry. 
 
 These facts raise two very important questions : First, what can these 
 states do in the way of production of wood by growth; and, second, what is 
 the situation in the rest of the country regarding forest supplies? 
 
 Today the home product does not nearly meet the annual requirements, 
 and the cutting that is done far exceeds what is grown each year. It is 
 probable, from the best estimates that I have been able to secure, that 
 the annual growth of material of potential value in the three states is 
 
25 
 
 not over one-quarter of what is cut each year. This means that the 
 forests are progressively losing ground with considerable rapidity. 
 
 This deficit is due only in part to the clearing of land for agriculture. 
 It is due also to the failure to handle the lands in a way to secure good 
 reproduction and properly to protect the young trees that become estab- 
 lished. With better care and management the forest lands of these states 
 should yield from two to three times the present growth, and this would, 
 I believe, be possible without cheeking the extension of cultivation over 
 lands suited to that purpose. 
 
 These central states should not, however, consider that their respon- 
 sibility ceases with promoting the production of home grown timber. Even 
 with that production, it will be necessary to look to other sources for a 
 large part of the annual requirements of the industries, of the farmers, 
 and of other consumers. If these states complacently expect that there 
 will be an indefinite supply in the general market of the kind of material 
 they have been securing, they will be gravely disillusioned, unless the 
 present methods of handling forests are changed. They may not be able 
 to act directly in altering conditions outside their own boundaries. Where 
 interstate interests are involved the nation itself must take the leadership 
 and direction. Individual states may, however, express their demand for 
 the protection of their industrial interests and support the government in 
 the necessary action to secure it. 
 
 The 'National Problem. We have throughout our history drawn chiefly 
 upon the original forest growth for the bulk of the material used in the 
 industries. Though in certain localities we are now beginning to use 
 second growth for certain purposes, most of the lumber in the general 
 market comes from so-called original growth, that is, from trees one hun- 
 dred and fifty to two hundred and fifty years old. As one region has been 
 exhausted railroads have been extended into new centers and material in 
 abundance has been furnished the general market. After the softwoods 
 of the northeast and the lake states were largely cut, we looked to the 
 southern pine forests, and the country felt secure in the knowledge that 
 there are still large quantities of timber on the Pacific Coast. Many 
 economists still think in terms of our original supplies, largely ignoring 
 the high prices that result from the transport of material for two or three" 
 thousand miles, ignoring the consequences of the withdrawal of competition 
 from the older and more accessible sources of supplies, ignoring the 
 effect on communities of exhausting the resource that has constituted the 
 chief basis of their industrial prosperity. All these, and other matters too, 
 must be included in considering the economic problems of forests and 
 forestry. 
 
 The lumber industry has been built up to exploit old growth timber. 
 The belief that there is a plentiful supply left somewhere further on has 
 made the country complacent, and the result is that our forests have 
 been cut without reference to restocking with new growth. The interest 
 in protection has been chiefly centered on the old growth timber. Little 
 progress has been made in restoring to productiveness lands laid waste 
 by destructive lumbering and fire. 
 
 The consequence is that most of the eastern states are in a position 
 
26 
 
 analogous to Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois. They are drawing upon other 
 states for a large part of their requirements, the amount cut each 
 year is two to three times what is produced by growth in the home 
 forests, and there is an increasing area of wasted lands unfit for cultiva- 
 tion and that might be producing forests. Prices are very high, partly 
 because of the same factors that influence the price of other commodities, 
 partly because the lumber is brought from greater distances or from less 
 accessible areas that require expensive logging operations. 
 
 Difficulties are already being encountered in securing raw material of 
 the character and in the quantity desired. Many of our newsprint 
 paper mills of the east find increasing embarrassment for pulp wood 
 within reasonable shipping distance. Some concerns will probably have 
 to close, or move to the west. 
 
 The HardAjcood Situation. Perhaps the most serious situation exists in 
 the matter of hardwood supplies. In the case of softwoods there is a much 
 greater reserve supply left than with hardwoods. Moreover, one species 
 of softwood may be more readily substituted for another previously used, 
 than in the case of hardwoods. 
 
 The quantities of original hardwood growth in the Appalachians, the 
 Ozarks, and southern valleys are less than iwpularly supposed. Most 
 of the bodies of timber suited to major lumber operations are already 
 placed, and the majority of operators say that they have not more than ten 
 to fifteen years' supply ahead. Estimates of the available supplies of old 
 timber show that most of our better grades of first growth poplar, basswood 
 ash, and walnut will last but fifteen to twenty years, and of oak but 
 little longer. 
 
 This in itself would not be alarming if there were a crop of younger 
 growth coming on. We find that our old reserve of virgin hardwoods is 
 being rapidly depleted. This is inevitable. But unfortunately it is not 
 being replaced in any adequate degree. Not only is there almost no 
 effort to secure a replacement, but fires still burn over the lands, destroy- 
 ing what nature may establish and preventing natural seeding. 
 
 The hardwood industries must look in the future to two sources of 
 supply : The mountain regions, such as the Appalachians and Ozarks, 
 where there are large areas of land suited only to tree growth, and to 
 the smaller tracts of land unsuited to cultivation within the farming 
 country. We are failing to secure adequate forest replacement and 
 growth in both these natural sources of future supply. 
 
 Our hardwood forests are progi-essively deteriorating. Some sort of 
 vegetation follows cutting as a rule in the hardwood region, but it is 
 very commonly of poor species, scanty, and of poor form, having but 
 little potential value. 
 
 Other countries are looking to the United States for hardwoods. 
 Russia, Finland, and Scandinavia may largely supply the deficit of western 
 Europe for softwoods, but there will be a constant demand by Europe 
 for our hardwoods if we have the supply. We are not today producing 
 by growth enough to meet our own future needs for hardwoods, let alone" 
 the needs of other countries. 
 
 The General Situation. In the main the problem of a supply of soft- 
 
2? 
 
 wood lnmb©r is less serious than of Iiardwoorts, becaiise there is a much 
 greater reserve supply of old timber. The coniferous forests are not, how- 
 ever, being handled materially better than the hardwoods, and the damage 
 by fire is much greater. We have not yet mastered the fires. The 
 coniferous forests are in the main cut without reference to their perpet- 
 uation, and the replacement and growth that does occur is far below 
 what is used and destroyed and only a small part of what the country 
 will need in the future. 
 
 The most serious situation in regard to softwoods is that the old 
 centers of supply are being rapidly exhausted without adequate replace- 
 ment and our country must depend on material brought from great dis- 
 tances. The southern pine which has been a dominating factor in the 
 market for a number of years is already yielding to Pacific Coast lumber 
 in many places. This tendency will increase, for most of the old growth 
 yellow pine will be cut within fifteen to twenty years. This means that 
 the country is paying a constantly increasing freight bill for its lumber. 
 I don't know what freight bill Indiana pays. I think New York pays 
 over six million dollars a year. 
 
 It is not sound national economy for a country of our size to have 
 to draw its lumber supplies from one section. The Atlantic States 
 should not be required to obtain their lumber from three thousand miles 
 away, with the high prices necessitated by the long transport. There 
 should be producing forests well distributed throughout the country. It 
 is of interest to the central states to have producing forests in Minnesota 
 and in the south. With the rapid depletion of these older centers and the 
 failure to replace them, the burdens upon the farmers and other consumers 
 in the central states and the east will increase each year. 
 
 Many have urged that we are using more lumber than is really nec- 
 essary. It is urged that we can reduce our consumption of lumber and 
 use other materials. We might become a cement using nation like the 
 Mediterranean countries. We learned to do without a good many things 
 in the war. But that does not signify that it would react to our public 
 welfare to do so in peace times. Our consumption will decline if lumber 
 becomes so high priced as to be out of reach of the ordinary buyer. If 
 it is available, however, our total consumption will not decline; it will, 
 in my opinion, rise in the future. 
 
 Europe is often cited as requiring a constantly smaller quantity of 
 lumber. In England the total consumption of lumber from 1851 to 1911 
 increased five-fold. Its per capita consumption was in 1911 three times 
 what it had been sixty years before. 
 
 It is not necessary for us to become a cement using nation. It is not 
 necessary for us to close our wood using plants. It is not necessary for 
 the farmers and other consumers to use other materials when they prefer 
 wood as a better and more convenient material for many purposes. It is 
 not necessary for our nation to be deprived of a material that in the war 
 proved to be an absolute necessity for a multitude of uses. For we have 
 enough land for forest productibn that is of little or no value for anything 
 else, and will not be used for anything else. Some have estimated that 
 we have fifty to one hundred million acres of such lands that already 
 
tave been reduced to waste and today lie idle and unproductivow I ani 
 speaking, of course, of conditions where the bulk of the land, or a con- 
 siderable part of it, is porous and suited only to the growing of forests. 
 We can meet our forest needs if only we will stop the destructive processes 
 that are now in vogue and employ wholly practical methods to secure 
 forest renewal. 
 
 Forestry the Solution. The solution of our forestry problem con- 
 sists in stopping the destruction by fire and other agencies, in using 
 methods that make possible natural reproduction after logging, and in 
 the restocking by tree growth of lands that have been made economic 
 wastes. The fear has been expressed by some that such an objective would 
 conflict with the expansion of agriculture and stock raising. Exactly the 
 contrary would be the result. No sane program of forestry would propose 
 the use of lands for forestry that are better adapted to agriculture and 
 settlement. Forestry, agriculture, and stock raising go hand in hand. 
 They are complementary. It is possible to point to numerous circum- 
 stances and cases where destructive handling of forests retards agricul- 
 tural development. We can show in the same way how the right handling 
 of forests with protection and replacement is a factor, and often the prin- 
 cipal factor, in building up agriculture that otherwise would follow 
 very slowly or be indefinitely held back. 
 
 Public Aspects of Forestry. The problem of forestry has both a na- 
 tional and a local aspect. The nation is concerned in the country-wide 
 securing and distributing of raw materials for the varying needs of differ- 
 ent regions, and in the protective service of forests on interstate rivers. 
 The states and localities are interested in the support of local industries, 
 in local protective benefits of forests, and in having lands productive 
 and a basis for support of the communities. 
 
 W'e have today something like one hundred and sixty million acres 
 of public forests. These should be, I believe, practically doubled. We 
 have been carrying on a moderate program of purchases, having acquired 
 in the last two years two million acres in the east. The public benefits of 
 productive forests justify the participation of the public in working out 
 the problem. The character of the problem is such as to make public 
 participation absolutely necessary. It is one in which the nation, the 
 states, the communities, and private owners must each play an important 
 part. 
 
 The emphasis in recent years on public forests has given the impres- 
 sion that our forest question was being solved. Our National Forests 
 are rendering a great public benefit. They are under protection and their 
 resources are being used in a way to insure their perpetuation and con- 
 tinued service to the communities and the nation. Their timber already 
 provides a large part of the local demand in a number of the western states 
 and will increasingly be used for general needs of the country. But they 
 are not extensive enough nor well enough distributed to meet more 
 than part of the country's needs for forests. At present the timber cut 
 from them constitutes about three per cent of the entire lumber consump- 
 tion of the '?ountry. The rest comes from private lands. As the private 
 timber of the west becomes exhausted they will be of increasing importance 
 
2§ 
 
 as a reserve for the general market. It is obvious that even with a greatly 
 extended program of acqui«Uion of public forests we must still look to 
 private forests, exactly as utaer countries do, for a part of our future 
 forest supplies. 
 
 The problem of forestry requires action both by the public and by 
 private owners. I would emphasize especially the production of old 
 growth lumber of special quality. The public should assume a much larger 
 share of the burden of forestry than it does today, both in acquiring 
 and managing larger areas of publicly owned forests and in aiding private 
 owners to protect their lands and to secure forest replacement. 
 
 Responsibility of Private Ovmers. The entire burden of forestry shoiild 
 not, however, be assumed by the public. Private proprietorship of land 
 carries with it certain definite responsibilities that owners can not escape. 
 They have the duty of handling their lands in such a way as not to injure 
 others or the general public. The turning of forest lands into a waste as 
 is now being done on a very extensive scale is a very great injury to the 
 public. These destructive practices can be condoned only on the ground 
 that the public has complacently permitted them and has not furnished 
 the aid and direction that are needed in getting constructive measures 
 of a practical character into actual practice. 
 
 The character of the problem of forestry is such that the private 
 owner unaided has great difficulty even in securing adequate protection, 
 let alone the renewal after cutting. The public must, therefore, share the 
 responsibility for the present situation that has resulted from destructive 
 methods. If, however, the public does its part, it may require owners to 
 handle their lands in such a way that an unproductive waste will not 
 follow in the wake of their operations. 
 
 l^eed of a Naiioiml Policy. The situation clearly calls for the adoption 
 of a broad and far-reaching policy for the nation ; a policy in which 
 objectives are clearly defined, the responsibilities of the public and of 
 private land owners are recognized, the activities of both the public and 
 private owners brought into correlation, and a practical legislative and 
 administrative program outlined. 
 
 On various occasions during the last eight months I have set forth 
 what I believe to be the principles that should underlie such a policy. 
 Time does not permit on this occasion a discussion of all its details, but 
 a brief outline will indicate its chief features. 
 
 A National Policy Outlined. (1) Public Forests. A national policy 
 of forestry should provide first of all for an extensive program of publicity 
 owned forests, owned in part by the federal government, in part by 
 the states, and in part by municipalities, and by quasi-public institutions 
 and organizations. At the present time the public owns about twenty-five 
 per cent of the country's forests. This should be extended to fully forty 
 or fifty per cent. 
 
 The federal holdings should be extended by purchase, by exchange of 
 stumpage for cut-over lands, by additions to the National Forests of land 
 now in the unreserved public domain. It should be the aim to include 
 areas needed for the protection of, watersheds, for the prevention of 
 erosion for recreation and other general public purposes. Cut-over 
 
so 
 
 lands should be acquired for the additional pux'pose of future production 
 of lumber and other products, and of establishing demonstration areas 
 and centers of federal co-operation with states and private owners. These 
 federal forests should be distributed in all forest regions of the country. 
 
 The states should establish public forests with the same general 
 objectives as the federal forests and with special reference to the local 
 economic and industrial needs. Several of our states have already outlined 
 a definite program of acquisition towai'd which they are working as fast 
 as money can be supplied. Thus the officers of Pennsylvania, which 
 already own over one million acres, have a program for acquiring over 
 four million acres more. New York has an ambitious program and is 
 adding to her forests rapidly. Massachusetts is endeavoring to secure 
 some two hundred and fifty thousand acres, and other states are making 
 progress along the same line. Indiana has made an excellent beginning. 
 It is hoped that it will be possible to secure the dunes for a great recre- 
 ation park, and I hope that the movement also may extend to acquiring 
 larger public areas within the other forest regions of the State. The 
 establishment of well located state forests in Illinois and Ohio would 
 greatly stimulate the interest in forestry and aid in securing better hand- 
 ling of private woods. 
 
 Every encouragement should also be given to municipalities to acquire 
 public forests and woodland parks. The municipality or community forest 
 is a great factor in Euroi^ean countries. Their benefit has been con- 
 spicuously demonstrated. Many cities and towns in this country already 
 have public woodlnads. The movement should be greatly extended. 
 
 Private Forests. The safeguarding and perpetuation of forests on 
 private lands are possible through an organized system of fire protection, 
 through the prohibition of destructive processes that produce waste lands, 
 and through the promotion of constructive and entirely practical measures 
 of forestry. The participation, liberal co-operation and direction of the 
 public in working out the problems involved is essential to success. 
 
 Fire Protection. Effective fire protection is achieved only through a 
 joint undertaking between public and private agencies in which all 
 lands, regardless of ownership, are brought under an organized system. 
 Necessarily conditions in different states vary widely. In these central 
 states the requirements are quite different from those in Minnesota, 
 Oregon, Maine, or Louisiana. 
 
 In general there should be incorporated in the forest laws of the State 
 requirements to bring all forest owners into the protective system, and 
 to extend it to all cut-over and unimproved lands in the State not needed 
 for agriculture, together with the disposal, by lopping or burning, of 
 dangerous slashings and other si)ecial measures that the local conditions 
 may require. 
 
 There should be provided by the State the administrative machinery 
 necessary to carry out the work effectively. 
 
 The public should share in the burden of protection. The division 
 of cost will necessarily vary in different states, as is now the case 
 among those states which have inaugurated such a system. The public 
 may properly bear the cost of the State-wide patrol system, including 
 
31 
 
 overhead, inspection, look-outs, and similar items, and a portion of the 
 fire suppression costs. 
 
 In general, the cost of the preventive system should be shared about 
 equally between the public and the owner of the land. At the present 
 time assistance by the states and the efforts of the private owners alike 
 are inadequate. Measures like brush disposal are essentially a part of 
 the logging operation and should be a charge against it. 
 
 The Federal Government should grant liberal aid in fire protection, 
 far greater than at present. Its aid should be contingent on the State's 
 inaugurating and carrying out such a system as alcove described. This 
 financial help should not exceed in amount that appropriated by the State. 
 
 I think that the Federal Government should grant a much larger 
 co-operation than they have heretofore. We have been distributing about 
 one hundred thousand dollars to meet the conditions of the Federal law. 
 This, of course, is very small. We have a national problem and I believe 
 that the national government should provide liberally to aid the states, 
 making the aid contingent on acts by the states. 
 
 Protection Against Insects and Diseases. As in fire protection, the 
 spread of dangerous insect infestations and diseases requires the aid and 
 direction of the public. Both the national and State governments should 
 participate and appropriate liberally to check the depredations. 
 
 Fwest Renewal. The renewal of forests on lands not required for 
 agriculture and settlement is an essential feature of a national policy 
 of forestry and an effective program should be worked out in each state, 
 backed by appropriate legislation and efficient administration, which will 
 achieve this object on private as well as on public property. As in the 
 case of fire protection, forest renewal on private lands require the partici- 
 pation and aid of the public. 
 
 There are two problems of forest renewal : First, the restocking of 
 lands already cut over and now in a condition of waste ; and, second, 
 providing for natural reproduction as the timber is cut. 
 
 Probably the only way to secure a restocking of cut-over waste lands is 
 for them to be replanted. Michigan is pursuing the policy of replanting, 
 and a number of other states are beginning to follow that example. Where 
 there are still seed-bearing trees on cut-over lands, or seed in the ground, 
 continued fire protection may often suffice for restocking. Where there 
 Is no chance for natural reproduction, planting or sowing will be necessary. 
 The public will have to take over a large portion of the cut-over lands and 
 restore them to productivity. In many cases, however, owners may be 
 Induced to restock their waste lands as a business undertaking. 
 
 Provision for forest renewal should be made at the time of cutting. 
 Sufficient restocking of the average private tract can be secured by natural 
 measures. On certain types of forests, forest renewal will result from 
 fire protection alone. In many instances, however, where exploitation is 
 unrestricted fire protection alone does not suffice to secure renewal and to 
 prevent the lands becoming waste. 
 
 If protection alone does not suffice to secure forest reproduction, the 
 owners should be required to adopt such additional measures as may be 
 necessary to accomplish this, with co-operative aid by the public in work- 
 
32 
 
 ing out the problem as a practical undertaking. As in the case of fire 
 
 protection, the additional measures necessary for forest renewal should 
 be made a part of a systematic program in which the public and private 
 owners engage in a joint undertaking with a common objective. 
 
 The first steps in this undertaking are to determine in each region : 
 
 1. The circumstances under which fire protection alone will not suffice 
 to prevent wasting of the land under prevailing methods of lumbering. 
 
 2. The additional measures necessary to secure conditions favorable 
 for natural renewal. 
 
 3. The classes of land upon which forest growth should be continued. 
 
 4. The co-operation that should be given by the public to make 
 feasible in practice the measures that it may be necessary for the owners 
 to take. 
 
 5. The legislation needed to bring these measures into practice as a 
 part of the State's program of forestry. 
 
 Special Proilems in the Central States. In the states of Illinois, Indi- 
 ana and Ohio, our problem is essentially one of the farm woodland. Here 
 we have to do with small tracts and small operations. In some ways the 
 problem is a simpler one than in the great lumber regions. In the first 
 place the fire danger is easily controlled. Then again the work can usu- 
 ally be brought into close correlation with other phases of farm manage- 
 ment. Of great value also is the fact that the owner himself is often the 
 manager and can give personal direction to the work of forestry. 
 
 In such circumstances the aid of the states may be directed to educating 
 the farmer in how to cut his woodland in order to secure natural reproduc- 
 tion, how to thin the young stands so as to increase their growth and 
 value, how to reforest the lands now waste, how best to market his wood- 
 land products, and so on. Advice should be afforded through the State 
 Forester and the agricultural field agents. Planting stock should be 
 offered at cost, with assistance in establishing plantations. Co-operative 
 marketing enterprises should be encouraged when this is practical. 
 
 Puilic Assistance to Private Owners. As already explained, the public 
 should aid private owners in organized fire protection, in giving direct 
 advice in regard to the methods of handling their properties, and in furn- 
 ishing planting material at cost. 
 
 In many parts of the country the present form of taxation is acting 
 as a detriment to owners' handling the forests conservatively and it even 
 tends to force premature and wasteful cutting. In general, the form of 
 taxation that should be substituted is to levy an annual tax on the land 
 and a yield tax on the timber when it is cut. Each state should give this 
 problem careful study and provide a form of taxation that will encourage 
 the owners to grow trees on their cut-over and waste land. The Federal 
 Government may well give assistance to the states in this study. 
 
 Further assistance could with propriety be given by extending to forests 
 the existing legislation providing for farm loans so as to include loans 
 for the purchase and improvement of forest lands, to encourage the holding 
 of lands previously acquired, where the purpose of the owner is to hold 
 and protect cut-over lands or those having growing timber, to reforest 
 lands by seeding or planting, or to use other measures in promoting forest 
 production. 
 
33 
 
 Other measures of co-operation and aid would include research in 
 forestry and forest products, land classification, obtaining and diffusing 
 information regarding our forest resources and industrial conditions. Of 
 special importance is a comprehensive survey of the forest resources of 
 the country, to determine the quantities of existing timber suited to differ- 
 ent industrial uses, the current and future requirements of different regions, 
 the possible production of our forests by growth, and other matters that 
 would aid in developing a national policy of forestry. 
 
 Function of the Federal Gove7-nnient. The Federal Government has a 
 function not only in owning and administering the National Forests ; it 
 should take the leadership in formulating a national policy that includes 
 the right handling of private forests. The Federal Government alone" can 
 act effectively to bring about concurrent action as between the states. 
 Its research and educational work may be directed to the problems of 
 the nation and of regions that comprise more than one state. It can 
 stimulate and guide local action where the states acting individually would 
 fail. The Government is in a position to organize all agencies affected by 
 the forest problem in a united effort to carry out a program of forestry. 
 
 The legislation directly affecting the private owner in the protection and 
 renewal of forests may best be by the states if they will only take the 
 action. The Government should aid the states in formulating plans and 
 developing methods and should give direct financial assistance in carrying 
 them out. 
 
 The Federal Government has not given adequate assistance to the 
 states. It has helped to some extent in fire protection and research. One 
 hundred thousand dollars a year is now distributed to states qualifying 
 under the law to receive it, for organized protective work. This principle 
 of assistance should be greatly extended both in amount for protective 
 work and in scope to include other lines of forest activities. 
 
 The direct aid of the states by the government, made contingent on 
 adoption by the former of acceptable programs of forest legislation and 
 administration, would help to secure concurrent action in different states 
 and would make possible the standardization of methods, and the achieve- 
 ment of results impossible without such aid. 
 
 The first step in inaugurating a national policy of forestry is a federal 
 law providing the authority to co-operate with the states in formulating 
 and carrying out a program of forestry along the lines indicated in this 
 statement ; and carrying an appropriation that can be used to assist such 
 states as inaugurate and put into effect a program determined to be ade- 
 quate by the Secretary of Agriculture. 
 
 A great deal can be accomplished pending such substantial co-operation, 
 but with the aid that the nation might offer, results could be accomplished 
 that otherwise would be impossible. 
 
 I may say that there are some people who do not agree that the program 
 of forestry should be carried out through the states. I have, however, 
 undertaken and proposed a program of very greatly increased activities 
 by -the states, backed up both in the matter of assistance in carrying it out, 
 and by a large appropriation, without which the states themselves can not 
 possibly get the work under way. (Applause) 
 
34 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: I have observed your close attention as our na- 
 tional forester gave to us this illuminating paper. Many of the points 
 which Colonel Graves has raised here, are to be considered in special 
 papers. I am sure that some of you would like to ask some questions. 
 There will be an opportunity later in the afternoon for this. The next 
 speaker is Mr. J. G. Peters, whose subject is "Co-operation Between 
 Federal Govei-nment and States." (Applause) 
 
 MR. J. G. TETEIIS : Ladies and gentlemen, the program which Colonel 
 Graves has presented is very practical. Perhaps the most important 
 feature of it is co-operation, and that is the feature I shall deal with, 
 especially as it applies to the states and the Federal Government. 
 
 The progress of any forestry program will depend, in general, upon 
 the extent of co-operation between the private owner, the State, and the 
 Fedei-al Government. Each has an obligation, and each must realize this 
 in an adequate way before the timber supply problem can begin to be 
 solved. In other words, to face the question in a practical manner, the 
 success of the undertaking is going to vary with the amount of money 
 available, for upon this depends whether we shall continue to go along 
 with the customary meager funds and relatively small accomplishment, or 
 whether we shall take hold in man fashion and strive to have something 
 to show for our efforts in the next generation that will really be worth 
 while . This requires adequate appropriations by the Federal Government 
 and the states and adequate participation on the part of private forest 
 owners. 
 
 The Federal Government by reason of its centralized authority and 
 its ability to raise funds is the natural leader in such a movement and 
 should, of course, give liberal financial assistance. It has started in cer- 
 tain lines in a small way. With a larger public demand, that is bound to 
 be made, congress will be obliged to take the necessary adequate action. 
 
 The interest of the Federal Government is very great. Not only must 
 it protect and manage its own forest lands, the National Forests, but by 
 reason of the general character of the problems of timber supply and 
 water conservation, which affect the entire nation, it also should assist 
 in pi'otecting and encouraging timber production on other lands. Consider 
 this with reference to the states of Indiana, Ohio, Illinois and the rest 
 of the Middle West. None of these states has an adequate timber supply ; 
 they alone can not furnish their timber needs. It is a matter of concern 
 to them how these needs are going to be supplied and they are vitally in- 
 terested in what other states may do. They are interested, too, in seeing 
 the Government extend its aid to them and other states and strive to insure 
 all the states timber for the future. 
 
 The most important lines of co-operation between the Government and 
 the states, where co-operative effort is almost essential if results commen- 
 surate with our needs are to be obtained, include the following : 
 
 (1) Acquisition of public forests. 
 
