. 40*. .. '%^ indi i'he Ari;ri FORESTRY PROBLEMS IN THE UNITED STATES THOMAS P. IVY, B. A. 1906 Hekdersonyille, North Carolina CLo(>tj I LIBRARY of CONGRESS Two Cooies Received APR 16 1906 /i) Coay right Entry CLASS Q_' >vXc, No / ^ 9 09^ .15 Copyright, 1906, by Thomas P. Ivy FOREWORD. "Express yourself. Whatever you are, out with it ! We do not want a world of niasqueraders. Make yourself felt, make your real self felt. Put your private stamp upon the future." THE writing of this pamphlet was undertaken to jiresent in a short space and in uncensored language the forest situation as it ap2:)ears to be to-day in the United States. It is the opinion of the writer that much of what the National Government is doing in the name of forestry is based on a mistaken forest policy, and if con- tinued the nation as a whole will be in a worse forest condition an hundred years hence than if our present forest problems had been left to individuals and to the States to work out. If this contention is true, it is most important that the error be corrected now. AVhether there are errors or not can only be ascertained by a free discussion of forestry in Congress, on the rostrum, and in the public prints. Cer- tainly it is supreme folly to leave a subject so vital to every citizen, State, and Territory, to be dealt with by the exclusive judgment of one person, the United States Forester. THOMAS P. IVY. DuNLiNNE, Centre Conway, N. H., March 1, 1906. THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. WHERE, WHEN AND HOW ACQUIRED. 1783 — Treaty of Peace with Great Britain gave to United States all land she held in America by discovery or treaty with Hol- land, France and Spain. Area : 259,171,787 acres. 1798 — Concession from State of Georgia. Area : 56,689,920 acres. Cost: $6,200,000. Cost per acre : 10 10-11 cents. 1803 — Louisiana Purchase ( France). Area : 756,961,280 acres. Cost: $27,269,621.98. Cost per acre : 3% cents. 1819 — East and West Florida (Spain). Area : 37,931,520 acres. Cost: $6,489,768. Cost per acre : 17 1-10 cents. 1845 — Texas Purchase. Area : 61,892,480 acres. Cost: $16,000,000. Cost per acre : 25 17-20 cents. 1848 — Gauda loupe-Hidalgo (Mexico). Area : 334,443,520 acres. Cost: $15,000,000. Cost per acre : 4^^ cents. 1853 — Gadsden Purchase (Mexico). Area : 29,142,400 acres. Cost: $10,000,000. Cost per acre : 34 3-10 cents. 1867^ — Alaska Purchase (Russia). Area : 369,529,000 acres. Cost: $7,200,000. Cost per acre : 1 19-20 cents. Total cession 259,171,787 acres. Total purchases . . . 1,589,900,800 " Grand total . . . 1,849,072,587 " Total cost of purchases.. .$81,957,389.98 Average cost per acre. ... 5 1-10 cents OUR INSULAR POSSESSIONS. 1898 — Hawaiian Islands. Area: 4,313,600 acres. Cost : Annexed. 1899 — Porto Rico, Philippine Islands: (Spain) Treaty of Paris. Area : Porto Rico, 2,295,280 acres. Philippine Islands, 73,616,640 acres. Cost: $20,000,000 for the Philip- pine Islands. Porto Rico ceded. The Public Domain in the Philippines is estimated at 61,000,000 acres. Of this 40,000,000 acres are forest lands. THE FOREST SERVICE AND THE CIVIL SERVICE. Forestry, in general, may be fairly defined as the treatment of land and tree growth for the maintenance or creation of woodland to be utilized for forest products, or for a protective covering, or for pleas- ure, or for all of these purposes. But tlie growing and han'"esting of timber and wood for man's use must always remain the central idea and leading purpose of forestry. The utility of the forest floor for conserving the rainfall and the retention of trees for landscape effects are the incidental, not the essential, features of forestry, although under the first of these heads conditions might exist that demanded a forest for the influence solely in regulating the rate of the run-ofl of the rainfall. The earliest adoption of forestry principles in this country was at Exeter in JSTew Hampshire, in 1640, when regulations for the cut- ting of oak were promulgated. From that date down to our own time very little was done because our forests were so abundant that pro- vision for the future seemed unnecessary. After the Republic was established, the rapid settlement of the country, the extensive railroad and mineral development, the requirements of pulp for the press and the demands of almost every line of manufacture made such inroads upon the visible supply as to cause some uneasiness about future sup- plies. In response to this feeling the Congress appropriated, in 1S76, $2,000 for a forestal agency in the Department of AgTiculture. From that date to 1898 there were, in order, three chiefs — Drs. Hough, Eg- gleston and Fernow — of the Division of Forestry. These men had many difliculties to encounter — most of all, a lukewarm public senti- ment manifest in the small annual appropriation by the CongTess for prosecuting their inquiries. But these men, for their earnest efforts in the infancy of forestry in the United States, should not be deprived of their meed of praise. The works of Dr. Hough will always be a valuable source of reference, and Dr. B. E. Fernow we still have with us as our most learned book forester. In 1898 the present United States Forester, Mr. Gifford Pinchot, came into power. With his advent the appropriation has been in- 6 creased greatly — from $2,000 in 1S76 to $900,000 last year, 1905. The scope of forestry work and investigatioii has also been enlarged and the division raised to a Bureau in the Department of Agriculture. Whether all that Mr. Pinchot has done and is doing is forestry, or merely carrying out his personal wishes and ambition, intelligent criticism and judgment must decide. Besides being the United States Porester, Mr. Pinchot is one of the founders and the promoter of the Yale Forest School. Out of his school about 80 per cent, of the for- esters that now yearly get places are taken. The remaining 20 per cent, come from the other half-dozen forestry schools, or schools that teach forestry, in the rest of the United States. As has been stated, governmental forestry started as an agency in the Department of Agriculture in 1876. The agency was promoted successively to a division (1881) and a Bureau (1901). In 1905 there was a change in nomenclature, and what had been known as the Bureau of Forestry became the Forest Service. The term "Forest Service" includes the organization, the work, and the men and officers Avho do the work of the government, in looking after the National Reserves, and such other operations of a forestry nature as the United States Forester decides to engage in. The varied work of the Forest Service is organized under seven offices, viz. : Office of Forester ; Office of Measurements ; Office of Management ; Office of Extension ; Office of Dendrology ; Office of Products ; Office of Records. These seven offices are again sub- divided into sections. ]!^ominally, the Secretary of Agriculture is at the head of the Forest Service. But it is well known that, practi- cally, the Secretary of Agriculture is so busy on his farms he neg- lects his forests altogether. The real head is the United States For- ester, to whom everybody is responsible, and he is responsible to nobody. In his absence the Associate Forester, the chief executive officer, acts. The Fiscal Agent conies next after the Associate For- ester. The number of officers and men engaged in the several grades of the Forest Service are as follows : 1 Forester, 1 Associate Forester, 5 Assistant Foresters, 10 Forest Insi^ectors, 6 Assistant Forest In- spectors, 102 Forest Assistants, 13 Forest Agents, 14 Experts, 9 En- gineers of Tests, 2 Civil Engineers, 79 officers in charge of Re- serves, 390 Forest Rangers — a total of 532. How inadequate this number is, compared to what the force should be if the forests of the United States were properly cared for, can be shown b}^ referring to European states. France has a forest force, all told, of nearly 4,000, and Great Britain, to manage and protect the forests of India, em- ploys 10,000 in the ranks from guards to conservators. The salaries of field men in our Forest Service range from $700 to $3,500. Kangers receive from $700 to $800 ; Forest Assistants, from $900 to $1,400 ; Super^dsors, from $1,000 to $2,000. If the service is to have good men and retain them, these salaries will have to be in- creased. 