97-84060-1 Bailey, Liberty Hyde Statement made at Rochester, New York... [n.p.] [1913?] COLUyBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DIVISION BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET MASTER NEGATIVE # ORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FILUED - EXISTING BIBUOGRAPHIC RECORD MM III iiiiiii 308 Box 143 i 5. •ii'. Bailey, Liberty Hyde, 1858-W6i Statojaent made at Roohester, New York, Deo, 22, 1913, by L. H. Bailoy. Statement on tlie forestry situation* «• (19137 3 12 p. 23i^ om. j i Captioo-title. 0 RESTRICTIONS ON USE; Wipodtoeitarw may nor toe mediiiii^ Ubrams. TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA FILM SIZE: REDUCTION RATIO: /dl/ IMAGE PLACEMENT : lA IB UB DATE FILMED: INITIALS: TRACKING # : FILMED BY PRESERVATION RESOURCES, BETHLEHEM, PA Statement made at Rot^ter, New Yoric, Dec. 22, 1913, by L. H. BMunr. STATEMENT ON THE FORESTRY SITUATION To the Governors of the Cornell Club of Rochester, ^0% GenUemen : In response to your request, I am come to give you "some first hand information" concerning "the numerous questions being asked and criticisms bdng made about the forestry sit> uatkm at Cornell." Although not connected in any way with Cornell University, and not an alumnus of the institution, I am nevertheless ^Jiad to be the means of idactng in your hands a dear statement of the facts, without controversy and I hope without prejudice, touching the situation in which the importsoit forestry work is now idaoed. You desire an answer from me on such statements as the folkywing : It is reported that the College of Agriculture made no effort to resume instruction in forestry until the bill to establish the New York State College of Forestry at S^rracuse University had been passed by the L^^slature, although refused by the Governor; also that Cornell then started on a course for farmers as part of the College of Agriculture and that it had no intention of undertaking pro- fessional work until the enterprise developed at Syracuse University. It is also stated that the building at Ithaca was not appropriated by the Legislature as a forestry build- ing but only as a part of a group of plant-industry build- ings. Some people understand that Cornell University asked for a certain appropriation for foiesby work and that there was a contest on this appropriation between Cornell and Syracuse University and the appropriation was secured by the latter rather than the former. It is charged that the duplication of forestry work in the state is be laid to Cornell. If these statements are true, then some one has acted in bad ^th, and for this you, as alumni, would qpt wish to stand. Some of you have been uneasy about such statements. I shall give you the facts. The gist of these reports is that Cornell University was moved to establish courses in foiestry, and particularly pro- fessional courses, because another university was moving in the same direction. This certainly is an unworthy motive. V and the situatioQ ahocild be cleared up. Inaannidi as the pres- ent forestry work at Cornell is in the College of Agriculture and as I was director of that college in the period under dis- pute, I feel that in justice to that college, as ireU as to myself. I should acquaint you with the intentions —for this is a ques- tion of intentions. Of course you understand th^t in no way am I q)eaking ofiQdaUy or for any one else : I am makins a personal statement. I ought to say at the outset that I have tried to put these matters straight with the people of the state. In a pubUc ad- dress on the 8th of last March I gave the essential facts, and that address was printed and widely distributed. At the le- qwest of the editor, I also stated important parts of the case in The Tribune Farmer for May 8, 1913. Certain parts of the address have been discussed and attacked, but I am not aware that the history of the resumption of the forestry work, given in the same print, has been acknowledged. THE OLD CQLL£G£ OF FORESTRY Before taking up the matter immediately in hand, let me recall the first organization in this state for the tAarhmg of forestry. I am domg this only to answer the questkwis that are in your minds, for the experience of the old College of Forestry has little or no bearing on the merits of the present situation. The hirtory of the old litigation is the subject of another statement, which may be presented as a matter of informatk>n. The New York State College of Forestry at ComeU Uni- yersity was established in 1898. I have always thought that its establishment was a mifttairp The College of Forestry undertook two kinds of work, both of which were, of course, very ckisely associated. One was the regufaur teac^mg at Ithaca. The other was the manage- ment for educational purposes of a large tract of land in the Adirondack region. The regular appropriatioa for the College ol Forestry was $1(^000 a year, although special appropriations had been made for the forestry work in the Adirondack tract. The system of dear-cutting and replanting that was in- troduced in the Adirondack tract, aroused the objection of persons in the vicinity and an agitatkn arose against it. As a result, in 1903 the Governor declined to sign the regular appropriation for the College; and the staff was then