United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest

Research Station

General Technical

Report

PNW-GTR-638

November 2005

Harry E. Burke and 

John M. Miller,

Pioneers in Western

Forest Entomology

Boyd E. Wickman

John M. Miller, 1882-1952 Harry E. Burke, 1878-1963
The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of

multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood,

water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States

and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands,

it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing

Nation.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable,

sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived

from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202)

720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office

of Civil Rights, Room 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call

(800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider

and employer.

Author

Boyd E. Wickman is a research entomologist emeritus, Pacific Northwest Research

Station, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208-3890.

Cover Photo Credits

Photo of John M. Miller, J.M. Miller family collection; photo of Harry E. Burke, H.E.

Burke family collection.

Throughout this publication, photo credit of PSW is for Pacific Southwest Research Station

entomology photo collection; PNW is for Pacific Northwest Research Station entomology

photo collection.
Abstract

Wickman, Boyd E. 2005. Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, pioneers in Western forest

entomology. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-638. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 163 p.

This history was compiled from the memoirs, diaries, and other personal documents 

of the two forest entomologists in charge of the first forest insect laboratories on the west

coast. It traces the lives of the two pioneers from 1902 to 1952 as they pursued their

careers in the USDA Bureau of Entomology, Division of Forest Insect Investigations.

Cooperative bark beetle control projects with the USDA Forest Service, Park Service, and

private timber owners guided much of their early activities. Later, when the laboratories

were located on university campuses, cooperative research was undertaken with Forest

Service Research Stations. The focus shifted to more basic research and, particularly, 

studies on the silvicultural management of bark beetle populations. 

Keywords: History, forest entomology, bark beetles, Forest Service, Bureau of

Entomology, National Parks, insect control projects, cone and seed insects, forest fire and

insects, ponderosa pine, Jeffrey pine, sugar pine, lodgepole pine, Sitka spruce.

Preface

Dr. H.E. Burke was the first forest entomologist to be hired and assigned to study insects

on the west coast. He was appointed to the Bureau of Forestry in October 1902 as an 

assistant to Dr. A.D. Hopkins, Chief of Forest Insect Investigations. At the request of

Hopkins, John Miller joined the Bureau of Entomology (the Forest Insect Investigations

unit had transferred to the Bureau in 1904) in 1911 after several years as a forest ranger in

the U.S. Forest Service in California. These men were the first university graduates trained

in forest entomology to work under A.D. Hopkins on the west coast, but many in the forest

entomology profession are barely aware of their histories or contributions to the science of

forest entomology.

This biography of the two pioneers came about because of some timely correspondence in 2001. David Pratt, a grandson of H.E. Burke, requested some information from

Dean John Brown, Washington State University. The university had just honored Burke as

its first graduate in entomology. Dr. Brown referred David to me and other forest entomologists, starting a chain of events. I provided David an early photograph of Burke and his

unpublished memoir. David then provided me with a genealogy of the Burke family and

suggested I write to Burke’s two surviving daughters: Dorothy Burke Walker, born in 1914,

and Janet Burke Eglington, born in 1920. They both enthusiastically responded to my

inquiries for information about their father with unpublished material, short vignettes 

by other Burke children about life with their father, and some family photographs.

Daughter Janet carried on an invaluable correspondence with me from 2002 through

2004. She provided her memories of family lore and events, has been my sounding board,

and inspired me to keep moving on this project. Most importantly, she introduced me to her

childhood friend Betty Miller Moore via correspondence. Betty is the daughter of John M.

Miller, the second forest entomologist on the scene in this account. Through Betty I learned

i
that John Miller had kept diaries of his professional duties from 1907 until his retirement in

1951. The diaries were in the possession of Betty’s niece, Susan Miller Lowenkron, who

graciously entrusted Miller’s diaries to me for research and eventual archiving. She also

mentioned many letters that her grandfather had written to his wife while in the field with

the USDA Forest Service and the Bureau of Entomology. We all recognized the importance

of these letters because Miller had left no biographical material about himself. Betty and

Susan began the painstaking job of typing and organizing these letters by date and providing me with pertinent copies. 

At this point I felt that both men deserved a published biography of their lives and

contributions to the science of forest entomology. When I was employed by the Forest

Insect Laboratory (Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine) and a student at the

University of California, Berkeley, in 1948, I assembled a small number of Burke’s 

memoirs for limited distribution. I kept one of these original copies for 54 years thinking

someday I would try to formally publish it. I got as far as publishing, as editor, only a

small part of Burke’s memoirs.1

My connection to John Miller was slightly different. I actually worked for Miller as a

student, sometimes summarizing his field data at the Berkeley office. Miller was in charge

of the Forest Insect Investigations Laboratory of the Bureau of Entomology for many

years. In the summer of 1951, shortly before he retired, he assigned me to a detail on the

large Colorado Spruce Beetle Project as a survey crew leader. At that point, I had taken

several entomology courses, but my major was education. I had worked as a student 

assistant in the field and office since 1948, and he evidently felt I could do the job. This

assignment changed my life. Most of the men detailed to the Spruce Beetle Project from

the Bureau of Entomology were graduate entomologists with considerable experience.

Miller’s trust in me affected me deeply. I must have passed muster because when I returned

to Berkeley, I was assigned increasingly responsible jobs. Of course, after that, John Miller

was my hero. I immediately changed my major to forest entomology in the fall of 1951. 

I vowed to someday write a biography of Miller. However, sources were rare because

he just didn’t write anything about himself. The closest I came to his story was an article

written in 1987 about the Ashland Field Station, which he led from 1912 to 1924.2

Combining the story of these two pioneer entomologists makes sense beyond my 

personal bias. Miller came to the Bureau of Entomology 9 years after Burke’s appointment,

but from the moment of his arrival he was given managerial responsibilities by A.D.

Hopkins, Chief of Forest Insect Investigations; for all practical purposes, Miller was

coleader, with Burke, of the bureau laboratories and field stations until 1923 when he was

placed in charge of all forest insect investigations on the Pacific coast. Burke and Miller

were gentlemen of the highest order. I have yet to find a critical comment from either man

1 Burke, H.E., Wickman, B.E. 1990. Northeastern Oregon bark beetle control project 1910-11. Gen.

Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-249. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Research Station.

2 Wickman, B.E. 1987. Early forest insect research in the Pacific Northwest: Ashland Field Station,

1912-1925. Oregon Historical Quarterly. Spring: 27-48.

ii
about the competitive leadership situation that was forced upon them by Hopkins, or 

about their brilliant, but sometimes cantankerous, boss in Washington, D.C.

Accounts from both families indicate that Burke and Miller were more than 

colleagues. As friends, they shared family camping trips and social events. 

My approach to writing these biographies was to use, as much as possible, the words

of the two men, by using direct quotes and passages from autobiographies, family letters,

diaries, official correspondence, published and unpublished reports, oral histories, and the

short-lived “Forest Insect Newsletter.”3 Burke and Miller descendants were also most 

generous with their recollections that helped tie the personal family lore to the official

activities.

My contributions were minimal and involved organizing the text, locating photographs, and providing additional historical detail or interpretations when warranted. All

errors concerning dates or interpretation are absolutely mine. I hope future generations 

of historians will give me some latitude, because this is not strictly a history of forest 

entomology in the West. It is meant to record the human side of two really fine gentlemen

and outstanding scientists. I have tried to weave some of the significant historical events

into the story to indicate how these pioneers in a new forest science influenced our current

thinking. 

I hope I have succeeded in making their colorful lives and times a good read.

3 The newsletter name changed several times. See “Other Sources” section.

iii
Contents

1 Chapter 1: Burke’s Childhood and Education

3 Chapter 2: A.D. Hopkins and How Forest Insect Investigations Were Started

7 Chapter 3: Exploratory Work in Western Forests, 1903-1910

11 Chapter 4: The Northeastern Oregon Bark Beetle Control Project, 

1910-1911

21 Chapter 5: John Martin Miller Family History and Education—

The Forest Service Beckons

35 Chapter 6: The Early Forest Service Years, 1909-1910

57 Chapter 7: Miller Starts Entomology Work With the Forest Service, 1910

63 Chapter 8: 1911-1912, Year of Change—Miller Joins the Bureau of

Entomology, Burke Heads the Yreka, California, Project

75 Chapter 9: 1913—Western Forest Entomology Is Reorganized

81 Chapter 10: The Early Ashland Years, 1914-1916

89 Chapter 11: 1917-1919, Burke and Miller Change Roles as the Division of

Forest Insect Investigations Evolves

95 Chapter 12: Burke and Miller Move Again, 1920-1922

101 Chapter 13: A New Chief in Washington, D.C.—

More Reorganization, 1923-1924

113 Chapter 14: The Forest Insect Division at Stanford University, 1925-1929

123 Chapter 15: The 1930s—A Momentous Decade for the Forest Insect 

Division 

131 Chapter 16: Miller Closes His Bureau of Entomology Career

137 Epilogue

141 Acknowledgments

143 References

147 Other Sources

151 Appendix

153 Index

iv
Chapter 1: Burke’s Childhood 

and Education

An Indian attack in Paradise Valley, Nevada, during the 

summer of 1878 (the Bannock Indian War) had important

consequences for the future of forest entomology in the

Western United States. The danger and upheaval of the

attack caused a young homesteader, his wife, and 6-weekold baby to pull up stakes and head for a safer more settled

clime. Thus began the life of Harry Eugene Burke, who

might have grown up to be a Nevada farmer rather than an

eminent pioneer in Western forest entomology. Here is

Burke’s memory of those days from his unpublished 

autobiography.1

I was born May 19, 1878 in the old Camp

Scott buildings at Paradise Valley (North of

Winnemucca), Nevada. My ancestry was typically

American. The Father, Harry Daniel Burke, was an

emigrant from Hanover, Germany, who had served

through four years of the “war between the states”

as a cavalryman in the Northern Army. His father

and several older brothers had been killed fighting

the Prussians in 1848. His mother died soon afterwards and he moved to America in 1859. After his

discharge from the army he moved west and was

growing wheat near Chico, California, when in

1876 he met Sarah Eugonia Jones who was teaching school near Chico. They were married in 1877

at Mt.View, California and soon after left for

Nevada in search for more and better land. They

finally reached Paradise Valley where I was born.

The Jones family moved from Wales to North

Carolina in 1735 and Sarah Eugonia’s grandfather

and several uncles fought in the American

Revolution with Washington. Her father was captain of an artillery company on the Southern side

during the “war between the states.” Before the war

and afterwards he was a Methodist minister for

sixty years as well as a storekeeper and newspaper

man. Because of some hot editorials during the

war, he was much sought after by some of

Sherman’s men when they marched through

Georgia to the sea. Parson Jones, however, 

managed to keep out of the way of the Yankees and

soon after the war was over migrated to Missouri

with his family. California was the promised land,

so on to California they went in the 1870’s.

I was six weeks old when the Paiute Indians

made a raid through the Paradise Valley and the

Burkes moved back to California and settled near

Mayfield in the Santa Clara Valley. [Insert by

daughter Claire –“I remember hearing tales of this

flight in a spring wagon. Mother and infant were

bounced out, but Sarah Eugonia held the baby so

high that even his long white dress did not get in

the mud.”] After three years, in 1881, the family,

now composed of two sons and the parents still 

in quest for better land, moved to what was then

Washington Territory and settled in the White River

Valley south of Seattle.

In 1881, due to illness of my father, the family

now including two more sons and a daughter,

returned to California. Father died in 1888. In 1891

the family, with a new stepfather, Alford C. Baker,

returned to Washington.”

By the spring of 1897, I had managed to spend

enough time in the public schools of Washington

and California to graduate with the first high

school class in Kent, Washington.

1897 is noted in northwestern history as the

year of the great gold discovery in Alaska. Then

nineteen, I was offered the choice of joining the

gold rush to Alaska or of being the first King

County free scholar to attend the then rather new

Washington Agricultural College and School of

Science at Pullman, Washington. Carrying 100 lb.

sacks of flour over White Pass on my back in the

snow did not appeal to me, so I accepted the scholarship and enrolled at the college (now Washington

State University) in September, 1897, as a senior

preparatory student.

The first year, due to the Alaskan influence,

my major study was mining engineering. The second year it was economic science and history with

law the final objective. But one fine day during the

spring of the second year, I went on a collecting

trip with a class-mate who was studying insects.

That trip opened up new visions and solved the

problem of choosing a life’s work. For the third

and final time a major was chosen, this time it was

Zoology.

After five years at Washington State, I graduated June 19, 1902 with high honors and the degree

of B.S. in Zoology.

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

1

1 H.E. Burke prepared an autobiography, My Recollections of the First

Years in Forest Entomology in 1946 at the urging of his colleagues J.M.

Miller and F.P. Keen. The intention was to publish the manuscript after it

was carefully edited by Miller. Unfortunately this never happened. It

remained an unpublished report widely referred to by forest entomologists.

The Burke family provided me with an early draft of Burke’s autobiography that Miller deleted from the official report. This heretofore unknown

draft is the basis for the first chapter.
While at Washington State, I achieved a number of political and other student honors. Among

these were president of the class of 1902 during the

freshman year, treasurer of the class the last three

years, president of the Websterian Debating

Society, lieutenant in the cadet corps, member of

the board of athletic control, business manager of

the college yearbook (Chinook 1902), and member

of the college track team with points against

Washington, Idaho and Whitman in shot and 

discus.

During the summer of 1900 I was assistant at 

the Washington State Oyster Experiment Station,

Keyport, and during the summer of 1901, laboratory assistant in Entomology at Washington State.

Also while at Washington State, I made my

first contact with forest insects. I became acquainted with J.L. Webb who was studying forest insects

under the direction of Dr. A.D. Hopkins, then at the

University of West Virginia, and made several trips

with Webb in the forests near Moscow, Idaho collecting various insects from western pine beetlekilled yellow pine.

Upon my graduation, I received an appointment as special field agent with the Division of

Entomology, U.S. Department of Agriculture and

spent the months of July, August and September in

1902 in Boise, Idaho carrying on investigations of

codling moth life history and control under the

direction of C.B. Simpson.

While at Boise, I received a letter from J.L.

Webb who was then in the Black Hills of South

Dakota working on the Black Hills beetle, saying

that Dr. Hopkins was looking for an assistant in

forest insect investigations just starting in the

Division of Entomology and that Webb was 

recommending me. A letter was also received from

C.V. Piper, professor of Zoology and Botany at

Washington State, saying that he was recommending me for the job with Hopkins. I therefore

applied and was appointed a special field agent in

the Division to take effect October 1, 1902 and

ordered to report to Webb at Elmore, South Dakota.

The month of October was spent with Webb

learning the forest insects and assisting in taking

the life history and in experiments to determine if 

it were possible to trap the Black Hills beetle by

girdling and falling trees in various ways and at

various times of the year. Rocky Mountain yellow

pine were back girdled, belt girdled, peel girdled

and fallen at regular intervals.

On November 1, 1902 I was appointed as

assistant forest expert in the Bureau of Forestry and

ordered to Washington to work on forest insects

under the supervision of Dr. Hopkins.

The winter of 1902-1903 was spent working

on the insects collected in the Black Hills by Webb

and me. The adults were classified to species as far

as possible and all material was filed in collection

and the notes catalogued.2

When his father died, Burke was only 10 years old. Family

lore has recorded that his mother struggled to keep the farm

going, raise a large family, and all the while instill the

importance of education in her children. When she remarried in 1891 and the family returned to Washington state,

the die was cast for Harry to receive his education in public

schools and Washington State College (now Washington

State University). His choice of college was perhaps a

strong influence on his chosen vocation because the campus

was close to forests, and while there he met J.L. Webb, a

pioneer forest entomologist who recommended him to A.D.

Hopkins for a professional position as a forest entomologist.

Burke and Webb remained lifelong friends, and Burke

became the first entomologist assigned to the Pacific Slope

Region by Hopkins.

The next three chapters are reproduced verbatim from

Burke’s “My Recollections” report and include photographs

as presented by Burke (1946). In his recollections, Burke

introduced A.D. Hopkins, who was considered the father of

forest entomology.

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

2

2 Unpublished manuscript from the descendants of H.E.B. Biographies of

the men connected with the Northeastern Oregon Control Project, Bureau

of Entomology, 2. Harry Eugene Burke, an Autobiography.
Chapter 2: A.D. Hopkins and How Forest 

Insect Investigations Were Started

At its beginning, forest entomology in the United States

evolved mostly around one man, Andrew Delmar Hopkins

(1857-1948). His illustrious career began, not with a formal

education in the subject, but as a young farm boy intensely

interested in forest insects and willing to work for $1 per

day. Hopkins’ life has been described by Rowher (1950),

Berisford (1991), and Furniss (1997b). The story of Hopkins

and his relationship to Burke is best told in the latter’s own

words (Burke 1946).

Dr. A.D. Hopkins was the first chief of the

Division of Forest Insect Investigations and directed this work in the Bureau of Entomology from

1902-1923. Previous to that he had been: farmer,

1877-1890; entomologist, West Virginia Experiment Station, 1890-1902 and vice-director, 

1897-1902; Professor of Economic Entomology,

University of West Virginia, 1896-1902; author of

many bulletins on insects and holder of many scientific honors. He has often been called the Father

of Forest Entomology in America.

Hopkins’ experience in western forest areas

was limited to brief trips. In 1899 he made a trip

out of Washington, D.C., lasting from April 9 to

June 17, in which he visited areas in California,

Oregon, Washington and Idaho, which was quite

remarkable in its results. In this short period he collected 4,363 specimens and took 760 notes. Later

developments showed that he had uncovered and

correctly interpreted most of the important forest

insect problems of the region. As a result of this

trip, he published “A Preliminary Report of the

Insect Enemies of Forests in the Northwest.” In

1902, 1903, 1904 and 1905 he made trips into the

Black Hills, Pacific, Colorado and southwestern

areas. In 1911 he visited the Northeastern Oregon

Project and areas in northern California. His last

trip to the west was made in 1915 when he made

the rounds of western field stations.

To start at the beginning we have to go back 

to the Hatch Act passed by Congress in 1887. This

law appropriated money for the organization of the

State Agricultural Experiment Stations. Most of

these stations soon established departments of entomology. The West Virginia Station at the University

of West Virginia, Morgantown, decided to establish

such a department in 1890. There were two applications for the position of entomologist. One wanted a salary of $2,000 (real money in 1890) and a

secretary. The other, A.D. Hopkins, offered to do

the work for nothing if he were allowed to live on

his farm. Hopkins was given the position and started on his official entomological career.

On a trip made through the state of West

Virginia in September 1890 Hopkins found great

quantities of dead spruce in Randolph County. An

examination indicated that bark beetles were the

cause. This discovery caused Hopkins to make further investigations in the forests of the State, which

started him on the road to becoming the Father of

Forest Entomology in the United States. A trip was

made to Europe in 1892 to collect specimens of the

European bark beetle destroyer, Clerus (Thanasimus) formicarius L., for introduction in the

forests of West Virginia to prey on the southern

pine beetle. 

As the leading authority in the United States

on forest entomology, Hopkins was chosen by the

Division of Entomology, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, to make an investigation of the Pacific

Coast forests during the summer of 1899. On this

trip he found the western pine beetle and the mountain pine beetles killing numbers of trees in the

pine forests of California, Oregon, Washington and

Idaho.

One stop on the trip was at the Washington

State College at Pullman. Here Hopkins visited

G.V. Piper, entomologist of the Washington

Experiment Station. Together they made a trip into

the pine forests of western Idaho to study various

insects, one of these the western pine beetle. 

As a result of this trip, Piper induced one of

his students, J.L. Webb, to take up forest insects as

a major. Webb, therefore, was probably the first

college student of forest insects in the United

States. Webb collected forest insects in western

Idaho during 1900 and 1901 and in studying them

corresponded with Hopkins.

In 1901 the Chief of the Bureau of Forestry of 

the Philippines requested Gifford Pinchot, Chief of 

the Bureau of Forestry of the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, to get him a forest entomologist.

Pinchot passed the request on to Hopkins who

replied there were none, but he would train one if

given time. This suggestion was followed and

Webb, the only known student, was appointed a

field assistant in the Bureau of Forestry in the fall

of 1901 and sent to Hopkins at the University of

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

3
West Virginia to train for the Philippine position.

As a side light, it should be said that Webb did not

know that a field assistant was supposed to have

expenses, so he worked the winter of 1901 at $25

per month and subsisted himself. 

The appointment of Webb by the Department

of Agriculture to work on insects under Hopkins

stirred [L.O.] Howard, Chief of the Division of

Entomology, into action. He started to work toward

the establishment of an Office of Forest Insect

Investigations in the Division. 

In the meantime the Black Hills Beetle had

started its destructive work in the yellow pine

forests of the Black Hills of South Dakota and

Wyoming.

In May 1902 Webb was appointed an Assistant

Forest Expert in the Bureau of Forestry and sent to

the Black Hills to investigate the trouble under the

direction of Hopkins, who was to be appointed 

July 1 Chief of the new Office of Forest Insect

Investigations in the Division of Entomology. 

Since Webb was expected to take the Philippine position, an assistant to take his place was

needed. I had collected some with Webb in 1900

and 1901 and was recommended by him for this

appointment. Being already in the Division of

Entomology on a three-month appointment to work

on the codling moth at Boise, Idaho, I was appointed October 1, 1902 as Special Field Agent of the

Division, to investigate the damage to forests and

forest trees by insects and was sent to the Black

Hills to receive training from Webb. On November

1, 1902, I was appointed an Assistant Forest Expert

in the Bureau of Forestry and ordered to Washington to work on forest insects under Hopkins, 

following Webb in by about a week.

The Office of Forest Insect Investigations

therefore completed its first six months with Dr.

A.D. Hopkins, an appointee of the Division of

Entomology, in charge with J.L. Webb and myself,

appointees of the Bureau of Forestry, as assistants.

During the spring of 1903, W.F. Fiske, Assistant

State Entomologist of Georgia, was appointed a

special field agent in the Division of Entomology

and assigned to work on forest insects under Dr.

Hopkins. All expenses for the work were paid by

the Bureau of Forestry. 

This organization continued until July 1, 1904,

when the Division of Entomology became a

Bureau and Webb and I were transferred from the

Bureau of Forestry to the Bureau of Entomology.

Webb did, however, spend the field season of 1903

in the Philippines as an appointee of the Philippine

Bureau of Science.

It was during the winter of 1902-03 that Dr.

Hopkins suggested to Webb and myself that each 

of us specializes on some important family of 

forest insects as Hopkins had specialized on the

Scolytidae. Webb selected the Cerambycidae and I

the Buprestidae. Dr. Hopkins also submitted a plan

for dividing the United States into four major forest

areas for forest insect fieldwork with a man specializing on the insect problems in each area. The

areas suggested were the Eastern, the Southern, the

Rocky Mountains, and the Pacific Coast. Webb

took the Rocky Mountain region due to his experience with the Black Hills beetle and in the yellow

pine forests of Idaho. I selected the Pacific Coast

mainly because I was from that section and already

familiar with some of the conditions [figs. 1

through 3].

The epidemic of the Black Hills beetle, which

ran from about 1898 to 1907 in South Dakota, was

the first case of western bark beetle depredations to

receive serious attention from foresters. It resulted

in the heavy killing of ponderosa pine. The Black

Hills outbreak so impressed Gifford Pinchot that he

took aggressive action which finally resulted in the

establishment of the Division of Forest Insect

Investigations (Furniss 1997a). 

As a result of the studies that were made in the

Black Hills, control methods were devised and a

limited amount of control work was done. The 

epidemic soon subsided, however, and no field stations were set up for continued studies in this area.

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

4

Figure 1—Andrew Delmar Hopkins (1857-

1948) Washington, D.C., March 1909. 
Most of the major forest insect problems of the era

were apparently in the western portion of the United States.

Burke’s appointment made him, at the time, the only 

formally trained entomologist in the Bureau of Entomology

in the west coast. The seat of power was, of course, in

Washington, D.C., so when Hopkins was appointed Chief 

of Forest Insect Investigation in the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, he maintained his office there. Even though 

he was far from the scene of action (a train trip from

Washington, D.C., to California for instance took several

days), he still managed periodic field trips to the West. He

also maintained tight control over his field assistants and, 

in the early years at least, few decisions were made in the

field without telegraphic or postal consultations with Chief

Hopkins.1 This micromanaging from afar eventually affected the morale of the field men and probably the speed at

which some projects could proceed. This would play a role 

in the careers of both Burke and Miller.

John Miller’s arrival in the Bureau of Entomology

Forest Insect Investigations occurred about 9 years (1911)

after Burke’s, but his professional background with the then

newly formed U.S. Forest Service from 1907 to 1911 is a

fascinating story in itself. In those early years Miller kept a

fairly detailed diary and wrote dozens of letters to his soonto-be wife describing the duties of a pioneer Forest Service

employee, but first, Burke’s autobiography continues with

an account of his first forest insect investigations on the

west coast. 

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

5

Figure 2—The first office occupied by forest entomologists in the

old insectary, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.,

December 1902. J.L. Webb (left), Lee, and H.E. Burke. Lee was

the first stenographer and clerk employed by Hopkins. He worked

for one winter only and was replaced by E.C. Wood.

Figure 3—Pioneer forest entomologists and forest pathologists,

Black Hills, South Dakota, July 1902. (Left to right) J.L. Webb,

assistant forest expert; Dr. Hermann VonSchrenk, in charge of 

forest pathology, Bureau of Plant Industry; Burns, assistant in 

forest pathology; Dr. A.D. Hopkins, in charge of forest insect

investigation.

1 Correspondence between Burke and Hopkins between 1910 and 1911 in

my possession.

H.E. Burke, PSW

H.E. Burke, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

6
Chapter 3: Exploratory Work in Western

Forests, 1903-1910

Burke’s autobiography continues with brief accounts of his

fieldwork in Washington, Oregon, and California. His

apparent independence to travel about during these first 7

years was likely because Burke had no responsibilities for

insect control decisions, project management, or supervision. He mainly collected insects, made field notes on their

life histories, and returned to Washington, D.C., each winter

to write reports and prepare his specimens. This fit right in

with Hopkins’ plan of learning as much as possible about

forest insects in the United States, having specimens available for reference, and publishing the results of investigations. Hopkins sometimes was less than generous with his

authorship and credit for illustrations. And while his men

were in Washington he was no doubt sizing them up for

future responsibilities and indoctrinating them in his

philosophies of insect control, for with Hopkins the only

good bark beetle was a dead bark beetle.

These early years seemed to have influenced Burke in

another direction. He truly enjoyed collecting specimens and

studying the biology and life histories of insects new to 

science. This probably resulted in some of Burke’s later

career choices.

Now back to Burke’s autobiography.

In April 1903 I left Washington with orders to

proceed to the Grays Harbor Country of western

Washington and establish a station whose field of

operation would be Washington, Oregon and

California. The main projects were to determine 

(1) the span worm that had defoliated large areas of

hemlock and spruce about 1891, (2) the maggot or

other insect that causes the injury to living hemlock

and produces a defect in the wood known as black

check, (3) the bark weevils that cause damage to

reproduction of spruce, fir and other conifers and

(4) the bark and wood-boring insects that damage

Douglas-fir.

The station was established at Hoquiam,

Washington. About all that could be found out

about the span worm was that it had occurred a

number of years before and had done a lot of damage. Some old snags were found in the Hoquiam

River basin that were said to be the remains of

trees killed by the span worm. The hemlock bark

maggot was found and cages were placed on the

trees to rear the adults. A similar bark maggot was

found in the bark of the grand fir. Several species

of bark weevils were found. Among these was a

new species that severely injured the terminals of

Sitka spruce. Various types of girdled trap trees of

Douglas-fir, Sitka spruce, western hemlock and

Pacific red cedar were made at regular intervals

throughout the season and numerous insects and

notes on their biology were collected. Trips were

made to Willapa Harbor, Pialschie [sic] and to

Moscow, Idaho, to study forest insects at these

places.

The winter of 1903-04 was spent in Washington, D.C., working on reports and on collections of

insects made during the summer. 

For the field season of 1904 I returned to

Hoquiam, Washington, with trips to Palo Alto,

California, Snoqualmie, Smiths Ferry, Idaho,

Elmore and Nemo, South Dakota, and St. Louis,

Missouri. This season I succeeded in rearing the

adults of the hemlock bark maggot and the grand

fir bark maggot and determined the main points in

the biologys of these insects and of the Pissodes in

the spruce terminals. A Pissodes working in the

basal bark of young spruce and one in the basal

bark of Douglas-fir were also studied. Many observations were made on numerous other forest

insects such as the bark beetles, the wood-stainers

and the woodborers. The western oak spanworm

was studied and reported in epidemic form for the

first time. At Smiths Ferry, Idaho, a new Pissodes

was found in the terminals of Engelmann spruce

and a study was made of an epidemic of the 

western pine beetle in a commercial stand of 

yellow pine and of the Douglas-fir beetle in a 

commercial stand of Douglas-fir. This was probably the first study made of such epidemics.