'No class of men belonging to the government service deserves good pay so much as the Forester. His life is one exposed to many risks and hazards and his whole time is devoted to his profession, usually away from and out of touch with civilization, without the usual opportunities of other men for the investment of his savings, if he is fortunate enough to have any. Positions in the Forest Service are supposed to be reached through examination under tlie Civil Service laws. The Act of Congress of February 1, 1905, transferred the Reserves from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture. But before the trans- fer bill could be passed, all of the existing officers and employees on the Reserves were classified and placed under the Civil Service rules. Furthermore, section 3 of the Transfer Act provided that all super- visors and rangers needed in the future for the Reserves should be selected, when practicable, ''from qualified citizens of the States or Territories in which said Reserves, respectively, are situated." This was a wise provision, and if carried out will have a salutary influence. It was intended to protect citizens of a State in their rights which residence in the State or Territory conferred. P)esides, it would tend to bring the Forest Service in direct touch with the people. But if the present United States Forester exercises the same arbitrary methods with Rangers and Supervisors that he does in other branches of the service, section 3 may as well have been omitted. Apparently no law or statute can stand in the way of his personal wishes and prejudices. The examination for Rangers and Supervisors ' hinges more on physical and moral qualities than mental attainments. It is different with the Forest Assistant. He requires technical qualifications of a higli order and lias to pass an examination in scientific forestry, dendrology and lumbering, for which a course of two years at a forest school, provided he is already a college graduate, is usually taken to prepare himself thoroughly. Examinations for Forest Assistants are held usually at several places. They are held under the auspices of the Civil Service Commission, and the names of those who pass — that is, those who receive the required government percentage of 70 — are placed by the Civil Service Commission on the register in the order of their rating. Now, that is all the part the Civil Serv- ice Commission takes, in or after the examination. The United States Forester does all the rest. He makes up the questions for the examination papers and he appoints the men to rate the papers. When he wishes a Forester and goes to the Civil Service Commis- sioner for a name, if he does not like the man whose name is offered to him he can reject it. After a Forester has been on the register of the Civil Seiwice Commission for a year he is disqualified and all of his work counts for nothing so far as the government employment is con- cerned. Such are the rules and regulations, called Civil Service, that ha^•e been established at the instance of the present United States Forester, that he may exert his benign influence to keep all out of the Forest Service who do not come within the favored circle. In a letter addressed to the Civil Service Commission in December last, the writer went over this whole ground. A portion of that letter is reproduced hero : ''Let us begin with the examination, where the Commission and the candidate first touch elbows. The sheets on which answers are to be written should have nothing on the top margin exce])t (1) the sub- ject of examination, (2) the date, (3) the candidate's examination number. The candidate's name and residence, the name of the place where the examination is held, should all be written in the begin- ning of the examination on a separate slip bearing the candidate's examination number. This slip should be used only to identify the candidate after his papers are rated. If such sheets as these were delivered to the parties authorized to rate them, there would be on them the least possible evidence by which the identity of the candi- date might be revealed to the examiner. Leaving off the name of the place where the examination is held would also tend to disguise the 9 forest school of the candidate and to that extent put all the forest schools on the same basis. The examination over, the next move is to have the papers rated. Who should do this? Your custom is to assign the work to officials of the Forest Service, oiviu^ the jiapers on Technical Forestry that count 50 per cent, out of the possible 100 per cent, to the Associate Forester, This is one of the worst features. These forest officials are administrative officers whose duties lie afield vv'ith the men after they have been taken into the Service. These duties should occupy all their thought and time, and they are such duties as do not induce that condition of mentality which can weigh and balance the fine differences required to be adjusted in rating these papers. That is strictly a professional and judicial function. "A second objection : The Associate Forester has had more or less correspondence with every candidate the preceding one or two years, and therefore the sheets, though carefully guarded, as suggested, do not disguise the identity of the candidate from him. "A third objection: Making an administrative official and an examining official one and the same is confounding officers that ought to be kept separate. jN^o man can properly serve two conflicting in- terests at the same time. The revelations of recent insurance investi- gations bear directly on this point. Other departments of the govern- ment take cognizance of this. For admission both to the Army and jSTavy we find that the cadets are not examined by their commanders in the field. This practice must be a good one, or it would not have been continued for a century. Therefore, I say have the papers rated by an impartial board, wholly distinct from the administrative forest officials. "The examination and rating over, the candidates who have re- ceived the necessary percentage to pass are entered on the Eligible Register in the order of the percentages obtained in the examination. A vacancy occurs in the Forest Service. How do you fill it ? Three names, you say, beginning with the highest percentage man on the register, are taken in order. From these three the United States For- ester, or, in his stead, the Assistant Forester, has to take one to fill the vacancy, and may reject any two of them. The two rejected ones go back on the register in their respective order and wait for another vacancy and chance. In this way either or both of them may be rejected to the end of the year, when their eligibility expires. Why 10 give this right of choice ? It certainly deprives the highest per- centage man of the value of his scholarship, for he is placed on the same basis with the man of lowest rating. How you can compute fairness and justice in the procedure 1 am at a loss to understand. Why should the United States Forester be given any choice at all? It is just at this juncture you permit ' person alism' to come into the Forest Service. 'Can't we trust the United States Forester to do the square thing?' you ask. ]^o human being can be entrusted Avitli un- checked arbitrary power. When we bridge a stream we do not make the plans for the low-water mark, but for the liigh-water mark. We want a structure that will afford transportation at any season of the year and under all conditions of the weather. When you bestow upon the United States Forester the right of choice and rejection, you are surely making your bridge plans from the low-water mark. Your procedure, relative to the man on the register, is a lottery, a gamble, in which the United States Forester is both stake-holder and judge. And I undertake to say, without fear of successful contradic- tion, that no man on the Eligible Register, no matter how high his per- centage or how valuable his services might be to the country, can enter the Forest Service unless he is in personal favor with the United States Forester ; that any man, however worthless in character and of mediocre intellect and technical acquirements, can enter the Forest Service if he is in personal favor with the United States Forester. That is to say, your present methods and procedure make both these contingencies possible. "Xow, why not do away with all this lottery and gamble ? Ought it to be true that a young Forester who has spent two years of his life and $2,000 of his money to pass the examination, when he has passed, holds nothing but a ticket in a lottery wliere the drawing is manipu- lated by a device which does not permit even the fairness of luck ? W^hy not adopt the straightforward methods of the CJorman Forest Service ? There the candidate who passes the examination is placed on the Eligible Register in the order of his rating. When a vacancy occurs priority rules and eligibility is continuous, so that every man on the eligible list is sure of an aiipointment if he is willing to wait for the vacancy." To this letter the Civil Service Commission, with their usual cour- tesy, replied in part as follows : 11 ''The Commission desires to thank you for the very excellent sug- gestion made in your letter concerning the methods which are desir- able in conducting examinations and in making certification. The provisions of the Civil Service law and rules, however, render it impossible for this office to secure assistance in rating; papers of per- sons who are not connected with the Government