dis- 2 banded. That is, the appropriation, and not the college, was discontinued by the Governor. An appropriatkm was made in that year, however, for doing certain work in the Adirondack tract and this appro- priation continued even after the teaching work in the Col- lege of Forestry was discontinued. Litigation arose over the title to the Adkondack lands and it was finally determined that the University was an agent of the state and the lands have^ therefore, become state property. The tract of about thirty thousand acres was secured for the state at $5.00 per acre, which is a low price for the tract, and the area is now a part of the general State Adirondack Park. Much has been made of the discontinuation of the old College of Forestry, but the circumstances arose in connection with the management of lands in the Adirondack regkm and not in connectkm with the r^ular teaching work of the College. The law establishing the College of Forestry was not re- pealed. It is still on the statute books. In fact, the business connected with the old CoU^ of Forestry necessitated the continuation of the legal organization, and Mynderse VanCleef, of the Board of Trustees of Cornell University, was made the Direct<»: of the New York State College of Forestry at Cor- nell University. It has been asked why the forestry work at Cornell was not resumed by securing another appropriation and re-offioering the Odlege of Forestry. The reason is that in the meantime a State College of Agriculture was established, and a separate College of Forestry was not necessary, nor was the resumptkm ol that institution the best way of reaching the forestry situa- tion there. Of course, the forestry work at Cornell can be ac- complished much more effectively and also with less outlay by developing it in the State College of Agriculture than by main- taining two independent establishments. With two establish- ments, it would have been very difficult to have prevented duplicatk)n. You probably have not forgotten that the reason for es- tablishing the College of Forestry at Comdl University is that Cornell University is founded on the Federal Land-Grant Act of 1862, whkh places a cdlege in the different states for the teach- 3 iag ci agriculture and mftrhanif arts and related subjects, in co-operation with the states. The charter given originally by the Legislature obligates Cornell University to teach agriculture and the mechanic arts. In 1894 the state had oafaiMiahH the Veterinary College at the University, and the founding of the College of Forestry was in continuation of its policy. The sub- sequent estaUishmeiit of the State College of Agrieultitie was a further continuation of the policy. THE EARLY INTENTION IN THE RESUMPTION OF THE FORBmY WORK I now come to the question of the personal intention or motive in resuming the forestry work at ComeO. I can 8petk positively, for the intention was mine. Frcmi the very first discussion of forestry *«^hmg and fatpmmenting in this state, I have held that the work is pri- marily agricultural (in the broad sense in which the term "ag- riculture" is used in state departments of agriculture, ool* leges of agriculture, tiie agricultural experiment statkms, and . the United States Department of Agriculture), and that the agricultural and professional phases should be developed to- gether, both in the interest of effectiveness and of good public policy; and also in the interest of economy. These matters were the subjects of many conferences and recommendations. In 1903, when the discusskms touching the old College of Forestry were acute, the late S. F. Nixon, then Speaker of the Assembly, wrote me for advice. My reply I considered to be so inq^ortant at that juncture that I submitted it to the Presi- dent of Cornell University before I mailed it; and here is the letter with the President's approval. [Letter exhibited]. It was written Oct 26, 1903,-^iote that this was before the State College of Agriculture was established. Most of the part relat- ing to instruction in forestry is as follows ; — "In regard to the forestry question concerning which you ask, there are two distinct phases. * * * As I already have explained to you, the forestry problem in New York State is essentiially an agricultural problem. * * * * ♦♦•*****The larger part of these lands is probably on fisums and not in forest preserves. Almost every farm in the state has its woodlot. We are giving advice in respect to butter, and poultry, and green- houses, and many other agricultural interests, but no 4 agency in this state is taking up the subject of farm for- estry. These farm forests are the source of much direct revenue to the farming interests; more than seven and one half million dollars per year is the value of the farm-forest products of New York State and this state leads the Union in the value of such products. These forests also have a very important relation to the public welfare. Tliey are concerned with the whole question of mamtenance of streamy preventing of floods, controlling of water power, preserving of fish and game, and shdtering the country sweeping winds. "I beheve that a school of forestry should train pro- fesskxial foresters, for a certain number of these will always be needed." From that time to tins, I have persistently