Proceedings of the Southern Forestry Congress

Material Information

Proceedings of the Southern Forestry Congress
Uniform Title:
Lumber World Review
Added title page title:
Proceedings of the ... Southern Forestry Congress
Southern Forestry Congress.
Place of Publication:
Chapel Hill, N.C.
Southern Forestry Congress,
Publication Date:
2nd, 1920, Jan.28-30
Physical Description:
12 v. : ; 23 cm.


Subjects / Keywords:
Forests and forestry -- Congresses ( lcsh )
Forests and forestry -- Congresses -- Southern States ( lcsh )
serial ( sobekcm )
conference publication ( marcgt )


Dates or Sequential Designation:
1st (1916)-12th (1930).
Numbering Peculiarities:
Published in Feb. 25, 1922 issue of Lumber World Review.
Numbering Peculiarities:
Suspended 1917-1919.
General Note:
Publisher and place of publication vary with each edition.
General Note:
Title varies slighty.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact Digital Services ( with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
LTUF ( ACW4218 )
OCLC ( 06241304 )
AlephBibNum ( 000540771 )


This item has the following downloads:





























































































































































Full Text





JANUARY 28-30, 1920

In order to meet the needs of the country for forest products lands not needed for agriculture and settlement should be put to use growing trees rather than to lie idle and unproductive.

The preservatte dca;efaut-h adli qAl the,second growth and small *imhm presents an opportumnty *ha& i f -aken advantage of b Ndrp it is too late will contribute f1 .,f phuilding of the. South in a measure difficult at the prest.*tine for mqsj.-'epple to rqeli~2p :'; . . * ". .
.: * -GRAVE*z.

Chapel Hill, N. C.





.* .t*. a

* a. ** * . a. a a .
* * . a *. ;





PRESIDENT . HENRY E. HARDTNER, President, Urania Lumber Co.
SECRETARY J. S. HOLMES, State Forester, North Carolina
Geological and Economic Survey
Forestry, Department of Conservation


JOSEPH HYDE PRATT, Director North Carolina
Geological and Economic Surv,,37 Chapel Hill, N. C.
JOHN H. WALLACE, JR., Commissioner of Conservation Montgomery, Ala.
R. D. FORBES, Superintendent of Forestry,
Department of Conservation New Orleans, La.
E. 0. SIECKE, State Forester College Station, Texas
J. E. RHODES, Secretary-Manager, Southern Pine Association New Orleans, La.



JOHN H. WALLACE, JR Montgomery, Ala.
R. C. JONES, State Forester Charlottesville, Va.
W. GOODRICH JONES, President, Texas Forestry Association Temple, Texas
C. C. SMOOT, III North Wilkesboro, N. C.
A: TRIESCHMAN, Crossett Lumber Co Crossett, Ark.
M. L. ALEXANDER, Conservation Commissioner . New Orleans, La. J. E. BARTON, Commissioner of Geology and Forestry . Frankfort, Ky. MRS. A. F. STORM, Chairman, Federation of Women's Clubs Morgan City, La.
JOHN L. KAUL, President, Kaul Lumber Company . Birmingham, Ala. McGARVEY CLINE, Consolidated Naval Stores Company Jacksonville, Fla.

COL. THEO. S. WOOLSEY, JR. Cornwall, Conn.
DR. A. M. HENRY, Assistant State Chemist Tallahasse, Fla.
F. H. ABBOTT, Secretary, Georgia Land Owners' Association Waycross, Ga.
VERNE RHOADES, Forest Supervisor Asheville, N. C.

R. L. HOGUE Jackson, Miss.
R. S. MADDOX, State Forester Nashville, Tenn.
W. D. TYLER, Clinchfield Coal Corporation Dante, Va.
C. F. SPEH, Turpentine and Rosin Producers' Association New Orleans, La.

VICTOR CALvER, Times-Picayune New Orleans, La.
J. H. WHALEY, Secretary, Tenn. Forestry Association.Nashville, Tenn. L. L. BisHoP, Forest Supervisor Pensacola, Fla.



Hon. E. J. Glenny, Commissioner of Public Utilities, New
Col. Joseph Hyde Pratt, Director N. C. Geological and
Economic Survey
Prof. J. G. Lee, Univ. of Louisiana, Baton Rouge THE FORESTRY OUTLOOK IN THE SOUTHERN STATES:
Mr. J. S. Holmes, State Forester of North Carolina
Mr. R. D. Forbes, Supt. of Forestry, Louisiana
Mr. R. S. Maddox, Forester, Tenn. Geological Survey.
Hon. John M. Parker, Governor-elect of Louisiana
Hon. M. L. Alexander, Commissioner of Conservation, New
Orleans, La.
Col. H. S. Graves, U. S. Forester

Mr. H. E. Hardtner and others
Messrs. H. E. Everley and C. B. Harmon


SZ 13 ?.

Led by Mr. C. F. Speh, Secretary, Turpentine & Rosin Producers' Ass'n., New Orleans
Mr. J. G. Peters, U. S. Forest Service
Led by Prof. S. M. Tracy, Forage Crop Investigations,
U. S. Dept. of Agriculture; Mr. Roy L. Hague, Jackson,
Miss.; and others
Mr. E. E. Miller, Editor Southern Agriculturist, Nashville, Tenn.
Led by Mr. McGarvey Cline, Consolidated Naval Stores
Company, Jacksonville, Fla.
Dr. H. E. Howe, Division of Research Extension, Washington, D. C.
FRIDAY MORNING SESSION (joint meeting with the Louisiana Forestry
Association) 117
Ex-Governor Jared Y. Sanders
Mr. Henry E. Hardtner, President
Mr. Austin Cary, U. S. Forest Service
FORESTRY IN THE LANDES (Southern France) 129
Col. Theodore S. XWoolsey, Jr., Cornwall, Cainn.


At the invitation of the North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey and the North Carolina Forestry Association the first Southern Forestry Congress was brought together in Asheville, N. C., July 11-15, 1916. At that meeting a permanent organization was effected and the executive committee was empowered to convene the Congress "at such times as may in its judgment seem necessary."
Owing to our entrance into the world war and the many distractions incident thereto, the calling of the second Southern Forestry Congress was delayed much longer than had been contemplated by its organizers. With the resumption of regular business and the greatly increased prices and uses of timber, calling the attention of the general public very insistently to the need for more interest in and better care of our Southern forests, the executive committee decided the time for another general conference had arrived. The Secretary was therefore directed to call the Second Southern Forestry Congress to meet in New Orleans the last week in January 1920. (This was done.)
Owing to the severe illness of the President of the Congress, Dr. Joseph Pratt, the Secretary, who is a member of the North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey, requested the advice and assistance of the United States Forest Service and the Louisiana Commission of Conservation in getting up the meeting. This was most effectively given through the persons of Mr. J. G. Peters, Chief of Forest Management in the Forest Service and Mr. R. D. Forbes, Superintendent of Forestry in Louisiana. The latter acted as Assistant Secretary and thus contributed very largely to the success of the New Orleans meeting.
In the following pages practically all the papers given during the three days' session are included. In order, however, to conserve paper and the time of the reader as well as reduce the high cost of printing, the discussions have been carefully edited, so that perhaps not niore than one-half of this part of the proceedings appears. It is thought, however, that the parts of the discussions having the most permanent value and the greatest interest are retained.


Second Southern Forestry Congress

Gold Room, Grunewald Hotel New Orleans, La.

JANUARY 28-29-30, 1920

(The Congress was called to order and presided over by the Vice President, Major J. G. Lee, Professor of Forestry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, in the unavoidable absence of the President.)
In his welcoming address Hon. E. J. Glenny, Commissioner of Public Utilities of the City of New Orleans, said in part:
The forests, as we know, are being cut away beyond their productive power, and some laws should be made and carried out to conserve the timberlands of this great country. We are going to get to a point where conservation will be the password of this country, but until we realize what it means, we are not going to get anywhere. The United States Goverment has done a great deal, but they cannot do everything; unless they have their hands upheld by the States in their various departments they can do very little, indeed. I believe that the State of Louisiana, through its conservation department, is working towards that end, and I am sure that Mr. Alexander will do what 'he can to support this body in any progressive movements which it might care to inaugurate.
THE SECRETARY: Our president, Col. Joseph Hyde Pratt, asked me to express his very sincere regrets at not being able to be here. Since being discharged from the Army, Col. Pratt has been in the hospital for four months and has only just


returned home. He has been looking all along to this meeting and is greatly disappointed at having to give it up.
Dr. Pratt asked me to call your attention to two things: First, the timeliness of this movement to establish a constructive forestry policy. He feels very strongly that, our young men who have been in France and have seen the care with which the French forests are managed, even in war time, and the way in which every product of the forest is closely utilized, will heartily support a more intelligent and farsighted forestry policy for this country; in fact will insist upon one.
Secondly, he urges your careful consideration of the "plan to meet the national danger of Forest Devastation," recently submitted by the Committee of the Society of American Foresters, of which he was an advisory member, not as a finished plan to be adopted as a whole or rejected, but more as a basis for discussions by which may be built up a policy probably even better adapted to meet our present and future needs.
Dr. Pratt's thought is, ladies and gentlemen, that we want a constructive policy which will prevent further forest devastation, and now is the time to adopt one.

Ladies and gentlemen of the Southern Forestry Congress: I am sure the members of this congress will join with me in expressing regret at the enforced absence of our worthy President, Dr. Joseph Hyde Pratt, of North Carolina. Let us extend to him our syrnpathy and express our hope for his speedy restoration to health and activity amon-st us. We shall miss his wise counsel and inspiring leadership.
It was Dr. Pratt's foresight and vision that saw the need, the possibilities of such an or-anization and brought into being this congress for the promotion of Southern Forestry, at Asheville, N. C., July 1916. And while the prefix "Southern," was attached to embrace the fifteen original Southern States, those of us who were present will recall, with pride and satisfaction, its national sco e and character. It was a great meeting; its inspiring influence is still felt among 1.1s. Representatives from the North, South, East and West were there, men and forest-


ers, earnest, trained and experienced, to help lay broad, deep and strong a Southern forestry foundation and building program.
In the North, East and West original forest depletion had already become apparent or real; the need of present and future supplies of raw material was already felt, and after twenty years of theorizing, teaching, and preaching, the study and practice of forestry, unorganized and theoretical though it may have been, had begun. But to us of the South, still in the midst of comparative plenty, the value of our forests, as a resource, (second only to agriculture) and the importance of their perpetuation had not come home. We needed to be awakened and hurried to "shut the stable door before the horse was out and gone"-" History ever repeats itself."
Today we are meeting in the Second Southern Forestry Congress to take stock of "where we are at," to consider farther our forest conditions and to formulate and agree, if we can, upon a policy of forestry for the South. We have much of precedent and incentive to guide and help us.
Since last we met we have fought and won the great world war for democracy and humanity, and the many lessons learned, of patriotism, service, sacrifice, cooperation and unity of purpose ; of the newer visions born, as to our sense of responsibility for and duty and obligation to, the common good
-all these find application in the subjects of this congress. For the war enforced upon the attention of thoughtful rrien and women everywhere the imperative need and duty of taking better care of our natural resources, particularly of our forests, which is a renewable and therefore a continuous resource. We found that our forests were as essential in times of war as in times of peace, second, only in importance to food and clothing in their relation to the comfort and well being of mankind, in community, state and nation.
As a nation how have we regarded our forest resources ? At the time of the first settlement of America, our forests, in extent, variety, quantity, and quality, were unexcelled anywhere in the world. With but few breaks they stretched across the Continent froin the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean and from the Gulf to beyond the Great Lakes, comprising in the aggregate some 850,000,000 acres. With settlement came clearing for home building and agriculture; and as popu-


nation increased and great centers of business and industries developed, demand for forest products grew apace. Lumbering became a business and an exploitation. In its wake came other destructive agencies forest fires, disease and insects and thus the march of forest destruction was begun and has progressively continued to this good day.
In the East, the first center of production and supply to be attacked, depletion has long since been felt and exhaustion is now practically at band.
At a New England Forestry Conference the past year, the facts were brought out that New England, up to thirty years ago, was not only self-supporting in her timber resources, but exporting large quantities; that she had now become an importing region, of paper pulp from Canada and lumber from the South, the Lake States, and even the far off Pacific coast and that she looks more and more to these sources of supply for the raw material to keep her $300,000,000 invested in her wood and forest industries going and her 90,000 wage earners working; that she is importing thirty per cent of the lumber used; that her annual growth is less than half her annual cut. And yet New England has vast areas of idle forest lands, suitable only for forest growth.
The story of Pennsylvania is even more tragic. We are told that when William Penn held his "Treaty of Peace in the City of Brotherly Love," ninety-seven per cent of the domain was covered with magnificent forests. Today that percentage is reversed. Lumbermen bought up her splendid forest lands for 26 cents per acre, exploited the forests and devastated the lands. Penn's edict to save "one acre for every five acres cleared," was forgot. For many years Pennsylvania has been importing her lumber and even props for her mines. For more than a quarter of a century thoughtful men and women had advocated the practice of forestry and the reforestation of her waste lands, without appreciable results. But today she has bought back more than 1,000,000 acres of those devastated lands at from $2.00 to $8.00 per acre as State Forest Reserves, and has well begun the slow, laborious and expensive operation of artificial reforestation, in order that posterity might enjoy the comforts and blessings of forests and forest products. Pennsylvania's example is worthy of emulation.


New York, similarly situated, has purchased over 2,000,000 acres in the Adirondack region as "Forest Reserves" which she too is artificially replanting but with a constitutional prohibition against cutting. Her example is only partly worthy, because forestry means not only "reproduction" but it means also "use."
The next center of production to be attacked and exploited was the "Lake States" region. Many of you will remember with me that up to twenty-five years ago the "Lake States" were the greatest lumber producers and exporters in the history of the world. Today they import the bulk of their timber supplies from the South and the far West, paying an annual freight bill of $6,000,000 for the privilege. Their virgin pine forests are practically exhausted, their hardwoods soon will be. And yet, we are told that in the three Lake States there is as much idle land as the whole area of Michigan.
Meanwhile, exploitation of the central hardwood belt was going on, in the States of Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana. A recent forestry conference of these three states brought out startling facts regarding their hardwood supplies and dependent industries. Not only have these states been the center of hardwood production, but also the center of hardwood manufacturing, the latter representing a combined invested capital of approximately one and one-half billion dollars, employing 1,360,000 wage earners and combined production valued at two and one-half billion dollars. About one-third of the total capital invested in the wood manufacturing industries of the country and about the same proportion of wage earners employed therein are found in this section which uses about five and onehalf billion feet of lumber a year or about one-fourth of the aggregate consumed in the United States. Up to twenty-fivc years ago, these states were self-supporting and exporting from their own forests of native species. Today Illinois imports about ninety per cent, Ohio seventy-five per cent, and Indiana sixty-five per cent of their hardwood material in order to keep their 4,000 hardwood manufacturing industries going. And yet no less an authority than our Chief Forester, Colonel Graves, tells us that the situation of our hardwood supplies is more acute than our softwood, there being greater reserve supplies of the latter than the former. I might add that this TriState Conference took proper steps to prevent the impending crisis threatening their industries.


In the meantime, "Southward the axe and fire took their way." Many of us here witnessed the coming of the lumber industry from the Lake States to the Southern States. For the last twenty years, the Southern pine region has been the center of the world's greatest lumber production. With a virgin supply of 325 billion feet of yellow pine, an invested capital of more than half a billion dollars in 20,000 sawmills, employing 400,000 workers and supplying seventy per cent of the country's population, the yellow pine industry held indeed a commanding place in the nation's lumber markets, furnishing forty-nine per cent of the entire cut of the country. Yet, today, we are told by the largest organization of Southern lumbermen themselves that this great storehouse of timber is at the point of exhaustion, that ninety per cent of their southern operations will be compelled to close their business within the next ten years for lack of timber, that within the next five to seven years more than 3,000 sawmills will go out of existence.
"Westward again the axe and saw will take their way" seeking "new worlds to conquer" in the Pacific Northwest and we of the South will join you of the North, East and West as importing regions, paying prohibitive prices for our lumber supplies, with the freight on "across the continent haul" added.
Nor is our southern story of depletion yet told. With the passing of our lumber industry, will also go our naval stores, pitch, rosin, turpentine, and the developing new industry of paper pulp and other by-products manufacturers. The production of naval stores, a national necessity, is peculiarly a southern industry. There are but two species, the Iongleaf pine and the slash pine, that are suitable for the purpose and these may be produced indefinitely in the South. The industry represents a product value of $35,000,000 and can be vastly extended. But like other forest by-products it can be and will be exhausted, if proper measures are not taken promptly to prevent it. However, it enjoys the advantage of younger, smaller growth utilization and we have much young second growth. Nevertheless, North Carolina, once leading in production, lost the industry with the vanishing of her longleaf pine stand. With the new order of things in forestry matters now forming, she can, and will win it back.
There are but two principal world sources of naval stores


production. One is n the Southern United States and the other is in Southern France. France made her naval stores industry on waste sand dunes, worthless, malaria-stricken and uninhabitable, through reclamation by the artificial planting of maritime pine. It is said that the land was so valueless that for $1.00 one could buy as far as the voice could carry and that today this barren waste, within the reclaimed area, is worth f rom $2.50 to $24.00 per acre, while that planted to twoyear old pine seedlings sells for $9.00; that covered with tenyear old pine sells for $30.00; that stocked with thirty year old pine for $80.00 and stocked with fifty-year old pine it is worth $160.00 per acre. This should be an inspiring example to us.
I love to think of France, her foresight, her thrift, her forest policy, and practice as it was revealed by the great war and of the lesson it brings to us. How her lands all classified and devoted either to agricultural crops or to forest crops, with total forest lands of nineteen per cent, about equal to that of New England, yet producing by growth fifty per cent more and nearly supplying her domestic needs. How her woodusing industries, employing 700,000 people both made permanent, because her intensive and conservative management kept up production by growth, cutting less than she grew. How her forests, expressed in terms of supply, met adequately, in kind, quality and quantity, the demand of her own vast armies and those of her Allies, England, Belgium and the United States. How the thousands of our boys composing our forestry re-1ments in France will be impressed, as expressed by one of them, "The lumber industry of France is concerned more with growing wood than in manufacturing it."
Returning to my thought and coming closer home to my own state of Louisiana, let's note her forest conditions briefly:
For several years Louisiana has stood second to the state of Washington in lumber production. According to the U. S. Department of the Interior, Louisiana had 10,000,000 acres of virgin timber in 1907; in 1918 she had but 4,700,000 acres. Lumber production is outstripping timber production in the ratio of six to one. According to the State Board of Affairs, Louisiana has 559 sawmills valued at $17,606,649. And as an heritaE e from the exploitation of her forests, she has 12,000,-