On July 1, 1904 the Division of Entomology

was made a Bureau and I was temporary Field

Agent transferred from the Bureau of Forestry. This

was a promotion in salary from $600 to $1200 per

annum and was the realization of one of my youthful ambitions to have a government job at $100 per

month.

The winter of 1904-05 was spent in Washington, D.C., as before. The main feature was the publishing of U.S.D.A. Circular No. 61 “Black check

in western Hemlock.” This was the first scientific

paper that I published [figs. 4 through 6].

Part of the field season of 1905 was spent at

Hoquiam and Pialschie with a trip to Rainier in

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

7
August. The main feature of this season’s work was

the finding of the larva of the cedar pole borer

which was damaging many standing red cedar.

We now know that the borer was a flathead,

but which one? A new Pissodes was found infesting the alpine fir on Mt. Rainier and the mountain

pine beetle was found to be killing western white

pine at Longmires.

Since it was thought that the main facts about

insects in the forests of the Pacific Northwest had

been determined and because Dr. Hopkins had

found extensive bark beetle damage to yellow pine

and sugar pine on a trip to the Yosemite in 1904, 

it was decided to move the Pacific station from

Pialachie to California in 1906. Professor J.H.

Comstock’s report that on a trip to the Yosemite in

1905 he had seen a great flight of small moths and

much dying lodgepole pine probably had its influence too.

During April 1906 I completed some observations at Pialschie which include the finding of 

fragments of a Trachykele beetle indicating that a

species of Trachykele might be the borer of the living cedar. The move to California was made in May

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

8

Figure 5—On the grounds of the National Museum are seated (left

to right) Strauss, Webb, and Burke. Standing are Van Horn and

Wood. Van Horn came into the Division as a preparator and was

rated as an entomologist of great promise. He mysteriously 

disappeared in February 1909. No trace of him was found, but 

it was suspected that he drowned in the Potomac River.

Figure 6—Forest Insect Investigations, Washington, D.C.,

November 21, 1905. (Left to right) W.F. Fiske, Phillips, and J.L.

Webb. In 1903, W.F. Fiske, then Assistant State Entomologist of

Georgia, was appointed by Hopkins as a special field agent to

study the forest insect problems of the Southern States. He 

continued on this assignment for a few years only and was then

transferred to the gypsy moth work in the New England States.

Fiske became well known for his work on the introduction of parasites of the gypsy and brown tail moths. Phillips was in charge of

the bee culture for the Bureau of Entomology.

Figure 4—The Washington office, 1904-1906. In 1903, Dr.

Hopkins moved his office from the insectary to these quarters in a

private building at 904 B Street, S.W. Practically all of the work

on the Dendroctonus and Pissodes bulletins was done here. This

room was occupied until 1908. (Left to right) W.F. Fiske, Special

Agent for the Southern States; E.C. Wood, clerk and stenographer;

Dr. A.D. Hopkins; J.L. Webb, Special Agent for Rocky Mountain

States; J.F. Strauss, artist; and H.E. Burke, Special Agent for

Pacific Coast States.

H.E. Burke, PSW H.E. Burke, PSW

H.E. Burke, PSW
shortly after the San Francisco earthquake. After a

few weeks at Palo Alto I went to Wawona. I spent a

week there, ten days in the Mariposa Grove of Big

Trees, and the established temporary headquarters at

Summerdale (now known as Fish Camp). Many

insects were collected and infested trees marked for

further study. Small sugar pine and yellow pine

were cut for trap trees. The period from July 10 to

August 11 was spent in the Yosemite with one week

in the little Yosemite and one week in the Tuolumne

Meadows. The return to Fish Camp was made

August 12 and the investigations continued there

until September 17. 

One of the principal results of the season’s

work was the discovery in the Mariposa Grove that

Trachykele was the destructive borer of the Pacific

red cedar. The Yosemite may seem a long ways

from the red cedar forests of the Pacific Northwest,

but we already had the boring larvae and only

needed to connect it with the adult to determine the

species. The finding of Trachykele opulenta larvae

and young beetles in a small Sequoia in the Mariposa Grove proved that the borer of red cedar was

also a trachykele. And the fact that Trachykele

blondeli beetles were found in the red cedar forests 

indicated that species was the one causing the 

damage.

The western pine beetle was found killing 

scattering yellow pine in both Fish Camp and the

Yosemite areas. The mountain pine beetle was

found killing scattered sugar pines and yellow

pines in the Fish Camp area and large numbers of

lodgepole pines in the Little Yosemite just north of

Lake Tenaya and around the Tuolumne Meadows.

No needleminers were found, but the foliage of the

trees on some areas looked thin and abnormal.

One important discovery in 1906 was a new

species of Dendroctonus (jeffreyi) which was

killing Jeffrey pine around the top of Yosemite 

falls and in the Little Yosemite.

At Fish Camp an epidemic of the fir tussock

moth (Notolophus oslari) was studied and numerous parasites reared. The defoliation of the tops of

many large white firs caused the death of a large

percent of the tops and the loss of the seed crop for

the year.

After a few weeks at Palo Alto in late

September and early October studying the insects

of Monterey pine and the Monterey cypress, I

returned to Washington, D.C., October 17 [fig. 7].

The winter of 1906-07 was spent as usual working

up the notes taken during the summer and in classifying and filing the insects and the information

about them. A special study was made of the

Buprestidae, particularly of the larvae. This 

included a key to the various genera.

The field season of 1907 from May 31 to

October 24 was given over to a series of studies in

northern and southern Utah with trips to Joseph,

Oregon, and Palo Alto and Pacific Grove, California [fig. 8]. The results of the 1907 season were the

recording of numerous observations and the determination of important points in the biology of the

mountain pine beetle, the western pine beetle, and

the red turpentine beetle. A new Pissodes, afterwards described as burkei by Dr. Hopkins, was 

discovered attacking the trunks of living alpine fir

near Kamas, Utah. An infestation of the mountain

pine beetle found near Joseph, Oregon, was one of

the starting points of the great northeastern Oregon

epidemic which killed millions of lodgepole and

yellow pines during the next five years.

The winter of 1907 and practically all of 1908,

1909 and the first four months of 1910, except for

occasional short field trips, were spent in Washington, D.C. working on the numerous notes and 

specimens collected during the first five years of

forest insect investigations.

One of the field trips during this period included Custer, South Dakota, August 21-24, 1908, to

study the end of the great Black Hills beetle epidemic. All that could be determined was that the

epidemic appeared to be over. Only seven infested

trees could be found. I also visited Anaconda,

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

9

Figure 7—Harry Eugene Burke, at

Palo Alto, California, after field season

in the Yosemite country, 1906.

H.E. Burke, PSW
Montana, from August 27 to September 7 on the

same trip to investigate the relations of forest

insects to the killing of trees and other vegetation

around the smelter areas. The conclusions were that

the insects had practically no relation to the

smelter-killed trees. Most forest insects were very

scarce, seemingly due to being scattered through a

great amount of slowly dying timber. The report on

this investigation was used as evidence in several

suits for damages caused by the smelter smoke.

Thus far in this autobiography I have retraced

some of the trails which I followed in western forest entomology from 1902 up to the spring of 1910.

This was largely a period of exploration of the field

to locate the more important problems. After this

period the Bureau of Entomology began to develop

both control and research programs in the western

forests.

This account brings us up to the Northeastern

Oregon Bark Beetle Control Project which was the

first large undertaking of its kind in this country

and marked the beginning of a considerable expansion of the Division of Forest Insect Investigations. 

Burke did a prodigious amount of forest insect 

collecting and studies on the life histories of those insects.

His lengthy periods in the Washington office identifying 

his collections and preparing his notes for publication was

excellent training that Hopkins required of his field entomologists. It probably instilled the lifelong habit that was

characteristic of Burke, publishing his studies of insects in

numerous well-written publications. 

Burke’s responsibilities were about to change, perhaps

not to his liking. Some unknown poet very cleverly

expressed the evolving relationship between the Bureau 

of Entomology and the U.S. Forest Service over the control

of bark beetles.

Whatever killed that monster pine

Whose branches pierced the clouds so fine?

Ask Doctor Graves, he herds the trees,

Perhaps it is an extra freeze.

“Freeze nothing” Doctor Graves’ reply

“It’s fire that kills all trees that die

Except a few that lumber jacks

May murder with the saw and axe.”

“Fire never killed that forest tree”

Says Doctor Hopkins, “You hear me:

Bugs killed that tree, son, don’t I know

My printed books have told you so.

For years I’ve warned you bugs were bad

But you have just been fire mad.

Trees killed by bugs in twenty years,

Value one billion dollars it appears.

From Hopkins’s bulletin eight three

Page four I name as referee.”

Thus Graves and Hopkins don’t agree

On what or who killed that big tree.

But still the bugs grow fat and strong

No matter which is right or wrong.

-Anonymous

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

10

Figure 8—The Burkes spent their 1907 honeymoon camping in the Utah wilderness while Burke accomplished fieldwork. These photos

show them cooking in camp. 

H.E. Burke family
Chapter 4: The Northeastern Oregon Bark

Beetle Control Project, 1910-1911

As Burke pointed out at the end of the last chapter, the

Northeastern Oregon Bark Beetle Control Project in 1910

was the first of its kind in the United States and marked a

change in the way Forest Insect Investigation entomologists

carried out their duties. A portion of Burke’s biography covering this project was published earlier and edited by the

author. It goes into greater detail than Burke’s biographical

history of the project (Burke and Wickman 1990).

Hopkins was not an idle bureaucrat in Washington,

D.C. He was a first-rate scientist and entomologist, but he

was also an effective promoter. The Division of Forest

Insect Investigations in the Bureau of Entomology was not

going to be an academic organization collecting, cataloging,

and writing about forest insects. Hopkins had a vision for

the organization very early as co-managers and active 

advisors for the U.S. Forest Service and later the National

Park Service in matters relating to forest insects. These two

public agencies managed most of the forested public lands

in the United States, and where there were forests there

were insects feeding on trees and in many cases causing 

tree mortality over thousands of acres.

Hopkins was a member of the Washington, D.C.,

Cosmos Club. Most of the politically elite were also members including Chief of the Forest Service, Gifford Pinchot

and his soon-to-be replacement Henry Graves. The year

1910 was called the “year of the fires” by historian Stephen

J. Pyne not without cause (Pyne 2001). Millions of acres of

prime timberland burned over a long dry fire season in the

Western United States that year. Dozens of firefighters and

settlers (the exact numbers will never be known) lost their

lives. It changed the way the public and government 

agencies viewed forest fires for almost a century.

Prior to these fires, the Forest Service under Pinchot

took a more ecological view of forest management. That is,

all forest influences; biotic, like insects and diseases, and

abiotic, like windstorms, drought, and fire, played a role in

the life history of a forest. Insects or fire might kill trees

over hundreds or thousands of acres, but in the big picture

they did not usually devastate forests. After 1910, forest

fires and the unacceptable loss of life they incurred, were

paramount in the planning, budgeting, and managing of

national forests. Against this tide, Hopkins argued valiantly

that, taken together, forest insects and diseases caused more

forest mortality, year in and year out, than one aberrant fire

year like 1910.

The bark beetle situation in northeastern Oregon played

right into his hands. Mainly through Hopkins’ drum beating,

both Forest Service personnel and private timber owners

were aware that the “Forest Insect Investigations” division

had trained entomologists who were willing to live in the

field and help them combat the menace of bark beetle outbreaks. The private landowners petitioned the government 

to do something to reduce or stop the tree killing. Forest

Service field people were also concerned and requested

assistance. However, there was some reluctance from Forest

Service people higher in the organization to dilute their

efforts against forest fire by assigning rangers or spending

money on killing bugs!

Hopkins was not shy about promoting his views. He

visited northeastern Oregon in March 1910 and talked over

plans for a grand control project with whoever would listen,

including a Town Hall type meeting in Baker City, and started lobbying for a Congressional appropriation.1 Hopkins

placed Burke in charge as his technical representative. This

was Burke’s first assignment where he set up a field station,

supervised others, made technical decisions, and essentially

managed the project work. All was not smooth sailing, however, and the Forest Service leaders in Washington, D.C.,

and the district office in Portland, Oregon, were wary about

having their rangers report to, or be under, the direction of

one of Hopkins’ entomologists. The Forest Service’s cooperation was vital in order to obtain the needed appropriation

of $25,000 to carry on the control project and to make it a

viable biological operation given that much of the outbreak

was on federal land.

The following exchanges and agreements were found 

in documents in my possession. They are not in Burke’s

autobiography so I will record them before proceeding to

Burke’s version (Burke and Wickman 1990). 

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

11

1 Appendix. Hopkins even had a “broadside” type handout to vent his

views on the matter.
The shortcomings in agency cooperation that had 

actually begun early in the spring of 1910 were reported by

Burke to his chief, Hopkins, and resulted in a flurry of letters and meetings in April 1910 between Hopkins and H.S.

Graves, Chief of the Forest Service, in Washington, D.C.

One meeting took place at the Cosmos Club and resulted in

Graves writing to Hopkins, “ . . . I read over your memorandum of our conversation at the Cosmos. In the account of

my statement there are a number of errors, which I will correct and show to you as soon as I have an opportunity. They

do not matter much as long as we are able to get together on

the general proposition.” Hopkins tactfully replied, “ . . . 

I was doubtful about some of the features in our conference

and am glad that you will correct them. I agree with you

heartily that the thing is to get together on the main 

proposition and proceed to kill the beetles.”

Hopkins was a strong individual who was going to

insist that Bureau of Entomology personnel remain in 

technical charge of forest insect control projects on federal

lands. It was also evident that at least some Forest Service

people resented this intrusion of nonforesters into their

domain. Hopkins insisted, on recommendation from Burke,

that only one technical expert be in charge of a control project and that that person be an entomologist, namely, Burke.

Hopkins and Burke also felt strongly that Forest Service

personnel assigned to the project should be of high caliber

and remain on the project for the duration and not be pulled

off to take care of other forest management demands as R.E.

Smith, Ranger on the Whitman National Forest, had been in

1910.

Chief Forester Graves acceded to the first request but

resisted having his foresters so tightly restricted from carrying out other duties. In a letter to District Forester Chapman

in Portland, Oregon, Graves wrote, 

I enclose a copy of Doctor Hopkins’ plan for this

project. I approve of the general plan, but think that

the form of the agreement is too rigid in the matter

of agreeing in advance to devote to this work certain of our men. I think a better plan would be to

find out just how much money must be expended,

and then arrange to put the men on the work. I fear

that Doctor Hopkins’ plan might result in a conflict

of work on the part of their time to it. It would be

better to have a man specially assigned to the

whole time.

To resolve this apparent impasse, the federal bureaucracy by winter 1911 produced a thick stack of agreements

(called supplements to Project Number 38), eventually

signed by everybody up to the Secretary of Agriculture. 

The agreement very rigidly spelled out responsibilities and

personnel assignments.

Henry S. Graves was new as Chief Forester of the

Forest Service, having been appointed a few months before

this exchange of letters from his position as dean of the Yale

School of Forestry. He had been a long-time associate of

Gifford Pinchot, who was dismissed as Chief Forester by

President Taft in 1910. Graves’ relationship with Pinchot

began when he (Graves) was an undergraduate at Yale.

Graves became a member of Pinchot’s forestry consulting

firm in 1896 and became Assistant Chief of the Division of

Forestry under Pinchot in 1898. In 1900, Graves was hired

as dean of the Yale School of Forestry, largely through the

influence of the Pinchot family. When he replaced Pinchot

as Chief Forester in early 1910, he no doubt had many more

things on his mind than humoring Hopkins or worrying

about a bark beetle problem in faraway Oregon. But, Graves

had an ecological bent. He had seen the beginnings of the

large bark beetle outbreaks in the Black Hills in 1897 and

was sympathetic to the need to combat the mountain pine

beetle in Oregon (Clary 1979, Graves 1965). I have copies

of letters that indicate he was diplomatic and gentlemanly in

his dealing with Hopkins, and this was perhaps not always

easy.

The private landowners were also having difficulties.

The main problem was that there were so many small

landowners; they were hard to locate or they were absentee

owners. There was also quite a bit of distrust among

landowners, so getting signed agreements and assessments

from everybody was hard. An attitude of “I’ll do it if he

does it” seemed to be prevalent. W.B. Turner, special agent

in charge of cooperation with landowners, evidently did an

excellent job of lining up agreements and support from 

private landowners, and a cooperative agreement for the

project was signed by many parties. 

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

12
In Sumpter, the economic advantage of the control

work was recognized. The Sumpter Blue Mountain

American editorialized on April 16, 1911, “ . . . Between 

the logging camps and the bug hunters there is no reason

why all laborers should not have employment at this place

this summer.”

The Sumpter Blue Mountain American reported the

conclusion of the project on June 29, 1911:

Bug Fighters Through—Government Complete

[sic] Season’s War on Pine Beetle. Government

Officials Well Pleased With Results Accomplished. 

Tomorrow the government work for the season

in Uncle Sam’s war on the pine beetles, with which

the pine forests of Eastern Oregon are infested, will

have been completed. The officers in charge of the

work are well pleased with the results accomplished. They report that more than 30,000 infected

trees have been cut down and burned and that a

larger scope of country than they anticipated when

starting in the spring has been cut over. From 120

to 130 men have been employed in the work. The

government men in charge of the work feel that

much good will result in checking the spread of the

little bug which they say is creating such havoc in

the pine forests. The general impression seems to

be that the beetles only attack the lodge pole or

black pine [young ponderosa pine] a timber of little

commercial value. This impression is erroneous.

The reports show that fully as many infected 

yellow pines were cut down as of the black pine.

Some of these yellow pines were large trees, one

being noted that was 84 inches in diameter.

Burke’s memoirs give a detailed account of this first

forest insect control project on the west coast (fig. 9).

The Northeast Oregon Bark Beetle Control Project

a. Developments during the fall of 1910.

The Northeastern Oregon Forest Control

Project really started August 17, 1907, when at the

request of Supervisor Howard O’Brien of the

Imnaha (Wallowa) N.F. I examined dying lodgepole and yellow pine on the divide between Little

Sheep and Big Sheep Creek near Joseph, Oregon.

The mountain pine beetle was found to be the main

depredator, but the western pine beetle was also

present in the yellow pine. During the preceding

three years, 90 to 95 percent of the lodgepole and

much of the yellow pine had been killed on an area

of over 100,000 acres.

During the spring of 1910, W.C. Calder, an

agent of the Wallowa Timber Company of Warren,

Pennsylvania, stationed at Baker, Oregon, became

alarmed at the dying yellow pine near Baker and

started a movement among the private owners to

have something done about it. From the Forest

Service he heard of the Office of Forest Insect

Investigations and started corresponding with Dr.

A.D. Hopkins. Forest Ranger W.D. Edmonston of

Colorado and I were ordered to Baker to represent

the Bureau of Entomology at a meeting of private

owners, forest officials and others interested in 

protecting the timber. Private owners from Baker, 

La Grande, Portland and Spokane were present 

and forest officers from Portland and Sumpter

(Whitman) National Forest.

May 15, 1910, the party traveled to Anthony

Creek in the Whitman National Forest and examined the infested timber. The mountain pine beetle

was found to be the main depredator in both the

lodgepole and the yellow pine. The western pine

beetle was found in the yellow pine, especially in

the larger trees, usually in the bark left unattacked

by the mountain pine beetle.

May 16 the party went to Austin on the divide

between the Powder and the John Day rivers.

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

13

Figure 9—The Northeastern Oregon Bark Beetle Control Project.

First office and field station, Baker, Oregon, September 1911.

(Left to right) W.B. Turner, special agent in charge of cooperation

with private owners, and H.E. Burke, agent and expert in general

charge of the project.

H.E. Burke, PSW
Around Austin where the forest was mostly yellow

pine the dying timber was rather scattered and

mostly the work of the western pine beetle.

As a result of these meetings, Forest Assistant

B.T. Harvey and Forest Ranger R.E. Smith were

detailed to work under my supervision and make

examinations of the Wallowa National Forest and

the Whitman Forest to determine just where the

infestations were and just how many trees were

infested. Ranger Edmonston went to Medical

Springs to examine the timber on private holdings

adjacent to the Wallowa Forest.

Following these postings, I moved to Sumpter

to make headquarters for the project and to demonstrate to the private owners and visiting forest officials the infesting insects and their work. Investigative trips were made through the infested areas in

both the Whitman and the Wallowa Forests.

By July 1 it was determined that the infestation

was widespread, involving at least 2,000,000

infested trees, and that the infesting insects were so

far advanced that no effective control work could

be done on the 1909-1910 infesting broods. It was

decided to spend the summer studying the infestation and working with the various owners to convince them that a cooperative control project was

practical against the infestation developing during

the 1910 season.

Forest Ranger Edmonston was made an Agent

and Expert in the Bureau of Entomology and transferred from the Forest Service. Edmonston arrived

in Baker several days before May 15, 1910, and in

company with the Whitman Forest official examined the infested area west of Baker and selected

the Anthony Creek area as the proper one for

demonstrating to the private owners the seriousness

of the infestation. After the trips with the private

owners and others to Anthony Creek on the 15th

and to Austin on the 16th, Edmonston spent some

time at Medical Springs examining private holdings on the Wallowa Forest. Later trips were made

through both the Wallowa and Whitman Forests.

After July 1, when it was decided that no control

would be undertaken against the 1909 broods,

Edmonston spent most of July and August at

Sumpter and Joseph cruising infested areas. About

September 1, Sumpter was made his headquarters

and he cooperated with the forest officials in working up plans for fall control.

August 3, Agent W.B. Turner of the Bureau

arrived from Washington, D.C., with instructions to

work with the private owners of timber and help

them to organize and work for an appropriation for

forest insect control work in the area.

September 1, Baker was made headquarters for

the project and Turner and myself located there.

September 18, various private timber owners 

organized the Baker Forest Protective Association

and determined to undertake forest insect control.

Control work started on the Northeastern

Oregon Project on October 28, 1910, with the

establishment of one camp by the Baker Forest

Protective Association in private timber at Cold

Springs near Lockharts and one camp by the Forest

Service in the Whitman National Forest on Wind

Creek near Sumpter.

The primary object of these camps was the

training of cruisers and foremen for the main control camps that were expected to be started in the

spring of 1911 and to experiment with several

methods of control.

The Association camp consisted of E.L Gerber,

manager, E.J. Maberry, cruiser-foreman; four

woodsmen; one cook; Agent W.B. Turner; and

Expert H.E. Burke. One of the woodsmen, J.J.

Sullivan, became an entomological ranger and was

with the Bureau for a number of years.

Instruction started immediately with the cruising of the timber and the plotting and marking of

the infested trees. After six days of cruising instruction was given in the proper methods of destroying

the infesting insects.

Infested trees were felled and peeled, felled

and scored on top, felled and burned. Cruising was

then continued until November 12 when treatment

was taken up again and continued until November

27 when a deep fall of snow caused the closing of

the camp for the winter.

The Forest Service camp was composed of

Ranger R.E. Smith, manager; from 2 to 13 woodsmen; one cook; and Expert W.D. Edmonston. On

reporting for work on October 27, the men were

instructed in the determination of insect-infested

trees and in the methods of treating them by Expert

Edmonston and Ranger Smith. Due to the heavier

infestation, most of it in lodgepole, spotting and

treating went on together. Edmonston could mark

enough infested trees in a few hours to keep the

crew busy treating for a day or more. The camp

was closed November 19 because of heavy snow.

The Association covered 3,640 acres and treated 723 merchantable trees and 130 saplings at a

cost of $806. One hundred of the trees treated were

lodgepole. The Service covered 340 acres and

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

14
treated 1,120 trees; 1,056 of the trees treated 

were lodgepole, 61 were yellow pine, and 3 were 

white-barked pine. The 61 yellow pine were merchantable, but most of the others were not considered so though many of the lodgepole were large

and looked like good timber.

b. Control work during the spring of 1911

I spent the winter of 1910-11 in Baker,

Oregon, consulting with timber owners and 

working up data and plans. Edmonston stayed in

Sumpter at the headquarters of the Whitman Forest

to assist the forest officers. Turner returned to

Washington to help present the project to the

Bureau and to Congress.

February 8 and 9 Edmonston and I made a trip

to the Highland Mine in the mountains east [sic] of

Haines. Fifty percent of all of the lodgepole over

10 inches in diameter were found infested by the

mountain pine beetle and a number of Engelmann

spruce by the Engelmann spruce beetle.

During the winter Congress appropriated

money for forest insect control and on March 8,

$15,000 was allotted to the Whitman.2

Dr. Hopkins spent March 25-30 at Baker looking over the project area and talking over plans for

the work. Agent Turner arrived in Baker April 1,

and started at once to work up cooperation among

the owners and to assist the Baker Forest Protective

Association.

Control work started April 5, 1911, with the

establishment of Forest Service Camp 1 on Deer

Creek near Sumpter. Camp 2 was started April 6 on

Anthony Creek near North Powder. These two

camps were used as training camps for training

foremen and cruisers for the other camps.

Edmonston had charge of the control work in the

field for the Bureau and Assistant Ranger Ephriam

Barnes for the Forest Service.

Additional camps were started from time to

time until nine camps in all were working. As soon

as one area was worked, the camp was moved to

another. In all, 28 camp areas were worked.

May 3 the Baker Forest Protective Association 

started its 1911 control work by establishing a

camp on Sutton Creek under the management of

L.D.W. Shelton. Small mobile camps were sent out

from this camp. May 26 a camp was established at

Cold Springs, but due to lack of funds this camp

was turned over to the Forest Service on May 28

and became Camp 7. 

Control work was continued by the Forest

Service to June 30 when all of the camps were

closed. The Association continued until July 10.

While the control work was in progress, my

time was largely spent demonstrating and explaining the work to the various visiting owners and

officials. Owners from as far away as Warren,

Pennsylvania, visited the project. Among these

were E.D. Wetmore, President of the Wallowa

Timber Company of Warren, Pennsylvania, W.B.

Sellers of the Shevlin Lumber Company, Secretary

C.S. Chapman of the Oregon Forest Fire Association, State Forester Elliot of Oregon, District

Forester Cecil of District 6,3 Dr. Hopkins from

April 11 to 16, and many small owners, newspaper

men, etc.

Several companies sent cruisers to be instructed in the work. These men worked in the camps as

regular employees. Among them were E.J. Maberry

and E.L. Gerber of the Wallowa Timber Company,

William Long of the Inland Lumber Company of

Spokane, J.B. Larsen of the F.A. Kribs of Portland.

Josef Brunner of Forest Insect Station 1 sent Lew

Thomas, Hugo Kneiff and Al Wagner to assist in

the work and receive training.

The organization as carried out was composed

of myself in general charge for the Bureau of

Entomology, Forest Supervisor Henry Ireland for

the Forest Service, and Cruiser L.D.W. Shelton for

the Association. The actual managers of the control

work in the field were Expert W.D. Edmonston 

for the Bureau, Assistant Ranger Barnes for the

Service, and Cruiser Shelton for the Association

[figs. 10 through 13].

P.D. Sergent was engaged by Edmonston as a

worker on several control projects in Colorado

before coming to the Northeastern Oregon project

in April 1911. He had previously been a deputy

United States Marshall in Oklahoma. He was a special cruiser assistant to Edmonston until July 1911

when he was appointed as Agent. He moved with

Edmonston to the station at Klamath Falls, Oregon,

in the fall of 1911 and was later assigned to the station at Ashland, where he remained until November

15, 1924. He resigned to take a job as foreman for

the McCloud River Lumber Company on bark beetle control projects, but after a year or so with the

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

15

2 This was the first funding provided by Congress specifically for a forest

insect control project in the West. Burke was in error on the amount; actually $25,000 was allotted.

3 The Forest Service changed districts to regions in May 1930 (Williams

2000).
company joined the Water Department of the City

of Ashland.

Edmonston directed the work in the field, 

placing the camps and instructing the cruisers and

foremen. Barnes and Shelton supplied the men,

equipment and provisions and moved the camps.

Each camp was composed of one camp 

foreman, from one to three cruisers, three crew

foremen, from 6 to 14 woodsmen, one cook and

sometimes a cook’s helper. The treating crews were

composed of a crew foreman, two woodsmen and

additional men to pile brush when that had to be

done.

The standard wage for a camp foreman was 

$3 per day and board, for a cruiser $2.75, a crew

foreman $2.50, a woodsman $2.25, and a cook $75

per month.

The control work covered 109,610 acres, parts

of 22 townships, along the eastern edge of the

Whitman National Forest in Baker and Union

counties. The Service covered 94,890 acres, about

35,000 acres being government land and 59,890

private. The Association covered 14,720 acres, all

private.

Service treated 11,403 (2,914,130 board-feet)

of yellow pine and 15,170 (1,295,960 board-feet)

of lodgepole. The Association treated 2,265 yellow

pine and 3,728 lodgepole, total board-feet 610,310.

The maximum number of trees treated per section was 571 yellow pine and 1,074 lodgepole; the

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

16

Figure 12—Control camp of the Baker Forest Protective

Association, fall 1910.

Figure 13—Recruise of control area, July 1911. On the summit of

Elkhorn Mountain are (left to right) F.C. Craighead, an unidentified agent, and P.D. Sergent.

