1940: Forestry

The year 1940 was one of uncertainty in American Forestry. On Dec. 20, 1939, F. A. Silcox, chief of the United States Forest Service since 1933, died suddenly at his home in Alexandria, Virginia. Widely recognized for his energy and ability in promoting forest conservation, his death was deemed 'a blow to the whole American movement for conservation of human and natural resources' (Henry A. Wallace).

Although it was generally acknowledged that Mr. Silcox's place would be difficult to fill, the forestry profession was scarcely prepared to see the position remain vacant during the whole of 1940. Inaction of this kind on the part of the administration inevitably led to rumor and surmise, neither of which has been beneficial to service morale. The Secretary of the Interior has been trying for several years to effect the transfer of the Forest Service to the Department of the Interior, and in February 1940, it was reported that the transfer would be authorized by the President in one of his Reorganization Orders. But in orders issued in March and April, the Forest Service remained in the Department of Agriculture, and interest in Mr. Silcox's successor was intensified. In September News Week reported that the post was to be offered to Rexford Guy Tugwell, but a month later the Secretary of Agriculture, Claude R. Wickard, blandly announced that the Acting Chief Forester had been performing the duties of office so satisfactorily, the Department of Agriculture 'does not consider that there is a vacancy for the position at this time.' Needless to say, the profession did not find the secretary's statement at all reassuring, and the atmosphere is still heavy with surmise.

State Forestry.

Meanwhile the routine functions of the Forest Service have been carried on competently, but new developments have originated elsewhere. The movement to expand state forests and to establish community forests gained considerable momentum during the year, and a review of the status of forestry in the states is illuminating. There are duly constituted forestry organizations in 39 states, and in three additional commonwealths forestry activities are carried on officially by representatives of agricultural colleges. More than 75 per cent of the forest land in the United States comes under the surveillance of the state foresters, and most of it is privately owned. For this reason state forestry organizations perform the important function of extending sound principles of conservation and economic utilization of forest products from publicly administered to privately owned lands. Inevitably the progress which has been made in the several states is uneven, for there are wide discrepancies in state budgets, personnel, total acreage requiring administration, ratios of publicly and privately owned land, and allotments of federal funds. It is natural, therefore, that impatience should be felt with the situation in certain circles, and there is recurrent agitation for legislation which will give virtual control of all forest lands to Federal agencies.

In view of the fact that state forestry is a scant twenty years old, it seems premature to brand it as a failure; and within the past five years, the rapid development of community forests suggests that better forest management is likely to be achieved through community ownership and administration than through nationalization. Figures for 1940 are not yet available, but in 1939 a total of 81,000 acres were added to the community forests of the country. The 67 municipalities which created forests during this calendar year brought the total to 1,500, of which 620 are in New York State. Greatest interest in town forests is manifest in the states east of the Rocky Mountains, but the largest city-owned tract is the 66,000-acre Cedar River Watershed, purchased and efficiently managed by the city of Seattle, Washington. Seattle has demonstrated that a well managed community forest is an economic, sanitary, and recreational asset of the first importance. Originally designed to protect the city's water supply, the forest has supplied 422,000,000 board feet of lumber which sold for $885,000, and the forester in charge estimates that an annual cut of 48,000,000 board feet is available on a ninety-year rotation, with an annual net return of $150,000. Similar, if more modest, results have been achieved by other cities, but the community forest has exerted a more profound influence: Created for the practical purposes of watershed and reservoir protection and for recreation, it has given citizens practical lessons in forest administration, a pride in local ownership, and an appreciation of conservational problems, in addition to a tangible return on their tax investment.

It must be confessed that practical education of this kind penetrates the public consciousness of the nation as a whole rather slowly, and a question of immediate and urgent importance is whether the nation can afford to wait for slow but highly salutary education. As Secretary Wallace pointed out to the Joint Congressional Committee on Forestry, 'Annual growth in usable sawtimber forests is one-half less than the annual drain from them. . . . We are far from being on a maintenance basis. . . . Public regulation of cutting practices on privately owned land is essential. This regulation might well be a joint State-Federal undertaking, with the Federal Government retaining the right of direct action if such became essential. . . . Just how much additional forest land should come into public ownership depends partly on how rapidly progress toward conservational management is made on privately owned lands.'

Effects of War.

As 1940 ends, disrupted international trade and problems of national defense are seen to have direct bearing upon prospective nationalization of privately owned forests. The war has severed the commerce in forest products which moved from Scandinavia, Finland, and Russia to countries bordering the Atlantic. Among them was the United States, which drew heavily upon Sweden, Norway, and Finland for supplies of craft and sulphite. Now this country must look to its own forests and to those in Canada for these products, and at the same time users in other countries are bidding for Canadian and American forest products to replace the materials that formerly came from northern Europe. Rising prices are bound to stimulate excessive cutting on private lands.

On the other hand, Government officials are citing the recent German statement that 'to be without wood in time of war is almost as bad as to be without bread.' Cellulose, turpentine, and rosin are basic in explosives and other modern missiles; special and ordinary woods are indispensable in gun stocks, gun carriages, pontoon bridges, cantonments, timber posts, gas masks, and training planes. Competition for forest products is obviously destined to be keen, and essential war needs will undoubtedly compel the federal Government to assume control over the entire forest industry and over all forests. How quickly this step will be taken depends upon the role which we assume in the war during 1941. Whether the step will be for the duration of the emergency or for an indefinite period, only a prophet can foretell. See also CONSERVATION.