FORESTRY HEARINGS COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE HOUSE \OF REPRESENTATIVES SIXTY-SIXTH CONGRESS THIRD SESSION ON H. R. 15327 (BY MR. SNELL) JANUARY 26 AND 27, 1921 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 32002 1921 COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. HovusE OF REPRESENTATIVES. GILBERT N. HAUGEN, Iowa, Chairman. JAMES C. McLAUGHLIN, Michigan. GORDON LEB, Georgia. WILLIAM W. WILSON, Illinois. EZEKIEL S. CANDLER, Mississippi. CHARLES B. WARD, New York. THOMAS L. RUBEY, Missouri. WILLIAM B. McKINLEY, Illinois. JAMES YOUNG, Texas. ELIJAH C. HUTCHINSON, New Jersey. HENDERSON M. JACOWAY, Arkansas. FRED S. PURNELL, Indiana. JOHN V. LESHER, Pennsylvania. EDWARD VOIGT, Wisconsin. JOHN W. RAINEY, Illinois. MELVIN O. McLAUGHLIN, Nebraska. : CARL W. RIDDICK, Montana. J. N. TINCHER, Kansas. WILLIS J. HULINGS, Pennsylvania. J. KUHIO KALANIANAOLE, Hawaii. L. G. HAUGEN, Clerk. ne ee OT LIBRARY OF CONGRESS RECEIVED APR® 19238 DOCUMENTS DIVISION PoP tek CONTENTS. Statement of— Page JE ay ohgs OX os Cs) EDO) 2 i AR el AD a ek AG Se el cal igen at Pe ee cn a Cols Wes: ‘Greeley. (‘threeistatements)i 9 222s te ee 6, 84, 50 PAU Gal Grays allies = © ns ee SpeAE ARE agrees Ree pe ee 12 eas VA ems t ae ee baka fu ai ey LW PRY Fy Ale ee aye A 14 GuitO TG in Chota tae ee Meme Nr cme Oo mnn elees nue boe Oe RE Tees 25 Rens aiKellogcem(tyworstatements) ao. ae ee eee 38, 42 Cola S sGraves(iwoOrstatements) ==.) 2) 2 ea es ere ee 37, 46 VB, desks, TEY2U (eyes ee os aE SAE ce ps Se eee ee. Lemus eves eras eee 389 1B eran (GO. O Clay ll Cee ek A ee es Ee 40 CORWEE SISS OM sepa ee BLT | Pee Oe eS dept BEX) Se MRP cele 42 Dg LENG» FORESTRY. Sections 7 and 8.—Will be discussed by William L. Hall, of Chicago, formerly assistant forester in charge of acquisition of forest lands under the Weeks’s law, and Philip W. Ayres, forester of the Society for the Protection of New Hamp- shire Forests. Section 9.—Will be discussed by HE. A. Sherman, associate forester of the United States Forest Service. Sections 10 to 12.—Will be discussed by L.-F. Kneipp, assistant forester in the United States Forest Service. The interests of the general public in the proposed legislation will be pre- sented by: Elbert H. Baker, publisher of the Cleveland (Ohio) Plain Dealer and chair- man of the committee on forest resources of the American Newspaper Publishers’ Association. D. L. Goodwillie, of Chicago. Charles Lathrop Pack, president of the American Forestry Association. J. Randall Williams, chairman of the forestry committee of the National Wholesale Lumber Dealers’ Association. Col. Henry S. Graves, former Chief Forester of the United States. George W. Sisson, jr., of Potsdam, N. Y., president, American Paper and Pulp Association. In order to further facilitate the time of the committee, we have divided up our witnesses and assigned to each one a certain section of the bill, and each man, as far as possible, will confine himself to that particular section to which he is addressing himself. It also might be well for me at this point to enumerate to the com- mittee the main provisions of the bill that will be amplified later by the gentlemen appearing in the interests of the legislation. ° The first two sections are of chief importance at this time. In the main they propose a method of Federal cooperation with the States and individual landowners which, in my judgment. constitute the most effective and constitutional method of getting into operation a comprehensive national forestry policy which outlines Federal, State, and private responsibility in the protection and management of all forest land. The third directs a survey of forest resources and requirements necessary at an early stage to insure that steps taken under the pro- visions of this bill are neither inadequate nor superfluous. The fourth is an appropriation section covering the foregoing three sections, and is of less importance at this time than that you should mark out and approve of some purpose and policy. The fifth deals with forest research and investigations in wood utilization, also study of forest taxation. The sixth with reforestation of denuded lands in national forests. The seventh and eighth with purchasing additional lands for na- tional forests. The ninth, the acquisition of similar lands by exchange. The remaining sections cover classifications and inclusion in the national forests of permanent forest lands now in other forms of Government ownership. This is a short synopsis of the whole bill, which is based on the general assumption and belief that it is now possible to have a mu- tual cooperative arrangement between Federal, State, and individual! landowners governing future forest management. ~ Speaking for myself, I want to say to the committee that I was engaged in lumbering and timberland business for 20 years and have, as I think, a personal and practical knowledge of this industry as far as Pennsylvania, New York, and New England are concerned, FORESTRY. ; 3 and a general understanding of existing conditions in this industry throughout the whole country. I will say for the further benefit of the committee that at the present time I do not own one acre of timberland, nor am I in any way interested financially in any company or corporation owning or operating in timberlands, and that my only interest in this pro- posed legislation is that of a citizen who is familiar with existing conditions and knows the actual need at the present time of lecisla- tion of this character. I can not better state to you the purpose of this legislation than to read the preamble of the bill: To provide through cooperation between the Federal Government, the States, and owners of timberlands, for adequate protection against forest fires, for reforestation of denuded lands, for obtaining essential information in regard to timber and timberlands, for extension of the national forests, and for other purposes, all essential