H.E. Burke, PSW H.E. Burke, PSW

Figure 11—Preliminary training camp. (Left to right) Woodsman

Stockburger, agent and expert H.E. Burke, woodsman J.J. Sullivan,

woodsman Ike Miller, cruiser-foreman E.J. Maberry, and woodsman Henkel.

Figure 10—Examining mountain-pine-beetle-infested ponderosa

pine, Miner Creek Area, Whitman National Forest, near Sumpter,

Oregon, April 16, 1911. Dr. A.D. Hopkins in center with control

crew.

H.E. Burke, PSW H.E. Burke, PSW
average number treated was 62 yellow pine 207

lodgepole.

The total cost of the spring control was

$25,582.97 of which $2,000 was spent by the

Association. To this, to get the total cost of the

project, should be added the $1,681.55 spent for

fall work.

The control work demonstrated conclusively

that in this infestation the mountain pine beetle was

the insect responsible for the damage to all species

of trees—yellow pine, lodgepole pine and whitebark pine. The western pine beetle was sometimes

present, but practically always under conditions,

which indicated that it had attacked the tree after it

had been attacked by the mountain pine beetle. The

western pine beetle never was found in the young

yellow pine, lodgepole pine nor white barked pine.

In a few instances, the red turpentine beetle seemed

to be the primary cause of the death of lodgepole.

Apparently the infestation of the mountain

pine beetle first became epidemic in the lodgepole

pine and then spread upward into the white bark

pine and downward into the yellow pine.

In June orders were received to recommend 10

men for appointment as agents to the Bureau. A.G.

Angell, C.C. Goodpasture, George Hofer, Hugo

Kneiff, Ike Miller, J.D. Riggs, Phil Sergent, J.J.

Sullivan, Lew Thomas and Al Wagner were recommended and appointed.

When the project closed I was ordered to take

charge of Forest Insect Field Station 5 at Yreka,

California, and to take with me Angell, Sullivan

and Riggs. Edmonston was placed in charge of

Station 6 at Baker with Goodpasture, Hofer, Miller

and Sergent. Kneiff, Thomas and Wagner were

ordered to report to Josef Brunner in charge of

Station 1 at Columbia Falls, Montana. Agent

Turner was ordered to Station 7 at Spartanburg,

South Carolina. He took with him Hamilton

Farnum who had been taking notes on the infesting

insects during the control work. Farnum was later

appointed an agent and worked for the Bureau for 

several months at Spartanburg and at Washington.

During July and August, Edmonston and his

crew made a survey of the control area to determine the amount of new infestation that was 

developing. F.C. Craighead, now the chief of the

Division of Forest Insect Investigations, was a student assistant for the summer and spent some of his

time with this survey. This was his first experience

in the forests of the Pacific Coast.

c. Some of the Cooperators

The Private Owners

W.C. Calder probably was the main personnel 

reason for the Northeastern Oregon Control

Project. As the agent at Baker for the Wallowa

Timber Company, Calder became alarmed at the

dying of the timber and did something about it.

Calder was about 40 years of age in 1910, a

native of the middle west, very good looking and

always well dressed. His reputation was a little

shady, he having been a dealer in mining stock,

insurance and particularly in investing money for

more or less rich widows wherein the widow usually lost the money. At the time of the project, Calder

was married to the widow of Mason of Holly,

Mason and Marks, the leading hardware dealers 

in Portland.

As agent for the timber company, it was

Calder’s duty to buy timber land and to look after

the timber, fire protection, etc. It was the same old

cut-throat game of buying your timber so you

could surround an area and prevent the other fellow

from getting in or having a way of getting his timber out without paying you for the privilege.

At the time of the project the only way to get

timber out was by railroad and the only railroad

into the timber near Baker was the Sumpter Valley.

This road was to be a common carrier but it was

owned by the Mormon family of Eccles of Utah.

This family owned timber lands in the Baker section, at Hood River and other points so had considerable influence. Cars were often short when other

owners desired to get out their timber. This caused

considerable friction between the Mormons and

other owners of timber which made it rather difficult to form a cooperative project among the various timber owners. Calder, in particular, was in bad

because he had said a great deal about the Sumpter

Valley and the Mormons.

Calder, however, was all energy and enthusiasm and with the aid of Turner did get the various

owners together. The Baker Forest Protective

Association was formed and 3 or 4 thousand dollars was collected. Calder also kept after the Forest

Service and the Bureau until they got behind this

project.

E.L. Gerber, the Association manager for the

1910 fall control work, was about 25. He came

from a circus family and was born on the road.

Gerber was a timber land looker for Calder and had

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

17
some cruising experience. As manager for the control work, he hired the personnel and saw that the

camp was supplied and outfitted. He also did some

insect spotting of infested trees. One of the men

hired was J.J. Sullivan who became an entomological ranger for the Bureau.

E.J. Maberry, the cruiser-foreman for the 1910

Association control work, was also about 25 and a

native of southern Idaho where his father was a

horse raiser. Maberry seemed to know his work

well having had cruising experience with the

Warren Timber Interests in New Mexico, as well as

in Oregon. While Gerber was strictly a Calder man,

Maberry had been trained by Shelton and was more

of a Shelton man. In a way it looked as though the

Company was playing safe and had Shelton keeping an eye on Calder. Maberry worked under

Shelton in the 1911 control work carried on by 

the Association.

L.D.W. Shelton, manager of the 1911

Association control work, was about 65 at the time

of the project. He was an experienced surveyor and

timber cruiser and had made the original surveys

for parts of western Washington. The town of

Shelton on Puget Sound was named for him.

Shelton was a good field manager but did not think

much of Calder, the Bureau, or the Forest Service

so ran the control more or less on his own.

Mr. E.D. Wetmore, president of the Wallowa

Timber Company, was about 50 and a man of wide

business interests. He was a good backer of the

project and reported to Washington that he was

well satisfied with the way the control was 

conducted.

The Forest Service

At the time the project started in 1910, C.S.

Chapman was the District Forester of District 6 of

which the Whitman and the Wallowa Forests were

a part. Chapman was a trained forester who had

considerable training and experience in various

parts of the United States. He was a good cooperator and did all that he could to make the work a

success. Later he became the secretary of the

Oregon Forest Fire Association and then worked

for the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company in Washington State until his death a few years ago.

George H. Cecil was the Associate District

Forester of District 6 at the time the project started.

He visited the project several times, but was not as

good a cooperator as Chapman and did not favor

the control work. Cecil followed Chapman as

District Forester. Later he became Supervisor of the

Angeles Forest in District 5 and then forester for

the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce which

position I believe he still holds.

Henry Ireland was supervisor of the Whitman

National Forest with headquarters in Sumpter.

Ireland was about 50 years of age and one of the

old Interior Department political appointees. He

was a carpenter by trade in west-central Oregon

and when appointed fought forest fires by riding up

to the fire on a horse with his rifle on his shoulder

and watching the timber burn. This was the usual

method of forest fire fighting in those days. Soon

after the start of the century, however, methods

improved and forestry became a profession. Ireland

made good and soon rose to the position of supervisor of the Whitman National Forest which contained several areas of very good yellow pine

accessible to a good market. Ireland was a good

cooperator, but did use the bark beetle infestation

to increase his timber sales. The more receipts the

more important the position. He remained the

supervisor of the Whitman until his death in 1918.

The forest assistant on the Whitman was M.L.

Merritt. Merritt was a forestry graduate of the Iowa

State College and had been in the Philippine

Forestry Service. He was much interested in the

insect work, but became seriously ill and was in the

hospital most of the time during the project. Merritt

afterward transferred to Alaska and later became

assistant regional forester in charge of operation for

Region 6.

Three of the rangers on the Whitman were

R.E. (Kan) Smith, Ephraim Barnes and H.B.

Rankin. Smith was a Kansas boy who had joined

the Service without any previous forestry experience. He was a serious student, however, and had

taken several short courses in forestry. He made the

original insect survey on the Whitman and had

charge of the 1910 control work for the Service. 

He did not like control work so was transferred to

other work in 1911. Later he transferred to Alaska

and was there for a number of years.

Barnes was a young middle westerner, also

without technical forestry training. He was made

manager of the 1911 control work for the Service,

but in the middle of it was promoted to be Supervisor of the Ochoco Forest with headquarters at

Prineville in central Oregon. Afterwards he was

made supervisor of the Minam Forest with headquarters at Baker. Later, about 1918, he left the

Service.

Rankin was an older man who had been a railroad station agent before joining the Service. He

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

18
saw something of the infestation and the control

work but was transferred to western Oregon where

he became Supervisor of the Siuslaw Forest.

W.T. Andrews, logging engineer for the

District, spent some time in the infested areas. He

did not think much of control work and believed

that the best plan was to sell the timber before the

insects could kill it.

In spite of these colorful characters, the Northeastern

Oregon project ended on an up beat with apparently some

success in reducing the amount of timber being killed by

bark beetles. But, perhaps the most important outcome was

the demonstration that private timber owners, the Forest

Service, and the Bureau of Entomology could all work

together toward a common goal and, in the process, a model

for future insect control projects was established.

We shall see whether future projects would be as successful for Burke and the Bureau, but first John Miller needs

to be introduced. He began his career as a forest entomologist under Hopkins just as the Northeastern Oregon project

concluded. He arrived via a different route, however, starting as a Forest Service Ranger with an interest in forest

insects and mildly defying some of Hopkins’ theories as

applied to a new bark beetle outbreak in 1911 on the

Klamath National Forest near Yreka, California. Hopkins

may have been taken aback by this upstart, but a forester

with a university degree and a keen interest in forest insect

biology and forest ecology was just the sort of professional

needed in his expanding organization. The fact that Miller

was not overly impressed by “The Father of American

Forest Entomology” might have also worked in his favor.

Hopkins seemed to appreciate critical minds unless they

wandered too far from his set ideas. At any rate, he saw

something in Miller he liked because in 1911 he had the

young ranger transferred to the Bureau of Entomology and

put him in charge of the next major bark beetle control project on the Klamath National Forest. Burke and Miller were

about to be long-term colleagues and friends, and forest

entomology in the West was better because of their 

association. 

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

19
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

20
Chapter 5: John Martin Miller 

Family History and Education—

the Forest Service Beckons

John Miller did not come into the world in as exciting a

fashion as Burke did (during an Indian uprising), but he also

descended from pioneer farming ancestors who moved west

with the frontier. Miller’s mother and father moved from

Pennsylvania to Ohio, then to Illinois, and as the Mississippi

valley got crowded for them they continued west to

California. John’s brother said “they sometimes talked of the

Sandwich Islands” (Miller 1943). John’s son described his

birth and what is known of his early years; it is recounted in

a second family history assembled in the 1960s (Miller

N.d.b).

John Martin Miller was born August 31, 1882

at the Miller Ranch called The River Bend Place.

This was about one mile east of the town of Parlier,

in Fresno County, California. He was the youngest

of four children born to Martin Miller and his wife,

Ardalissa Dryer Miller. His first five years of boyhood were spent at the River Bend Place. In the fall

of 1887 his parents endeavored to sell the ranch

and moved to Los Angeles at a location near the

present Prospect Park on the Los Angeles River.

Two years later, in the fall of 1889, the Miller 

family returned north to the River Bend ranch, 

the sale having fallen through. The family had suffered economic reverses in the Los Angeles area.

John would have reached school age, but it is

uncertain if he actually began elementary school 

in the Los Angeles area.

His parents again took up farming at the River

Bend ranch and John progressed through elementary grades at the River Bend School which was a

short distance from the family home. In 1896, he

was ready for secondary (high) school. There were

no such schools at Parlier or Reedley, so John was

enrolled at Selma High School. Selma was a small

town on the Southern Pacific main line about eight

miles southwest of Parlier. He completed high

school in the year 1900.

As a boy growing up on a ranch, Miller had chores and

responsibilities from an early age. He was also fortunate to

be raised in a healthy environment and close-knit family.

His skill in handling horses and camping experiences gave

him an instant advantage when he began working for the

Forest Service in later years. There was no question about

Miller continuing his education at the college level because

the family valued education as well as hard work. He

entered Stanford University in 1902 and majored in

Biological Sciences. He particularly enjoyed entomology

taught by Professor R.W. Doane, a noted entomologist.

Probably because of his outdoor upbringing, he and a few

other students formed a forestry club.

Miller dropped out of school in the winter of 1907 

and worked for the Water Department of Pacific Grove,

California. He must have been casting about for other

employment opportunities at the time. The following

excerpt from an April 26, 1907, letter to his sweetheart,

Miss Bessie Brose in Parlier, California, indicates that the

U.S. Forest Service, Sierra National Forest made a job

offer.1

Although Miller’s letters were meant as love letters to

his fiancé and they are not included in their entirety here,

they are significant historical accounts of the everyday life

of a pioneer ranger in the U.S. Forest Service.

John’s first letter of the period begins with an apology

for not writing sooner. This is how he explains his tardiness.

April 26, 1907

It all happened about this way:

I am about to leave Pacific Grove, and I have

had so many affairs to straighten out here that time

has been a pretty scarce article with me. I have had

a chance to take a Government position on one of

the Sierra forest reserves and I have about decided

to take it up. I am going to start next Monday for

North Fork. I have had a hard time of it coming to

a decision. I will be disappointed in not getting

home this summer in more ways than one and I

hope that you will not think me foolish when 

I say that one of the most important of these 

reasons concerns you.

However if I keep on in the Forestry Service,

the experience of this summer will be just what I

need and I can hardly afford to let it go. When you

hear from me again I hope to be able to tell you

more about this.

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

21

1 Miller and Bessie Brose carried out a regular correspondence for the next

3 years until they were married. The Miller family has kindly allowed use

of parts of the letters.
Evidently Miller decided to give a job in the Forest

Service a try, for his next letter to Bessie several weeks later

show him on the job in camp.

May 19, 1907

My Dear Bessie:

I hope that you will pardon me for using a lead 

pencil, but it is the only accommodation that the

camp affords. I reached North Fork Friday evening

and found orders awaiting me to report at Sugar

Pine with the technical Assistant and two other

Rangers. So it was saddle up early the next morning and take the trail. It was an all day ride and I

enjoyed it immensely. There are so many pretty

places about the mountains.

We came on past Sugar Pine to the Rangers

Camp on the old Miami Mill Site. We are in an old

log cabin that has a big stone fireplace in one end

and no windows or doors. We have a big open

meadow out in front of the house where we pasture

our horses. It is decidedly cold at night. The meadow was white with frost this morning and the snow

is only a few miles away.

Everything is much later here than it is in the

valley. The trees are just beginning to leave out and

the willows are still in catkins. I have found a few

snow plants and there is plenty of dog wood in

blossom. I wish I could send you some of the wild

flowers that we have here. There is certainly plenty

to spare.

I am marking out timber for the mills to cut

and enjoy the work although I haven’t very much

of it yet. Yesterday we had to lay off and take our

Sunday as part of party did not get here, so we had

to start in work today.

I did not get to see the Supervisor so can’t tell

yet whether I can get a leave of absence next

month or not. Write to me next time at North Fork,

Cal. That will be my permanent address while on

this work.

Lovingly yours, John

I will digress a bit and describe what John Miller was

getting into being a field employee of the U.S. Forest

Service. As starters, Miller probably took the job because he

loved the outdoors (from his early letters he described long

walks to see scenery and the cypress trees on the Monterey

Peninsula). The Sierra National Forest was also directly east

of his family home ranch and that of the Brose family, thus

he would be closer to his future wife. Miller may not have

been fully aware of how physically demanding the field

work in this new agency, the U.S. Forest Service, could be.

The Forest Service was officially only 2 years old in 1907. 

The history of the formation of the U.S. Forest Service in

1905 from the original Division of Forestry formed in 1881

in the Department of Agriculture is well documented by the

first Chief, Gifford Pinchot, and others (Guthrie 1995, Joslin

1999, Pinchot 1947). 

As the following letters will illustrate, John Miller was

the model Forest Ranger of these first years of the organization’s existence. Rangers had to know how to work hard,

(dawn to dark at least 6 days a week), ride, shoe horses,

pack animals, rope, shoot, build fences and cabins, and

somehow also have enough education to read, write, and do

at least rudimentary arithmetic for timber cruising and sales

and land surveys. In addition, honesty, integrity, and loyalty

to the Forest Service were demanded. Needless to say, many

of these early rangers were not college educated. They were

mostly farmers, ranchers, trappers, hunters, and other outdoorsmen having some secondary school education. Miller

was rare, along with a few others, in having 3 years of 

biology from Stanford University. He probably had to prove

himself more than once with his less educated and less

socially polished coworkers. 

As to the other side of the coin, his formal education

resulted in rapid promotion in the Forest Service when he

obtained his civil service appointment. Probably because of

his university zoology courses, he could recognize and 

interpret natural processes, like tree killing by bark beetles.

He became a lifelong researcher of tree-killing bark beetles

of the genus Dendroctonus. To the Forest Service’s credit, 

they recognized his unique talents and, as we shall see,

eventually detailed him to emerging forest insect problems.

Down the road in this history we shall see how he came to

Dr. Hopkins’ attention (and ire) and eventually an appointment in the Bureau of Entomology under H.E. Burke.

Miller’s letters to Bessie continue to describe his life in 

the early U.S. Forest Service.

June 28, 1907

My Dear Bessie:

I don’t know when this letter will reach you

but I will write now and trust that you will be 

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

22
satisfied with news that is several weeks old. I

made the trip up here without any serious mishaps

although I nearly lost the pack mule on the cable

bridge at the San Joaquin River.

It was desperately hot through the foot hills. 

I camped the first night about twenty miles above

Centerville. I reached the San Joaquin River about

six o’clock the following evening and got my supper at the Light and Power company’s power plant

and then climbed out of the Canyon up to the

Supervisor’s headquarters. I had a ten mile trail and

2000 feet to climb and I got there about 10 o’clock

p.m. I found the place deserted as everybody had

gone up to the upper camp. The next day it was

good and hot at North Fork. I climbed up 3000 feet

more to Shinn’s2 upper camp and found it cold

enough in the evening to enjoy a fire. I am located

on a pretty little meadow with big sugar pine trees

all about it [fig. 14].

Shaver, June 30, 1907

I did not get this letter finished as I was suddenly called out to go back to the South of the San

Joaquin River. I am outfitting now at Shaver and

start back on a thirty mile trail into the mountains. 

I will have to go back to snow.

Lovingly, John

Miller made time to write every several days, and given

the circumstances he did quite well as a correspondent.

July 7, 1907

Sunday in camp! Little there is to remind one

of Sunday at home unless it is the fact that we are

not at work. I am thirty miles from a house, fifty

miles from a church over a hundred miles from

you. We certainly hit the wilderness on this trip and

had to come through snow and ice to get here. We

left Shaver last Monday morning started back on

the Mono Trail with saddle horses and pack outfits.

By noon we were in the snow but left it above us

that afternoon as we went down into the Canyon of

Big Creek. Our horses had to swim to cross the

creek. That night we camped on other side of the

canyon just at the edge of the snow line. And

cold!—Oh my!!!

The next morning we went through Kaiser

Pass where at an altitude of ten thousand feet we

crossed snow drifts from six to ten feet deep. Then

we came on down into the canyon of the San

Joaquin and here we have been ever since. This

altitude here is only about five thousand feet and it

is a good deal warmer. We are camped right on the

river which is high with water just off of the melting snow and goes roaring by in a regular torrent.

When we came through Kaiser Pass it was

hard to realize that it was the middle of summer

and that down on the plains it was hot and dry and

dusty. The grass was just beginning to grow on the

meadows and the willows still had catkins on them

and the leaves were only starting. As yet we could

only find a few wild flowers. Down here on the

river the snow leaves early and it is a good deal

warmer and dryer. Every evening we go fishing

and get all the trout we can eat for breakfast.

The canyon walls rise on either side of the

river in rock cliffs from five hundred to a thousand

feet high and from there back to the summits the

canyon walls are timbered. On this little flat down

by the river there is only yellow pine and sage

brush.

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

23

2 Charles T. Shinn arrived in North Fork in 1902 as the Superintendent of

the Sierra Forest Reserve. When the Reserves became National Forests

administered by the U.S. Forest Service in 1905, Shinn was appointed the

Forest Supervisor of the Sierra National Forest. He held this post until he

resigned in 1911 because of increasing deafness. His wife, Julia, was

appointed clerk of the Sierra Forest in 1907, and served several more supervisors until 1923. In her role as clerk and then chief clerk of the Sierra

National Forest, she became more famous than her husband (Pendergrass

1985).

Figure 14—Mrs. Shinn at their cabin, North Fork, Sierra National

Forest, ca. 1909.

J.M. Miller family
Miller’s letters demonstrated his keen powers of 

observation and ability to describe what he sees.

Supervisors Upper Camp, July 26, 1907

My Dear Bessie:

I believe that explanations are in order and as

usual I hardly know where to begin. I have almost

forgotten whether two or three Sundays have gone

by without my writing to you. Your last two letters

were both received on the same day and as I had

not heard from you for nearly a month (not a word

since I left home) I was just a little more than

pleased to get them. I might as well tell you something that I did not tell my folks and that is that I

took sick on the San Joaquin river trip and was

hardly able to get back to Shaver. I think that I

wrote to you one Sunday while back on the river. I

took sick the following week some time. I seemed

to have neuralgia or something of the kind and

could not eat anything for four or five days.

Sunday noon we started back again on the

trail. I was just about able to hang onto the saddle,

but we got nearly to the snow line and camped. I

was feeling a good deal better the next morning

and we made it through to Shaver. From Shaver I

got sent back to Bench Meadow. This is about a

thousand feet above Shaver Lake and is one of the

prettiest camps I have found in the mountains. We

could look down over the lake and clear out onto

the plains. I camped with one other ranger. We took

life easy and I soon began to feel a great deal better. Every night we had a little frost and it was so

cold that we enjoyed setting around a rousing fire

in the evening and we slept under three blankets,

two comforts and a canvas. During the day we

could look out over the valley and fairly see the

heat. We could not see much of the plains as they

were hidden in a sort of brown haze. I would just

as soon have stayed at Bench Meadow the rest of

the summer but I had to come over to North Fork

to take the Forest Rangers’ examination there July

23 and 24.

So I left Shaver last Sunday for warmer

regions. We came down the old Italian Bar Trail

and crossed the San Joaquin river again on the

cable bridge. We got to North Fork again in the

evening and I had to stay there three days to take

the examination. I don’t know whether I passed or

not and don’t care very much. Our papers had to go

to Washington and it will be some time before we

hear from them. There were ten altogether in the

class. As soon as I got through the Supervisor sent

me up to his upper camp. I left North Fork yesterday morning and made the climb up the hill by

noon. It is certainly surprising what a difference ten

miles makes in the climate up here. It is so cool

that one keeps close to the fire at night and wears

his coat in the morning. I am on the invalid list

again today as I hurt my knee yesterday trying to

shoe my saddle horse. I think I will be able to get

around again tomorrow.

Well, I think I have told you enough about

myself as it is certainly an uninteresting subject. 

I can sympathize with you so far as the hot weather

is concerned as I still remember last summer. I

wish you were up here in the pines for a while; you

would certainly get cooled off. Sometime we will

come up here every summer and listen to the sound

of the wind in the big pines and the murmur of the

water in the mountain streams—now please don’t

laugh at this, it’s serious.

By this time Miller, it seems, realized he had found his

calling. His prediction about sharing the beauty of the high

sierra in summer with Bessie would come true several years

later after they married. Also the 2-day Forest Rangers

examination mentioned in the letter was no trivial test. 

It included both practical (horse packing, horsemanship, 

surveying, timber cruising, etc.), as well as a written exam

covering rules and regulations, and mathematical problems

relating to timber measurements and scaling.

Nowhere in Particular, Aug. 4, 1907

Dearest Bessie:

It seems like a long time between letters and I

guess that you have reason to think so too. I believe

that I told you in my last letter that I was going to

do better and be a little more prompt. As this is

Sunday again and I have my own time, I will do 

the best I can.

It is Sunday afternoon but so different from 

a Sunday at home that it reminds me of Kipling’s

poem “Christmas in India.” I am still at the upper

camp doing nothing in particular. This morning I

worked about the office for a while and then stayed

around and helped cook dinner. This afternoon I

felt like I wanted to get away so I saddled up and

started out to see if I could find a little of “Nature’s

Solitude.” There is plenty of it around here and I

did not have to go very far to find it. I rode down

an old mill road through some groves of splendid

big sugar pines and finally came to an old deserted

mill site. The mill burnt down some years ago but

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

24
some of the old cabins are still standing. In some

ways the place suggests Goldsmith’s Deserted

Village. Back of the mill is a little meadow with

big pines (I am in the shade of one now) all around

it as green as a lawn and covered with white and

yellow flowers. I know if you were here you would

call the place pretty. But you see I am all alone, or

rather, my saddle horse (out feeding on the meadow) is all the company I have.

Well, I don’t think I will enlarge much more

on the beauties of this place as they have to be seen

to be appreciated. I would give a good deal to be

down in the valley, for about a day and get some

fruit to eat. I have almost forgotten what peaches

look like. We will begin to have a few ripe gooseberries and elderberries after a while, but down in

the valley we wouldn’t think of eating such things.

We are still having plenty of excitement up at

the camp. Mr. Pinchot, the Chief Forester from

Washington, came up here last Saturday with the

Chief of the Survey and a few more big men from

Washington to stay a few weeks. The Secretary of

Agriculture is expected in a few days. Last Tuesday

I was sent over to Shaver again to take over Mr.

Page, a writer from the World’s Work who is out

here gathering material on Forest Reserves. I came

back by the Italian Bar on the San Joaquin River

and had a little taste of hot weather. I was glad

enough to get back here in the pines again.

I expect I had better be finding my way back

to camp or I will be too late to get anything to eat. 

Love from John

Letters were less frequent now that the field season 

was winding down. Instead of once a week they were now

monthly.

Billy Brown Meadow, September 3, 1907

Changing the subject—I would like to pick

grapes myself for a day or so just to get filled up

on them. I have had just one bunch of grapes this

summer and they made me think of home. I certainly do get hungry for fruit but have to make up

for it eating venison.

I found it warm enough down at North Fork

yesterday morning. I climbed the hill and got up

here about three o’clock. Then it started in to rain

and rained some during the night. We got our tent

up just in time and are now prepared to let the rain

come down as hard as it wants to.

I don’t see much show now for getting home

before December 1st. The Foresters Convention is

to be held at North Fork instead of Fresno as originally planned. I have a notion to “jump my job”

and come home anyway.

Tuesday, October 1, 1907

I am still up at Billy Brown Meadow herding

shake makers. I would like the job alright if it wasn’t quite so lonesome. There will be another man in

to help me before long, but I can’t tell how soon.

The deer season is still on and I have been out

hunting for several mornings. I missed a shot at an

old buck yesterday and I have been feeling pretty

bad about it ever since. One of the shake makers

captured a bear here last week. The coyotes howl

around my camp every night and make it seem

lonesome and dismal indeed.

Last week it was warmer than usual and I was

able to stay around camp without freezing to death,

but last night it was so cold I could hardly sleep.

There was ice on the spring when I went to get the

water this morning.

By late fall, Miller was again enrolled at Stanford, but

there were no known letters until April. He did not say why

he returned to the university. He might not have passed the

Ranger examination and realized he could profit by obtaining a university degree.

April 13, 1908.

As usually happens about this time of year, my

university work is piling up so that I can hardly see

my way clear ahead. The final examination begins

three weeks from next Thursday and will be over

the following Wednesday. I will have to stay over

until the last day to take them.

I am becoming perfectly heathenish too. I did

not go to church this morning. My only excuse is

that I stayed at home to work on another Journal

Club article that I have to give next Tuesday. It is

not altogether my fault that it happened this way it

did. I selected an article some time ago on ants and

had it partly worked up. In the mean time though

another member of the class (there are only four in

the class) selected the same article and arranged

with the Prof to give it two weeks from last Tuesday. So I had to select another which I did last

Friday and began work on it Friday night. I worked

on it all last night and all this morning and I think I

can finish it by working tonight and Monday night.

The subject of it is on the artificial fertilization of

starfish eggs. That doesn’t sound very interesting, 

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

25
I know, although I find it intensely interesting after

I get started on the subject. A scientist in the East

by a series of experiments used certain chemicals

and the influence of heat to start the development

of unfertilized eggs. It was supposed that these

eggs would never develop except under the fertilization of the male so his results are quite contrary

to the commonly accepted laws of biology. But I

won’t bore you any more with this kind of talk, as 

I know that you are not interested.

I think I have my plans pretty well made for

the next year unless something new turns up to

upset them. I expect to come back here and do one

year of post graduate work. One reason why I

made up my mind to do this is that I had the place

of assistant in the entomology laboratory offered to

me which will take care of the financial factor in

my staying here. And besides it will give me a

chance to do some work and possibly get an

advanced degree which is something else that I

very much want. I will go back to the mountains

for the summer as I have agreed to report at North

Fork by the 20th of May. I can make this fairly

easy as the senior class have decided to cut out

their commencement exercises. This is on account

of the recent trouble we had with the student affairs

committee. Thirty members of the class were

“fired” so the class thought that they ought to

choose some appropriate means of their grief.