Service, and the Commission is unaware of any competent person in the Government Service along forestry lines except those in the Department of Agri- culture. Under these conditions, it is obliged to depart somewhat from the ideal system which would entirely separate the nominating and appointing power from that engaged in rating the papers of com- petitors. Under these rules, the Commission is required to certify the names of the highest three eligibles, if there be that many, in order that the appointing officer may exercise a proper discretion in selection for the service." If the rules are not fair, as the Commission practically concedes, why are they not changed ? Without doubt, because the United States Forester does not want them changed. As they are, he is judge and editor, prosecuting attorney and. jury, all combined in one. In no other department of the Government can there be found such absolute and comprehensive powder placed in one individual's possession. The whole Forest Service lies helpless at his feet, to be made use of to carry out his personal ends and ambitions, which may or may not be the forest interests of the countr}^ The same dictatorship is also over those who wish to come into the Forest Service. For them he sets the trap, he prejDares the bait, and he catches only game pleasing to his palate. Under such methods the Forest Service can never be representative of the American people. It will become only a type — a type that must consider the United States Forester greater than the United States i^eoide. But what we want is a Forest Service made up of all classes of the people. There should be no distinction, no difference in treatment of Jew or Gentile, of Catholic or Protestant, for of all these is the American i^ation. This has been the policy in the Army and iSTavy, and so far, wheii the country has needed our Army and N^avy, both arms of the military service have been equal to the demands made upon them. LOCATION AND AREA OF THE NATIONAL FOREST RESERVES IN THE UNITED STATES, ALASKA, AND PORTO RICO, JAN. 25, 1906. [From "The Forest Service."] State. Reserve. Area. Totals. Acres. Arizona Black Mesa 1,658,880 do Prescott 423,680 do Grand Canyon 2,307,520 do San Francisco Mountains 1,975.310 do Santa Rita 387,300 do Santa Catalina 155,520 do Mount Graham 118,600 do Cbirlcahua 169,600 do Pinal Mountains 45,760 do Tonto 1,115,200 8,357,370 California Taboe^ 838,837 do Stanislaus 627,780 do Sierra 5,040,520 do Santa Barbara 1,8-38,323 do San Bernardino 737,120 do San Gabriel 5.55,520 do San Jacinto 668,160 do Trabuco Canyon 109,920 do AYarner Mountains 306,518 do Modoc 288,218 do Plumas 579,-520 do Trinity 1,24.3,042 do Klamath 1,896,313 do Lassen Peak 897,115 do Diamond Mountain 620,724 do Shasta 1,377,126 do Vuba 524,287 18,155,043 Colorado Battlement Mesa 797,720 do Pike's Peak 1,681,667 do White River 970,880 do San Isabel 321,227 do Gunnison 901,270 do Leadville 1,219,947 do Medicine Bow- 1,155,909 do Sau Juan 1,437,406 do Park Range 757,116 do Wet Mountains 239,621 do Cochetopah 1,133,330 do Montezuma 570,719 13 Colorado Uncompabgre 478,111 do Holy Cross 990,720 do La SaP 29,502 Idaho Bitter Root* 3,860,960 do. Priest River' 541,160 do Pocatello 49,920 do Yellowstone" 177,960 do Sawtooth 1,947,520 do Weiser 324,964 do Henry's Lake 798,720 do Payette 1,460,960 do Cassia 326,160 12,691,145 Kansas Garden City ' 97,280 Montana Yellowstone'' 1,229,680 do Bitter Root* 691,920 do Gallatin 40,320 do Lewis and ( 'lark 4,670,720 do Madison 958,800 do Little Belt 583,560 do Highwood ^Mountains 45,080 do Elkhorn 186,240 do Hell Gate 1,481,280 do Big Belt 630,260 Nebraska Niobrara 123,779 do Dismal River 85,123 Nevada Tahoe^ 59,115 New Mexico Gila 2,823,900 do Pecos River 430,880 do Lincoln 542,519 do Portales 172,680 do Jemez 1,237,205 Oklahoma Ter . , Wichita 57,120 Oregon Bull Run 142,080 do Cascade Range 4,424,440 do Ashland 18,560 do Baker City 52,480 do Wallowa 747,200 do Wenaha ■ 413,250 do Chesnimnus 220.320 do Maury Mountain 54,220 9,488,324 97,280 10,517.860 208,902 59,115 5,207,184 57,120 6,072,550 14 South Dakota. . . Black Hills^ 1,103,320 do Cave Hills 23,360 do Slim Bnttes 58,160 do Short Pine 19,040 1,263,880 Utah Fish Lake 288,800 do Uinta" ' 2,218,216 do Payson 167,280 do Logan 182,080 do Manti 777,920 do Aquarius 639,000 do Grautsvllle 68,960 do Salt Lake 95,440 do Sevier 710,920 do Dixie . . •. 465,920 do Beaver 261,593 do La SaF 128,960 6,005,089 AN'ashiugton Priest River' 103,960 do Mount Ranier 1,943,520 do Olympic 1,466,880 do Washington 3,952,840 do Wenaha" 318,400 7,785,000 Wyoming Yellowstone" 6,580,920 do Black Hills'* 46,440 do Big Horn 1,151,680 do Medicine Bow- 418,759 do Uinta" 63,662 8,261.431 Total of 95 Forest Reserves in the United States 94,227,893 Alaska Afognak 403,640 do Alexander Archipelago 4,506,240 — 4,909,880 Porto Rico Luquillo 65,950 65,950 Grand total of 98 Forest Reserves 99,203,723 'Total of Tahoe in California and Nevada : 897,952 acres. -Total of Medicine Bow in Colorado and Wyoming : 1,574,668 acres. "Total of La Sal in Colorado and Utah : 158,462 acres. n^otal of Bitter Root in Idaho and Montana : 4,552,880 acres. ''Total of Priest River in Idaho and Washington : 645.120 acres. "Total of Yellowstone in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho : 7,988,560 acres. ^Total of Wenaha in Oregon and Washington : 731,650 acres. *Total of Black Hills in South Dakota and Wyoming : 1,209,760 acres, "Total of Uinta in Utah and Wvoming : 2,281,848 acres. . II. THE RESERVE ACT OF 1891 AND THE EFFECT ON THE FORESTS OF THE EAST. As an introduction to this branch of the subject, so much of the letter addressed to President Roosevelt bv the writer as is pertinent is here inserted : '^During the j)ast year it was my privilege to take into view the his- tory of forestry in all European States and India. From a study of what has been done there, it became evident to me that successful forestry depends upon these two precedent conditions : "(a) Correct Forest Policy. "(b) Correct Forest Administration. "If the policy is wrong and the administration is faulty, the results are bound to be disappointing. A forest policy, to be correct, should embody these tAvo principles : "(1) It must be gauged to the kind of government. ''(2) It must accord with the temper and occupations of the people. A forest administration will be a failure that is not both (1) efficient and (2) comprehensive. It must do all it does well, and know all tliat needs to'be done. "The ISTational Forest Policy of the United States comes conven- iently and is fairly w^ell divided into three periods : "(1) 1799-1870. "(2) 1870-1891. "(3) 1891-1906. "The first period shows merely that the Xational Government even that early recognized its authority in forest protection. The second period marks the beginning of public discussion of forestry topics emphasized in the Timber Culture Act (1873) and by the appropria- tion in 1870 of $2,000 for a forestal agency in the Department, of Agriculture. The third period w^as ushered in by the Reserve Act of 1891, giving the President authority to reserve from sale cer- tain kinds of public lands, to be retained as Federal domain for for- estry purposes. "All of the national attempts at any kind of forestry previously to 1891 were failures, because the cardinal principles of correct forestry policy and administration were wanting. To this is to be added also 16 the further fact that during the early periods necessity had not de- veloped a sentiment and action strong enough to carry these initial movements forward. This brings us to the consideration of the period of 1891-190G, in which we now are, and the important ques- tion is : Are we repeating previous errors or following sound princi- ples under safe leaders ? "Erom those who hold the Reserve Act of 1891 as a great stride forward in forestry I am compelled to differ. The doubling of the price of lumber in the past decade, the slaughter going on in the East of all young prospective timber trees, the upsetting of our national forestry policy, the narrow and one-sided view of our forest adminis- tration — all these are, I charge, the natural fruits of the Reserve Act of 1891. If the Executive discretion permitted by the Act of 1891 had been exercised with moderation, possibly the criticism I am now making would have not applied. From a true forestry standpoint there was no necessity of taking but three classes of land, namely, (1) mountain slopes so steep that reforestration is practically impos- sible artificially, as nature has perhaps been thousands of years in clothing them with a forest which ought never to be cut away under any circumstances ; (2) lands around bodies of water or other natural wonders that make the aesthetic values exceed the commercial; (3) lands with the finest specimens of Western forest species from which to gather seed for reforestration. If the selection had been held down within these limits