to continuous forest production on Jands chiefly suitabie therefor. For more than 20 years the people of this country have been realiz- ing that one of our greatest sources of national wealth—the Nation’s forests—were fast disappearing, but not until the last few years, when the beginning of the end appeared in sight, have we entirely waked up and all agreed that something definite must be done in the way of improved lumbering operations, better forest management and reforestation if we were going to perpetuate an adequate ‘timber supply for the future needs of the « country. This is such a large proposition. It so vitally affects such varied interests in different parts of the whole country—the landowner, the lumber manufacturers, the paper and pulp interests, the newspaper interests, the building interests, etc., to say nothing of the large number of people who are interested in our forests as public plav- grounds and camping places—that for a quarter of a century we have argued this proposition among ourselves and have never been able to get together on any acceptable common ground until the present time. And now for the first time the people most vitally interested in this fast-disappearing natural resources, the people who have given the matter the most thought, the people who will necessarily be called upon to bear a large part ‘of the burden, are united in asking Congress to consider this legislation. As further evidence of our sincerity in asking for this legislation, T want you to know the people who are back of this bill and fully indorse its main provisions: The United States Forest Service, nearly all State forest departments, National Lumber Manufacturers’ Asso- ciation, American Paper and Pulp Association, National Wholesale Lumber Dealers’ Association, Association of Wood-Using Industries, American Forestry Association, and ‘American Newspaper Pub- lishers’ Association. This group comprises landowners, manufacturers, consumers, and public forest authorities from every part of the United States. This | is the first time in history of forest legislation that representa- tives of all these groups have gotten together and unanimously asked Congress for consideration of a forestry measure. The fact of the diversified interests represented i in these groups, the facts that they are practically united at this time, proves three things conclusivly, and that is: First, that this legislation has been thor- oughly discussed and considered; second, that it is practical; and third, that it can be accomplished at this time. 4 ‘ FORESTRY. By this statement I do not mean to say that all parties are abso- lutely committed or even satisfied with every provision of this bill, but rather that this bill furnishes the basis or framework of legisla- tion that is not only absolutely necessary but will be of lasting benefit to the people of the whole country. With this object in view, I introduced H. R. 15327 for the purpose of having the Federal Government define its future policy toward one of its greatest natural resources—the forests and their products. Mr. Chairman, thus far we as a Nation have been profligate in the use of our natural resources, and to-day we are brought face to face with the rapid depletion of the forests, and in order to preserve them and the industries in this country that are dependent upon them, it is high time to establish some fixed policy that will provide a continuous supply of timber in the United States. The proponents of this legislation simply desire to have the Gov- ernment, before it is too late, establish a policy that will insure a continuous timber production in our own domain, and not make us entirely dependent on foreign countries for this raw material. The fire loss alone on timberlands is $25,000,000 per year; and it is cer- tain that a large part of this can be ‘avoided by legislation that properly regulates and protects private and public domain, This is not sectional legislation or class legislation, but something that is of vital importance to every section and every industry in the United States. It affects the housing situation in the ereat cities; it affects the farmer in the rural sections; and especially does it. affect the taxable assets of the country, which at the present time is no small matter. The future cost and supply of lumber and forest products is of interest to every civilized community in the United States. Therefore I am convinced that this subject deserves most careful consideration on the part of the committee and is of vital importance to the people of the whole country. Mr. Chairman, I believe this is the start for some real, constructive legislation, and I am sure your committee will give it the attention that it is entitled to receive. We will first present, Mr. Chairman, a gentleman who will discuss the first two sections of the bill. The CHatrman. Mr. Snell, may I ask how much time is desired ? Mr. Snetu. We had about two hours of real material we desired to present to the committee. We have condensed it as carefully as possible and divided the sections among different men, and they will confine themselves to the matter being discussed. The CHatrrmMan. You would prefer to be heard to- day? Mr. Snetu. These men come from all over the country, as far west as Minneapolis, and they are desirous of getting away and would like to be heard during the day. Mr. Trncuer. I do not know much about this subject, but I agree with Mr. Snell that it is an important one. As I understand, there are opponents and proponents here on this bill, and for this morning I would lke to get a general idea of the views of both sides. We will only be able 1 to sit duri ing the morning. The Cuarrman. It occurred to-me that possibly arrangements could be made to have a session this afternoon in order to accommo- date some of these gentlemen. FORESTRY. 