Miller obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree in Zoology

in May, then was off to the Sierra National Forest for another summer and fall of work as a field ranger. His next letter

was written after he returned to work in May 1908.

Sunday May 26, 1908 

But to get back to what I started to do which is

to write this letter. I left home last Monday morning on horseback en route to North Fork. I supposed that I would have to make the trip alone, but

just as I was starting, Dr. Acers brother (whom I

knew at Stanford) rode up on the Doctor’s horse.

He wanted to ride along with me and before we

had gone very far, he decided that he would like to

go clear through to North Fork. So we stopped at

the first ranch we came to and he telephoned to his

brother that he was going and came on with me.

We got to Humphrey’s station after dark but

they refused to take in anyone so we had to camp

out. It rained during the night and I had a good

canvas so we didn’t get particularly wet. The next

day was cool and pleasant so we made good time

and got to North Fork that evening.

I seem to have suffered somewhat from the

change in climate. The first two days that I was

here I wasn’t able to do anything much but work

around the office. Acker went up to Shuteye and

started for Reedley Thursday noon. Friday I took

some contracts up to the shake camp at Shuteye

and came back yesterday. The trip up into the cold

gave me a good deal of an appetite, and I feel all

right now. I am about rid of my cold at last!

It certainly seemed good to get back into the

big trees and the high altitudes once more. I had to

cross some snow drifts that were three or four feet

deep. The air feels fine and the odor of the sugar

pines puts new life into the blood. The snow was

fast disappearing and then there are the snow

plants. I wish I could send you one. They are the

most peculiar sort of a flower. Some times they

come up where the snow is very thin, which makes

them very conspicuous as they are bright scarlet in

color.

I was in hopes that I would get to put in the

summer near here or at least get to go back to the

Shuteye camp, but it seems as though I have developed an undue amount of popularity while I was

away and I am wanted now in a number of places.

Mr. Shinn’s first plan was to keep me at the office

as a sort of assistant clerk, but he says that more

pay involves more responsibility so he is going to

put me in as scaler at Shaver. In some ways it is

one of the best jobs on the reserve. One has an

excellent opportunity to learn how to scale timber

and if the work was such as it was last year, it only

takes about three hours per day. I don’t know

whether you know what scaling is, but it consists in

calculating the board feet in each log that is bought

of the Government by the mill company. It consists

mostly in book keeping but it is much simpler. I

will probably have to be going down to Shaver

about the last of this week and the mill there

expects to open up about the first of June. The

scaler is in charge of the Government end of the

cutting—hence the responsibility.

It was quite warm down here at North Fork

yesterday and warmer yet today. Still the nights are

always cold. It never gets hot like it does down on

the plains. I think I like the North Fork climate better than any I have found yet.

Now I will have to go and catch my horse and

take this letter down to the P.O. so that it will get

away on the stage in the morning. I don’t feel like

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

26
writing a decent letter this afternoon anyhow. I

wish so much more that I were down at Parlier.

Yours lovingly, John

Miller’s letters about his Forest Service life and duties

are classic history of the fieldwork of that era. They are

worth detailing here because they also show how this 

background helped shape his future with the Bureau of

Entomology.

Shaver, Sunday afternoon, 06/10/08

My Dearest:

I have been trying all day to write to you but

so far have failed. I intended to write sometime

during the week but various things came up to

interfere. I guess I will have to tell you something

of my wanderings during the past week so you can

understand what my difficulties were.

I left North Fork last Monday morning in company with the Technical Assistant Tomkins, an

assistant State Forester named Smith, and Ranger

Noddin. I had been about sick for the past two or

three days, due I think to the board I was getting at

the North Fork Hotel. I haven’t tried to batch any

since I have been here this summer. I soon began to

feel better after I made the trip and it was so cold

at Shaver that it seemed as though winter was starting in again. Cold frost and ice every night. I could

not begin scaling as the Lumber Company were

behind with their logging. So the first part of the

week I went with the party up to McRanger’s Mill

where we surveyed and estimated timber for two

days. Then we went down to Petersen’s Mill about

15 miles below Shaver where we did two days

more of surveying and estimating. Friday I went

over to Camp Seven, and stayed, but they will not

begin to log until tomorrow [fig. 15].

Camp Seven is about four or five miles 

from Shaver. The place where they are cutting

Government Timber is on the rim of Blue Canyon.

I will have to stay here for three or four weeks yet

until the sale is completed. Then I don’t know

where I will be, but I have an idea that Mr. Shinn

will want me back at North Fork.

Living in a logging camp is something awful,

but it is about the only thing I can do so I have to

board there. I hope soon to have a government tent

to myself, which will be much more pleasant. They

have “Chinamen” for cooks at camp seven where

about 148 men stay . . . .

This morning I went down to Shaver and rode

by the old Sage Mill. It is about a mile and one half

from the camp and it has a sort of attraction for me,

as it was the first place I ever camped in the mountains. I was there just ten years ago this summer. It

was that camp trip that gave me such a liking for

the mountains, and I have always wanted to go

back ever since. The place has changed decidedly.

The Mill, of course, has gone, but some of the old

cabins still stand. The timber has all been cut away

and it makes the country look barren in places. I

did not get back from Shaver until four o‘clock,

and that is why I am writing at this late date.

I don’t remember whether I told you in my last

letter that at last I have an A.B. and sheepskin. I

received my study card about ten days ago and I

drew a straight + on all my sixteen hours of credit

which brought me up to 120 necessary for graduation. Then I had a notice that my name was read off

at Commencement with the rest of the graduates.

So, I guess I can get my diploma whenever I want

to claim it.

It doesn’t mean very much but then you know

there is a certain amount of satisfaction in knowing

that I have earned it. It is one thing that I have

done that stands completed and cannot be taken

away from or added on to. And then it helps some

too in almost any kind of work that one goes into

both in the standing that one gains by it among

other men and the training helps one to get hold 

of the general principles of any new proposition

readily.

But, at the same time I know that College

training alone can never carry one successfully

through life and whatever I can do in the way of a

vocation will depend entirely on my own efforts. I

am still pretty much at sea about the kind of work

that I can do to the best advantage. I am determined to go back to school again next year and

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

27

Figure 15—Bretz Mill, Shaver Lake, 1908.

J.M. Miller family
work out a high school teacher’s certificate. I started out to do that a few years ago, and I always like

to accomplish what I start out to do. I can get

another leave of absence here without losing my

standing in the Forest Service. Then, next Spring, 

I am going to try the technical examination in

forestry and if I can pass that and get a high school

certificate, I will have two lines of work that I can

depend on for a living. I wish I could combine the

two and teach forestry!

But, why ramble on this way! It probably

doesn’t interest you particularly. The reason that I

happened to get started on the subject was probably

due to a talk that I had with the assistant state

forester Smith. He advised me strongly to try the

technical examination. Said that if I could pass the

technical exam after the experience I have had in

the ranger’s work, my chances for advancement in

the U.S. Forest Service would be excellent.

Miller was beginning to have some doubts about a 

permanent career in the Forest Service, but perhaps some 

of this was due to rough camp life and loneliness. 

Sunday afternoon, 06/19/08

I have been scaling for a week now and so far

I have found that it is pretty much of a lazy man’s

job. I have to go to work at half past six in the

morning and quit at half past five in the evening,

but the work consists in sitting around in the shade

most of the time. Nothing to do only scale a few

logs once in a while as they are pulled into the

chutes. I don’t think that I care very much for the

job but it won’t last more than two or three weeks

more although I shall probably have to stay here

for a month yet before the cutting is finished.

I suppose that your school is over now for the

summer and I know what a feeling of relief it will

be tomorrow morning to know that you don’t have

to go back to the round of studies again. I know

that I was glad enough myself when I got out of

school in May, and I had only been there for three

or four months. Now I know that I can expect your

letters regularly from now on although I have had

little reason to complain on that score recently.

I am glad to know that you are coming to the

mountains and you can just bet that you will see

me if you are any place near Shaver. I hope you

will let me know when you are planning to start so

that I can know when to expect you. I am sure that

you will like it up here if you find a pleasant place

to camp.

I wish that I could get a leave while you are up

here but I suppose that I will have to stay on duty.

Anyhow I will have my evenings and Sundays.

Monday evening:

As you see, I did not get this letter finished

last night. The candle burned out once so I had to

give it up and besides I was somewhat sleepy. I am

sorry that I did not get it mailed today for I know

that letters are long enough on the road when they

are mailed here. This letter ought to get the

Wednesday stage down and if nothing delays it

should reach you Thursday—a little late, I know.

How do you like the way my new fountain pen

writes? The pen I am sure is much better than the

writer. I lost my own pen the first day that I scaled

so I sent into headquarters and they sent me one of

the Forest Service pens. It works very well but has

a stub point which I don’t like. But back in this

country one has to take what they can get and be

thankful they have it.

Yesterday and today have been quite cool compared with some days last week. The cold weather

I hope is over for this summer. Friday and Saturday

it was quite warm out in the sun but it is always

cool in the shade.

I don’t like to stay at a lumber camp as well as

I did camping out at Shuteye last summer. This

country is not so pretty anyway. It was once, but it

is being rapidly ruined by the lumber men. The F.F.

and Irr. Co. cut down every stick of merchantable

timber on their land and then bury the slashing so

there is little left but a barren waste when they are

through.

Somehow I don’t seem able to write an interesting or a concentrated letter tonight. I am afraid

that I will have to give it up. The camp fire outside

the tent is burning low; it is after nine o’clock so I

think I will turn in.

Wie immer, Hans 

Wednesday afternoon, 7/5/08

My Dear Bess:

In as much as my end of our correspondence

has been somewhat disjointed and intermittent of

late, I guess it is up to me to explain. I did not

write last Sunday but I think that you have heard

from me since then. I moved up to MacKenzie’s

Mill yesterday and I did my first day’s work today;

that is if one has the heart to call it work. I think

that I put in about an hour and a half altogether in

actual time.

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

28
The reason for my coming over here I think

was due to the fact a certain amount of trouble has

arisen between the Government and the company

on this particular timber sale. The rangers and the

company men have been at sword’s point for some

time. It was finally decided that the best way to settle the friction would be to put in new men altogether and so it happened to fall to my lot to be

one of them.

It also fell to my lot to be scaler and I seem to

have won quite a home [fig. 16]. We scale the logs

in the rollway of the mill and as they accumulate

there before they are taken on the saw, we only

have to scale about three or four times per day. It is

extremely “easy” work but it gives me an excellent

chance to study forestry and lumbering and I am

going to try and make the most of it.

I don’t suppose that I will see North Fork

again this summer until I leave to go home,

although one can never tell what is going to happen

to him when he is on this work. I think I will like it

here very well. We have a good cabin to stay in, a

good place to board and plenty of time to read and

study. I do hope that your plans for coming to

Shaver will carry through. I think that we can surely have some good times up here “boating on

Watoke lake” only it will be Shaver lake this time.

It is a good deal of satisfaction to have Roscoe up

here for I feel like I can see some one from home

occasionally. We are planning a trip back to Dinkey

Creek for the Fourth of July, where we can see the

Big Trees and go fishing. We expect to go up

Saturday and come back Sunday. I wish that you

could go along.

Your letter came in on the wagon this afternoon; a little bit late as it went up to camp 7 and

back. I will have to give you another address 

for my mail. Instead of camp 7, just put on

MacKenzie’s No. 7. I have to be particular as there

is a J.W. Miller here in the U.S. Geological Survey.

I got some of his mail today by mistake. Miller is

an extremely common name as you will learn some

day after you have adopted it.

Miller wrote again 2 days later. His easy work as a

scaler allowed more time for writing and probably his self

study of forestry subjects. However, it was not all work and

no play for the rangers. Miller was a sportsman, and living

where he could fish and hunt was a definite plus for him. 

7/7/08

I might as well tell you something about the

trip. I have been waiting to go fishing all this

spring and as we had two holidays coming together, the fourth of July I began to plan a trip for that

day two weeks ago. Another ranger and myself

talked of going back to Dinkey Creek but we finally gave that up owing to the reports we had heard

that there are very few fish in Dinkey Creek. After

Roscoe came up we planned to go back to the Big

Trees or some place the Fourth, but we did not get

our plans completed until just the day before. We

finally made out our party consisting of the ranger

I am staying with now, Roscoe, and me. I got

through work about four o’clock Friday evening

and we took the trail then and rode over the ridge

to Tamarack Creek where we camped about dark

that evening. The next morning we tried fishing in

Tamarack Creek but the fish were rather small and

did not bite readily so we packed up about nine

o’clock in the morning and started for Red

Mountain Lake. Red Mountain is one of the higher

peaks of the Sierras about 10,000 ft. in altitude and

about thirty miles back to Shaver. It is in a region

where a number of small mountain lakes abound.

We had three saddle horses and one pack mule in

our train so we had to look for a camping place

where horse feed would be plentiful.

We reached Red Mountain Lake about noon,

but we found feed so scarce that we kept on and

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

29

Figure 16—Miller (right) and unknown person scaling sugar pine

at Bretz Mill, 1908.

J.M. Miller family
tried Coyote Lake which was about two miles further back. This is a beautiful little lake, about a

mile in length lying at the foot of a big granite

mountain. Snow was still lying about the edges of

this lake, and owing to the altitude and the cold

feed was very scarce. We decided to go down then

to Big Creek and camp on Long Meadows. These

were also quite a distance below Coyote Lake and

consequently some warmer. Our first view of these

meadows convinced us that we had good fishing

and good horse feed, so we made camp, cooked

some dinner and about three o’clock started down

the creek with pole and line. So few tourists get

back into this country that the fishing is but little

molested. We had about as good sport as I have

ever enjoyed. My brother ranger is an expert fisherman and caught the limit. We returned to camp

with a catch of about seventy and proceeded to 

fill up on trout. I had all I could eat for once.

We tried our luck again the next morning but

the fish did not bite nearly so well. About ten

o’clock we packed out of camp again and decided

to go home by another trail. We were not so very

sorry to leave the meadows as we were bidding

farewell at the same time to our friends the mosquitoes. It may seem strange to hear of mosquitoes

in the high mountains, but they are quite in keeping

with the size of the trees. They are the biggest and

most bloodthirsty I have ever seen and they fill the

air in clouds. Unless one keeps in fire smoke or

wears a veil it is almost impossible to enjoy life on

account of them. My face and hands were sore and

swollen on account of the many punctures I

received.

We climbed up to the head of Dinkey Creek

and about noon passed Dinkey Lake. This lake is

not quite so large as Coyote and is set in a little

valley at the foot of the Three Sisters—three needle

like granite spires which have snow on their flanks

most of the year. From here we worked down the

canyon of Dinkey Creek. This is a rock walled

gorge and the trail is rough and dangerous in

places. We came out over Bald Mountain down to

Markwood Meadow and reached camp 7 in time

for supper. I went around to Sulfur meadow and

stayed with Roscoe last night. Got up at four

o’clock this morning and walked up to

MacKenzie’s Mill in time for breakfast.

Mosquitoes! The bane of the forest worker.

July ?

My Dearest Bess:

I believe I said that I would write the middle

of this week and as this is Wednesday morning I

guess that it is about time for me to begin. There

has not very much happened to relate since I wrote

last, except a fire that broke out in the woods here

Monday night. I haven’t had very much experience

yet with forest fires and this is the first one that I

ever helped to extinguish.

I was about as sleepy as I ever want to be

when I got to bed that night. I had just been out on

our fishing trip for three nights and did not have a

chance to get much sleep. I got up at four o’clock

that morning and walked up here before breakfast.

About eleven o’clock the night watchman rattled

on our door and told us that there was a fire up on

the hill.

It was like pulling teeth to get up, but I finally 

succeeded and climbed about a mile and a half up

the hill where the fire was burning. It had not started very badly and with a force of about fifteen men

we soon had a fire line around and the fire under

control by two o’clock. The most of the crowd

went back to camp and went to bed, but two other

men and myself stayed up to guard it. It broke out

on us once but we had it out before it got very

much of a start.

At six thirty another guard came to relieve us

and we reached the cook house in time for breakfast at seven. I was so tired and sleepy that I could

hardly find the way home. I scaled up the landing

in half an hour and went home and went to bed. I

slept until noon, got up for lunch, scaled logs for

an hour and went to bed again. I expected to have

to watch the fire again last night, but it was so

nearly out that one company man was enough for

guard. I caught up on sleep last night and am taking it easy today.

Miller’s next letter tells of a health problem miles from

medical help. It may have only been a toothache, but the

early rangers did not have a medical safety net like today.

July 27, 1908

My Dearest Bess:

I hope that you will excuse the official looking

heading on this paper but it is all I have in camp

and I am sure you don’t want me to wait until I can

get some more before I write.

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

30
It may seem rather selfish to begin this letter

by relating my own troubles, but I know that you

must have expected a letter before this and I will

have to let you know that my excuse for not writing was a good one. Your own good letter (which I

have reread four or five times already) came Friday

and it still further helped to remind me of the fact

that my letter writing duties have been sadly neglected this week.

The trouble is that I have been trying a little 

experiment with that peculiar affliction known as

the toothache. The results were that I did not get

any sleep for three nights and had a case of that

“don’t care whether school keeps” feeling.

Thursday night my pardner had the toothache so

bad that I stayed up until twelve o’clock trying to

relieve his suffering with hot applications. The next

day I did not feel very well and by night, I did not

know that I had so many teeth in my head. They

were all insistently making their presence known

and I had to stay awake all night just thinking it

over. The pain did not let up until last night and

then one side of my face began to swell. Last night

I slept some better and aside from a certain lack of

balance about my physiognomy felt fairly well.

I started once to write to you yesterday but I

felt so bad I had to give it up. The weather for the

past week has been decidedly hot for the mountains. Last night about 12 o’clock one of the worst

thunder storms came up that I have ever seen. We

had several bad peals of thunder that were enough

to make you think the world was coming to an end,

and then for a little while the rain poured down. It

must have rained nearly half an inch, for this morning the dust is nicely settled and everything seems

fresh and clean. The air feels fresh, like it did two

weeks ago today when we started for the Big Trees

that morning. I wish that we could have a shower

like that every night. I believe that one would feel

far better than in a dry climate.

We have been considering the question of

building a kitchen on our cabin and doing our own

cooking. The board at the cook house keeps getting

worse and the four of us are convinced that we can

board much better if we “batch.” And then besides

we won’t have to get up at such an unearthly hour

in the morning. We have breakfast at a quarter past

five and as a rule we don’t have to go to work until

nine o’clock. Besides, as we only have to work two

hours per day we will have, more or less, time to

do our cooking.

I was planning a deer hunt back in the mountains for yesterday and today, but my pardner and I

had to give it up owing to certain dental complications. If we had gone, I am sure that we would

have had good luck, for a rain such as we have had

always makes fairly good hunting. I want to go

back to Dinkey and Coyote Lakes again before I

leave here and get some pictures of the high mountain scenery. I failed to have a camera when I was

there before.

Miller’s interest in photography started at an early age

and continued throughout his life. The official photography

files of the Bureau of Entomology contain hundreds of his

photographs. Many of the pictures are used for illustrating

this book.

August 18, 1908

My Dearest:

Here it is Tuesday morning and I have not

written yet. I would have written Sunday but I went

down to Shaver and from there to Ockenden. Then

I stayed to hear the meeting at Shaver in the

evening and did not get home until nine o’clock.

An outdoor meeting of the anti-saloon league was

held at Shaver and they had a very good attendance. The speaker was Mr. Bristow, whom we

heard down at Parlier last winter. He is an excellent

speaker and I think made a good impression. It

helps the League to have as good a man as that

working for it.

I was getting ready to do some writing yesterday when the district ranger came around and I had

to go back in the woods to mark some timber for

cutting. Then I found that I had some back scale

cards to correct which took me most of the afternoon. After that I got out with Parkinson for some

rifle practice and then the day was gone. I have

been planning to use this week to catch up with my

correspondence and do some reading and I guess

that I will succeed if nothing goes wrong.

I have been trying to get my plans settled for

this fall but it seems like a pretty hard thing to do. I

am more at sea than ever. Mr. Shinn was over here

about two weeks ago and I had a talk with him. He

seemed to be opposed to my leaving in September

and wanted me to stay here this fall until this timber sale closes and then go back to North Fork and

stay until Christmas.

I don’t want to make any decisions yet until 

I can hear from the University and see if I can

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

31
arrange my plans there accordingly. I rather favor

staying here this fall if I can do so without seriously interfering with my University courses; for nearly every move that I have taken in the Forest

Service so far has been for the better and I feel disposed to give it a trial before I quit. “A bird in the

hand is worth two in the bush,” so I have heard and

I don’t like to give up this position until I am sure

of another. Besides, there is the possibility that

some opportunity may open up for a better position

in the Forest Service and that will be this fall if it

comes. I hate to think of waiting until November

though to go down to the valley but then I will see

you twice this fall anyhow, which is better than I

have been able to do any year yet.”

His spirits rising, Miller seems to feel more optimistic

about his future with the Forest Service. Besides, he needs 

a steady job before he can marry Bessie. And deer hunting

season was on. Decisions, decisions!

August 27, 1908

I don’t suppose that you care to hear very

much about the hunt. I always seem to have periodical spells of the hunting fever about this time of

year and it takes two or three good trips to work it

out of my system. This time Parkinson and myself

took our horses and rode over to Tamarack creek

which is about ten miles across the ridge from

MacKenzie’s Mill. It was after dark when we

reached the creek so we had to camp without horse

feed as best we could. It is quite a bit colder in the

Tamarack basin than it is at Shaver and when we

woke up in the morning there was four inches of

ice on the water pail that we had left by the fire.

We started out at day break the next morning

thinking that we would find some buck signs near

the head of the creek. There is something exciting

about buck hunting that does not depend on

whether you find the deer or not. Getting out at

daylight on a cold frosty morning may not seem

particularly inviting but you feel fully repaid for it

before you are out an hour. Climbing around over

the high rocky ridges where the bucks range gives

you chance to see some magnificent sights. And

then, there is a certain excitement that belongs to

the hunting, for you have to be on the alert, all the

time.

About nine o’clock we struck a trail and had

not followed it very far before we startled a big

buck, but it was in the timber and we did not get

sight of him. We followed his trail until three

o’clock in the afternoon when we jumped him

again out of a fir thicket where he had bedded, but

he had been watching his back trail, so we missed

another chance of seeing him. About four o’clock

we started him again out of a little meadow but 

it was getting so late that we could not follow him

any longer as we had to head for home. We had

walked nearly twenty miles and had not seen a

deer, but I think that we went home just about as

well satisfied as if we had. We are pretty well

acquainted with the country and the buck now, so

we will go back in a week or two and get him.

I am still postponing the matter of my going

back to Stanford until I can hear from some of my

friends at the University. I don’t think it pays to

decide on anything like that too soon for sometimes if you let it go it will settle itself.

This is my week to watch the woods so I will

have to ride out pretty soon but I am going to finish this letter before I go. I am glad that you have

decided to finish school this year. It may seem like

a waste of time in some ways, but I know that you

will never regret it. I have often felt that I could

have done better in some ways if I had not tried to

finish school, but I am very glad now that I stayed

with it.

I was intending to send the rest of the party a

set of those pictures only I have not had a chance

to print off any of them yet. My developing outfit

is over at North Fork but I expect to make a trip

over there in a few weeks and I will try to get some

of them printed.

We are getting along very well now batching

and hope to do better in a few days when we get

another buck. We are going out hunting again

tonight. A peddler comes up to the mill about once

a week which gives us a chance to get fresh fruit

and vegetables.

In his youth Miller enjoyed deer hunting, but later in

life he did not hunt and did not seem to miss the autumn

buck fever at all. One thing he did enjoy was watching

sporting events. His later diaries are full of entries noting

football games, especially between Stanford University and

the University of California, track meets, and baseball

games.

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

32
September 6, 1908

We are expecting Mr. Shinn over in a few days

and I hope to get my plans straightened out after I

have another talk with him. I hate to think of leaving this place in the fall for that is the time of year

that I enjoy the most in the mountains. I don’t think

I ever felt better in my life than I feel now since

the cool weather has set in. I have gained 7 pounds

in the last two weeks.

The big traction engine, that has been causing

so much excitement on the hill has just arrived in

camp. It was brought in here to haul the lumber

from MacKenzie’s Mill down to the flume to

Shaver. Everyone has been speculating on whether

it will ever be a success or not.

2:00 P.M.: I failed to finish this letter before

dinner as my pardner came in with a mess of

mountain quail and I had to stop and clean them.

The quail season is open now and the mountain

quail are in fine condition and very easy to get. I

think we will have plenty of them from now on.

Yours as ever,

John

This is the last letter known from Miller that fall; 

the next series starts in January at Stanford University.

Evidently Professor Doane was pulling at him one way and

Supervisor Shinn, the famous first and long-term supervisor

of the Sierra National Forest, wanted him to return to his

staff. It says a lot for Miller that both academia and a field

agency wanted him as the year 1908 came to a close.

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

33
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

34
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

35

CHAPTER 6: The Early Forest 

Service Years, 1909-1910

Miller’s letters indicate he did return to Stanford University

to pursue an advanced degree. But in January his thoughts

were with obtaining a permanent Civil Service appointment

with the Forest Service. 

January 27, 1909

Mr. Shinn was here Tuesday night and lectured

the Forestry Club. It was a wild sort of a night,

pouring rain and other conditions which kept a

good many at home, but on the whole the meeting

was very well attended and every one seemed to

enjoy Mr. Shinn’s talk, although he discussed

everything from forestry to the Platonic theory 

of life.

If I can arrange it I expect to go back to North

Fork March 1st. The Examination (Forestry

Assistant) will be held next April 14th and 15th

and I will have to come to San Francisco or San

Jose to take it. If I go back to North Fork the last 

of March it will hardly pay me to come back here

again. I have very little to gain by staying here

much longer and besides I want to get back to

work and earning something like a decent salary

again. So if I can get my leave of absence revoked

for a month sooner than I had it extended, I hope to

leave here in about four or five weeks. So if everything goes well I will not have to wait so very long

before seeing you again.

Once more; it is now twenty minutes after

eleven but I am going to finish this letter before I

go to bed. I went back to the quad after supper and

ran a typewriter until eleven o’clock. I am copying

off a set of notes that I got from one of the State

Foresters last summer. There are about 15,000

words so I find that it is quite an undertaking.

For once I do not find myself wishing for a

buggy ride, although I surely would if climatic conditions were only a little different. I don’t believe

that I ever saw quite such a spell of weather—the

nearest to it that I have ever seen was down at

Pacific Grove two years ago when it nearly washed

the town down into the sea. We have had rain

steady now for two weeks and no sign of any 

clearing up yet.

Did I tell you I had a rather startling experience last week. Took dinner with Dr. Jordon!!

[Stanford University President] The invitation

included four seniors and graduates from the

Zoology Dept. But it was not a very distinguishing

honor as the Doc. occasionally invites upperclassmen.

I will either have to build a fire or go to bed or

freeze to death. Considering the hour of the night, I

think I had better go to bed.

Forever yours, John

Was Shinn doing a little recruiting at Stanford, 

specifically for John Miller? If so it says a lot for how well

thought of Miller had become. It appears Miller also had the

outdoor forestry work in his blood and was loath to become

a city dweller.

February 8, 1909

My dearest Bess: 

It is such a cold disagreeable night that I am

remaining peacefully at home instead of going to

church. We are certainly having a most unheard of

winter. It rains all the time. Today has been worse

than usual. It hasn’t rained steady, but there has

been a cold wind all the time with occasional

showers of rain and hail. Outside it is raining now.

I went out to the University Chapel this morning expecting to hear a good sermon, but was more

or less disappointed. It was announced that Dr.

Jordan would talk on Lincoln. We are to have a

holiday next Friday, Lincoln’s birthday so this was

a very appropriate time for such an address. Dr.

Jordan, however, was not there for a very unfortunate reason. His daughter, Miss Jordan, who is a

teacher in Los Angeles High School, was engaged

to be married in a few months and her fiancé died

very suddenly yesterday. It was quite a blow, I

think, to the entire family.

So, instead of hearing Dr. Jordan, I had to 

listen to . . . the regular Minister which to say the

least is something of an ordeal. 

I have only three weeks left in which to get to

North Fork and I am sure I will have to keep moving between now and then as I have a good many

things to do. I am not altogether certain what is

going to happen to me when I get there. I had

another letter from Mr. Shinn last week saying that

he was expecting matters to turn so that he could

put me in charge of a District, March 1st. In that

case he said, that he would recommend me for

$1200.00 July 1st. I certainly will not object to

that; at least not to the raise in salary. In that case

he wants me to agree to stay on for a year, but I am

hardly ready to promise that yet. Something else

may turn up that I want to go into. I will explain
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

36

things a little more fully when I see you. I wish

that we could talk it over tonight, but then, what’s

the use of wishing. It don’t do any good.