 (2) Protection against forest fires. 
 
 (3) Reforestation of denuded lands, 
 ('i) Conservative cutting. 
 
 (5) Farm forestry. 
 
35 
 
 besides these there are other forest activities which either the Federal 
 Government or the states have been conducting independently, such as 
 an investigation of the forest tax problem, a survey of forest resources, 
 land classification, and research. There is no question whatever about 
 their importance, but co-operative effort in carrying the work on is not 
 essential, although in some instances it would be beneficial. 
 
 One of the chief features of any forest program must be the acquisition 
 by the public of lands unsuited for agriculture or settlement. It is esti- 
 mated that the area of such lands now in public ownership should be 
 doubled, that is, we should strive for an ultimate area of some three lum- 
 dred million acres. National Forests now aggregate one hundred fifty-five 
 million acres; and state forests about four million, nearly three-fourths 
 of which is held by two states — New York and Pennsylvania. Municipal 
 forest areas are negligible. Except where the lands for public forests have 
 been set aside from the public domain, as has been the case with nearly 
 all the National Forests and some State Forests, notably those in the Lake 
 States, the acquisition of such lands has been a very slow process. The 
 Federal Government has been purchasing lands for National Forest pur- 
 poses since 1911 and, in this period of nearly nine years, the funds appro- 
 priated have amounted to only $11,600,000 and the area acquired totals 
 less than two million acres. The cost per acre has averaged about five 
 dollars and twenty-five cents. The appropriation recommended for the 
 current fiscal year was two million dollars ; congress cut it to six hundred 
 thousand dollars. The states, with the exception of New York and Penn- 
 sylvania, have done comparatively little. New York has acquired nearly 
 two million acres for State Forest purposes, and has recently authorized 
 an issue of seven million five hundred thousand dollars of bonds to supply 
 funds for purchasing additional areas ; Pennsylvania has about one million 
 acres ; Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota between three hundred thou- 
 sand and four hundi-ed thousand each ; ten other states have forests ranging 
 in area from sixty thousand acres to less than one thousand. 
 
 As the bulk of the area to be acquired will necessarily have to be pur- 
 chased, the cost will amount to at least three-quarters of a billion dollars. 
 But at the present rate of acquisition, no material accomplishment can be 
 hoped for in a long time. Especially is this the case with the states, as 
 has been shown. Therefore, it is desirable not only to speed up appro- 
 priations by congress and the state legislature but, at the same time, to 
 devise a plan by which the Federal Government can aid the states. I 
 am convinced that some co-operative plan for encouraging the states to 
 adopt an adequate purchase policy is needed. I suggest that the Govern- 
 ment loan to the states the necessary funds subject to the approval of the 
 National Forest Reservation Commission, which is the commission that 
 approves the purchase of lands for National Forests. The Government 
 should obtain the funds through the issue of bonds, and the loans should 
 be made on a long-term basis. The National Forest Reservation Commis- 
 sion would make the actual purchases subject to the approval of the sim- 
 ilar State commission, and the Government would be secured in the 
 transaction by retaining title to the lands until the debt was liquidated. 
 At the same time tha State would be the custodian of the property and 
 
S(5 
 
 would protect and manage it and collect the receipts. The Government 
 would lose nothing on such deals because it would charge the states enough 
 to meet the interest payments on the bonds, and the states would thus get 
 the benefit of the Government's credit and low rates of interest. States 
 should not find such transactions a heavy financial burden, for the sale 
 of forest products and the fees for grazing and other uses should furnish 
 the money not only to pay the interest on the loans, in many cases from 
 the very beginning, but also to build up a surplus to pay off the loans. 
 
 Before passing on the next subject I might pause here to say that some 
 persons, especially some of those who got alarmed over the proposal for 
 a program of forestry on private lands, would have the public buy all the 
 large bodies of cut-over land and would make the public practically the 
 only large forest owner. Entirely aside from the questions of whether 
 this would be good policy in the light of the experience of other nations 
 and whether our public would approve it, the plan would not be desirable 
 as meeting present needs. If what has been accomplished in public acqui- 
 sition in the past is any indication of what might be expected In the future, 
 it is perfectly apparent that to complete any reasonable program of acqui- 
 sition will require many years. 
 
 While it is urgent that the Federal Government and the states acquire 
 public forests and properly take care of them — protect them from fire, cut 
 them conservatively, reforest them, and so on, their obligation goes much 
 farther. They must, at the same time, recognize their responsibility in 
 encouraging the proper care of private forests, the area of which even after 
 the program of acquisition has been completed will at least equal the area of 
 public forests. The public has scarcely any greater obligation in forestry 
 than aiding in the protection of private forests from fire. Nor is there any 
 forest activity where co-operation between Government and state will bring 
 quicker and better results. 
 
 Fire protection is fundamental. It is the chief means of preserving 
 timber growth to the end that forestry may be practiced and. a continu- 
 ous supply of timber maintained. Adequate fire protection will undoubt- 
 edly solve a large part of our forest problem. It will save timber now 
 standing and it will promote natural regeneration on most cut-over lands 
 after lumbering. 
 
 Already a beginning has been made in co-operative fire protection by the 
 Government and states though in a very inadequate way financially. Never- 
 theless, enough has been accomplished to demonstrate the practical value 
 of the co-operation, and furthermore a precedent for Federal and State 
 co-operative effort in forestry has been established by the specific terms of 
 a Federal law. Tliis law is the well known Weeks Act which passed con- 
 gress in March, 1911. It provided for two things, the acquisition of lands 
 for National Forest purposes and co-operation with states in protection 
 from forest fires. The latter provision was an afterthought ; it was an 
 experimental feature, but that it is now justified as a permanent policy of 
 the Government the results achieved are conclusive proof. 
 
 The appropriation for co-operative fire protection for the current year 
 is one hundred thousand dollars. The law requires that the protection 
 must be limited to private and State lands on the forested watersheds 
 
37 
 
 of navigable streams, that a state must have provided by law for a system 
 of forest fire protection, and that the federal expenditure in any state 
 can not exceed in the same year the expenditure made by the state. 
 
 Co-operation began in 1911 with eleven states, in which approximately 
 seven million acres of forest land received protection, two hundred federal 
 patrolmen were employed, and the federal exi^enditure was only about 
 thirty-nine thousand dollars. The number of states is now twenty-four, 
 the area protected is approximately fifteen million acres, the number of 
 federal patrolmen employed is four hundred, and the federal expenditure 
 is practically the full appropriation of one hundred thousand dollars. These 
 states include all but one of the Northeastern States, about half of the 
 Southern States, the three Lake States, the four in the Pacific Northwest, 
 and California. The chief result accomplished by this co-operation, besides 
 the purchase of a certain amount of protection, has been educational, 
 especially in encouraging states which have had no protective system to 
 enact legislation providing for one and appropriating funds for its support. 
 Furthermore, private owners have been encouraged through state and fed- 
 eral co-operation to adopt protective measures and, where practicable, to 
 organize into associations. 
 
 The federal appropriation is allotted to the states on the basis of the 
 greatest good to the greatest number. A maximum is fixed, depending on 
 the number of states to receive co-operation. At first this was ten thousand 
 dollars, but the increase in the number of states necessitated a reduction 
 first to eight thousand dollars and then to seven thousand dollars. The 
 money is used primarily for the hire of lookout watchmen and patrolmen. 
 The watchmen are stationed on prominent points from which the lower 
 country can be seen and forest fires readily detected. By means of tele- 
 phone, these men describe the location of a fire to patrolmen or fire wardens, 
 who endeavor to secure help, if necessary, and reach the fire as quickly 
 as possible. 
 
 As compared with the federal expenditure of one hundred thousand 
 dollars annually, the twenty-four states co-operating are expending about 
 six hundred fifty thousand dollars, and private owners in these states 
 approximately a like amount. The private and state holdings in these 
 twenty-four states which require protection from fire, including both tim- 
 bered and cut-over lands, aggregate at least one hundred forty million 
 acres. To adequately protect this area will require a minimum expendi- 
 ture of one and one-half cents an acre yearly, or something more than 
 two million dollars. If, as stated above, these states and private owners 
 are together expending about a million and a quarter, this sum falls short 
 of the estimated minimum by about three-quarters of a million. From these 
 figures, it is obvious that the Federal Government is not recognizing its 
 responsibility in this matter in adequate fashion. Furthermore, these 
 twenty-four states do not include such important timber states as Penn- 
 sylvania, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Missis- 
 sippi and Arkansas. If these were extended co-operation, the above-men- 
 tioned area of one hundrded forty million acres would be increased to at 
 least two hundred millions, for the adequate protection of which the 
 yearly minimum expenditure required would amount to three million dol 
 
lars. My opinion is, therefore, that when the states and private oWnet-s do 
 their part, with the latter disposing of their slash after lumbering, the 
 fair share of the Government in the co-operation would be at least one 
 million dollars. 
 
 Befoi-e leaving the subject of co-operative fire protection as provided 
 for under the Weeks Law, I wish to say that it is my feeling that the 
 best interests of the public would be served by doing away with the limita- 
 tion in that law in regard to the watersheds of navigable streams and by 
 placing the co-operation exclusively on the basis of protecting our future 
 timber supplies. Merely because the purchase of lands is limited to such 
 watersheds is no sound reason for so limiting the co-operative fire pro- 
 tection. It places an unnecessary restriction on the expenditure of federal 
 funds on certain lands where protection is urgently needed. All forest 
 lands need protection from fire. This restriction should be removed. 
 
 I have in this paper given the subject of fire protection more space 
 than other subjects, and I realize that it is of minor importance in parts of 
 Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois. Still, it is the largest forest problem which 
 confronts the country as a whole, and I realize how very seriously it 
 affects your wood-using industries which draw their supplies of lumber and 
 other forest products largely from other states. Moreover, fire protection 
 is the only co-operative undertaking in forestry which the Government and 
 the states have started on a substantial and permanent basis. 
 
 Along with fire protection should go the reforestation of denuded lands. 
 Whatever areas of this character which the Government or the states do 
 not acquire, and the aggregate will be large, will, by reason of the time 
 element and present economic conditions, remain luiforested for a long per- 
 iod unless the Government and the states co-operate with the private own- 
 ers. Some of the states have been doing this for a number of years. The 
 common practice is to sell the planting stock at cost. But even so, the ac- 
 complishment in the reforestation of private lands has been almost insignifi- 
 cant both because of the small appropriations made by the states for the 
 purpose and because of the cost of placing the young trees in the ground, 
 which of necessity has largely to be done by inexperienced labor. The 
 present average cost of such planting is in the neighborhood of ten dollars 
 an acre, including the price of the trees which generally amounts to less 
 than half. If we consider first only the most important stretches of de- 
 nuded lands, it is estimated that the area totals at least five million acres. 
 The cost of reforesting this would amount to approximately fifty million 
 dollars or if one hundred thousand acres could be reforested annually, 
 the yearly cost would be one million dollars. Even so small a program of 
 reforestation would require fifty years. If private owners would enter 
 into contracts with the states by which the former would pay the cost 
 of the planting operation, which would be at least one-half of the total, and 
 agree to give the plantation the necessary protection and care, I believe 
 that the Federal Government would be justified in giving the undertaking 
 the great encouragement that it would, by sharing with the states the 
 remainder on a fifty-fifty basis, or, if I may be specific, by, making a yearly 
 appropriation of two hundred fifty thousand dollars. 
 
 Some day we shall have in this country a sustained yield of timber an- 
 
39 
 
 nually. Some day we shall manage our forests with this in view. A few 
 organizations, like the larger pnlp companies, are endeavoring now to get 
 on a sustained yield basis. But in many cases this is scarcely possible on 
 account of the pressure for quick returns and the method of tinancing for- 
 est lands. The Federal Government and states should co-operate as far as 
 possible in encouraging and aiding private owners to cut their forests con- 
 servatively. The way which api^ears now to be the most feasible is through 
 some form of loan that will enable timber land owners to secure money 
 from the Government or states on easier terms than is possible elsewhere, 
 and a change in the method of taxing forest land. It has been suggested 
 that the provisions of the Farm Loan Act be extended to include the 
 financing of forest properties and that Federal Forest Loan banks be estab- 
 lished. By whatever financial and taxation plans the conservative handling 
 of our forests is made possible, the Government and states might co-operate 
 further, and follow the custom in some foreign countries, by detailing for- 
 esters to the owners of the large, so-called commercial timber tracts to 
 assist in the execution of the work. 
 
 The conservative handling of forests connected with the farms can be 
 very largely encouraged through the agricultural extension work conducted 
 under the Smith-Lever law. The appropriation under this law for the 
 current year is over four million five hundred thousand dollars which, for 
 the most part, the states must duplicate. The money is allotted to the 
 states on the basis of rural population and is expended through the States 
 Relations Service in co-operation with the Director of Extension in the 
 various states. The work is chiefly demonstrational and is conducted by 
 county agents right on the ground. One can readily see the possibilities 
 in this for extension in farm forestry. It offers practically a virgin field. 
 No phase of forestry is of greater importance to the states of Indiana, 
 Ohio, and Illinois, than the proper handling of farm woodlands on ttie 
 basis of continuous production. The area of farm woodlands in these 
 states is about ten million acres, which is something like ninety per cent, 
 of their aggregate forest area, and farm woodlands occupy between ten 
 and fifteen per cent of the area in farms. 
 
 As in agriculture so in forestry the most effective way to encourage 
 farmers to adopt scientific practice is through field demonstrations on their 
 own property or in their own locality. Of course, any increase in the 
 value of products is an additional incentive. Farmers have given little 
 or no attention to the proper handling of their woodland and they have 
 been strikingly ignorant of the value of wood products. As a rule, they 
 are chiefly interested in getting immediate returns from the woodland 
 and care little about its future development. This fact should serve as 
 a method of approach in encouraging them to cut their timber conserva- 
 tively. In other words, they must be assisted in getting larger revenue if 
 they are to become more interested in improving the woodland and raising 
 more and better timber. To this end farmers need to be given practical 
 information about markets for the various kinds of timber, methods of 
 selling, the variation in the common log rules used, and where practicable 
 the grading of lumber. In some cases it may also be feasible for the farm- 
 ers to form co-operative marketing associations similar to other agricul- 
 
40 
 
 tural associations for marketing purposes, since an association of this kind 
 would be able to get the advantage of cheaper freight rates and market 
 the material to better advantage than the individual owner. 
 
 Farm forestry should be an important branch of farm management, 
 particularly in connection with diversified farming, such as is practiced in 
 this region. It offers the opportunity for the use of otherwise idle land. 
 The forest on the farm is the source of much wood for home use such as 
 fuel, fence materials, and rough building stock, and where coal is largely 
 used it affords a reserve fuel supply ; it acts as a windbreak for crops ; it 
 affords shade for stock ; it offers an opportunity for the profitable employ- 
 ment of men and teams at times when other farm work is light ; it helps 
 to check erosion, and it brings in revenue from the sale of wood products. 
 Surely in this region the most should be made of the farm woodland. 
 
 Farm forestry is recognized by the States Relations Service as coming 
 within the scope of extension work authorized by the Smith-Lever law. 
 But before it can be conducted on an adequate scale the Forest Service 
 must have additional funds .so that trained foresters can be employed to 
 direct the work. The states would then be authorized also to employ 
 foresters with Smith-Lever funds to work in the various counties as 
 extension foresters who would conduct demonstrations, give practical in- 
 formation to the farmers, and instruct the county agents in forestry prac- 
 tice. In the states of Indiana, Ohio and Illinois, it is urgent that 
 co-operative work of this character should be started and aggressively car- 
 ried on. 
 
 I have endeavored in this paper briefly to describe the main features 
 of the important lines of co-operation which the Federal Government and 
 the states should undertake, or which, if already begun, should be largely 
 extended. The question is chiefly one of making funds available. This 
 is for the public through congress and the state legislatures to decide. The 
 public is being given the fffcts about our forest problem by the state and 
 federal forestry departments and the various forestry associations. May 
 we hope for an adequate response. (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: Before taking up the discussion of these two 
 papers, I am asked to call your attention to the fact that at eight o'clock in 
 this room there will be a banquet, the price of the tickets being two dollars 
 and fifty cents, and those who plan to attend should get their tickets imme- 
 diately. Also if you are thinking of accepting the invitation to visit the 
 experimental farm which Mr. Lieber is conducting, you should see the 
 secretary for particulars and give him your name so that accommodations 
 may be made for those who wish to go. 
 
 DR. LOGAN: I would like to ask Col. Graves to what extent aero- 
 planes are being used in fire protection. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES: We have secured the co-operation of the War 
 Department during the past .season in California and there has also been 
 some work done in Oregon. The original plan was to get as many track 
 fields, located in different parts of the country, as possible, but there 
 wasn't money enough for that so all that could be done was to have a little 
 work done in their fields. In the long run I believe it will be too expensive 
 
41 
 
 to have separate air service. Now we have a patrol ou a forest in southern 
 California and in central California and we have patrols in certain parts 
 of Oregon. So far the aeroplane service has proved valuable and very in- 
 teresting. There are a good many things that the aeroplane can see that 
 ygu can't see from a signal station. We have also tried the stationary 
 balloon, but a man in an aeroplane which is moving over the ground can 
 see things that the stationary object can't see. A good many people believe 
 that a small dirigible would be a better instrument than the plane, but we 
 haven't had an opportunity to try it. Of course the greatest diflEiculty that 
 we have is in the remote, undeveloped wilderness where we have no roads, 
 no trains and can't get to the fires quickly after they have been discovered. 
 We don't go far enough. We don't accomplish what we start out to 
 accomplish because of lack of funds. I don't know of a state that is getting 
 enough money to carry on protective work. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : Do you find any opposition to federal encroachment 
 on state reservations? 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES: This plan as I have proposed is assisting the 
 states along these lines. The federal officers are working under the state 
 forestry. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: The reason I asked that question is because I 
 have had a small part in the admission of the Smith-Lever act in Illinois. 
 I have been surprised to find how many people there are who are a little 
 bit alarmed at the thought of federal inspectors working instead of the 
 state when the federal government is furnishing large sums of money for 
 vocational education. I wonder if you have found in any of the forestry 
 propositions as you have presented them to us this afternoon, any objection 
 anywhere to federal supervision. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : I have found no objection as far as I have pro- 
 posed it. I have, on the other hand, found a good many persons who think 
 I do not go far enough, 
 
 PROF. BLAIR : Mr. Miller in his paper this morning, pointed out that 
 in the State of Illinois there are some six and a half million acres of land 
 which might better be used for forestry purposes than for other uses. 
 Now we are not especially interested as a state in the matter of fire pro- 
 tection, but we are interested in the proposition of co-operation. It is now 
 a question of what we must do as a state through the legislature to get 
 the co-operation that we need from the federal government. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : I'd like to see that incorporated into a law setting 
 forth that principle and appropriating funds which could be used by the 
 Secretary of Agriculture. I would make the law very broad so that 
 he could attend to reforestation and participate in the establishment of 
 nurseries in the state. I would like to see the state of Illinois go a good 
 deal further than they have so far. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : I have had a question in my mind as to what those 
 charts are up there. 
 
 MR. PETERS : I might say that they are prepared to show the lumber 
 production in these three states and the men employed, and the relation of 
 
42 
 
 wood-using industries to all other industries as to the number of men em- 
 ployed, capital invested, and value of the products. 
 
 You will notice in Illinois there are 140,0(X) men employed in the wood- 
 using industry, while there are 620,000 employed in all industries. In 
 Indiana there are 265,000 men employed in all of the industries with 
 70.000 employed in wood-using. In Ohio there are 600,000 in all industries 
 and 90,000 in wood-using. 
 
 In Illinois there is $2,000,000,000 invested in all industries with $400.- 
 000,000 invested in lumber using industries. Indiana has $675,000,000 in- 
 vested in all industries with $175,000,0000 invested in wood-using industries. 
 Ohio has $1,675,000,000 in all industries and $160,000,000 in wood-using. 
 
 The value of all products in Illinois is $2,250,000,000 and the value of 
 wood-using products is $320,000,000. The value of all products in Indiana 
 is $730,000,000 and wood-using products are valued at $140,000,000. In 
 Ohio the value of all products is $1,785,000,000 and the value of woofl-using 
 products is $175,000,000. 
 
 MR. LOVEJOY : The figures of these charts show that the wood-using 
 industries employ a large proportion of the men in our three states and 
 that a large proportion of the capital invested in all industries is invested 
 in lumber-using industries. I am wondering if the timber deficit is likely 
 to be so great as to seriously injure these industries. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : That is a very direct question which should be 
 answered by a result of a direct study. I can only answer that in general 
 terms. I have talked with a great many mill men and asked them how 
 much of a supply they have ahead and inquired if they are still able to get 
 material. They haven't a definite supply ahead but they seem to think 
 they will be able to get their material whenever they need it. 
 
 MR. LOVEJOY : Does it seem likely they will be secure for a period 
 of ten years? 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : I think so. 
 
 MR. LOVEJOY : Timber is a long-time crop and if anything is to be 
 done upon an adequate scale it should be done very shortly. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES: Both of the estimates apply to the higher grade 
 timber. We need in the first place the husbanding of material of medium 
 size. We need to prepare ourselves for the exhaustion of that material 
 and start to grow material. I presume that material will be found that 
 can be substituted for the best grades which will tide us over in a measure 
 if we start now. If it is taken hold of immediately, I think there is a 
 chance of tiding over. 
 
 MR. LOVEJOY : Then yon would anticipate that conditions would be- 
 come really serious if something is not done? 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : Yes, I think they would become very serious. 
 Many plants would have to go out of business. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : Do you mean that wood used in many things would 
 be laid aside and some substitute devised? 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES: That would be done to a certain extent. But 
 
43 
 
 we have never found a satisfactory substitute for wood and I don't believe 
 we ever will. Wood is a better material for a great many uses than any 
 substitute, but we could get along if we had to, but not otherwise. I think 
 it is very urgent that we take steps now. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: The statement has been made that the average 
 man who has any wood-holdings at all has no conception of their value 
 and that people will sell woodlots and wood-holdings without ever stopping 
 to consider their value. Great sums of money are invested in tliis part of 
 the country in wood-using industries and the supply is steadily growing 
 smaller and certainly under such a plan, it will soon disappear, so it seems 
 to me that the most important thing to be done is to constantly issue this 
 call of danger. People don't understand how important this subject is and 
 it is hard to enlighten them. But if we don't arouse them it will be mighty 
 serious. 
 
 SENATOR GUTHRIE : One of the important questions is how to pro- 
 tect what we already have. This state is a large, rich state, most of which 
 is being farmed. As Mr. Deam told us this morning, we have some small 
 areas of timber and we want to know how to protect them. We still use 
 wood for ties and today we are getting about six times the amount we 
 got for the first ties we sold. We have never found a substitute for ties. 
 In our state the scarcity of timber is getting to be a very serious question. 
 I think that we should protect the young timber in some way and show the 
 people that there is nothing more profitable than raising timber, if it is 
 handled in the right way. 
 
 MR. SEGREST : Colonel Graves, have you anything in mind relative to 
 a timber census of the entire, country? 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES: I proposed to have an economic survey of the 
 timber resources in connection with the present census. There is a bill at 
 congress now setting aside one hundred thousand dollars for a survey of 
 materials. Of course that would be quite inadequate. 
 
 Senator Guthrie, why wouldn't it be possible for the state of Indiana 
 to adopt a program of acquisition of forests on a much larger scale than 
 heretofore ? 
 
 SENATOR GUTHRIE : That is what we want to do. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : I feel aLso that we have got to get forestry to the 
 agricultural man. I judge from the papers given this morning that they 
 haven't appreciated the place of forestry in agriculture. 
 
 Now what are we going to do without wood? What substitute are 
 we going to use? Metals? I don't think so for an instant. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: I am advised that it is necessary that we adjourn 
 so they can get this room ready for our banquet tonight. Unless there is 
 some other question or some other matters which ought to be considered 
 at this time, I will entertain a motion for adjournment. 
 
 ADJOURNMENT. 
 
 W^EDNESDAY EVENING, BANQUET SESSION 
 
 The meeting was called to order at 8 :00 p. m., with Mr. Walter Crim, 
 President of the Indiana Hardwood Lumber association, presiding. 
 
44 
 
 MR. WALTER CRIM : Gentlemen of the conservation conference and 
 distinguished guests, we are certainly very glad to see this liberal turn-out 
 this evening in honor of the movement inaugurated by Indiana, Illinois 
 and Ohio in conserving the forests of our states. This is an opportune 
 time to start a movement of this kind and as usual, Indiana is glad to be 
 in the foreground with the assistance of her sister states. 
 
 I don't know why you should pick a lumberman to start the ball rolling 
 tonight. But I am glad to say that our entire Board of Directors is here 
 in a body attending this meeting. No movement of this kind is successful 
 without a good ringmaster. In Indiana we have had many orators and 
 writers but we have kept the best at home and I am very glad to introduce 
 the Honorable Charles Bookwalter, who will take charge of this meeting. 
 (Applause) 
 
 MR. BOOKWALTER: As I look over this illustrious and dignified 
 array of talent, I feel that this limited program that I hold here in my 
 hand somewhat checks the possibilities of the evening's festivities because 
 as the majority of you are from Indiana, and Hoosiers being orators, it 
 may take us until the wee small hours to get everything said that we want 
 to say. 
 
 I suppose all of you think that to make everything fitting and proper, we 
 should open up with a talk by the Governor. I am almost in bad because 
 I insisted that he should make a few remarks and he insisted that he 
 should not be called upon, so I am going to keep faith with him. But I 
 will say that this bland gentleman sitting at my right presides over the des- 
 tinies of the state of Indiana. 
 
 The toastmaster is not expected to make a speech, but as soon as I 
 get on my feet, I readily fall into my weakness of talking too much. But 
 I am not going to do that tonight, although I would like to talk about your 
 problems. Some of my kind friends tell me that I can talk more at length 
 and most entertainingly on those subjects which I know nothing about. 
 (Laughter) I am sorry to confess that I know nothing about forestry 
 except what I have learned as a businessman of the world. 
 
 Indiana, Illinois and Ohio are the very garden spots of the world. But 
 I do watch these things as I pass through life and I have thought of these 
 problems and I have read about them. I am not going to abuse the lumber- 
 man. He is not guilty of destruction except when he cuts indiscriminately 
 —he only cuts what the necessities of man compel him to cut. We must 
 reserve, not so much preserve, but we must replace the timber that we are 
 using now. 
 
 Yesterday I came down from northern Indiana. I had gone up in 
 Wabash county on a business trip and as we were driving back we 
 passed an eighty-acre woods. It was just as God had planted it — it had 
 never been cut at all and nothing in it had been touched. I said to my 
 friend, Charlie Greathouse, who was with me. "Look at that ; isn't it won- 
 derful?" "Yes," he said, "that is a remarkable woods." We stopped our 
 car and sat in silence just looking at that magnificent picture. 
 