5 Mr. Snexu. If it’ is possible, we would like to be heard to-day, because these men are all business men. | Mr. Tincuer. I would like to ask Mr. Snell one question. You state that now is the opportune time for this legislation. As a Mem- ber of the House, holding a position of some consequence with refer- ence to the functioning of the House between now and the 4th of March, I would like your opinion as to whether we will have much chance to enact general legislation of this character during this session of Congress ? Mr. Snetu. I did not mean by that statement that I expected this legislation to be enacted during the present session of Congress. As the gentleman well knows, there will probably not be much general legislation between now and the 4th of March; but it is very impor- tant we get this matter started and get the educational work that is necessary to be done in connection with the legislation before the country. Mr. Tincner. As I understand it, this committee will have per- haps more new members than any committee of the House after the 4th of March. Of course, the hearings will be available. Mr. McLaveuurn of Michigan. I would suggest to the gentlemen from the outside who would be inconvenienced by having to remain, that they be given the first opportunity and then we take this matter up again at some other time. The gentleman talks about this being an opportune time; it is anything but that for this committee. Mr. Snewu. I appreciate that the hearing happened to be wrongly placed so far as this committee is concerned on account of the appropriation bill that is on the floor at the present time. Mr. McLavenuin of Michigan. And other matters which we have before the committee demanding our attention; some very important measures, Mr. Tincner. One that we have spent almost a year in hearing upon. ‘The CuHarrMAN. Is there anyone present in opposition to the bill who desires to be heard this morning? Mr. Prncuor. Yes, Mr. Chairman; I would like to be heard after the proponents of the bill, and I would suggest, inasmuch as the essence of the bill is in the first two or three sections, that after the gentlemen have spoken on those sections, I would like very much to be heard for 10 minutes, if I may. The CHatrman. Are there any others? Mr. Wriiuiams. I believe we come last in the list; but it is very important I should get back to Philadelphia this afternoon by 6 o'clock. The Cratrman. Are you here to oppose the bill? Mr. Wiuu1ams. No, sir. The Cuatrman. Mr. Snell will control the time as to those who favor the bill. Whatever arrangement you make with Mr. Snell wil! be followed out. Mr. Sneti. Mr. Chairman, we will present first Col. William B. Greeley, Chief Forest Service of the United States, who will discuss the proposed legislation from the viewpoint of the National Forest Service contained in the first few sections. 6 FORESTRY. STATEMENT OF COL. W. B. GREELEY, CHIEF, FOREST SERVICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The Cuatrman. Thank you, Mr. Snell. Col. Greeley, we will be pleased to hear from you. Col. Grertey. Mr. Chairman, I just wish to suggest at the outset that this is a very fit subject for national legislation. There is scarcely any commodity as to which our States are more dependent upon each other than upon the products of the forests. Our large industrial States like New York and Pennsylvania are compelled to-day to import from four-fifths to nine-tenths of the forest prod- ucts which they use from other States. Our most highly developea agricultural section in the Middle West import to-day 97 per cent of the lumber and other forest products which it uses from other States. The beehive of wood-using industries in the vicinity of Chicago and Detroit and Milwaukee would largely have to shut down within three or four weeks if the supplies of timber, which they now from Southern and Western States, were cut off. In other words, this isa national problem. It must be viewed from a national standpoint, and the leadership in its solution must be taken by the National Government. Four-fifths of our forest lands are in private ownership, and not- withstanding the utmost possible progress in the extension of pub- licity owned forests, which is one of the things we are advocating, where public ownership is particularly essential, we must recognize that a large proportion of our forests will remain in the owner rship of private individuals. How, then, can the National Government most effectively bring about the growing of timber on priv ate lands which will always form the bulk of our forests; and what will this enterprise cost? These are the two questions which I wish to discuss specifically, addressing my remarks to the first two sections of the bill. The growing of timber can not be left to private initiative alone. Our future supply of timber can not be lett to the turn of profit or loss to the owner of the land under existing economic conditions. Tt is just that “ leave-it-alone” course which has led to the timber shortage now impending. ‘The public interest must be protected through some form of equitable regulation of the use of forest lands, to see to it that they are kept at work growing timber. The principle embodied in sections T and 2 of this bill is analogous to that adopted in our national policies for the education of the farmers in practical agriculture and for the construction of public highways. In each instance plans and standards are worked out by the Federal Government and financial cooperation extended to ihe States which comply with such plans and standards and carry them out effectively. These great movements for extension work in agri- culture and the construction of public highways are now being car- ried forward by the power of national coope1 ration. The same prin- ciple should be woven into our national forestry policy. Congress can not legislate an economic process like the growing of timber into being. But Congress can, by initiating a far -sighted program of Federal cooperation, directly with the States