it would have made no appreciable effect in the working of our land laws as they bad been going on for a hundred 3^ears. On these lands thus reserved no cow, sheep, horse or goat should have been admitted for grazing purposes ; all hunting should have been forbidden, thus creating an asylum for the preservation of our wild animal and bird life. If this had been the case we should not see now foresters practically converted into cow-boys. "What is forestry, anyway ? Some one high in authority has defined forestry in the United States as "conservative lumbering." Applied to the Pacific Coast only, the definition would be correct. Eorestry in its truest and final analysis is the planting of a seedling in the place of every grown tree or other size felled for man's use, to be tended and protected until it in turn falls to a successor seedling. In the East, from the Mississippi to the Atlantic, Ocean, forestry is sylviculture, pure and simple. In this Eastern area just defined, so far as I know, 17 our active forest adiniiiistration is not sj^mdiiig' one dollar. The wliole appropriation of $900,000 passed bv the last CongToss is con- sumed in the live-stock and coAv-boy operations in the far West, be- yond the Mississippi River. Xow here in the East we scarcely have enough timber left for breakfast. If the present forest jiolicv is to be continned, Avill some one anthorized to speak tell us how and where we are to get dinner and snp])er 1 It will re(inire three good meals a day to keep ns alive and agoing. Since the time of the growth of a seedling into a timber tree covers a span of seventy-five years, even beginning now, it will be rather a long wait between meals. "I have referred to the price of lumber doubling in the last decade. Some one says that it is due to increased demand. Partly that is true. But lessening the supply has the same effect on the price of a conmiodity as increasing the demand. The sudden withdrawal of 94,000,000 acres of land from the right of entry was a very sensitive lessening of the supply. The intention to proclaim still other Reserves is a perceptible factor of short supply also. Every owner of stura]iage in the United States has recognized this, and the better the timber the firmer it is held standing. "The Reserve Act of 1891, then, has created an hiatus in our national lumber development and progress. Previously to that, our wooden industries, as local su])plies were exhausted, removed to new sui)plies, this action resulting in periodical industrial migrations westward. But the giving out of a timber-land supply in the AVest has kept these industries at home, and in order to live they have entirely changed their methods in order that they might utilize the second growth of the forest here in the East. Results published, in the last census are very convincing on this point. Out of the total number of minor wood-manufacturing ])lnnts, it was found that one-fourth of these were established in the census year 1899, thus indicating a rapid change in business to meet new conditions. Of all these new industries, sixty-two per cent, were private individuals, thirty-one per cent, were firms, and only seven ])ev cent, were corpora- tions. The result of this new class of operators shows itself very plainly in the woods. All the growing young timber is being cut before the manhood stage is reached, and even' every trout brook is being stripped of its cover in the keen search for stock. 2 18 "So, figuring it as best we can, the East is facing a s])an of vears without a home sujiply of timber, apparently ignored by our forest policy. But our National Government has plenty of money to experi- ment on alkali deserts and dry limestone mountainsides of tlie far West. Experiments are justified only in search of something needed and not in visible existence. .Vll the Appalachian Range, the Pied- mont Plateau, the Coastal Plain, the southwestern Mississippi Valley are the finest forest lands in the world. To neglect these certainties for experiments seems as unAvise as starting a cotton plantation in the Adirondacks when thousands of acres of known cotton lands could ho secured in the Southern States. It is almost a maxim that old coun- tries olfer legitimate fields for forestry, and that new countries, like the far West, are for exploitation. "There is a ])olitical and economic dogma abroad in the laud rluil gwernmental ownership and operation should take the place of pri- vate, because the people could get supplied cheaper. The ])resent forest policy reverses this. It is that the government should sell its timber in such a way as to make lumber higher.* But higher lum- ber, when proi)erly translated, means fewer homes. The safety and prosperity of the Republic, it has been well said, can be measureil by the proportion of home-owTiers to the whole population. "Destructive criticism is always easiest. To build up is more ditH- cult. First of all, then, do away with the live-stock and cow-boy part of the Western undertakings and leave that business to individual American enter])rise. Reduce the forces and curtail the expenses out there. Transfer the surj^lus foresters and funds to the East. Every State in the East needs a United States Forester of high order attached to its administrative staff. Let it be the duty of this Forester to do everything that, ought to be done, to start his State in a sane forest policy. lu (»ur State governments, with their comparatively feeble executive and administrative initiative, working alone in this way will take any given State twenty-five years to establish a correct forest policy and administration. For example, take Xew Hamp- shire, with which I am familiar. That State, since 1893, or in thir- *" Study the change of prices in wood; they are sure signs of the conditions of supply and demand. It is perhaps not possible to draw valid conclusions from one statistical item; but if we find that the price of white pine uppers during the thirty years from 1S70 to 1900 advanced 50 per cent., and in the three years following advanced 56 per cent., we do not need fine discrimination in order to realize that the end of this class of supply is near. Similarly, all other woods have during the last fifteen years appreciated between 50 and 100 per cent."— Dr. B. E. Fernow. 19 teen years, has spent $18,000 in attempts at forestry, and out of that expenditure the State has not an acre of land or a single seedling planted to show for it. With a Forester there to advise and direct, this conld not have happened. Any Forester who failed to bring his State into action would need rotation, to say the least. It is scarcely possible that a single State would refuse a United States Forester offered free of charge. This would be cooperative work that is needed in every State ])ressingly, without delay, for forestry methods can only succeed in this country when the local jieople are led on to ap- proval. Down South, where I was born and grew u]), we were accus- tomed to b\dl-wliip our slaves into doing what we wanted, wliether tliey liked it or not. That regime has passed away, never to be re- vived. The American people will not be bull-wlii])]>ed into a kind of forestr}^ they don't want. "Sooner or later we shall have to remodel from to]) to bottom our forest administration, making it comprehensive enough for the great area and many different peoples that have to be dealt with. The forest problems of the United States are not a one-man proposition. They are beyond the ken of any one man to master and solve. Even in the smaller States of Europe the necessity of the division of respon- sibility in the forest administration is recognized. France, as many contend, has shown the greatest capacity in the managing of forestal property, and, financially speaking, France makes the best exhibit of a credit balance in forestry. From the experience of France and of Great Britain in India, probably we can learn most that we can utilize for administrative reform. Following somewhat after their model, we should have a board of at least seven forest conservators ; six should come, one each, from the six forest zones into which the United States can be divided: (1) Pacific Coast, (2) Rocky Moun- tain States, (3) Lake States, (4) :N"orth Atlantic States, (5) South Atlantic and Gulf States, (6) Middle Western States. This division no one maintains is correct, botanically, but it is as nearly correct as our political units permit. The seventh conservator should be the Secretary of Agriculture ex officio, and he should be |)resident of the board. This board should have a resident secretary in Washington and meet there as often as necessary — certainly twice a year — to authorize all moneys that are to be expended and to approve or dis- approve all plans of the United States Forester. The members should 20 be appointed in pairs for two, four and six years, respectively, for their first terms, and after that for six years as each