 All of the land in this part of the country was at one time covered with 
 forests just like the one that we stopped to look at, but this wonderful 
 cowtry has bee» stripped bare. We must »ot continue to do this without 
 
45 
 
 replacing in some measure the trees that we have destroyed. We must 
 think of the future of this country. Man is naturally a destructive animal. 
 If you don't believe that, just keep your eyes open. So this sort of a con- 
 ferences comes at this time particularly "pat" for the people of Ohio, 
 Illinois and Indiana. 
 
 Now I am going to present the first gentleman on the program. Mr. 
 Pack is unable to be here this evening and Mr. P. S. Ridsdale is to fill his 
 place. (Applause) 
 
 MR. P. S. RIDSDALE : Mr. Toastmaster and gentlemen, Mr. Pack, who 
 was to speak to you this evening, is ill and is unable to be here. He caught 
 a bad cold recently and his physician forbids him to leave his home. He 
 has asked me to be his substitute this evening and so I would like to read 
 to you a little article which Mr. Pack had planned to read. 
 
 "I do not believe the human mind can devise a more suitable memorial 
 to Theodore Roosevelt than a movement which will look to preserving the 
 forests of this country. Knowing the man, as it was my privilege to know 
 him, I am positive that could the selection of a memorial be left to his 
 choosing he would say 'save the forests.' As president he called the first 
 conference of governors which took up the great questions of conserving 
 our natural resources. He was our greatest exponent of the value of these 
 resources and of the value to the nation of outdoor life. 
 
 "You foresters can do a great work in directing the public mind to these 
 values. You must take the public into your confidence and the way to do 
 that is to tell your story to the editors of the country for without them your 
 progress will be as that of the snail— you may get there some day but with- 
 out the editors I firmly believe you will have arrived when there are no 
 forests to conserve. Our forests are like a bank account ; they cannot be 
 continually drawn upon without making some deposits. 
 
 "If you expect to see a national forest policy adopted in this country 
 you have to show the people the necessity for it as they are the ones who 
 pay the bills. There is but one way to show the people and that way is 
 through the editors. The editor is the spark that stands between your lever 
 — the forest policy, and the motor — its adoption. Show your editor what 
 a forest policy means and where our forests, one of our great natural re- 
 sources are going, your motor starts and your battle is nine-tenths won. 
 
 "The force of public opinion today is working 'on high' on several ques- 
 tions. Turn that force toward a national forest policy. Show your editor 
 what a national forest policy will do and the wheels will begin to turn. 
 Show him how a national forest policy adopted one hundred twenty-five 
 years ago in France saved her and civilization. Show him how the forests 
 of France held back the Hun from Paris. Show him the figures that esti- 
 mate last year's forest fire losses to be $28,500,000. Show him what a 
 national forest policy means to his paper bill. Show him that the net 
 growth of timber is not more than one-third the amount which is being 
 used or destroyed every year. Show the editor these things and you show 
 the world. 
 
 "The time has come for forestry to be taught as a science in a college, 
 to become a subject for popular thought. The people must be interested 
 ^ tpegs. The Americftij Forestry association is conducting a campaign toy 
 
46 
 
 a national forestry policy by telling the people how vitally necessary it is 
 to them. It is also conducting a campaign for memorial tree planting and 
 for roads of remembrance which is the road side planting of trees as me- 
 morials to the heroes of the great war. I hear some good foresters say that 
 it is not forestry. Before you can become initiated into the mystei'ies of 
 where the milk comes from you must first get acquainted with the cow. 
 Before you can hope to enjoy , the delights of Shakespeare you must 
 first give some thought to the construction of the English language. Be- 
 fore the producer puts on a play lie spends thousands of dollars in an 
 endeavor to get an audience for that play. Before you foresters can ever 
 hope to interest the public, which is the court of last resort in this country 
 in a national forest policy, you have got to interest that public in a tree. 
 
 "That is just what the American Forestry association is doing. The 
 response on the part of the editors has been magnificent. As a result the 
 people are planting trees as never before, as memorials to the man who 
 gave his life or offered his life to his country. I could recite here hun- 
 di-eds of places where trees are being planted. Roads of remembrance are 
 being laid out and memorial groves and parks being planted. Does anyone 
 doubt that those people will listen with a ready ear to the reasons for a 
 national forest policy? They are getting acquainted with a tree. As a re- 
 sult you will be able to talk trees to them. 
 
 "If the people of the United States want to erect a real monument, a 
 lasting memorial for all time, in honor of Theodore Roosevelt, let them 
 mark his birthday next Monday, October 27, by starting to work in earnest 
 for a national forest policy. You can celebrate 'the coming of age,' the 
 twenty-first anniversary of forestry being taught in a college, in no better 
 way than by taking the public in on the celebration. 
 
 "You gentlemen are the ones to take the lead. Some of you represent 
 forestry and some of you the lumber industry. Get together first on a 
 fire protection policy. Then get together on other features of a national 
 forest policy. Let me quote just a paragraph from the opening address of 
 Mr. Roosevelt, the then president, to the congress of governors in 1908. I 
 quote, 'Every step of the progress of mankind is marked by the discovery 
 and use of natural resources previously unused. Without such progressive 
 knowledge and utilization of natural resources jwpulation could not grow, 
 new industries multiply, nor the hidden wealth of the earth be developed 
 for the benefit of mankind. We want to take action that will prevent the 
 advent of a woodless age and defer as long as possible the advent of an 
 ironless age.' Those words have even greater weight today, since a world 
 war has made such inroads on our resources, than the day they were spoken. 
 Call your findings the Roosevelt Memorial National Forestry Policy if 
 you like the suggestion, and you will have honored the man who did so 
 much in pointing to the value of our forests. In any event, you will have 
 done the greatest of services to posterity — you will have saved our greatest 
 natural resource for that posterity." (Applause) 
 
 MR. BOOKWALTER : This evening just prior to my departure from 
 home I was talking to the members of my family about this particular 
 occasion. A member of my household was an officer in the late world war 
 and served in France. He said to me," Well, Dad, if those men down there 
 
47 
 
 want to find out how much a tree is valued, tell them to go over to France " 
 He then told me about an incident which happened in a rest camp in 
 which his battalion was placed. They were constructing a retreat when 
 a hard-boiled old sergeant concluded that they needed a tree as a sort of a 
 screen and began poking aroimd to find one. He finally decided on a young 
 sapling about four inches in diameter and promptly cut it down. A hornet's 
 nest broke loose around his ears. A major rushed up and yelled, "Who cut 
 that tree?" The French had command of each billeting sector so a 
 Frenchman rushed up and demanded to know who cut that tree. Before 
 they got through with that sergeant, my son said that he was afraid the 
 story would get to General Pershing himself. Those people over there 
 no longer have the forests that we still possess. Practically all of their 
 trees were planted by man so they have learned to value them. But we 
 go on and waste our heritage like a nation of drunken sailors and when 
 somebody comes around with a suggestion that we should not only con- 
 serve and protect that which we possess, but map out a iwlicy of replace- 
 ment, the matter is treated as a source of jocularity. 
 
 I met a friend of mine down stairs before I came up here to speak to 
 you and he said : "Well, what bunch of cranks are you going to talk to this 
 evening?" People of this day consider a person who has a problem a 
 crank. I thank God that you men are here to work out ways to protect 
 our land for coming generations. It is necessary to cut our trees, of course, 
 but they should be cut only as our needs demand, and cut wisely. 
 
 I am not going to make a speech, I am just going to present Professor 
 H. H. Chapman of Yale Forest School. (Applause) 
 
 PROF. H. H. CHAPMAN: When I was asked to address this confer- 
 ence, I consented, but I did so before I knew I would have to present my 
 paper at a banquet. I am afraid this is going to seem very dry to you and 
 I think another subject might have been presented with much better grace 
 at this time. The subject of forest taxation has the reputation of emptying 
 the hall faster than any other subject. (Laughter) 
 
 From the time when the possibility of handling forest lands to produce 
 future crops of timber, instead of stripping and abandoning them, was 
 first discussed in this country, two arguments have been advanced by for- 
 est owners as imposing insuperable obstacles to the undertaking of for- 
 estry ; namely, fire and taxes. Lumbermen in Minnesota and elsewhere 
 expressed themselves eager to maintain their forest lands in growing tim- 
 ber, but unfortunately such a policy required investments in holding land, 
 young timber, etc., and there was no reasonable chance of realizing on 
 this investment because of the certainty of destruction by fire, or confisca- 
 tion by taxation. Therefore they were reluctantly compelled to strip the 
 land bare and let it burn. 
 
 Foresters met this challenge by undertaking to provide fire laws and 
 administration and the time is approaching when the risk of destruction 
 by fire will be brought under reasonable control — it never did present much 
 of a problem in hardwood regions of farm woodlots. 
 
 At the same time the question of reform in forest taxation was taken 
 up, but here very great obstacles were encountered and up to the present 
 time no general solution has been reached, nor are there any laws in oper- 
 ation which have become generally used or promise to meet the situation. 
 
48 
 
 Yet if we are to grow forests on private lands, the "risk" of confiscatory 
 taxation must be met or else it will continue to be cited as an obstacle 
 which prevents the contemplation of forestry by land owners, much as 
 they might desire to practice it. 
 
 Is the present system of taxation an obstacle to the production of timber 
 on forest lands? Or is this conception a convenient myth, to color a failure 
 to put these lands to a use in which the owners have no interests or are 
 deterred' by other, quite different, factors? The main reason why lands 
 are not devoted to gi-owing trees are, that Americans as a class do not un- 
 derstand the business of forestry, its practice, its economic advantages or 
 its necessity as a measure of general property and public economy, and 
 having in the main, destroyed the forest capital by a mistaken policy of 
 clean cutting, are loth to undertake the restoration of the business by the 
 time consuming process of tree planting and growth — so many obstacles 
 look big to them, and taxation becomes a serious stumbling block. 
 
 Is the general property tax a burden sufficient to prevent or discourage 
 the undertaking of growing crops of timber? This is a very different prob- 
 lem from that presented by the annual tax on timber which is already 
 mature and fit to cut. Annual taxes on standing mature timber tend to 
 force cutting. But mature timber ought to be cut — ^if held for long periods, 
 it represents an economic waste. The community is deprived of the use of 
 wood, incurs a loss of wages, industries dependent on wood suffer, and a 
 form of capital which represents taxable wealth escapes its just burden 
 of taxation. This is especially true, since virgin timber has usually cost the 
 owner nothing in the way of expense for production — it is not an artificially 
 grown crop — the only expense is fire protection which is a form of insur- 
 ance similar to that placed on any property, and taxes. The investment 
 of capital in mature timber is often for speculative purposes, with no 
 thought of engaging in forest production. It is true that large timber op- 
 erators often find it necessary in order to insure a supply of raw material, 
 to acquire a twenty year supply of timber, the taxes on which may prove 
 a large item of expense. When this supply is so great as to require fifty 
 years to remove it, the holding can be considered largely as purely specu- 
 lative, and not needed for the conduct of a normal operation, and it is not 
 good policy to relieve speculators of a just burden of taxation in order that 
 they may realize expected profits from which the community gains no 
 advantage. The tendency of taxation to force the cutting of timber is not 
 in itself the evil to be met — this problem should have been solved in quite 
 another way; namely, by retaining the ownership of these large timber 
 reserves in public hands as was done with the national forests. 
 
 Another reason for taxing timber is that the growth in virgin timber 
 is negligible, being offset by decay and other natural losses, so that the 
 productive capacity of the land is not put to its proper use but is stagnant. 
 
 A final reason for continuing to tax mature timber is the loss in public 
 revenues which would result from exempting such property from taxation, 
 and which would tend to defeat any effort to bring about such an exemption. 
 
 The arguments of owners of standing timber; namely, that taxation 
 would prevent their utilizing the land after cutting to produce new crops 
 of timber is not an argument for relief from proper or equitable taxation 
 of timber already grown. 
 
49 
 
 Is there then still a problem of taxation connected with timber? There 
 is. The admitted fact that annual taxes on standing timber hastens the 
 cutting and makes holding unprofitable, tending to increase the cost of 
 lumber, acts with equal force to discourage the production of new crops. 
 Owners and operators come to believe that if taxes on standing timber 
 are a heavy burden, it would be a still greater burden on land devoted 
 to forest production, when extended over the long period required to grow 
 a crop. And they are right. 
 
 While necessary as a present day measure of revenue production, on 
 timber purchased as an investment, the principle of taxing property values 
 instead of income creates this undue burden of taxation just so long as it 
 is impossible to realize the income with which to meet this tax. This 
 results from two factors. First, the total tax or sum of taxes paid on 
 such non-productive property continually increases with the period of 
 holding which explains the difficulties of large speculative holdings. 
 Second, it is hot the same thing to pay out a given sum at the time the 
 revenue is realized from this property and to pay this same total amount 
 at periods anywhere from one to forty yearS in advance of this income. In 
 the latter case mathematicians compute the total equity at compound 
 interest and for periods of twenty years or more, even the most reason- 
 able rates of interest will give a total cost of from three to ten times the 
 actual cash outlay. 
 
 These facts are well known to investors and while the purchaser or 
 owner of mature timber has the opportunity or choice of cutting, no 
 such choice is presented to the owner of land and growing timber who, 
 in order to get revenue would have to go out of business ; namely, sell 
 the land itself. It is therefore perfectly fair to state that unless a differ- 
 ent system of taxation is applied in the future to property represented by 
 growing timber, few will have the courage to attempt the undertaking or 
 to cut their mature timber in a manner so as to secure reproduction by 
 leaving a part of the stand, the younger trees, as an investment in for- 
 estry. 
 
 Accepting past and present conditions as a necessity, does not mean 
 that we can ignore future conditions. If we wish to continue to have 
 timber it will be necessary to grow it. Nature unaided will not produce 
 the goods. There is not time to discuss this at length, but the statement 
 is based on wide and close observation of the conditions in which cut-over 
 land is left after logging with no thought for the future. 
 
 It is therefore the absolute duty of states to provide a different and 
 equitable system of taxation for timber. This need has been almost 
 universally recognized and nearly every eastern, northern and prairie 
 state has legislation of some kind intended to encourage the growing and 
 planting of trees. Yet up to this time not one of these laws has solved 
 the problem nor do any existing laws even promise to accomplish the 
 needed reform. 
 
 Why have these laws failed in practice? The answer in every case 
 is that they have sought to create special conditions or exceptions in the 
 nature of privileges, to such owners of forest lands as agree to carry 
 out special measures ; namely, practice forestry, and have never attempted 
 
50 
 
 to create correct conditions applicable to all timberland, without disarim- 
 ination. To these special conditions have been tied numerous special 
 requirements of procedure, or red tape, often accompanied by a burden 
 of inspection, penalties for failure to comply, or regulations of methods 
 of management. The cost of the proposed systems to the owner far exceeds 
 the privileges granted, and the cost of administration by the state is too 
 large in proportion to the benefit derived. 
 
 The initial mistake was to grant bounties, tax rebates, tax exemptions, 
 or low fixed valuation of forest lands as a feward for planting or growing 
 trees. The reasons for failure lie in the general system of assessment of 
 taxes. Such lands seldom form more than a small portion of any taxable 
 unit. Local assessors resent such exemptions, and nullify their effects 
 by adjusting other assessed values so that there is no saving to the owner, 
 who is put to the trouble of complying with additional formalities to 
 secure a fictitious gain. The general underlying principle of such laws is 
 wrong, for if we are seeking to correct an injustice or inequity in taxing 
 timber, all such property is equally entitled to the benefits of this reform 
 rather than to attempt to set up an elaborate system of separating sheep 
 from goats, in which the goats being numerically superior will ultimately 
 see that the special privileges are wiped out. 
 
 Private property is not usually taxed according to the intention of the 
 owner as to its future use, or his actual method of handling it, but solely 
 on the basis of the material values present. Yet every law for forest tax 
 reform has disregarded this fundamental fact, probably confusing the idea 
 of possible public benefits with that of public ownership and use. 
 
 This error has created insuperable difficulties of which a few may be 
 cited : 
 
 1. The effort to fix and reduce the assessed value of forest land has 
 required : 
 
 (a) Clssification of land. 
 
 1' on basis of intention of owner to practice forestry. 
 
 2' on basis of suitability of the land for forestry. 
 
 3' on basis of the value of the land, to prevent misuse of the 
 
 law by speculators to avoid taxation. (This factor has 
 
 caused the vetoing of some such laws.) 
 
 (b) It has at the same time threatened to so reduce local revenues 
 
 that its final overthrow would follow its widespread appli- 
 cation. It is self-defeating. 
 
 2. The effort to require the practice of forestry on such lands as a 
 condition of receiving this privilege has required : 
 
 (a) The parceling of holdings into separate lots, with maps, de- 
 
 scriptions and legal forms, special blanks, listings and 
 assessments. 
 
 (b) The compulsory incurring of expense for planting or other 
 
 measures, not required of other forest owners. 
 
 (c) Special provisions for penalties in shape of back taxes on 
 
 withdrawals of lands from the special class. 
 
 (d) Limitation of maximum areas to receive the supposed benefits 
 
 of tax reform. 
 
51 
 
 (e) Special contracts to cover the obligations incurred by state and 
 
 owner. 
 
 (f ) Cumbersome procedure in accounting and in payment of prod- 
 
 ucts taxes. 
 
 (g) Cumbersome efforts to distinguish between age classes, and 
 
 land bearing mature timber versus plantations, which 
 features are most difficult to administer as part of a tax 
 system, 
 (h) Burdensome requirements on state forests in the line of in- 
 inspection of small widely scattered tracts to see that 
 various phases of the law relation to valuation, practice 
 and products tax, are carried out, for which if the law were 
 a success, these officials would have absolutely no time 
 unless the staff were increased. 
 
 These laws all attempt to shift the burden of taxation, either to other 
 land owners or as in Pennsylvania, to the state instead of trying to apply 
 a universal tax reform, and permitting the operation of this reform to 
 effect such improvements as other conditions render possible. 
 
 What we need is a plan which will not only remove the inequality 
 of the present system, but which will remove it on timber as a class of 
 property throughout the state, namely, for all owners of timber. There 
 are three requirements of such a law. 
 
 1. All forest economists are agreed that the value of timber should 
 be separated from that of land for purposes of taxation, and that the 
 timber should, if possible, be taxed in the form of a products tax when cut 
 in lieu of annual taxes. 
 
 2. It is not generally agreed that local revenue from taxation should 
 be maintained, and the products tax substituted gradually. 
 
 3. It is not so universally conceded, but I believe is to be equally 
 essential that virgin timber should continue to bear an annual property 
 tax and that the reform should apply to future, artificially grown timber. 
 
 The law which comes nearest to satisfying these requirements is that of 
 Massachusetts. This in turn was based on the Connecticut law. 
 
 The Connecticut law required the separate valuation of standing, mer- 
 chantable timber from land — but it attempts to fix the value of land for 
 fifty years and to limit the tax rate to ten mills. Then to avoid specula- 
 tion, it limits the value of such lands to twenty-five dollars per acre. 
 Standing timber is taxed annually until cut, but young timber will pay 
 only a products tax. 
 
 Massachusetts was the first state to establish the principle "that no 
 effort should be made to fix or lower the assessed value of bare timber, 
 the land is assessed at its fair value as bare land and pays annual taxes. 
 This value may be adjusted when changing economic conditions make it 
 necessary. This brings all land of whatever character, value or location 
 under the operation of the law provided only that the owner desires to 
 take advantage of it. The merits of this universal classification are : 
 
 1. That it wipes out the necessity of classifying lands. 
 
52 
 
 2. That it insures steady and continuous local revenues, and the pos- 
 sibility of adjustments of values. 
 
 3. That it does away -with the false principle of special privilege in 
 assessed values or rates of taxation. 
 
 The abandonment of the idea of limiting the power of assessors to 
 raise land values is a hard point to concede for advocates of forest tax 
 reform. But it is the first step towards any lasting progress, and must 
 precede the educational movement which will be needed to secure equitable 
 valuation of forest land, based on its value for growing timber. If assessors 
 can so easily defeat the purpose of special privileges, they will continue 
 to show a certain amount of unfairness in valuing lands belonging to 
 different owners, but it will be much easier to correct these inequalities 
 when all owners of forest land are equally interested. 
 
 The second distinct gain which the Massachusetts law presents is in 
 its plan for taxing standing timber. In effect this is to continue the annual 
 tax on the present assessed value of this timber until it is cut or destroyed, 
 but to arrange for the substitution of a products tax in place of this sys- 
 tem, as soon as possible. 
 
 For this purpose, after the original separation of assessed value into 
 land and timber, the value of the timber can not thereafter be increased. 
 But as fast as the timber is cut, and pays a products tax, this assessment 
 is reduced. The basis of reduction is value, not quantity. The purpose is, 
 to maintain the original total assessed value of the property, land and 
 timber, thus maintaining the town revenue from annual taxes. The chief 
 merit in the law is, that only the original assessed value of timber pays 
 this annual tax. Growth in value, or growth in volume is not so taxed. 
 Value of the timber cut is the basis of wiping out this value of standing 
 timber. So that if any such increase in value or growth occurs, it is not 
 necessary to cut all of the timber in order to do away for the future with 
 the system of annual taxes on the timber. 
 
 Since all increases in assessed valuation of timber are. prohibited, the 
 owner of timber who manages it to secure growth, or who leaves young 
 trees or a part of the stand for forest investments, and the owner of land 
 who plants it or of immature timber who protects it, is assured of relief 
 from all annual taxes on standing timber for the future. He does not 
 pay these taxes on any timber except the present value of his present 
 mature stock, on which as we have seen he should probably pay in 
 any case. By paying on this value, the town revenues are absolutely 
 protected for the present and near future. It is an equitable arrangement 
 for the taxpayer and for the community. 
 
 The third provision of the Massachusetts law is the products tax, im- 
 posed on timber at the time of cutting. In this law the payment of this 
 tax is the means of securing the reduction and final abatement of the 
 annual tax on standing timber. This would appear to threaten double 
 taxation. But in effect, this danger is done away with by fixing the amount 
 of the tax. This law increases the tax one per cent by five year periods 
 up to a maximum of six per cent, on the value of the timber on the stump 
 at time of cutting. 
 
 The Justification of imposing a products tax on timber which has bee» 
 
53 
 
 paying annual taxes lies in this— that the owner has, under the law been 
 protected from increased assessed value on his standing timber and can 
 therefore predict what his taxes on this timber will be, and that actual 
 increase in either or both value, and volume, is sure to occur, which will 
 not be taxed annually. 
 
 The real purpose of imposing the products tax is to substitute this tax 
 eventually for that on standing timber and to avoid the impossible condi- 
 tion of imposing one kind of tax on a part of the timber cut in a region, and 
 another kind on the remainder. Young timber which has never paid an 
 annual tax must pay a products tax when cut. It is impossible to separate 
 this timber, physically, from timber which has borne the annual tax. 
 But it is a very simple thing to keep account of the original assessed value 
 of standing timber and wipe out this value on the payment of products 
 taxes from any timber grown on the owner's property. When this process 
 is completed, the substitute of the products tax for annual taxation is com- 
 plete for that property. 
 
 This Massachusetts law failed as did its predecessors, not because these 
 principles were unsound, but because It still retained the principles of 
 classification, and of special requirements to practice forestry by stock- 
 ing the land with timber together with the need for special listing and 
 records. Less than fifty owners have availed themselves of it in five years. 
 
 If we can accept these principles as established, there then remains one 
 feature to make a practicable law — universal application and simplicity of 
 procedure — the abandonment of special classification for timber as well as 
 for land and the establishment of the principle of taxing as such, and not 
 taxing the owner's intentions. This means doing away with the imprac- 
 tical features of the law, namely the special classification of lands and 
 their registration, the requirements regarding planting, etc., and inspection 
 by state officials. But does this leave any forestry? 
 
 The answer is that forestry will never be crammed down an owner's 
 throat by a tax law. Given a square deal in taxation, the owner is free 
 to choose what use his land is to be put to, and the handicap against for- 
 estry is removed. This should be the purpo.se of the law rather than a 
 thinly disguised attempt to cajole occasional individuals into placing them- 
 selves under state control. 
 
 This leaves a clear field for educational forces in forestry or even 
 for measures of necessary regulation, to apply to all alike. 
 
 Can a law be framed which can be applied to all land owners within 
 a reasonable period? I believe it can if we do not require impossibilities. 
 To accomplish this we must depend on the existing local machinery and 
 make its requirements such that they can be met by land owners and 
 so that it will be to their advantage to do so. The plan proposed is as 
 follows : 
 
 1. Establish by law the principle that all lands when reassessed for 
 taxation, must have the value of standing timber separated from that of 
 land. 
 
 2. Provide that the value of standing timber when so determined, shall 
 not at any time thereafter be reassessed or increased. 
 
 3. Tbat the vftlue Of lancl, separate tvoja that of standing timber shaU 
 
54 
 
 be that of similar wild or unimproved land in the vicinity and that the 
 value if any, of immature or young timber shall not be considered in 
 assessing the value of such land, but that land bearing such young 
 timber shall be assessed the same as w^ild unimproved bare laud of similar 
 quality. 
 
 4. That at any time within five years of passage of the act, any 
 owner of land bearing mature timber may declare the value of that timber 
 and that thereupon the proper officials shall separate the assessed value of 
 the property belonging to the said owner, into two parts, the sum of which 
 shall equal the former assessed value of the property. The value of the 
 timber shall be entered in a separate record for purposes of future taxation, 
 and shall be assessed annually at current rates but shall not thereafter 
 be reassessed or increased. The remaining value shall be the assessed value 
 of laud and other property, and shall be assessed as before, so that the 
 sum of assessed values shall remain the same as the total property as if the 
 separation had not been made, for a guaranteed period of at least three 
 years. 
 
 5. That in consideration of declaration of value of timber, there shall 
 be no revaluation of the land for a period of three years thereafter, and 
 that in consideration of the fact that whatever valuation is placed by the 
 owner on the timber the owner thus fixes the residual value of the land 
 for taxation, and that the total value of the property is neither increased 
 nor decreased, the assessors shall accept without review the value of said 
 timber and not increase the same, since such action would either decrease 
 the assessed value of the land or increase the value of the total property 
 before the end of the period of three years agreed upon. 
 
 6. That at the expiration of three years from date of declaring the 
 value of the timber, or at any time thereafter, the value of the land may 
 be reassessed but that said assessed value shall not include the value of 
 any timber whatever, young or mature, and shall not exceed the value of 
 the wild or unimproved lands of similar character in the vicinity. 
 