The intercollegiate Carnot debate was held

here last Friday night. Of course Stanford won. The

medal this year went to W.C. Shelton, a brother of

the Shelton who won it last year. They are both old

Fresno boys and both seem to have remarkable

ability along the same lines. Berkeley was completely outclassed by all three of our men! This

makes the fourth consecutive year that Stanford has

won this debate.

The Forestry School at Stanford seems to be

on the point of going through. The Trustees have

the matter under consideration now, but they won’t

make any decision for a month yet. It will take

some time to get the school established, even if

they decide in favor of it.

It is getting too cold to sit up much longer. I

think I will have to call this a letter and go to bed.”

As ever yours, John

Miller was an avid supporter of Stanford University,

especially in any and all events competing with the

University of California, Berkeley. As his career 

progresses it is interesting to see where he ends up.

February 15, 1909

My Dearest Bess:

I am sitting here listening to the gentle patter

of the rain drops outside, and although it is not calculated to give one a very cheerful inspiration, I

will do the best I can to write this letter. For a wonder it did not rain today, although it has been promising to all afternoon; but of course it is out of the

question to let 24 hours go by without rain so it is

setting in again tonight.

We had a holiday last week owing to the fact

that Friday was Lincoln’s birthday. The University

had an assembly in the morning which was very

good. Rev. Bert Estes Howard gave the best talk of

the morning on “Lincoln, the Man.” Dr. Jordan also

spoke at some length.

At the close of the meeting, Mrs. Maud Wood

Park of Boston spoke on Women’s Suffrage. What

do you think of Women’s Suffrage anyway? I

rather think that I liked the way this woman spoke

better than I like her cause, although that is alright.

She was certainly a very entertaining speaker. In

the evening the Y.M.C.A. gave a smoker, which

consisted of a number of athletic events, some

music by the orchestra and a talk by Dr. Jordan.

The affair ended up with a feed of peanuts. The

Y.M.C.A. has a much larger membership this year

than ever before, and they are working to get a new

building. The Stanford Memorial Church is at last

reduced to a huge rock pile about the foundations

and is about in the same stage as when they began

its construction ten years ago. It seems like a

shame that a building so beautiful and which cost

so much money should have to go that way. It is all

clear loss to the University—the money would certainly have done far more good if it could have

been spent in some other way.1

I wish that I could have been down home and

gone to the league social with you. I don’t believe

that we ever did go to a social together. Still, I

hardly have time to think about socials or anything

else just now. It keeps me going until eleven

o’clock every night to keep my work in shape. I am

trying to get the dope on my examination worked

up before I leave here so that I won’t have to study

so much when I get to North Fork. I am wondering

where I am going to be and what I am going to do

when I get there, but I suppose I will have to wait

patiently to find out. 

Lovingly yours, John

February 21, 1909

My Dearest:

I am about a day ahead of my schedule this

time, but as I am writing letters tonight, I will try

and finish this one before I go to bed. This is probably the last letter I will write to you from Stanford

for some time to come; perhaps the “very last” one

and I certainly hope that it will be the last one I

write you from here.

I was in hopes that I would have a chance to

see you before I have to write another letter, but 

I am not so sure about that. I will have to go to

North Fork before I can come down home. I have

to report there the 1st of March and I can’t get

away from here before Friday, so it just leaves 

me Saturday to get into North Fork on the stage.

However, I expect to come down the following

week as I have to come down to Reedley to get 

a horse and outfit.

I will have to put in the most of tomorrow 

I think getting packed up and ready to leave. It

seems to me that I never have a chance to do 

1 This was a result of the 1906 earthquake.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

37

anything but pack up and go. About as soon as I

get settled in one place, something always happens

that I have to get up and go again. I am afraid that

it will always be that way for some time to come

according to the way that I am planning things at

present. (I know I ought to say “We” are planning,

for your approval will have to rest pretty much on

my plans from now on).

I somehow feel that I am leaving Stanford for

good this time. Of course, I may come back some

time for another semester’s work but I think that I

ought to give the Forest Service at least two years

trial before I leave it again. There is the possibility

that I may make good there and work into something worth while and besides I have made up my

mind to pass the Philippine Service examinations

in two years. I know that it is a pretty hard thing to

look ahead and tell just what is going to happen,

but at present I intend to go into the Forestry work

and see what I can do at it. All my opportunities

seem to be along that line and everything present

seems to oppose my ambitions to become “an old

maid school teacher.”

We had two fine days this week that gave me

the “mountain fever” and made me wish that I

were back in the hills again. Yesterday and today

however there was quite a decided change and we

are having the usual storm and cold rain. I will

probably run into some snow before I get to North

Fork.

Thursday I went through the arboretum with

Professor Dudley to look over the conifers there. I

think that I have enjoyed my work and association

with Professor Dudley more than anything I have

done this year. It has largely compensated for the

six months that I have spent here. He is certainly

one of the finest type of men that I have ever had

the pleasure of knowing. I had expected to work

with Professor Kellogg, but he did not return last

semester as expected and is still on his honeymoon.

Miller’s ambitions were clearly toward the Forest

Service appointment now that decision time was upon him.

And, spring fever for the mountains was also tugging at

him. One can sense that he had the intellect to become an

academic, but his heart was in the Sierra Nevada. In undertaking this course of action, he needed equipment and transportation. Forest Service men had to provide their own 

riding and pack horses at that time, so Miller was casting

about for some good horseflesh to get him over the rough

Sierra trails.

February 8, 1909

Dear Friend John:

I believe that I have that location of a good

(one of) horse flesh for you if you want to go as

high as seventy five dollars. It is a five year old

mare, raised in the mountains, rides, drives and

sound as a bell so far as I can see, and has the size.

Cannot say much about the color, but I imagine

that after she is shed, it will be blue roan.

The fellow who has it bought it from an Indian

up above Squaw Valley, and has had her about two

months. He drives her and works her. I saw her

Sunday and if you want her let me know what . . .

[page missing].

I am very busy. There is another dentist in

Reedley so chances are that I will have more time

for myself in future. I bought a coming three year

old colt the other day for $100. It can go about four

gaits and I am riding at leisure times and will show

you something nice in horseflesh some day if my

expectations are not overdrawn.

I hope for an answer soon and trust you will

believe me.

Very truly yours, A.V. Acker

February 12, 1909

Dear Friend John:

I received your letter this morning and immediately rang up Mr. Huey and explained to him the

circumstances in regard to the option etc. and your

coming down the first of next month. He will not

consider the option at all as the only reason for him

parting with the mare is that he is badly in need of

the money. Now I am sure that you could not buy 

a horse that would suit you better, and if you can

repay me when you come down I will pay him the

$75.00 for you, and let him keep the mare until you

come down, if you want her taken to your father’s

place, will do that.

If I can help you out in this matter let me

know, and I will do what I can for you and trust

that you will accept friendship and assistance as

intended.

Very truly yours, A.V. Acker

P.S. Will you kindly let me hear from you

immediately by return mail. Arthur

Seventy-five dollars was a lot of money in 1909, so a

good horse was expensive then just as they are now. Many

horsemen preferred a gelding over a mare because horses

from several outfits had to be pastured together or used

together on the trail. It is not known whether he bought this
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

38

horse, but some of his later diary entries mention his mare,

so I suspect he eventually purchased the horse.

March 9, 1909

I don’t feel very much like writing tonight.

They are having some music at the South Fork

Hotel where I am staying now and the music

always makes one homesick when I hear it in the

mountains. I am rooming with Mr. Howard who

came out here from Harvard last year. He plays the

violin and some one is playing the piano with him.

I wanted to stay in the parlor and listen but I knew

if I did that I would not get this letter written

tonight. And then it is tonight or never for I have to

leave on my trip to Mariposa tomorrow and I won’t

have much chance to write letters until I get back.

I suppose that you might like to know how I

got here, so I will try and explain my presence here

before going any further. I went up to Sanger the

next morning after seeing you. Of course I left on

the 7:40 A.M. train. Somehow I always seem to

leave on that train. I took the stage from Sanger up

to Trimmer. It was quite a thrilling trip. We peddled

hay and vegetables along the road and stopped

once or twice to fish in the river. It is 28 miles

from Sanger to Trimmer and it took us from 9

o’clock in the morning until 5 o’clock in the afternoon. I spent the night at the ranger’s headquarters

at Trimmer with my pardner of last summer, Bill

Parkinson. There are three rangers staying at

Trimmer this year. They have built a new house

and are fixed up quite comfortable.

My principle [sic] object in going in there was

to get the horse I had last year and this I succeeded

in doing. The next morning I started out to ride up

to North Fork. It was raining a little but I had a

good slicker and it quit raining about noon. I

stopped in the Auberry valley Thursday night and

got into North Fork Friday noon.

Yesterday I was treated to my first experience

in a snow storm. When I woke up in the morning it

was raining but this soon turned off into a fine

snow. In a little while we had the ground covered

with several inches and in the afternoon, it came

down harder. This morning when I got up (about 8

a.m.) it was one grand sight. The ground was

white, the morning was clear and the pine trees

were bending under their weight of snow. The day

was so warm though that the snow all disappeared

this afternoon. I took a two mile run with Howard

this morning and a cold bath and have been feeling

fine all day.

I don’t much like to leave South Fork as it is a

very nice place to stay. However I will have to start

out early in the morning and spend the most of

next week up in Mariposa County. When I get back

I hope to stay here and work in the office until I go

down below and take the examination. Then in all

probability I will take the district up there.

Miller was a tall, long-legged ranger and the several

pictures of him horseback showed his preference for longlegged, 15-plus-hands horses. From his outfit, as the old

song goes, “I see you are a cowboy.” That he also took a run

with Mr. Howard indicates his fondness for athletic outlets

(fig. 17).

March 16, 1909

I got back day before yesterday from the trip

up north where I went to take a look over the proposed “District.” Mr. and Mrs. Shinn drove over to

Jerseydale in a buggy and the head cattle ranger

and myself rode over. The trip was a little hard on

man and horse, but on the whole it was exceedingly interesting and well worth while even if I did not

intend to go back there soon.

The first day we rode through to Grub Gulch

and stayed at the old hotel overnight. Grub Gulch

is not a very classical sounding name and the town

Figure 17—Miller on horseback, Sierra

National Forest 1909.

J.M. Miller family
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

39

does not disappoint your expectations after hearing

the name. It is a relic of the old mining days.

Several thousand people once lived there and

worked in the old “Death Trap” mine and several

other prospects near there. Since the mine closed

down the town has naturally faded, and one by one

its numerous buildings have been torn down and

moved away.

There are still left several hotels and a store or

two. One of the hotels is still kept up by one of the

old miners who has not yet acquired the ambition

to move away. Mr. Tully and myself ate our supper

and breakfast in a dining room that had once seated

over two hundred people.

Tuesday morning we rode over to Ben Hur,

another town with a classical name but little else to

speak of. We stopped at another ranger’s camp for

lunch and rode into the old town of Mariposa about

seven o’clock that evening.

I think that Mariposa is one of the oldest towns

in the state. It is almost as old I think as Monterey

and has some of those old Spanish buildings that

were put up by the Spaniards who first visited and

settled in California. It is now the county seat of a

county that lies entirely within the hills and is situated forty miles from a railroad. During the mining

days it had a thriving population of five or ten

thousand inhabitants. Now there are scarcely fifteen hundred inhabitants who are left to tell the tale

of the golden days that once were.

Wednesday morning we went out to Rangers

Camp and talked to a number of the dissatisfied

residents of our National Forests. On the whole I

found the people very nice and was never treated

any better any place. I am not anticipating very

much trouble in handling the situation there for

most of the disputes that were causing so much 

trouble last fall are practically settled now.

I left there Thursday morning and stayed

overnight at Fresno Flats and came on to North

Fork Friday. Yesterday was a beautiful spring day

and I worked all the time in the office when I wanted to be outside.

Just before I left on the mountain trip, I had a

letter from the University saying that I had been

recommended for a position as assistant entomologist in Hawaii!! I have had so many of these things

turn up though, that I have little confidence in them

and will believe that I have the job when I hear

about it. On one hand, I told Mr. Shinn that I would

take the mountain district if nothing else turned up.

I am very well satisfied with his plans for me up

there. He only intends to have me stay there a year,

and will then transfer me to some other line of

work. The principal advantage that I see of the

place is that it will bring my rating up to $1200,

and perhaps give me a good standing with the

Service. On the other hand I have decided that as

soon as an opportunity comes to go to the Orient, 

I am going to take it although whether I actually go

or not depends pretty much on what you say.

Now Mr. Howard, who I’m rooming with at

the South Fork Hotel insists that it is bed time. 

I guess that he is right, so gutter Nacht.

Yours as ever, John

Miller was witness to the tail end of the gold mining

era. Most of the mines had long since ceased operation, but

there were remnants of towns and buildings that are now

lost to history.

March 23, 1909

I stayed up at the office last night and studied

until about twelve o’clock and then started down to

South Fork. It is about a mile from headquarters to

the hotel where I am staying and down hill all the

way. It was just beginning to snow when I left the

office and the sleet blew in my face so that I could

hardly find my way home. This morning it was still

snowing some, and about four inches covered the

ground, but it disappeared rather fast and was gone

by noon.

I went up to the old Mission pasture to try to

catch my horse, as I turned it out there some time

ago. It started in to storm again so I had to give up

and come home. I really enjoy the snow as it is

quite a new experience to me. I don’t suppose that

it would be so nice if I were up further where the

snow is deep, but it certainly is a wonderful sight

to see the pines bending down with the weight of it

and the bushes and ground cover white. It reminds

me of Whittier’s “Snowbound.”

My plans for the work there are coming

through nicely just now. Mr. Shinn has promised to

let Howard go up and help me for a month with the

surveying, and also to let the head cattle ranger

stay for a while until I get the grazing matters 

started.

Even though he was probably better prepared than

most, his letters often mentioned his studying for the civil

service examination for forest assistant. He also refers to

classic literature in this letter and others, indicating he read
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

40

things other than forestry and entomology literature. John

Miller was an erudite man with broad interests and curiosity.

Sunday night, March 30, 1909

My Dearest:

I will do my level best to write a few lines

tonight, although I just returned a few hours ago

from a long hard trip up into the snow. As that is

the subject on my mind most just now, I might as

well tell you about it as it was the most interesting

trip I have ever taken in my life.

Mr. Howard and myself have been watching

for a chance for the last month to go up on the hill

and if possible climb up on Mt. Shuteye. There is

about twenty feet of snow up there now but of

course that made the trip all the more attractive. 

So when the Supervisor remarked that he wanted

someone to go up and look at the buildings at his

upper camp we promptly volunteered. We left here

Saturday morning carrying a light pack and snow

shoes.2 When we had tramped for about three

hours we reached the top of the ridge above North

Fork where we found the snow too deep to wade

anymore so we took to the skis, and after breaking

my neck a few times and doing considerable damage to the picturesque mountain scenery in numerous places where I fell down, I finally got so I

could travel. We stopped at the upper camp for our

noon lunch and had a very nice little lunch and a

rest before we started back to the shake camps at

the foot of Shuteye.

The weather did not behave very nicely and

about two o’clock it began to snow. The snow here

was about ten feet deep and as the loose snow

accumulated on top it soon became very heavy

snow shoeing. We were pretty familiar with the

country or we would not have been able to find our

way. As it was, it took us about four hours to go

four miles and we reached the camp about six that

evening. I was never so tired in all my life. The old 

bachelor who kept the camp cooked us a good hot

supper and I went to bed about an hour afterward

and slept like a log.

This morning we went up to Mr. Stout’s camp

about a mile from where we stopped for the night.

The snow here was 10 feet deep. The cabin was so

completely buried that only the gable end of the

roof stuck up above the snow.

We took breakfast here and then went on up

nearly to the foot of the mountain. Here I broke

one of my skis which rather disarranged our plans

about going up on the summit. We worked our way

back to Stout’s where I fixed my ski and then we

started for home. I was very glad to get in here

about five o’clock this evening and get a hot bath

and some supper.

I think that we have some very nice pictures to

show for our trip. I would be quite willing to start

back again tomorrow for I certainly saw more

beautiful and interesting sights than I have ever

seen in two days before.

Well, I see that I will bore you to death if I

keep on with this “thrilling” narrative. I have a

good many other things that I ought to think about

just now, for I have several weeks of hard studying

to do before my examination comes off. You were

quite right about the time of the examination. It

occurs just two weeks from next Wednesday &

Thursday, April 14 and 15.

Sunday afternoon, April 5, 1909

I finally escaped from the office last week and

had a chance to spend three days in the field. We

were running a survey up near the Cascadel Ranch.

It is one of the prettiest places that I have ever seen

in the mountains—located in a cozy little valley

which opens out to the plains on the lower side. 

It has a most delightful climate the year round—

warm in winter and cool in summer. We have certainly had some perfect days for the last week. It

was almost too warm. If I had not been able to get

outdoors for the time I think that I would be sick.

As it is, I have been feeling fine. This morning I

took a 2 mile run with Howard which helps very

much to “straighten” out the spring inertia of one’s

system.

There is going to be a convention tomorrow of

the five District rangers and assistants. It will last

for two days. I don’t know just what the program

will be yet. I suppose though that I will be down

for something of course.

He ended up establishing some long-term study plots at

Cascadel later in his career. These plots were used to study

bark beetles in ponderosa pine, a study that continued into

the 1930s. His time in the Forest Service proved valuable

when he started doing research on bark beetles for the

Bureau of Entomology. His knowledge of the timber types

and lay of the land enabled him to choose some important

long-term study sites in the Sierra Nevada. 2 Skis were also called snowshoes at that time.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

41

April 20, 1909

I am a little bit tired tonight as the trip today

was rather long and hard. On the whole thought I

had rather good luck as I came through without any

serious mishaps. I left Fresno at 7 o’clock this

morning and got off at a switch about eight miles

from Polaski. I found three horses waiting for me

there so I climbed on and started out. I reached

Polaski at ten and Bellview at 1:30 where I added

another horse to my trail. I had no bad luck on the

road so I made the entire trip today—about 60

miles—and arrived at South Fork at 6:30 in the

evening.

As ever, John

P.S. Address me at Bootjack, Mariposa County, 

c/o Forest Service

Bootjack? What a name. It is east of Mariposa on state

highway 49. It probably was one of the old collapsing mining towns that often became temporary Forest Service work

centers in the early days.

April 27, 1909, Sunday night

I was also both surprised and pleased to know

that you would be willing to address a letter to

such a place as Bootjack. It is certainly a very formidable looking sort of name and one quite unsuited to civilization. The place is no better than the

name. It is a little one horse post office about six

miles from our camp along the mail road out from

Mariposa. You don’t see much there except three

houses, and one of them is a barn.

I intended to write sometime again last week

but I had so much traveling to do that I did not

have the chance. We did not get away from North

Fork until last Wednesday morning. We made the

ride through in one day although it is quite a trip.

The next day I had to go to Mariposa to look up

some land records in the County Court House.

Mariposa is twelve miles from here and is the nearest town of any size. I did not get back until late in

the evening and had to go up near Signal Peak to

look over a claim the next day with the same

result—I got home late.

So far as my work is concerned at present I

think that I shall like it fairly well, although I have

considerable to do between now and the opening of

the summer season. We certainly have a camp full

of rangers here now. Altogether there were nine

men there yesterday and there will be about seven

tomorrow. I think that we will camp at our present

quarters for a month or six weeks yet before we

establish a permanent camp. We are all living

together and batching—I sometimes think that I

have had enough of batching, but we have a very

jolly time of it here.

May 1, 1909, “Bootjack”

This will be another short letter as I will have

to write it before breakfast. It is now 5:20 a.m. so

you see that I am getting up pretty early. I have a

chance to mail this letter in a little while so I will

try to do the best I can. 

I have been very busy this week; in fact I have

been very busy ever since I came up here. I have a

crew of eight men and it takes some rustling and

planning to keep them all going [fig. 18]. We are

working now on a pasture fence where we will

probably have our permanent camp for this summer. It is a very pretty location although I am hardly in favor of establishing the District headquarters

here on any place in this neighborhood for that

matter. I think that next fall we will try and get a

station over near Fresno Flats. That is on the regular Yosemite stage road and we get a daily mail

there. At “Bootjack” the mail only comes three

times per week which is not very satisfactory, all

things considered.

I am of the opinion that you are having some

warm weather down in the valley now. It has been

fairly warm here, although we are over 3000 feet up

in the mountains. It gets warmer here I believe than

it does at the same altitude other places in the

Figure 18—Bootjack Rangers, Sierra National Forest, May 1909.

John Miller is second from right.

J.M. Miller family
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

42

mountains. The feed and wild flowers are growing

nicely every place in the hills here.

Yesterday I rode out to Jerseydale where one

can look across the Merced Canyon and see the

Yosemite peaks. It is a very pretty strip of country

up that way-much prettier in fact than I expected to

find in this District.

May 6, 1909

To begin with, I spent the best part of yesterday by taking a ride with Mr. Tully and Howard

out to the Outlook point above the Merced river

where we could look out over the old Hite mine

and Devil’s gulch. This is the first time that I have

had a chance to see the northern boundary of this

District although I have been here now considerably over a week. I must say that I saw some pretty

wild and rugged looking country. I could see the

Merced river and down to the old Hite mine.

This morning when I first got up and went out

to look for my horse, I made the discovery that she

had disappeared in the night and it took me several

hours to find her. Then by the time I had saddled

up and was ready to go, it was almost ten o’clock.

We went up past Jerseydale, a very picturesque little valley set in the pines and on down the old Hite

mill road. This is one of the historic mines of

California and once produced millions of dollars

for its owner. A well built road once ran from

Mariposa to the mine on the South Fork of the

Merced River. It is down in a very deep gorge and

it hardly seems possible that anyone would live in

such a hole, even for gold, but never the less a

busy settlement once thrived there.

The mine was abandoned some years ago and

the road is rapidly going out of repair. TheYosemite

railroad comes up the Merced River several miles

from the mine. Another railroad has been surveyed

up the South Fork of the Merced River to Wawona

and I suppose that if we wait long enough we may

sometime hear the train whistle up in this country.

It will give us a much easier method of getting here

when it comes.

I have been very busy ever since I first came

up here and I find that I have a bigger contract on

hand than I expected, although everything is going

along as well as can be expected. It will take some

time to get the District into shape but I have agreed

to stay for a year and I intend to see it through

unless something happens to change my present

plans. I have had very pleasant dealings with the

people here so far, but it will take some time to

establish ranger stations and administrative sites.

I saw in the paper last night that Mr. Shinn

might possibly be promoted, which means that we

will have a new supervisor here. I don’t know yet

how that will affect me, although I am quite sure

that it will not affect my present position for some

time. Mr. Shinn was exonerated from the charges

made against him by the people of this District and

the chances are that he will be transferred to some

other line of work.

It was not uncommon during the early days of the

Forest Service to have local citizens file legal charges

against the Rangers or Supervisors for thwarting their 

God-given and historical rights to cut timber, mine, graze

stock, and hunt wherever and whenever they so desired.

Sometimes to save the officer so charged, the Forest Service

“promoted” them out of the area to save them from bodily

harm or ostracism of their family. The early years were not

always fun years, but apparently Miller got along with the

local pioneers quite well.

May 13, 1909, Tuesday night

I have not entirely recovered from the effects

of going to school yet, and even after I have gone

to work out in the cold world where I have plenty

of other things to keep me busy and all I need to

keep me occupied, I still seem to be unable to

avoid the impression that I will have to quit pretty

soon and get ready to begin school work again. I

received a notice in the mail last night inviting me

to the reception of Pres. and Mrs. Jordan to the

Senior and Graduates at the Zoology building. 

I will have to hurry some, I am afraid, if I go.

The Wawona Big tree trip was quite a success.

Mr. Howard and I worked all Saturday morning

with the surveying crew and rode over to Wawona

in the afternoon. Wawona is quite a picturesque

place with one big hotel and a number of small

summer cottage buildings. There were a few

tourists there on their way to Yosemite Valley, but

as yet the season in not underway. The biggest

crowd comes in June.

We took the trail up to the Trees a distance of

about 8 miles. The grove is much larger than any I

ever saw before. In fact there are really two groves,

and upper and lower and both contain hundreds of

large and small redwoods. This is the grove which

has the famous pictures which you have seen so

often. The Wawona, which had a roadway running

through it, and the Grizzly Giant, the largest and

oldest tree in the world. The best part of the trip
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

43

though consisted in the view from Wawona point.

This gives one an outlook over the South Fork of

the Merced Canyon and it was well worth the trip.

The Merced Canyon has some very pretty falls

known as the Chilnualna. The falls are a long series

of cascades which form almost a mile of spray. We

came back over Signal Peak and so had another

fine view of the mountains and plains before we

arrived home.

The weather has changed from warm to cold

again. My fingers are getting so cold that I can

hardly write, so I will either have to build more fire

or go to bed. From the way I feel, I think I will

have to go to bed, so good night.

Forever your own, John

Miller had not fully recovered from the “Universities,”

a common syndrome in those who had just completed a 

satisfying college career. He kept close ties to Stanford

University throughout his life.

Wawona is a beautiful area in Yosemite National Park.

In 1909 there was a company of U.S. Cavalry from the

Presidio, San Francisco stationed there in the summer

months who acted as park managers. They evidently had not

arrived yet or Miller probably would have mentioned them.

May 17, 1909, Sunday night

My Dear Bess:

I started a letter to you Friday night and

intended to mail it at Fresno Flats today; but I

failed to finish it so I guess that I had better begin

all over again now.

I was too tired Friday night to write much of a

letter as I had just returned from a trip to Mariposa

where I spent a day in the County Recorder’s

Office looking up land cases. It was a pretty good

long ride. I left at eight in the morning and returned

at six o’clock at night and spent 4 hours at the

court house.

It seems peculiar to speak of this as a “court

house.” It more nearly resembles a large size

school house, but as it was built in 1854, it is not to

be expected that it has a very prepossessing style of

architecture. Besides, it is quite in keeping with the

town. 

Yesterday, Bill Howard and myself left here

about three o’clock in the afternoon to go to Fresno

Flats. Before we had been on the road for an hour

we changed our minds and decided to go to Miami,

where we could get telephone communication with

North Fork. This is about twelve or fifteen miles

from our camp and requires a climb of about 1,000

feet. We reached there about half past six and

stayed over night at the rangers’ camp. There was

one ranger and his wife there.

We telephoned to North Fork, Fresno Flats and

around over the Reserve generally. The telephone

is certainly a great institution up here in the mountains. It saves all sorts of hard work and inconvenience. This morning we left the Miami camp about

eight o’clock and rode down to Fresno flats in

about two hours and a half. Our principal reason

for going down there was to get a horse which I

bought. I now have a “real” horse. I wish you

could see him. He is a big bay, five years old and

as pretty as a picture. I don’t know what to call

him. I will have to try and get a good name for he

is gentle and sensible and has a good disposition. 

I still have little Chiquita but she looks so small

beside him that I guess she will have to do for a

pack horse now. We left the Flats about one o’clock

and arrived here at seven, just about two hours ago.

I will have to go over to North Fork again

about the first of June to meet our new Supervisor.

Mr. Shinn is going to leave about the first of July,

having been promoted in the Service. I don’t know

yet how this is going to affect my plans, but I suppose that I will have a chance to stay here just the

same as I intended. It may relieve me of my agreement to stay here for a year, but I won’t know until

after the first of July whether I will want to stick to

that or not. We will certainly miss Mr. Shinn as a

supervisor for he has done a great deal for the forest and for the men who are working under him. I

expect that we will have a sort of farewell “hurrah”

at North Fork before he leaves.

I will have to let this do for this time as it is

time to go to bed. I will have to get up early in the

morning.

Forever yours, John

Supervisor Shinn was the first and only Supervisor the

Sierra National Forest had ever had to that point in time. He

was a legendary pioneer Forest Service Officer. His wife,

Julia, also worked for the Forest Service as the telephone

operator (called a dispatcher nowadays) in the Supervisor’s

office. It was said she did this as a volunteer. The Shinns

retired in North Fork.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

44

June 6, 1909, Friday night

My Dearest Bess:

I shall probably not have a chance to write

tomorrow night or Sunday as I expect to leave for

Yosemite then, so I shall probably have to mail this

letter in the Valley or some place along the road.

Besides, I certainly owe a letter by this time so I

will do my best although it is nine o’clock.

I would like to come down to the plains about

June 4th [July?] but I don’t see how I can as I have

to be in North Fork on that date to meet the new

Supervisor. There will be a general meeting of the

District men of the Sierra Forest then to meet the

new “boss” and say goodbye to the old one. We

will all be sorry to see Mr. Shinn leave. He has

always been a good man in the place and he always

seems to have the interests of his men at heart. I

have been wondering whether or not I will have as

good an opportunity under the new Supervisor but

I presume that if I do not, I will soon find it out.

Monday morning:

This letter was unfinished Friday night so I

will proceed to add something to it while I am

writing in camp. Howard and I rode through to the

valley yesterday and we are now camped on the

Merced River with the grandeur of the Yosemite all

about us. I don’t know whether I am sufficiently

impressed with it all or not, as it looks so much just

like the pictures I have seen and read so much

about that I can hardly believe that I am seeing

anything new.