term expires. This would give an immortal body to keep alive a rational forest policy. Made np of snch members from all sections of the country, this board would undoubtedly command the ]mblic confidence, and all of its decisions and acts would be accepted as final. If any one criti- cises this plan as too cumbersome and expensive, let it be compared with the same administration in India, which consists of nineteen conservators, one hundred and twenty-two deputy conservators, one hundred and seventy assistant conservators, with a field and protective force under them of ten thousand men. "Further to j)opularize forestry in the United States, all appoint- ments to the Forest Service should come from each of these six forest zones in proportion to the population of each zone. It goes without saying that a man born and reared in a ])articular section gets in closer touch with the flora and fauna, with the forest and its denizens, than some chance importation. But,* most of all, he M-ould under- stand the temper of the people — how to give them what they should receive and how to keep from them what they ought not to have with- out exciting opposition. With a forest administration and a forest service established on the basis of this outline, failure in forestry would belong only to tlie ]iast history of the United States. "With a board of administration such as this, it is not believed that the pressing forestry problems here in the East would lie untouched. As a specimen of one of these, look at what is taking place in the South Atlantic coastal plain. From N^orfolk, Va., to southern Texas the long-leaf pine, associated with other species, forms what was once an unbroken belt of timber, extending at some points more than a hundred miles into the interior. It has been under the shelter of this belt of timber that truck farming over the entire area skirting the coast from Virginia to Texas has been carried on so successfully. Probably not less than a million people are engaged there in this industry and producing food products sufiicient for five million ]ieo- ple, chiefly in the great cities in the Northeast. The stimulus for high prices for lumber, largely induced by governmental action in the West, has made this belt in recent years the point of attack of the great lumber kings who captured and subdued the Lake States. This belt of timber is now being felled and sawed at the rate of 21 300,000,000 board feet per montli, according to the returns of tlie Yellow Pine Association for 1905 ; that is to say, at the rate of 3,600,000,000 feet per annum, or, in the terms of tree units, 7,200,000 trees per annum. At this rate of consumption, within twenty-five years at the longest, this belt of timber will entirely dis- appear, for neither any State nor the nation is planting one seedling to take the place of the 7,200,000 trees that are felled annually. ]S"ow this belt of timber standing, as a physiographic feature, competes sharply with its commercial value sawn into lumber. It retains and dissipates backwards the heat of the warm winds from the Gulf, and, on the other hand, it parries the shock of the cold winds from the Xorth, thus furnishing the ideal trucking region. In a few years these conditions will be changed, truck farming will be belated and hazardous from uncertain frost to bankruptcy. And yet our national forest policy can only find occupation in the far -West! "The very great importance of the subject, Mr. President, is the only excuse I have to offer in asking for enough of your valuable time to run over these suggestions ; for it is known to you that the industry of wood products is the fourth" in the United States in annual value, amounting in the last census year to $1,031,000,000, and that of the total gToss earnings ($1,900,000,000) of our railroads in 1904, 10 per cent, of this revenue- was derived from transportation of forest products." In treating of the topics touched upon in the letter with more detail, it will be well first to point out the differences between a park and a reserve. A park, as, for example^ the YelloAvstone Park, is established by a special act of CongTess. A reserve is simply pro- claimed by the President under authority of the Reserve Act of 1891, and can only be created out of the public lands which have not yet been taken up under an}' of the laws of entry still in force. Again, *THE FOUR LEADING INDUSTRIES IN THE UNITED STATES. (1) Food products (2) Iron and steel- (3) Textile (4) Lumber No. Estab- lishments. No. Laborers. 61,300 314,000 14,000 734,000 30,000 1,030,000 47,000 547,000 Wages. Capital. $ 130,000,000 $ 941,000,000 382,000,000 1,529,000,000 342,000,000 I 1,367,000,000 212,000,000 I 946,000,000 Product. 2,278,000,000 1,793,000,000 1,637.000,000 1,031,000,000 2.2 a park may be created out of public lands, or private lands may be bought by the government for this purpose. ^V further distinction exists in the fact that reserves are set aside primarily for forestry purposes, whereas with a park that may be only one of the considera- tions leading to its establishment. The preservation of natural scenery of national importance may be the controlling influence for a ])ark. What the people of the East are asking for, therefore, are parks — the White ]\Iountain Park in Xew England and the Appa- lachian Park in the Southern States. They are wanted for forestry purposes, for natural scenery purposes, and, most of all, for the con- servation and protection of water-sheds. In regard to the Reserve Act itself, but little can be said in its favor, or of the methods by which it was passed. Onlj^ by courtesy can it be caNed an Act. It consists of a few lines engrafted on an ajipropriation l)il] in tlie expiring hours of Congress. Very few knew it was there, or what it really meant. That class of legislation has been very a])tly styled "pickpocket" legislation, for something is done unawares. What has been attempted under the Reserve Act is, by far, the most considerable eifort at forestry in the Fnited States. As will be seen from the tabulation on another page, there are in the United States and Territories ninety-five reserves of a combined area of 1)4,227, 893 acres. In Alaska there are tAvo reserves of 4,009,880 acres, and in Porto Rico one reserve of 65,950 acres. How much of this area is woodland and forest and how much is grazing and agricultural land no one seems to know; for in the beginning of our reserve policy very little attention was paid to the kind of land taken, the object be-~ ing to get about everything in sight. U])on investigation it will be seen that with the exception of four small reserves, one each in Okla- homa and Kansas, two in ISTebraska, all the others are located in the Rocky ]\I(»unt;uu States, on the Pacific slope or in the Territories of Arizona and Xcw Mexico. At the time, and since, there has been much opposition in some of these States to the large amount of lands that have been reserved. This opposition is far more reasonable than the people of the East think. It has a basis both in law and justice. When these States were admitted into the Union it was supposed that tlie Federal domain within their limits would be snliject to entry the same as had liccii the })ractiee in predecessor States. All investments. 23 all individual and pnblic improvements, were based on this assump- tion. To come after that and deprive those States, some of them of ahnost one-fonrth their area, simply lessens the possibilities of State growth and individual wealth and prosperity to that extent. Whether the law, if tested in the Supreme Court, would be upheld, remains still unknown. Besides, what is there to prevent any succeeding President from restoring all these lands to entry lands again if he shoidd be so inclined ''. .Vs the increase of population in these States requires more land, will not that very demand be' made upon the President? In view of such contingencies, is it a wise policy to expend all the for- estr}' a})pro])riation on these Reserves and leave the rest of the country uncared for '{ But let us suppose the Reserves are maintained and increased, to Avhat extent will they meet the requirement for timber and wood in the United States 'i Our Federal domain exclusive of Alaska amounted to 1,500,000,000 acres in round numbers. Of this amount the United States Government still owns (577,000,000 acres. This area uiay be subdivided into — (Jrazing land 3,32,000,000 acres. Wooaiaiitl 184,000,000 acres. Deserts 70,000,000 acres. Indian 80,000,000 acres. IMiscellaneous 11,000,000 acres. According to the latest bulletin of the Forest Service, already there have been set aside of the woodland for reserves 94,227,893 acres. AVhen the whole 184,000,000 acres of woodland have been reserved, how far will that supply us in timber and Avood % The lumber con- sumption of the United States is estimated at 45,000,000,000 feet b. m. annually. An acre of woodland will give an annual