000 acres of unproductive cut over land, much of it absolute waste and is adding to that total 250,000 to 300,000 acres annually. At the present rate of cut her virgin timber will be gone in fifteen years and with it tax values of millions of dollars; for cut over lands are assessed at an average of $5.00 per acre, while the assessment on timber lands ranges from $17.00 to $166.00 per acre. Even the railroads of the state will lose forty-three per cent on total freight earnings, not mentioning the stupendous losses, in the aggregate, to industries, the individual, the community and the state. By the same authority there are 155,000,000 acres of cut over lands in the South, with 10,000,000 being added annually. What is true of Louisiana, in greater or less degree, is also true of all our Southern States.
I have purposely thus briefly reviewed our forest conditions, in order that we might visualize our ultimate situation and in this "multitude of counselors, find safety."
Ladies and gentlemen of the congress, in this new era of reconstruction and readjustment, let us approach the question of a "Southern Forestry Policy," acknowledging our responsibility and obligation, and with open hearts and broad minds, with candor and unity of purpose, in a spirit of patriotism, unselfishness and cooperation; with a full sense of our duty, holding paramount the Public Welfare. And when we shall have adopted a policy, let us get behind it and push it forward unitedly and aggressively. I think one difficulty, heretofore hindering the practice of private forestry has been the difference in view point and lack of sympathy and understanding between foresters and lumbermen. The traditional definition of a forester and a lumberman is that a "forester plants and holds on," a "lumberman devastates and moves on," has perhaps been overdone. However that may be, 1 think, the presence here of so many of both of you is evidence that a get together spirit is going to characterize our effort in finding solution of the problem which concerns us all so vitally.
All of you, doubtless, are familiar with "A Policy of Forestry for the Nation," presented by the Forester, Colonel Graves of the Forest Service. Personally, I am in agreement with that policy and would favor its adoption either as a state or Southern policy, because it is in my judgment, fundamentally sound in principle, broad in application and workable. serves the public good, it does not hurt private interest. It is


a policy of general principles, which lend themselves to local application. Principles do not change, but conditions do. We can apply the principle to suit the condition.
A committee of the Society of American Foresters has recently presented another national policy. I do not oppose it, on the contrary, I think it sets a "high ideal for foresters and conservationists to work towards," but hardly practicable now.
The limits of this paper will not permit discussion in any detail of Colonel Graves' National Policy, it is here in pamphlet form for your consideration. But there are a few matters, so intimately and vitally touching the South, that I feel that I must consider them briefly. The principle of Federal cooperation with the states, which some of our folks south shy at as opposed to the principles of "States's rights," as developed at the national lumber manufacturers' association meeting in Chicago recently, is preempted now by Rhode Island and New Jersey on the constitutional prohibition question. As a Southern democrat, I have modified my views on the State's Rights question because I am already enjoying the benefits of the Land Grant College act, the Hatch Experiment Station act, the Morrell act, the Smith-Hughes and the Smith-Lever acts, the Post Roads act, the Weeks law, and others, and I make the point that Fe(leral cooperation is not federal interference.
The Weeks law, is I understand it, provides for two principal things, first, for the acquisition by purchase of lands in the Southern Appalachians as Forest Reserves and second, for cooperation with the states in protecting against fire the forested watersheds of navigable streams. The only fault I find with this law is that congress has failed to appropriate adequately money for this purpose. The purchase of -5,000,000 acres in the Southern Appalachians was contemplated and only a little over 1,000,000 acres have been acquired. None will debate the wisdom of this purchase of Resrves in the Southern Appalachians. They meet all the purposes of supply, protection and recreation. I recall that at the North Carolina meeting, Col. Graves told us this region, because of its topography and favorable tree growing conditions, would become the principle future hardwood production of the country. The appropriation of $100,000 for cooperative fire protection under the law, is entirely inadequate, it should be at least half a million. Twentyfour states have qualified and are receiving from $1,000 to


$8,000 Federal money now. Seven of these are Southern states and one of them is my own state, Louisiana. The pity is that more states have not qualified and receiving its dollar matching benefits.
The "cut over" land question is the biggest economic, social and industrial problem of the South, 155,000,000 acres. Authoritative land classification is the first principle that should be applied and fire prevention and control is the second.
Foresters believe, and 1 agree, that all land should be utilized, put to its best productive use; that all land fit for agriculture should be used for agriculture; that all land not fit for agriculture, absolute forest lands, should be used for permanent forest growth. It is estimated that seventy-five to eighty per cent of these lands are fit for some sort of farming, grazing, etc., and that the remaining twenty to twenty-five per cent are unfit for any sort of agriculture, but are fit for forest growth, and should be reforested. Also it is admittedly true that it will be one or more generations before all the agricultural land will be needed. It is abundantly proven by Mr. Hardtner at Urani, and elsewhere, that the loblolly pine grows to commercial maturity in forty years. I know personally of old plantations, abandoned after the war, since grown up to old field pine that are now cutting eight to ten thousand board feet per acre. The same is true of slash pine, growing in eastern Louisiana and Florida. Therefore, good economics would say, grow a crop of pine trees on this land, while waiting on agriculture. Personally, I would put our cut over lands to a trinity of uses, viz: farming, grazing and forestry. Cooperative reforestation, national, state and private owner, is our imperative public duty. Likewise is cooperative fire protection and control, adequate funds, rigid laws, stringently enforced and above all an aroused public sentiment are some of the factors that shall make for success in any policy adopted.
On our remaining timber, no less important will be "slash" disposal after logging and the leaving of seed trees at time of cutting. Again it is abundantly proven by Mr. Hardtner at Urania, that natural reproduction is certain if these things be done.
I recently read a statement by a prominent Mississippi lumberman that he had been clearing land in the south for over


twenty-eight years, that he had never burnt "slash" to prevent fires and that reforestation on cut over lands was not practicable in Mississippi, because they were agricultural lands, something to be proud of. This sort of attitude must be changed and the Hardtner attitude acquired before reforestation will go forward satisfactorily.
Cooperative investigational work, forest experiments and demonstration well distributed, must have place in any forestry program and publicity must light the way.
Farm woodlands forestry under States Relation Extension Service must be encouraged and practiced. Farmers are the largest users of forest products. The growing scarcity and rising prices make it imperative that farm woodlands be made to supply domestic demands. The preservative treatment of farm timbers is an economic principal that must apply. The holding of great bodies of timber for speculative purposes must stop.
In conclusion, I emphasize the point that nature favors the practice of forestry in the South. Our favorable climate, with many valuable native species of both hard and soft woods, with good soil, ample rainfall, mild winters, long growing seasona maximum of heat units-these give us every advantage for forest perpetuation.
Ladies and gentlemen, the National Lumber Manufacturers' Association, the Southern Pine Association, the Western Forestry and Conservation Association, and others have already adopted the principles of a policy of forestry for the Nation. Shall we of the South, in convention assembled, fail to join in this forward forestry movement; shah we fail to do our plain duty?

By J. S. KOLM!',S,

The total area of the Southern Appalachian States referred to in this review, i. e., Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama, is approximately 220,000,000 acres. Ac-


cording to the Census of 1910 about 160,000,000 acres of this was then included in farms, one-half of which was "improved," or under cultivation. The remainder, or 140,000,000 acres, nearly two-thirds of the total area, was wild land, practically all of it in some kind of forest growth.
The Appalachian or strictly hardwood producing region of these States is the part lying across and on each side of the Alleghany, Appalachian and Cumberland ranges, and comprises some 90 or 100 million acres. In these mountains alone there are some 30,000,000 acres of forested non-agricultural lands. This is nearly equal to the entire forested area of Germany and is 20 o larger than the forested area of France. In addition to this, there is another 28,000,000 acres in this region, now timbered and probably better suited for timber growth than for agriculture. An additional ten or twelve million acres, or 15% of the piedmont area surrounding the mountains should be growing timber as farm woodlands or in larger holdings. Altogether we have in this restricted region some 70,000,000 acres of forest land or about 70% of the area, the best and most economical use of which is for growing timber.
Not only are these forests necessary for timber production, but they are extremely valuable for the preservation of soil and the protection of the many important streams which take their rise in these mountains. It is for this avowed purpose that the Federal Goverment has already purchased 1,200,000 acres in the Southern Appalachians and plans much larger purchases.
Three main types of forests, serving different needs and requiring different methods of management, occur in these States, the spruce, the hardwood and the pine.
The spruce is confined to the higher mountains and occurs to any extent only in West Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee. Nearly all this ',ye in West Virginia has been cut out; and probably thre :6-fourths of the area in North Carolina, and half in Tennessee. There now remains, according to the report of the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics, about 950,000,000 feet in North Carolina and Tennessee, and 390,000,000 in West Virginia and Virginia. At the present rate of cutting for lumber and pulp this will only last a very few years. All the cut over land has been burnt over, much


of it several times, with the result that almost inevitably barren wastes take the place of spruce forests with consequent injury to streams and destruction of future pulpwood supplies.
It is said that "The hardwood forests of the Southern Appalachian States and those of adjoining regions formed originally the most extensive temperate zone hardwood forests in the world. Among the commercial species are ten or more oaks, at least as good as any foreign species, several hickories, which so far as known have no foreign equivalents, yellow poplar, basswood, black walnut and cherry, specialty woods without a peer in their own fields, several valuable ashes, chestnut and a number of other species, such as locust, dogwood, persimmon, etc."
There is comparatively little virgin timber in all this area, the greater part having been cut over once or several times. Nearly all of it as been more or less seriously damaged by repeated forest fires.
I do not know what the annual damage f rom fire is in these States, but in North Carolina, which well represents the region with its mountain, piedmont and coastal districts, we have had a yearly average of nearly $1,000,000 worth of damage in the past ten years. If the other States have had similar experience, these nine Appalachian States have lost annually from forest fires approximately seven million dollars.
The wood-using industries of the Central and Eastern United States have been and still are largely dependent for their supply upon the hardwoods of this and nearby regions. Practically all the chestnut used not only as lumber in a variety of wood-using industries, but also for the manufacture of tanning material and for telephone poles comes from this region. In fact, the chestnut bark disease and other pests are killing out this species in all but the higher mountain regions.
Three-fourths of the yellow poplar used in a very large variety of industries comes from the Southern Appalachians, while 257o of the oak, 40, of the cherry, 207o of the hickory, 2517o of the walnut, 187o of the basswood, 157o of the sugar maple and large proportions of many other valuable trees are secured in this region.
The superiority of the Southern Appalachians as a region


on which to depend for our future supply of hardwoods lie in the fact that more than 70% of its area is probably better fitted for timber growing than for agriculture. On the other hand, the lands which are now yielding hardwood timber in the Gulf States, the Mississippi Valley, the Central Hardwood Region and the Northern States are largely suitable for agriculture, and will eventually be used for this purpose
If the forests in this region were protected from fire and were cut in such a manner that a full stand of the more valuable species would succeed the present crop, sufficient timber might be grown, if not to fully supply all our industries, certainly to stabilize the market and assure a supply of more timber, and timber of the more valuable and special kinds. It is said that Germany's 33,000,000 acres of forests grew and cut 1,300,000,000 cubic feet of timber in 1910, and that the 24,000000 acres of forests in France grew and cut 910,000,000 cubic feet in 1909. The present annual cut in the Southern Appalachians is not more than 8,000,000 cubic feet, and even though it is made up largely of the reserve stock of virgin timber, and is much greater than the annual growth, it is smaller than that of either France or Germany. When the technical basis for the practice of forestry has been worked out and the forests of the Southern Appalachians have been put under conservative management, it should be possible to produce and cut in perpetuity several times the total production of either France or Germany. This means permanent forest industries for the Southern Appalachians and continued prosperity.
The annual drain upon the hardwood forests of the Southern Appalachian is at least 4,000,000,000 feet board measure. Of this a little over 45 per cent goes into lumber, about 25 per cent into tannin extract wood, ties, veneer, poles, and wood pulp, and the remaining 30 per cent to the secondary woodusing industries. Since no provision is being made for producing additional timber the total cut is much greater than the growth.
Many important industries are dependent upon continued hardwood production. For example, our furniture industry, normally requiring about 1% billion feet a year uses 95 per cent hardwoods and 45 per cent oak, and our vehicle industry, consuming normally about 740 million feet, requires 32 per cent hickory, 28 per cent oak, and 6 per cent yellow poplar.


Twenty per cent of railroad requirements for car contruction, using 1Y4 billion feet a year, is of oak. White oak is the standard railroad tie material, and hardwoods normally supply 56 per cent of the annual requirements of 1Y2 billion f eet.
There is no doubt but what the wood-using industries are beginning to realize the failure of their supply of timber. All of the eastern journals in commenting upon the supply of hardwoods and upon the market condition emphasize the shortage in logs being brought to the mills and in the supply of hardwood lumber available for the markets. They do not, however, openly attribute this shortage to a reduction in the amount of timber available, but put it down to scarcity of labor, bad weather and various other causes.
Manufacturers themselves, however, are not so careful to avoid allusion to this most important cause of the shortage. A recent card inquiry addressed to the wood-using industries of my own State of North Carolina has brought out some very enlightening comments in regard to the timber situation. In speaking of the supply of hardwoods available for the industries in the mountain and pied mont section of the State the optimistic ones expect to get a full supply by going further away, or by changing from one species to another which is more abundant. For instance, a bug- manufacturer is changing from poplar to tupelo and cotton wood; while a manufacturer of veneers, who is now obliged to bring in most of his logs f rom another state, confessed that ten years ago 75 lo of his supply was local. He thinks the future supply depends on the ability to pay the freight. A manufacturer of agricultural implements has "enough lumber on the yard for two years" and is content to put up with a lower grade material. One hopeful lumberman says "we gather from those that have made a study of the situation that western woods will be carrying the larger part of the load within the next ten years," while two furniture manufacturers in different parts of the State, who in the past have been obtaining all their lumber locally, think that in ten years 907o' of the lumber will have to be shipped in.
Some of the more hopeful look for an exhaustion of the original growth white and yellow pine and all the good grades of hardwood within ten years, but think there will be a supply


of second growth. This belief, however, is not shared by the pine men. Numbers of lumbermen, planing mill men, box shook and package manufacturers and others depending on a supply of second growth pine admit that in ten years time the available supply will be practically exhausted.
Although not requested in the questionnaire two or three prominent manufacturers go so far as making suggestions for remedying the approaching exhaustion. The two following suggestions come from the eastern part of the State in the pine region:
A manufacturer of veneer packing cases says: "We note with anxiety the depletion of the timber supplies in the State and think that some legislation should be passed, especially as to pine, making it unlawful to cut pine below 12" in diameter for lumber purposes. If such a law had been in existence for the past twenty years, we would have a growing supply to replace the deflection." One of the largest manufacturers of North Carolina pine lumber in this State in referring to this meeting of the Southern Forestry Congress says:
"I think the body wants to discuss very thoroughly the matter of reforestation and the leaving of seed trees in cut over territory. If you will visit the cut over territories of Louisiana and Mississippi in the longleaf section, you will see what I mean. On my visit through La. and Miss. about sixty days agoI was struckwith the wasteful methods of such companies as -and-, and other companies, who practically take everything from the land, whether it is large enough for timber or not, without leaving anything to furnish seed for reforestation of the timber."
The pine region of the So. Appalachian States comprises somewhat more than half of their total area. It lies to the east or South of the hardwood region in the Coastal Plain Belt along the Atlantic and extends well up into the Piedmont section of these States. In this Piedmont part of the region hardwoods originally predominated and still do in the original growth forests, but much of this section was cleared up and cultivated before the Civil War and subsequently was abandoned and has naturally reforested in pine.
The Iongleaf pine did not extend beyond the Coastal Plain, but outside of the narrow bottom lands along the streams where it once formed almost a continuous forest. Thisoriginal


forest has almost entirely been removed and the succeeding forests of loblolly pine is disappearing even more rapidly. When fires have been prevented loblolly pine is often succeeding itself and in some places where hogs are excluded longleaf is reseeding, but very little of the cut over area is securing a full stand of second growth. No steps have been taken to secure this, either by leaving seed trees, preventing fires, or securing stock law so that the prospect for the future in this whole region is very discouraging.
The need for conservation of our timber resources in the North Carolina Pine Belt has been very strongly emphasized in the questionnaire recently sent out by the State Geological and Economic Survey of North Carolina, to which I referred above. A few replies relating to the future source of supply may be of interest here.
New Bern, N. C., has generally been looked upon as the center of North Carolina pine production, and the large lumber mills of that immediate region have led in the production of this commodity. One operator here says in ten years "all large mills in this section will be cut out." Another says "we have about enough bought to last us five years." The most hopeful reply is "will about use up the second growth in the next ten to twenty years." A large manufacturer of building material says that in ten years "there will be no timber cut," while another eastern .o~t fCaoln- "I'mb~rman says that in that time "the su~ph7 *'ilt . elabut 'eklauted'".'Au optimistic manufacturer oa-,.he.'etge of the Piedmontg0'oi,'iays that he has "pletity.6 t un him for four or five years. that he may ha t- quit, buj hik.4* jes-4r.btnilging in Are'imber," whire.-a manufactiirei :f tA;t i truck packages/says "that fiveyears' supply is assured." A sash and blind manufacturer, using nearly 2,000,000 feet a year, writes "we have been cutting local timber for 25 years. It looks like the supply will be exhausted in the next five years." This is the tenor of replies from all parts of the pine region.
Furniture and veneer maufacturers have been thinking that they would escape all further trouble by using gum in place of poplar and other woods, but even the supply of this timber is precarious. A cooperage company using 4,000,000 feet of gum a year located on the water front thinks that "about all the timber will be gone in ten years ;" while another


using some 14,000,000 feet of gum and pine writes: "In years past we have been able to secure a supply of logs from outside people, but in the last two years especially, it has become necessary to depend on the cutting of logs from our own timber. We estimate we have ten to twelve years' supply of timber."
A large lumber company cutting 8,000,000 feet of pine, cypress and gum reports that in ten years "the present supply will be practically exhausted."
One of the chief excuses for neglecting to take steps for reforestation has been that the land is agricultural and should be used for farming. Very strenuous efforts have been made by some large owners of cut over lands to put these lands on the market and dispose of them to settlers, but without any great amount of success. It is beginning to be realized that the demand for such land is and of necessity must be very limited, and that one or more crops of timber can and should be produced on most of the land before it will be needed for farming.
The Census figures for 1910 show a total area of improved farm land in the Appalachian States of 36.6% while the 1900 Census shows 34.6% of such land. According to these figures, therefore, 2% of the total area of the region was improved during the ten years previous to 1910. Taking this as an average, we find that in. th. rIekt 'fif t'yyears, not more than 10% of the area.vyil. b& dlear*ttp,igultivation; or there will still r t iA-tncultivated more tfi .yo: of our present
forest:arema" To my mind, this is a libe'af1.eltjmate, as the tended iy:'now is tl @.r6Je thrt;i41y ctiltivate the,'.:1d already cleadetl rather than: cll'i uA r .A policy, thrhfore, of "enlightened self-interest," to say nothing of futui~tbenefit to the region, would dictate growing a crop of timber rather than holding it as cut over land until it can be sold to some "would-be" farmer.

Since the convention of the First Southern Forestry Congress at Asheville in 1916 forestry progress in the five Gulf


Coast States of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, has, we believe, been considerable even if no single event of larger significance, such as the establishment of a forestry department in a new State, can be reported. At the time of the First Congress, Texas had had a State Forester for about nine months, and financial provision had been made in Louisiana for the employment by the Department of Conservation of a Superintendent of Forestry, beginning January 1, 1918. Mississippi, Alabama and Florida were without forestry departments or funds for their establishment. Briefly, the four year history of forestry in each of these States is as follows:
Texas. From September 1, 1915, to the same date in 1919, $11,500 has been appropriated annually by the State f or forestry work, and from $3,000 to $4,000 has been contributed yearly toward fire control by the United States Forest Service tinder the Weeks Law. Since September 1, 1919, the State appropriation has been $13,500, or $2,000 more than in previous years.
More than half of the total expenditures have been for fire protection. Patrolmen have covered a total of seven to nine million acres during about six months of every year. The main function of these men has been, of course, educational, for with districts of a million or more acres apiece it has not been possible to attempt much actual control of fires. The patrolmen have been local men in every case, and have built up a very considerable local sentiment against burning the woods and cut over lands. The great cause of fires in Texas, as all over the Gulf Coast region, is the carelessness of human beings, coupled with a deep-rooted feeling (it is not generally a conviction based on careful observation and thouglit) that burning is a proper thing. It takes time to correct this idea, and to change the custom of decades, but in the end the patrolmen's patient arguments, based on demonstrable truth, are winning out. Between July 1 and December 1, 1918, nearly 90% of the fires reported by patrolmen were controlled by them and local residents before they could do serious damage, whereas in 1916 the percentage of controlled fires had been but ten. Texas has built up a seasoned and enthusiastic personnel for its fire protective work. Annual meetings of the patrolmen have greatly increased the esprit de corps.