The trip in here was almost as interesting as

the valley itself. We left our camp about six yesterday morning and came down the old road to Hites

Cove on the South Fork of the Merced River. This

is a pretty big canyon and very rough and wild. 

We had a steep, hot trail to climb in getting up the

north side of the canyon. We crossed the main

Merced on an old cable bridge which threatened to

give way at any minute and let our horses drop

down into the cascade below. Still it held us up

long enough to get our horses and pack over. Then

we followed up the railroad track to El Portal.

It seemed rather queer to be riding along a railroad track in the middle of the mountains, but it

came in very conveniently too. The track follows

right up the main river to the boundary of the

National Park and from there a wagon road leads

on to the valley. We reached El Portal about four in

the afternoon and rode on to the valley in the

evening.

We stopped at a little camp above the Sentinel

Hotel and were mighty glad to get there as we had

been traveling all day and it was then about 9 p.m.

I don’t think that Yosemite is a nice place at all to

camp. The place is all tied up with rules and regulations and the Valley usually is full of people.

Still, there are not many campers in here yet and

this morning we found a beautiful little camp right

along the river. 

Mr. Howard has been expecting his folks out

from the East for a long time and they arrived in

the valley by stage this morning. He expects to go

back with them to Wawona and then take them on

to North Fork. I will have to go back alone I suppose about day after tomorrow.

It is quite warm in here today and I am loafing

around camp here as I write. It seems quite natural

to hear the murmur of the Merced River and look

up to Glacier Point on one side of the valley and

see Half Dome on the other. You can hear a gradual

roar from the waterfalls. They are the most interesting and picturesque feature of the valley. I think

that I have seen some canyons in the higher mountains that are almost as good, but we do not have

them all in one place and we do not have in any

place such magnificent waterfalls.

It is almost time to start dinner, so I think you

have tried to read this writing long enough. I have

a stub pen and I can’t write much with them.

Someday I will have to write to you on my new

typewriter so that you can read it.

I will write you again when I reach North

Fork.

Forever yours, John M. Miller

Yosemite Valley obviously captured Miller, for he

returned there at least once a year for either business or

pleasure for the next three decades.

It is interesting to note Miller’s dislike for all of the

rules and regulations and hordes of tourists in 1909. He

should see it now.

June 8, 1909

I have been pounding on the typewriter all day

today and worked off two long reports that I have

been dreading for some time. I have had four and

occasionally five men at work all this week. We are

building a “place to live” up at the Cummings

Station. We have about completed now a good

sized barn, and will probably begin on a five room

house after the first of July. I have been wondering
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

45

if I will have someone to share it with me next fall!

I almost hope not for I hope to be some place else

next fall, although we have a pretty location at the

Cummings Station I hope to hear from my examination pretty soon now. It may not change my present plans very much, but I am in hopes that it will.

Rangers not only had to be horsemen and packers, but

they also built most of the original ranger stations, cabins,

and barns. Many national forests still have an original building or two standing from these early efforts maintained as

historic sites (Joslin 1995).

June 21, 1909, Sunday night

My Dearest Bess:

It is after ten o’clock but I am going to do my

best to write before I get too sleepy and have to go

to bed. I have procrastinated most shamefully today

and did not get around to letter writing until the

very last thing. I had two reports to get off in

tomorrow’s mail, but I put them off until after supper and then I found more work than I expected, so

here I am, just getting through now.

The weather is behaving quite improperly this 

season. It treated us to a very heavy rain last Friday

which was quite unheard of for the 29th of June.

We had to lay off for a day, and the farmers about

here are all discouraged over having most of their

hay crop spoilt. It is almost as bad as a rain down

on the plains during the raisin season. It has been

dry for so long that this shower seems as though

fall were upon us. And the fourth of July not gone

yet! I am afraid that this will seem like a long summer although I think the time will go fast enough

from now on.

I hope to hear from my examination in a few

days or a week now. I may not hear until July 1st,

but am beginning to wonder how I came out. My

application papers came back to have several dates

corrected, which had to be done by Mr. Shinn at

North Fork. I carried these with me on the trip

through Yosemite to North Fork, and as luck would

have it, lost them there. They were returned to the

Yosemite P.O. and mailed to me at North Fork after

I had left that place and returned to Mariposa.

However, Howard happened to get them and as he

understood the situation, had them corrected and

returned to the Civil Service, so that I think they

arrived in time for me to get my rating.

I have had to put my bay horse out in pasture

again as the Yosemite trip used him up pretty bad.

Yesterday I packed some shakes for our barn down

the mountain on Chiquita. Packing shakes however

seemed to be an occupation quite unsuited to her

tastes and sensibilities and she proceeded to make

her objections known by bucking about 300 shakes

off and scattering them at various intervals over the

mountain. Some of them are there yet, but we gathered up most of them. This was not quite so 

dangerous though as your episode in Parlier.

It is getting late. I must “zu Bett gehen.” Mr.

Egan, one of our men, is still writing here too. Says

he’s writing a girl in Missouri!

As ever your own, John 

So maybe the mare, Chiquita, didn’t like being a pack

horse. She may have been too small for Miller’s lanky

frame, but she wasn’t stupid.

July 12, 1909, Tuesday night

You may find it hot in Missouri but I think you

can thank your stars that you are not down in the

valley at present. We seem to be having another

one of those hot weather celebrations and we are

getting our share of it up here in the hills. I went

down to Mariposa yesterday and almost melted

down on the way back. I put in a good share of my

time at the ice cream soda fountain while there,

making up for all that I lost while up here in the

hills.

Today I went to a cooler climate by going up

on the hill above us to examine a homestead claim.

It seemed good to be up in the Sugar Pines and the

tall firs again. As I was coming home I passed

through a little canyon where I saw some of the

most beautiful rhododendrons that I have ever seen.

They bloom early here. The sight of them took me

back about a year to the time when a party of us

were on our way back to Dinkey. I wish that 

I could have seen and experienced all of that trip

again. It was not so much the Big Trees that interested me as some other associations.

Mr. Shinn left this morning on his way back to

North Fork and I was not altogether sorry to see

him go as I have been working early and late since

he has been here. As usual, my plans have been

more or less disarranged upon seeing him. He

wants me to stay at North Fork this winter instead

of Mariposa. Also he wants me to start out on a

sort of entomological tour of the forest about this

fall and work up a report on it this fall and winter. I

hardly know yet whether it will be possible for me

to get done all that he has planned, but I think I

can’t afford to miss the trip.

As ever yours, John
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

46

Supervisor Shinn was proposing a new project that

would change Miller’s life forever after. He had of course

taken some entomology courses from Professor Doane at

Stanford, and Supervisor Shinn was aware of this because

he had visited Miller at Stanford the year before. To Shinn’s

great credit he discerned that his subordinate’s education

and interests could be used in a most useful way. And, 

obviously, Shinn had not transferred from the Sierra

National Forest.

July 14, 1909, Sunday night

Mr. Shinn has been here since Wednesday and

has had me going some ever since. We have been

working on the forest boundary, looking it over to

see if any more land can be added to the forest, or

if any should be withdrawn. Incidentally we have

been visiting the settlers to see how they feel about

it. The attitude of most of those we met seemed to

be very friendly towards the Service. There are

some very nice people up here in spite of the fact

that many unpleasant things have been said about

them and there has been almost two years war

between them and the Government.

Last night I went to a party up at Boothe’s

place. They are the largest and most influential

family here—two of the boys are appointed

rangers. We had a very nice time and did not get

home until morning.

This afternoon we went up to Ferguson’s

place. They are very peculiar old people who came

here in 1885 and have a peculiar history connected

with their ranch and early settlement. Miss

Ferguson, their daughter, is the school mother here

and a very nice girl. She was educated in Oakland.

Well it is getting late and I have some rather

bad news to relate so I had better get through with

it as soon as possible. The Government seems to

have gone bankrupt and has postponed all promotions in the Department of Agriculture until next

January. This leaves me on my present salary until

then, but Mr. Shinn has assured me that I am sure

of getting a raise then, but it don’t help me out very

much in the meantime. Besides, I lost out on my

examination in April so I will have to keep at my

present work for a while. It does not affect my

plans very materially as I expected to stay here

anyway for a year. Mr. Shinn wants me to take up

some work in entomology next fall which will take

about a month of travel and also wants me to stay

at North Fork for the winter. I hardly know yet

whether I will agree to all of this as I want to have

my sis Clara come up and stay with me this fall if

possible.

Miller was just introduced to one of the vagaries of 

federal government service, annual appropriations may or

may not be as much as expected and salary freezes are often

the result. It is surprising though that he did not pass his

Ranger’s Examination. His education, experience, farm

background, and intellect seemed to make him a natural for

Ranger appointment.

July 19, 1909, Sunday night

Everything is moving along at a rapid rate

here, and my plans have been shifted about with

considerable suddenness in last week. We will have

our house done in another month but as I expected,

I will probably not stay here this winter. I think I

told in one of my recent letters that I came out

about as I expected on my examination and that

promotions have been delayed until next January.

At present, my “boss” intends to put me on an altogether different type of work and turn the District

over to someone else for this winter.

He is willing to let me stay here if I want to,

but he has also offered to let me take my scientific

work, and spend my winter at North Fork. His

intentions are that I shall work up a general report

on the injurious insects of the forest from the

Merced to King’s River. This will require about six

weeks work in the field collecting specimens, photographs and data, and take probably most of my

time this winter working them into shape for a published report.

I do not expect to get away from here before

September 1st or possibly not until later. It is really

up to me to stay here until I get the work in this

District into some kind of shape. Everything has

been going along fairly well, and I think that I will

be free to leave in six weeks more. On the whole 

I think that I will like the work better than this

District work and besides, North Fork is a much

more desirable place to stay. Then, this other work

will give me more of an opportunity, besides being

interesting.

Well, I don’t suppose I ought to bother you

with a discussion of all my troubles. I would rather

talk these matters over with you if I could. You

have not told me yet when you intend coming back

to California. I hope to get down to Reedley soon

after you return if you are there by October 1st. If
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

47

my present plans carry through I will travel down

through the mountains with saddle and pack outfit,

going through the back country and timber cuttings

and finally work down home through the Kings

River Canyon. It will be a most delightful trip, but

I am not sure yet whether I will have anyone to go

with me or not.

Yesterday I rode up to Signal Peak and from

there over to Miami, where I stayed last night. This

is a most delightful camp—it was so cold that we

had to build a fire in the house to keep warm.

There is quite a colony of rangers here too, counting in their families. The mountains are fine too as

there are so many beautiful meadows which are

just at their height now. The rhododendrons about

them are a beautiful sight.

Miller was about to take up some “scientific” entomology work. This may have been an unusual assignment in

those times because the national forests were usually short

handed and underfunded and few Rangers could be spared

from essential day-to-day work. Miller had obviously

impressed Shinn with his knowledge of entomology and

curiosity about the state of injurious forest insects in the

Sierra National Forest. 

July 28, 1909, Monday night

The management and responsibility of this

work here takes a lot of time and is quite a strain

on my small amount of gray matter. I have five

men here now and several different lines of work

going on. Sometimes I am too tired at night to

write even when I have the time, so I go to bed

without further ceremony.

You ought to be back in California to enjoy the

cool summer we are having. It will soon be the last

of July and we have not had any of the record

breaking hot weather such as we had through July

last summer. No fires yet as a result our work has

been going along very well. The house is up and

the roof will be on pretty soon. I sometimes wish I

had more time to help work on it for I like to do

some kinds of carpentry.

Miller’s carpentry skills come in handy in a few years

when he built screened cages to rear forest insects. He 

continued using these skills until the late 1940s at the

Institute of Forest Genetics at Placerville, California.

August 23, 1909, Sunday night

Sunday night a ranger came in from District 2

and wanted two men to help on the telephone line.

We were about ready to move up to our new camp

so we made the move Monday and I sent two of

the boys over to Miami Tuesday. That day Mr.

Shinn came in and I had to take another trip with

him the next day down into Hite’s Cove. We left

camp at 2 o’clock in the morning and got back at

six in the evening. There was not much chance 

to catch up on sleep the next night for Mr. Shinn

got me up at four o’clock again and we started out

for Miami stopping at C.K. Westfall’s and Mr.

Boothe’s on the way. We got to Miami that evening

and I went out on the telephone line the next morning and worked until last night. There was shortage

of men on the crew and we were trying to rush the

line through so that we could get it over into our

District. I was too tired to write last night and so

went to bed. This morning I went down to camp

meeting and did not get back until about an hour

ago. 

They are holding a camp meeting now about

five miles from our camp. Today was the first

chance I had to attend and they had a very good

service this afternoon. I intended to stay to church

tonight, but our grazing ranger, Tully, came over

and besides, I wanted to write to you tonight.

As ever, John

In addition to other duties, forest rangers had to be 

telephone linemen. Two-way radio was still in the future, so

the crank-operated battery-powered telephone, primitive as

it was, connected the outlying guard stations, lookouts, and

supervisor’s office. The trouble was that the heavy galvanized line had to be packed and strung in some very rough 

country, over as straight a line as possible. Telephone poles

were hard to come by and it took time to dig holes and set

them, so white porcelain split-ring insulators on about a foot

of wire were spiked 10 or 15 feet up the bole of large, live

trees. These white insulators can still be found on large ponderosa pine, wherever old lines were established. The only

problem was that during storms, trees might fall across the

lines. The lines purposely had slack in them so the tree

would ride the line to the ground and not break it. But the

telephone would not work then, so someone would have to

patrol the line, cut off fallen trees, and sometimes shorten
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

48

the line up a bit with a splice. The men doing this often

worked alone and there are more than several cases of

Forest Service men falling to serious injury when their

climbing spurs tore loose.

September 3, 1909, Thursday night

I would give almost anything if I could only be

down there for a few days when you arrive, but I

know that my boss wouldn’t think of letting me go

at such a strenuous time as this. Fortunately, we

have had no more fires since the big one down on

the Merced River, but the season of bad fires will

be on for a month yet.

There are five of us here tonight and we are

very comfortably situated in our own new quarters.

Somehow I like this camp better the more I see of

it. I think that we will have a very pretty little

house when it is completed. I don’t much like the

idea of going off and leaving it this winter. Mr.

Mace, the man who is going to take my place for

the winter, is here now and will probably stay for a

few days. He will go back to North Fork and move

up here with his family later. He has a wife and a

little girl.

I wish that I could make some promises about

when I am coming but I can’t do that for a while

yet. Still the season acts as though it were going to

be an early fall. It is a great deal cooler than it has

been for some time. The summer has gone so fast

that I can hardly realize that it will soon be over. I

am always glad to see the fall come. It is the pleasantest season of the year for me and I think the

very best of all seasons in the mountains.

September 6, 1909, Sunday night

The Camp Meeting closed last Sunday and it

seemed to be quite a success, both as regards to the

amount of noise and the number of converts. I

think that there were about 38 conversions altogether. Some of them were of the howling

Methodist kind, but I presume that they were all

sincere. They were going to start a movement

today to build a church here. I hope that they succeed for I think that it would be a nice thing for

them to have a church in this community. I would

like to see them get a better minister, though . . .

Mr. Mace, the man who will probably take my

place here this winter, came up here last Tuesday

and left this morning. He will probably move up

before long and bring his wife with him. He seems

like a very pleasant sort of a man and I think will

make friends among the people here.

It seems hard to realize that the summer is

over. It has gone so much faster than I expected.

The days are beginning to feel like fall though, and

we had a little touch of rain today. We are not having the rain that we had last summer at Shaver. At

camp 16, it rained almost an inch in August. I

would like to see that much rain, now, to put an

end to the fire season, but I am afraid that the farmers down in the valley would object. It seems

strange yet not to be out picking grapes at this season of the year. I don’t believe that I care much

about working in a vineyard anymore. I think that I

would rather fight fire.

September 11, 1909

I went down to the Boothes’ last night. One of

the boys here is going away and they were going to

have a little evening’s music for his benefit. However, he went down to Mariposa and did not get

back last night. Two of us went down anyhow and

we had quite a sing. The Boothes are certainly

pleasant people and we always have a good time

every time we go there.

I stayed at home yesterday and worked in the

office all day—a new filing case came in the other

day and I had to transfer all the correspondence. The

day before, I went over to Miami and got my brown

horse at the Grove pasture. He has been enjoying a

protracted vacation for the last six weeks. He came

here fat and looking fine and I hope to get some

good use out of him from now on.

Miller’s pretty bay horse was living a life of luxury in a

Forest Service pasture. Most ranger station locations were

chosen with the necessity of having pasture nearby for their

horses and mules. These pastures were often very pretty 

natural meadows with a source of water. Consequently the

old ranger station sites can be some of the most pleasant

areas on the forest. Many such stations are still actively used

as work centers or were converted to public campgrounds. 

All because the rangers needed fuel for their four-footed

transport. 

September 29, 1909, Saturday night

I returned last night from a trip to Fresno Flats

where I rode to have my horse shod and also to

have a talk on the telephone with Mr. Shinn. I also

had a talk with him a little over a week ago before

the fires broke out which rather unsettled my plans

for this winter. I don’t think that I have written to
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

49

you about this yet. I would much rather talk to you

about it but that will be out of the question for several weeks yet so I will try and tell you something

of it now.

My plans were to leave here sometime before

this and work down through the mountains to

North Fork and further south on a “bug hunting”

expedition. When this was completed, the boss had

planned to put me in one of the stations near North

Fork and put in my time there through the winter,

doing general office work and writing out my special report.

One thing and another has come up to delay

my trip so that it is now pretty late in the season to

start out. Although Mr. Shinn said a lot of nice

things about my being too valuable a man to leave

in a district, and that I could expect to be a deputy

supervisor soon, etc., he did not offer me anything

definite in the way of promotion. Besides his

understanding that if I gave up this District now, I

could expect to do so permanently, did not appeal

to me very much. I prefer to stay with the district

until something better turns up. Consequently, I got

stubborn and refused to go in to North Fork this

winter. I don’t know whether or not the boss liked

this very well, but he agreed to let me stay up here

and do what I could with the special work in entomology using this as headquarters.

I don’t hardly know whether I acted wisely or

not, but I had several reasons for doing so. One

was that if we carry out our plans I think that you

will like it better here than at North Fork. Mr.

Shinn still expects to move me out of here next

May, but that is a good way ahead yet and a good

many things may turn up between now and then. I

don’t suppose that I can make all of this clear to

you until I have seen you and talked with you, but

if everything goes alright, I think that we are safe

in going ahead and making our plans.

I would say that if nothing interferes we ought

to be able to set a date for that little affair on which

my happiness depends, about next December. This

will give us a chance to spend several weeks on the

coast or some place so that I can come back and

start to work again about January 1st when I hope

to have that long postponed promotion.

I have been hoping all day that I would have a

chance to get started out on my trip in a few days,

but I had a letter tonight saying that an inspector

was coming down here from San Francisco soon

and for me to remain in the District until he

arrived. This will delay my work quite a little. 

I may not be able to get down until about

November 1st.

Miller’s assignment to survey forest insect problems

that fall apparently went awry. The “District” he is referring

to is his Ranger District (Mariposa). In those days (before

1930) Regions also were called “District” e.g., District 5 for

California. It seems that Supervisor Shinn may have been

stringing Miller and his insect survey along for some

unknown reason. Perhaps Shinn was simply too shorthanded to let Miller take off “hunting bugs” for 6 weeks.

October 5, 1909, Monday night

Now this sounds foolish does it not? To come

down to practical affairs, I have every reason to

feel like celebrating tonight. The fire season is

over, the telephone line is completed, our house is

comfortable and we will soon have it fixed for the

winter. The telephone crew left here Friday and I

now have one man left with me to run the District

with this winter. We have just had a splendid rain,

which lasted for almost 3 days and put a damper on

the fires for the rest of this season. I suppose that a

great many in the valley were rather sorry to see it

on account of the raisins, but it is an ill wind that

blows no good, and it certainly did sound good to

hear that rain pouring down on our new roof.

An inspector was in here for two days and left

apparently well satisfied with affairs at this end. He

was from the San Francisco office and seemed to

be an A-1 man in every respect. Before leaving, he

asked me if I wanted to consider a position in the

San Francisco District office—said that they had

been looking for a man there with considerable

field experience and he thought I could do the

work. He did not know whether the place had been

filled yet or not, but he would see about it when he

returned. I told him that I would be ready to think

it over when he had something definite to talk

about but for the present would consider my plans

here as permanent. I do not even know if it will be

a desirable job, but on whole I will be rather surprised if I hear anything further from it.

October 11, 1909, Thursday night

I have been pounding the typewriter all afternoon and I almost feel tempted to use the machine

instead of trying to write with pen and ink. I am

becoming so accustomed to the machine that I can
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

50

scarcely write a letter anymore that anyone can

read. In fact I am getting no better fast if such a

thing is possible.

I wish that you were here now to enjoy some

of this beautiful spring weather. I say “spring”

weather for that is just the way it feels. The days

are warm and the grass is coming out at a great

rate. If this keeps up and we have plenty of rain

later, we ought to have a good horse feed through

the winter.

We returned from the Mt. Pinoche trip Friday

night and I was certainly glad to get home. It was a

hard trip over the most abominable trails and we

hope to be able to keep out of that part of the

District hereafter. I came very near losing my saddle horse in two or three places.

We reached the mining claims and stopped

there the first night. Our second day of travel took

us down to the railroad at El Portal and we came

home Friday via Hites Cove.

Now his horse was earning his keep and then some.

Horse accidents were common. Forest Assistant Pernot on

the Ochoco Forest in Oregon died from a horse accident on

duty in 1913 while surveying a bark beetle infestation. He

was the first entomological worker to die in the line of duty

(Burke and Wickman 1990). Many others have been injured

including myself when I was bucked off a horse in the Eagle

Cap Wilderness in 1992.

October 13, 1909, Tuesday night

I worked on our house yesterday morning and

in the afternoon rode down to Chowchilla school

house to send a message back to a man whom we

are dealing with. I came home by Mr. Boothe’s

place and stopped there for supper. They are certainly nice people and have been extremely good to

me this summer. Of course they are naturally

friendly to the Forest Service as there are two of

the sons in the work and they are stationed in two

of the lower districts.

I went out hunting this morning but I didn’t

meet with much success. One of the Boothe boys

came up here tonight and we will go out and try it

again tomorrow morning. That means get up at

four o’clock so I will hurry this letter along so that

I can get to bed early.

I have been staying at camp as much as possible for the last few days trying to put it in some

sort of shape. We want to build a fire-place for the

winter and our house is not finished much on the

inside. Other work keeps piling up though and it

seems like I will have my hands full getting some

of it completed. I have a homestead application to

examine, several trespass cases to take up and a

number of reports to complete. Consequently it

keeps me planning to tell how my time is coming

out. Sometime when I have a chance I am going to

write you a decent letter.

Saturday night

My Dearest Bess:

I came down tonight from Signal Peak for

which I departed about four o’clock this morning.

It has been a very peculiar day. In fact, I don’t

believe that I have seen one just like it in the

mountains. There has been a sort of blue haze over

the hills that is so dense you can not see but a few

miles. When I got up on the ridge this morning, 

I could look out towards the plains, and there

seemed to be a heavy fog there. This afternoon has

been quite cold, very much in contrast to the last

few days which have been quite warm. We are all

hoping for more rain which would be a great benefit to the country now and insure us a good feed for

the rest of the winter.

We have been working on the water supply of

the house and have it piped into the kitchen now

with faucets, sink etc. That is, we will have it piped

in here as soon as the water rises in the spring up

on the hill. The hot weather of the last few days

lowered it so that it scarcely runs now, but the cool

weather will bring it up again, as soon as another

rain comes. It will be convenient when we get it

into working order.

Sunday night,

Today seems to have slipped by without my

seeming to know where it went to. I have a lot of

other letters to write tonight but I shall complete

this first. It has been a lovely autumn afternoon and

I have been wishing that we could stroll out on the

hill or take a horseback ride or do something so that

we could enjoy it together. Our neighbors, the

Boothes, came calling on us this afternoon, and as

we were just getting through lunch and did not have

the house cleaned up yet, I guess that they formed a

rather poor opinion of our housekeeping ability.

Mrs. Boothe said, though, that we had a very cozy

little house—that is, it would be such when we get

it cleaned up.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

51

I believe you asked something about the house

and I will try and send you a picture of it before

long. It has four rooms and two seven foot porches

on the south and west. We are planning to build a

fire place soon. In fact, we begin to feel the need of

it these cold nights. However, the house is double

walled on the outside, and covered with shingles,

cottage fashion, so I guess that we ought to be able

to stand the snow.

I have thought a great deal about our plans for

this winter, and I am all the more anxious to see

you soon and talk it all over. I have but one man

left with me now and he goes over to North Fork

the first of next week to take the examination, and I

shall have to stay here until he gets back. You can

depend on my coming down as soon after that as I

can get away which shall probably be soon after

Nov. 1st.

Of course you probably understand that if we

are up here together this winter, that the arrangement will only be temporary and we will probably

be at headquarters after May. Mr. Shinn tried hard

to get me out of the District this fall, but I objected

for various reasons. I had intended to put my time

in this winter on special work in entomology, but

did not have enough time for the field work this

summer so I decided to try and have the work postponed for another year. It seems probable that I

may spend next summer at this too.

In fact it is hard to depend upon a permanent

home for anyone who stays in the Forest Service.

In this respect, I guess it compares with the teaching profession or the ministry. While this mode of

life has some advantages as well as disadvantages,

I seriously question my right to ask you to share it

with me, for I know your choice would be for

something permanent. But on the other hand, I

think that there are a great many things you would

enjoy about a year or two up here. There are many

pretty and interesting things to be seen, and there is

a certain amount of freedom about the life that

appeals to anyone who can appreciate beauty.

Besides I don’t regard the branch of the work I am

in now as permanent unless advancement comes

around my way. For the next year or two, it offers

me a living and an opportunity to get into something better, so I don’t intend to leave the Forest

Service until I have given it a test.

November 1, 1909, Sunday night

My trip to Signal Peak was rather unproductive of any results except the evil kind. As I wrote

you Friday, we had a good rain that did a world of

good down here, and Friday morning broke clear

looking as though it would be a beautiful trip on

the mountain. I started out to make the climb on

foot as I intended to stay overnight, but Mr. Davey

laughed at me for going that way, as my horse,

Mike, was kicking up his heels and working off

surplus energy in various ways.

I saddled him up and rode up to the top of the

ridge just back of camp. The peak did not look so

inviting then as I could see snow over most of it.

When I reached the snow it began to cloud over

and get very cold. The snow was not deep however, but by the time I reached Stendarts camp it

began to snow again.

The man whom I had arranged to meet did not

appear, so I left my horse in an old barn and went

on about five miles to the hunter’s camp. I had a

big feed of venison steak that night, and the next

morning was a brighter day, but rather cold. I hunted over most of the mountain and returned to the

barn where I had left the horse. As the shakemaker

had not appeared yet, I took my horse on down to

the Hunter’s camp and stayed there again last

night. Something scared Mike in the night and he

broke his rope and started out. When I woke up

this morning I did not have any more horse than a

rabbit. I carried my saddle back to Stendarts, and

then followed my trail on out thinking that the

horse would return to camp. He has not appeared

yet so I suppose that I have several days’ walk laid

out for me hunting him up. It was so cold up there

in the snow that I almost froze my feet and I think

I contracted a bad case of chilblains. I will have to

go back up there again, I guess, and get some more

snow to cure them.

Now the most unfortunate thing about it is that

I am afraid it is going to delay my trip down there

for another week. I have a lot of work piled up

ahead of me besides finding my horse. I am sorry

for it delays just so much about making arrangements for that event in December.

I think that we had better plan on putting the

date pretty well along toward the last of the monthboth on account of my work here, and because it

will give us more time to prepare for it.

As ever, John

November 2, 1909, Bootjack, California

I found my runaway horse yesterday after following him until four o’clock in the afternoon. I

thought for a time that I would have to go clear up
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

52

to Miami to catch him, but someone caught him

along the road and tied him up. I think that I shall

ride him down to Fresno next week, just to have an

opportunity for him to redeem himself. I shall

probably leave for the valley about next Saturday

or possibly Monday.

Somehow it seems that the harder I try to get

away, the more there is to do. We had an excellent

storm the other day, and as it has turned warm

since then, it has done a world of good. The hills

are turning beautiful now in their autumn coloring.

We have so many oaks about our camp here that I

think it makes a very pretty spot.

They are all turning a brilliant scarlet and 

yellow now. The warm weather has started the

grass to growing too, and that means that we will

probably have good pasture and plenty of feed this

winter.

As ever, John

November 21, 1909, Friday night

Well, I started in to discuss my trip. I rode to

the Toll House the first night and put up at the

Hotel there. I started at six o’clock the next morning and rode to North Fork arriving there about two

o’clock. I intended to write you from there, but I

stayed with Mr. Shinn that night and he had so

many things to talk about that I did not have a

chance.