increment of 90 feet b. m. Therefore 184,000,000 acres would yield annually only 16,560,000,000 feet b. m., or a little more than one-third of the consumption to-day. But it is th(> future that we must provide for. An hundred years hence, when our ]iopulation has doubled and trebled, our ])resent national forest policy will scarcely yield fire- wood enough. Fortunately, however, all the woodland is not owned by the government. The total estimate of woodland in the United States is 700,000,000 acres. The government, as we have said, owns about 36 per cent, of the woodlands of the country, 30 per cent, are 24 attached to farms and the remaining 34 per cent, are controlled by lumbermen, railroads, and other corporations. But it is highly probable that not over half of this woodland is in a productive state. Much of it is in a stationary stage, where the death-rate equals the new growth, and much of it is cut-over land. So, actually, we are most likely now living oft" our principal instead of our interest and are daily approaching the end of that principal. What is to be done '( Where is the remedy ? The present United States Forester has deiined for- estry in the United States as "conservative lumbering," and since we must accept that as his prescription, let us see if we can find the merits of this cure-all. Conservative lumbering is opposed to destructive lumbering. It is lumbering with a due regard to the young gTowth and regeneration. It is also periodic lumbering: Cutting now the trees of a certain diameter and twenty years hence, or whatever period may be adopted, cutting the trees that have reached the original diameter, and repeating the operation ad infinitiun. In the first jilace, it is lumbering, and lumbering presupposes the existence of a forest. If we had started out this way, or even fifty years ago made the beginning, the theory might have worked ; that is, met the situa- tion, if it is practical. It is too late now. Our existing forest area, if properly stocked and managed, would not yield a supply equal to the demand. In the second place, is the theory practical ? It is a fine j)hrase ; looks well on paper and sounds well when written. But take it into the woods, to a lumberman, and rattle it off. What will be the result ? He will invite you to go away back and sit down on a log by the river and spend your time fishing. The lumberman, like everyone else engaged in a gainful occupation, wants the last dollar that he can get oft' the area noic. He knows that financially forestry means the curtailment of present revenue for the sake of future reve- nue. The lumberman also knows that "conservative lumbering" is impractical in ''soft" growth, in coniferous growth — pines, hemlock, cedar, firs, larch, and spruce. lie knows that when a diameter- cutting is made in coniferous forest that in the next year or two the wind will cut the balance, because they are all fiat-footed species, that is, have no ta])-root, and can only withstand the wind so long as each one remains to help the other. Therefore the lumberman in conifer- ous gi'owth makes a "clean cutting," converting the large diameter into lumber and selling the small diameter for i)ulp-wood to the paper mills. 25 So far we have investigated the merits of "conservative lumbering" in conifers. With the broad-leaved species the conditions are more favorable to conservative Inmbering. The broad-leaved species are tap-rooted, and each individual can stand by himself, if necessary. "Conservative lumbering" is practical so far as the requirements of tlie broad-leaved forest are concerned, but the increased cost of that method of lumbering militates against its introduction. In addition to this objection the area of the broad-leaved forests is so small that "conservative lumbering" there would have little effect in keeping supply up to consumption — .the goal that forestry must aim for and attain if it is to have public approval. This leads us to a view of the forest area in the United States. A few years back Dr. B. E. Fer- now made this estimate of the standing timber in the United States: Southern States 700,000,000,000 ft. h. m. Northern States .jOO,000,000,000 ft. h. ui. Pacific Coast 1,000,000,000,000 ft. b. m. Rocky Mountain States 100,000.000,000 ft. b. m. Total 2,300,000,000,000 ft. b. m. How much of this is broad-leaved and how much is coniferous tim- ber we cannot determine accurately. AVe do know, however, that there are no broad-leaved forests in the Rocky Mountain States and on the Pacific Coast. What broad-leaved forests are here are the remnants of what were once the grandest hardwood forests of the world, in the Southern and the jSTorthern States. The hardwood forests have had to resist the force of civilization and the force of vandal destruction besides. Occupying a deep rich soil, as compared to the thin soil of the coniferous, our hardwood species have been cut down and burned into ashes to increase the acreage of agriculture. In the last census year the lumber from conifers amounted to 26,150,000,000 feet b. m., and from hardwoods 8,630,000,000 feet b. m. Taking these figures as a guide, the hardwood area is scarcely one-third that of the coni- fers. This is misleading, for the largest area of conifers, the Pacific coast, yielded that year only 9.6 of the total cut. So we are safe in saying that the hardw^ood area in the United States, as compared' to the coniferous, is about as 25 to 75. From the point of view of the writer, therefore, we have .seen that "conservative lumbering" in coniferous forests is impractical because of natural obstacles, and in hardwood forests, which constitute anyway only 25 per cent, of the 26 forest area of the country, it will not be introduced on account of the increased cost of that nietliod of lumbering. Xo one lumberman, looking out for financial gains, will add to his cost of production un- less all his competitors do the same. Before leaving this part of the subject, 1 wish to ([uote some statis- tics on supply and demand from Mr. K. A. Long, a very prominent lumberman of the West. His figures do not embrace the United States, as he has chosen those States and sections where the main sup- ply of conifers stands. For the yellow-pine belt of the South and Southwest this is his estimate by States: Florida l(),."iOO.(;MlO.OOO ft. b. m. Mississippi 4G.0, 0,000,000 ft. b. in. Alabama 11,250,000,000 ft. b. in. (ieoi-gia 12.000.000.000 ft. b. in. Arkansas 1 0.500.000,000 ft. b. in. Missouri 2,00(».(t(l0.000 ft. b. in. Texas .".u.ooo.ooo.ooo ft. b. m. Louisiana 45,000.000.000 ft. b. in. North ("arnlina anil Viriiinia 15,000,o; 10,000 ft. b. in. South ( "ai-olina 5.000,000,000 ft. b. m. Total 187,250,000,000 ft. b. m. The annual cut in this belt is now about U,569,21-l:,000 feet b. ni.. showing that the supply will be exhausted in less than twenty years. For the white-pine btdt of the Lake States the estimate is: Wisconsin '. . 13,000 000.000 ft. b. m. Michigan 17,000.000,000 ft. b. m. Minnesota ;W.OOO.OOO,000 ft. b. m. l\)tal 60,000.000.000 ft. b. ni. At the rate of cut in 1890, namely, 5,419,333,000 feet b. m., the supply would be exhausted in eleven years. On the Pacific Slope the estimate for Washington is 175,000,- 000,000 feet b. m., divided into s]iccies as follows: Ked Fir 00,59;^.000.(IOO ft. b. m. Spruce 8.221.0(10.000 ft. b. m. ("edar 22.(i40,(M)0.(MlO ft. b. m. Hemlock 41,571.000.00(1 ft. b. m. Yellow Pine 1.3,082.000,000 ft. b. m. Oregon has about 250,000,000,000 feet b. m., of which 170,000.- 000,000 feet are red fir and 50,000,000,000 feet yellow pin(^, the rest being divided into spruce, hemlock and cedar. In California there are standing abont 150,000,000,000 feet 1j. ni. With the excejjtion of a small anionnt of sugar pine, California's stock is abont equally divided bet^veen redwood and yellow pine. Adding together the amount standing in the three sections exam- ined, we find the total stand of conifers is 842,000,000,000 feet 1). ni., and the total annual cut is 20,600,000,000. This would make the life of the supply, at the present rate of consumption, forty-cnie years. But when we take into the account that our population is increasing at the rate of 3 per cent, per annum — 2,500,000 people — and that the increase in consumption per ca})ita per annum is 10 per cent., the calculated life of forty-one years is quite too much. If to the estimate above is added about 25,000,000,000 feet b. m. of white pine, spruce, and hemlock in New York, Pennsylvania, and the JN^ew England States, we should get still nearer to our total supply. N^or is there to the north of us, in the Dominion of Canada, so much forest wealth as one might think, as their tntnl wliite ])ine standing is only about 37,000,000,000 fett b. m. To meet the situation which these figures portend we have seen that the remedy of the present United States Forester is "conservative lumbering." As a part of this scheme the lumbermen of the Ignited States