As Texas is essentially a farming State, though standing fifth in 1918, among the lumber producing States of the Union, farm- forestry has been emphasized as next in importance to fire protection. Fifteen hundred dollars has been spent yearly fof nurseries and experimental planting of trees, particularly in the now treeless portions of the State. Courses in farm forestry are given at the Agricultural College, a survey has been made as the basis of a bulletin on the production and sale of timber in farm woodlands, and advice on the ground has been given to farmers and owners of small woodlands
The forest resources of east Texas have been studied and reported on, and the rate at which they are being depleted has been given publicity. In its general publicity work, particularly through the Texas Forestry Association, the State has met with marked success under the direction of State Forester Siecke. Women's Clubs, teachers, newspapers, and trade journals have been interested in the forestry movement, and a small but earnest group in the Forestry Association have done yoemen service in getting forestry before the public and keeping it there. The president of the A. and M. College has been a staunch and effective friend of the forestry work particularly in the matter of securing continued and increased appropriations.
Louisiana. Unlike any other State in the Union, Louisiana carries on her forestry work by a tax on the lumbermen. The original Severance Tax law of 1910 was intended to give the entire proceeds of the severance tax on forest products to the Department of Conservation for forestry purposes. Subsequent legislation diverted these moneys into the General Fund, and it is only since the beginning of 1918 that a small portion (one-fifth) has been available to the Department of Conservation. Small collections in 1918 were supplemented by Commissioner Alexander from other funds of the Department, permitting total expenditures of about $13,000, but in 1919 the collections available for forestry were greater-somewhat over $1,000 a month-and the work has stood on its own feet. Four thousand dollars was received in two years from the United States Forest Service under the Weeks Law.
As in Texas, roughly half of the expenditures are for fire protection. Except in response to the very dangerous condi-


tions produced by the great storm of August, 1918, in Southwest Louisiana, when actual fire fighting was made possible by the Commissioner's placing as high as nineteen men in an area of less than a million acres, the patrolmen have covered districts of one-quarter to a third of a million acres, or about half a parish. Education has been the invariable weapon used much as Texas, and the results are distinctly encouraging. An innovation has been the formation of a local fire protective association among small and large landowney-s of the Florida Parishes, and we intend to organize others. Another feature of our fire work and one upon which Louisiana particularly prides itself has been our spark arrester regulations. These apply to both trunk lines and tram roads, and inspection to date, while showing that much work is to be done indicates clearly that both railroads and lumbermen are in the great majority of cases willing and glad to comply with reasonable, yet effective, regulations. The lumbermen's interest in fire protection has been particularly encouraging, and amply confirms the wise policy pursued in every branch of his conservation work by Commissioner Alexander, namely that of close cooperation with all interested in our natural resources.
In furtherance of the same policy the Department has conducted a preliminary investigation of the relative cost of logging large and sinall pine timber. The investigations of the thinning of Southern pine, of the effect of fire and hogs on pine reproduction, and of slash disposal, conducted at Urania in part by the United States Forest Service and in part by Mr. Henry Hardtner, have been very interesting and very valuable. Urania Forest, which comprises some 30,000 acres of cut over land being reforested by Mr. Hardtner under contract with the Department of Conservation has attracted wide interest. Under the terms of the unique reforestation law of Louisiana taxes on land being reforested are reduced from $5 an acre to $1 for a period of thirty to forty years.
In educational work the Louisiana forestry officials have employed publicity through bulletins, newspapers items, lectures illustrated by slides and "movies," and particularly through the trade journals of the lumber industry, whose columns have always been wide open to forestry items of all kinds. The Department of Conservation is proud to have engineered the first two forestry meetings ever held in the far


South-those in New Orleans in January 1918, and in Jacksonville, Florida, in the same month of 1919. At the State University the forestry courses given by Major Lee, though in no wise connected with the work of the Department of Conservation, have powerfully aided in creating public sentiment favorable to f forestry.
Mississippi. Nothing came of an attempt to pass forestry legislation in this State in 1918. The outlook for the passage of a forestry law in the present legislature is, however, bright. Governor Russell has emphasized the importance of reforestation in his message to the law-makers. The State University, the Mississippi Landowners' Association, some of the lumbermen, and other public-spirited citizens have championed the cause of forestry, and we understand that these efforts are being coordinated. We are confident that the next Southern State to place forestry laws on its books, backed by an appropriation, will be Mississippi.*

*The confidence of the speaker was misplaced. The reactionary lumbermen in Mississippi were evidently more influential than it was thought possible. The New Orleans Lumber Trade journal of March 15, 1920, in a short editorial, describes the "killing" in the following words:
The judiciary committee of the lower house of the Mississippi legislature has put the axe to all four forestry measures that were before that body for consideration. Immediately after a minority report was submitted by four members protesting against the action and demanding that suitable legislation be devised for the purpose of saving the vast forests of that state from ultimate destruction.
The action of the judiciary committee was taken following a lengthy conference with leading lumber interests of the state. It was made clear that lumbermen of the state were not opposed to forestry legislation that was of a wise and beneficial character; that would actually result in proper conservation of the virgin timber of today and the reforestation of denuded lands of the present and future. It was generally agreed that the legislation before that body was hurriedly drawn and therefore entirely unsuited to the best interests of both the state and its vast lumbering industry.-THE EDITOR.


Alabama. Some of the lumbermen in Alabama interested themselves last year in an effort to pass a forestry law, or to secure appropriations, making effective the law of 1908, we have been unable to learn which. Whatever the attempt was, it failed, and for another three years Alabama was condemned to forestry inactivity.
Florida. The conference of Southern foresters held in Jacksonville last January stimulated interest in forestry in that state and tended to coordinate separate efforts which had previously been made by the Federation of Women's Clubs and other agencies. A committee was appointed at the Jacksonville meeting on which these and other powerful interests were represented. The cattlemen were desirous of fire control on account of its effect on the range, as well as on the broader basis, and for a time it looked as if at least a scheme of county option in fire protection, with a small appropriation, would be agreed upon. We understand it was found impossible, however, to frame a bill which would receive the support of the various agencies interested in forestry and fire control, and as a result nothing was accomplished. This unfortunate outcorne will, we hope, be retrieved by increased interest and better team work next year.
General. In closing, it is not out of place to urge the delegates from every Gulf Coast State to join their state forestry association, or if none exists, to form such an association. It is safe to say that state associations have been the means, directly or indirectly, of establishing forestry departments in practically all states which have them. There may have been certain dominating figures in each case, to whom a large share of the credit should go, but in the last analysis, public sentiment was the compelling power. Without public sentiment, directed through organization into effective channels, the forest conservationists of the South cannot make real headway. The good roads movement, the better agriculture movement, the tick eradication movement, and every other valuable reform, have required for their accomplishment years of patient education, constant publicity, and skillful organization. For its full fruition the great forest conservation movement in the South will require nothing less.


Mr. Forbes' paper brought out some discussion, during which Colonel John H. Wallace, Jr., Commissioner of Conservation of Alabama, said in part:
The only features of the Alabama forestry law that are of value relate exclusively to forest fire control. There has been going on in the State for a number of years, principally conducted by myself, a propaganda seeking to interest people in Alabama in forestry and in the conservation feature as relating to forest lands.
Due, however, to the devastation of the forests of Alabama, the lumbermen are beginning to realize that unless something of a real and tangible nature is done, the wonderful longleaf pine forests, erstwhile the glory and grandeur of the State, will linger only in memory and tradition, and the entire state will be nothing but barren waste plac,,S, and the over one thousand sawmills now engaged in cutting lumber, will be chucked into the scrap heap.
I am about to consummate a deal with the United States Forest Service, by and through which, under appropriation by congress in the matter of state cooperation, the Federal Government will meet the state of Alabarna halfway -fifty-fiftyin the matter of securing forest wardens for a number of counties of my state, with a view of doing something tangible and real in Alabama in the matter of the protection of the forests.
We must realize the fact that we are consuming three times as much lumber and timber as we are growing year by year. The Federal Goverment must embark upon a large and most comprehensive program looking to the acquisition of large areas, seeking to reforest devastated areas, so that the trees may be gathered when they are ripe.


The central hardwood region of the Southern States includes parts of Kentucky, Tennessee, the northern part of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas. Since Tennessee, my state, is the very heart of this section and since my work is concentrated within her borders, I am going to speak al-


most wholly upon conditions there, recognizing the fact that in most particulars her situation as to hardwoods is typical of the rest of the region.
In the recent past Tennessee produced great quantities of yellow poplar, oak, ash, chestnut, hickory, walnut, and other hardwoods. Both the quantity and quality of this lumber have been alarmingly reduced everywhere and on vast areas practically exhausted. Even within the last five years this has become most noticeable. No otber state in the Union yields a greater variety of economic ha, dwood species nor grows them more abundantly nor more rapidly if left undisturbed. It is perhaps due to these, we might say, too favorable conditions that such a prodigal and prodigious waste has gone on in Tennessee so long. In the midst of such plenty, scarcity was not expected. But facts must be faced. The difficulty with which our sawmills are supplied with logs, the distance of the haul, the inferior quality and the small size of materials used, are all indisputable evidence of the growing scarcity of timber in the State.
However apparently discouraging the situation now appears, if it is met with proper vision, cooperation and constructive effort a regeneration of timber growth in Tennessee is sure. The physical structure of Tennessee is such that regardless of the agricultural land proper, there is, I believe, enough timber land, that is, steep, shallow and purely mountainous areas which ought to grow timber alone to produce all the timber that Tennessee will ever need.
Taking up conditions in the state more in detail, I will first touch upon the western section known as West Tennessee. Here Memphis is the great hardwood center, and she also is one of the great hardwood centers of the United States. Her mills are fed very largely from timber outside the Statelargely from Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas. West Tennessee has ceased to be any considerable factor in the production of timber for supplying Memphis mills. Even at Jackson, Tenn., the mills secure a great quantity of logs from Mississippi. The bulk of West Tennessee timber is found in what is known as the swamp lands, lands which lie in bottoms through which meander sluggish streams. These areas contain possibilities for some of the best agricultural soil of the state. This is recognized by the landowners and therefore


a progressive system of dredging these bottoms for drainage is being undertaken. This process prepares the ground for clearing. Therefore, it is merely a question of a short time before this bulk of Tennessee timber is gone, and not only gone, but the land itself which grew it will cease to be timber producing. Therefore, on such areas in West Tennessee there is no possibility of practicing forestry. This same condition, I believe, extends into North Mississippi, Louisiana and Arkansas.
At first blush it might appear there is no outlook f or West Tennessee as regards forestry. This, however, is far f rom true. There are two vital phases of forestry work which are being carried on for the benefit of that section-f arm forestry and the reclamation of waste land.
Already in many portions of West Tennessee the woodlands left on the farm are not sufficient in size, or are not managed in such a way as to produce an adequate amount of timber for farm necessities. The farmer considers that when he leaves land in timber he is not getting the real use of it and therefore in order to use it he feels he must graze it. This shuts off the possibility of reproduction in the woodlands and as the farmer continues to cut down his old trees his woodlands gradually disappear. Here forestry comes to the rescue. Since these men wish to have a definite area of woodland continuously, it is the business of forestry to show them how to handle such areas so as to maintain them in timber.
A policy in West Tennessee of clearing land and wearing it out for agricultural crops has resulted in large acreage of waste land, doubtless around 500,000 acres of land once cultivated but now lying out. The reclamation of this land will stave off further clearings of woodlands and prolong the life of the woodlands which are not now needed for agricultural purposes. Since fence posts are almost of vital necessity in West Tennessee now, it is an economic proposition to reclaim much of this land with black locust. A fourfold purpose in this way is served. The land itself is reclaimed, necessary post timber is produced, other woodlands are saved f rom clearing, and further erosion stopped. The success of this type of endeavor is remarkable and men who five years ago regarded these undertakings in a skeptical way are now thoroughly in sympathy with the work.


The topography and character of the soil in Middle Tennessee make conditions for woodlands and forested areas different from those in West Tennessee. Here the steep rocky hills, shallow soil, and mountain slopes make it almost iniPossible to clear all land for cultivation. This is particularly true in the foothills of the Highland Rim which jut out into the Central Basin, and the Cumberland Mountain slopes in the eastern edge of Middle Tennessee. Such areas now contain the bulk of timber in Middle Tennessee. I am safe in saying these areas do not supply all the logs sawed in that section since some of the mills are supplied partly from logs in Alabama. Here there are three forestry problems which need solution: the proper handling of these hillside and mountain lands which should be used primarily for the growing of timber; the management of farm woodlands which should be maintained for the use of the farm as in West Tennessee; and the reclamation problem.
The handling of these hillside and mountain lands should include as every forester knows, fire prevention, restricted grazing and careful cutting. The farm woodland problem is similar to that which I have just described as existing in West Tennessee, the solution being very much the same. The reclamation problem in this section will be devoted to a much greater extent than in West Tennessee to the reestablishment of young forests because of the steepness of the slopes and the shallowness of the soil on many areas which have been cleared and cultivated.
Forest conditions to be considered in East Tennessee are very similar to those in Middle Tennessee. Here we have the steep forested slopes of the Smoky Mountains, the steep cleared hillsides and mountain sides and the farm woodlands. The big mills in East Tennessee arc located at Townsend, MaryvilIe, Knoxville and Chattanooga. These are supplied by logs secured from a distance from operation both by rail and by river. Here as everywhere else in the state there is a scarcity of material. Vast areas of virgin timber which once furnished some of these mills have now become farm lands and the source of supply is pushed further and further back. Such portions as have been left wooded have, because of their treatment, not proven to be dependable for future crops.
Again the threefold forestry problem of Tennessee con-


fronts us-protection of our mountain lands, proper management of farm woodlands and reclamation projects.
Any forestry outlook in Tennessee must take into consideration one primal fact, viz: that practically all Tennessee land is privately owned and therefore, any step toward constructive forestry must be made with the cooperation of the citizens themselves. One big forward movement in Tennessee can be seen in the attitude of the members of the Tennessee Forestry Association. Men and women everywhere throughout the state are recognizing that something must be done to save the forest of the state and all they represent. In the final analysis the people must realize the urgency of conditions and together take a firm stand, but active, for the continuous, necessary growth of forests and to this end protection against forest fires is an essential.
Vice President Lee made the following committee appointments:
RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE-Messrs. R. S. Maddox, Chairman, W. B. Townsend, Henry E. Hardtner, J. G. Peters, R. D. Forbes, Mrs. A. F. Storm, A. T. Gerrans, H. E. Everley, E. 0. Siecke, John L. Kaul, McGarvey Cline.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE-Messrs. R. C. Jones, W. D. Tyler, J. E. Rhodes.

(Presided over by Hon. M. L. Alexander, Commissioner of Conservation for Louisiana.) Hon. John M. Parker, Governor-elect of Louisiana, addressed the congress. He said in part:
It has been my good fortune for probably twenty years to know intimately Gifford Pinchot, one of the really great Chiefs of forestry in America. It has been my privilege also to know for years, on terms of intimacy and affection, Henry E. Hardtner, whose work is well known all over the United States.
We have in the State of Louisiana only about 15 per cent of our total area under cultivation. Now there is no reason why it should he so. One reason why I have gone into public life is to try to devote four years of what energy I may have to this work, with the deep and set conviction that the future


welfare of our state rests largely upon our agriculture and intelligent reforestation. I propose to go the limit along those lines. My idea is to give Louisiana the finest agricultural college of any state in the land--one which will be managed on broad and practical lines, to upbuild and make valuable the vast tracts of land that now lie idle and are non-productive and of little value to any one.

The people of Louisiana are to be congratulated upon the opportunity presented to them of acquiring first-hand knowledge of forestry needs and conditions as will be outlined by the Second Southern Forestry Congress. I need not mention the intense interest which I myself take in this gathering or the interest of the Department of Conservation, which I represent, which has extended over our splendid forest resources the protecting cloak of conservation.
We of the South, the chief lumbering center of the United States, feel that this congress will prove most wide-reaching in its effect. It is fitting that this congress should hold its sessions in Louisiana, second only to Washington in its lumber production.
Adequate protection of the timber lands of Louisana has been hampered in the past through the lack of legislative appropriation for such purpose. I am gratified to state at this date that the law making body of the state is at last coming to realize the importance of preserving to other generations this tremendous heritage.
A denuded Louisiana is unthinkable, but this is the very danger which confronts the people of Louisiana unless means are devised that will at once further industrial development in timber, conserve the forests, and wisely provide for the proper classification of cut over lands and their ultimate disposal for purposes to which they are best adapted.
The Department of Conservation was utterly without means to meet this situation until 1918, when some relief was obtained through the establishment of a forestry division and the inauguration of a fire fighting patrol. This division of the depart-


ment, while unquestionably valuable, is by no means, under present conditions, able to afford the protection which I feel is imperative and to which the people are entitled. It is my hope that in the near future the importance of this work will find a livelier appreciation and that adequate provisions will be made for the upkeep and operation of a fire fighting force able to cope with any emergency which may arise.
Scant thought is given to forest resources until after the virgin timber is gone. It is time the South took an accounting and honestly faced a situation which must be met, a problem which must be solved, a condition demanding immediate attention. We are responsible to future generations and the wisdom with which we proceed and the intelligent effort we bring to bear now will find f fruition in the years to come. It must not be said of us that we have been wasteful, neglectful, improvident, or unwise. This is the moment, gentlemen, for us to display what wisdom we may possess to the ultimate good of the state and the nation.
A most important subject of discussion here must be that concerning itself with the utilization of cut over lands and their adaption to the requirements of timber growing, farming, and grazing. This is emphasized by the report of the Secretary of the Interior for 1918. The following is his list of the cut over acreage in fifteen southern states:
Alabama 14,785,000
Arkansas 13,893,000
Florida 10,109,000
Georgia 20,141,000
Kentucky 3,222,000
Louisiana 11,877,000
Maryland 1,848,000
Mississippi 13,203,000
Missouri 8,900,000
North Carolina 12,745,000
South Carolina 8,994,000
Tennessee 7,833,000
Texas 12,936,000
Virginia 9,929,000
West Virginia 4,634,000



It is estimated that we are adding to this vast area of denuded land at the rate of 10,000,000 acres a year. This land must be intelligently apportioned to the uses for which it is best suited. Not to do this would entail a staggering economic loss.
In Louisiana we have in the past two years spent about $25,000 on forestry and fire protection, and in previous years have expended such sums as we could spare from the other resources of the Department of Conservation. It is our intention to ask the next legislature for the entire severance tax on forest products for the support of the forestry work in the state. For
the past two years we have been receiving but one-fifth of this tax and prior to that not one cent. This tax should amount to somewhere in the neighborhood of $75,000 a year. The lumbermen of the state consented to the original severance tax with the expectation that this money would be used in fire protection and reforestation. It is only just and right that it should be used for these purposes and with the support of the lumbermen and forest conservationists of this state, it will be so spent. We will need a portion, possibly one-third, for fire p rotection and for general administration. The remainder we plan to use for the purchase of lands for state forests. If Louisiana will wisely set aside say even 100,000 acres of her poorest lands within the next ten or fifteen years as state forests, think of the magnificent revenue which thirty or forty years from now will be derived from such a property. The cost of administration will be small, and on the basis of a fifty year rotation we should have 2,000 acres to cut over annually, yielding a product worth not less than $150 an acre at a most modest estimate. An annual revenue of $300,000 a year from her state forests in perpetuity is well worth the investment of a few thousand dollars a year for the next ten years.
Many men who have distinguished themselves in this division of conservation effort, and representing numerous industries and interests vitally affected by the policies which this congress may adopt, will express their views and give the benefit of their wide experience, among whom there is one whose intelligent effort in the science of forestry and its practical applications has resulted in coordinating private, state, and national activities, and bids fair to bring out of the present gathering a national forestry policy, not alone applicable to


Louisiana, one of the greatest of timber producing states, but to every commonwealth in the Union.
Colonel Henry Solon Graves, Chief Forester of the United States Forest Service, first advanced the idea of a national program of forestry in an address before the New England Forestry Conference at Boston, February 24, 1919. At that meeting he called attention to the imperative needs of the nation, arousing an interest which promises to be nation-wide. Since then, with the backing of the federal goverment, he has vigorously pushed his plans. He has conferred with lumbermen, owners, representatives of industries allied to lumber, lumber users, legislators, and leaders in conservation work. As his experience grew, his plan has developed. Today Colonel Graves will present to you his perfected program.