As usual the effect of talking with Mr. Shinn

was to unsettle my plans generally. His latest

development was that he was going to send me in

to San Francisco to the District Office there for

three or five months. This would be soon after the

first of January next. However he has to get the

approval of the District Office to carry this

through, so the success of the plan does not look at

all probable. I am telling you this, not because

there is any possibility of its happening, but to give

you some idea of the uncertainty of Forest Service

work generally. Something of this sort may turn up

almost any time to knock out all calculations you

have made for other things.

I left North Fork Wednesday morning and rode

through to Miami that day. I say rode through,

although waded through is probably a little more

descriptive term. I found snow from Crane Valley

on and it made progress rather slow. There must

have been about a foot of it left at Miami. I stayed

at Ranger McLeod’s summer camp that night.

There were plenty of provisions in the house and

hay and barley in the barn, so neither Mike or

myself had any reason to complain about quarters.

The next morning I went over to the Grove

pasture where I left my other horse. Although I had

to cross nearly two feet of snow in places, I found

the pasture open. The little roan was looking fine. I

don’t think I ever saw her any fatter. If it had not

been for the trouble of making another trip back

there to get her I would have left her there for a

while yet. However, I brought her down and put

her in the pasture near camp.

Mr. Davey had made himself busy while I was

gone painting the house and fixing up around the

place. We have the fire-place almost completed but

have not had a chance to test it with a fire yet. We

hope to get it fixed up and most of the house finished inside by the middle of next month.

You are certainly missing some beautiful sights

by not being here now. The oaks at our place are

right at the height of their autumn coloring. We

have a view of the mountains where the oak and

pine are mixed, and it is certainly a contrast to see

the golden and scarlet leaves of the oaks among the

green pine needles.

The Forest Service of this era was probably the most

military-like of any civilian government agency. Personnel

were moved about constantly, sometimes with little regard

for family situation. If an employee didn’t like it, there was 

usually only one solution—quit! Miller showed some gumption when he told his supervisor that he would spend the

winter on his district, in the house he had built, thank you.

But then Shinn came up with another idea—send Miller to

District 5 headquarters in San Francisco for the winter.

November 25, 1909, Tuesday night

We are having an awful time at our camp

keeping the work going. Something keeps coming

up to interfere with our work on the house, so that

it is hard to accomplish much. We have three or

four days work left yet on the fire place and then

we have some papering and inside finishing yet to

do. My pardner is going out on his vacation the

first of December and will be gone 12 days so I

will have a hard time getting very much accomplished before I leave as there is always other matters coming up to take the District ranger’s time.

Most of Miller’s letters now are discussions about

arrangements for the soon-to-be-wedding in Parlier,

California. Most of the discussion was about how rapidly

they could catch a train for San Francisco to get away from
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

53

the small town. Miller was no longer very chatty about

work. His mind was elsewhere.

November 29, 1909, Saturday night

Dearest:

I got your letter last night just before I was

leaving to go down to Boothes’ for supper. We

were asked down there for Thanksgiving dinner but

it rained so during the day that we did not try to go.

To keep them from taking offence, we went down

there and spent yesterday evening. Their oldest son

is there for a few days. He is a district ranger down

below the Toll House and was married a few days

ago to a girl in Tuolumne County. The bride seems

like a very nice girl, and is a sister of Will

Parkinson, the ranger whom I was with at Shaver

last summer. I think they left today for their home

camp.

We were feeling very well satisfied at our

camp tonight as we at last have a big fire going in

the fire place. The chimney is not quite completed,

but we at least have it far enough along so that we

can keep warm. One advantage of it is that it is big

enough to hold a lot of wood, and I guess that we

will have plenty of wood on this place to last us for

a while yet.

So you got my letter a day ahead of time! I

guess that was because it was mailed in Mariposa

instead of our mail box. I was down in Mariposa

last Saturday. We drove down with our team and

brought back a load of provisions.

Sunday afternoon

I have about forty other letters to write this

afternoon, but I am going to finish this one first. I

got sleepy last night and got to talking afterwards

with Mr. Davey, so that I did not accomplish much

in the line of letter writing.

This has been another beautiful day. Last night

we had a fog up here—something that rarely happens. It cleared away by morning though, and I

think that you were getting your share of it down

on the plains then. I imagine you are having some

of Fresno’s famous fogs from the looks of things

below. 

I had to stop just now to talk to Mr. Shinn on

the phone. He brought up the San Francisco question again and said that he was going to try and

make the arrangements for my going in. I hardly

know what to expect, but in any case don’t care

much one way or the other. He will have to get the

authority of the District Office first and that is

something that I am skeptical about. I shall certainly plan on staying here as the San Francisco

arrangement would only be temporary anyhow.

The detail to the District 5 office in San Francisco (now

Region 5) keeps cropping up. Supervisor Shinn sounds a bit

insensitive to a sensitive time in one’s life—getting married.

He surely knew of Miller’s impending marriage.

November 30, 1909, Monday night

Your letter of Thursday came in this evening

and I have just finished reading it for the second

time. It really must have been exciting to watch a

football game in the rain. It reminds me of the time

when I used to play. I certainly missed seeing the

game this fall. But then I have so many other interesting things that I hardly have time to think about

football.

We finally finished our chimney today and I

am certainly glad of it. It has been a pretty big contract. But then I guess that it will be worth all the

trouble. It works fine and I am sitting before a big

bed of coals which make the room seem cheerful.

A fire place always seems to afford an air of comfort and cheerfulness to any sort of house. We

might have built a better looking one than we did,

but we had to do the work ourselves and we were

more interested in getting something that would

keep us warm than we were in looks.

We are having lovely weather now. There are

light frosts in the mornings but the days are warm

and sunny. I am afraid that you are hardly so fortunate down on the plains, as I can see a bank of fog

out over there all day. We have not had a foggy day

here yet.

The reference to Miller having played football was

probably referring to high school. As mentioned earlier he

was an avid Stanford football and sports fan.

December 3, 1909, Thursday night

It is so cold tonight that it is a hard matter to

get far away enough from the fire to write this letter. I am afraid that it will have to be brief and of

not very much interest to you as I have to get up at

three o’clock tomorrow morning and there is not

very much in the way of news to tell.

We have been having some very rapid and

noticeable changes of weather during the last two

days. Tuesday was a pleasant day and I went to

Mariposa. Yesterday it began raining in the 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

54

morning and rained nearly all day. I went down to

the Magoon pasture to catch the roan horse, and it

sprinkled nearly all of the time. We got back to

camp by noon and then it began to rain. It was a

regular downpour and it kept up until this morning.

Today we had some surveying to do and that

kept us busy until four o’clock this afternoon.

While we did not have to work in the rain, it was

very cold and cloudy. I thought all the time that it

would snow but it didn’t. I guess the storm is over

though by this time and I hope it will be clear by

tomorrow morning. Mr. Davey is going over to

North Fork to go out on his vacation. I have to go

to Signal Peak, and as he is going to start at 3

o’clock, I think that I will get up and go with him

part of the way.

December 5, 1909, Tuesday night

It seems as though Jupiter Pluvius has started

in to give us our share of storms this winter.

Yesterday the thermometer did not rise above

freezing and in the evening a strong wind came up

and it began another snow. Instead of getting colder

this time, it turned warmer and before morning,

settled into a rain.

Well, I suppose that all this discussion of the

weather does not particularly interest you. If you

were here you probably would be interested as one

has to be prepared to go from warm spring-like

days to cold wintry weather with everything as

white with snow as though Santa Claus were 

coming.

If you were here you would probably make me

change my mode of living too. I do hate to go to

the trouble of cooking when I am all alone, and I

haven’t built a fire in the cook stove since Sunday.

I simply camp in here around the big fire place like

an Indian. I rather like it, both because it seems

like camping out, and because it is so much more

comfortable than building another fire in the

kitchen.

I took some more pictures yesterday, and hope

to have enough to send away to be developed by

the end of the week. Snow pictures are pretty, I

think, if they are successful.

December 7, 1909, Thursday night

Our siege of bad weather is getting tiresome

and I would like to see it stop some time. I have

been able to do nothing all this week but rustle

wood for the fire and a little office work. This

afternoon I went out for a few hours and worked

on the telephone line.

This morning about four o’clock, I woke up

and was glad that our house is up on a hill. Even as

it was, I began to consider building some sort of an

ark before the water should come any higher. For

about two hours the rain came in a steady downpour. It was a warm rain and carried the snow with

it, so that by daylight every small stream was a raging torrent. Fortunately the drainage is good here

so that no damage was done but I am afraid that

something must have happened down below.

Figure 19—Rangers’ convention, North Fork, Sierra National Forest, 1910.

J.M. Miller family
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

55

Yesterday my pardner cut his foot, and I have

been exercising my medical skill to his great sorrow. By my “pardner,” I mean the yellow pup who

is a great deal better than no company at all. He is

in the irresponsible stage yet, but will make a good

dog when he gets older. He ran into a saw lying in

the snow and nearly split his front paw open, but I

think that it will heal without his going lame.

Miller’s last letter to Bessie was on December 15, 1909

and was full of plans for the wedding that he would be

departing for within a week.

This was the end of Miller’s letters for 1909. After he

got married on December 23, 1909, the letters were infrequent except for several when he was working near Yreka,

California. Miller’s life and career was about to change 

in 1910, perhaps more drastically than he could have 

imagined (fig. 19).
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

56
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

57

Chapter 7: Miller Starts Entomology 

Work With the Forest Service, 1910

“Married on the morning of December 23, 1909 and after

the ceremony at Brose ranch left for San Francisco.” This

short passage in John Miller’s diary marked a change in his

personal life, and as the New Year progressed there was a

major change in his professional life.1

After the private wedding ceremony at his in-laws’

home, the newlyweds left on an afternoon train to San

Francisco. John and Bessie had been planning their wedding

for months via correspondence, but much of the planning

seemed to revolve around how private the wedding could be

and how quickly they could depart for San Francisco. And

the trip to San Francisco was not for an extended honeymoon. Miller immediately took 2 weeks of leave in Palo

Alto at Stanford University to work on an “Insect Report,”

and prepare for a planned entomological survey on the

Sierra National Forest (fig. 20). During this period he also

visited the District 5 office at least once. 

On January 7, he reported to the District office and

worked on Sierra Forest Boundary reports with Roy

Headley, chief of operations, and he “worked out a 

circular for supervisors instructions on collecting insects” 

to be used for Forest Service Personnel.

He worked in the District office for the chief of

Silviculture and office of operations under Headly until

January 22, when he and his wife left San Francisco. By

January 23, he had returned to the Cummings Ranger

Station to resume his duties as District Ranger. 

Obviously something else was in the works for Miller

during the coming field season. He had spent a lot of time at

Stanford and San Francisco preparing insect reports, gathering entomology publications at the Stanford book store, and

setting up some insect collecting criteria for field rangers in

District 5.

After returning to the Cummings Ranger Station (fig.

21), he did a lot of wood chopping and hauling to keep his

new home warm. But he also worked with his Forest Guard,

Davey, through the remainder of January, all of February,

and March on grazing examinations, trail building, 

Figure 21—Mrs. Miller at Cummings Ranger Station, 1910—

their first home. This is the cabin the crew built as described in

chapter 6.

J.M. Miller family

1 Miller’s letters were rare after his marriage, but all forest rangers were

required to keep a daily official diary. The diaries were saved by John

Miller’s son Harold (Dusty) Miller who also served as a forester on the

Sierra National Forest at North Fork, California. His daughter Susan Miller

Lowenkron was entrusted with them until she gave them to me for writing

this book.

Figure 20—Mrs. Miller on horseback during honeymoon trip.

Miller was checking bark beetle infestations in the southern Sierra

Nevada Mountains, 1910.

J.M. Miller family
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

58

boundary surveying, fence building, and checking settlers’

property claims. According to his diary, he worked 6-day

weeks and spent at least part of many Sundays writing and

filing reports and letters. With Miller’s inclinations toward

biological research, such a schedule must have been onerous. Especially demanding was a grazing allotment map for

the district that Supervisor Shinn desired. This task took

weeks according to his diary.

March 8-11 Miller led a Forest Service trail crew to set

up a camp on the Merced River below El Portal. An interesting camp supply list with prices was included in his diary

as follows:

“List of provisions for trail”

1/2 sack flour $1.25

6 cans milk $.60

20 lbs. spuds $.80

10 lbs. sugar $.15

1 lb dried peaches $.15

5 lbs beans $.40

1/2 roll butter $.40

1 3-lb bucket of honey $.25

3 loaves of bread $.10

2 bars soap _____

$4.75

Unless they were planning on catching a lot of trout 

in the Merced River or shooting a deer, this sounded like

pretty skimpy fare for a three-man crew. Perhaps every man

was required to bring his own camp food and this was just

Miller’s larder. The diary also indicates they “got powder

from the Hite mine,” indicating another skill the rangers

needed, rock blasting during the trail building.

On March 17, Miller returned to El Portal to inspect the

trail work, get the crew’s time, and take them supplies. He

found that they had used “50 lbs of powder, need 50 lbs

more, also butter and canvas.”

Finally on March 22, Miller was able to get back to 

his “insect report, mounted several specimens and took 

pictures.” But the next day he was out riding a telephone

line and repaired it in several places. On March 25 it

stormed all day so he delayed his trip to the El Portal trail

crew and mounted (pinned) insects all day. The 26th he

packed barley (for horses) and supplies to the El Portal

Crew.2 The next day, Sunday, March 27, 1910, “Went to 

top of Pinnoche [sic] Mountain to look over work on trail to 

old Mexican mine—decided to abandon work and transfer

trail money to Devils Gulch [Trail]. Returned to camp

Cummings in a snow storm.”

For the next several weeks Miller alternated between

working on his insect collection and repairing telephone

lines. By April he was out looking at insect infestations for

the first time in the season. “Wednesday, April 13, 1910,

worked in office in a.m. writing letters to Professors Doane

and Kellogg—mounted insects collected the previous day.”

By the next day he was back to counting cattle on the range

and trying to get stockmen to pay their range fees. On April

18, Miller had a bad toothache all day. He could not find a

dentist locally so had to take the stage to Reedley where he

had “two teeth extracted and some repaired.” The medical

trials of rangers in the field were notorious. Not only that,

but because of the transportation problems, he had to take 4

days of sick leave. When he got back to the Sierra National

Forest headquarters at North Fork on Sunday, April 24, he

spent the morning talking to Supervisor Shinn and then

went target shooting in the afternoon. Forest Rangers were

supposed to be proficient marksmen (Davies and Frank

1992).3

On April 30 Forest Guard Clark arrived as Miller’s

assistant. Clark was being trained to act as Ranger for Miller

during the planned insect survey so pretty much shadowed

him for most of May. On May 19, Miller packed up his

entomological supplies and household goods. “May 19 started for North Fork with outfit consisting of wife, 3 horses, 

1 dog, and various incidentals. Reached the Buford Camp

that night.” The Millers went on to South Fork so John

could have a last conference with the supervisor before he

started his entomological detail examining the Sierra

National Forest for insect-damaged forests. 

2 This is what he took to the crew: 25 lbs. potatoes, 5 packages of salt, 50

(?) Star tobacco, 1 sack barley, 1/2 doz. cans tomatoes, 10 lbs. sugar, 5 lbs.

dried apricots and prunes, 1 gal. syrup.

3 Part of the field tests in 1905 on the Klamath National Forest required

shooting at targets with a rifle at 100 yards and pistol at 50 yards. It didn’t

say whether they had to hit the target.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

59

Bess took the train and part of the outfit to Reedley, but

John rode horseback to Reedley with their camp outfit. Then

they traveled to Visalia, to Porterville, and to Hot Springs

over the next several days that were hot and disagreeable. It

must have been bad because the page for May 30 has been

torn out of the diary. But it was the start of an interesting

wilderness pack trip to survey and report on all national forest lands in the southern Sierra Nevada. Shinn’s promise to

Miller finally came true. It also appeared to be a combined

work trip and delayed honeymoon for the Millers.

The months of June and July were spent riding, packing, camping on the southern part of the Sierra National

Forest including parts that are now part of the Sequoia 

and Kings Canyon National Parks and the John Muir

Wilderness. Bessie was more than a tagalong; she cooked,

washed, watched the horses, and, interestingly, kept part of

the journals. It must have been agreed that in order to free

John for collecting insects and keeping biological notes,

Bessie would keep the travel journal. Thus there are two

diaries for this period. John’s would be interesting to an

entomologist, but his scrawls are practically unreadable and

mostly noted insects collected, counts of bark beetle larvae,

etc. He must have had entomological shorthand. Some of

Bessie’s entries are included here because they introduce

some important new colleagues that Miller was associated

with for many years. And, some entries illustrate the trials

and tribulations of horsepacking in 1910.

Diary of Bessie and John Miller

June 9, 1910

At Loyd Meadows John inspected some dying timber and took some pictures. I stayed in camp and

washed. In afternoon Dr. Meinecke4 and ranger

Kelly arrived and camped for the night [fig. 22].

June 15,

Camped at Rifle Creek. John fished in morning

(got 4) and in the afternoon took pictures of dead

timber. I stayed in camp and cooked—provisions

down to bed rock. John went fishing in the evening

and did not come in till late. I got uneasy about

him and started out with rifle on my back to look

for him—met him with string of 12 fish.

June 16, 

Camped at Rifle Creek. John walked 5 miles to

look at some dead timber and when he reached it

found out fire instead of insects had destroyed it. 

I stayed in camp and watched the horses. Turned

them loose at noon and they struck out over the

hill, hard time catching them again.

June 17,

Packed up and made it through Farwell Gap down

to Mineral King. Shoveled path through snow in

the Gap and were 6 hours coming through Gap to

Mineral King. Old Bachelor Stephens took us in

and treated us kindly giving us our meals while in

Mineral King.

June 25,

John went to Breely and I stayed at Hopings

[Hoppings’].”5

Figure 22—E.P. Meinecke camped with the

Millers several times during their 1910 

honeymoon trip.

J.M. Miller family

5 Ralph Hopping was stationed in District 5 San Francisco and was in

charge of insect control in the District. Miller probably met him in 1908 or

1909. They became friends and colleagues jointly visiting many insect out4 Dr. E.P. Meinecke was born in San Francisco and died there in February breaks in the District. There will be more about Hopping later in the story.

1957 at 87 years of age. He was educated in Germany and is considered the

pioneer forest pathologist in the West. He spent almost all his career in

District 5 (Region 5) and became a close friend and collaborator of Miller.

Together, they often visited forest areas having tree mortality problems.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

60

June 26,

At Hoppings in morning, afternoon Clair and I

went up to meet the men. Rode through Grant Park

[eventually a National Park].

July 2,

Stayed in camp. John in camp in morning, afternoon went out collecting with the Dr., Hopping and

Derby. Between them carried whole tree into camp.

July 3,

Stayed in camp and baked bread. John dug bugs

out of bark most of the day.

July 4,

Broke up camp and came as far as Big Meadows in

the morning. P.M. John and the other three went

out collecting and I stayed in camp. Sierra Club’s

pack train came through and got mixed up with our

horses.

July 16,

Left Simpson Meadows and came over the Tehipite

Trail to Tehipite. Terrible trip. My horse fell hurt

her leg. Mule fell had to be unpacked another mule

over the precipice almost killed himself. Delayed

two hours digging him out. Killed 4 rattlesnakes—

hard time finding a suitable crossing in the river.

Scenery magnificent!”

July 17,

Left Tehipite came to Gnat Meadows and stopped

for lunch. Caught in thunderstorm. Came on to

Crown Valley, rained all evening. Ate supper with

rain pouring on us. Tehipite Trail a fright!

July 25,

John left early in the morning for Ellis Meadows. 

I got up early got his breakfast and there at six

o’clock took the stage for Fresno. Forgot my tie

and Dr. Meinecke gave me one of his.

When their trip ended at North Fork the end of July,

Bessie went home to her folks’ home in Reedley for awhile

to help prepare for her sister-in-law Clara’s wedding. She

rejoined Miller on August 11 as he continued his entomology work on the north end of the Sierra National Forest. He

made copious notes in his diary, about his insect collections.

Miller rode to Reedley on September 1 and from this

point, I don’t think Bessie was with him in the field. On

September 4, Miller arrived in Palo Alto “saw Burke, Doane

and Mann. I made arrangements with Doane to send in

specimens for rearing and storing.” At this date, Burke knew

that Miller was doing forest entomology work and had 

official Forest Service orders to survey, collect insects, and

make entomological reports for the Lassen and Klamath

National Forests. What Miller was doing was a little 

irregular and, according to Hopkins, impinged on the 

supposed responsibilities of the Bureau of Entomology,

Division of Forest Insect Investigations.

For most of September, Miller traveled to insect 

infestations (mostly mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine)

on the Lassen National Forest. He collected insects and

wood-borer-infested wood and made observational notes 

of tree damage. He also sent back material to Doane at

Stanford University for rearing and he started what he called

“experiments,” cutting down infested trees and counting

insects under the bark in the upper bole. 

His diary notes the following:

September 22 worked on Lassen Report. Wrote to

Baldenweck, R.A. Teet and Case [names unknown

to me]. September 23 sorted out specimens, wrote

to Stanford bookstore, A.D. Hopkins, and Mann.

Mailed specimens for identification. [to Hopkins?]

September 27, examined 180 cones drying at

Crocker R.S. splitting them open and found 76%

infested with worms.

By now Hopkins must have known that this Forest

Service Ranger, John M. Miller, was doing entomology

work in California! And there was more to come in October

and November.

Miller remained on the Lassen until October 19, writing

reports, taking some field trips with forest pathologist Dr.

Meinecke, complaining about some eye trouble, and writing

to Ralph Hopping in District 5 headquarters. Hopping will

enter the story a little later.

Miller’s next move was to continue his entomology

work on the Klamath National Forest. His itinerary follows:

October 20, stage to Truckee, October 21, train to

Nevada City, October 23, night train to Sisson 

[Mount Shasta], October 24, to the Headwaters of 

the Sacramento River with Rangers, October 26,

Hummingbird Ranger Station to Fawn Creek,

October 27, collected near Sisson and road to

McCloud, October 27, to Yreka. 
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

61

All of this travel could be done in one day by auto now.

On October 31, Miller went with Klamath Supervisor

Rider and Deputy Supervisor Hall to Glendinning’s ranch

on Moffett Creek to examine dead yellow pine [ponderosa

pine]. They found trees being killed by western pine beetle,

Dendroctonus brevicomis. (This area was to become the

next bark beetle control project in the West and will be the

subject of the next chapter). However, Miller still had 

several more weeks on the Klamath Forest with some 

interesting diary entries concerning his work. He remained

at Glendinning’s ranch for several more days to select trees

for cutting [his experiments] and observed a small woodpecker apparently feeding on bark-beetle-infested trees. He

next went to Humbug Creek and took photographs. On

November 7, he corresponded with L.O. Howard, Chief of

the Bureau of Entomology, who was Hopkins’ superior. On

November 8, he “talked to Attorney Taylor at Yreka, who

was representing Moffett Creek Lumber Company. He said

his company was willing to cooperate on control of beetles.”

November 10, Miller was in the Sisson office working on

expense accounts and reports, then left on the train for

Sacramento. The next diary entry is very significant.

November 11, could not leave Sacramento on train

so went down to State Capital and interviewed

Assistant State Forester Hodge in regard to the

insect infestation on Moffit [sic] Creek. Hodge

favored the project as mainly for state supervision.

“There is very little prospect of treating the entire

territory as a matter for Forest Service supervision.” Left Sacramento 10:10 am, reached Fresno

at 6:10 pm, stayed at the Grand Central.

By now A.D. Hopkins must have been getting anxious

about the number of nonentomologists who were players in

his self-described domain.

This was pretty high-powered control policy for a

young district ranger on a detached work detail to be discussing with another agency. My guess is that Miller had

approval from the District 5 headquarters, namely, Ralph

Hopping, to represent the Forest Service. By November 15,

Miller had returned to North Fork, but he did not resume 

his district ranger duties. Instead he selected some trees 

for “experimental work” then went on annual leave. On

December 3, 1910, he set up a laboratory at Stanford

University. On December 9, he gave a talk to Professor

Doane’s forestry class and on December 11, worked on 

a paper to give at the forest supervisors’ meeting to be 

held December 12-17 in San Francisco. With time out for

Christmas, he worked on his insect collection until the end

of the year.

For the next 2 months, Miller was on detached duty at

Stanford University, Palo Alto, working on his insect collection, rearing material he had sent to Doane earlier, working

on the Klamath National Forest report (Miller 1911; the earliest report I know of concerning a forest insect outbreak in

California national forests) and, significantly, writing to

A.D. Hopkins and sending him insect material from “lot

171.” He also was preparing an insect manual for rangers.

Miller was for all practical purposes the District 5 entomologist long before any other Forest Service districts had such

a professional.

Miller was at Stanford until the end of February 1911,

then mysteriously his diary ends, and we (the family and I)

can find no other diaries by Miller for this year. As this is

the only gap in four decades of Miller’s diaries, he might

have purposely destroyed the last 10 months of his 1911

diary because of some unpleasant controversies that 

developed over his entomological work as a Forest Service

employee. However, one of Miller’s rare letters to his 

wife after they were married written May 2, 1911, from

Yreka, California, states, “I am mighty glad to think that I

can get out again and camp out. I think that we will have a

pretty jolly crew, with the Supervisor (Rider) two forest

assistants and three rangers. This is to be the ‘bug’ crew

with Miller in charge. I don’t know what old A.D. Hopkins

will say when he hears what I am doing, but I don’t care

much.” If this is what Miller was writing in private, there

must have been some controversy developing between his

role with the Forest Service and Burke’s with the Bureau of

Entomology. Miller’s next letter on May 11 indicates he has

plans for continuing his forest insect surveys during the

summer.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

62

Camp No. 3, Tuesday night

My Dearest:

I will have to write a few lines tonight as the

mail goes out tomorrow. I must not miss an opportunity to send out a letter at least every other day as

you will get discouraged and not write to me every

day.6

. . . Monday, I go down to Sisson in the Shasta

so after Saturday you had better send your letters to

Sisson care of Forest Service.

I am going out on a snow ski trip from there

but I hope to get back and started for Palo Alto by

next Friday night. I had a letter from the District

Forester recommending my plan to the Forester for

this summer’s work. That is the trip on the Shasta,

return to Palo Alto, the trip to Lassen in June, and

then the trip to the Little Kern to study the needle

miner after July first. I certainly hope that this plan

goes through. 

I have been out in the cold all day and am too

sleepy to write any more. I am sleeping in a barn

now, so I guess that it is about time to “hit the

hay.”

Lovingly your husband, John

Miller’s next letter indicates that Hopkins is aware of

the proposed control project and is making certain that he

has technical control over Miller. 

Hotel Clarendon, Yreka, California, May 16, 1911

My but I was glad to get this job done and get

out of the wilderness this time. I was covered with

dirt and wood ticks and must have been a pretty

hard looking specimen when I hit town. The waitress at the hotel refused to speak to me. I could not

get a bath tub so I took a sponge bath and what

was worse, I did not have any clean underclothes

and there was no way of buying more. So I took

the dirty underclothes that I pulled off two weeks

ago and turned them wrong side out and put them

on again. Tomorrow, however, I will get another

new suit and this will last me until I get home.

I also had a letter from Dr. Meinecke. He says

that he is thinking up new dishes for you to cook

this summer. He also says that the District office is

very much interested in the work I am doing up

here. I rather feel that I will make a showing on the

job. I also had a letter from Dr. Hopkins. He seems

to give unqualified approval to this work but wants

me to understand that I am following his suggestion by so doing.

Miller was such a gentleman that I think he did not 

go into greater detail about the professional conflicts so

diplomatically summed up in that last sentence.

But the year 1911 was one of change for Burke too. He

was transferred to Yreka effective July 1, and arrived July 8

to set up Forest Insect Station 5. He explains the HopkinsMiller situation very clearly in his memoirs.

6 None of Bessie’s letters to John seem to have survived.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

63

Chapter 8: 1911-1912, Year of Change—

Miller Joins the Bureau of Entomology;

Burke Heads the Yreka, California, Project

During the period in 1910 and 1911 that Miller was 

scurrying around California national forests making insect

collections and surveys, Burke was in charge of the

Northeast Oregon Project, and Hopkins was preoccupied

with convincing Chief Forester Graves that he and his staff

were the insect experts and the Forest Service should defer

to the Bureau of Entomology in all matters concerning

insects. Both organizations were young and in the process of

establishing their own operating procedures (Miller 1911).

Turf was to be identified, fenced, and protected. Luckily,

Graves was very much the gentleman and had an ecological

interest in forestry. (Photographs in my possession show

him on field trips and camping with forest entomologist

Edmonston evidently enjoying the experience.)

Hopkins was another matter. Correspondence indicates

he could be quite controlling when his ideas were questioned or his authority challenged (Furniss 2003). He was,

however, the consummate politician and he was very careful

not to alienate his superior L.O. Howard, Chief of the

Bureau of Entomology or the Chief Forester, Henry Graves.