 7. That in the absence of a declaration of value of timber within the 
 period of five years, the value of the property shall be assumed to be that 
 of land bearing no timber of taxable value, until reassessed. But that 
 before reassessing any land on which no timber values have been previously 
 declared, the assessors shall ascertain whether there be any timber values 
 on said land, and shall in every case separate said value for purposes of 
 taxation. 
 
 8. That from date of passage of law, a products tax shall be assessed 
 upon the stumpage value of all timber cut from the land except such timber 
 products as are used on the land belonging to and assessed against the 
 same owner or by the owner in the same town, for domestic use or improve- 
 ments having a taxable value. That this tax shall be one per cent, of the 
 said value for the first ten years following the passage of act, and shall 
 increase one per cent, for each succeeding decade up to a maximum of six 
 per cent, provided that nothing in this section shall prevent the payment 
 of a products tax on said exempted products for the purpose of obtaining a 
 reduction of assessed valuation on said standing timber. 
 
 9. That the value of any timber stumpage which has been declared by 
 
55 
 
 owner before the products tax was paid, or which has been fixed by 
 assessors, in absence of said declaration by owner shall be reduced for 
 purposes of future annual taxation by the amount of the value of stumpage 
 upon which said tax is paid, provided, that said value of stumpage upon 
 which said tax is paid must have reached a total of at least five per cent 
 of the original listed value of timber taxable in any one town assessed 
 against said owner, before said reduction in assessed value becomes oper- 
 ative, and provided, that when the value of said stumpage upon which the 
 tax has been paid shall have equalled the original declared or assessed 
 value of the timber listed by the owner, said annual taxes shall cease and 
 thereafter any timber standing or growing upon said lands shall be relieved 
 of annual taxes and shall pay only the stumpage tax on the products when 
 cut. 
 
 10. That an account shall be opened with each owner of land having 
 standing timber whose value has been assessed for taxation, on which 
 shall be entered, the assessed value of standing timber, the value of the 
 stumpage upon which a products tax is paid, and the rate and amount of 
 the tax. Whenever said value shall equal five per cent, of the assessed 
 value of the timber, a reduction shall be made in said assessed value equal 
 to value upon which tax has been paid, and the annual taxes shall there- 
 after be assessed against said reduced value. 
 
 The purpose of these provisions is self-evident. They are to secure a 
 complete or universal adoption of the law within a reasonable time and 
 with minimum cost and effort and least injustice. 
 
 It is made an object to timber owners to list the timber values, as by 
 doing so they secure a fixed value on this portion of their property and 
 protection from increase in total assessment for three years ; namely, from 
 any action on part of assessors to nullify the effect of listing timber values 
 by simply adding said values to value of the property. They also secure 
 a definite procedure by which said values can be extinguished by payment 
 of products tax. It is to their interest to declare full values, since this is 
 bare land on which taxes will be continued. Failure to declare any value 
 permits and justifies the continuation of correspondingly high values on 
 the only portion of their assessed value which can subsequently be so ex- 
 tinguished. Failure to declare value, or declaration of too low a value 
 permits the assessors to determine new value at any future time, both for 
 land and timber, while declaration of timber values confines them to re- 
 valuation of the land without timber, on the assumption that existing 
 values having been the basis of taxation when the law was passed, shall 
 equitably remain the basis of taxation of the timber. 
 
 The public interests on the other hand, as represented by the assessors, 
 are thoroughly protected. The total assessed value is in no case reduced. 
 After three years, the value of the land can, if equitable, be reassessed, 
 and within the requirements of the statute, be further adjusted. The loss 
 of annual taxes does not occur unless timber is cut, when they should in 
 any case cease, and the increasing value of young timber and old stands 
 is taxed by a products tax. 
 
 Failure to declare and pay the products tax on old timber carries its 
 own punishment in that the timber although cut, will continue to be as- 
 
56 
 
 sessed and taxed annually. By the time the products tax on young timbet* 
 assumes large proportions, the machinery for securing its collection would 
 be in good working order. 
 
 Owners of wild, vmimproved or cut-over lands, under this system, will 
 pay on the same assessed valuation as those who have left seed trees, young 
 timber and have planted or secured natural reproduction. Although the 
 latter property will constantly increase in value as the result of forestry, 
 there will be no increase in taxation which is not imposed equally upon 
 unimproved wild lands. Yet these forested lands will eventually bring 
 in the additional revenue of products taxes, besides furnishing employment 
 and raw material for the wood-using industries. 
 
 Unless the public is willing to agree in advance to such a plan of tax- 
 ation for timber, no such inducement or guarantee is offered for proper 
 management, instead the owner of young timber may be certain that the 
 assessor will raise the value of such lands because of his industry, long 
 before the trees can be cut, and by the time he can sell his crop, taxes 
 and interest will have absorbed far too great a part of his expected income. 
 
 If there is anything unequitable in this universal but gradual substi- 
 tution of a products tax for the present property tax on standing timber it 
 does not appear on the surface. 
 
 I promised you this would be a dry subject and now you see that I was 
 right. (Applause) 
 
 MR. BOOKWALTER: I now take pleasure in presenting to you Mr. 
 Wilson Compton, who is secretary-manager of the National Lumber Man- 
 ufacturers' Association. His subject is the "Economic Aspect of State 
 Forests." (Applause) 
 
 MR. WILSON COMPTON : Mr. Toastmaster, and ladies and gentlemen 
 of the Tri-State Forestry Conference. 
 
 Governor Lowden, in his recent statement that the chief need, not only 
 of this country, but of the whole world is "economic equilibrium" has 
 furnished a slogan which is peculiarly pertinent to the public problem 
 with which three great states, in this conference, are grappling. Equi- 
 librium implies a balancing of opposing forces. In the world at large this 
 economic balance will be accomplished only through a general increase in 
 the production of useful commodities and by a readjustment of consumption 
 whereby there shall be more of the necessaries and fewer of the luxuries, 
 until normal human activities throughout the world shall have been re- 
 established. 
 
 The supply of useful commodities must be made more adequate to meet 
 the demand for them upon such terms as will enable all persons who 
 will work, to have a fair share of the fruits of their labor. A condition of 
 production and distribution, entirely out of normal equilibrium, is primarily 
 responsible for the prominent place in the news of the day which is oc- 
 cupied by the activities of misguided men, who, by only a wave of the 
 hand would accomplish a social state which the experience of the human 
 race has indicated can be accomplished only through centuries of gradual 
 evolution and development. 
 
 The forests have had a large share in the world's industrial activity, 
 and will in the future contribute largely to the accomplishment of economic 
 
5T 
 
 equilibrium. The effort of the states of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois to 
 establish a plan for their forest lands, consistent with the larger needs of 
 the nation is a timely one. It is appropriate that search be made for the 
 basic principles which must underlie such plan if it is to have promise of 
 permanence. For pride or sentiment or opinion should not, and in the 
 long run, will not prevail against fact, or against the fundamental economic 
 laws upon which industry and commerce have been built, the world over. 
 
 Abundance and variety of natural resources have constituted, perhaps, 
 this nation's strongest claim to industrial and commercial prosperity. 
 Waste is national folly. Conservation is a guarantee of national life. 
 
 About half a century ago the congress of the United States became 
 much exercised over the alarming prospect for the nation's timber supply 
 which was then said to exist, a prospect which would within forty years, 
 it was stated, leave the United States bare of its great forests. For some 
 years thereafter senators and congressmen endeavored to save the forests 
 by making speeches about conservation. Then a Division of Forestry was 
 operated to find out what was becoming of the trees. Today its powerful 
 successor, the United States Forest Service, is itself the administrator of 
 more timber in the national forests than congressmen fifty years ago 
 thought there was at that time in the whole of the United States. But 
 the spectre of the "timber famine" still stalks. 
 
 Essentials of a State Forest Policy. The forests, in addition to provid- 
 ing raw material for the manufacture of lumber and other commodities 
 of almost universal use, have a more or less remote relation (a) to the 
 control of water flow; (b) to soil fertility; (c) to the pleasure and recrea- 
 tion of the people; and even, it is often asserted, (d) to climatic conditions 
 and the public health. The chief concern of forest conservation is, however, 
 the adequate future supply of those useful commodities which are secured 
 through the industrial uses of the standing timber, especially through man- 
 ufacture into lumber. A determination of the economic position which 
 state forests occupy in a consistent plan for the forests of the nation 
 as a whole, would involve the answer in the light of all the complex condi- 
 tions in American industrial life, to the following four questions : 
 
 First, how much standing timber is needed in the United States? 
 
 Second, what species of timber should be replaced and perpetuated in 
 the forests of this country? 
 
 Third, how, geographically, should these forests be distributed? 
 
 Fourth, who should grow and own the forests? 
 
 Quantity, quality, location and ownership! These are the essential 
 questions which confront Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, and indeed all other 
 states, in their effort adequately to meet the needs of their people for the 
 products of the forest. 
 
 How Much Tvmher Is Needed? The permanent needs for standing tim- 
 ber cannot of course be ascertained with mathematical precision. The 
 future is inscrutable. The public requirement for lumber and for other 
 forest products cannot be determined separate from the supply of other 
 materials having substantially similar uses. An accurate determination 
 of probable future forest needs would require a nation-wide survey of the 
 whole arena of industry and of the supply of all the materials which may 
 
58 
 
 be substituted for wood. But such a determination would itself be only 
 provisional. Lacking even this information perhaps the most trustworthy 
 evidence is to be found in the experience of other nations at the same rela- 
 tive stage in industrial development as we are now experiencing in the 
 United States. 
 
 It is undeniable that this country is today, and heretofore always has 
 been, using up its forests more rapidly than they have been replaced by 
 regrowth. When timber was plentiful and cheap, and industrial devel- 
 opment in comparative infancy, wood was of course, freely used. In many 
 parts of the United States before the war the average annual consump- 
 tion per person of lumber and wood products, not including firewood, was 
 equivalent to more than two thousand five hundred board feet. In the 
 state of Montana an agricultural and mining community it was about one 
 thousand two hundred fifty feet; in Oregon, seven hundred twenty feet; 
 but in Pennsylvania and New York, industrial states, only three hundred 
 feet and tv.o hundred feet re.spectively. In the United States as a whole 
 the consumption of lumber per person is now approximately three hundred 
 twenty feet, as against more than five hundred feet less than fifteen 
 years ago and one hundred feet in England, ninety feet in France and one 
 hundred fifty feet in Germany immediately prior to the outbreak of the war. 
 
 Industrial evolution has, in the history of nations, been accompanied 
 by a decline in the wood-using customs of the people. While Americans 
 will, of course, desire for this nation, always a larger inheritance of na- 
 tional resources than other less favored peoples have possessed, it is likely 
 that the same drama of changing lumber requirements will be enacted here. 
 It is improbable that the annual production of lumber in this country will 
 for any substantial period, if ever again, exceed forty billion feet. Last 
 year it was less than thirty-two billion feet. Ten years ago it was forty- 
 five billion feet. Increases in population will probably be offset by recip- 
 rocal changes in the wood-using customs of the people. 
 
 Exports of lumber are not likely to absorb the volume of timber which 
 many glittering reports from abroad may have indicated. The export 
 trade will undoubtedly increase — and it should. But the nations in the 
 greatest need of materials for construction are so thoroughly committed, 
 through tradition and sentiment, to the use of other materials such as 
 brick and tile and stone, that the predicted avalanche of demand for 
 American lumber is in doubt. 
 
 Were a permanent forestation enterprise established in this country 
 on the basis, for example, of the system used successfully in Sweden, on 
 a one hundred year period of rotation, a supply of merchantable standing 
 timber of two trillion feet with a proper distribution of age classes, would 
 probably be adequate reasonably to meet the needs which may be fore- 
 casted. We have today according to present standards of estimate, nearly 
 three trillion feet of merchantable timber most of which is relatively ma- 
 ture. Roughly speaking therefore there is a "slack" of nearly one trillion 
 feet. Supplemented by probable new growth of not less than three-quarters 
 of a trillion more, this supply should last approximately fifty years. Dur- 
 ing this period provision will have been made for making the remaining 
 two trillion or its equivalent, self -perpetuating, or else "timber shortage" 
 
6d 
 
 will have ceased to be a threat and will have become an accomplished fact. 
 So much then for the quantity of standing saw timber permanently 
 needed in this country — approximately two trillion feet of distributed age 
 classes, and about half a century to accomplish the proper distribution. 
 Even with the additional provision appropriate for woodlots and other 
 acreage furnishing fire-wood, posts, iwles, and miscellaneous wood products, 
 it is apparent that, in this country as a whole, there is enough mountainous, 
 rough and waste land, wholly profitless for agriculture but suitable for 
 forestation, to supply its permanent timber needs. Fortunately therefore an 
 adequate forest policy need not, at any point, conflict with an equally wise 
 national policy for agricultural and general industrial development. 
 
 What Species of Timber Should Be Perpetuated m the Forests of the 
 United States? But in the definition of forest policy, the determination of 
 necessary quantity of timber is not enough. Of equal importance is the 
 selection of species and quality. 
 
 If nature, unaided and undisturbed, were to be the universal regulator 
 of all economic and industrial processes, then doubtless, in the long course 
 of time, most if not all of the species in the original timber stands would 
 be replaced by natural re-growth. There have been more than one hundred 
 different species of American woods having substantial commercial uses 
 and nature if given a fair chance, would in time replace nearly all of them. 
 Northern Ohio and Indiana would have some softwoods ; the Miami Valley 
 would have fine walnut; the southern counties at the big bend in the 
 river would have big sycamores. Ohio, Indiana and Illinois would all have 
 great forests of oak, elm, ash, hickory and a generous mixture of scores 
 of other species native to their soil. 
 
 But is that what we want when we plan a permanent forest policy? 
 Is it necessarily true, because gum trees are native to Ohio soil, that the 
 replacement of gum should be encouraged? Or, because woodworking in- 
 dustries established in the state have been using hickory, that forests of 
 hickory should be replaced in Indiana? 
 
 Conceivably might it not perhaps be wiser and more profitable for those 
 in Ohio who want gum to get it from Arkansas and Tennessee where it 
 grows to better quality? And for those wood-using industries of Indiana 
 which have been accustomed to use hickory, to learn to use, if possible, 
 ash, or elm, or other species of more rapid growth but having appropriate 
 physical properties. 
 
 These are only illustrative of an important principle, namely, that 
 within substantial limits, the peculiar industrial advantage of using a 
 given species of wood may be outweighed by the advantage of using a 
 species of timber that can be regrown more quickly and at lower cost. 
 
 For commercial purposes it is well known many siiecies are readily 
 interchangeable. Practically the same useful things that have heretofore 
 been made from more than one hundred commercial species of hard and 
 softwoods may be made from ten different species wisely selected. Where 
 there is substantial similarity in physical qualities and virtual equality of 
 fitness for given industrial uses, those species should be perpetuated which 
 can be grown to commercially useful size in the shortest time at the lowest 
 cost The entire elimination from the forests of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois 
 
60 
 
 of many of their native species, provided adequate substitutes were pi'e- 
 served, would therefore involve no necessary impairment of the welfare of 
 their industries or of their people. 
 
 In the administration of the permanent plan of forestation there should 
 be interference with nature sufficient at least to secure the perpetuation 
 of the species which are economically the most useful and to secure the 
 elimination from the commercial forests of other species less useful and 
 more expensive to reproduce. Perhaps we have not always given adequate 
 consideration to this principle of selection of species in the effort to pro- 
 vide a permanent future supply of timber for the wood-using industries of 
 these states. 
 
 How Geographically, Should the Forests Be Distributed? The third 
 great factor in the determination of the economic position of state forests is 
 their geographical distribution. If it may be assumed that the lumber 
 requirements of the nation will be adequately met by a volume of growing 
 forests, with properly distributed age classes, sufficient to yield during an 
 estimated average one hundred year period of rotation a total of four 
 trillion feet ; and assuming that the forest lands on the average for both 
 softwood and hardwood will yield ten thousand feet of mature timber per 
 acre, not more than four hundred million acres under permanent foresta- 
 tion will be required. This is about one-fifth of the land area of the United 
 States and is approximately twice the area of the present public forests, 
 national, state and municipal. 
 
 Less than one-fourth of the total land area of the United States is now 
 in improved farms. About one-fifth more is attached to farms but is un- 
 improved. Nearly one-fifth is at present arid waste land useful for neither 
 agriculture nor forestation, much of it capable of reclamation by irrigation. 
 There is available, therefore, land sufficient to support a great expansion 
 in agricultural activity and to provide fully for future forest supplies. 
 
 The softwood forests will probably be located in the mountain regions 
 of the west, east, and south, the sand plains of the lake states and the low- 
 lands along many parts of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. The hardwoods 
 will perhaps be confined largely to the southern Appalachians, rough 
 country along the Ohio river, the middle and lower Mississippi and their 
 tributaries, to some of the uplands of the lake states and to the farm 
 woodlots which are characteristic of the agricultural enterprises in the 
 central states and the middle west. 
 
 Forest policies by states individually or by groups are formulated under 
 a substantial handicap because of their lack of control over the policies 
 and activities of other states. No single state can intelligently determine 
 how large its forests should be, what kinds of timber they should contain, 
 and on what lands they should be located without giving consideration to 
 the policies of neighboring states and of the nation at large. The products 
 of the forests are sold in interstate commerce which ignores all state 
 boundaries. A centralized control over the forestry activities of all the 
 states would make practicable a national forest policy that would secure 
 the most efficient possible adaptation of the quantity, quality and location 
 of the forests to the needs of the industries for which they must continue 
 to provide the raw material. If state lines do not determine the markets 
 
61 
 
 for the finished product or the channels through which they may be 
 sold, neither should they determine the character, or the distribution of 
 the raw material— the forests themselves. 
 
 This local handicap to state forest policies is important but it is not 
 decisive. Each state individually may, in the formation of its plan, as 
 you yourselves are doing here, recognize the need not only of an under- 
 standing with its neighbors, but also of co-ordination with the larger plan 
 for the forests of the nation as a whole through a powerful federal agency, 
 such as the Forest Service. 
 
 Who Should Grow Forests? Finally arises the question: Who should 
 grow and own forests? Considerably less than two million acres of forest 
 lands is today publicly owned, and some of that is not in timber. Prob- 
 ably more than two million additional acres now in private holding will 
 be required as a permanent source of timber supply to the nation. May 
 private enterprise be counted upon to provide this raw material for the 
 distant future use of American industries? I do not think so. Men who 
 have bought timber and built saw mills are foresters and interested in a 
 business way in the perpetuation of the forests only in the same sense and 
 to the same degree that coal operators are geologists and interested in the 
 perpetuation of the coal supply. The business of the lumber manufacturer 
 is to make boards out of the trees which he already owns, not to make more 
 trees out of which some one else some day may make more boards. 
 
 By fortuitous circumstances he is usually an owner of cut-over land. 
 This land may be the most useful for permanent forestation, but the owner- 
 ship of such land does not put the owner under obligation to engage in a 
 reforestation enterprise unless he elects to do so. He will not, and he 
 should not, in the public interest, choose to reforest his lands unless to do so 
 would be a profitable enterprise. Even effort, misguided though it is, to 
 compel through legislation, reforestation of private logged-off lands, such 
 as has been not infrequently proposed, will not avail against the economic 
 laws which direct everywhere men's industrial activities. Such legislation 
 would secure, throughout the country at large, not a replacement of the 
 forests through private enterprise but instead a wide-spread reversion to 
 the state of the private lands thus designated for reforestation. Legisla- 
 tion making private forestry compulsory, irrespective of its profitableness 
 or its prospect of profit would produce therefore not trees, but substantially 
 the confiscation of the land upon which it was intended that the trees 
 should grow. But a "forest policy" that does not produce forests is not a 
 forest policy. 
 
 Private enterprise is notably not suited to undertakings which do not 
 bear fruit for from fifty to one hundred years and it cannot wisely be 
 counted upon to provide a substantial future supply of standing timber, of 
 which large size and superior quality are essential. In the case of spruce 
 for pulp manufacture it is possible tha'. private enterprise may be relied 
 upon because the period of tree crop rotation is relatively short and size 
 and quality are by no means such important factors as they are in the case 
 of timber for use in lumber manufacture. 
 
 Similarly softwood timber of some species on southern lands frequently 
 reaches merchantable size within forty years. But this is not true of the 
 
62 
 
 hardwoods nor of the softwood timber that will produce wide, clear lumbet , 
 or large dimension timbers. 
 
 The Position of the State Forests. For the reforestation of the inferior 
 grades of softwoods private enterprise may be adequate. But for the 
 perpetuation of the superior grades of softwoods and of the desirable hard- 
 wood species, such as are native to the soil of the Ohio valley, no adequate 
 provision will have been made until state forests or federal forests shall 
 have been established for that purpose. The hardwoods are of peculiar 
 concern to the states of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois. But there can be but 
 little prosiiect of permanent success in their forest enterprises until these 
 state's shall have committed themselves definitely to the establishment and 
 maintenance of state forests, and these not as an experiment, but as a 
 business. 
 
 The quantity, location and species of timber with which the appropriate 
 lands of these states should be reforested can wisely be detemined only in 
 relation to the policy which may be established for the nation as a whole. 
 State pride might encourage us to seek for our own industries and our 
 own people, comparative independence of the sources of timber supply out- 
 side the state. But it is not impossible that the interests of these three 
 states may be permanently best served if the bulk of their future supply, 
 for example, of oak lumber should come from West Virginia or Kentucky or 
 Tennessee. There is essentially no greater reason that Indiana should 
 supply her own people with oak from her own forests than that Nebraskan 
 homes should be built of "Nebraskan pine", provided that the land, the 
 labor, and the capital which Indiana would have devoted to the growing of 
 oak timber could have been directed more profitably into other lines of 
 enterprise. 
 
 The test of true conservation is not therefore in the size of the forests, 
 or in the quality of the timber standing therein, but in the fitness of the 
 plan of forestation to contribute to the most eflicient possible utilization of 
 the state's resources of land and capital and to the most profitable appli- 
 cation of the labor of its people. "Conservation" of any other kind is not 
 conservation, but waste. 
 
 The specific forest needs of the three states of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, 
 cannot, it is true, be determined by the total forest needs of the entire 
 nation, but they can be largely guided by them. Although timber generally 
 is still plentiful there is a growing scarcity of a few important species 
 which may properly cause concern to our industries and people. The fer- 
 tile lands of the Miami and Wabash valleys once carried the finest walnut 
 and oak forests in the middle west. Today the same lands produce the 
 finest corn crops in the Ohio river valley. Fifty years ago pioneer farmers 
 in southern Ohio were having neighborhood "log-rollings" at which they 
 burned millions of feet of black walnut trees like those for which the War 
 Department during the war literally scoured the country to find material 
 for gun stocks. The heavy hewn beams of the old barns in the Ohio 
 valley are of wood that now makes table tops for kings and many an old 
 granary door would make fine furniture. 
 
 The industrial life of these states is today in their farms and pastures, 
 their packing houses, canneries, steel works, refineries and factories. Their 
 
63 
 
 prosperity is largely due to their farms, and agricultural development would 
 have been impossible without the sacrifice of the finest of their forests. 
 Nations and states, like individiials, cannot "eat their cake and have it, 
 too." 
 
 Now, we are endeavoring to reclaim a part of this lost heritage of 
 forests. Removal of timber and the rapid vanishing of nearby sources of 
 supply are focusing public attention more and more upon the need of prompt 
 and systematic provision for the future. There is enough time but not too 
 much, in which to put forestation in the United States upon a sound and 
 permanent basis. But there will be no definite or assuring accomplishment 
 until the nation and the several states themselves shall have assumed this 
 obligation as their own. 
 
 The fertile valley lands of the Ohio, the Wabash and the Miami have 
 figured prominently in the agricultural development and the industrial 
 prosperity of the central west. 
 
 In the great joint forestry enterprise which you are here planning the 
 hill lands may be reclaimed. They too may help to make this prosperity 
 secure and permanent and the forests on the hills in the big bend of the 
 Ohio river may yet become a factor in the industrial life of these states 
 as vital perhaps as the farms on the banks of the Wabash. (Applause) 
 
 MR. BOOKWALTER: I take special pleasure in presenting to you 
 Professor Rothrock of Indiana University, who will address you for a few 
 moments. (Applause) 
 
 PROF. ROTHROCK: Mr. Toastmaster and gentlemen, I am not 
 a forester at all, I know very little about forestry, although I would like 
 to know a great deal more. This matter appeals to me in a personal way. I 
 like to see things saved and it seems to me that our forests are well worth 
 saving. Perhaps we can take steps at this conference that will lead into 
 something, so that the future legislature will give us more authority in the 
 conserving of forests. (Applause) 
 
 MR. BOOKWALTER: A meeting of lumbermen or any industry con- 
 nected with the lumber industry held in Indianapolis would not be com- 
 plete without a few words from Mr. Barnaby, of Greencastle. (Applause) 
 
 MR. BARNABY : It has always been that saw-mill men have been 
 blamed with misusing our forests. I am sure I don't know why it is, 
 because we only use the lumber as necessity demands. But I am glad to 
 see this company of men so alive and interested in forest conservation. I 
 have been attending lumber conventions for something like thirty years 
 and at their annual meetings we always hear from some forestry man, and 
 while he is talking, everybody goes to sleep. I don't know why they 
 don't become more interested, but they don't seem to. They need a bunch 
 of men like you to get them stirred up. The need for conservation is 
 growing daily more and more apparent. Right now there is a great de- 
 mand for white oak and we are having difficulty in getting all that we 
 need. The men who manufacture material from white oak are at a loss 
 to know where their future supply is coming from. 
 
 I don't know how we are going to get the people of our country aroused 
 but I think it is up to the nation as a whole as well as the states. I don't 
 believe that the individuals alone can do it. (Applause) 
 
64 
 
 MR. BOOKWALTER: It is not our desire nor purpose to draw out 
 this program to a tedious lengtli, but I think that even though you have the 
 opportunity of hearing from him tomorrow, that we would like to have 
 just a few words from him now. He is the man whom I consider to be 
 the most useful citizen of this capital of Indiana, a man who has always 
 unselfishly worked for the betterment of his home town. It is to me a great 
 personal pleasure to present to you for just a few remarks, Mr. Richard 
 Lieber, of this city. (Applause) 
 
 MR. LIEBER : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, this evening I was so 
 happy as I sat here quietly in the background and listened to the papers 
 that have been given. I have been thinking of the times that I have had to 
 sit up there at the speakers' table waiting for my turn to come, and wait- 
 ing to get out of my system the paper I had been asked to give and now 
 our toastma&ter asks me to speak. I hope this is as far as we will go. 
 