advised that an orgamsation for teaching and investigating forestry should cover the two phases of the subject— the agricultural application and the {xofesskmal training. The desire to e»- tabfish forestry work m the new College of Agriculture, pro- fessional and otherwise, was formulated and explained before I ever heard that any other iastittttiaa in the state desired to enter the field. In 1908 (before the State established the State College of griculture) I made a report or statement for ^leaker Niion id otheis, of which the foikywing is a pert "Nearly every farm in the State has woodland. The value of the farm-forest products is more than seven and one-half millions of dollars yearly, being greater than in any other state. No college or mstitutkm in the State gives advice for the management of these farm woodlands. Advice is needed for the management of farm woodlands as much as for the management of orchards, dairies, green- houses, gardens and com fields. "All private woodlands have inqxirtant relatkms with the pubhc welfare— with preventing of fkmds, mamtam- mg of water power, preserving of game, providing wind- breaks and shelter-belts. "Aside from the preservation and policing of its own reservatkms* the State needs two kmds of forestry enter- prise :•— 1. Education on the management of private wood- lands. 2. Training of professional foresters. 5 "This work should be conducted by the College of Agri- culture, for all forestry is an agricultural subject and farm forestry is inextricably asaodated with agricultural teach- ing." THE STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE SUCCEEDS TO THE FORESTRY YfORK Fortunately, some of my eariy recommendations are mat- ters of printed and other record, as I shall now relate. The recommendation lor the professional work is continuous and is sufficient to stKm tliat it was always consictered to be an essential part of a forestry program. The State established the New York State College of Ag- riculture at Cornell University in 1904. The Administration Act to govern the College was passed in 1906 and the first reg- ular appropriation for maintenance was made at that time. In my report as Director of the College of Agriculture to the Fntadeat of the Umveisity for the college year 1905-06, I outlined in skeleton form the main lines of work that the College should undertake in order to fulfill the requirements of the law and to meet the needs of the people of the state. In this outline, "forestry" is mentioned, as recorded in the Presi- dent's published report for that year and subsequently in the Report fd the Cornmisskmer of AgricuU»re published by the State. In my report for the year 1906-07, I made two special recommendations looking to the organization of large depart- ments in the Cdlege and one of these was for a Department of Forestry, some of the reasons being as follows : • 'The forests are important sources of wealth and prosperity in New York State. There are great tracts of public forests. Almost every farm of any size also has its forest. Almost one-third of New York is in woodland. In the last census year New York led all the states in the Union in the value of farm-forest products. These forests are related also to maintenance of streams, water power, water supplies, floods, fish and game, climate and the gen- eral attractiveness of the countiy. No instituticm in the state is teaching forestry. The state is greatly in need of an enlightened mtelligence on these questions. They are primarily agricultural questions. The forest is a crop. Whatever forestry work is done by the University should 6 be a part of the College of Agriculture. This College of Agriculture is giving advice on many crops of much less inqxnrtance than the forest crop It should be able to make a beginning towards meeting the economic needs of the people, providing one more agency to educate persons in terms of their daily lives, and to train professional foresters." Under the head of "Other Departments Now Needed," the above recommendation appeared in the Report of the Com- missioner of Agriculture for the year 1907; and although the special title was given there as "form forestry", the recom- mendation as to the training of professional foresters was re- tained. In the lefKxt of the fdlowing year, 1907-08, I called at- tention again to the need of a Department of Forestry. In an address delivered on the occadon of Farmers' Week m February, 1909, on the ration of the College to the State, I made a statement of the need of developing forestry work, and this address was published in pamphlet form and widely distributed. In the year 1909-10, Acting Director Webber m my ab- sence made a strong argument for instruction in foiestry, as published in the President's annual report of that year. He called attention to the fact that "the closely allied branches of study, such as plant physiology, plant pathology, principles of agriculture, horticulture, scmIs, climatology, and the like, are now regularly given in this College, so that a strong course in forestry can easily be arranged. The importance of instruct- ing fanners of the state on these problems in connection with our extension work will also be clearly recognized." In the summer of 1910, the Board of Trustees of Cornell University established a Department of Forestry in the College of Agricultiure. In November, 1910, a definite program of organization was laid out, inchiding professioDal forestry and farm forestry. In the following month a professor of forestry was secured. In July, 1911, Governor Dix signed the bill establishing the State College of Forestry at Syracuse Univer- sity, the bill having been vetoed the year before by Governor Hughes. 