During the last 30 years the forests of the South have played a very important part in providing the country with lumber and other products. The South still stands first in amount of lumber produced, furnishing over one-third of all the sawn lumber used in the entire country. The South is the one remaining large source of softwood timber in the East, with the remnant of what was once the greatest pine forest in the world. The end of the old growth southern pine is now in sight. Ten to fifteen years will see the bulk of it cut out. Its pending exhaustion is a great loss, for the eastern markets will become increasingly dependent upon the lumber supplies from the far West.
Still more important to the country are the hardwood forests of the South. Even if the southern pine forests were wholly used up and destroyed, we still have large bodies of timber in the West that can be drawn upon for a limited period, though at high cost. But the southern hardwoods are both unique in character and represent the last center of supply of material of this class in the country. They are vital to supply wood-using plants in the North and Central States and even the Pacific Coast.
The service of the southern forests to the economic welfare of the country has been and is still very great. With a climate


and soils peculiarly adapted to forest production and with numerous species of both soft and hardwood capable of exceptionally rapid growth, the South has an opportunity to remain always the most important center of lumber production in the East if the opportunity is grasped in time. If, however, the present destructive handling of forests continues this opportunity will be lost, to the injury both of the South and the Nation. With the introduction now of wholly practical methods of forestry, the forests will in the future contribute to the permanent industrial prosperity and building of the South even in a greater degree than in the past.
Passing of the Original Forests
We are witnessing today the rapid passing of our original forests. We have seen within our own lifetime the progressive exhaustion of the older sources of timber supply, and the movement of the center of large lumber production to the South; and now realize that it is a matter of only a few years before the bulk of the old growth timber in the South will be cut, and the last body of timber in the East capable of large-scale lumber production will be gone.
Our lumber and related industries have been built up on the basis of the original forest. Builders, architects, engineers, manufacturers of wood articles, and general buyers of lumber have been accustomed to the high grade material that comes from trees 100 to 250 years of age. In many cases people have been using high grade material when lower grades would answer the purpose. just as in the old days the farmers of the Middle West made rails of walnut, so we have been very often using prime products of the virgin trees for common purposes, simply because it was abundant and the price within our means.
Heretofore when one center of production has been exhausted, the industry has moved on to another body of original timber, furnishing the market with perhaps a different species but still an excellent product from old-growth trees. And today fully 85 per cent of the lumber in the general market still comes from original or old growth forests. As long as there were new and untouched bodies of timber within reasonable distance, the general public did not materially suffer, so far as supplies of lumber were concerned. A new situation has, however, now come about through the approaching ex-


haustion of all the large centers of old growth timber in the East and the necessity for going to the Pacific slope for material of the character that consumers have used and still demand.
Economic Consequences of Forest Depletion
The movement of. the center of lumber production from one region to another has been invariably followed by important economic consequences. An upward trend of prices is always one of the results, besides many local effects. The depletion of all the large producing centers in the East and the dependence of the largest number of consumers of lumber on forests located 2,000 to 3,000 miles away is an occurrence that will be widely and very unfavorably felt. Even the lessening of production within the last two or three years has sent up the price of lumber to a point permitting western competition in the Atlantic States, and the East is today paying for lumber on the basis of the value of Douglas fir plus freight from the West Coast.
Large operations and large quantity production are the resultant of the existence of great bodies of old growth timber. When the old timber begins to fail and the large mills to close down, production falls off with great rapidity. The national market is then immediately affected until there is readjustment by the opening up of new supplies of original timber capable of large scale production with big mills.
Precisely this process is now going on in the South. It is the original forest and large scale operations that govern the situation. While the present deficiency of production is not wholly due to cutting out of the old timber, it is so in part. This effect on the market is the same. Yellow pine is already being crowded out of some markets, prices mount up and finally are governed by the lumber from the new region, in this case the Pacific Coast.
Thus we have an economic timber depletion and all its consequences when the old bodies of timber are reduced, even though there may be in the aggregate a great deal of smaller timber or scattered old trees available for small mills. This is the reason why the effects of forest depletion are felt long before the actual exhaustion of all the forests. This is the reason why the conditions created by the war (some of which are temporary and some permanent) have developed all the


manifestations of timber shortage, failure to obtain material, high prices, unstable markets, etc. It is a forerunner of what will happen in more aggravated form as the progressive exhaustion of the old supplies goes on.
Failure to Prepare for Forest Depletion
The using up of the original forest is in itself not a disturbing circumstance. It is inevitable, for the supplies originally furnished by unaided nature must sooner or later come to an end. We may deeply regret that we have wasted and destroyed so much of our natural heritage of timber, but the feature that should give us the most profound concern is that we have taken no adequate steps to prepare ourselves for the passing of the original forest.
We have not only wasted in premature cutting and through forest fires an immense amount of lumber that might have served to prolong the life of our original supplies, but we have destroyed the second growth timber and young growth, and on millions of acres effectively and unnecessarily prevented a normal renewal of the forest. This is not the time or place for me to explain the influences that have led to this condition, the faulty public land policies, the encouragement of speculative holdings, the factors forcing premature and wasteful cutting, the indifference of the public and failure to meet its responsibilities, the adverse attitude of many operators and owners, and so on.
What might have been, is an interesting study. But we are concerned with the cold and ugly facts of broken and depleted forests, unproductive or actually devasted cut over lands, a great deficiency of middle-aged second growth of any potential value and usefulness and a net loss each year of our resources that is leading direct to forest bankruptcy.
The transition from the original forest to second growth is comparatively easy when there are middle-aged and younger trees in abundance. This has been demonstrated in a number of cases where special circumstances caused the growth of a large amount of second growth pine, as, for example, in Virginia, the Carolinas, and the New England States. But in most other sections and more recent cuttings we have been progressively destroying the immature trees. Probably the best forestry ever practiced by private owners was when they


culled the forests and left the immature trees standing. It was not intentional. They simply had no market for these trees. Where not injured or destroyed by fire these trees grew rapidly and there are hundreds of tracts being cut over now a second or third time, giving high profits from accumulated accretion and from opportunity for more economical utilization. With the increase of values and multiplication of uses for wood products, however, the immature trees standing with the old growth are now cut in most cases on a large scale. Certainly but few operators leave any trees purposely in order to constitute the basis for a later cut.
But even more serious than that is the fact that fires are allowed to run through the woods killing or injuring the younger trees, and these same fires retard or prevent reproduction. The result is that when our original forests are exhausted, we find that we have also exhausted a large part of the immature stands that would constitute our second cuttings and have not been providing for new reproduction. We will face in consequence a great deficiency of timber in the immediate f uture.
The Critical Importance of Second Growth
In some respects the most important single factor in the problem of forestry in the near future is the immature timber or second growth. It is this material that should normally tide over the country's needs after the exhaustion of the virgin timber and pending the growth of new stands that may be established now. This is the material that should furnish the local needs in building up the new farms that we hope to see in the South. This is the basis for our lumber and wood-using industry of the near future. And if there were enough of it in the South, it could most likely compete with the products of the West and even reinvade the competitive field in the nearby middle western States, at least with common grades of lumber.
I am interested in knowing how much virgin timber there is left in the South. I am more interested in knowing how much immature and second growth timber there is. Let us by all means protect and handle with great economy the remaining portions of our original forest. But especially let us husband with great care the stands of smaller growth. Self -interest will in a measure take care of the first. Self-interest


ought to safeguard the second, for there are hundreds of thousands of acres of immature timber in the south that represent a splendid opportunity for profits if it is handled right. Yet many of those stands are being fast destroyed by abuse, premature cutting, premature boxing, forest fires, or other destructive agencies.
The destruction of the second -rowth and small timber will be a loss that will be felt not only by the producing lumber industry but by every community and purchaser of lun-iber in the South. The preservation and careful handling of this timber presents an opportunity that if taken advantage of before it is too late will contribute to the building of the South in a measure difficult at the present time for most people to realize. The preservation and careful handling of second growth presents also a great opportunity to the owners, for in many cases it does not represent an actual outlay but is rather a remnant after cutting off the old forest, and in a few years it will return very substantial profits. Many an owner who has not realized that this young timber represented any particular value has found himself in possession of stumpage value of not less than $50 per acre for young timber 40 to 50 years old. In the North young pine is often worth $250 to $300 per acre.
Our Nation's Forest Deficit
Our forest deficit is increasing every year. Our original forest capital is constantly dwindling. We have been destroying young timber at the period of its greatest rate of accretion. By abuse we have been preventing lands from becoming restocked after cutting the old timber. There can be but one final answer to such a course, and that is the depletion of our forests resources down to a point where the country will suffer great injury.
It is estimated that about 100 million acres of forest land have been practically devastated and are producing almost nothing of value. They are today an economic waste. On the other hand, there are probably over 200 million acres of cut over land on which some measure of forest growth is taking place. A large part of these second growth forests, however, have an excessive amount of poor species, defective or poorly formed trees, or are broken, with only a scanty growth.


Moreover, through unintelligent cutting, over-grazing, or repeated forest fires, a large part of our second growth forests are constantly deteriorating and the percentage of valueless material steadily increasing. While we do not lack production of cubic feet of wood suited for fuel, the production of material having a potential value for sawn products is far below what is actually used, let alone that destroyed. It is believed the production by growth of useful material is less than one-third of what is consumed.
Need for Action
During the past 25 years there has been a vigorous movement of forestry and many achievements of which the country may be proud. If, however we go to the forest and see what is actually being accomplished, we find that the nation's forest problem is not being met; nor will it be met by any plans which are today actually under way.
It is clear that in order to meet the needs of the country for forest products lands not needed for agriculture and settlement should be put to use growing trees rather than to lie idle and unproductive. It is equally clear that the first step is to stop the destructive processes that even today are still devastating each year hundreds of thousands of acres of forest land.
The restoration of the vast quantities of land which have been turned into wastes by forest abuse is a second step of great importance but of less immediate concern than the stopping of forest devastation.
Public Responsibilities in Forestry
The public is vitally interested in the forest problem. The general publicist interested in having available lumber and other forest products in adequate quantities and at reasonable prices. It is interested in preserving the forests at the headwaters of rivers and for other general benefits. The local public is interested in the maintenance of industries which depend upon forests for raw materials. It is interested in the productive use of lands which are suited only to growing trees. Like the nation at large, the local public is interested in many general benefits which are derived from the very existence of well managed f forests.


The character of the problem of forestry is such that our forests will not be properly protected and handled without the aid and participation of the public itself. That is, the great public interests involved in forests both justify and require that the public not only own large areas of forest land but that it also take part in working out the problems of private forests. Heretofore public responsibility in the matter of forests has not been recognized, and even today neither the Nation, nor the States nor local communities are doing what they should to safeguard the forests.
Responsibilities of Private Owners
While there is a large public aspect of forestry and the public should recognize this responsibility and fully meet it, there is also a very definite responsibility on the part of private owners which is inherent in the very proprietorship of property. It has been often urged by lumbermen that forestry is wholly a public function and that there is no responsibility resting upon private owners to take action on their lands looking to the forest perpetuation. Many lumbermen today, I am glad to say, are taking a larger view point and expressing a readiness to perform their part where a feasible place is pointed out.
A large part of the forests of the country have been placed in the hands of private individuals. We may say that the country has entrusted to private owners the bulk of one of the most important of its basic natural resources. This may not have been a wise policy, but it was done. The handling of private forests in a way which will not be injurious to the public through the creation of unproductive wastes and through the consequent impoverishment of the States and communities, is certainly a responsibility that rests upon private owners and can not in the long run be ignored.
I am, however, the first to recognize the practical difficulties of the forest problem and that the average individual timberland owner is unable without public cooperation to redeem this responsibility. Experience has already shown us that adequate forest protection can be secured only through Statewide organization in which there ;-, definite participation both by private owners and by the public. The same principle holds true of other measures of forestry than fire protection. The


stopping of forest devastation and the perpetuation of our forests require a joining of hands of the public and the private owners under a plan in which the public recognizes and liberally fulfills its own responsibilities and in which the private owner also recognizes that he has an individual responsibility and is prepared to fulfill it.
A National Policy of Forestry
To meet our forest problem there is required a national policy and program that provides for the organized effort of the Goverment, the several States, and private owners in a common undertaking. The need of such a policy I have been urging during the past year and have presented on various occasions the principles which I believe should underlie it.
A national program of forestry includes necessarily many different features. It involves legislation by the Federal government and by the individual States, and a plan for correlating the action of the different public agencies with private effort. Obviously it may not be expected that such a far-reaching program can be adopted in its entirety at once. It is very desirable, however, for the country to have before it certain definite objectives to be achieved, definite principles to be embodied in legislation, and the steps needed to get them into practice in the forest.
An outline of principles of a national policy has been p-,,blished in a circular (No. 148) of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. There is presented also in mimeographed form a statement of the essential points that I believe should be included in Federal and State legislation to carry out a national policy.
Time does not permit here the discussion of all the different points involved in this far-reaching problem. A few of the most essential questions may, however, be emphasized.
A balanced program for the nation must provide for both. public and private forests. I have referred to the responsiblities of the public in forestry. These involve in the first place the direct ownership of a large amount of forest land. Today the public owns altogether about one-quarter of the forest land of the country. I believe that ultimately from 40 to 50 per cent of our forests should be in the hands of the public. So I am urging as one feature of the national policy that the Gov-


ernment greatly enlarge its forests and that the States also acquire extensive areas of forest lands to be handled permanently in the interest of the public. Every encouragement, too, should be given to municipalities ar ! w counties to own forests, but these will probably be chiefly woodland parks for recreation.
Of immediate importance is the completion of the program of purchases by the Government in the eastern mountains, involving altogether about one million acres in the north and some five million acres in the south. At the same time we are endeavoring to secure Federal legislation to round out and extend the other National Forests by exchange and purchase. As soon as possible the Federal forests should be established in other centers and should include lands acquired for the purpose of timber production and not merely for the protection of navigable rivers.
I hope that the Southern States will undertake a policy of acquiring public forest lands. Not only would they serve to produce timber, to protect water resources, and for public recreation, but they would have a great educational value as demonstration grounds and centers of cooperation. I believe that every southern State should own a large area of forest land comparable in the long run with the public forests of Pennsylvania and New York.
Public ownership of forests will, however, meet only part of the needs of our country. It has been suggested by a good many persons that the solution of the forestry question is for the Government and the States to acquire by purchase the private lands after they have been cut and then to restore them to productiveness. The program which I am advocating urges such acquisition as fastas means can be furnished by the public. At the best, however, public acquirement of private lands will progress slowly. Even to acquire an additional fifty million acres of cut over lands will take a good deal of time at the rate appropriations are likely to be made. Acquisition by the public of all the forest lands of the country needed for permanent production would be out of the question.
The problem of forestry has got to be worked out both by public forests and by the right handling of private forests, and we might as well recognize that and shape our policies accordingly.


Private Forests
The right handling of private forests in a way to prevent devastation and to keep the land productive is both possible and practical, if there is organized effort and public cooperation. A great deal of opposition has been voiced by lumbermen against our proposals regarding private forestry on the ground that they are not pr ' ctical. Much of this opposition is due to confusion as to what measures would be required to accomplish the purpose. A part of the opposition is due also to the definite stand taken by many that the private owner is not concerned in the question of future timber production and it would be an infringement on his rights of private property for the public in any way to interfere with the way he handles his lands.
In our national program of forestry we are seeking two things, so far as private lands are concerned: first, to stop the destructive processes that are turning the lands into economic wastes; and second, to induce the owner in his own interest to apply just as good method as possible so as to secure a maximum yield of timber growth on the land.
The public must insist upon the stopping of forest devastation. It should do its own part in a liberal spirit in accomplishing this, but it should require that private owners adopt such measures as may be necessary to do their part in preventing devastation. To accomplish the second objective of good forestry practice aimed to get the maximurn growth of timber on the lands, there should be liberal inducements offered through cooperation, education, and demonstration, in order to get as many as possible to undertake in their own financial interest the growing of timber.
These two objectives have been confused in the minds of many persons. Obviously the intensive practice of forestry, involving often actual planting and subsequent cultural methods, cannot be undertaken by all persons and should not be made obligatory. On the other hand, the handling of timber lands in a way to prevent devastation is a wholly different question. Here we have a question of prevention of injury to the public. It is an injury that is permanent in character. It is analogous to the abuse of farm lands which results in heavy erosion. Ordinary exhaustion of the fertility of the soil may be remedied in a short time. Agricultural exploitation and abuse that result in washing away and ruining the


land is a permanent injury, and I look to the time when destructive methods which lead to such devastation must be prohibited by the States in their own protection.
The denuding and devastation of forests is also a permanent injury, requiring for restoration either very intensive planting operations or a long process of nature extending oftentimes from 50 to 150 years.
In the policy of forestry which I am advocating I urge recognition of individual responsibility on the part of the owner to so handle his land that it will not be devastated and thus become an injury to the public. I urge at the same time the adoption by the public of measures of assistance and cooperation which will make the application of this principle feasible in practice.
The principal destructive agency is forest fire, and ordinarily the first action that is necessary in any State is to establish a system of organized fire protection. Already considerable progress has been made in this direction in a number of States. Success has been achieved by incorporating in the State law requirements upon owners to participate in a Statewide protective system, and in a number of States there are requirements as to disposal of dangerous slashing.
The policy which I am proposing looking to organized effort to prevent forest devastation has already a precedent so far as certain features of the forest fire problem are concerned, in a number of States. The problem of other destructive agencies should be taken up in the same way as that of forest fires. Where live stock ranges at large and makes impossible the reproduction of forests, there should be fence laws which would protect the individual from such depredations. If methods in use in lumbering result in denuding the forest or in destroying a natural resource, like the old fashioned methods of turpentining, the owners should be required to modify their methods.
Briefly speaking, therefore, our proposed policy looks to the establishment of an effective state forestry organization and recognition in the law of personal responsibility of owners to prevent forest devastation, provision for a State-wide system of fire protection, authority to the State organization to take


such action as is necessary to prevent destructive processes that would devastate the lands, and adequate appropriations to make State laws effective.
On the other side there is advocated a liberal assistance on the part of the State through the establishment of methods of taxation which will encourage rather than discourage forestry, advice and assistance to owners in the development and use of methods of fire protection and of cuttings that will be followed by natural reproduction, and assistance in patrol and other protective measures against fire. Ordinarily in a cooperative system of fire protection, there would be a sharing of cost on the basis of about half to the public and half by the owners.
Our policy places on the State direct responsibility for the public's immediate participation in the private forest problem. The problem of forestry, however, is in many aspects a national one and the Federal government should have a definite part in working it out. The function of the Federal government should be to stimulate State action, to assist in securing concurrent legislation among the different States, to maintain standards of forest practice, and to assist the States directly in various important ways. ,
The assistance by the Federal government should be in the first place a financial one to aid in perfecting and carrying out a system of fire protection and to develop good forest practice. A precedent has already been established under the*, Weeks Law and today the Government is co-operating with over 20 States in fire protection at the headwaters of navigable rivers. Such financial assistance as might be given to the States by the government should be contingent upon the carrying out by the States of a program of forestry satisfactory to the government.
The Federal government may properly aid also by extending the existing Federal law concerning farm loans to include Aoans for the purchase or improvement of forest lands cut over or bearing immature growth, for holding and protecting such lands previously acquired, for reforestation, and for the employment of other measures designed to promote timber growth.
Still again, the Federal government should assist in the problem of land classification, in forest surveys, and in research in forestry and in forest products.


While the problem of forest taxation is of course a State function, nevertheless the Federal government might properly cooperate with the States in making investigations of existing legislation and its effect, and thus aid in promoting the adoption of improved methods of taxation. And, finally, every encouragement should be given to plans for the insuring of forest lands from fire and other damage along lines already undertaken in the Northeast and for a long time in effect in older countries.
In applying in the South the principles which I have been discussing, the first step in my judgment is to establish in all of the States a forest organization and then to make the first drive on fire and other destructive agencies that are so greatly depleting the resource and reducing its power of regeneration. If there is a determination on the part of the general public and the landowners to accomplish this purpose, I have no fear of difficulty in working out the details in practice.