 I am reminded of a little incident which I witnessed when I was a 
 young man living in England. It had been raining for several days when 
 one night it turned cold very suddenly.* The next morning the streets were 
 extremely slippery, a serious matter because of the hilly country. As I 
 was watching, an old gentleman from across the street started out very 
 carefully, picking his way along on icy pavement. He was getting along 
 very nicely until a young person came out, paying no attention to the 
 change and started down the hill just behind the old man. Very suddenly 
 she slipped and the next I knew they were both rolling down the hill 
 together and when they reached the bottom, she was found sitting on 
 top of the old gentleman. He said, "I beg your pardon, madam, but I 
 presume you will have to get off; this is as far as we go." (Laughter and 
 applause) 
 
 MR. BOOKWALTER: Well, Mr. Lieber, this is as far as- we will go 
 tonight. 
 
 ADJOURNMENT. 
 
 THURSDAY MORNING SESSION 
 
 The meeting was called to order at 9:30 A. M. with Senator Guthrie 
 presiding. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : It is far past the hour at which we were scheduled 
 to begin this morning, so I think we had better come to order. We have 
 a lot of work to be done this morning. I am going to ask all of you to 
 take particular notice of Mr. William's paper and I hope you will be able 
 to remember the points he makes. I take it that we had better go right 
 through with the program and carry it out as it is. We will first hear 
 from Dr. C. E. Thorne, Director of Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. 
 (Applause) 
 
 MR. SECREST : I regret that Mr. Thorne could not attend the confer- 
 ence and present this subject to you. It was impossible, however, for him 
 to be here, and he has requested me to present to you an outline of what 
 we think should constitute our program of forestry for Ohio. 
 
 The maintenance of the forests concerns the public interests as well as 
 those of individuals who are directly dependent in some manner upon 
 
G5 
 
 wood as a source of raw material. The various functions of forests are 
 so vital to the welfare of a state that their depletion cannot be permitted 
 to longer escape the attention of the public. 
 
 Private ownership in the main has failed to provide for the renewal 
 of the forest after cutting. The timbers of commerce have continued to 
 come largely from the original forest growth. The second growth available 
 for use is meagre, and results from a let alone policy rather than any 
 effort on the part of woodland owners to produce a second crop to succeed 
 the virgin growth. The total- available saw timber in the state does not 
 exceed 1,100,000,000 feet, and this is by no means first quality material. 
 The wood using industries dependent upon hardwoods are rapidly absorb- 
 ing the limited stumpage, and they will soon be compelled to shut down 
 or go elsewhere. The consumers of hardwoods are finding good grades 
 increasingly diflicult to obtain and at higher prices. The hardwood timber 
 supply is limited in this country as compared with that of softwoods, and 
 the sources of first growth material from the states that now have a reserve 
 will soon cease to exist. 
 
 The effect of forest depletion upon communities within the inherent 
 timber section of the state is also serious enough in consequence to engage 
 the attention of the public. Small centers of population which within the 
 last few decades were dependent to a considerable degree upon a liveli- 
 hood derived from the various factors of the lumbering industry are no 
 longer able to enjoy the modest prosperity which was theirs. Since the 
 passing of the merchantable timber many small towns and villages have 
 lost an important source of income, and the reaction is reflected in depopu- 
 lation, vacant houses and abandoned wood working plants. Nor is this 
 alone the only loss to communities and the commonwealth. The depleted 
 forest lands of no practicable utility aside from timber production, after 
 having been stripped of all merchantable growth are permitted to become 
 devastated by fire, thus further reducing their usefulness by destroying 
 even their potentiality. Such lands, and there are several hundred thousand 
 acres in Ohio, can hope for little development by virtue of private ownership 
 under present existing conditions, and there must be a material change 
 in economic conditions and in governmental regulations before private 
 capital will undertake forest renewal. 
 
 Those who have been in close touch with the forestry situation in Ohio 
 are of the opinion that the state must adopt a policy in which positive steps 
 are taken to maintain and perpetuate the forests now existing on inherent 
 forest soils and to provide for reforestation where needed on non-agricul- 
 tural or idle lands, and that this must be done in a manner that will 
 accomplish the purpose with the least possible delay. The program pro- 
 posed for Ohio is believed to embrace the greatest needs at the present time 
 and it may be modified or supplemented as future conditions warrant. 
 
 Publicly owned forests are undoubtedly a basic factor in a program for 
 increased timber production. The public through state, county and munic- 
 ipal government, is the agency that can best take over cut-over and wild 
 lands and provide the necessary protection and maintenance for the pro- 
 duction of successive crops of timber. Nor is this a problem of the produc- 
 tion of timber only. It is economy for the state to utilize all land to its 
 
fi6 
 
 fullest extent. Productive land adds to the wealth of a community and 
 state by direct and indirect means. Idle and wild lands are a liability. 
 
 Again the function of state forests would be extended to other purposes 
 of utility. They would serve to protect stream flow and the maintenance of 
 navigable streams. The proposed public forests for Ohio are in a section of 
 broken topography and in close proximity to the Ohio river. 
 
 The state needs, furthermore, publicly owned forests f<fr natural recrea- 
 tion grounds. There are virtually no places existing with proper facilities 
 where citizens of Ohio can secure camping and outing privileges, other than 
 those under private ownership. Trespassing and going onto another's land 
 even with permission is not attractive to most people. State forests with 
 appropriate camping sites would attract people to them. It would add to 
 their usefulness and would serve as a means of education in the aims and 
 purposes of forestry, and would gain support for a policy of forest conser- 
 vation. 
 
 Ohio has approximately 500,000 acres of land which should come under 
 public ownership, at least until economic conditions warrant returning all 
 or part to private ownership under a guarantee of the continuance of 
 sustained yield forests. Out present program contemplated the acquisi- 
 tion of 200,000 acres of cut-over and wild lands in some of the southern 
 Ohio counties. Such purchase would not entail a contiguous area, but 
 would comprise several tracts. A recent detailed survey of Scioto Co. 
 indicates the possibility of acquiring some 75,000 acres in virtually a con- 
 tinuous body. In any case the proposed total acquisition would be so 
 grouped as to render administration easily and economically applied. 
 Authority to purchase lands for state forests was conferred upon the 
 Board of Control of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station and suffi- 
 cient appropriations secured to make a beginning, although the two tracts 
 purchased are devoted to experimental and demonstration purposes. An 
 effort therefore must be made to procure adequate appropriations or bond 
 issues to carry out the purchase program as adopted. 
 
 Municipalities can and should take part in the program of forest con- 
 servation. There is ample opportunity in Ohio for a considerable number 
 of cities to acquire lands on broken topography suitable for forests, con- 
 tiguous or in close proximity to the corporate limits. Such tracts would 
 often be partially wooded with native forest, and would require no great 
 amount of artificial forestation. These areas could be converted into 
 natural parks for the benefit of the urban dweller, and at the same time 
 be a factor in timber production. While requiring a monetary outlay 
 at the outset, municipal forests could ultimately be made to pay their way, 
 and in time yield a revenue. It would be well for the people of cities to 
 contrast the usefulness of the relatively inexpensive municipal forest with 
 some of the ostentatious and freakish parks that adorn some of our cities. 
 Ohio now has two city forests, those of Oberlin and Cincinnati. 
 
 Other political subdivisions such as counties and townships should also 
 be authorized to acquire forests or forest parks. In this connection there 
 would be the opportunity to preserve certain forested scenic features. 
 
 Forest protection is coextensive in importance with the acquisition of 
 publicly owned forests. An adequate system for the control and suppres- 
 
67 
 
 sion of forest fires is needed in certain counties of the state. Fire injury 
 of any consequence exists only on the inherent forest lands of large con- 
 tiguous holdings. The smaller bodies of forests, mostly farmers' wood- 
 lands are rarely damaged by fires. Legislation will be needed and will be 
 requested for putting into effect the necessary machinery for fire protection 
 where needed in southern Ohio. 
 
 Grazing of woodlands has become a fixed habit with the farmer, and 
 in general is unprofitable since woodlands are poor pasture, and pastured 
 woodlands are poor forest. A campaign of education has been directed 
 against this practice and it is believed has accomplished some result. It is 
 probable that this problem can best be solved by educational means. For- 
 tunately grazing is more prevalent on the woodlands of the better agricul- 
 tural sections of the state, where land is high priced and the woodlands 
 will soon give way to farm crops. Granting the realization of the purchase 
 program of such areas as are practicable for public ownership, the bulk 
 of the forests of the state would still be in private hands. Greater assis- 
 tance to the owners of woodlands by the state by means of definite advice, 
 more comprehensive working plans, fire protection, equitable taxation, 
 adequate research in forest problems, will avail much to promote the prac- 
 tice of private forestry, but it is altogether probable that it will not meet 
 the needs. Indeed this doubt seems to be well founded in the experience 
 of the states which have had seemingly well established policies for some- 
 time. 
 
 Definite assistance where the public assumes the financial burden, the 
 attendant risks through the long period of time in carrying the timber crop 
 from the beginning well along to maturity would seem to be required if 
 any general results are obtained. We are inclined to favor, therefore, that 
 upon application of the owner of certain classes of timberland the state 
 take over the land and take charge of the renewal of the forest and its 
 management, the cost to be charged against the owner, and is to be a lien 
 against the timber. The burdens of taxation, fire risks, long time invest- 
 ment, etc., could thus be assumed by the state and at time of final cutting, 
 which would be under the supervision of the state, the cost charges would 
 be obligated by the owner. The owner, however, should have the option 
 of discharging the obligation at any time upon payment to the state of the 
 accrued costs of reforestation and administration together with a conserv- 
 ative rate of interest. A plan somewhat similar to that above has been in 
 operation in Massachusetts for some years, and though it has apparently 
 been limited to the artificial reforestation of idle lands, has been quite 
 successful in operation. It would seem that if the plan could be extended 
 to second growth and cut-over lands, partially or fully stocked as well as 
 to purely planting projects, its usefulness would be greatly, extended. 
 
 Artificial reforestation must necessarily be given considerable promi- 
 nence in any forestry program. This phase, however, is of minor conse- 
 quence as compared with the renewal of the native woodland through 
 natural regeneration. The areas wherein planting must be done, however, 
 will increase rapidly unless steps are taken to protect and maintain the 
 native growth or inherent forest soUs. 
 
 The state should give encouragement to private owners in planting waste 
 
68 
 
 and idle lands, slaelterbelts, etc. To this end it should be prepared to give 
 assistance which will promote the most economical formation and suc- 
 cessful development of forest plantations. 
 
 The state should establish forest nurseries where planting stock is 
 grown in large quantities and could be distributed to landowners free of 
 charge or at a cost not to exceed cost of production. Forest nurseries are 
 now maintained but the output is not suflBcient to furnish any large quan- 
 tities of stock. 
 
 Forest utilization and marketing of forest products are important fea- 
 tures of an adequate forest policy. Economy in the use and disposal of 
 timber has a definite salient influence on the conservation of merchantable 
 timber. The Ohio Department of Forestry has given attention to these 
 problems, and has established a service by which woodland owners are 
 given assistance relative to timber estimates, values, methods of logging, 
 marketing, etc. There should be co-operation between woodland owners 
 in marketing timber. It would enable them to dispose of their different 
 grades of timber to better advantage, and would often prevent waste and 
 misutilization of grades. 
 
 A land classification is now in progress and it should be pushed to 
 completion as rapidly as possible. By this means it will be possible to 
 determine the amounts, classes and location of lands suited to forest pro- 
 duction. Along with land classification a survey of the present forest 
 resources should be made, comprising the present supplies and the future 
 potentialities. 
 
 The needs for more extensive and better organized research work would 
 be evident in putting into effect the program as proposed. There is virtually 
 a virgin field in forestry for research work, and more definite knowledge of 
 certain phases of forest production and utilization would undoubtedly lead 
 to an earlier realization of a workable and satisfactory forest policy. 
 
 We have not proceeded as fast as we would have liked to, but I am not 
 discouraged. The outlook for some real accomplishments in the near 
 future is pretty bright. The war has had a good effect and I feel that we are 
 going to get something done that will be worth while. (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : I have been particularly interested in what Mr. 
 Secrest had to say because conditions in Ohio and Indiana are practically 
 the same. I think that Ohio has much larger tracts of timber than Indiana 
 has, but this will be interesting when the discussion comes up as to how we 
 are to acquire the timber lands. 
 
 The next speaker to appear is Dr. F. W. Shepardson, Director of Regis- 
 tration and Education. Dr. Shepardson will speak of Illinois state forest 
 policies. (Applause) 
 
 DR. SHEPARDSON: The representatives from Illinois to this confer- 
 ence came to listen rather than to talk, to learn rather than to teach. Our 
 program in Illinois for forestry is just tentative ; our policy — we have none. 
 We have not done as much as Ohio and Indiana, and I am afraid that 
 hitherto we have not been much impressed with what either of those two 
 states has done, as it has been unfolded here in the meeting of this confer- 
 ence. 
 
69 
 
 If I were to stop there, I should certainly do injustice to Illinois. Be- 
 cause there are some things that we have done which ought to be brought to 
 your attention. These things, to my mind are hopeful, especially in view of 
 the prevailing sentiment that the three states along the Ohio river have 
 more or less common interests. 
 
 When I was appointed to my present position, I had no idea what I was 
 expected to do. I found among other things that there was to be a Board 
 of Natural Resources and Conservation. That title appealed to me. It 
 had vision, and seemed to imply that the state expected that something was 
 going to be done in conservation line. I studied the make-up of that board. 
 There was an expert in geology to co-operate with the state in the geological 
 survey. There was an expert in natural history. There were experts in 
 chemistry and sanitation. There was an expert in forestry. 
 
 The next question came as to whether Illinois had accomplished any- 
 thing along the lines of forest preservation. It was found that in May, 
 1893, Mr. G. W. McCluer in connection with Professor T. J. Burrill of the 
 University of Illinois made a report on forestry in Illinois. This is an 
 extremely interesting document. In a general way he showed that there 
 are eighty species of forest trees in Illinois besides many large shrubs. 
 The first appropriation for forestry was made on March 11, 1869, one 
 thousand dollars being set aside for trees and seeds. Experimental plant- 
 ing was begim by the University of Illinois in the spring of 1871. This 
 report is found in Bulletin 26 of the Agricultural Experiment Station at 
 Champaign. Its general conclusions are that the land in Illinois which 
 was fit for wheat and corn was too valuable to be used for forest trees ; 
 that well timbered land sold at a less price per acre than adjoining lands 
 that had been cleared or than prairie land of the same productiveness. The 
 value of the timber was less than the cost of clearing and bringing under 
 cultivation. The report continued, that, apart from economic views, the 
 planting of trees had higher and other claims for consideration. These in- 
 cluded the equalization of temperature, the better distribution of moisture, 
 better sustaining the running streams and minimizing and reducing the 
 danger of destructive floods, the checking of heavy winds, the better pro- 
 tection of the crops from the destructive influence of air moving too rap- 
 idly, and the aesthetic value of trees used as ornaments. 
 
 On May 5, 1903, a resolution was adopted in the state legislature lament- 
 ing the diminishing of the forest area of Illinois and asking that the De- 
 partment of Agriculture of the United States of America be requested to 
 make an investigation as to the condition of the forests and to make rec- 
 ommendations for preserving what remained and for encouraging the prop- 
 agation, growth and protection of forests in general within the state. 
 
 In 1910 another study was made in co-operation with Mr. Peters by 
 two representatives of the forest service, this report being published in 
 1911 under the title "Forest Conditions in IlUnois." The survey which 
 was made was thorough so far as it went. The report shows what various 
 kinds of trees were to be found in lUinois and it was illustrated by photo- 
 graphs which brought out many points of interest. 
 
 Nothing else seems to have been done imtil the adoption of the Civil 
 Administrative Code. This provided for a Board of Natural Resources and 
 
70 
 
 Conservation to advise regarding the scientific work of the state, forestry 
 being mentioned as one specific phase of it, this to be represented on the 
 board mentioned by an expert on the subject. Under the direction of this 
 board, Professor John M. Coulter, the expert in forestry, was instructed to 
 present a report on possibilities along this line.- As a result of his recom- 
 mendations which followed some investigational work by graduate students 
 under him, the Board of Natural Resources and Conservation recommended 
 that a forester be employed to niake a preliminary study of the needs and 
 possibilities of the situation. An item was included in the budget of the 
 Natural History Survey to provide for the salary of the forester whose 
 work began July 1st, 1919. 
 
 Now I think I have recounted the history of forestry in Illinois. I want 
 to call attention to the fact that we have in the vicinity of Chicago, in 
 Cook coimty, forest preserves, that have led many people to think seriously 
 of this question of forestry, and of the desirability of preserving trees. 
 
 As we look forward, what is the situation? The first thing we did was 
 to ask the legislature for an appropriation to start something and they 
 did give us a small amount which we plan to use to make a survey which 
 will reveal in printed form the various conditions which have been discussed 
 in this room during the last day. We hope to use this for the purpose of 
 stimulating interest in preserving the forests of Illinois. We want to be 
 able to provide valuable information so that at the next session of the leg- 
 islature, we may be able to get a larger appropriation and then really 
 start work as it should be started. We have made the right kind of a 
 beginning. We gave careful consideration to the kind of a man we should 
 have for state forester. We found one who pleased us and with whom we 
 are increasingly pleased as the days go by. He is working under handicaps 
 of not having enough help in men or money, but he has made a good be- 
 ginning. Now then, the question is, what can we do in the future? There 
 again we come to some peculiar conditions which confront us. Illinois is 
 in the midst of a big undertaking — we are now trying the budget system. 
 If there is a legislative body which knows nothing of the relation of income 
 to outgo, it might easily be induced by argument to make an appropriation 
 of a hundred thousand dollars for forestry purposes, but you can't get by 
 with this and the budget system. 
 
 We can't get an appropriation unless we can show that we can actually 
 give something that will benefit Illinois. This applies to forestry or any- 
 thing else. We are now at work on a good roads program which will cost 
 us over a hundred million dollars. Not only the roads which the state is 
 building, but those of local communities, are being reconstructed. We are 
 undertaking a great waterways program in Illinois, and an investment of 
 a good many million dollars is going into that, not only for tomorrow but 
 for the future. We are engaged in making a topographical survey of Illi- 
 nois, in co-operation with the United States Government. We have just 
 completed about twenty-three per cent, of the map making. We want to 
 publish that just as fast as we can. Incidentally, we have started a little 
 bit of work along drainage lines. 
 
 All of these things are working favorably toward forestation, because 
 people are being united as they never were before. We have begun to 
 
71 
 
 realize that Illinois must do things as Illinois, and not as sections of a 
 state. We are already co-operating with the Federal Government in the 
 topographical survey. In this map-making the ground is being prepared. 
 There is this background for study and thought. There have been papers 
 prepared, relating to various minor features of forestry. There have been 
 small groups of people interested in this thing. And now I come back 
 to where I started, saying that the forestry program of Illinois is still 
 tentative, and as for a forest policy, we have none. I believe I am also 
 justified in saying that Illinois is working on a lot of things which are 
 preparing the way for us so that if Ohio, Indiana and Illinois get together, 
 working with the Federal Government, doing those things which can be 
 done, Illinois will be ready to co-operate, and Illinois will lend its influence, 
 not only in the halls of congress, but also at home. (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: "We have all been interested in Dr. Shepardson's 
 talk, and I know it will bring out much discussion when we come to that 
 point. It interested me, because he admitted that we were ahead of Illinois 
 in forestry. All of you are aware that Indiana made some changes in the 
 last legislature, and created a Department of Conservation, which covers 
 five or six different offices, listing them under this board. After the Gov- 
 ernment created this board, which was to commence action thp first of 
 April, the board thought only of one man as director of these departments. 
 He was a man who took great interest in parks, conservation, had spent a 
 good deal of time and money along these lines, and so we selected for this 
 position a man who will talk to you now, and who no doubt will give us 
 something which will be appreciated. Col. Richard Lieber, Director of Con- 
 servation for the State of Indiana. (Applause) 
 
 MR. RICHARD LIEBER: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, at the ban- 
 quet last night Mr. Bookwalter referred to an accident which happened 
 to a lonely tree in France. That to us, sounded like a strange incident for 
 nobody in this country has ever thought of planting trees for the future 
 since everybody expects that the remnants of forests that we do have 
 should last forever and so save us from the necessity of exerting ourselves. 
 Whereas in the old countries of Europe tree planting has become a necessity 
 and has been practiced for centuries, we are now just in the early stages 
 of considering it. It is not that we are less careful than the other nations, 
 not that the other nations are wiser than we are, but it is because neces- 
 sity has not yet driven us to it. As matters are shaping up at this time, we 
 still have a margin of safety, but is it always wise to use the margin of 
 safety? We should be prepared to have that material which is so essen- 
 tial, therefore the entire matter of forestry is one of public interest. 
 
 The forestry problem of Indiana must be solved on the basis of public 
 welfare. Under this I would include such contributing factors as the 
 aesthetic, climatic, recreational and most important, the economical. 
 
 All these elements are contained in the wider scope of a forestry policy 
 and so interwoven are they into the public weal that it is doubly neces- 
 sary to work out a well defined, at times even a narrowed down, plan of 
 forest management in order to keep its character free from confusion with 
 its attributes. 
 
 The silent woods may be the poet's inspiration, but that is not forestry. 
 
72 
 
 The white-tailed deer which I hope to see reinstated in its former do- 
 main may again give joy to the nature lover and to the sportsmen, but that 
 is not forestry. Winding roads through inviting woodlands over which 
 travels in super-limousines or in the well-known and popular make, a 
 crowd of recreationists more variegated than the motley crew of Chaucer's 
 Pilgrims to Canterbury, are a by-product but a by-product only of forestry. 
 And even the purer waters of streams, their greater abundance and their 
 wholesome influences on climatic conditions are not forestry. 
 
 Forestry is the science of producing wood and keeping it in sustained 
 use for the benefit of men. And therefore, again the forestry problem of 
 Indiana must be solved on the basis of public welfare. 
 
 Of all the materials that bountiful nature has bestowed on us, none has 
 found so many ready uses as wood. For, while the minerals lie dormant 
 until we reach out for them, the very life of a tree is full of productiveness 
 in the interest of man ; its death only marks a transformation of usefulness. 
 For that reason the oft-heard claim that we will find a substitute for wood 
 if we run out of trees is a dangerous fallacy, for we human beings need 
 trees in order to enjoy the many products thereof, because in a world 
 without trees we would not need any further substitutes having renounced 
 our place to the reign of billions of insects. 
 
 So again we see how forestry has its ramifications in all human en- 
 deavor, how it is essential to human welfare — nay, to its very existence. 
 Of late years there has come over many people in our state a keen realiza- 
 tion that all is not well on that score. More and more it becomes patent 
 that private ownership of forest land has been a round failure. 
 
 We have spent a great amount of energy and a considerable sum of 
 money attempting to convince and encourage the private land owner in 
 the practice of forestry with but little result. We cannot escape the fact 
 that private ownership of forests and timberland is possible only, if imme- 
 diate cutting is contemplated. It is impossible in the sense of forest 
 administration. 
 
 When we condense our material, we find that about the only advantage 
 in forestry practice that we can offer to the private owner, is the improve- 
 ment of aesthetic and climatic conditions — surely a small boon for long 
 risks and short profits. We cannot say it is a profitable investment because 
 under present conditions it is not. Furthermore, the present disadvantages 
 of private forestry are many. The income from the land used for agri- 
 cultural, horticultural, and grazing purposes, for instance, is greater and 
 is received dally, weekly, monthly, semi-annually or annually. Intensive 
 agriculture gives an outlet for man-power and increases the local popula- 
 tion, improves the public roads system which contributes to desirable social 
 factors, together with establishing a greater number of churches, and 
 social centers, and increasing the population of the school. With our 
 waning forests our saw mills are disappearing and in some communities 
 only one, or not even one remains which means no competition and a rela- 
 tive slump in the price of stumpage. The people of these districts will soon 
 not know how to haul logs or have the necessary equipment for handling 
 timber. The rapid development of the dairy business, the recent intro- 
 duction and wide use of the silo, added knowledge of certain forage plants, 
 
73 
 
 the high price of competing food products, all go to form an economic 
 bulwark against which private forestry cannot stand. No agency except 
 fire is so destructive of our woodlands as the grazing business which is 
 now throttling our remnant forests. 
 
 With this in mind we are face to face with the fact that there are in 
 the state large industries that depend upon the forests for their raw mater- 
 ial and the employment of thousands of people. These great commercial 
 enterprises are confronted with inevitable dissolution if some means is not 
 worked out by which their future supply will be assured. If they go, many 
 communities will be practically destroyed and even if the industry can 
 afford to bring its raw material from greatly distant and foreign fields, 
 the state must repay in a greatly increased cost. 
 
 Forestry in Indiana is not a locjil question, nor is it a political one. It 
 is essentially a question which affects the prosperity and happiness of the 
 coming generations. 
 
 The situation is acute. We must have a constructive forest policy 
 which will establish a permanent timber supply. There is but little hope 
 in private interest, although they may be urged into some activity by the 
 proper classification of lands with corresponding taxation which will per- 
 mit the placing of i)rivate forestry on a profitable basis. 
 
 It is seeming paradox that just as wood is the fuel for the very 
 rich or the very poor, so is the tenure of forest land likewise only pos- 
 sible for the two extremes ; the millionaire who makes a plaything out of it 
 and the poor man whom it supplies with the return of a few wagon-loads 
 of railroad ties, hoop-poles or tanbark, to maintain his precarious exis- 
 tence. 
 
 This, however, does not include the circumspect farmer whose proi)erly 
 arranged woodlots constit«»ite a valuable farm asset, but neither can the 
 woodlot be construed a solution of the forestry problem. 
 
 We cannot shun the fact that the question is one for the public and it 
 remains for the state and the municipality to meet the situation. The state 
 can carry the investment safer than the individual. A long time invest- 
 ment is no object. It is the duty of the state to have a forest at hand for 
 national safety. 
 
 When in August, 1914, the world was set afire, we admitted in tlie 
 following years that we were unprepared for war. Isn't it plain to us 
 now that primarily we were unprepared for peace. And when we did arise 
 in our might, what was it that lent substance to our energy and to our 
 devotion but our wonderful natural resources. 
 
 Colonel Graves has told us and from Colonel Greeley we will hear a 
 similar story— what part American timber has played in the war. If we 
 could have that mighty contril»ution presented to us in one bill it would 
 readily open our eyes to the immediate need of replacement. , 
 
 This time we still had the substance. Let not another emergency arise 
 and find us wanting. 
 
 Intensive growing of timber is work beyond the strength of the indi- 
 vidual. It is more than a mere economic need ; it is a solemn, patriotic 
 duty for it aims to preserve the integrity of a nation. 
 