7 It wiU be seen, therefore, that the intentkm to establidi forestry work m the Cdl^ of Agriculture was recommended from a tmie preceding the organization of the College on a state basis until the establishmeiA was finally aeeuied. Such equip- ment as the old Odl^ of Proestry had is now the property of the Forestry Department. The Department of Forestry in the State College of Agriculture is the natural successor of the old Coil^ of Forestry: what the denomination of the organ- ization is— whether department or college— is of no conse- quence. The CoUege of Agriculture gives a professional for- estry degree (M.F.), the same in grade as is given by separate coUeges of forestry; and it does the same kind of professional work, and in addition it reaches the rural situation so for as it is equipped to do so. It would have been a violation of all ndes of modem efficiency to have resumed the College of For- estry to train professional foresters and to have maintained a dq»rtment in the CoU^ of Agriculture for the practical farm applications. When the staff ol the dd College of Forestry was disbanded, It had a faculty of three professors and an enrolhnent of 70 students. The Dqiartment of Forestry in the State Ccitege of Agriculture now has five professors of forestry and various assistants, and an enrollment in classes of some 260 students, than 125 students are pursuing the pn^essional forestry course. The forestry work hi the State College of Agriculture, therefore, is a larger teaching enterprise than was the old CoUege of Forestry, although, because of the allied and funda- mental departments provkted at public expense, the maintenance Olrtlay is not very greatly incr^ised. THE ACTUAL BEGINNING OF THE FO|t£STRY WORK It has been charged that in the first few months of the development of the present Department of Forestry at Cornell, those connected with it repeatedly said that the only purpose was to teach farm forestry, implying that the teaching of pro- fessional forestry was an afterthought and puipoeely in oppo- sitkm to the plans of another institutkm. I know of no reason for such a charge. I have tried to discover any statements of this kmd by responsible parties at ConieU but have not been able to do so. Certaii^ my own recommendations and my correspondence with prospective teachers are dear in ex- 8 pressing the intention to develop professkxnal forestry with the rest. In the first letter that I wrote Walter Mulford, now head of the Department, Oct. 13, 1910, I made these statements : '1 want to reach the farm forest situatkm in the State as a part of our regular work. I want at the same time to train professional foresters, and I think that the faciUties will be got for it." In tepty, under date of Oct 15, Professor Mul- ford wrote : "The two lines of effort (help for the farm wood- lot and the traming of professional foresters) which you out- fine for the future forestry department are both vital. And I hope that Comem will soon be able to add a third very un- portant Une of forestry work,— a thoroughly equipped experi- ment station at Ithaca, as a pert ol the Agricutanal Emd- meat Station." On Nov. 7, 191Q, the provisional plans for the forestry work were made in my office with Professor Mulford, and these fdans very definitely included both piofessfonal and form forestry. In fact, nothing else could have been expected in an institutfon of the grade of Cornell, in urtudi poet-graduate work is anticipated as a matter of course. Professor Mulford agreed to tay^ up the wiofk with that understandmg. and the foUowing month (Dec. 1910) the Board of Trustees elected him professor ol forestry. Professor Mulford was on duty at Cornell from Jan- uary 26 to February 23, 1911, and on June 15^ 1911, he took vp his residence in Ithaca. It was not posable, however, to bring together at once a sufficient staff and equipment to warrant the offering of such a piofessfonal course m 1911 as would be worthy of the institu- tion. On Aug. 14, 1911, a mimeographed sheet (for use in an- swering questions) was issued, indicating the courses then available, and only farm forestry courses were mentfoned. Much has been made of this circular as showing that the College intended giving only form forestry woric, but nothmg was said in the circular to indicate that other courses were not in contempla- tkm. and the circular very castinctly said that the proposed lines of work were to be given for "the present year," "for the year 1911-1912," "during the year 1911-12.'