and through the States with the woodland owners of the country, accomplish the results sought to a large degree. FORESTRY i. Section 1 of the bill thus provides that the Secretary of Agricul- ture shall determine and make known the essential things to be done in each forest region to keep in continuous production of timber such of its lands as are suitable therefor. These essential require- ments include the protection forest lands from fire, the disposal of débris left in logging, the planting of forest trees, and regulation of the cutting of timber or extraction of forest products, where any one or all of them are necessary to grow new crops of timber on the lands in question. In accordance with the terms of section 2, pre- liminary investigations to determine these essential requirements may be made, if necessary, at the cost of the Federal Government alone. Thereupon the Secretary of Agriculture will invite the co- operation of the States concerned, and through the agencies of the State the cooperation of its timber owners in putting into effect the essential requirements which have been determined upon. ‘Section 4 of the bill carries a yearly appropriation of $2,000,000, which may be drawn upon for such cooperation, with a proviso that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the prevention of forest fires. Under the terms of sections 1 and 2 the Secretary of Agriculture will fix the conditions which he regards as fair and reasonable as a basis for his cooperation with any “State. And he is authorized to ened cooperation from any State which fails to put in effect the requirements for keeping forest lands productive which have been found to be essential. The Federal Government, as in agricultural extension or the con- struction of public highways, would thus assume the technical lead- ership of the reforestation movement throughout the country. It would correlate and establish the concrete measures necessary to grow timber in each group of States having similar forest conditions, and it would then offer substantial financial cooperation to the States accepting and putting into effect the requirements determined upon as necessary. ‘The bill places specific limits upon the extent of the financial cooperation that can be extended to any State by providing that Federal expenditures must not exceed those of the State itself for the same purpose. And it gives a powerful incentive to the State to impose upon its forest owners an equitable portion of the cost of fire prey ention and other reforestation measures by recognizing private expenditures for these purposes made in compliance with the laws of the State in the Federal cooperation. The cooperative work done in any State will vary with its forest conditions and requirements. In the prairie States and States con- taining limited areas of forest land, Beare would consist chiefly in the maintenance of forest nurseries and diStribution of trees for planting. In other States cooperation should cover technical methods of fire prevention, of disposing of débris left in logging, of cutting various types of timber, so as to secure a new crop of the kind desired, and the like. Assistance should be given to the States in educating their forest owners not only through general publica- tions but specific advice on the management of individual properties. The largest and most important field for cooperation, however, in all States” “containing extensive forest areas is in the prevention of forest fires. In this regard, the proposed bill is an expansion of the work done by the Forest Service in cooperation with States on the 8 FORESTRY. watersheds of navigable streams since the enactment of the Weeks law in 1911; and our experience in this work gives us a basis on which to eauge the success of the larger cooper rative policy now pro- posed. hy Thirty-nine States in the Union contain approximately 325,000,000 acres of timbered and cut-over lands in State and private owner- ship, requiring protection from fire. This 1s the first step to a con- tinuous supply of timber. Out of this amount about 175,000,000 acres are almost wholly unprotected. We have from ten to twenty - five thousand forest fires every year, and we know that they destroy the young forest growth on at least eight or ten million acres every year, aside from large areas burned over annually of which no record can be obtained. These conditions, combined with destruc- tive methods of logging, have already devastated 81,000,000 acres of forest land so completely that it may well be compared with the American Desert; and from eight to ten million acres are being added to it every year. Effective protection of these 325 million acres of forest land lies at the bottom of any national policy of reforestation. Once this vast area of land is really protected from forest fires, three-fourths of our timber supply problem is solved. Since 1911 the Forest Service has cooperated in this work with from’ 10 to 25 States, expending from $40,000 to $125,000 per year of Federal funds. During these nine years, and largely as the result of Federal cooperation, we have seen State and county expendi- tures for the prevention of forest fires increase from about $250,000 a year the country over to over one million dollars; we have seen private expenditures for forest-fire prevention increase six or eight fold; we have seen the areas of forest land actually protected in- erease from year to year as the result of practical cooperation car- ried out in the woods by the Federal Government, the State govern- ment, and the private forest owner under the terms of that law. The method has been worked out; its success has been amply demonstrated; it remains simply to extend it over all the forest lands in the country, of which at the present time over half are practically without protection. The cost of protecting these forest lands from fire, as reported by 26 States, averages 24 cents per acre.