are asked to found a chair of lumbering in one of the forest schools. That is to be a sort of Sunday-school where the Inmbermen are to learn and teach the altruism of money -getting ! So far as the writer can judge, what is proposed by the United States Forester to solve the problem of keeping our forest supply ade- quate to the consumption would be just as effectual as a ])oy with a squirt-gun trying to save a great city in conflagration. Xor will the forest-fire laws, both for the protection of timber and seedlings — as much as that would help — do all that is needed. AVhat we shall have to come to and ado])t is what other nations have found indispensable. We shall have to enact a national law of Compulsory Reforestration. This would bear equally on all owners of woodland, whether in large or small tracts. It would ajqdy ecpially to all sections of the country and produce a uniform forest develop- ment; it would make State forestry possible and practicable — some- thing that we shall have to do if a real forestry movement is to suc- ceed. Let us take as a Avorking basis that the cost of reforestration ]X'r acre is $10. Whoever sells the wood or timber from his land, pro- 28 vided it is not to be converted into agricultural land, has only to add the $10 per acre for reforestration to the price. Who would do the reforestration i* The State, and the A'ational ■Governnient also. Such a general law by the government would lead all the States to enact similar laws, covering the points for each State that a national law could not reach. To reforest and care for the young growth would necessitate a forest administration in every State. By degrees, with such assistance as the ]Srational Government had to offer, a rational and safe State forest policy would in this way be worked out, and our forestry development would go along in harmony ^vith our theory and system of government. AVhat the government is trying to do to-day does not fit in with our institutions and the customs of our people. We are a nation of indi- \i(huils, and so long as we retain our individual initiative, so long shall we continue to be a great, free, and prosperous people. The selling of wood and timber is not one of our governmental functions. If Ave have undertaken it, we have followed to that extent bad advice. Elsewhere I have referred to the results of the present forest policy of the government. While saving one tree in the far A^"est, we have by that action caused the destruction of two young trees in the East, Avhereas, if there had been no governmental interference with our law of development as it had been going on for a hundred years, the two young trees in the East would have been left to ripen, and the old tree of the far West would have been taken in its place. If this policy is continued, the East will find itself in less than twenty-five years dependent upon lumber for its homes to come from the far, AVest. Is this a pleasant situation to contemplate, with a coal famine and railroad strike at the same time ? What answer will our great captains of industry east of the Mississippi Iviver make ? Does a forest policy with such an outcome meet the wishes of the Illinois Central Railroad, the Louisville and Xashville, the Southern Pacific, the Southern, the Seaboard Air Line, the Pennsylvania, the New York Central, the Missouri and Texas Pacific, the New York, New Haven and Hartford, and the Boston and IMaine ? Will the Senators and Representatives in Congress east of the Mississi])pi and from Missouri soutliAvard continue to vote appropriations for a forest policy, the logic of which makes their constituents homeless and fireless ? What say the people of the Middle West to buying their future supplies from a Pacific Coast luml)er trust, promoted 29 by the misguided action of their own government? Heretofore the Middle West has been protected, in that it could draw on the Atlantic Seaboard, the Gulf Coast and the Mississippi River for lumber, and it is to their interest that all these sources should be kept open and alive. As to a trust. When the government offers its timber on the reserves for sale by auction, who will be the buyers ? IS'o one can aiford to, except the lumbermen of that section, and it is easy to see that they will control the government's output, i^ow, since the government began the reserve policy there has been a grab policy of the timber dealers all over the United States. The individual owner of timber-land is fast going, and in ten years he will have entirely disappeared. The timber of the United States will be held in a very few hands. It is for these few that the Reserve timber is unwittingly being held also, for they will take charge of every sale that is made. To return to Compulsory Reforestration. Some say it cannot be done, on account of the Constitution. It would seem that the ''welfare clause" in the Constitution ought to come in here. Then, too, we have a i^ational Bank KcX that applies all over the country, in each and every State. Why- not a Forest Act? But can we not legislate for our own interests to the same extent that we have legislated for the Philippine Islands? In the "Forest Act" for the Philippines, re- forestration is very clearly provided for. It has been stated that forestry interests in the United States are too manifold and vast in extent to be entrusted to a single head ; that it would be better if the policies of older countries were followed in di- viding the responsibility and making a more comprehensive adminis- tration. Plow one man takes in the whole situation may be gathered from a review of the "Forester." This is the official annual publica- tion of the United States Forester, and is supposed to tell wdiat was done the past year. The "Forester" is continuous, that is, the pages are consecutively numbered from year to year. The "Forester" for 1905 fills in the pages from 199 to 237. The future historian of forestry for our period would turn first of all to the pages of the "Forester" for his information. That is the official organ, and should contain what was wanted. In the "Forester" of 1905 what do we find ? First of all, the names of but two persons appear in or on its pages, one Secre- tary Wilson and the other the United States Forester. So far as this published record shows, these are the only two names connected with 30 forestry, and one of them, Secretary Wilson, is a well-known farmer. Elsewhere I have given the total nnmber of the Forestry Service as 532. Have none of these men done anything of special excellence to win a place in the '"Forester" ( Ought not the public to know who are at the head of all the "offices" under which the Forest Service works '( ^^'hy not print a roster of all the men in the higher grades of the service 'i Let the public know who they are and what they are doing. The demand to-day is for publicity, and nowhere is it needed more than in all departments at Washington. Again, why not give us in detail the organization of at least one of the Reserves^ How many men are required, their general grades and remuneration, and the total annual outlay on the Reserve ? Be- side this put the income from the Reserve. In that way the people Avho have to pay the bills could see for what they are paying. After reading through the "Forester" for 1905, I find these several geiici-al statements of the expenditure under the Forest Service : Office of Dendrology $ 15,086.44 Office of Mensureiiieiits .30.158.99 Office of Extension .>3.970.9(! Office of Products 56,881.22 Office of Records 90,881.98 Office of Forester 121,078.16 Preceding each of these financial statements is a very general sum- mary of the uses to which the moneys were applied. As far as I can nnde bought by the Western timber men, the only ones who will be prepared to bid, these bidders being the same persons who own the Pacific Slope timber lands. If the price of lumber seems high, the man who builds a home in the East twenty-five years from to-day will figure on brick and stone for cheapness against wood. But since the Reserves exist by the caprice of the President, and any President may restore the reserve land to entry again, is it not unwise to be expending large sums of money on them ? What ought to be done is this : Determine by a properly made up commission of civilians and experts which Reserves, or the parts of any Reserve, 44 are national necessities and make them Reserves or Parks by statute, to be kept permanently under forest management. The White Mountain Park asked for in jSTew England and the Southern Appalachian Park, are types of National Necessity Parks. The preservation of the forests there is demanded over and above local considerations. Prom these two areas issue the great manufac- turing rivers of the East, whose power is an important factor in our national commercial supremacy. Undoubtedly there are such areas in the West, or they will become such, and they ought to be reserved. All land