* I clearly remember 4. autlxvizing this statement oi the work then ready, not for professional foresters and not leading to a forestry degree, but there was no intention whatever of giving up the projected j^m of pfofessioDal training. The devdopement of it was only post- poned. ' In tbe same year (Dec 11, 1911), I wrote as follows to the President of the University when recommending another professor of forestry : "Forestry is naturally a part of agriculture. An in- stitution really has no right to call itself a college of agri- culture imless it is allowed to develop forestry work, as well as dairying, horticulture, farm crops, ammal husbandry, soils, plant-breeding, and other subjects. Aboiit twenty- seven per cent of the State of New York is in woodland. Nearly every farm has more or less timber. These farm forests are really farm crops, as much as com, grass, or potatoes. These forest crops are relatively very unpro- ductive at the present time. The subject of forest crop- ping must be taught along with other farm subjects. It would be just as illogical to separate the forestry from a college of agriculture as to separate the animal husbandry or the pomology. The subject of farm management, tor example, cannot be taught without considoing the forest as a part of the farm, just as much as we consider the meadow or the grain fields as a part of the farm. Of neces- sity, a cdlege of agriculture must teach forestry if it reaches the niral situation. "It has sometimes been said that the College of Ag- riculture here might concern itself only with farm forestry; but there really is no such subject as farm forestry, any more than there is farm physics or farm geology or farm dairying or farm entomology. In other words, the fana forestry is only an applicatkm of the general principles and pcactices of good forestry, and the i^iole subject must be developed in order to have teaching in forestry that is really substantial and worth the while. It is im- possible to separate it into its different applications, and yet have those appUcations founded on good scientific princi- ples. Practically the same equipment that is needed for teaching forestry in general must be established for the good teaching of farm forestry. Moreover, it will be im- possible to secure the best men if the department is limited merely to what is called farm for^try. There must be suflSdent organization and momentum to cover the groimd and to attract the ablest experts." I do not see how it is possUide for any serious misappre- hension to arise respecting the nature of the forestry work in 10 the College of Agriculture. The plans have been pubUshed as freely as the plans of other work in the College. I have ex- plained the fore^ry work at Albany, the same as I have explained other work of the institution. The forestry has been included with the other matters in the r^rts required by law to the Commissioner of Agriculture. The subject has been presented and ea^lained in many conferences and lectures. IBOS INTBNTION LIES IN THE NATURE OF THINGS But even if there were no records of the intention to in- troduce praiessional forestry work to meet the natural and necessary demand, every person acquainted with the situation would have expected, — ^as I have explained, — ^that this phase would normally develop. Farm fore^ is only a special ap- plication of the general principles of forestry. These principles must be taught. They must be taught welL At Cornell they must beof university standards. Po6t-graduatework(thatis,prafe88kMial work) must be developed in forestry as well as in plant-breeding or soils or dairying or entomology. I should never have been interested in a department of forestry at an institution like Cornell if there could not have been prospect of sufficient equip- ment and a staff of sufficient size and capacity to handle the whole field; all parts of the subject should go together,— this is important for the professional work as well as for the dis- tmctly agricultural work. Forestry work is an essential pert of a fully developed coll^ of agriculture. The subjects of instruction interlock. One department aids another. The necessary fundamental and accessory subjects are aheady provided in a college of agricul- tare, and relatively small expense and little overhead outlay are entailed to add the specialties. THE OTHER MISAPPREHENSIONS The statement that the forestry buikiing at Cornell was not appropriated separatdy for forestry needs explanation, for this further indicates the articulation of the work. A group- building for plant4ndustiy is projected in the CoU^ of Agriculture. In this compound it is intended to headquarter such subjects as plant-breeding, forestry, pomology, plant 11 pathology, farm crops, and others. The appropriation by the Legislature of 1912 of $100,000 was for the " forestry sectioii of the plant industry building." The Legislature subsequently appropriated $20,000 "for equipment of the forestry building." It is the first section of the plant-industry group, and of course it is yet standing alone; it is nearly completed. The design is to connect it and the forthcoming sections into one gep^ral building or ffoap. But these discussions are really of no con- sequence: the building is by statute a forestry building and it will house the forestry work. The statement I hear to the effect that there was contest between two instituticxis as to which one diould secure a cer- tain appropriation is wholly without meaning or foundation. CONCLUSION I hope that I have now explained to you my attitude on the foresby situation, in so for as it relates to the introduction