MR. HARDTNER: When I commenced the study of the reproduction of forests fifteen or twenty years ago, I had no government publications to go by. ,p But we began to make experiments and we soon f ound out that by giving the forest a little attention, longleaf pine would reproduce just as readily as any other kind of pine, and it had the advantage over other pine from the fact that it would withstand the average fire, and sometimes very heavy fires. It is an actual fact that it is a hard matter to kill longleaf pine by fire, even through the droughty months of July and August, where the shortleaf or the loblolly pine would be absolutely destroyed. So, it is the easiest and most valuable pine to produce, and makes the loveliest kind of a tree, and all of our virgin longleaf pine forests should be reproduced in longleaf pine.
The United States Government must take the lead, and the state governments must follow, and wherever these two agencies point out to the people the right methods to pursue, the very first to assist those governmental agencies will be the lumbermen. The lumbermen of this state voluntarily agreed to tax themselves thousands of dollars annually so that money


could be provided to protect our forests from fire, and to buy up the denuded land for State Forests. And I do not know what is the matter with them, that they have been willing to contribute all these years, and get nothing in return. They knew they were paying this severance tax, with the understanding that it was to go for the protection and perpetuation and preservation of the forest, but they have seen that money, thousands of dollars a year, amounting probably now to half a million dollars, diverted to other sources, when that money, properly expended, would have purchased 100,000 acres of denuded forest lands in this State. It seems to me that in this chaotic condition in which we find ourselves, the lumberman in Louisiana is perfectly willing to pay tribute in order that he might not be molested in carrying on his business until the people find out just exactly what they do want.
MR. GERRANS: In our portion of North Carolina our timber is scattered; it is second and third, and I would not be surprised if some of it is fourth growth, and we have to cut trees that in some sections of the country, they would be hunting us for taking children from the cradle, but they are the biggest we have. If you put a two foot limit at the stump, you might put it on f or Louisiana and the West Coast, but it would put us out of business. We would cut one tree a day, whereas our record is 150 an hour. You see, you cannot place all of the United States under the same law without very, very carefully taking into consideration the trouble that each of us has in our own district. We will be only too glad-the North Carolina Pine Association people-I can speak for them, I know, in saying that anything the department wants, we will give them the heartiest cooperation possible. We only ask that we be given an opportunity to give our troubles before the law is made so that it won't be unworkable.
MR. GRAVES: I want to make it clear that forestry does not necessarily mean fixing a diameter limit on your cutting; it does not mean that smaller trees and even comparatively young trees may not be used when it is a good thing to do, provided there is some reasonable chance for something to come up in their place.
MR. GERRANS: Well, in order to have something come tip in their place afterwards, in our particular district, where the timber runs anywhere from 1,500 to 5,000 feet per acre, some


times 10,000 feet, though the average is not over 1,300 feet, we would have to remove the tops of the timber to prevent the fire from spreading through that country. We have not the labor; it has gone somewhere. We cannot even get wood to burn. We have to buy coal to run the locomotives, and my friend Mr. Hardtner over there made the statement that longleaf pine was very hard to burn. I can prove to him it is very easy.
We are cutting pretty fast. We have not time to see to getting reproduction. Most of the lands that we are able to clear the timber from, we are putting on the market. They are agricultural lands.
MR. GRAVES: Those forests you are cutting on were originally agricultural lands.
I state that because there is such confusion about that. So many people in thinking of forestry and of any concerted action, think there is going to be a law limiting the cutting. That is not so. We want a reasonable condition, so that the young growth will come back. Then, if we can show you that it is to your interest to do some other things, I will come around and make the proposition for you to take or leave, as you please .
MR. HARDTNER: Another thought along that line. The forests of the future that will be grown in the South are trees that you can grow in from 20 to 30 years. It is possible to grow a forest in 20 to 30 years, not trees 15 to 20 inches in diameter, but trees from 4 to 12 inches in diameter. That will be a forest that will be very advantageous for the people of the South to grow, and I know that Mr. Graves will be only too glad to encourage the growing of trees 4 to 12 inches in diameter if they can be used for posts and poles and pulp wood and various other products that the country needs. You can grow that very quickly, and you will have a ready demand for it.
MR. NEAL: In our section of the country (Alabama), we have not taken any steps towards reforesting our lands, but I have noticed that within the last few years, the statement made by the gentlemen here that longleaf pine will reproduce itself, is a fact, and over our holdin-s the longleaf yellow pine is reproducing itself in very large quantities.


I have noticed that fires do very little damage to this young timber, even to little bushes two or three feet high. When fire passes over them, it looks like they are almost burned up, but if you will examine them there is a green bud, which in a short time is growing again. Of course, it is injurious to the land to burn it, and it ought not to be burned. In my opinion there should be some method devised whereby this burning could be eliminated.
MR. TOWNSEND: As to just how to protect the forest, and what the immediate trouble is, we have heard that it is largely local. That is true.
Beginning 19 years ago, for five years, probably seven years, I cut over an area in the Smoky Mountains of the Appalachian range, adjoining North Carolina and Tennessee, probably an area of over 20,000 acres. I was under the impression up to that time that if you could keep fire out of the woods for four or five years after cutting you were perfectly safe from fires. By that time all the leaves and branches that the logging produces would have settled down and rotted to some extent, and the growth of weeds and briars, and so forth, would grow and protect it, and you were practically sure of the f orest being safe from fire. I practiced that for five years at very considerable expense, and had at that time the finest young forest of about 18,000 or 20,000 acres that a man ever looked on-very many more poplar trees on many acres than I had cut-in fact, ten and twenty times as many, a magnificent growth, young poplars, bigger in diameter than your body, and away up yonder in height to the first limb, as though they were looking up, and striving each one to beat the other.
I watched the growth of these trees, and concluded that unquestionably the natural growth of a forest more beautifully portrayed the survival of the fittest than even wild animal life, or anything else. And yet, in the spring following the fifth year, some son of gun, or several of them, thought they were not getting enough grazing for their cattle, and took a dry time in the latter part of March and went out and set fire in several places to this forest, and the whole thing was consumed. I hurried with what force I could gather together across the mountain, and close by I watched the fire licking up those young poplar trees-a tree as big around as my body and away


up yonder to the first limb, the fire would lick around it once or twice, and you could hear it crack like a pistol shot, and fall over. All those things are mighty impressive.
No lumberman, or set of lumbermen can handle a forestry proposition against conditions of that sort, it is impracticable. But if the State or the Nation would give proper support and prescribe laws, not only for imprisonment but heavy fine, and give every bit of the fine to the warden that will convict the people that do such things, the work that you expect lumbermen to do will become practicable.
When the people want it, it will be done. You can depend on one thing, and that is that you cannot ask the lumbermen of this country to do anything that is practical, that they will not do.
MR. TYLER: The properties owned by the corporation which I represent lie in the extreme southeastern corner of Virginia. The original growth of timber in the Alleghany Mountains, and in our neighborhood, consisted of poplar, oak, and in some localities quite a considerable quantity of maple sugar trees.
The original lumbering of that mountain region was the cutting of the poplar, which has been almost completely accomplished years ago. The Yellow Poplar Lumber Company and others went through that territory beginning 35 years ago, and
b y
bought up the poplar trees which they branded and reserved for marketing at such time as they might be able to accomplish it. Those -trees were almost entirely cut and floated. The main portion of Dickinson county is on the watershed of the Big Sandy, tributary of the Ohio River, and the poplar in that watershed was cut and floated out. There stands in Dickinson county today the only reinforced concrete splash at that time anywhere in existence, so far as I know.
Today the floating in our neighborhood has been practically completed. The Yellow Poplar Lumber Company, after they had floated out all their poplar endeavored to do the same thing with oak, and did accomplish some oak floating, but the loss from sinkage and water-logging was tremendous, and they finally abandoned it, and sold their remaining hardwood to field men, who would manufacture it on the ground. Today we have in Dickinson county one corporation that owns about 70,000 or 80,000 acres of timber land; that is, they own the


timber on the land-probably 10,000 acres of which carries virgin poplar. If I could take you people up bodily and transport you a long distance, I could still show you some yellow poplar trees that are 8 feet in diameter, standing up towards the head of the streams in some of those little hollows where it was not possible to get them to a place where they could be splashed out.
We have one condition existing in the oak portion of that neighborhood which is to some degree unusual, and that is a large part of the oak forest is, as the lumbermen say, ripe. The trees are beginning to deteriorate, and particularly on the Southern exposure. For that reason we are anxious to get that timber cut as promptly as it can be done. The Ritter Lumber Company, of Columbus, Ohio, who own the major portion of the stumpage, are endeavoring to remove the ripened portions of the forest first.
Referring to Colonel Graves' diameter proposition, these people have purchased the timber down only to 12 inches in diameter, and their cutting is limited to 12 inches; nothing below that is taken except for construction purposes. This timber is now being cut and removed with the probability that the operation will be concluded some time within the next twenty or twenty-five years.
To show you that the lumbermen do really recognize the value of fire protection, I want to say here that we have in Dickinson county a Forest Fire Prevention organization. That organization was gotten together about the time of the rneeting of the first session of the Southern Forestry Congress at Asheville, a little over three years ago. This year we have had some unusual weather conditions, but one of the results of that organization has been that it has not cost us $500 for the past season to extinguish every forest fire that has started in Dickinson county, and we have not had a fire that has done any material damage to an area greater than 150 acres. We have lookout towers throughout the county and we have two Federal patrols to assist us in this work.
MR. RAYNE: When we were operating in Pennsylvania, as I recall, there was no public sentiment against fires. The State was taking no interest in it. It was all personal with the operating lumbermen.


In West Virginia, I am glad to say, it is different. The public domain protects the forests. The public demands protection of the forests, but it is some times difficult to find whether the fire has been carelessly or purposely put out. They are largely accidental. I am glad to say we have had but few fires. However, a few years ago, a fire occurred, and our men were all called out and had the fire practically extinguished when the patrol arrived on the ground. They did the best they could, coming from a long distance on horseback. I take off my hat to the West Virginia patrol for being on the job when a fire occurs.
We cut our timber down to about 14 inches in diameter. All the residue is preserved for mining interest. So it is to our interest not only from the love of forest, but from practical ends, to protect that growth, so we are doing that to the best of our ability, and I am glad to say that a beautiful forest cover is growing where cutting has taken place.
I believe the little mill should be discouraged. Maybe that is selfish. When I first went to West Virginia, I found little mills cutting white oak and cutting up the whole log into cross ties. It seems to me that is almost criminal and should be prevented. I wish something might be done. The white oak is passing, and it will be a long while before we will have anything to take its place; probably never, because its growth is very slow. I am glad to see that the interest of the public is being aroused in our State.
I trust that Colonel Graves will come among us and will recommend to the legislature the enactment of such laws that not only we ourselves, but coming generations may have the joy and beauty of these magnificent forests, as well as the utility that goes along with them.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other lumbermen here who would enter into this discussion before the discussion is closed?
MR. RHODES: (Secretary, Southern Pine Association). Colonel Graves stated in his very interesting address that lie had been in a conference with a committee representing the Southern Pine Association the past two days, and that he felt very much encouraged over the spirit of cooperation manifested by the representatives of the committee with him and


with his views. I simply want to confirm that and to say that the committee appointed by the Association will formulate a report based largely upon the recommendations of Colonel Graves, which will be submitted to the annual meeting of the Southern Pine Association, to be held in February or March, and I have no doubt but that it will be endorsed, because it is eminently practical and comprises about all the recommendations which Colonel Graves has seen fit to make at this time, so that I feel as a result of this conference distinct progress has been made.
MR. WALLACE: I want to say at the outset for the benefit of the laymen-those who are not constitutional lawyers-that the matter of the preservation of the forest is in an entirely different category from that which relates to the protection of any other National resource. For instance, we can pass a law with impunity, and it will be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States, declaring that all birds, all game, all fish, all wild quadrupeds, all shell fish, belong to the people of the State in their sovereign capacity, and that they can only be taken as prescribed by law. Not so, however, in reference to forest products, because that which grows from the ground is a part of the ground, and that ground is susceptible of private ownership. It, therefore, belongs to the individuals. Hence, you could not pass a statute that would stand the constitutional test by the State or by the United States, prescribing the size at which a tree should be cut, or anything else that is particularly related to the cutting of those trees, would not be constitutional. Such legislation must be classified entirely differently.
I want to impress this sovereign fact upon your minds. Conservation in no sense means prohibition; it means the wise use of our resources. It does not mean that we shall take no trees, but preserve them, as something in which sweet birds can sing or through which soft zephyrs can blow! Not that! But it does mean that we shall use wisdom in the use of these resources.
Now, what is it I propose? Let us issue bonds-government bonds-bearing interest, and let the United States Government come in, and buy up an area of land year by year, and set it aside to be administered as a national forest.


Now, what profit is it? Take my friend from Browden, what profit is it to him to grow trees which will reach maturity in 100 years? Can an individual go'into the proposition? Will it be possible for him to do so? Take the State of Alabama. It has declared every foot of public land in that State, whether held in fee or in trust, as a State forest reserve. It makes it unlawful for any person to enter thereon for the purpose of taking any tree or trees, or setting fire or placing inflammable material thereon. Thus they have set aside hundreds of thousands of acres of land as a State Forest Reserve.
The thing we have had to overcome was self-consciousness and stupidity. That is what you men have to go up against in the matter of conservation and that is what we are up against now in the matter of forest protection. It is because the people have not the vision to see for themselves, and because they are contaminated by that voraciousness for which the people of the United States are so famously and so justly renowned, that they regard a tree, not as a natural resource, but something to be converted into dollars. That is the proposition.
This gentleman here referred to the poplar trees being burned. Let me tell you, my friends, that it is impossible to absolutely prevent that. It is a violation of law to commit murder, and yet I see reports, or I hear of men being hung every Friday, and it will always be thus, but by promptly apprehending him, when a party is caught attempting to destroy our forest, and bringing him quickly to justice, and pursuing him with the vengeance of a spiteful fury on the trial of a lost spirit, we can minimize the commission of offences, and through that medium alone can it be achieved.
Let us before we leave here get up a comprehensive memorial to Congress. Let us let them know what we want them to do, and, in the event they do not do it, let them hear from us when they have the next election. When we do that, we will get some modern legislation through relative to the conservation of these great forest reserves of the country.
Now, before I sit down, I cannot help but tell you that I hope that all of you gentlemen and ladies will stop over in Alabama to pay us a visit. Alabama! There is magic in thy matchless name, forest Queen of States! Thy face is white with the cotton fields of the Tennessee Valley. The silks of the blooming corn are thy flowing tresses! Thy cheeks are rosy with the


apples and peaches which blush upon thy everlasting hills! Around thy graceful neck, as a lover would entwine a diamond necklace about his sweetheart's snowy throat, is that magnificent river, the pearl-paved Tennessee, wandering there from the pineclad hills of old Virginia, to pay loyal tribute to thy shrine, only to dash on with new momentum, as if eager to extol all the grandeur and glory of that matchless realm, happy and peaceful with contentment's joyous song. Around thy graceful waist is a belt of polished steel, set with diamonds, black, yet precious, which have dazzled the world with the magnitude of their princely values. Thy skirt of fleecy cotton is bespangled by the needles of the longleaf pine, while thy dainty feet are laved by the soft water of the opal gulf. From the waving woods and clustering hills of North Alabama, resonant with the song of trilling wild birds, to the sunny shores of Mobile, where the bridegroom sea is toying with the shore, his wedded bride, and decks her tawny brow with shells, retires a space to see how fair she is, then, bless him, rushes in and kisses her, is a land where
"If there is peace to be found anywhere "Hearts that are humble might hope for it there."

MR. H. E. EVERLEY: I am neither a forester nor a lumberman, or a user of the products of the forest. But I am sincere in the belief that this endeavor that the foresters and other folks are making at present, is one of the best and most helpful things that can come to our wood-working industry. I represent the furniture industry of the country, and I want to say that the furniture industry is deeply concerned in this problem that you have before you. The furniture industry represents an annual production of $3,000,000,000, and its consumption of hardwood lumber is over $1,000,000,000 of it. The furniture industry, as a whole, has just met the very serious problem of a shortage of lumber. With the great increase in the demand for furniture, and the great decrease in the supply of lumber, they do not know what to do. In fact, some of them are threatening to shut down. I want to say that the furniture people are very deeply interested in this


problem. It is a certain fact that an industry as large as the furniture industry sending a man out to investigate such lumber conditions, means something. It means that this industry is interested to the extent that they are willing to find out what the actual conditions are, and I want to assure you that 'they are ready to cooperate in any way possible, not only with the foresters of this country, but with the lumber manufacturing interests, in conserving our present supply of lumber, if there is any possibility of doing that.
The old problem that had confronted the lumber producers in regard to cutting up waste lumber into small stock, has been one in which the furniture people, I am afraid to say, have not cooperated possibly as closely as they might with you. We cannot conserve scrap lumber unless we get enough to pay for cutting it up into lumber.
There has been a considerable amount of jealousy and criticism and suspicion among manufacturers of both industries. There is a time coming, however, when I believe there will be closer cooperation between these two great industries, and the fact that they are waking up to the necessity of looking into matters in regard to future supply, is something which possibly points towards a closer cooperation.
The furniture industry is really interested in this problem. They are not looking at it from an entirely unselfish standpoint. Their future and their future success depends largely upon their future supply of lumber, and they are willing Lo cooperate and they will stand back of any great and strong national program for conservation of that lumber which is so important to them.
MR. C. B. HARMON: (Read by the Secretary in his absence). Having been called upon but a f ew days ago to take part in discussing the forestry subject with you today, I have not had an opportunity to confer with the industry which I represent, so what I have to say must express my personal views and impressions, although I feel reasonably sure that I may say that my ideas and suggestions represent the general feeling among millwork manufacturers of the South.
We are convinced of the necessity of some uniform action looking towards the conservation of our timber, of the reforestation of our cut over lands, of the protection of standing


timber and of the preservation of virgin tracts, etc., and believc that certain legislation and taxation should be enacted by Congress and the Legislatures to accomplish these things. We, however, do not favor the passage of any laws by our Government either National or State, which would take away or interfere with, the fee simple rights of our land or timber owners.
We are not prepared to make suggestions as to how, when or where our present stand of timber should be cut and cannot assist you on the subject of replanting or seeding our cut over lands, but as millwork manufacturers and distributors of windows, doors, mouldings, dressed lumber of various kinds and of wood house building materials generally, are pleased to offer the following suggestions regarding the use and conservation of lumber now being manufactured and used from our present stand or supply of timber.
With a very few exceptions our architects are specifying the use of certain kinds and grades of lumber without a proper regard or knowledge of their adaptability to the purposes for which they are intended and likewise are requiring to a critical extent the use of many of the higher or upper grades, when in most instances lumber of the lower grades will answer just as well and in some cases better. This has been their custom and policy as long as I can remember. Unfortunately the average consumer follows the same course.
It appears to us that a big saving could be had, if some way could be provided or arranged so as to inform the architects and consumers:
That sap pine lumber for most purposes, when properly painted and kept painted will last as long as heart lumber, when used in the ordinary construction of dwellings or frame buildings.
That in most instances, shortleaf pine framing will answer the purpose as well as longleaf pine or anything else.
That stock sizes can be had from the pile in the yard, while odd sizes must be cut special.
That when pine lumber is to be painted, blue stain, shop stain, and a few small knots or even a few large ones are no objection except on really the highest grade work.
That by creosoting sills and joists a much lower grade will answer the purpose.


That clear grade pine lumber suitable for sash doors and millwork, over five quarters thick, both sap and heart is scarce and except for common or ordinary work, built-up or veneered stock is just as economical and generally more durable.
One not well versed in the millwork business cannot appreciate the waste, time lost, and confusion brought about on the part of consumers and the architects in ordering odd sizes, and grades which do not and never existed.
These rock rib facts which the architects and consumers do not seem to know, although commonly known by every lumberman in the South are costing the public fabulous sums of money without any reasonable returns, are costing the millwork manufacturers loads of trouble, delay and money, and are wasting the upper grades of lumber and draining our forests of timber which could be used for other and correct purposes.
We have been trying for twenty-five years to rectify this waste, loss and trouble, but the architects and consumers continue sleeping. If any of you gentlemen present today can suggest some plans to "wake them up" you can save our forests at least one year's supply from every ten and perhaps a greater percentage.
I regret being unable to be with you personally and am sorry that 1 cannot be present to say more. We hold our next quarterly meeting at Palm Beach, Florida, in a few days and I am very busy making preparations for it.