 Deep significance lies in the fact that our fore-fathers beheld the forest 
 
74 
 
 with awe and reverence and attributed supernatural forces to its being. 
 Tlie cities and municipalities in the past timidly began with parks, but 
 parks are not forestry. The Federal Government in some states has cour- 
 ageously plunged into the maintenance of public forests. The time has 
 come when Indiana should follow suit on a large scale ; the state as well as 
 its municipalities. The extent to which they should engage in forestry will 
 be determined by equating the value of the profits on the forest with the 
 profits that might be obtained on the same land from agricultural crops 
 including grazing. At least the location of public forests would be deter- 
 mined by this method, because it has always been axiomatic with foresters 
 that land with high agricultural possibilities should be used for that pur- 
 pose. 
 
 State owned forests would be in large bodies, hence, could be more eco- 
 nomically administered and the management would be under trained for- 
 esters which would insure the maximum of income. Again, forests in 
 large bodies would afford opportunities for revenue from game, from 
 xise as a hunting preserve and from park privileges in general. 
 
 The time for the inaiTguration of state forests for Indiana is today. We 
 cannot afford to delay any longer. We must go to work at once and find 
 the most economical locations ; the method of financing ; the administration 
 and work out the great mass of detail consequent upon such a project. 
 We cannot intelligently speak of the hundreds or thousands of acres, but 
 rather in hundreds of thousands of acres, because we must get out of the 
 time worn rut we have been running in, and realize that the question is 
 large and pressing and that only by the intelligent management of himdreds 
 of thousands of acres of forest can we hope to establish a permanent sup- 
 ply of Indiana hardwood. 
 
 The biggest problem is to place before the public the urgency of the 
 situation ; the necessity of action and responsibility that rests upon the 
 civic body. Thankfully ! the large upheaval caused by the world war 
 has aroused the public from its old lethargy to a keen appreciation of its 
 power and responsibility. There must be launched at once a campaign of 
 education, through the schools and mails and the press, setting forth the 
 present conditions of our timber supply and the requirements which will 
 make it possible for the great wood-using industries to continue. Pains- 
 taking investigation is necessary to produce the authentic information with 
 which the public must become acquainted. 
 
 The Department of Conservation is a willing instrument and I hope that 
 it may prove an able one to make the people of our state acquainted with 
 the prevailing condition. Together with Ohio and Illinois we have stated 
 the purpose of our conference to be "an arousing of the public and wood- 
 using industries to the need of action if our future timber supply is to 
 be assured, to formulate a practical working policy of state forestry, out- 
 line a comprehensive legislative program and secure adequate legislative 
 backing." 
 
 When we adjourn this meeting tonight after we have learned even 
 more from the moving pictures that we are to see, then the real work 
 should begin. It has been my pleasure to consult with a few of the gentle- 
 men and we agreed that the following would be the best plan to conserve 
 
75 
 
 the work of the conference, namely, that each state should form a Forestry 
 Propaganda Committee of any size they wish to make it, have the committee 
 select three men to serve on an Executive Committee— these men to be 
 men connected vsrith a wood-using industry and in sympathy with our 
 movement. The committee should meet at an appointed place and outline 
 the plan in general to be followed out simultaneously in the three states. 
 The Executive Committees should carry the information to the state com- 
 mittees and make their particular wishes known to the governing body. 
 The object is that we will be able to preserve the work that we have done 
 here, keep 'in touch with each other, obtain the assistance of the Federal 
 Government and put ourselves in a position wherever the legislature meets 
 to assist in the formation of proper legislation. 
 
 In conclusion I wish to say that if the Department of Conservation had 
 the autocratic ix)wer to bestow great blessings upon the people by its use, 
 we would disdain to use it. For a finer sensibility of the purposes of a 
 republican form of government teaches and invariably returns us to the 
 full realization that lasting good can only come through the public voice 
 of an enlightened electorate. In full security and confidence of its final 
 decision we rest our case. (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : I know you have all been interested in the very able 
 paper which we have just had presented and will have a few questions 
 about it later. Now we will hear from Mr. Marcus Schaff, State Forester 
 of Michigan, on the subject of "State Nurseries." (Applause) 
 
 MR. MARCUS SCHAAF: Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen: If forests 
 are to be grown, and in our opinion they will be grown but for obvious 
 reasons only or at least principally by the state and federal governments, 
 then the forest nursery is an important consideration in any state forest 
 policy worthy of the name. The primary object of such a nursery should be 
 twofold. First, to insure an unfailing supply of dependable planting stock 
 of the proper species and classes needed in the systematic reforestation of 
 the state forests, assuming of course that the state already has or is to 
 acquire acreage for that purpose. Second, to be able to furnish the neces- 
 sary material for the planting of private holdings, not for ornamental 
 effect but only for acreage planting with a view to the production of timber. 
 Ornamental planting is more or less of a luxury little affecting public 
 welfare, but to encourage as far as possible reforestation of private lands 
 on a commercial basis the state can well afford to provide suitable stock 
 at moderate prices to those desiring it. Under no circumstances, however, 
 is it deemed advisable to distribute it free of cost. 
 
 In making provision for the production of planting stock on a large 
 scale for use over a wide range of territory a choice of two plans is ad- 
 visable. One is to have a single large nursery, located somewhat centrally 
 with respect to the region to be supplied, in which all of the work is cen- 
 tralized and from which all material is distributed to the various points 
 of consumption as needed. The other plan involves the establishment of 
 individual and smaller nurseries, one in each of the localities to be planted 
 such as the different state forests, or separate districts each of which in- 
 cludes a number of forests within easy reach. There are objections as 
 well as advantages in either of these arrangements. 
 
7« 
 
 The principal points in favor of the single central nnrsery ai-e that all 
 of the operations are centered at one place and under one head, therefore 
 resulting in hetter supervision, greater uniformity of stock and lesser cost 
 of production per unit. Less initial investment is required for major 
 equipment. The outlay on this accoinit for a small station is comparatively 
 heavy and it goes without saying that a large establishment can be equipped 
 more cheaply than can a number of smaller similar ones. Consolidation 
 and large output mean cheai^er production. Nursery work is intensive and 
 highly specialized and as such demands close and constant sui)ervision by 
 one well versed thi'ough practical experience in such matters if success is 
 to be attained. Consequently one large nursery under the supervisioji of 
 a competent man will be better managed than a number of separate places 
 under as many different men. And above all, the central nursery is. if 
 properly located, a permanent affair whereas the others are in their very 
 nature more or less temporary. 
 
 On the other hand there ai-e certain drawbacks that are inseparable 
 from the central nursery. The work Iteing of an intensixe kind and there- 
 fore requiring much labor, there is the ]x»ssibility when operating on a large 
 scale of not obtaining sufficient helj> where production is restricted to one 
 place. This is brought to mind all the more forcibly when we realize that 
 state forests usually, and naturally, are located in sparsely populated dis- 
 tricts. This problem may, however, be largely overcome by dividing activ- 
 ities as much as possible between the fall and spring seasons. The central 
 nursery must be depended upon to produce all the stock required for plant- 
 ing not only in the immediate vicinity but in the remoter parts of the state 
 as well. This involves transixjrtation of the plants over long distances, 
 which to .say the least is in no wi.se ctmducive to their betterment. Then 
 again there are .somewhat greater chances of infestations of dangerous 
 diseases where the tendency is to overcrowd or confine great numbers 
 on small area.s. Plants, like animals, are more or less subject to epidemics 
 where extreme c(mgestion occurs, and ajtplicable to a certain extent in this 
 case is the old adage that we sliould not place all of our eggs in one basket. 
 
 Considering the alternative of a system of individual local niu'series the 
 following advantages are apparent. The work is distributed and the diffi- 
 culty of securing the necessar.v lalior diminishes in proportion. The place 
 of production being on the forest itself, the stock is always immediately 
 at hand and the delays and possible damage incident upon transportation 
 are thus eliminated. Should disaster befall any one of the nurseries 
 through any cause, there are the others to fall back upon. 
 
 This same plan carries with it, however, a number of decidedly objec- 
 tionable features. The matter of suixrvision and inspection becomes as 
 scattered as are the nurseries themselves. The ai'ea of each, and conse- 
 quently the output, is apt to be so small as hardly to justify the mainte- 
 nance of a qualified suiierintendent in each case and without such super- 
 vision, good results cannot be expected. The initial investment put into 
 a place of small producing capacity can very easily be made to exceed be- 
 yond reason the demands to be met. In many instances, especially on the 
 smaller forests, the nursery could not possibly be otherwise than temporary 
 and temix»rary nurseries, implying lax or incompetent supervision, inade- 
 
77 
 
 quate facilities and haphazard methods, are to be always avoided. All of 
 which makes for either high cost of production oi- a less dependable supply 
 of cheaper stock of inferior quality. 
 
 Our own experience leads us to boliexe that the establishment of one 
 Well-equipped, permanent nursery suitably located is by far the more ad- 
 visable course to pursue. Or it might perhaps be good policy in a state 
 where extremes of soil, climate and si)ecies are encountered, to effect a 
 compromise and have two permanent nurseries, one to supply the northern 
 and the other the southern half. 
 
 After deciding upon the general location, due attention should he 
 given to the selection of the nursery site propei-. There is a difference of 
 opinion as to the soil best adapted for the purpose, some even maintain- 
 ing that it should be as nearly as iM)ssible identical to that on which 
 the trees are to be ultimately .set. Practice, however, does not bear out 
 this theory and it is only reasonable to suppose that a healthy, vigorous 
 plant grown under the most favorable conditions will do better when 
 transplanted to a poorer site than would a less vigorous one. On the other 
 hand a plant less favoi'ed in the nursery will respond noticeably when 
 transferred to a better soil than that in which it formerly grew. After 
 all the soil to a large extent serves only as a physical supporter for the 
 trees and by supplying in the way of fertilizers the elements necessary to 
 their development good stock can be grown in any properly drained soil. 
 In this respect more attention should be given to the physical condition 
 of the soil tMn to the mer& question of fertility, since it is easily possible 
 and entirely practicable to supply the latter whereas adverse physical 
 conditions cannot always be remedied and often only at great expense. A 
 deep, fresh, porous, sandy loam free from stones and easily worked is 
 preferable. It should have thorough and rapid natural drainage. Even an 
 extremely light sandy but well-drained soil is far safer than a heavier 
 and more fertile one alfording poor or at best slow natural drainage, for 
 in any case water can be provided artificially but imly a light well-drained 
 soil will itself take care of excess precipitation. Given a choice therefore 
 between the lightest possible soil provided with water and a heavy agricul- 
 tural soil the former is to be preferred. This applies more particularly to 
 nurseries devoted primarily to the production of coniferous species but 
 even in the case of broad-leaved species, which naturally affect a more 
 fertile soil and which will undoubtedly enter into reforestation in this 
 region to a considerable if not a prei>onderating extent, a good sandy loam 
 will suffice and will very probably be not much inferior to the best soil 
 that will ultimately go to make up the state forests. The site should be 
 level, or practically so, and so situated as to i»ermit of an enlargement in 
 the future should occasion demand. 
 
 An absolutely essential part of any well managed nursery is a depend- 
 able water supply. Whether it be a temporary or permanent nursery it is 
 poor policy to depend upon rainfall. One should 1)6 wholly independent of 
 this by installing a complete irrigating system that will be adequate not 
 only for the present but for all future needs. An underground system of 
 pipes through which the water is delivered to hydrants, or possibly overhead 
 sprinklers, is considered best in that it is permanent, does not interfere with 
 
T8 
 
 operations, eliminates danger of damage to the system due to sudden 
 changes of weather and brings the water to the plants at a more equable 
 temperature. The pii^es need not be buried below frost line but all should 
 be laid on a grade sufficient to drain them thoroughly in winter. Hydrants 
 should drain underground automatically and should be provided at fre- 
 quent intervals. 
 
 The size of the nursery will depend entirely upon the quantity and 
 classes of stock that are required annually. Obviously a great deal more 
 space is needed for growing transplants than for an equal number of seed- 
 lings and broad-leaved species as a rule demand considerably more room 
 than do conifers. Ordinarily for conifers an acre of ground will take care 
 of from thirty-five thousand to one hundred twenty thousand transplants, 
 depending upon the length of time they are to remain in the nursery rows, 
 whereas the same area devoted to the production of seedlings is sufficient 
 for approximately two million two-year olds. But for a sustained annual 
 output of say two million two-year seedlings twice this acreage is necessary 
 since the trees occupy the ground for a period of two years. Likewise with 
 transplants the space required to supply any given quantity per annum 
 is dependent upon the number of years that they are to stand in the nursery 
 before being sent to the field. In other words the amount of growing space 
 to be provided is in almost direct ratio to the numbers and age classes 
 desired annually. It is well, however, to allow for some additional ground 
 so that some portion of the nursery may always be resting under beneficial 
 cover crops so regulated that the entire area 'may periodically imdergo a 
 complete rotation. 
 
 As to the best cultural methods to be employed in the nursery no general 
 rules can be given that will apply to all alike. So much depends upon the 
 latitude, the site, the species to be raised, and like conditions. The ques- 
 tion therefore becomes more or less of a local one, best met and solved 
 through practice and experience in each individual case. Even with two 
 nurseries where almost identical conditions obtain, the same methods may 
 produce quite different results, or putting it another way, the employment 
 of opposite methods may lead to entirely satisfactory results. The per- 
 sonal element enters very largely into the degree of success attained. In our 
 own work we have found that discontinuance of a number of practices, at 
 one time generally considered as prerequisites to success, has brought about 
 marked improvements. Practically all of our seeding is now done in the 
 fall, whereas spring sowing was formerly the rule. We no longer make 
 use of shades for shade's sake, and the stock is none the worse off for lack 
 of it. Mulch in every form has been dispensed with and a considerable 
 item of labor thereby avoided, to say nothing of the subsequent beneficial 
 effects upon the plants: And all of these innovations combined have ap- 
 parently led to the total elimination of the dread disease known as damping- 
 off. Originally, as was the custom, we attempted to combat this disease 
 by the application of fungicides as a preventive but with only mediocre 
 results. Now we feel that we can control it entirely by the simple cul- 
 tural methods mentioned above. We are also tending more and more 
 towards greater intensiveness in all lines of nursery work believing it to 
 be economy to do so on the assumption that, other things being equal, the 
 
79 
 
 more that is put into it the more will be gotten out. As an instance of this 
 all ground preparation Is now done by hand. Plowing is no longer permitted 
 and a horse is not allowed in the nursery, all of the ground being carefully 
 spaded. We do not, however, mean to convey the impression that this 
 same mode of procedure would necessarily work out as satisfactorily in 
 other regions. 
 
 Time will not permit us to enter into the details of the various nursery 
 operations, nor is that deemed appropriate here. We have therefore merely 
 touched upon what appears to us to be the outstanding features to be con- 
 sidered in the establishment and management of state forest nurseries. 
 (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: I notice we have all been interested in this paper 
 because we want to know more about nurseries. I feel that we are only 
 in our infancy along this line. Now, to me the next subject on our program 
 is the most interesting one that we have. I refer to the subject "Acquisi- 
 tion of Lands for State Forests." This was the subject given to Mr. T. C. 
 Williams, Deputy Commissioner of Forestry of Pennsylvania. I hope some 
 good suggestions that we can use in Indiana will come out from his 
 paper. (Applause) 
 
 MR. I. C. WILLIAMS : Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, in pre- 
 senting this subject to you, (I shall take the liberty occasionally to refer to 
 some of the experiences of my own state and have brought with me a map 
 of Pennsylvania. The black patches upon it represent the present Penn- 
 sylvania state forests. The scale of the map is six miles to the inch. This 
 map will give you some idea of the .size of some of our tracts.) 
 
 In any discussion involving a policy of land purchase for forest uses, 
 obviously what first commands attention is some kind of land classification. 
 For the present purpose it is proposed to divide all lands into two classes, 
 agricultural and non-agricultural, or farm land and forest land, it being 
 pretty well understood by this time that all soil not suited for growing 
 farm crops is or may possibly be made suitable for growing a forest crop. 
 Within the class forest land we will regard included all forms of barrens, 
 moors, wastes, undrained swamps, rocky areas, as well as the better moun- 
 tain and upland soil, either too steep, too high, or too poor for productive 
 agriculture. • 
 
 To determine what lands, then, are absolute forest or relative forest, 
 in such states as the three represented in this conference, may not be an 
 easy task. In the Appalachian region to the east or in the Rocky moun- 
 tain region to the west, the problem is much simpler; but where the land 
 is generally level, or slightly ridged by low hills, where extended bodies of 
 woodland no longer exist, and where the farm woods are gradually melting 
 away, the question is reduced to a nice balancing between the demands of 
 the population on the one hand, for the products of the farm, and on 
 the other, for the products of the forest. That we must have both, and 
 in increasing quantities, goes without saying, else there would be no 
 need for such a meeting as this. 
 
 It would therefore seem that a logical approach to the subject would 
 be by some kind of survey and report, made by a properly constituted state 
 authority, now existing or to be created for the purpose, equipped with 
 
80 
 
 men and means, and unhampered by any other consideration than the 
 immediate business in hand. No doubt there already exists a large 
 amount of data in each of the states, gathered in the past by agricultural 
 geological, or topographic surveys, and easily adapted to the needs of the 
 new effort. The land which is agricultural will readily separate from that 
 which is forest. It is with the areas which lie between where the greatest 
 doubt arises. But a final disposal of the middle class lands need not im- 
 mediately be made. Set aside by purchase or other means, the land deter- 
 mined to be forest. Begin a careful system of administration, protection, 
 and develojiment, guided by the principles of scientific and practical for- 
 estry, and within a reasonable time it will be apparent whether any state 
 has too little forest land for its present and immediate future needs. Upon 
 this determination it may rest the necessity of reachng out for the middle 
 lands and forcing them into the class of absolute forest. 
 
 Among all the lands which may be set aside, widely varying conditions 
 will be met. There will be large areas and small areas, cleared and cul- 
 tivated lands of good quality surrounded by forest, drainage conditions 
 favorable or unfavorable, valuable mineral deposits which have been sold 
 outright or for the removal of which leases may be outstanding. Timber 
 cover may be adequate, scanty, or none, values may be low and prices high, 
 and titles clouded or uncertain. 
 
 Should it become necessary so to increase the forested area that some 
 of the lands we have called middle must be brought in, this might be accom- 
 plished by a system looking to the establishment of ratable areas of farm 
 woods. Upon many farms now not furnished with a tract of woods, there 
 will be quarter and half acres, up to ten or more acres, where pasturage 
 might l)e temporarily discontinued and a woody growth started. Existing 
 farm woods may be strengthened, and. in the aggregate, a large area thus 
 added to the woodlands of the state. At all events without state action, 
 every farm should have a piece of woodland for domestic needs; and while 
 it might be difficult to persuade a farm owner to plant a highly productive 
 acre with red oak or tulip poplar, yet considerations of state policy accom; 
 panied by state action may make it necessary to require that it be done. 
 
 It is more than probable that the foregoing may be found as conditions, 
 modified, of cour.se, in practically all our states, and must be considered in 
 every purchase. Tliey are certainly true for Pennsylvania and constantly 
 occur in the experience of the writer. 
 
 The history of the origin of our land titles shows a wide variance. The 
 titles to land in the three states here met in conference are derived through 
 an act of the Continental Congress, the Ordinance of 1787, preceded by 
 grants to the United States of various state claims ; while those for Penn- 
 sylvania are through the English grant to William Penn in 1682, the 
 various treaties with the Indians and conveyances from tribal chiefs the 
 will of William Penn, who died in 1718. and the Divesting Act of the Penn- 
 sylvania Legislature of 1779, by which, in consideration of £130,000, 
 accepted by the Penn heirs, the title of the heirs to the whole of what is 
 now that state, became vested in the commonwealth. 
 
 In proposing a form of government for his colony, Penn outlined "Cer- 
 tain Conditions or Concessions" and in Article XVIII thereof he states : 
 
I 
 
 81 
 
 "That in clearing the ground care be taken to leave one acre of trees 
 for every five acres cleared, especially to preserve oak and mulberries, for 
 silk and shipping." It will thus be seen that the seed of practical forestry 
 was sown in the virgin soil of Pennsylvania at its birth as an English 
 colony; and to those of us who now live there it is a matter of lasting 
 regret that the wise injunction of the founder was disregarded for two 
 hundrded years. 
 
 Knowing conditions best as we have them in Pennsylvania, I crave your 
 indulgence if the methods in use there for making state forest purchases 
 be used as an illustration. The state of Pennsylvania is traversed from 
 northeast to southwest by the Appalachian mountains. It contains an 
 area a little less than thirty million acres. Roughly we divide the state 
 into three parts, of whieh the mountains and their foothills occupy about 
 one-third or a little less than ten million acres, most of which is absolute 
 forest land. Another part, or about ten million acres, is wholly agricultural. 
 The remainder, or a little less than ten million, is of that in between class 
 almost too good for forest and too poor for agriculture. The areas of 
 cities, towns, lakes, and rivers are also included in this class. 
 
 When the real forestry program started, about 1870, attention was 
 directed to conditions at the heads of the larger streams. The people 
 first became convinced that better stream flow meant better forest cover 
 tm the upper watersheds. All this great hilly and mountainous area, pre- 
 viously covered with heavy frost, was rapidly being uncovered by lumbering, 
 with no attention given to regeneration or protection from fire. A Division 
 of forestry was created in the newly organized Agricultural Department 
 in 1895. 
 
 The earliest acts passed by the Assembly for the purchase of lands for 
 State Forests, or forestry reservation, as they were then called, were of 
 the session of 1897 and were two in number. The first provided for the 
 purchase of land sold for unpaid taxes and the second for the establishment 
 of reservations of forty thousand acres each upon the drainage areas of 
 the three largest river systems, the Delaware, the Susquehanna, and the 
 Ohio. The explanation given in the Act itself, for the passage of the first 
 statute, was, "the preservation of the water supply at the sources of the 
 rivers of the state and for the protection of the people of the common- 
 wealth and their property from destructive floods." In that day everything 
 had to be explained in advance, and we have not yet wholly passed beyond 
 that stage. The second statute carried the right of eminent domain, giving 
 power to seize lands suitable for the establishment of the reserved areas, 
 could they be obtained in no other way. It may be noted in passing that 
 it has never yet been necessary to invoke the aid of this extraordinary 
 means of acquisition. 
 
 Purchase at tax sales was made to the extent of over sixty thousand 
 acres. About one-half of it was sul)se(iuent!y redeemed. Lauds acquired 
 by these means are usually correct forest areas, but you are never certain 
 of your holdings. The right of redemi)tion, if exercised, will break up the 
 continuity of tracts. I think we all agree that forestry is best pi-acticed, 
 most economically administered, with large solid bodies of land. At 
 present, tax sale purchases in Pennsylvania have almost ceased. Wild, 
 
82 
 
 unseated, mountain land is looked upon as having greater value than 
 formerly, and the owners are paying taxes promptly. Twenty years ago, 
 in certain counties, the treasurer's biennial tax sale advertisement in the 
 local newspapers frequently covered a page. Today, in the same coun- 
 ties, it runs to less than half a column. 
 
 Purchases on the watersheds of the principal rivers proceeded rapidly 
 in the acquisition of private holdings, but before the prescribed area of 
 forty thousand acres had been obtained upon each of the watersheds 
 named, the Department of Forestry was created by the legislature of 
 1901, and is now a constituent branch of the state government. 
 
 The Department of Forestry consists of a Forest Commission of five 
 members, of which body the Commissioner of Forestry is one. The sub- 
 divisions at present are ten in number, each headed by a forester or special- 
 ist. Any suitable tracts of land may be purchased in any county, the test 
 being its fitness for forest culture. The price to be paid was limited at 
 first to five dollars per acre, but has since been raised to ten dollars. 
 Where conditions. relating to re-foresting and betterment of stand may be 
 improved, timber may be sold. As a result of timber and mineral sales, 
 made from what for the most part is abandoned land and decrepit timber 
 left by the old-time lumbering, the department had paid into the state 
 treasury $195,789.42. 
 
 In procuring forest land for state purposes, the first consideration is 
 that it be forest land. Occasionally small areas of cleared, or formerly 
 cleared, land, but now chiefly abandoned for farming pur]X)ses, will be 
 included. These few acres are useful for many purposes, the chief being 
 that they afford living places for forest ofl3cers. All deals and negotiations 
 are preferred to be had directly with the owners. The department employs 
 no agents to seek out lands and does not desire to deal through agents. 
 Lands have been and are now being offered in abundance. All offers must 
 be made in writing. If there is seeming suitability an examination is 
 directed and made. 
 
 Because the state is in the market to buy land, some owners think 
 fancy prices should be paid. They even at times try to exert political 
 pressure to accomplish their end. Nothing counts with the Department of 
 Forestry except actual values for forest purposes, and the value is deter- 
 mined by the prior examination, having due regard to soil, water, timber 
 and location. What is determined to be the real value is included in the 
 form of a counter offer to the owner. If declined by him the matter is at 
 an end. If accepted, there follows the formal contract of purchase and sale, 
 duly acknowledged by the owner, so that if necessary the contract may 
 be placed on record. 
 
 Following the execution of the contract is the title examination. The 
 Department has been singularly successful and fortunate in this part of its 
 work. All title work is done by a regularly incorporated title company, 
 whose expert examiners are the best in the state. Pennsylvania uses the 
 old common law forms of title, and the unseated land titles are among the 
 most complicated and difficult of the kind. 
 
 The title work is closed by a report of the examiner, certifying a clear 
 title, if it be so, otherwise pointing out all defects, which must be remedied 
 
83 
 
 by the owner before conveyance can be accepted. Sometimes the depart- 
 ment waives defects of record, should they have an expiration of limitation, 
 or otherwise in no way affect marketability. Occasionally it becomes nec- 
 essary to have tracts sent back to tax sale to clear title, a process requiring 
 from three to five years. 
 
 The title made right, there follows the formal conveyance by deed of 
 general warranty, payment by the owner of all taxes due, payment of the 
 consideration money, and recording the deed, which vests an indefeasible 
 title in the commonwealth. 
 
 When the state of Pennsylvania originally granted lands to individuals 
 in severalty, it did so by "warrants", which name has now come to be 
 used for the tract of land involved, as well as for the legal process. Full 
 warrants are definitely of record in the general land office, by metes and 
 bounds, with location definitely fixed. Since the state parted with its lauds 
 by warrant areas, plus an allowance of six per cent, for roads, it now buys 
 them back only in the same way. For this reason no prior survey on the 
 ground is necessary to determine acreage, except in the case of partial 
 warrants, where a survey and draft will be furnished by the owner, sub- 
 ject to the test of the department's engineering division. 
 
 The foregoing careful method of purchase has resulted in an almost 
 total absence of title suits. The fact is that only two such suits have ever 
 been brought and both were determined by the courts in favor of the 
 state. In states where titles are founded upon recent government surveys, 
 and where public abstract of title officers are maintained, all this is much 
 simpler. 
 