withheld from entry, that does not come under the head of national necessity, should be restored to the public domain and become again our common heritage. Grazing lands are not forest lands, and the live-stock business is not a necessary adjunct of forestry. All moneys available should be spent for direct and pressing forest re- quirements. I^or is the large expenditure for a literary bureau justifiable. If I understand the accounts correctly, last year some- thing over $200,000 were used in literary efforts and publications of various kinds. This amount appropriated for five years would be enough to make at least one of the Reserve Parks the East is asking for a certainty. But if these Western Reserves are to be retained, and the rest of the public woodland, about 90,000,000 acres, is also to be reserved, there should be some compensating policy adopted for the East. The Irrigation Act, which seems to meet with general approval, offers a model. In accordance with the terms of the Irriga- tion Act, the money received for the public lands sold in the States specified is carried to a special account in the Treasury and held for irrigation purposes in the States in which the sold lands were. In a similar way let all moneys received. from the sale of timber and wood from the Western Reserves be carried to a special account in the Treasury for reforestration in the East. The Eastern forests have been exhausted in building up the whole country, and it is but fair that the whole country should aid in replacing them. What w^e want above all things is a uniform development of forestry and a perpetua- tion of the necessary percentage of forests in every State and every section. In the treatment of forestry and forest lands in the United States to-day no rule of general application can be laid down for every ]n'ol> lem. Variations will have to be admitted to fit the particular situa- tion. On the Pacific Slope and in the Rocky Mountain States the 45 problem is how to lumber and yet not destroy the yonng growth and leave the land stocked for a new crop. In the Lake States the situation and solution are different. The virgin white-pine forests have been removed. Lumbering came, had its day and went away. It abandoned thousands of acres of cut-over lands to the States for taxes. In Minnesota, Michigan and Wis- consin the crying need is reforestration — reforestration, which is but another name for sylviculture. The South Atlantic and Gulf States, so far as their coniferous forests are concerned, are begging to be rescued from the fate of the Lake States. 'No help seems to be going that way, and when forestry gets there it will be for reforestration. The old fields and cut-over lands of New England and the other Northeastern States have long awaited reforestration. The Appa- lachian Mountains and the Atlantic and Gulf rivers, especially the Mississippi and its lower tributaries, the area once occupied by the broad-leaved or hardwood species, largely demands reforestration. The hardwoods still standing are in immediate need of forest man- agement. Now, how much of this work is our present forest administration doing ? At the rate it is meeting this demand, it would require five hundred years to get the area just described under forest manage- ment. But with Compulsory Reforestration all of this work could and would be done with only a fraction of the cost to be borne by the United States Government. The States would act, individuals and corporations would act. There would be uniform and timely develop- ment of forestry throughout the United States. The beginning of such a movement could be started on the right road now by the assignment of a competent Forester, as already suggested, to each State administration, where the State was one that justified it by its possible forest area. This would only be following a military exam- ple, since any State that makes the request can get a West Pointer for the State troops. After reviewing the figures and estimates that have been quoted of our lumber supply, and after making such additions and changes as the circumstances seem to dictate, the stock of timber twelve inches and over in the United States and Territories, exclusive of Alaska, mifilit be classed and located as follows : 46 Northeastern States 25,000,000,000 ft. b. m. conifers. Lake States 70,000,000,000 ft. b. m. conifers. Rocky Mountain States 80,000,000,000 ft. b. m. conifers. Southern and Southwestern States 250,000,000,000 ft. b. m. conifers. Pacific Slope States 800,000,000,000 ft. b. ni. conifers. All the States 250,000,0(X),000 ft. b. ni. hardwoods. Total stock ' 1,475,000,000,000 ft. b. m. conifers and hardwoods. Xow, if the consumption in 1900 aggregated 45,000,000,000 feet b. m., there would seem to be a supply for the rise of thirty years. The tenure of the land upon which the timber stands is held by the United States, States, Corporations, Speculators, Farmers. The United States, according to estimates, owns about 36 per cent. ; farmers, 30 per cent. ; States, corporations, and speculators, 34 per cent. The acreage of all these holdings is supposed to run up to 700,000,000. On the basis of these calculations our present forest administration is taking charge of only the government's percentage of the total — about 200,000,000 — with small voluntary parcels com- ing under management. Practically, therefore, there are about 500,000,000 acres of woodland in the United States without forestry care. Hence, the grand problem for forestry in the United States is to get these 500,000,000 acres in charge, and to put it all m a condi- tion of productivity. If this could be done, and the average incre- ment or annual growth of an acre of well-stocked woodland is 90 feet b. m., it is seen at once that the acreage would put on a growth annu- ally equal to the consumption of the census year (1900), or 45,000,- 000,000 feet b. m. But this result is possible only through Compul- sori/ Beforesiraiion. For many of the facts and figures in this pamphlet I am indebted to the various books of Dr. B. E. Fernow and of Dr. C. A. S^-henck. especially to the latter's Forest Policy. Prof. I. C. Russell's Rivers of North America has also been made use of freely, as well as the bulletins of the Forest Ser- vice. The War Department and the Department of the Interior have always responded promt>tly to requests for information. 47 LEADING LUMBER TREES IN THE UNITED STATES. HARDWOODS. White Oak Quercus alba. Red Oak Quercus rubra. Chestnut Oak Quercus prinus. Black Oak Quercus velutina. Tanbark Oak Quercus densiflora. Hickory Hicoria alba. Shagbark Hicoria ovata. Ash Fraxinus Atnericana. Beech Fagus atropunicea. Chestnut Castanea dentata. Yellow Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera. Yellow Birch Betula lutea. CONIFERS. Paper Birch Betula papyrifera. Basswood Tilia Aviericana. Cotton-wood Populus deltoides. Swamp Cotton-wood — Populus heterophylla. Elm Ultnus Americana. Walnut Juglans nigra. Cherry Prunus serotina. Maple Acer saccharum. Sycamore Platanus occidentalis. Tupelo Gum Nyssa aquatica. Coffee Tree Gymnocladus dioicus. Long-leaf Pine Pinus Palustris. Short-leaf Pine Pinus echinata. Bull Pine Pinus ponderosa. Jack Pine Pinus divaricata. Red Pine Pinus resinosa. White Pine Pinus strobus. Sugar Pine Pinus lambertiona. Red Spruce Picea Rubens. White Spruce Picea canadensis. Engelmon Spruce Picea engelmanni. Sitka Spruce Picea sitchensis. Hemlock Tsuga canadensis. Western Hemlock Tsuga heterophylla. Tomarock Larix laricina. Western Larch Larix occidentalis. Red Fir Pseudo tsuga taxifolio. Balsam Fir Abies balsamea. Lowland Fir Abies grandis. White Fir Abies concolor. Amabalis Fir Abies amabalis. Noble Fir Abies nobilis. Incense Cedar Libocedrus decurrens. Red Cedar Thuja plicata. White Cedar Chamascyparis thyoides. Yellow Cedar Chamxcyparis nootka- Red Juniper Juniperus unginiana. Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum. Redwood Sequoia sempervirens. PERCENTAGE OF FOREST AREA BY STATES. From Dr. C. A. Schernd's "Forest Policy, 1890.' OVER 70 PER CENT. Maine West Virginia North Carolina Georgia Alabama Arkansas Washington OVER 60 PER CENT. OVER 50 PER CENT. Michigan Minnesota South Carolina Mississippi Louisiana Tennessee Indian Territory Florida New Hampshire Massachusetts Pennsylvania Virginia Kentucky Wisconsin Oregon Missouri OVER 40 PER CENT. Vermont New Jersey Maryland Idaho OVER 30 PER CENT. OVER 20 PER CENT. OVER 10 PER CENT. UNDER 10 PER CENT. New York Delaware Connecticut Colorado Rhode Island District of Columbia Ohio Texas Montana Arizona California Indiana Illinois Iowa Oklahoma Wyoming New Mexico Utah North Dakota South Dakota Nebraska Kansas Nevada APR 16 1106 estern •«Wj (-^p .CA A SL ciiiAi *^.^^lOii ach ih d :,y»aOi>»yuu,Mi^u it. jp.o': URER /ifca«^'3-^3€]^ LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 000 921 462 8< s f . k orest- iFeriiov a sysieniatit vt only a co' literatur^ uubiished m vsiry ic;