Through the courtesy of the Louisiana lumbermen who made generous contributions for the purpose the Louisiana Forestry Association gave a banquet to the delegates to the Congress and invited guests in the Grunewald Hotel at 7:30 on Wednesday evening.
Quoting from the New Orleans Times-Picayune:
"Commissioner M. L. Alexander and Henry E. Hardtner double-teamed as twin toastmasters. The session was serious only in spots, high humor prevailing. Representatives of numerous women's clubs were in attendance.
"Commissioner Alexander, with marked versatility, appeared in the new role of a humorous monologist, and Harry


Gamble, relaxing after his strenuous efforts in the recent primary, told the company how he was responsible for conservation in Louisiana.
"I wanted a job," said Mr. Gamble, "and so I went to Governor Sanders and suggested that he start this conservation stuff, and give me a job at it for about $900 a year. He fell for my talk, and then I told him I knew a 'hill billy' named Henry E. Hardtner up at Urania who knew a pine tree f rom an oak tree every time. So he made Henry head of the commission. After Henry came Mr. Alexander, and neither one of them would have a job if it hadn't been for me.
"Mrs. A. F. Strom, President of the Federation of Women's Clubs, of Morgan City, talked on the advantages of forestry and conservation, and Mrs. Lydia W. Holmes promised to forget to talk on woman suffrage, but nearly forgot herself twice.
"John Henry Wallace, Conservation Commissioner of Alabama, supplied the essential pyrotechnics of the evening, and Jack Lafiance kept everyone in peals of laughter with his quaint Creole dialect.
"Theodore Woolsey of Massachusetts gave a brief talk on forestry and declared he had come all the way from the old Bay State to get a drink, but hadn't found it yet.
"Miss Constance Alexander sang and an orchestra furnished incidental music."
After referring to the organization of the Congress four years ago, which is outlined in the introduction, Mr. Holmes reported somewhat as follows:
The two principle matters carried over from the first Congress were the publication of the proceedings and the erection of a tablet on Pisgah National Forest to the late Mr. Geo. W. Vanderbilt, the former owner of the forest. Proceedings of the Southern Forestry Congress
The last resolution passed by the First Southern Forestry Congress was "that fl-e Executive Committee of the Southern Forestry Congress arrange for publication of the proceedings


in such form as they see fit." Jmmediate steps were taken to secure a $400 fund to pay for printing the proceedings. A circular letter was sent out to a large list of persons inviting membership in the congress on the following terms: Individual membership (including one copy of the proceedings) $1.50; Corporation membership (including five copies) $5.00; Association membership (including twenty-five copies) $25.00. Between August 1916 and August 1917, there were secured the following amounts: for membership subscriptions on the above plan $192.00; by two considerable donations $125.00, and by sale of copies of the Proceedings $58.00, a total of $375.00. With the exception of $31.00 spent on printing and postage to assist in securing recreational funds for the forestry regiments in France, all of the above money was used in securing funds and in publishing and distributing the Proceedings-$278 for printing 1,000 copies, and $89 for stationery and postage. A balance of $8 has been carried over two years or more with which a start has been made to finance this Second Southern Forestry Congress.
All expenses connected with the publishing of this report except those included in the above brief statement have been borne by the North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey. These expenses include typewriting, editorial work, proof reading and a large amount of correspondence. Vanderbilt Tablet Committee
The committee appointed by the First Southern Forestry Congress "to raise funds and erect a tablet at the entrance to the Pisgah National Forest" consists of the following men:
Governor Locke Craig, Chairman, North Carolina.
Dr. Joseph Hyde Pratt, North Carolina.
Dr. W. H. Holmes, District of Columbia.
Hon. Charles Lathrop Pack, New Jersey.
Hon. Henry S. Graves, District of Columbia.
Dr. Geo. F. Kunz, New York.
Mr. Geo. S. Powell, North Carolina.
This committee, through its Secretary, Mr. Powell, managed to secure a fund of $184.00, thirty dollars of which was expended for stationery and postage. The war came on and the Secretary of the committee was unable to increase this amount, of which $154 is now on hand. The committee asks the opin-


ion of the Congress as to whether it shall proceed to erect a tablet with the money available; or whether it shall endeavor to collect the $45 additional promised, but not paid in, and add to this if possible; or whether it shall be discharged and the money so far subscribed returned to the donors as insufficient for the purpose.
THE CHAIRMAN: 'rhe part of the Secretary's report concerning the Vanderbilt monument to be established in the great Pisgah Forest, which is now owned by the government, should be considered. It appears to me that something should be done, and whatever is done should be done now. It would look mean to let this thing drag along, and to abandon it, I was going to say, would look meaner still. The purpose is noble, and years hence, when you visit that section of the country, you will be glad to note that this congress was instrumental in commemorating the originator of the whole proposition.
COLONEL GRAVES: I am a member of the original committee, and, of course, I am very keenly interested in the project because of my relation to Pisgah Forest now. I feel very strongly that this project ought not to be dropped. Mr. Vanderbilt's contribution to forestry was a very great one. He initiated the first large scale experiment in private forestry in this country, and devoted a great deal of money to it, and the results are going, in the long run, to be very great. It would be a great pity to drop the idea. I appreciate that anything like a drive, for any project, or for raising funds for any project, is very difficult at the present time, and when my opinion was asked as to what we should do, I expressed myself in this way, that I should like to see the project continued, and that just as soon as a propitious time came that we urge the raising of funds as rapidly as possible. I should like to see the Southern Forestry Congress go on record in favor of this, and in favor of raising funds for the purpose, and which would be really an invitation to the committee to request funds from those in the South who may be interested in this. I should not myself feel entirely discouraged if we were not able to raise the necessary $500 or $1,000. What is it?
THE SECRETARY: The original idea was that it could be done for $500, but the increased cost of living has brought it


up to about $1,000, 1 believe. Mr. Powell estimates that we would have to raise at least $1,000.
COLONEL GRAVES: If we were not able to raise $1,000, 1 would not feel that we would have to drop the project, because people are going to become exceedingly interested in that section, and in forestry, and I think this forestry congress should recognize this, and give it sanction. The character of the monument is shown on this blue print. It is a large rock, to be designed to give it as natural an appearance as possible.
MR. WALLACE: I move that this entire matter of the erection of this monument be referred to the committee already appointed, and that the committee be vested with plenary powers to act as their judgment may dictate.
THE SECRETARY: May I suggest that one or two persons in attendance here be added to that committee? It will give it closer touch with this Second Congress. There is only one member of the committee present-Colonel Graves; all the others are away, and if we put on two members from this Congress, I think it would add largely to its value.
THE CHAIRMAN: We ought to have and must have a Louisiana member on this committee. Has the congress anyone to suggest from Louisiana-a good active man? In fact, all Louisianians, as far as I know, are active. It has been moved and seconded that two new members from this congress be appointed on that committee, and I take it that the officials of the congress will be authorized to appoint them unless there is some name suggested. (The motion was carried).
Mr. R. D. Forbes and Col. T. S. Woolsey, Jr., were subsequently added to the old Vanderbilt Tablet Committee bj the Chairman.
MR. WALLACE: I move that the secretary-treasurer's report be received and filed, and the thanks of the convention extended to the secretary for the able and efficient manner in which he has discharged his very difficult and onerous duties. The motion was carried.
A short talk was then made by Mr. B. A. Buck, Chief Tie Inspector of Mobile, Ala.
After briefly reviewing the history of land tenure in this country and the rapid destruction of our original forests, Mr.


Buck called attention to the fact that "nature itself will take charge of reforesting these lands if allowed. The seed and young growth which is the offspring of the original forest of 'Longleaf Yellow Pine' must be protected and allowed to grow. This is principally accomplished by fire prevention."
Mr. Buck then referred to a proposed venture in cooperative forestry in these words: "We propose to organize a stock company to be based on property now owned in fee simple by the company giving each purchaser of stock in the company a mortgage to a particular part or parcel of these lands, the proceeds of the sale of this stock, less a small amount for actual running expenses, to be reinvested in additional acreage of these cut over lands in the Gulf Coast Territory; these mortgages to be given with the restriction that the land is to remain the property of and in control of this company so long as this company shall comply with its obligations as set forth."
Mr. Buck asserted that "figures made in 1913 show that an investment of $1,675,000 will at the close of a twenty year period equal $3,756,750 or a net profit of $2,081,750.
Miss CAROLINE C. DORMAN: Mr. Buck did not touch upon a subject that has always been very interesting to me. There is one phase of the question with which I am quite familiar, and that is the cut over pine land. Anyone who has even seen the cut over pine land, where the people are trying to farm ought to realize the sadness of this situation. I don't know which is the sadder, the devastation of pine lands, or the people who are trying to live on them. Year after year these people go on-I am speaking now of the sand hills covered only with pine that has been cut off. Year after year these people go on and try to farm on this land. It is so poor that it will scarcely grow peanuts, but still they go on there and raise a little cotton and raise corn, and they try to raise cattle. My idea is that the only way these people will ever change will be to show them what actually can be done. They are ignorant, they are back woodsmen, and the only way we can ever get them f rom the beaten track is to prove the thing right before their eyes. My idea is this, that if there were some means of demonstrating to these people on a very small scale, just as Mr. Hardtner has done on a very large scale, that reforestation can be carried on, and at the same time cattle be grazed on these lands, I think they


would take hold of it. Of course, I don't know how it is to be done, but if there were some means of having in every parish, or better still, in every ward, a practical demonstration of this, where these people could see it, then, maybe they would take hold of the idea.
MR. GOODRICH JONES: Mr. Graves told us that the success of this movement depends upon each state. Gentlemen, I am here to tell you that somebody has got to help the State of Texas, and the State of Florida, and the other States of the Union, if you are going to make a success of this movement of forestry for the South and for the United States. We cannot keep on and battle alone. I want to tell you right now that you can count on your fingers the men in any State that take an interest in this subject of State forestry. I expect that Alabama can tell of only a few men who will carry it on. There are only a few men in Texas that have been carrying it on, and we have done so at our own expense.
Now, gentlemen, the State of Texas is on fire, Florida is on fire. There is a great conflagration going on all over the South. That conflagration is the waste of timber. In ten years our virgin pine will be gone.
How are we going to get the people of Texas interested in this subject of forestry, and tell them that in ten years hence, when the forests have gone, we will stand face to face with a country that is washed over-burned over-the birds gone where one-tenth of the millions of dollars spent on our streams, if spent at the watershed, would have kept the land from washing away.
I want this congress to pass a resolution that we ask the U. S. Forestry Department to send us some one down every year to help us in this educational campaign. The stream cannot rise higher than its source, and we cannot get the legislature to rise any higher than the people are educated, and the people know absolutely nothing about forestry. We will do the best we can in any State, but we have got to be helped and guided and controlled, you might say, by the National Government if we expect cooperation of all the Southern States.


My understanding was that there was not to be any formal address; it was simply to be a sort of a lead for discussion, and probably be a guide for any misunderstanding that might arise. I am sure that, as foresters and people interested in the subject of forestry, particularly Southern forestry, you appreciate what the naval stores industry means to Southern forestry. When you say "Pine" you also say "Naval stores." Probably the naval stores industry has been instrumental in carrying out your program. The money which has been paid for leases has enabled many people to carry their holdings of timber which otherwise they would have had to cut down sooner in order to meet the notes due in payment f or the amount of land and timber purchased. The naval stores man of old was an entirely different man than the naval stores man of today. He was a man who did not work, and did not have one iota, you might say, of technical knowledge. His sole idea was to get to a tree and get the stuff out and ship it into the market and lose money, and he succeeded at that very well for a number of years. Later, the Forest Service became interested in the subject, and had some investigations conducted into that branch which resulted in the adoption, or, rather, we will say, the practical abolishment of cutting the boxes into a tree. Today probably 95 per cent of the turpentine is made in the cup and gutter system, and that has been a great step forward, and has saved trees, especially in stormy regions, and it has increased the production of turpentine.
One other big step which has come into the naval stores industry was the adoption of copper instead of iron stills.
Those are the main steps which the industry has gone through in its more than three hundred years of existence. There has, however, been a big mental change in the producers, especially in the last four or five years. They are welcoming any advice which can come from the outside, to show them how to increase their production and work more efficiently. This is mainly through necessity, because they have been driven to the wall, and it has been a money losing proposition, and the adoption of cups shows that they had vision and understood that


there was a possible source of help from the outside. Most of the producers today arc directly or indirectly interested in the standing timber. In some cases the lumber companies themselves are operating their own timber through a turpentine department, and in other cases, they are financing the interests of the turpentine company which is operating the timber. In the first case, they are interested in the fact that the resulting timber means dollars and cents, according to the method in which the turpentine is extracted from the tree, and more and more of that education has been going on, and they have received information, some misleading, some helpful. But as I say, the naval stores man today is welcoming any practical advice that can be given him. We must always bear in mind, however, that you are working with an industry which is not a strictly speaking manufacturing concern like in a city, with all the facilities of a manufacturing concern. It is out in the woods, in many cases many miles removed from a railroad, and working with unskilled labor, except skilled in that particular line, and he has to do most of his work by hand. He is a pioneer, and goes in there long before the lumberman gets in there, and before the railroads, and he really has to build up his settlements and do pioneer work along that line.
Now, as I say, he is interested in all these different subjects, and in knowing where his future supply of timber will come from, and what the life of the industry is, and how he can save money all the way through on the work, and how he can increase the yield, and also what he can do to assist the agitation regarding the burning of forests. and anything along that line.
I merely cover the subject in that hurried way in order to show and express the attitude of the naval stores man. I am sure he would be interested in anything you men have to say. We have naval stores operators here who are interested, and I am sure will be only too glad to answer any practical questions, or to bring out the impractical side of some suggestion which might come forward.
COLONEL GRAVES: Might I ask a question. I am very keenly interested in the economic situation of the naval stores industry as it relates to this war. We have, of course, always led the world in the production of turpentine-something like 80 per cent, isn't it?


MR. SPEH: I believe today practically 75 per cent of the world's supply.
COLONEL GRAVES: How long are you going to be able to continue that production? The southeast is the natural place for the chief production of turpentine. We have the spruce forests. When those forests are gone, is not it going to'be necessary to go to the Pacific Coast and turpentine perhaps the western yellow pine, and use a much more expensive method of extracting turpentine where it comes from a source of that kind? What I want specifically is to know whether you believe that the industry, and the production of turpentine is not in considerable danger in the near future, because of the pending destruction of our forests.
MR. SPE11: I can best answer that by saying that the gum turpentine man is today becoming more and more, I will not say apprehensive, but to an extent interested in the production of wood turpentine-the curtailment in production of turpentine which is bound to come. The average production before 1914 was on the basis of 670,000 barrels of turpentine per annum. That has decreased rapidly, and today we find ourselves with a production, probably this current season, of in the neighborhood of 400,000 barrels. That is a fairly good increase of probably 20 per cent over last year's production. We do not look for any production to exceed 450,000 barrels any more in this country with the exception probably of some big year, which I do not believe will be possible with labor conditions. They are worried. Considerable investigations have been made in Mexican pine. They are more interested in Mexican and Central American than in western yellow pine. They are still at present operating in Mexico and some in Central America, and turpentine is coming into the country and is being offered for sale, and some of the rosin; but, of course, we are interested and we anticipate the increased production to come from France, and probably from Spain. India is becoming active in the work, and is practically supplying one-half of their requirements. So that the naval stores man is exceedingly interested, and is considerably worried about what is going to happen during the future. He wants to know where his timber is, and what to do until the time comes, because the turpentine business gets out probably three years ahead of the lumber business.


As you see, we have only ten years of virgin pine, and that means seven years of turpentining of virgin pine. They are watching with interest the development of reforestation. If you cannot get the lumbermen interested, it is pretty hard to get the turpentine man interested.
A MEMBER: Did you say they were practicing the French method?
MR. SPEH: No, Sir. The only French method I have seen is the experimental work in the Forest Reserve at Pensacola, Fla.
A MEMBER: How is it carried on?
MR. SPEH: We have adopted the cup system, but the French method is working trees for a prolonged period, which means that where the work was probably five years, on one side, to let the tree rest, and go around and work the other side, and then let it rest, and work the other side. The cost of carrying timber is higher here. We were not driven to the necessity, as they were. The turpentine man does not feel as if his interest lies any further than getting the turpentine out, and the timber taken away from him and cut down. I also understand that that method produces an inferior grade of lumber which probably would more than offset the increased yield of turpentine from the tree.
A MEMBER: I want to say that in Florida I saw millions of trees with great gashes on both sides, with only a few inches of the bark left. A great many of those trees had been blown down due to those gashes on both sides, and a great many of the trees were on fire, as the cattleman were burning over the grass with blazing torches, and at least half of the entire trees had been killed by the fire. I did not see anything in Florida but what had those terrible gashes on both sides, and I saw little trees not over ten years old cut the same way.
MR. JONES: The conservative turpentine man speaks of these as tooth picks. There is plenty of that being done, and if that could be stopped, it would be the best thing in the world for the naval stores man. It would be a move in the direct steps of conservation, and you will be doing him a good deed, because he is not making any m)ney out of it. But you can-


not stop it by the State Legislature, or by educational work. Most of the timber is at present being worked on specifications. That is, the lumber company, on leasing its timber specifies that no tree under eight inches shall be cupped; that a tree from eight to ten inches in diameter shall have but one cup; f rom ten to twelve inches two cups, and in some cases nothing over two cups. In some rare occasions they specify three cups, and they specify that the bark shall be preserved between any two cups on the same tree, and that in some cases 40 per cent of the bark shall be preserved. They are getting around to those things, and the modern naval stores man is living Vp to it, partly through compulsion, and partly to the fact that he realizes it is to his own welfare.
A MEMBER: What measure would you advocate, legal or otherwise, to prolong the life of the turpentine industry? I have in mind state legislation that would encourage forest regeneration-legislation that might restrict the cupping of trees to certain size timber, and the like.
MR. SPEH: Well, I am afraid it would meet with considerable opposition on the part of some. I believe the only sure way would be educational. There has been work going on in the Department of Agriculture at Washington to educate these men as to the cost of production, by going and asking them what their yield is, and what it costs to make it. They don't know how much it costs. You have to go and establish a set of books for them. Ask them what they pay for chipping, for instance, and they don't even know that.
To my mind the safe and sure way is education. It is going to take a long time, perhaps, to reach every man along that line, and legislation would probably be the proper way; whether it would be entirely just to some people or not, I do not know. You would be doing a big deed f or the small operator, to send him into other channels. He can produce food stuff and other things, and incidentally he would stop losing money. That holds as a general rule. Today probably it would not be entirely true, because the price of naval stores are comparatively high compared with previous prices, and it is mighty hard to go up and talk to a man about small trees, when it would almost pay to log tooth picks. The cost of production is increasing right along, and if they increase the production,


the selling price will go down, and pretty soon you will eliminate your margin of profit.
A MEMBER: May I say that the influence which operates in the cupping of very small trees to some extent is a financial one, as Mr. Speh has pointed out. They will cup everything that can hold a cup, and they know when they are doing it that it is not a financial desirability to cup that sized timber.
MR. BISHOP: just a word about the French system that Mr. Jones asked particularly about. For the last five years that system has been tried experimentally in the Florida national forest, and the conclusion, as reached at this time, is that it sees that this system is not practicable for the operation of mature timber-timber with which the industry is very largely concerned at this time. It is the expectation of foresters that it will be practical in the operation of second growth stands, or young timber, and that is the class of timber on which it is used in France. It is a system that is used for very long time operations on young growing timber. This is not the class of timber that is being worked by the naval stores industry at this time. We do expect, however, it will be used for second growth timber.
MR. SPEH: Mr. Cary has been giving considerable study to this matter of reforestation, and has developed some very valuable information along this line, and particularly in Georgia. I am sure that Mr. Cary would consent to give us a few remarks on this, and that it would be interesting both to the naval stores man and to the foresters.
MR. CARY: South Georgia is the country that I am most familiar with, and have seen the most of. It is a country that was logged a good many years ago according to the selection system, and its second growth has come up, following that early logging, and at the same time, in the swamps, there are more or less bunches of old growth timber. Mr. Jones' tooth pick is a very familiar recollection to me-young timber about six inches in diameter breast high with one cup, or one box; trees of somewhat larger size with two cups or boxes on them. The tree in most cases was bled to death. Now, necessity is making an end of that, because they are finding today that tur-


pentine chances are not as plentiful as they were; and as in every industry there are progressive and thinking men in this who will make an end of it because it is not good business; indeed, considering the reputation of the turpentine industry in the country at large, the number of such men that I have run across in the last few months has rather surprised me. I feel that there is a movement on foot which is just starting in this country that is going to mean a great deal for the turpentine industry, and for conservation at the same time.
For instance, there is a man in South Georgia who has the reputation in the industry of being a most careful and understanding man; a few years ago he purchased 18,000 acres, and so far he has not bled it. He is cultivating a portion, running some stock, and operating for turpentine on leased timber. Meanwhile, he is letting his own trees grow, and has in mind the idea of waiting until there is a sufficient number of good sized trees on that land to make a thoroughly good operation, and then work it conservatively. By that he means bleeding the trees of about ten inches and up for a period of five years, then resting five years, after which he will go back and repeat the process, at the end of which time he considers a large part of the trees will be suitable for lumber.
This was the first thing of a comprehensive -nature that I had run against, and it was very interesting. I spent a month with this man trying to check up his estimates on growth, to help him technically if I could, and it has been very satisfactory indeed. I find further, in that region, that a number of good, capable and substantial operators, seeing the weakness of their old system of working timber, have recently bouglit tracts of from four to ten thousand acres, with the general broad idea in their minds of doing business permanently on those areas. They say it can be done. For instance, a factor in the turpentine business, says he went to a certain place in Florida a few years ago with the idea that he could operate six years and be done. As a matter of fact, his nephews are operating there today, and have been for a good many years, and they have realized that with good business management, they can operate there forever for naval stores, and then bring out the timber when it is serviceable as stumpage. That has just begun.