 Any program involving a policy of land purchase for state forest pur- 
 poses must of necessity look to several elements of far greater future value 
 than present importance. One of these is timber. Wood products are 
 being called for in ever increasing quantities, outrunning the supply, with 
 prices keeping pace, and the great wood storehouses thousands of miles 
 away. For this reason there is an appeal to all of us to grow our own 
 wood in our own back yards, as it were. Why not? We have the land, 
 or can get it. It will never be cheaper, probably, than it now is, and the 
 need for a beginning is immediate. 
 
 The state of Pennsylvania has thus far bought outright 1,047,626 acres, 
 for which it has paid the sum of $2,389,542.55, or an average price of about 
 $2.25 an acre. At least this much more has been spent in administration, 
 protection, planting, fixed charges, and general development. But the 
 present value of this great estate is at least from twelve to fifteen millions 
 of dollars. The policy of the state is to increase these holdings to at least 
 six million acres. 
 
 Another element of immense future value is water power from streams 
 on state holdings. An increase in the density of timber cover means 
 better and steadier stream flow. No kind of power is so cheap as water 
 power. The increasing price of coal may very soon force a resort to this 
 too long neglected source of energy. In addition to being an inexpensive 
 source of permanent power, it can best be controlled or utilized in state 
 ownership or under complete state control. For this reason alone large 
 purchases of land by the states are justified. 
 
84 
 
 A thirfl element which holds direct relationship to all the people and 
 which cannot he ignored relates to health and recreation. Year hy year 
 more individnals and families seek the open woods for vacation purix)ses. 
 and to these mnst he added the great numbers of honest hunters and fislier- 
 men who work hard fifty weeks in the year that they may enjoy two 
 weeks of real life next to the ground in some great open woodland area. 
 Nowhere may this recreation he had with less expenditure of money and 
 energy than in state-owned land, and being the people's land they should 
 have the right so to u.>^e it. All this may he done without interfering in 
 any way with the use of the land for timber production or power. 
 
 It would therefore seem to be sound economic policy for the three 
 states here represented to determine at once some comprehensive plan for 
 state ownership and state regulation of land for public uses, adapted to 
 their respective conditions. The time to do it is now. The hisistency of 
 the demand is such that delay is hut deferring the problem, more easy of 
 solution now than later when the pressure will be greater and the competi- 
 tion more intense. You will no doid>t find it more difficult to accomplish 
 the result among the level farm lands of these states than would be the 
 case on the Atlantic seaboard or in the Rockies, liut the greater the obstacles 
 the greater the victory in overcoming them. It may be necessary and ex- 
 pedient to apply here in the first instance a form of state regulation for 
 privately owned woodlands, as is proposed in the plan of my good friend 
 Colonel Graves. It may amount to an expropriation of all suitably located 
 private woodland holdings, placing them, if not at once into state owner- 
 ship, at least under state management and control ; and all this on the 
 theory that the interest of the public is paramount. Should such conduct 
 seem like an invasion of the sanctity of old-time private rights, we must 
 remember that new problems demand new solutions and the precedents of 
 the past may not always be found to be safe guides for the future. (Ap- 
 plau.se) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: As I said before, I was very interested In Mr. 
 Williams' paper although I notice that conditions in Pennsylvania are (piile 
 different from those in our part of the country, but I feel as though he has 
 made a number of suggestions that we can use. Now thi.s is open for dis- 
 cussion but the hour is very late. 
 
 LT.-Cf)L. GRAVES: I feel that these papers and the whole subject 
 should be discussed pretty freely and thoroughly at this time and I suggest 
 if we do not have time for discussion now that we meet here promptly at 
 two o'clock and take these subjects ui> before we proceed with the program 
 of the afternoon. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: If this is agreeable to y(»u, gentlenuMi, that is what 
 we will do. And now I want to say just a few words in regard <o Pro- 
 fessor Stanley Coulter, who will address us this afternoon. He is a mem- 
 ber of our board of whom we are extremely pi-oud. He probably knows 
 more about forestry than any other member of our board. He is not pres- 
 ent this morning, so I feel free to say these things about him — he has 
 something worth while to say to us, something of interest, and so I want 
 all of you to hear him this afternoon. 
 
 Some annoiuicements were made by Mr. Lieber. 
 
 ADJOURNMENT. 
 
85 
 
 THURSDAY AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The meeting was called to order at 2:00 ocioek. 
 
 SENATOR r.rXinnE: We have had representatives from Illinois and 
 from our own slate iiresidins at our ni(<etin}; and now I am going to call 
 on one from Ohio-— Mr. Secrest, will you ijreside at our session this after- 
 noon ? 
 
 Mr. Seerest took the ehair. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : We had an interesting session this mm-ning and 
 aoeording to a suggestion which was made just hefore we adjourned for 
 lunch, we will now give some time to discussion of the suhjects presented 
 this morning. I hope you will feel free to discuss these subjects quite 
 thoroughly. 
 
 PROFESSOR COULTER: A great part of the work was about the 
 proper management and care of woodland. How do you provide for the 
 expenses of that? Does the department pay it? 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: In the case of woodlots the state has paid the 
 expenses. In the case of timber estimates, the traveling expenses are paid 
 by the owner. It may be questionable whether or not this is the proper 
 thing to do. but it seemed the best to us. How far it will be carried out, 
 I don't know. 
 
 PROF. COULTER: What appropiiation have you? 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: We have about twenty-six thousand dollars a year. 
 It is a lump sum which we handle as we please as far as instructional and 
 investigational work is concerned. 
 
 MR. FORBES : I would like to inquire of Mr. Lieber if I understood 
 him correctly when he said the maximum price of some of the forest land 
 secured was ten dollars per acre. I don't know of a^y ten dollar land in 
 Illinois. 
 
 MR. LIEBER : We have recently made an investigation and Mr. Deam 
 can answer you. He has found land for ten dollars an acre and perhaps 
 some less than ten dollars. 
 
 MR. DEAM: Well, my experience in that line has been rather limited. 
 We have located a few facts, however, about six hundred acres for eight 
 dollars per acre and one owner sai<l he could furnish about four hundred 
 acres at ten dollars jier acre. But in many parts of the state I have found 
 that you cant buy aiiy land of any type for less than twenty-five or fifty 
 dolla rs. 
 
 LT.-COL. (jJRAVES: You mean that in buying land to work out a sub- 
 stantial program the prices would run something like twenty-five dollars? 
 
 MR. DEAM: Yes. There is quite a good deal of the land in the valleys 
 which would run one hundred or one hundred twenty-five dollars. This 
 land has good buildings on it, however. 
 
 MR. MILLER: 1 think we have land for thirty-five dollars or fifty 
 dollars. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES: Does that have any timber on ItV 
 
 MR. MILLER : Yes, a little. 
 
86 
 
 MR. SHEPARDSON: There is one kind of land in Illinois which is 
 land which has been on top of coal, where the values from beneath the 
 soil have been extracted and the ground at present lies idle and looks pretty- 
 desolated. I have wondered if these tracts would not make good forest 
 reservations. 
 
 LT.-CAL. GRAVES : Mr. Lieber, you said in your paper this morning 
 that you thought that the forest problems of these three states would have 
 to be worked out largely by pul)lic ownership. Do you think at the present 
 prices and with the present condition of the state's finances it would be 
 possible to get enough land to carry out that idea of ours? 
 
 MR. LIEBER : That opens a very large subject. It is a matter of 
 figures. If the land goes higher than fifteen dollars or perhaps twenty 
 dollars, it is not practical to do it on that basis. It is a question whether 
 it is possible to buy it outright and make it profitable or whether some 
 other financial arrangement will have to be made. 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : It seems to me that if it is a feasable thing to 
 acquire lands on a considerable scale that it would be a desirable thing 
 for all of these three states definitely to work for a policy of public 
 ownership. I think we should be in a position at this conference to reach 
 a conclusion on a few of the larger points. Colonel Lieber suggested a 
 method of organization between the three states which would form a 
 splendid basis for working out a program. I should like to go on record 
 as being in favor of a policy by these states for the purchase of lands to 
 establish state forests as extensive as conditions will permit. In the work- 
 ing out of the Weeks law of piirchases by the government, we found 
 that a good many of the objections were much more easily overcome than 
 had been anticipated. Of course we had a very large coimtry to draw 
 upon which enabled us to secure lands at very reasonable prices. Person- 
 ally, I believe that in the long run if you can embark a policy of that kind, 
 if you don't try to push it too fast, that you will be able in the long run 
 to obtain lands at prices which would be well worth while for the public — • 
 in the form of receipts or in general public benefits which can be very 
 clearly shown. I believe that you can work it out. 
 
 We have found that every tract that we buy is a center of co-operation 
 and interest in the surroiuiding country. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : From the statements made here regarding Indiana 
 and Illinois, Ohio appears to be radically different. When we first pur- 
 chased tracts of land, we had land we could get from three to five dollars 
 an acre and some from eight to ten dollars an acre. I don't think that the 
 price of lands is going to be any obstacle at all in the way of acquiring state 
 forests in Ohio. 
 
 MR. WILLIAMS : Someone spoke of land from which coal had been 
 removed. Why not purchase only the surface rights? In Pennsylvania 
 we have endeavored to purchase the whole title and up to the present time 
 have done so. 
 
 I think I will also revert to the question of Senator Guthrie raised in 
 regard to the amount of money we are using in Pennsylvania to carry on 
 9ur forestry work. The fact is that at the session of the legislature in 1915 
 
87 
 
 they gave us $619,700 for two years" work. lu 1917, $813,000. The ques- 
 tion was asked as to where the money comes from. We do not grow it on 
 trees. A certain sum of money is set aside for us, — definite sums for defi- 
 nite things. I have a statement of the appropriations for 1919 : 
 
 Department Administrative Expenses $ 353,200 
 
 Surveys 6,000 
 
 Labor 190,000 
 
 Purchase of Lands 130,000 
 
 Materials, Equipment, etc 85,000 
 
 Bureau of Forest Protection 90,000 
 
 Forest Academy 30,000 
 
 District Foresters 15,000 
 
 School Charges 43,000 
 
 Road Charges 43,000 
 
 County Charges 21,500 
 
 $1,006,700 
 
 LT.-COL. GRAVES : The papers this morning and some of the papers 
 yesterday afternoon made mention of co-operation with the Federal 
 Government. I am referring to the interests of these three states. Just 
 what that co-operation should be was not specified. Co-operatiug with the 
 Federal Government in meeting this problem will mean that there is a 
 responsibility on the part of these states in connection with the federal 
 acivities and in the establishment of instructive measures. One of the 
 things which can be done, which we are trying to do, is the purchase 
 of lands by the Federal Government. We have laid out a program in the 
 southern Appalachians of about a million acres. We believe that this 
 program is much too small for the public needs in the long run. We have 
 talked a good deal about general co-operation with the Federal Government. 
 The Federal Government is to be able to co-operate with these states as 
 well as other states. It is but a question of expressing your interest and 
 demand co-operation and you will get it. If the public don't want this, it 
 won't be forthcoming. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: If there are any other questions, now is the time 
 to ask themr 
 
 MR. LIEBER : May I suggest we begin our regular program because we 
 will have a number of questions to come up after our papers have been 
 delivered this afternoon. 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : We will proceed with our afternoon program. We 
 have with us a gentleman who has been connected with the State Board 
 of Forestry ever since the work was organized in Indiana. It gives me 
 pleasure to introduce Prof. Stanley Coulter. His subject is "Forestry Edu- 
 cational Policies." 
 
 PROF. STANLEY COULTER: I do not purpose making a formal 
 address upon this subject, since I feel it more important to develop a discus- 
 sion than to present a paper. 
 
88 
 
 In discussing the topic we should remember that four groups are to be 
 reached and that the method of attack differs with the group. These 
 groups are tlie children easily readied through the schools ; the woodland 
 owner, the great indifferent and inert public and last of all and perhaps 
 most difticult of all, the law makers or legislators. 
 
 I may premise by saying that there is a very great difference between 
 propjigaiida and education. Propaganda has been over-done and certainly 
 has far outrun knowledge. AVe have in the office of the state Forester rec- 
 ords upon some hundreds of tree plantings in the state. These plantings 
 cover thousands of acres and, originally at least, contained hundreds of 
 thousands of trees. It is, however, a conservative statement to say that 
 85% of these plantings are failures, that is, that the sale of all of the 
 product at the highest market price would not produce an amount equal 
 to the outlay. 
 
 In this conference, much has been said about stimulating interest in 
 forestal problems. I think that at one time there may have been a need 
 for such stimulus, but I feel that time has passed and that the present 
 need is for education. The plantings to which I have just referred show 
 clearly a quick reaction to the stimulus ; the failures show that zeal had 
 far outrun knowledge and indicate that the next step is the development 
 of some educational policies. 
 
 Much of the educational work so-called, has been done in the public 
 schools with children. In every instance the purpose has been laudable, 
 but in most cases the methods have been inadequate and the results un- 
 satisfactory. Arbor day ceremonies served to arouse spasmodic enthusiasm, 
 but with all of the Arbor Day plantings the school yards are nearly as 
 destitute of trees as at the first observance of the day. 
 
 Nature study promised much when first introduced into the schools, but 
 it soon became manifestly purposeless and altogether sentimental in so 
 many cases that it is to be regarded as of dcmbtful educational value. Its 
 chief fault seems to lie in the fact that us administered at present, it seems 
 to have no objective and serves in the main as a means of relieving the 
 monotony of the ordinary school duties. At the same time I believe that no 
 more valuable educational weapon lies within our grasp, if we can train 
 ourselves in its right use. 
 
 I think that in any sound Forestal Educational policy we should see 
 that our foundations are sufficiently broad. Forestry is after all but one 
 of the phases of the far greater j)roblem of the conservation of our natural 
 resources. The mistake has been made in almost every instance, in consid- 
 ering it as a thing apart, leaving cnit of account its relations to a great 
 problem which in some of its phases interests every one. Much of the 
 weakness of the present Forestal Educational policies is to be attributed to 
 the fact that it has been presented from too narrow a viewpoint. 
 
 The form and content of the subject should, it seems to me, be worked 
 out in the main by the i>eople who teach, after consultation with the people 
 who know. Most of the books in use have been written either by people 
 who can teach but <lo not know the subject, or by peojde who know the 
 subject but cannot teach. The teaching of forestry should begin in the 
 schools in order that the next generation may have a proiier appreciation 
 
89 
 
 of the manifold values of this great natural resource. If this is done we 
 must have a different tyi>e of text-book in Forestry for the graded schools. 
 Probably the main appeal of such texts should be the economic. Sad as it 
 may seem, this is apparently the most successful of all lines of attack. 
 Whether you desire to have a bill passed by the legislature, or to stir a 
 great mass of people to action you practically insure success by vi^orking 
 along economic lines. It is almost certain that if educational work in 
 Forestry results in continued interest and ultimately develops a new 
 mental altitude regarding the preservation and development of our timbered 
 areas, it must have underlying it this economic relation. The type of 
 work that should be done lies fairly clear in my mind. There are many 
 men in this country who could give us such texts, but the immediate need 
 is to realize the importance of centralizing such an educational movement 
 if we hope for a new view-point as to our natural resources on the part 
 of the next generation. 
 
 Educational policies as they relate to the land owner are of quite differ- 
 ent sort. He should be taught in some way or other to classify his land, 
 separating at least roughly between that suitable for annual crops and that 
 suited primarily for forestral purposes. He should be encouraged to plant 
 trees in such areas on his farm and should be advised as to what particular 
 forms he should use in his particular case. We have not watched over the 
 land owner's interests as we should. We have awakened his interest 
 in tree planting and then left him at the mercy of any tree salesman who 
 might visit him. We have left him in utter ignorance of the ecologic condi- 
 tions necessary for the successful growth of the different species of eco- 
 nomic trees. 
 
 Again there should be, and this in plain untechnical language, instruc- 
 tion in estimating the value of his timber crop. He does not know how 
 many thousands of board feet his woodland is carrying to the acre, neither 
 has he any method of estimating it ; he does not know the differing values 
 of the various si3ecies nor the modifications in their values due to size, to 
 defects, or distance from the mill. In marketing his crop he must rely 
 wholly upon the honesty of the purchaser. This condition does not obtain 
 as regards any other land product and until it is remedied but little pro- 
 gress can be hoped for in woodland forestry. Of course, bulletins have 
 been issued by the National Forest Service and by the states, of high 
 value to those who can carefully study them, but I can see a small hand- 
 book of from thirty to fifty pages which would do more in the effective 
 education of the woodland owner than a library of the finely scientific 
 bulletins which have so greatly aided the student but have not as yet met 
 the real needs of the landowner in any practical way. Evidently the edu- 
 cation of the landowner is one of the most important features in any sane 
 forestal educational policy. The maintenance of existing areas in any- 
 thing approaching a normal stand, the utilization of waste areas for timber 
 production, the increase of values by improving the quality of the timber 
 whether by silvi-cultural methods or changing the proportion of the 
 species in the stand, all depend on such education. We have failed to give 
 him any adequate information in a straightforward, understandable way 
 as to the length of his investment or the time which must elapse before 
 
90 
 
 he can harvest his timber crop. Each one in this audience has been asked 
 scores of times this question : "If I plant trees how long will it be before 
 they are post size, or large enough to market?" The average man is not 
 greatly attracted by a long time investment, and unless we can educate 
 him to believe that such an investment is desirable because of its safety and 
 the certainty of its ultimate returns, we will see our woodlands not only 
 diminish in area but also in quality. 
 
 Incidentally the landowner should be made to understand that high 
 grade land suitable for annual crops should not be used for forestal pur- 
 poses. Only the other day a man asked me to advise him as to what trees 
 to plant on some ten or twelve acres of land he proposed to devote to that 
 purpose. When asked the value of the land he gave it as one hundred and 
 fifty dollars an acre. Of course the answer was easy — plant no trees on 
 such land, raise annual crops. I could take you to catalpa plantings in 
 this state on land worth over two hundred dollars an acre. 
 
 Another matter should be emphasized in the education of the landowner 
 and that is the impossibility of having a woodland and a woods pasture on 
 the same area. A perennial question is : "Under what kind of trees will 
 bluegrass grow?" It is perhaps too much to hope that the present gener- 
 ation of landowners will get away from the conviction that "woodland" 
 and "woods pasture" are not synonymous terms, but any forestal educational 
 policy should provide against this fatal fallacy being carried on into the 
 next generation. The other day I asked one of my assistants to go through 
 all of the bulletins that have come to me from the Forest Service and look 
 for those giving directions as to procedure in the establishment or improve- 
 ment of woodlands. He looked over some five hundred bulletins and 
 reported there were none bearing upon that subject. This of course does 
 not prove that there are not such bulletins but it does indicate that they 
 are not as numerous as the importance of the subject demands. In this 
 field again the forestal educational policy should be centralized, at 
 least to the extent of unifying the principles laid down in such cases. In 
 any event a nation-wide campaign emphasizing certain basic practices in 
 successful woodland management would be far more effective than the 
 present haphazard method, under which bulletins issue as they "happen" 
 rather than in accordance with a definite and clearly wrought out policy. 
 In a word, in the past in this phase of forestal endeavor there has been 
 too much propaganda and not enough education. 
 
 The great mass of people and more especially, those in urban com- 
 munities are not especially interested in forestry. Points of contact are 
 relatively remote and yet before any very great advance can be made 
 these uninterested people must be interested and made apostles of a new 
 order. One of the best methods of awakening interest is through an 
 appeal to local pride. In Indiana, the purchase of Turkey Run park and 
 Spencer park, the acquiring of the State Forest Reserve, the agitation for 
 a great park area in the dune region, and the development of municipal 
 parks has done more to further interest in forestry than all other agencies 
 combined. From these lesser areas with restricted use to the larger areas 
 with limitless possibilities is an easy and natural step. When in addition 
 to this the people are educated to a realization that these parked and for- 
 
91 
 
 ested areas are for them, for their pleasure and benefit, the problem of the 
 education of the people is solved. 
 
 Of course, this interest must be kept alive by a proper and almost 
 constant publicity, made as attractive by illustrations and other devices 
 as is possible. Foresters are scientists and in common with other scien- 
 tists are much to blame for the present general and almost appalling lack 
 of interest in their problems. Their method of attack has been wrong, and 
 the emphasis has very often been wrongly placed. To meet this need, to 
 awaken this interest, educational tools must differ materially from those 
 in the former groups. Here also the need of a centralizing agency is evi- 
 dent if the highest efficiency is to be secured. Our war time efforts in 
 financial lines have amply proven the eflSciency of concerted action in the 
 securing apparently impossible goals in an almost incredibly short time. 
 A sound educational policy will quickly utilize this dynamic fact in mass 
 psychology. 
 
 But after all we must acknowldege the fact that no very great advances 
 over existing forestal conditions are possible unless in some way we can 
 educate our legislators. The men who constitute our legislatures in the 
 main, have pledged themselves to give the people a "business administra- 
 tion," Ordinarily that means they will vote against every bill carrying 
 an appropriation if it is at all possible to find the slightest justification 
 for so doing, and where they are compelled by circumstance to vote affirm- 
 tively will "trim it to the bone." Now forestal advance means money 
 and it means money from the state. Money for acquiring lands, money 
 for the purchase of parks, money for the forester with his office and 
 field force. This of course, means that legislators should be educated in 
 such a way that they can see the economy of forestry. As a rule, these 
 men serve only a term or at most three or four. Our educational work 
 must therefore be intensive. Further it must focus upon one point, the 
 economics of conservation and therefore of forestry. It might even 
 overemphasize the point by demonstrating that the failure to pass adequate 
 forestal appropriations was irrefutable evidence of unwillingness to give 
 the people a "business administration." Such work would necessarily be 
 done through compact and attractive folders or bulletins, which would, 
 however, have to be prepared with infinite care and skill. It would 
 be easy to name a dozen men in this country any one of whom could 
 prepare a series of such folders or bulletins as would show to the average 
 legislature the economy of conservation in a compelling way. This work 
 has, in the past, been either neglected or so hastily done as to partially 
 defeat its own purpose. Here again there is need of a centralizing or 
 co-ordinating body, in order that a forceful presentation of the arguments 
 in favor of conservation measures may be made in every state in which 
 legislative action is sought. I have omitted purposely any suggestion as 
 to the work in the Forest Schools of the country. This work as we all 
 know is not only well organized but is in most cases being administered 
 with rare skill. These schools can be trusted to keep pace with all 
 forestal advances. Neither have I spoken of the training of the forester 
 himself, although personally I believe the effective forester will be found 
 to be made up of about one-tenth technical skill and nine-tenths common 
 
92 
 
 sense. I have only sought to bring to your attention points in which I 
 felt forestal educational methods were deficient and to suggest possible 
 remedies. From my point of view the vital educational work at the 
 present time is as follows : First, with the children or the outlook for the 
 future ; second, the education of the landowner along extremely definite 
 and practical lines ; third, the education of the general public to the end 
 of securing a far wider spread interest, and fourth, the education of the 
 legislator in order that he might have a firmer and more intelligent grasp 
 uix>n tlie economies of conservation. I believe some such plan should be 
 worked out in the immediate future, and that the organization of a com- 
 mittee to formulate forestal educational policies should be considered by 
 the Poorest Service. (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : We are very glad to have with us this afternoon 
 Mr. P. S. Ridsdale, Editor American Forestry. His subject is "Forest 
 Publicity." (Applause) 
 
 MR. P. S. RIDSDALE : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, you have Colonel 
 Graves' remarks about the necessity of public participation in securing 
 a national forest policy, you have heard Mr. i,ieber speak of educating 
 the public, you have heard Mr. Coulter speak of the uneducated public 
 and now I am going to tell you how to help educate them and how to 
 get tlieir co-operation. All of you know without being told of the value 
 of publicity. You all know that it was publicity that helped to put across 
 the big Liberty Loan drives and Red Cross drives and War Chest drives 
 and every other kind of a drive during the great war. 
 
 I just noticed a clipping in a paper the other day which said public 
 matters printed in newspapers in Indiana alone, received the attention of 
 five or six million people. I want you to realize tliat the newspaijers are 
 perhaps the greatest aid to publicity that can be found. The newspapers 
 have treated the various phases of the forest situation v^^hich have been 
 fed to them by the Agricultui-al Department in an editorial way as well 
 as a news item. I can go on quoting for hours from newspapers which 
 we receive day after day and in them you will find the trend of public 
 opinion. We have had editorials on shade tree planting and all kinds 
 of editorials on all kinds of forestry subjects. I can tell you any number 
 of stories that we have featured that have helped to awaken the interest 
 of the public but I do not want to take up your time. 
 
 My message is that the newspaper men are standing ready to co-operate 
 with you in putting across any program which you may have. We are 
 ready to give you more space than we have given and are ready to push 
 your whole program for a forest policy. (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN : Our next subject relates to wood-using industries. 
 It is "The Timber Supply in Relation to the Retail Trade." Mr. PMndlay 
 M. Torrence, secretary of the Ohio Retail Lumber Dealers' association is 
 our first speaker on this subject. (Applause) 
 
 MR. FINDLAY M. TORRENCE : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, if you 
 will bear with me, I am going to change my subject to read "The Retail 
 Trade in Relation to the Timber Supply". 
 
 The lay public naturally looks to the local lumber dealers as an author- 
 ity on trees, 
 
93 
 
 When the ladies Friday Afternoon Society or the Nature Study Cluh 
 asks him to read a paiier about the trees, he usually feels complimented 
 and manages to crib a few statistics and make good. But he does not 
 take the job very seriously. I believe that he should take the job seriously 
 and to that end I have a few suggestions to make. 
 
 One of the curious phases of the retail lumber industry today is the 
 air of complacent detachment and indiffei-ence of the average retailer of 
 lumber toward all problems of timber conservation. To him a sixty 
 year supply of timber seems like an eternal supply. 
 
 The attitude of the retailer is too often a feeling that "sufficient unto 
 the day is the profit thereof". He is too prone to regard as visionary and 
 academic those discussions and those movements which have to do with 
 the future stability and permanence of his business ; the welfare of his 
 industry a scoi'e or more years hence. 
 
 I was reminded of this attitude very forcibly when I endeavored to make 
 some inquiries among the Ohio Association of Retail Lumber Dealers rel- 
 ative to the local timber supply in relation to the retail lumber trade. 
 
 I discovered that less than 2% of the members of that association have 
 any saw-mill connections or any financial interest in local sources of timber 
 supply, and it is manifest from the discussion of the conservation question 
 in our district meetings that a still smaller percentage of them feel any 
 personal concern in the preservation of our forest resources. 
 