Over in that country are men of the other stamp-who bleed any tree they can hang a cup on, hang too many cups for the tree to stand, and cut deeper than necessary. Much of that sort of thing I believe is done because men don't know their business. They do these things by habit. They are in the turpentine business and work their timber in general, according to fashion, but as to why a particular operation is required or what is the best way to do it, they do not know. The salvation of that situation, as I say, is the elimination of the turpentine who does not know and can't really learn his business so as to conduct it efficiently. There is a big section in north Florida and south Georgia just starting tip with young timber, on which in my opinion good business in the form of turpentining and lumbering both can be carried on. I should like to see brainy men from any other section get into that region along side the bright local man and see just what can be done with it. It looks to me like one of the big business openings in the country.
COL. WOOLSEY: I think that one of the points that Mr. Cary has brought out, should be further emphasized. The Chairman has referred to the turpentine industry as temporary. They tap the trees for awhile and expect to move somewhere else. It seems to me that we have come to the period in forest development when we have got to look at it from the standpoint of permanent production. I would like to emphasize that point. I would like to ask the Chairman why is not the turpentine industry a permanent business. Why do you have to follow it for awhile and then abandon it?
MR. SPEH: For one thing, in a greater percentage of cases than the average, the turpentine man is not the owner of his raw material. That applies as a turpentine man. As a lumberman, in a good many cases, he does own the raw material. He is especially interested in lumber, and his turpentine is looked upon as velvet. There was an intimation, probably as late as four years ago, that it was not worth while turpentining timber, that good timber was cut round, and there is probably something to it. There are few who still feel that turpentining is destructive to resultant lumber, that is, that yoLi get an inferior grade. They are gradually overcoming that feeling, and I believe some of that was unjustifiably brought out through propaganda about damage and a lot of cases of pitch decay and


wind shake. Much of that was not due to turpentining. It was shown that the loss from turpentining was less than from lightning and fire set by lightning. Along the line of the fire proposition, the turpentine man today is in the habit of burning off his woods in the fall. I doubt very much if I could find one per cent of the turpentine men who through necessity burn off their entire woods. It is done for them long before they get at it, and that would indicate that they would keep the fire out of the woods until they are ready to set it. If you would assure them that there would be no fire in there they would simply do away with the burning as it costs money. Today it costs in the neighborhood of $70.00 to rake and burn a small unit, for one man, and just imagine what it means to a large operator. The turpentine men have been protecting their timber through necessity. They are doing that right along an very carefully raking around every single tree for a distance of about three feet. Then under proper weather conditions, probably after a rain, they will set fire to the woods, and generally have people riding around the while to see that it does not spread too rapidly. They do not do that with the idea of protecting the timber, but to save their cups. The cups will take fire quicker than the timber. Anything which they do to protect their interest, however, protects the timber, which is I believe what you gentlemen are after.
MR. F. H. FECHTIG: We have bought in the past twelve months in the Southern region something over one billion feet of lumber cut into cross ties. The gentleman has just talked about turpentine. Turpentine rights are sold in timber. Unless there is some form of contract under which it is sold, that is approved by the Forestry Department, or by some law, you cannot have any system with reference to it. And so with the cutting of lumber. There is lots of lumber sold on a stumpage basis. The people who buy lumber on a stumpage basis have no interest in what becomes of the land after the lumber is cut off. Therefore, if you don't have some form of law with reference to the replanting and taking care of that timber, you cannot get results. You won't do it by education. I am heartily in favor of education, but we all know that any man who plants a tree hardly thinks that he will live to see that tree grow and be cut again. I was very much struck with what an


old lumberman said to me the other night on the train. He has a large place in Warrenton County, South Carolina, on what is called Lynch Creek. That section is one of the finest producers of longleaf pine in the whole South. This man told me that where he cut that timber off and sold it to me when I was purchasing agent twenty-five years ago, he is now farming largely. He has 1,900 acres under cultivation, 1,300 acres of regrowth pine timber, ready to be cut. Now, you have got to get up the interest of big men like that, to take care of this subject. I hardly think you can rely on the small man. What we need in this country is great big men, and great big corporations with individual initiative. We have got to have them, there is no doubt about that. They will be helpful to every one. I think the Forestry Section at Washington has got one of the greatest duties to perform to this country that can be performed, but my thought is that we have got to come to the National Forestry regulation. We cannot handle this matter on State's rights, because one State is not interested like another.
MR. PACE: One of the questions asked was as to the best way to preserve our pine forests. I speak from a pine stand point, having been in the turpentine business for twenty-nine years. Our lamented Theodore Roosevelt travelled through the South several years ago; he was interested in forest preservation, and suggested that if we could have a limit of turpentining our timber forests, and not cut under 12 or 15 inches, all would be well. Now, there is no profit in turpentining trees of 5, 6, 7 or 8 inches in diameter, under certain conditions.
I want to impress upon this Forestry Congress that if the people of the South would only restrict their timber to 12 or 15 inch trees for turpentine purposes, they would be doing a good thing for themselves, and for the turpentine man, too. I speak after thirty years of experience. The thing for us to do is to preserve our forests, as our former president has said. All we have to do is to put, by national legislation, a 12 or 15 inch limit on our pine trees to be operated for turpentine, and then we will have a crop every 15 or 25 years, and also a crop of mill timber.
MR. PETERS: How would you bring about this restriction-through education or legislation ?


MR. PACE: Through Federal legislation. You can't do it otherwise. The turpentine operator does not care. He will put out a bunch of negroes and put turpentine boxes on everything he can put it on. The landowner does not know just how to restrict him. It is all the same to him whether it is a tooth pick tree, or a sapling. When he leaves the tree he does not care what becomes of it.
MR. PETERS: You think Federal legislation of that kind would be constitutional ?
MR. PACE: Our President (Mr. Roosevelt) suggested that it might be done some years ago.
MR. WALLACE: Legislation of that nature would be in the same category as Child Labor legislation, or the Mann Act. In other words, it would be entirely within the province of the Congress of the United States to make it unlawful to transport any material from any tree, or any naval stores turpentine or otherwise made from any tree tinder 12 inches in diameter.
MR. PACE: I am f rom North Carolina and have been in the forestry business for thirty odd years, and the best method of preserving our pine forests is not to let them turpentine a free, or put a cup on a tree under 12 inches in diameter. That is the only way in the world to get at it. The manufacturer gets nothing out of it, and he murders your tree in its infancy. If he does it after it is 15 inches in diameter, then your children and my children will have another crop of pine forests in this country.
MR. PETERS: I would like to see a resolution on this subject presented to the committee having charge of resolutions.
COL. GRAVES: I would suggest that five minutes be given to Colonel Woolsey who worked with the Twentieth Engineers over in the pine turpentine forests of France, to tell us how they worked that thing.
COLONEL T. S. WOOLSEY: I think that the last speaker, Mr. Pace, has niade the best speech of the morning, because he has hit the nail on the head. He says that those people who say that you cannot turpentine perpetually, are wrong, and I think they are. As Colonel Graves has remarked, I have just come back from Southern France, where they do it perpetually,


and they make a lot of money out of it. I will not go into all of the technical details, but I will tell you, in a few words, how they work the maritime pine: Over a century ago, this land was denuded, just as it is being denuded in the South. Then they spent money to get it back into forests. I will start my story with the forests which grow in dense stands and when young are thinned by being tapped to death. That is, they put so much tapping on the trees to be cut out that it kills them; those small trees are then cut and sold to England for use in the coal mines. That is the first stage. As the trees grow up, they keep on tapping to death the trees that they want to get rid of. When the trees are thirteen inches in diameter, they tap them alive-a kind of tapping designed not to kill the tree. They tap the tree until it is ready to be cut for lumber, and that period in state forests is usually at seventy years-say sixtyfive to seventy-five for state timber. As you can judge maritime pine is a very rapid growing species. On private places, they cut them after fifty-five or sixty years of growth. In other words, the owner cuts earlier than the state. Five years before the timber is mature, they tap all timber to death. That is, all the trees that are being tapped alive are given an intensive tapping. By two years, it is ready for the ax. They get all the rosin they can out of the timber, and when it is mature they cut the timber clean, leave the tops on the grounds, but protect the tops from fire, because the tops contain the pine cones (and seeds) that are to give them their future forests. Then, the new f orest comes up, and you start all over again. These men have made millions out of it. There is no question about it. 1 have authoritative figures that when they reclaimed this land (over twelve hundred thousand acres) they bought it f or seventy-seven cents an acre, and in 1914, just before the war, this land, without the timber-this same land-was selling for from $16.00 to $32.00 an acre, and one French writer estimated that they added a value in that whole Landes country of eighty millions of dollars, where before, perhaps, it was worth a few millions.
MR. CARY: Miss Dorman mentioned the matter of the small landowner, and the betterment of his condition, and the way in which we might better that, and conservation promoted at the same time by grazing stock and raising timber on the


same land. Mr. Hardtner could tell a great deal about that. He is the source of my first thinking on the subject. I have done a good deal of it since, and it certainly looks to me as if that was a scheme which should appeal to the owner of farm land, and an industry which should have a wide field in the South on lands of moderate grade. Mr. Hardtner thinks the desirable unit for that is not less than 500 acres. Of this a small portion, sufficient to provide food for the farmer's family and probably a little sales crop, should be cultivated; cattle would range the balance under fence; wherever it comes naturally or may be planted will grow timber. That program, if economically sound and applied on a large scale, settles the whole question, for the settler and for the country. The advantages are too many to be developed here. Furthermore, it may at numerous places from North Louisiana to South Georgia be seen in actual operation. I have seen occasionally men doing practically that same thing, owning a few hundred acres, running his stock at large for the present, but realizing that on their own land he has food for a certain amount of stock, if the range is ever restricted, taking care of the timber growing on their land at the same time. Several are in the region of the longleaf or slash pine section, bleed their own timber, and sell their gum to the neighboring turpentine men. This plan is suited to land of lower grade in respect to agricultural fertility. The suggestion was made that this thing be developed in each parish or county under the leadership of lumbermen, or any one who would undertake it. It looks to me like one of the most fruitful things that has been formulated in the way of advance this morning. I have talked that same thing in Washington, tried to start investigation there and hope that some time educational work will arise from that source.

THE CHAIRMAN: We have been hearing a good deal in these discussions about the subject of education in connection with forestry work, and restrictions, both as to State and Federal legislation. I want to take the liberty of a few introductory remarks this afternoon to say that it seems to me no mat-


ter how you go about it, whether through education or legislaion-restrictive legislation, I mean, that the first thing to do in these Southern States, as it has been proven to be the best thing to do by other states, is to establish strong and non-political State Forestry Departments, which will be authorized to appoint a technically trained man as State Forester, and the Department given an adequate appropriation of funds. I think that, in addition to that, measures should be adopted that will, so far as possible, do away with the customary practice of forest denudation, so that lands may be brought back to productivity after they are lumbered. I might say that there is such a law now before the Mississippi Legislature, which will provide for those things, namely, a State Board of Forestry organized along non-political lines, a State Forester, and adequate appropriation of funds, which will be raised through a license tax on the business of cutting timber and of gathering turpentine, similar to the fax adopted by Louisiana; and I want to make the suggestion that the lumbermen here and that the turpentine men here get behind that measure and urge its passage. I think that some action of that sort on the part of the lumbermen and turpentine men will go a long way towards bringing together those men-the foresters, landowners and others interested in this great subject, and making them see the need for working in cooperation to gain the common end.
The first subject on the program is "The Livestock Industry, and its Relation to the National Program of Forestry." It was to have been led off by Doctor Blackman, but unfortunately he cannot be present, and I am going to ask Professor S. M. Tracy, in Charge of the Forage Crop Investigations of the Department of Agriculture, stationed at Biloxi, Miss., who is engaged in testing various forage crops there, to lead off in this discussion.

PROF. TRAcy*: I did not come here to talk. I did not expect to have anything to say. I shall say very little today. In attending this and other similar meetings for the last ten or fif*The death of Samuel Mills Tracy at his home in Laurel, Miss., on September 4, 1920, at the age of 73, is learned with great regret.-The Editor.


teen years, I have received a very definite impression that the object of the association was to cover all the territory with trees; that lumber was regarded as an essential thing for building houses, and building barns, and stables. We must have lumber, no matter whether we have anything else. We do want more lumber. We have to build barns and stables and so forth, and yet it is no use to build those things unless we have .some cattle to shelter, or things to put in them. We have need for other things besides lumber. I suppose my ideas are a little exaggerated, but I cannot help thinking that the forest people have not given sufficient attention to the importance of growing live stock. At anything like the present price of beef and lumber, beef is a very profitable crop. I would combine the two, and they can be combined economically and profitably.
As a rough estimate, I would say that two-thirds of our Southern lands are fit for cultivation or for use as pasture; there is the other one-third, speaking roughly, that is not cultivable, and not fit f or pasture lands. I do not think you will find it possible, in general, to grow tirriber and grass, or cattle on the same lands. In the West the grasses are mostly small grasses. They have very little rain. Those grasses dry up and remain there all winter and make good feed for cattle, just as any other good dry hay. Here, as a rule, where there are cut over lands, our grasses, of course, are very tough; they are not very nutritious, and then, with our heavy winter rainfall, what good there is in them is washed out, and we have very, very poor food in them, although we have plenty of grasses.
Some years ago I was looking at the statistics published by the Department of Agriculture, and in it they gave figures on winter losses on cattle in the North and in the South. In Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana, which I looked at specially, the winter losses in cattle were more than double what they were in the North, simply because our cattle had been left out in these cut over lands to feed on wire grass and sage grass. If our cut over lands here are fenced and protected from fire, they will very soon grow up in timber so thick that no grass will come. We have very little good grass in cut over lands. If herds are allowed to run on those lands, they have neither trees nor good grass. The more nutritious grasses, the seeds are destroyed by fire, and are shut out by the other grasses, and we have very little good grass. That is where we have


protection and no fire. Where we have our lands protected by fencing, and heavily grassed, we very soon get rid of wire grass and broom grass, and all those other grasses very easily. It is on such lands that we get our best grasses, and even beef growing becomes profitable. Those lands need practically no protection frorn fire. Where we have those grasses, there is never enough of them left in winter to burn, so that they protect themselves. It occurred to me that that was one thing we wanted to do-to look out for protection, and fence the land, and grass them heavily with the cheapest and best pasture, and then devote our land which is suited for those grasses, to forestry work, and grow all the trees we can, and in that way we will have both our beef and timber.
MR. Roy L. HOGUE: A very casual glance over our timber lands of the South will convince almost any one, I think, that we are denuding them of timber. A more careful examination of these lands will convince one also that many of these lands at present are not agricultural lands. I say at present, because the time may come when these lands will be agricultural lands; but at present it is not economically possible to use them for agriculture. We have in the neighborhood of 50,000 acres near Jackson, Miss., and 20,000 acres in the Southern part of the State near Gulfport. All of those lands are or have been covered with a heavy growth of timber. We have now sold this timber. Some of it has been removed. On the tract near Gulfport most of it has been removed. It is our problem to know what to do with this cut over land. We have not a single tenant on our 20,000 acres near Gulfport. We do not get a dollar in revenue f rom all those 20,000 acres of land, which is nearly all cut over. On the 50,000 acres near Jackson in the early days, settlers and squatters and others settled on this land in spots, clearing 20 and 30 and 40, and sometimes 100 acres, making little farms-little indentations in the great timber belt, and when we purchased our timbered land, we purchased these farm lands along wth the timber, our primary purpose, of course, being to secure the timber, and the land was thrown in as a sort of "for better title" proposition. We never considered the land (per se) as of any material value. Only the amount of timber on the land that was purchased was considered, and the land was taken only


because the title to the timber was improved by the taking of the land, and no particular time, therefore, needed for removing the timber. And that is the way nearly all of the timber land in the State has been acquired. All of the large holders of land in the State, or nearly all of the large timber land owners of the State, acquired their land for this very reason, not that they considered the land worth much, but because they wanted to get better title to the timber, or longer time for the cutting of the timber. Probably that is the reason why lumbermen are so indifferent to the forestry problems of today. It is economically recognized by the forestry students, as well as the lumbermen, that it is now economically impossible to grow timber on this land under our present system of taxation which, in Mississippi, is a general property tax. In other words, as soon as this timber, which requires, say, fifty years to mature, from a seedling-as soon as this timber in Mississippi becomes of any commercial value, say at thirty years, it is the duty of the assessor to assess that timber at whatever it is worth. At thirty-one years, it is again assessed at what it is worth, and at thirty-two, forty and fortyfive, and we pay taxes on that assessment, not only for the year's growth, but, on the growth of all the previous years, that have gone by since the planting of the forest, and at the time of cutting, as you will see, we will have paid for not only the year's growth each year-the taxes on the year's growthbut on fifty years' growth, and each preceding year on all the preceding years. In other words, it is something like this: Supposing a farmer-it is not quite a parallel case, but somewhat similar-suppose a farmer would pay taxes on his agricultural products, but in lieu of disposing of them each year, lie would have to store them in a granary until at the end of fifty years, he would be allowed to sell them and get his reward, but all the time, like we do in forestry, he would have to begin to pay taxes on not only the crop he raised that year, but all the preceding years. You can readily see that that would "bust" any farmer. There is not so much labor required in growing timber, and that makes a difference. It is not quite a parallel case. However, they are very similar. No man is going to engage in a business that is going to break him if he keeps it up. I think that is one reason I fiat the timher men have been so indifferent to the reforestation program