 The retailer of lumber is not to be censored too severely for this 
 attitude. The problems of his business are so manifold; the competition 
 he encounters so keen and the general technique of his profession is so 
 exacting, that the average lumberman must keep his nose to the grindstone 
 and his eyes glued to the opportunity immediately ahead, rather than to 
 problems which he feels will concern a succeeding generation. At le^st he 
 must do so when acting in his individual capacity. 
 
 And yet I believe there is a possibility of making the retail distributor 
 of lumber an effective agency for constructive conservation work. 
 
 If this is done, however, the appeal will have to be made to the retailers 
 collectively, rather than to the retailer as an individual. The retail dealers 
 will have to be interested in the work through an appeal for such service 
 from their local and district state commercial associations. 
 
 The aggregate membership of the lumber organizations in the three 
 states participating in this conference, is more than 1500. Each state 
 association is now thoroughly and efficiently organized, with local zone 
 or district groups, comprising the dealers in every city, county, or several 
 adjacent counties. It is these groups of lumbermen which I feel could b« 
 converted into effective agencies through which the state departments of 
 conservation could be assisted in functioning. 
 
 In the first place, if I may digress slightly, I do not see why the lumber 
 manufacturers' associations, such as the Southern Cypress, Southern Pine, 
 West Coast Association, etc.. should not be encouraged or required to 
 assume responsibility for reforestation projects as associations. What 
 may prove to be a very burden.some and poorly performed duty, if required 
 of the timber manufacturers, as individual competitive concerns, might 
 be eagerly and efficiently performed as an association enterprise. Espe- 
 
94 
 
 cially would this be the case if the lumber manufacturers were permitted 
 to assess the cost of the undertaking against the consumer of lumber, where 
 it should properly be distributed. Thus the consumer of lumber as such 
 would be called upon to provide a sinking fund for the amortization of his 
 debt to future generations for his use of timber resources which belong 
 to succeeding generations just as truly as to the present. 
 
 I do not feel that a plan of reforestation which the lumber manufac- 
 turers would regard as compulsory and unfair will ever be a success. Such 
 organized opposition as they are in a position to give coercive reforestation 
 programs, would result merely in lavish expenditures for court procediu-e. 
 And in the national forestry project becoming a political issue, we can 
 readily see how imjwssible, how absolutely disastrous it would be to have 
 the problem bandied about between contending political parties with one 
 party carefully nullifying all that their predecessors in office had accomp- 
 lished. 
 
 But I do not feel that the lumber manufactures would regard as coercive 
 the requirements that they turn over to their association a certain number 
 of pennies for every thousand feet of lumber they sell to be used in re- 
 forestation. 
 
 Such an arrangement would give the associations a certain property 
 nucleus which would do a great deal to insure their permanent func- 
 tioning. Such a plan would also call forth the competitive impulse as 
 between the associations representing the different species. 
 
 And such a plan would avoid the tendency toward state socialism which 
 lies in the direction of the entire forest resources of the future, being the 
 creation and property of the government rather than the creation of private 
 enterprise. 
 
 It may be objected that these organizations are only indirectly or 
 vagu^y of a public character, and that they might not therefore be respon- 
 sible custodians of such a trust, but is it not true that we have neglected 
 too much in the past the opportunity of utilizing organizations of a quasi- 
 public character in the administration of public and patrotfc work? 
 
 Tlie war taught us what these organizations might accomplish in the 
 tasks incident to community or national welfare. 
 
 It is true that the commercial organizations to which I refer are created 
 for a selfish commercial purpose, but I am sure that they would welcome 
 the opportunity to broaden the scope of their activities and undertake a 
 work such as I gather it is the purpose of this conference to launch. 
 
 During the war some statesman asserted that no institution would sur- 
 vive long after the world war, which could not demonstrate that it con- 
 tributed or ministered in some essential degree to human welfare. 
 
 Applying that standard, I am somewhat inclined to question whether or 
 not a commercial organization which has no reason for existence other 
 than the selfish aggrandizement of its members is justifiable. 
 
 The day is here when the serious and thoughtful organization executive 
 recognizes that his organization must be made an implement for the 
 advancement of civic and patriotic interests ; for the promotion of public 
 and commimity welfare, as well as for the advancement of the interests of 
 the organization members. 
 
95 
 
 I do not believe that any quasi-public organization, be it commercial, 
 social or labor organization, will be long tolerated— or should be tolerated 
 —which can not demonstrate that the public welfare as well as the 
 interest of its members, is advanced through its activities. 
 
 The organization executive of serious purpose realizes that he directs 
 a vehicle of powerful influence for good or evil. He is confronted on all 
 sides today with evidences of the misuse of that power by thoughtless and 
 irresponsible organization leaders. 
 
 The menace of the destructive possiblities of purely selfish or misguided 
 organizations has awakened the conservative organization leader to a new 
 sense of his responsibility in the social and economic fabric. 
 
 You will find these organizations eager to devote time and money 
 and effort to such public spirited activities as your State Departments are 
 now fostering. You will find the Lumber Dealers' Organization eager to be 
 of service in forest conservation projects. 
 
 Of course, the details of their participation will have to be carefully 
 worked out, but it would seem to me that they might serve effectively in 
 conducting a survey of timber areas in each of the local communities and 
 that they could report also areas that could be more profitably devoted to 
 timber crops than to agriculture. 
 
 Second, they could conduct educational campaigns against uneconomic 
 and destructive methods of utilizing wood lot products. 
 
 Year after year the retail lumberman has sat placidly by and watched 
 his farmer patrons sacrifice potential fortunes in young hardwood timber, 
 in the belief that tamarack, cedar, locust or cement fence posts were too 
 high priced. 
 
 The Retail Lumber Organization should combat these practices by educa- 
 tional campaigns in reference to commercial value — the present and the 
 prospective value, of various species and growths of timber. 
 
 I see no reason why the Lumber Organizations should not go further 
 than this, and even become owners of timber conservation tracts in their 
 respective commxmities. 
 
 Commercial and social organizations responded loyally to the "Buy-a- 
 Bale-of-Cotton" campaign some years ago. Why should they not respond 
 just as readily to the "Own-a-Tract-of-Timber" campaign. 
 
 I feel sure that the local lumber dealers' clubs and district organizations 
 at least could be interested in such a campaign. Such co-operative owner- 
 ship and enterprise would give them, for one thing, a property nucleus, 
 which would go far toward insuring a live, permanent interest in the organ- 
 ization. 
 
 Areas that should be in timber to prevent erosion can generally be 
 bought very cheaply. When such tracts are disclosed in the association 
 survey to which I have alluded, they should be bought up, if necessary, 
 by the organizations of lumbermen. 
 
 There is an instance in point at the present time in my own county in 
 Ohio. A large and well-timbered farm, known as the John Bryan farm, has 
 been bequeathed to the state for a game and forest reservation. But a 
 provision was stipulated by the eccentric donor that there should never 
 be any religious services conducted on the premises. 
 
96 
 
 It is improbable that the state officials ever would haA'^e repaired to the 
 Bryan farm to pray, if the donor had not mentioned this stipulation, but 
 as it is, there has been a good deal of opposition expressed by religious 
 organizations against the state accepting the farm under this condition. 
 
 Now, in a case of that kind, if the opposition should definitely block 
 acceptance of the gift, steps should be taken to have some semi-public 
 organization or organizations ready to step in and keep the timber pre- 
 serve from being lost to posterity, as it assuredly will be if it is sold for 
 private exploitation. 
 
 It has seemed to me that for the greater part of this territory the prob- 
 lem of timber conservation is chiefly one of intelligent mainteuLJce of the 
 farmers' wood lot. 
 
 Most of the young growth on these wood lots is sacrificed for fence 
 posts and similar uses on the farm. The lot is then closely pastured so 
 that the seedlings have no chance. The wood lot soon becomes a grove 
 of matured trees, and it is ultimately skinned off entirely. This practice 
 can be combated by the right kind of educational propaganda, and organ- 
 izations such as the one I represent should be encouraged to make it their 
 duty to spread the propaganda. The State Bureaus can accomplish much, 
 I am sure, by encouraging the State. Di.^trict and Local Lumber association 
 to assume repsonsibility as custodians for timber areas, trustees for the 
 permanent protection of sylviciilture in their resiiective communities. 
 (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: We will next hear from Mr. Harry Soearce, who is 
 a member of the Indiana Retail Lumber Dealers" Association. (Applause) 
 MR. HARRY SCEARCE : In a study of the lumber industry covering 
 the distribution of softwood lumber in the middle west, made by the Forest 
 Service, it was learned that over ninety-five per cent, of the lumber sold 
 in this territory is distributed through the retail yards. 
 
 In 1914 eleven of the central states had eleven hundred yards, eighty- 
 one per cent, being in towns of two thousand five hundred and less, and sold 
 over seven billion feet of lumber, this being an average per capita consump- 
 tion of approximately three hundred feet. 
 
 To illustrate what this means : Indianapolis has a population of three 
 hundred thousand in round numbers, applying the average annual consump- 
 tion of three hundred feet, means that it requires ninety million feet of 
 lumber, or thirty-six hundred carloads of twenty-five thousand feet, to 
 supply the demand in this city from the retail yards. 
 
 To move all of this at one time, would require thirty-six thousand three 
 ton trucks, hauling twenty-five hundred feet each and forming a proces- 
 sion in close formation two hundred miles in length. Applying this to the 
 entire country, in which it is estimated there are forty-two thousand retail 
 lumber yards and you have some idea of the importance in the industry of 
 the retail branch. 
 
 The investigation of the lumber industry by the Forest Service, at the 
 request of the Federal Trade Commission, has cleared away many erron- 
 eous impressions held by the public, especially in reference to the retail 
 part of it. 
 
97 
 
 The economic necessity of the retail lumber yard was established beyond 
 question, for it was found that of the more than twenty-seven billion feet 
 sold in the entire country at retail, the average sale was considerably less 
 than $100.00. 
 
 Quoting from Forest Report No. 116, "Considering the location of the 
 bulk of the saw mills with respect to the one hundred million lumber con- 
 sumers throughout the United States, together with the service demanded 
 by the average user, it comes apparent that some type of local retail yard 
 which assembles stocks of lumber from several producing regions in car- 
 load lots and provides time and place utility for the customer is essential 
 to the practicable distribution of the bulk of the lumber required in rela- 
 tively small and diversified amounts. 
 
 "The retail dealer who makes a technical study of the relative merits 
 of different structural materials for diffei-ent uses may occupy the position 
 of an unbiased adviser who is capable of rendering a valuable economic 
 service to this community." 
 
 The retail lumber dealer, then, who comes so directly in touch with the 
 user is most deeply interested in the source of supply of timber, how long 
 it will last and what is being done to conserve and replenish it. The United 
 States has had during the past forty years, three great principal sources 
 of supply, The Lake States, The Southern States and the Pacific Northwest. 
 
 According to a recognized authority, the present supply of all merchant- 
 able timber is two thousand six hundred thirty-seven billion feet, as of 
 January, 191G. of which one thousand four hundred eighty-two billion feet, 
 or fifty-six and two-tenths per cent, is in the Pacific northwest, Oregon, 
 California, Idaho and Montana ; five hundred forty-five billion feet, or 
 twenty and ".even-tenths per cent, in the southern states ; ninety billion feet, 
 or thirty-four per cent, in the lake states, and the remaining five hundred 
 thirty billion, or nineteen and seven-tenths per cent, in the remaining forest 
 regions, including the central hardwood belt. 
 
 The record of production covering the thirty-five years from 1880 to 
 1915, discloses that the lake states produced in 1880 thirty-five and one-tenth 
 per cent, of the lumber from the three great districts, but in 1915 only nine 
 and three-tenths per cent, was produced in that territory. The southern 
 states were producing fifteen and nine-tenths per cent, in 1880 and rose to 
 forty-eight and nine-tenths per cent, in 1915, while the Pacific northwest 
 furnished but three and eight-tenths per cent, in 1880, while in 1915 it was 
 cutting twenty-one and four-tenths per cent, of the total. 
 
 My own experience in the lumber business goes back to the early part 
 of the nineties, just about the time southern yellow pine was getting into 
 the markets north of the Ohio river, and beginning to displace white pine 
 and hemlock in southern Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. 
 
 Prior to that time the chief source of supply of the states represented in 
 this conference had been Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota. Saw mills 
 located along the Mississippi river and supplied with logs brought down 
 in rafts from the woods above, distributed their products through Illinois 
 and westward, while large distributing yards located at the lake cities 
 received barges of lumber from the mills in the north and shipped it out 
 over Indiana, Ohio and the east. 
 
98 
 
 Michigan City was the principal point of distribution through a large 
 portion of Indiana, and it was no uncommon practice for large retail deal- 
 ers in Indianapolis and other cities to purchase an entire barge-load of 
 lumber and bring it to their mills where it was worked into flooring, siding, 
 finish, etc., and sold to the dealers in the smaller towns. At that time the 
 demand was confined to three or four different kinds of wood, the base of 
 supply was near, and the investment of the average retailer consequently 
 was small. 
 
 I recall when hemlock dimension lumber was shipped into this market 
 from Michigan City and sold at retail for $11.00 per thousand. The freight, 
 as I recall it, was about $1.25 per thousand feet. However, as the timber 
 in these states that were located near the water was cut out, and it was 
 necessary to build railroads far into the woods, prices began to rise and 
 southern yellow pine, which at that time could be found in great quantities 
 along almost every mile of railway through the timber states of the south, 
 found a market in the north. 
 
 The freight rates were low, being an average of about $4.50 per thousand 
 feet. Stumpage accessible to railroads could be bought for $1.00 to $2.00 
 per acre, and as a result, prices of yellow pine lumber were low. Recently 
 when looking over the invoice of the first car of lumber bought by my com- 
 pany, when we began business in 1892, which by the way was yellow pine, 
 I find we paid, delivered, $16.75 per thousand for four inch Star flooring, 
 that grade being practically clear, $14.00 for ten inch, number two boards 
 and $14.75 for six inch number one common drop siding. These prices do 
 not represent the present cost of freight from the northwest. 
 
 Now when the easily accessible timber in the south has been cut and 
 logging operations have become very expensive, prices have sharply ad- 
 vanced. Freight rates have gone higher as the average haul has become 
 longer, the rate from the south being now practically double that of twenty- 
 five years ago. 
 
 Statistics of the supply and cut of timber show that the source of 
 supply is again shifting and the northwest is now the only 'great reser- 
 voir of supply left, but on account of the great distance and expensive 
 methods of logging made necessary by the broken country and great size 
 of the timber, we can not expect the low prices that have prevailed in the 
 past at the opening of a new timber supply. 
 
 At the present rate of cutting, figures given being as of 1916, the supply 
 of all available merchantable timber in the United States, making no 
 allowance for new growth and based on present utilization and consump- 
 tion, is shown as follows : 
 
 Pacific Northwest 166 years 
 
 Southern States 30 years 
 
 Lake States 21 years 
 
 All Others 70 years 
 
 or an equivalent of over seventy years. This discloses the rapid approach 
 of the end of the supply in the lake and southern states, and means that 
 soon the entire central west and east must depend upon obtaining all their 
 supply of timber from the northwest, at a freight cost, based on present 
 
99 
 
 rates, of from $16.00 to $20.00 per thousand feet, unless some practical plan 
 of reforestation is speedily adopted. In some sections of the south, pine 
 has grown up since the Civil War and is now being cut and marketed 
 in the form of small dimension and common boards and when put to uses 
 for which it is suitable is practically as good as virgin timber. 
 
 This fact merely indicates the possibility of growing timber in a com- 
 mercial way in certain localities. I am not prepared to discuss policies 
 or plans of reforestation, as I possess no technical knowledge on the subject, 
 but from the standpoint of a retailer, knowing the far-reaching effect upon 
 prices when almost the entire supply of timber is confined to one section of 
 the coimtry and the consequent decline in the use of lumber as a structural 
 material, I feel that I may safely represent the retailers of Indiana as 
 favoring- national and state legislation that would have for its purpose 
 the reforesting of a vast acreage of land that is not suitable for highly 
 developed agriculture, but is adapted to the successful growing of trees. 
 Given proper tax exemption, timber landowners could be encouraged to 
 reforest the land from which the trees have been cut. Waste in logging 
 operations should be avoided so far as possible, but perhaps the only prac- 
 tical solution of this is for a market to be created for that which is now 
 not worth bringing into the mill and manufacturing. 
 
 This is a feature of conservation that is largely up to the retailer. In 
 the past it has been the practice of the public to demand certain standard 
 lengths of lumber, regardless, in many cases, of the purpose for which it 
 was intended. 
 
 If, for instance, four-foot lengths were needed, the order almost invar- 
 iably would be for twelve or sixteen-foot lengths. Until recent scarcity of 
 stock at the mills, resulting from war conditions, short lengths were not 
 easily marketable at prices that would make it profitable for the mill to 
 utilize the full cut of the log, and waste resulted. 
 
 That there is a use for lumber two feet and longer is obvious to anyone 
 who has given careful thought to the uses to which it is or may be put, 
 and with the proper effort on the part of the dealer, the user can be induced 
 to buy eight two-foot pieces instead of one sixteen, if the former is the 
 length needed. 
 
 In other words, if the retailer of lumber is to best serve the public, 
 he iftist seek to bring his merchandising methods to the highest point of 
 efliciency. His place of business must take on more the aspect of a lumber 
 store, rather than merely a yard, which is conceived by the public to be 
 a piece of ground covered by a miscellaneous lot of more or less orderly 
 piles of lumber, to be first sent to a mill to be worked or put in shape by a 
 skilled carpenter before it is ready for use. This is true of a considerable 
 part of the lumber that goes into general construction, but there is a 
 demand for small ready-to-use pieces, the supply of which, to the public, 
 would result in a closer utilization of the tree in the woods and at the mill. 
 
 The retail lumber associations have done a great deal to bring about 
 better methods in the distribution of lumber. The programs have been 
 almost entirely given over to the discussion of economies, efficiency of ser- 
 vice and better accounting. The problems of conservation and reforestation 
 are now recognized as vital to the industry and from now on will receive 
 the most careful thought and the heartiest support of the membership. 
 
loo 
 
 it is not my purpose, in tliis brief paper, to offer a solution of the 
 problems that are before this conference, but rather to give in a small way 
 a practical view of the retail lumber conditions as have existed in the 
 past, and as now exist, hoping to throw some light on the situation, and 
 to show that by reason of the close touch the retailers of softwood lumber 
 have with the buying public, they are in an excellent position to assist to 
 a considerable degree in the educational work necessary to the successful 
 realization of any plan that may be worked out by this conference. 
 (Applause) 
 
 THE CHAIRMAN: That ends our program for this afternoon, I will 
 call for a report of the resolutions committee. 
 
 Mr. Richard Lieber, Chairman, Resolutions Committee : "I will first 
 present a number of resolutions sent in by county fish and game and forest 
 associations of Indiana relative to forest conditions." 
 
 It was moved and seconded that the reading of the report of these 
 resolutions be dispensed with, but that the re.solutions be made a part 
 of the record. Motion carried. 
 
 Mr. Lieber then read the report of the resolutions committee which was 
 seconded and carried. 
 
 Resolutions sent in by the following County Organizations : 
 
 Howard County Fish, Game & Bird Protective Association, Kokomo, Ind. 
 
 Clay County Fish, Game & Bird Protective As.sociation. 
 
 Keego Angling Club, Indianapolis. Indiana. 
 
 Foots Lake Pleasure Club, Evansville, Indiana. 
 
 Floyd County Fish & Game Protective A.ssociation, New Albany, Indiana. 
 
 WHEREAS, The timber stands and timber resources of the state are 
 being rapidly depleted ; 
 
 WHEREAS, Reforesting, both natural and artificial of cut-over and 
 denuded areas is alarmingly inadequate; 
 
 WHEREAS, Private forestry is doing nothing to meet the situation due 
 ft) increahed land values and profits from the grazing industry; 
 
 WHEREAS, The removal of forests is resulting in greatly lowering the 
 water level with resulted bad effect upon streams and water supplies, which 
 in turn is working to decrease the fish life in oiu* waters ; 
 
 WHEREAS, The disappearance of our forests is removing the natural 
 habitat of wild game with a great decrease in wild life v^^hich must soon 
 re.sult in its complete disappearance and cause a loss to sportsmen ; 
 
 WHEREAS, Laws and measures for the control of timber and timber 
 supplies are non-existant, and their absence must soon bring us to privation 
 and want ; 
 
 WHEREAS, The present conditions must .soon result in the paralysis 
 and death of our great wood-using industries ; 
 
 AVHEREAS, The timber and forestry resources and supplies constitute 
 a stupendous and indispensable commodity and have no law or practice to 
 regulate them ; 
 
 RESOLVED, That laws be enacted whereby the state will acquire and 
 plant and cause to be planted forestry acreage sufficient to insure a perm- 
 anent timber supply. 
 
101 
 
 RESOLVED, That lumbering be done on an economic basis, and, that 
 the acreage be of sufficient proportions to supply all needs without impair- 
 ment or reduction. 
 
 RESOLVED, That the tax law should be so amended as to make it 
 possible and profitable to maintain the necessary wood lot on farms. 
 
 RESOLVED, That the public, commercial and technical interests should 
 co-operate to the end that a permanent timber supply will be assured. 
 
 RESOLVED, That a copy of these resolutions be sent to federal and 
 state senators and representatives with the request that they use their best 
 endeavors to secure the passage of laws as herein set forth to the lasting 
 benefit and security of all. 
 
 RESOLUTIONS TRI-STATE FORESTRY CONFERENCE. 
 
 WHEREAS, The forests of the states of Ohio, Illinois and Indiana 
 have been practically depleted and but little timber remains in the New 
 England and the northeastern sections of the United States. The southern 
 forests which have been the main source of supply for these three states 
 will be exhausted within the next decade or two ; 
 
 WHEREAS, There is a large portion of cut-over timber land on rugged 
 topography and poor soil which is not adaptable to profitable agriculture 
 and which should be growing forests for our future supply. A large part 
 of that which is being farmed will soon be completely lost by erosion ; 
 
 WHEREAS, The price of timber is rapidly increasing, consequent upon 
 the decrease of the supply ; 
 
 WHEREAS, The practice of forestry on essentially timber land is dis- 
 couraged by the present system of taxation. The possibility of an annual 
 cash income from the growing of tobacco and small fruits, and grazing, 
 further discoux'age forests ; 
 
 WHEREAS, in the large share of cases it is impractical and unprofit- 
 able for private interests to use their land in the growth of timber, since 
 the investment must run for a long term of years. The state can best meet 
 a situation which requires the investment of lai-ge fimds for many years, 
 through the purchase of public lands for reforestation ; 
 
 WHEREAS, There are four thousand wood-using industries in Ohio," 
 Illinois and Indiana whose main source of supply was native-grown timber 
 which, if the present supply is not maintained, must perish, move to the 
 source of supply, or bring in materials at a greatly increased cost ; 
 
 EMPLOYES 
 
 Illinois Indiana Ohio 
 
 All Industries 620,000 265,000 600,000 
 
 Wood-Using Industries 140,000 70,000 90,000 
 
 CAPITAL 
 
 All Industries $2,000,000,000 $675,000,000 $1,675,000,000 
 
 Wood-Using Industries 400,000,000 175,000,000 160,000,000 
 
102 
 
 PRODUCTS 
 
 Illinois Indiana Ohio 
 
 All Industries $2,250,000,000 $730,000,000 $1,785,000,000 
 
 Wood-Using Industries 320,000,000 140,000,000 175,000,000 
 
 WHEREAS, There is a large annual economic waste due to forest fires, 
 since, in the three states concerned, there has been no system of forest 
 fire protection developed ; 
 
 WHEREAS, There is great need of an extensive and thorough cam- 
 paign for the purpose of educating the public to the extremity of the forest 
 situation and the necessity of action ; 
 
 WHEREAS, The forestry situation and threatening condition of the 
 wood-using industries requires immediate action to the end that a policy 
 may be adopted and legislation enacted which will insure a permanent 
 supply of timber ; 
 
 THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Tri-State Forestry Confer- 
 ence of Ohio, Illinois and Indiana, convened at Indianapolis, on October 
 22nd, and 23rd, 1919, the Governors of the respective states concurring 
 therein, that the attention of the public and legislatures of the said states, 
 be called to the necessity of legislative action which will lead to the 
 assurance of a permanent timber supply. 
 
 BE IT RESOLVED, That a system of taxation on timberlands be 
 adopted which will discourage premature and wasteful cutting and encour- 
 age forest renewal. 
 
 BE IT RESOLVED, That the states should greatly increase their forest 
 holdings by purchase of young-second-growth and land adapted to refor- 
 estation, made possible by a bond issue of fifty to one hundred years' 
 maturity, so the burden may be equally distributed through generations. 
 
 Urging that large holdings by the states will present a steady and 
 permanent source of supply which will stabilize timber prices. 
 
 RESOLVED, That this conference urges upon our representatives in 
 congress the necessity for largely increased appropriations under the pur- 
 chase clause of the Weeks Act, to extend the area of national forests and 
 particularly into the hardwood regions of West Virginia, Kentucky and 
 Tennesse from which the three states concerned already draw a large por- 
 tion of their hardwood supply. 
 
 Be it further urged that the federal congress appropriate adequate funds 
 for co-operation with the states in forestry, as it is doing in road building, 
 agricultural extension, vocational education and other activities, with the 
 especial object of encouraging farm forestry extension under the Smith- 
 Lever Act, reforestation of idle lands and protection against fire. 
 
 BE IT RESOLVED, That the states launch an extensive and thorough 
 campaign through the press, the schools, the pulpit and mails, to arouse 
 the public to the need of a State Forest Policy and necessity of action 
 toward the assurance of a permanent timber supply. 
 
 It is furthermore urged that forestry education should be made a pro- 
 gressive part of the public school curriculum. 
 
103 
 
 BE IT RESOLVED, That the work of the Tri-State Forestry Conference 
 continue through State Forestry Educational Committees, these committees 
 to be formed Independently in each of the three states under the direction 
 of the state official having forestry in charge and to select from their 
 number three persons, to serve on an executive committee governing the 
 policies of the participating states. 
 
 BE IT RESOLVED, That the conference expresses the appreciation 
 of the work of the Governor of Indiana for calling the congress, the repre- 
 sentatives of the Federal Forest Service, officers of other states who con- 
 tributed their presence and papers, the War Department and the New 
 York Conservation Commission for the loan of films and the press for their 
 hearty support. 
 
 BE IT RESOLVED, That a copy of these resolutions be transmitted to 
 the President of the United States, the Chairman of the Agricultural Com- 
 mittee, and House of Representatives, to our representatives in Congress, 
 the Legislatures of Ohio, Illinois and Indiana, the Governors of the said 
 States, the Forester of the United States, and the President of the Amer- 
 ican Forestry Association. 
 
 ADJOURNMENT.