in the several States. Even in our State of Mississippi, where we are about to pass a forestry law, there is almost no interest among the lumbermen, who should be the ones interested if anybody is, because they are the great holders of the cut over lands of the State.
We are trying to make our holdings revenue-producing. I will tell you briefly how we attempt to do this. We fence in large areas. We try to make our units about 2,500 acres. We put a hog-proof fence around this land. Most of our land lies in the Pearl River Valley, which is very rich alluvial soil. The forests are virgin hardwood, mixed in places with pine, and there is a good deal of mast in there f or goats and hogs, and some good grazing for cattle. We get men, preferably those that live on an adjoining place, to rent these pastures f rom us. We f furnish the f ences and they f furnish the labor to put the fencing up. The first year they pay no rent; the second year they pay from twenty-five to fifty cents an acre for the use of this land. In this way we have managed to fence in about 25,000 acres of our land in the Pearl River Valley. We are trying to introduce the same plan on our land in the south end of the State. As yet we have succeeded in getting nobody to undertake the f fencing of any of these lands. It is true it costs considerable; about $250.00 a mile for the fencing; but, in about three years, if we take in large enough areas, we get this money back, and the fence ordinarily is good for twelve or fifteen years, by renewing the posts once. After three years, we have, therefore, liquidated our investment, not counting interest, and still have a fence and a revenue producing property. Although the revenue is rather small, it is still better than nothing.
Another thing about the pasturing of our land: The stock pastured inside this fence keeps the grass down. Wherever the land is cut over, immediately it starts up in forest weeds and grasses and briars and brambles, and so f drth. Some places have only grass and some places only briars, and some places young trees, and in other places all three start, and the goats are our principal allies in keeping this growth down. They would rather have blackberry briars than candy to eat. They are at home in a blackberry patch. Wherever we have 1,000 goats or more on our lands, the people have to go a long way for their blackberries. I might say, however, that in our


stocking of these farms, we never own any of the stock ourselves. We allow the other man who understands the stock business, and who must give it his personal attention, to own and look af ter the stock. We f eel that it is too hazardous a business to turn good stock over to a hired man. So we wait until we secure a renter for this land before we fence it in, because if we do not, these people who have been used to this open range all their lives, and have a sort of neighborhood claim on it, would not allow the fences to stand. That would probably be the experience in a large part of the State. It is better to lease the lands to people who live immediately adjoining them, for if you bring in somebody from the north, the local people will feel as though he is an outsider, and does not, maybe, belong there. In this way we have succeeded in getting much of our lands under fences, and have kept the growth down to a considerable extent. The tenants are also interested then in keeping fires out, because they understand that fires ruin the range. In the olden days when it was an open range, everybody's business was nobody's business, and fires would start and nobody was particularly interested in putting them out, if it did not threaten their own clearings, so that the fires would sweep up the valley, taking everything in their course. The way it is now, in case a fire breaks out, the tenants leasing pastures will organize little home crews to put the fire out. We have no organization for putting out fires, and it is up to them to stop fires when they start. Of course, we have had unusually favorable weather for the last sixteen months, and no fires of any consequence have taken place in our tracts in the Pearl River Valley f or two years. I believe that if we could have all our timber under fence, we could prevent most forest fires, and if fires can be prevented we can raise a forest. Fires are the greatest enemy, next to man, of the forests. With those tenants stationed along at intervals, with a little assistance, we can soon eliminate our fires. If we could put in roads across these forests, and give them some sort of additional protection, besides what they can give themselves, we could put out any fire inside of a mile square, that would start. We would have to have telephones installed, and more or less expensive protective systems, but that could be done and possibly will be done.
As Mr. Peters told you, we are going to have a bill intro-


duced, or it has already probably been introduced in our State Legislature at Jackson. There is a feeling throughout the whole State that something is gong to be done at this Legislature. Two or three bills have already been introduced, trying to regulate the diameter of the trees to be cut, but it is doubtful if you can force people to do the things that they ought to do but don't want to do. In my opinion, the best way is try and make it economically desirable for them to do those things. Of course, there will have to be a few regulations, but in order to get the lumbermen to do the things that we want them to do, it is going to be necessary to make it profitable to do those things.
At present, so far as I am able to see, it is absolutely economically impossible for them to plant forests. They can protect what they have got, and save what comes annually, probably, but it is impossible with our present law to plant forests. They are human, like anybody else, and they are not going to do something that they perhaps ought to do without profit-they must have at least a small profit. So that it seems to me that the only thing that we can expect them to do is to give some degree of protection to the forests that are already on the lands, and to the cut over areas, as they develop throughout the State.
MR. FORBES: Might I ask Mr. Hogue what the status of the f orest on that land is, and to what extent he agrees with Professor Tracy in his dictum that you cannot raise trees and stock on the same land, with profit to both.
MR. HOGUE: I am inclined to agree with Doctor Tracy. As soon as the timber gets big enough to cover the ground, there is no more grass. The grass is gone. But in a good many areas, especially in South Mississippi, in cut over lands, there will be large areas where there is no heavy growth of timber. You cannot fence in just a sniall area on a large tract profitably; you have got to take in a good-sized area if you are going to fence it in with a hog-proof fence. Fencing is expensive. Wherever the trees grow thick, there is no grass. Wherever the grass is heavy, the trees do not get a chance. So that if you fail to pasture any land that is not already in trees, the grass grows very high, and fire, which inevitably gets into those areas, will prevent repro-


auction. I do not know whether Dr. Tracy agrees with that or not.
MR. WILKINSON: Might I ask the gentleman to state the source of those fires in his territory?
MR. HOGUE: The greatest source of our fires is the dummy line-sparks from the engine.
MR. SPRAKER: I would like to ask-does not the gentleman own the dummy line, and if so, why not take precautions.
MR. HOGUE: We do not control the dummy line. We sold our timber to another concern and we have no law in the State to prevent them from doing anything they please. One might recover at law for damages incurred, but for immature reproduction there is no recognized value and we never press it. In some places we have second growth, some dating back as early as the Civil War, practically, though it is virgin forest except where our farms are.
PROF. TRACY: I think it is impossible to grow good timber and grass on the same land. Some parts will grow good grass and others grow good timber, and others any where in between them.
A MEMBER: The gentleman says he fences his land practically in 2,500 acre units. About how many acres would it take to feed a steer?
MR. HOGUE: We do not try to carry many cattle on our timber lands. We run them in the woods only in the winter time. There is a cane that grows on our land which makes very valuable winter grazing. In summer we take the cattle out of the woods and put them in the open land. It takes about five acres of open land, if we wish to keep them in there all the time, f or one steer.
MR. HARDTNER: You were asking about grazing on cut over lands in connection with growing trees. Our company, the owners and stockholders, are not foolish enough to own 50,000 to 60,000 acres of land and not utilize it to the best advantage. We have 1,000 head of cattle that we pasture on our land. We find it very profitable. The store manager looks after the cattle. The cattle almost look after themselves.


We are not foolish enough to own these broad areas without having cattle. We raise all the cattle we need for our local market, and the sawmill people consume a great deal of beef and mutton and hogs, and so forth. Besides, we ship several car loads a year to the markets of the North. If there is anything that I know something about, it is raising cattle and growing timber at the same time. You can make enough money out of your cattle business to pay for reforesting, on ordinary cut over lands. We find that it takes about four acres of ordinary cut over land that has bushes and trees on it, to take care of one steer. These piney wood pastures will take care of cattle about nine months in the year, and then you must either drive them to a cane pasture close by in the creek swamp, or else feed them for three months in the year. It does seem to me though that if you can have free pasturage for nine months, you can afford to feed them for three months. That is not nearly as long as you have to f eed them in the North and other places.
We have 2,500 acres fenced, and we keep a great many of our cattle in that pasture. We also have a herd of elks in that same pasture which we expect to make a success in raising as soon as they become thoroughly acclimated. But to show you my confidence in cattle raising, in addition to the cost of the land, I am spending $8,000 this year in fences, and buying a good grade of cattle, in order to make one special experiment in Winn Parish. We will put a good grade of cattle there, and have a man in charge, and while the trees are growing and the pine seeds falling, and germinating, we will be raising cattle, and we expect to make a great deal of money out of it. We will fence 1,500 or 1,600 acres of this piney woodland. We are also going to fence three or four hundred acres of adjacent swamp land that has good grass and cane on it, and we confidently believe that we can raise those cattle without giving them an ounce of hay, or any other kind of feed. However, if necessary, and I think it will be good business, we are going to feed those cattle two months in one year, because they are too valuable to be neglected. The tramping of the cattle does not hurt the pine seedlings. In the 2,500 acre pasture that is fenced, we have from three to ten thousand seedlings to the acre, and there are trees six years old of pine, and all kinds of hardwood, and while


we have had heavy grazing on that land, we do not find that it hurts them. Later on we would rather the cattle would thin this stand anyway. So, cattle raising and tree growing go hand in hand, and any one owning broad areas of land who does not engage in the business of both, is really missing a good opportunity.
I have a reprint here from the Lumber World Review, that I will be glad to give any of you as you go out. It relates to a permanent timber land policy, and its plan is for reforesting 1,500 acres in Winn Parish. We go into the subject very fully, and we find that the cost of this venture-I figured out last year that, including $4.00 an acre for cost of land, 1,500 acres, was $12,450, and I suppose it will cost us maybe a couple of thousand dollars more. The point I want to make is that we are making this experiment-not an experiment, after all, but we are going into this business, because it is not an experiment with us. We have been over the experimental stage ten or twelve years. We figure the land at $4.00 an acre, and the cost of that venture will be something like $14,850. We expect to get back annual returns sufficient to more than pay the interest on the investment. This table shows the cost of operation, profit, taxes and interest on investment, at 7 per cent, and f eed f or the cattle, and the annual returns will be 500 cords of wood, and we will have fifty head of cattle to sell. Thus, we find the annual return amounts to 7 per cent interest on the investment, and reforestation is accomplished without one cent of cost. Then, I go on to state how we expect to handle the timber and how we expect to bleed it for turpentine when it gets about 25 or 30 years of age, and how we expect to make posts, rails, ties and pulpwood out of the thinning, and all about the turpentine operations, and at the end of an investment of $14,850 for 1,500 acres of cut over piney woodland, yielding 7 per cent interest for 60 years, we will then have a surplus of $450,000 for the timber. We expect the timber on those 1,500 acres to be worth $450,000 in 60 years time. If you do not believe it, just read this paper and you will be convinced, because I have studied the matter very carefully, and I know what the price of timber will be 60 years hence. I know what it is now, and there is no doubt in my mind but what that 1,500 acres will be worth $450,000 when we have to cut it for lumber.


You see now that I am engaging in the cattle business while growing trees. I know that it is profitable.
COL. WOOLSEY: May I ask Mr. Hardtner a question? Ulave you tried raising goats?
MR. HARDTNER: Yes, to my sorrow. About a year ago I thought that the black jack oak bushes were taking my forest and were not permitting the young pine to grow as they should, shading the ground too much, and I decided that I was going to find a cheap way to get rid of the black jack oaks, so I got 1,000 goats and put them in there, and on those 2,000 acres, you could not tell that there was a goat in evidence, they made so little impression on those black jack bushes. So I decided that if I had to use goats to keep down the bushes, they would have to be restricted to a very small area, and I would have to have 10,000 head of goats to keep those bushes down. Besides, it is not necessary. There is always the survival of the fittest. Pine will soon reach above the bushes, and the bushes are not in the way at all.
MR. HOGUE: They interfere with the growth of the grass, don't they ?
MR. HARDTNER: Oh, yes. In this pamphlet I touch on this that we will have grazing for ten or fifteen years probably, after we commenced this special experiment or business venture. We can graze one head of cattle on four acres for at least ten years. Then when the trees begin to shade the ground somewhat, you might have to reduce the number of cattle which you have on that pasture. You can very well afford to do that, because you will begin to sell bean poles, tomato stakes, pulp wood and other products f rom the land, and maybe when the trees are 20 years of age, you can keep only a limited number of cattle on that pasture. That is what we want to do. We want to raise cattle while we are growing timber. That is exactly the idea.
MR. PACE: Are you getting short or long leaf pine to replace the growth?
MR. HARDTNER: Both. Where there was longleaf pine before, we have had considerable bushes growing up, but the longleaf pine is growing equally as well as the shortleaf or loblolly. Too much shade may prevent the longleaf pine from


getting a good start, but it will hold its own with the shortleaf or loblolly pine, if you give it an equal chance.
MR. JONES: The great bug-a-boo with the lumbermen in Texas is taxation, and yet I have never seen an estimate of what the taxation will amount to in 50 years. I would like to know this.
MR. HARDTNER: We provide for taxes each year, and we still make 7 per cent on raising cattle and using up the surplus wood on the ground, and at the end of 60 years, we will have $450,000 worth of timber. You have to settle the question of taxation any where, if you intend to try growing anything on an extensive scale, but you can pay taxes on a pretty good valuation, and still make money. No one wants to engage in the cultivation of timber unless he knows exactly what his taxes will be f or the next 30 or 50 years. That should be settled, and people all over the State should be foresighted enough to see that the question of taxation is settled.
The heavier grazing you have on sage grass land, and cut over land, the better the grazing will become. The only way to get rid of sage grass is heavy grazing. Fire won't do it. It makes it grow tougher. We want to get rid of this grass as it is very poor f or cattle and has very little nutriment in it.
MR. R. C. JONES: What is the discrepancy between Mr. Hardtner's and Mr. Hogue's experience with goats? I would be much interested to know why one finds its profitable and the other does not.
MR. HOUGE: Mr. Hardtner said they were unprofitable. He said they failed to eat down the blackjack bushes on the longleaf pine land. They do not ordinarily try to pasture them closely enough to keep the oaks down very much. They keep the briars and blackberry briars down, and some of the more tender woods. Unless you pasture very closely, they do not bother the blackjack. They are not very palatable; they are pretty tough. You would have to pasture them pretty closely to get rid of the blackjack. However, they get very fat on this cut over land, and they are a profitable crop, because they cost so very little to raise. They are very hardy, and require very little attention in the pastures. They are an unmitigated nuisance, if you turn them out on the range. They get over


any wire fence, or any other fence that the settlers ordinarily build, and are not very profitable on the outside f or that reason, but, in the pastures, they thrive and help to keep the bushes down. However, as Mr. Hardtner suggested, probably, in order to keep the blackjack crop down, you would have to keep a good many.
A MEMBER: just a point that Mr. Hogue touched on, that has no bearing on the livestock question, that I would like to draw attention to, and that is with reference to planting forest lands in the South. I do not want any of you here to get any idea that any forester, so far as I know, Federal or State, is advocating the planting of these Southern lands.
THE CHAIRMAN: As I understand it, Mr. Hogue, you must rely on natural reproduction to come in, provided you keep out fires. Is that correct?
MR. HOGUE: We cannot rely absolutely on natural reproduction in every case. However, wherever fires are kept out of the original virgin forests, natural reproduction will come in. On the old fields, if they are large enough, if you wish to put them back into forests, planting would have to be done. There is a limit to the area which pine seed will cover; that is will go f rom the seed tree, naturally, and if we wish to take in all of our lands and put into f forests all fields that are now in cultivation, we would have to do some planting.
A MEMBER: We leave seed trees on our land for the purpose of reproducing our timber-seed bearing trees.

(In the absence of the author Mr. R. S. Maddox read the following paper).
Any state or national program of forestry must concern itself largely with the farmer. Forest conservation is a matter of vital importance to the farmer even though he so seldom realizes it; and the farmer is a vital factor in any program of


forest conservation. A large part of the country's forested land is owned by farmers. This land may roughly be divided into farm woodlots and farmer-owned woodlands. The farm woodlot is the plot of timber kept on the farm to supply the farm's timber needs, in part or in whole. Farm woodlots are not nearly so numerous as our talk and our habits of thought some times lead us to believe. The wooded lands owned by farmers embrace lands that the farmer expects some time to clear, lands that are in the process of being wholly or partially cleared, lands that are left uncleared because it would not pay to clear them. Farmers own a lot of these wooded lands, first and last, and most of them are handled with little thought or care as to forest preservation. Some of them the farmer himself lumbers as he needs lumber or money, or has an opportunity to put spare time to profit; and he usually does his cutting as if the hereafter were not a doubtful proposition at all, but a thing certain not to be. Large areas of stumpage are annually sold by farmers to lumbermen, usually with no cutting regulations at all, and the lumbermen having no future interest in the forest, seldom gives a thought to its future welfare. On vast tracts effort is made to convert the woodlands into pastures by burning. The result, of course, is an appalling waste of timber, of soil fertility, and of the forest's ability to hold back and conserve the rainfall.
The tendency is for the farmer to dispose of the woodlands he does not expect to clear or is not preserving particularly for his farm use. This is a tendency to be encouraged. It is better, as a rule, for large areas of woodland to be owned by the companies that cut the lumber off of them, and who are therefore likely to have some interest in keeping up the supply of timber on them, than to be held by owners who think of the timber only in terms of immediate return. The sooner all nonagricultural forest land passes into the hands of government or into the hands of men who have a direct interest in forest preservation, the better it will be for the country. That time, however, is yet a long ways off. Until it has arrived there must be no let up in the effort to make the farmer understand that trees, too, are a crop, a crop to be harvested at long intervals, but a crop which can be kept constantly renewing itself if the seed stock is protected. The farmer who owns wooded lands needs to be reminded over and over that the cutting of


timber may be made a constructive process instead of the usual destructive process. Above all, perhaps, he needs to be reminded over and over that the burning off of the woodlands is always a destructive process. The laws against forest fires need to be strengthened in almost every state, and a campaign of education that will teach the criminal folly of such burning, is one of the things the whole South needs.
Land clearing needs to be discouraged too, in many cases. Of course, much land now in woods is suitable for farming and will ultimately be brought into cultivated fields; but every year, especially in the hill country, land is cleared that should remain in timber for all the years to come One can go into any mountain section of the South and see cleared lands that prove beyond all question the utter lack of vision or foresight possessed by the men who did the clearing. The pioneer idea of the forest as an obstacle in the way of agriculture still persists; countless thousands of farmers still think of the woods only as something to get out of their way.
The farmer who finds himself without timber, or who finds his timber supply running short is not likely so to think. Once in this condition, he soon perceives that a plot of woodland is one of the necessary parts of a complete farm. Then comes the woodlot stage-the stage where timber is valued and the forest more or less well taken care of. Usually the farm woodlot is a patch of uncleared forest land that the owner attempts to preserve. In some cases it is a plot that be has himself planted, too often it is a tract of timber the future of which has already been sacrificed to the live stock by pasturing. Usually the woodlot is mismanaged. New farm woodlots impress one as things of permanence. With most of them it is only a question of time when they will cease to pay their owners to keep them in timber. The average farmer does not know how to care for his woodlot so as to preserve it, and at the same time make it profitable, and there is a deplorable lack of information available on the subject. I know of none except a few bulletins of the most general nature, or a few even less explicit chapters in text books on forestry. There is need of some close special study of the farm woodlot to secure and make available the special localized information thai is needed. Where could one get for instance, the detailed information about its management


that a Tennessee Bluegrass woodlot owner needs? Or the owner of one in Piedmont North Carolina?
Farm woodlots are bound to become more numerous and better appreciated by farmers; but I do not think they can be counted on to supply any large proportion of the lumber the country needs. Indeed, I believe they will tend more and more away f rom the general f orest type and more and more to the specialized planting type They will contain fewer and fewer, comparatively speaking, of the forest lumber trees-oaks and hickories, maples and pines-and more of the rapid growing species that meet the farm's immediate needs for fence posts, poles, and so on. Black locust, catalpa, black walnut we may expect to see farmers planting these trees, even in preference often to preserving their old forest growths. We may expect, too, to see them harvesting them at an early age. In a word, the farm woodlot is going to be a place where the special kinds of timber needed on the farm are grown, and not a place for the production of the lumber of commerce.
It will seldom be a profitable business for the individual farmer to grow lumber on land that is suitable for cultivation. Yet the fact remains that some lands of agricultural value can be of more value to the community, if not to the individual owners, in forests than in anything else. What may be called strategic forests, forests about the headwaters of streams and in other locations where they will have a direct influence upon stream flow and the control of rain waters, are going to be increasingly important as the years go by. It seems that as a people we have determinedly put off any serious consideration of them; but we shall one day have to consider them, and to provide them. They will have to be provided, however, by the community, the state, the nation, rather than by the individual. Forest preservation will not cease to be an individual business, but it will become more and more a government function because we are all the time more fully realizing its importance to the state and to society, and more fully understanding the increasingly public character of the woodlands and their contribution to human welfare.
MR. H. B. HOLROYD: Our corporation maintains an Agricultural and Industrial and Immigration Department, all combined in one, purely for development work within the territory served by its line. We enter 13 States, and consequently that