He and Graves had at least a gentleman’s agreement about

respective responsibilities of entomologists and Forest

Service Rangers. It was negotiated successfully in District 6

on the Northeast Oregon Project, but now it was rearing its

head again in the form of Miller in District 5. The man

mainly responsible for this was Ralph Hopping who 

disagreed very strongly with Hopkins concerning his

“Percentage Control Principle,” that Hopkins had recently

advocated on the Northeast Oregon Project (Burke and

Wickman 1990). Hopping had administrative authority for

insect control in District 5 and it seems he was trying to

establish some turf of his own. Hopkins was not easily

cowed by Hopping as Burke’s memoirs indicate. The 

solution to the Miller imbroglio was simple—don’t fight his

insect surveys in the Forest Service—get him transferred to

the Bureau of Entomology. How this came about is not 

documented because Miller does not mention the transfer 

in his diary or letters to his wife.

Burke’s memoirs continue with the next bark beetle 

control project on the Pacific Slope.

The Station at Yreka, California

On July 1, 1911, I was placed in charge of

what was to be known as Forest Insect Station 5 to

be located in California. The old mining town of

Yreka was selected as the point at which to set up a

field station because of the interest in western pine

beetle control which had been shown by timber

owners in the vicinity. Soon after July 1 the Baker

Station was transferred to Edmonston and I moved

to Yreka, arriving there on July 8. As soon as

arrangements could be made, a dwelling house near

the edge of town was rented for office and laboratory use. Accompanying me on this move from

Baker to Yreka were Bureau agents, A.G. Angell,

J.D. Riggs and J.J. Sullivan. These men were on

temporary appointments, but later took Civil

Service examinations which qualified them for the

position of Entomological Ranger [figs. 23 through

25].

Angell was employed by the Bureau for one

year only. He was a cruiser with the Forest Service

in the 1911 spring control work of the Northeastern

Oregon Project. Appointed as an Agent July 1,

1911, he spent most of the next year attached to the

Yreka station. He was the Bureau representative on

the Moffatt [sic] Creek Control Project during the

winter and spring of 1912 and during May and

June was detailed to Baker to make a cruise of the

North-eastern Oregon control areas. He afterwards

became a Ranger on the Whitman National Forest

and made a name for himself by organizing a 

Figure 23—Forest Insect Field Station, Yreka, California, 1911-

1912 office and laboratory.

H.E. Burke, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

64

cattlemen’s cooperative association that really

cooperated. Later he was attached to the

Supervisor’s headquarters of the Whitman at Baker

and then to the North Pacific Region headquarters

at Portland where he had charge of the CCC work

for the Forest Service. I believe that he died in

Portland in 1943.

J.D. Riggs was camp foreman for the Forest

Service on the Northeastern Oregon project and

with the Forest Insect Station 5 at Yreka,

Placerville and Ashland from July 1, 1911, until

about August 1, 1916, when he resigned to go into

mining. J.J. Sullivan was a woodsman for the

Baker Forest Protective Association in the 1910 fall

control work for the Northeastern Oregon Project,

and a cruiser in the 1911 spring control work. He

served as Agent and later as Entomological Ranger

with Forest Insect Station 5 at Yreka and Placerville from July 1, 1911, to September 1915, and

was then transferred to the Northern Rocky

Mountain Station. Sullivan left the Bureau in June

1916 to go into lumbering [fig. 26].

About October 1, 1911, Forest Ranger J.M.

Miller was detailed to the Yreka station by the

Forest Service to assist on the control work that

was being developed on the Klamath National

Forest. In November Miller was transferred to the

Figure 24—Entomological rangers, J.D. Riggs, (right) and J.J.

Sullivan at Cecilville, California, starting on reconnaissance of

Salmon River County, September 1911.

Figure 25—A.G. Angel, agent (left) and H.E.

Burke, entomological assistant in charge of 

station, October 1911.

Figure 26—J.D. Riggs (left) and J.J. Sullivan.

H.E. Burke, PSW

H.E. Burke, PSW

H.E. Burke, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

65

station staff as Entomological Assistant, having

qualified through a special examination for

appointment by the Bureau.1

Although the Yreka station initiated the first

large scale western pine beetle control projects, old

correspondence in the Bureau files shows that at

least two earlier attempts were made by Dr.

Hopkins to start control in this region. These

deserve mention because of their historical interest.

In 1905 Ranger Baldwin of the Santa Barbara

Forest Reserve reported bark beetle infestations in

the south-eastern part of this reserve. His report

was referred to Dr. Hopkins who made recommendations for control measures by letter. This led up

to the first recorded attempt to control bark beetles

in any western area, so Southern California can file

its claim to this distinction if it so desires.

The area was in Seymour Canyon on Sawmill

Mountain, about 20 miles west of old Fort Tejon.

The timber was Jeffrey pine and the infesting

insects were Melanophila gentilis and Ips oregoni.

Logging slash was supposed to have caused the

infestation. Dr. Hopkins had recommended burning

the infested bark and in September 1905 Ranger

Baldwin undertook to carry out the control work.

Eleven rangers were detailed to this job and they

burned 55 piles of slash in two weeks. As the control area was a steep mountain slope and the fire

season was still on, each pile had to be burned in a

large pit. One of the fires got away and in the

words of Baldwin “it was hell for the swampers

chasing up and down the shale slopes and the fireman got pretty well blinded.” Ranger Baldwin also

reported, “I find in the case of slash cut after July

15 and exposed to the direct rays of sun, both larvae and in lesser degree the adult beetles are shriveled up and killed by the heat.” This observation

pointed toward the possibilities of using solar heat

to control bark beetles, but the point seems to have

been overlooked by the Bureau of Entomology as 

it was not until 15 years later that the solar heat

method of control was “rediscovered” and given

serious attention.”

The next attempt to set up control work in

California occurred in 1908. Early in that year,

Victor S. Barber, a brother of H.S. Barber of the

Bureau of Entomology, called on Dr. Hopkins in

Washington to inquire about some bark beetle

infestations he had seen east of Oroville,

California. Barber was a surveyor who had done

some work in the forests near Stirling City,

California, for the Diamond Match Lumber

Company.

For some time Dr. Hopkins had desired a practical man to investigate and demonstrate bark beetle

control to private timber owners. Finding that Barber

was acquainted with officials of the Diamond Match

Company and other private owners of timber in

California, Dr. Hopkins had him appointed as Agent

of the Bureau in March 1908 and sent him to California to see what he could do. Unfortunately Barber

did not arrive at a very good time for forest insect

control work among the private timber owners.

When the Diamond Match Company started up

its operation in northern California a few years

before 1908, the company had employed E.A.

Stirling (for whom Stirling City was named) as

forester. During the first year, operation was conducted according to strictly professional forestry

plans. No profits were made, however, so the next

year there was less scientific forestry and more oldtime lumbering. Some profits were made under this

shift in program so the third year still more of the

forestry program was dropped and more attention

given to lumbering and profits. By the fourth or

fifth year, forestry was given up altogether and

Stirling left the Company to become Forester for

the Pennsylvania Railroad where he remained for a

number of years.

Barber arrived at about the time when forestry

had been discarded and when anyone connected

with forestry in Washington was unpopular. He

tried to contact some of the owners in San

Francisco without much success, so went back to

the forests and tried to make contacts there. He

made collections of bark beetles in the vicinity of

Chester, California, which were later mentioned by

Hopkins in Bulletin 83. However, after several

months Barber concluded that there was not much

chance of interesting private timber owners in bark

beetle control so he quietly went into other work

without leaving a forwarding address or notifying

Dr. Hopkins of his change in plans. After 3 or 4 of

his monthly pay checks came back to Washington

unclaimed, the Accounting office appealed to the

Bureau of Entomology, who finally contacted

Barber and persuaded him to resign in the customary manner.

1 This was probably the equivalent of a reassignment arranged at high 

levels in both organizations. Miller’s diary does not give this event much

enlightenment, but apparently he did not instigate it. 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

66

The control work for which the Yreka station 

provided the technical supervision developed during

the fall of 1911 and the ensuing winter and spring

into three main undertakings known as the Moffat

[sic] Creek, Craggy Mountain [fig. 27] and Barkhouse projects. These projects and some of the

developments which followed during the next few

years largely set the pattern for a long list of bark

beetle control projects that have developed in the

California region. So again it seems desirable to

digress from this autobiography in order to give a

fairly complete story of these first western pine 

beetle control projects.

Moffat Creek, Craggy Mountain and 

Barkhouse Bark Beetle Control Projects

Had it not been for a rather sudden interest on

the part of the Southern Pacific Land Company in

pine losses on its timber holdings, the Station at

Yreka would in all probability not have been established. As it worked out, however, this Company

called the attention of the Forest Service and the

Bureau of Entomology to a western pine beetle

infestation on the Klamath National Forest and

started action which led to control, not only on the

Company’s holdings but on adjacent private and

national forest lands.

When the Southern Pacific extended its line

from Sacramento to Portland during the 1880’s it

received a grant of every alternate section of land

for 20 miles on either side of the right of way.

While most of the agricultural land in this grant

was rapidly sold, the Company held on to its timber until lumbering developments made it possible

to dispose of the stumpage at a good profit. In 1910

it still held many sections in Northern California

awaiting logging developments.

About 20 miles south of Yreka was the center

of the Moffat Creek area where railroad sections

were checker-boarded with other private timber

holdings. The stand of timber covered about 10,000

acres and contained around 150 million board feet.

To protect this timber from trespass and fire the

Company employed as its agent, W.E. Glendinning,

who owned and lived on a quarter section in the

heart of the Moffat Creek basin. Glendinning was

an observant individual and during the summer of

1910 he noted that a number of trees were dying

from some cause other than fire. He corresponded

with G.M. Homans, then State Forester of

California, who sent William Hodge, Assistant

State Forester, to Moffat Creek to investigate 

conditions.

Hodge and Glendinning examined a number of

recently dying trees in the area, chopped into the

bark and decided that the mortality was due to bark

beetles. This conclusion was in line with that of

Forest Assistant S.T. Dana who had made a silvical

study and report upon the Klamath areas in 1908.2

Dana had observed scattering yellow pine infested

with the western pine beetle all over the Forest and

surmised that “a succession of favorable seasons

might cause a great deal of damage, but all we 

can do at present is to watch for developments.”

Glendinning and Hodge estimated that the amount

of dying timber in 1910 had increased about 50

percent over that in 1909 so it was evident that

something was developing in the Moffat Creek

area.

Hodge reported conditions to the Regional

Forester of the Forest Service in San Francisco,

who detailed Ranger J.M. Miller to make a further

examination of conditions in Moffat Creek and

nearby national forest timber. Miller and Forest

Assistant Jesse R. Hall of the Yreka office made a

trip to the Glendinning ranch in November 1910.

Although they found that the western pine beetle

was doing a considerable amount of damage in this

area, national forest lands were not involved to any

extent. The Forest Supervisor, W.B. Rider, then 

suggested that an examination be made of areas

west of Yreka where large acreages of national forest timber interlocked with those of the Southern

Pacific Land Company. Miller and Hall went over

certain of these areas, mainly the watersheds of Big

H.E. Burke, PSW

Figure 27—Craggy Mountain Bark Beetle Control Project. Control

crew moves from North Fork Camp to Cayuse Gulch, March 17,

1912.

2 Samuel T. Dana worked for the Branch of Silvics in the Forest Service

until 1918 and then went on to a distinguished career as chief of the

Research Branch in 1920. In 1921 he was appointed Forest Commissioner

of Maine. In 1923 he rejoined the Forest Service as director of the

Northeastern Experiment Station. He next became Dean of the School of

Forestry at the University of Michigan.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

67

Humbug Creek and other tributaries of the Klamath

River, and found conditions quite similar to those

on Moffat Creek.

Miller made a report on these examinations to

the Forest Service in January 1911 in which he

attributed most of the loss that was occurring to the

western pine beetle, but also called attention to flathead and Ips infestations and to the decadent conditions of certain pines which appeared to be dying

slowly. This report and some of the correspondence

regarding the Klamath situation reached Dr.

Hopkins through the Forest Service office in

Washington. Dr. Hopkins had not previously been

informed of this activity and he immediately wanted to know what Miller was doing and why he was

making examinations under the pretense of being a

qualified entomologist and without the approval of

the Bureau of Entomology. He requested that the

Forest Service cease these goings-on until he could

look into the situation first hand; so the matter rested until Dr. Hopkins made his western trip in April

1911. After inspecting the Northeastern Oregon

project, he went to Yreka where he was met by

Miller.3

Dr. Hopkins first wanted to see the Moffat

Creek area and talk to some of the private owners

so he and Miller hired a team and drove out to the

Glendinning ranch. A day spent in going over that

area convinced Dr. Hopkins that this area presented

a good opportunity for a demonstration control

project. He was impressed with the infestation and

the interest shown by the private owners. He decided immediately that Yreka was the place to locate a

field station to further this project.

On the return to Yreka Dr. Hopkins found that

the Forest Supervisor was lukewarm toward control

work in Moffat Creek. Mr. Rider argued that the

Klamath River areas in the Big Humbug and

Barkhouse creeks would provide the best conditions for the Forest Service to participate in a

demonstration project, because of the large holdings of government-owned timber. Dr. Hopkins

remarked that the Forest Supervisor’s proposals

looked like a “Big Humbug” to him and left Yreka

without reaching any understanding with the Forest

Service; but he was determined to go ahead with

his plan of locating a field station at Yreka in order

to develop control work among the private timber

owners.

After Dr. Hopkins left for Washington, Mr.

Rider decided that more factual information was

needed on conditions in the Forest Service areas.

He assigned Forest Assistant A.D. Hodson [A.H.

Hodgson] to make a survey with Miller’s help and

three rangers were added to the party to make up a

timber survey crew. Five sections were selected in

the Barkhouse Creek area where losses seemed to

be heavy and 10 percent cruise made of both the

dead and green stand. In addition all infested trees

were located and mapped. Although the term “spotting” originated on the Northeastern Oregon project, it became officially established on this survey

to describe the activity of marking and mapping

infested trees. Hodson [sic] prepared a report which

showed that the accumulated loss in this area had

been very heavy on some sites and that an average

of 30 percent of the original stand had been lost on

the area cruised. This study was completed early in

May 1911 (Hodgson 1911).

After I arrived at Yreka in July 1911 preliminary surveys were started and carried on during the

fall on a basis for control plans, not only for Moffat

Creek but also in the Big Humbug and Barkhouse

areas.

The first control work to get underway was in

the Big Humbug Creek drainage. The name of this

project was changed to Craggy Mountain in order

to lend a little more dignity to the title. The

Southern Pacific Land Company agreed to pay for

the cost of treatment of trees spotted on its land.

The Forest Service proposed to handle most of the

cost of contributed labor of its year-long men. The

Forest Supervisor was sold on the idea that it was a

good thing for his rangers to have something to do

during the winter season and “bug work,” as it was

soon termed, seemed to offer a good outlet for

pent-up energy. About 10 men altogether, consisting of District rangers and guards, were called in

and assigned to this project. The Forest Service set

up a camp and paid for their subsistence.

The camp was moved into the Big Humbug

Ranger Station on January 5, 1912, and work was

started with about two feet of snow on the ground.

Riggs, Miller and Sullivan were assigned to the

camp to do the spotting, supervise control methods,

and keep a detailed set of records. The work was

new to all of the crew but they were fairly enthusiastic. The Craggy Mountain area was completed on

March 22 and on March 25 the camp was moved

into Barkhouse Creek where the work continued

until April 24.

3 Miller makes no mention of this meeting other than the May 16, 1911,

letter quoted in the previous chapter.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

68

For a good part of the time the Craggy

Mountain camp was in charge of Forest Assistant

Shirley W. Allen.4 Allen was not only a good camp

foreman but he had the happy faculty of keeping

the crew in good humor. His songs, jokes and irrepressible good nature went far toward keeping up

morale during the bad weather in January and

February which interrupted progress of the work.

His “Bug Song” to the tune of Casey Jones became

a classic among the natives of the Klamath River

Country.5

Oh, we’ve chopped ’em all down and you 

can’t find a beetle.

We’ve burned ‘em all up and you can’t find 

a bug.

We treated all the trees so you can’t find 

a beetle.

No, you can’t find a beetle on the Big 

Humbug.

As this was the first project concerned with the

western pine beetle, a number of experimental

phases were added to it. Time and cost records

were kept to determine the most economical methods of treating infested trees. Among the ideas tried

out were the use of blasting powder to fall the trees

[fig. 28], the use of saddle horses to get men out to

the more isolated trees, and the employment of

small mobile camps composed of 2 or 3 men each

instead of one central camp. None of these ideas

turned out to be very efficient.

The Moffat Creek project got underway March

14 and continued until May 10, 1911. It was

financed entirely by the private owners on a cooperative basis with W.E. Glendinning supervising

the work. Agent A.G. Angell was assigned from the

Yreka station to assist on the project and give it

technical supervision.

A report upon all three projects was prepared

in June 1912. This shows that 544 infested trees

were treated on the Craggy Mountain area, 383 on

Barkhouse and 373 on Moffat Creek, totaling 1300

trees with a volume of 1,772,000 board feet.

Some interesting developments followed the

initial work on the Klamath areas. In the fall of

1912 the Craggy and Barkhouse areas were

recruised and it was found that during the summer

following control work the beetles had killed about

75 percent as much timber as in 1911. This reduction of only 25 percent indicated that satisfactory

results had not been achieved, so the Forest Service

reworked the areas during the spring of 1913. This

second working of the areas was followed by a 

fairly satisfactory reduction of the infestation. The

amount of timber killed during the season of 1913 

was only about 45 percent of that killed in 1912.

This amounted to a total reduction during the two

seasons following the initial control work of about

70 percent.

It was here that Dr. Hopkins stepped in with

his percentage principle of control. He maintained

that if from 50 to 75 percent of the infestation is

removed by artificial control work, natural factors

of control then take over and hold the beetles to a

normal or endemic condition. He recommended

against any further control work on the Craggy and

Barkhouse areas, so the Forest Service did not

carry on work during the spring of 1914.

In the meantime Ralph Hopping had been

appointed as Forest Examiner to supervise all of

the bark beetle control programs of the Forest

4 Allen later became a professor of Forestry at the University of Michigan.

5 The full set of lyrics to this ditty can be found in Davies and Frank 1992:

52-53.

Figure 28—Infested tree felled with powder. Most of the men

hired on this project were local ranchers and miners. These men

knew how to use blasting powder and figured that it was easier to

shoot down infested trees than saw them down. Tom Lane, a 

member of the crew, had a box camera and wanted a picture just

as the blast exploded. He lashed his camera to a stake, 15 feet

from the tree, tied a string around the tree at the height where the

blast would occur and attached one end of the string to the camera

shutter. The picture was a success, but the front part of Lane’s

camera was wrecked.

H.E. Burke, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

69

Service in the California district. One of Hopping’s

first moves was to question the percentage principle of control. He believed that if there was any

infestations within an area it should be treated. He

examined the Craggy and Barkhouse areas during

the spring of 1914 and found infested trees fairly

plentiful. He predicted that this untreated infestation would increase and openly criticized the

Bureau of Entomology for its short-sighted policy

of percentage control. Much of this criticism got

into official correspondence channels which

reached Dr. Hopkins and Chief Forester Graves in

Washington. The matter soon developed into the

proportion of an inter-bureau controversy.

Mr. Graves decided to see for himself what all

this dispute was about and made plans to visit the

Craggy and Barkhouse areas in the spring of 1915.

In April he made a trip to Yreka and I accompanied

him on an inspection of the areas with Hopping,

Forest Supervisor Rider and W.E. Glendinning who

had then become an Entomological Ranger in the

Bureau of Entomology [fig. 29]. What we found

was of little comfort to opponents of the percentage

principle. The infestation left on the areas in the

spring of 1914 had not increased; on the other hand

it had declined without benefit of control work to

such an extent that there were fewer infested trees

to be seen than at any time since 1910. This condition convinced Mr. Graves that the strategy of percentage control was sound and he later issued a

statement reviewing the entire controversy and 

giving the endorsement of the Forest Service to the

recommendations of the Bureau of Entomology.

As the percentage principle has worked out on

many western pine beetle projects since then, a percentage of the total infestation is about all that it is

possible to find and treat anyhow. Even with the

most careful work from 10 to 25 percent of the

infestations is missed, so percentage control is the

best that can be hoped for.

Miller’s diary resumes in 1912, mostly in regard to his

work on the Craggy Mountain Project, out of Yreka, as a

new Entomological assistant in the Bureau of Entomology.

On March 20, 1912, John and Bessie’s son Harold was born

in Yreka, but during the summer wife and baby returned to

the Brose Ranch at Parlier (Miller, n.d.a). There is no record

of what Bessie thought of this transfer to the Bureau, but

she would soon learn that fieldwork was just as demanding

for a forest entomologist as it was for a forester. For the

next 15 years the Millers spent long periods apart and lived

in rented homes in many localities in California and Oregon. 

Miller’s diary shows he spent the first week of the new

year cutting down trees in 18 inches of snow and lived in 

an old log cabin at the Humbug Station with Sullivan and

Riggs (fig. 30). Not much change from the rigors of his

ranger duties the year before. Miller went to San Francisco

on January 21 to attend the District 5 Supervisor’s meeting.

January 25, 1912. 

Read paper at Supervisor’s meeting, very 

interesting and live [sic] discussion followed paper

resulting in the passing of a resolution by the meeting favoring the devotion of more time and money

[to forest insect work.] 

Figure 29—Glendinning in camp at Doggit Creek, California,

1914. 

J.E. Patterson, PSW

Figure 30—Miller in front of the log cabin he lived in on the Big

Humbug Ranger Station, 1911.

J. M. Miller family
Hopkins was pretty shrewd hiring a Forest Service

Ranger. He became an ex-Forest Service-insider promoting

what Dr. Hopkins had long been trying to convince certain

Forest Service officials to carry out.

The next day, accompanied by Burke, who also was

attending the Supervisor’s meeting, they went to the

University of California, Berkeley, and “turned over specimens to Coleman.” [Probably for identification?] Miller

next went to Stanford University and packed up his 

specimens there and arranged for shipping them to his new

station in Yreka. By the end of the month he was in Yreka

unpacking and arranging his specimens, preparing expense

accounts, etc. Three days later he was back at work in the

field. “February 3, Saturday, worked in the morning on 

section 1 with Sullivan’s crew. Morgan Johnson, walked

into Yreka in evening with Morgan, left work at 4:50 pm,

reached Yreka at 7:05 pm, went around by Hawkensville.” I

don’t know how many miles they covered in 2 hours and 15 

minutes after working all day, but I feel sorry for Morgan.6

For the first 3 weeks of February, Miller worked with

control crews in the field. Burke often accompanied him,

and it was pretty obvious from his diary that Entomological

Rangers Riggs and Sullivan were making decisions on camp 

locations and crew assignments, but in cooperation with

Rangers Gott, Morgan Johnson, and others. The Klamath

National Forest History said this about the proposed control

work: “Word was received that insect control work would

be supervised by the Forest Service [italics added] on

National Forest lands. A staff of specialists was to be established in the District office to assist the forest in surveys and

control programs. The Bureau of Entomology would be

called on to furnish only the scientific information needed”

[italics added] (Davies and Frank 1992: 53-54). District 5

Forester Coert DuBois was officially warning Hopkins not

to exceed his authority, but in the field there was evidently

very good cooperation with a mixing of responsibilities and

supervision. The field men realized the job at hand was to

kill bark beetles and went at it as a team—forest rangers,

entomological rangers, and laborers. For instance, Miller 

did everything from marking and falling trees to acting as

camp cook.

Burke sent Miller on a survey and insect collecting trip

to the Weaverville-Hayfork area for the next two weeks.

Miller’s diary entry for Saturday March 2 is interesting

because we have one of Miller’s most often used photographs documented by this entry. “Made trip from Lewiston

to Redding [by stage coach] stopping at French Gulch for

lunch. Took picture along road where Ruggles boys robbed

stage.”

The next day Miller was back on the control project.

The month of March, amid some nasty weather was spent

developing photos, writing reports, making maps of infested

areas, summarizing data, preparing insect specimens, and

every several days checking the progress of the field crews.

On March 20, when his first child was born, Miller was

overnight at a bug camp. He evidently received word of 

the event because he returned to Yreka the next day.

By the first week of April it turned hot, and several 

of the fires used to kill beetles in infested trees escaped.

“Saturday April 6 . . . rode back through Kelly Gulch and

saw heavy smoke on ridge above water trough (Lane’s

Camp) saw Conover and Sam White but took Bert Jackson,

O. White, and Musgrove to the fire.” Miller’s days as a

ranger when he was an automatic smoke chaser came in

very handy.

The next day, Sunday, April 7:

Went to rattlesnake den below Dead Cow

Spring. A large party of Klamath River people were

present. Pried off the rock covering hole and got

eleven snakes, 18 altogether according to reports

were taken from the hole. Took lunch with the

Party at the Beetle Camp. Went back to Whites, did

not go up to the fire as planned as the cool weather

seemed to make it safe. 

Life was simpler in 1912 when a picnic at a rattlesnake

den was considered an exciting Sunday outing (figs. 31 and

32).

The remainder of April turned cool and rainy with 

occasional snowfall making field work and camp life very

disagreeable. However, there were only a few more weeks

available for control work. By late April or May beetles

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

70

6 John Miller was a tall, long-legged individual who was renowned for his

walking ability by his coworkers even into his late years. There will be

more on his prowess over terra firma when Miller’s work in Yosemite

National Park is covered.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

71

would be emerging from the bark of pine trees, and further

felling and burning infested trees would be finished for the

season. So there was a rush to hire more men and push the

work to conclusion. During this period, Burke and Miller

were working together in the field constantly checking the

status of control work and moving camps as needed. By

April 23 they began closing camps and sending crews in to

Yreka. For the next week Miller worked on reports of the

Humbug control projects. But a few scattered trees were still

being found, felled, and treated up to May 21. The weather

had been cool and stormy in May, so the emergence of the

new beetle brood was evidently delayed. The next week

Miller worked up data on the control project and prepared

reports for Hopkins and others. It seemed that since Miller

had been involved with the project since 1910, Burke

deferred to him to prepare reports and data. Or since Burke

was in charge maybe he just gave Miller the dirty work,

because Burke authored the final report for 1912 (Burke

1912).

The draft copy of this report in my possession has 12

pages of single-spaced tables covering data on trees treated,

costs, crew organization, and other data. There is only a half

page of narrative. The report authored by Burke contains

page after page of data and says the report was prepared by

J.J. Sullivan and H.E. Burke. There is something unsettling

about the report. Both Burke and Miller were excellent 

Stagecoach at the site of the 1892 holdup by the Ruggles

Brothers. Miller was riding from Weaverville to Redding,

California, when he evidently convinced the driver to stop

so he could photograph the scene, March 2, 1912. The

photo has been widely used and is an example of Miller’s

interest in photography beyond just entomology subjects.

J.M. Miller, PSW

Figure 31—Bug control crew at Little Humbug Creek and the rattlesnakes they killed, 1912. 

J.M. Miller family
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

72

writers and other reports contained very clear explanations

and summaries of their projects. This report was presented

just 1 month after the conclusion of control work, had 

practically no narrative, and Burke lists Sullivan, an

Entomological Ranger, as author before Burke. It is almost

as if Burke and Miller did not want to be strongly associated

with it. Did Hopkins or the Forest Service put pressure on

Burke and Miller to rush the report out? The final report

was prepared by J.R. Hall, Acting Forest Supervisor of the

Klamath National Forest (Hall 1913). 

The report for the 1913 work gives no reference to

Burke, Miller, or other Bureau of Entomology personnel,

yet they were there off and on. It contains mostly costs and

expense tables and has no reference to the previous year’s

work. There is no final report by the Bureau of Entomology

that I can find. And the report submitted by Burke in 1912

was very uncharacteristic. It was unfinished and unpolished.

Burke packed up Field Station 5 and moved to Placerville, and Miller and several Entomological Rangers went to

Ashland to start a new field station. What happened? This

was the first large bark beetle control project in California,

and based on the reports from other projects of the era, it

should have been published.

In early June, Miller was at Sisson [Mt. Shasta City]

working on cone insects, but he was still based in Yreka.

His entry for June 13, 1912, is noteworthy. “Arranged at

garage in Dorris for automobile transportation to Hayworth

ranch . . . arrived at ranch at 10 am went up to the Secret

Springs ranch with Richardson and Riggs. Cruised out 100

acres in the afternoon. Stayed at camp.” Automobiles had

probably been used at an earlier date by Burke and Miller,

but this is the first reference of such use in Miller’s diaries.

In one day they traveled for several miles by auto then still

had time to cruise 100 acres.

The month of July was spent traveling as far south as

Sisson and north into southern Oregon collecting cones and

seed insects. Part of these collections were sent to Hopkins.

At various times, Burke, Riggs, and Coffman traveled with

him. By August 1 Miller was back at Yreka. Significantly,

he is calling it a “temporary field station.”

The first two weeks of August, Miller worked on cone

insects at Yreka. His August 14 entry “climbed Mt. Shasta

and returned to Sisson.” Quite a hike in one day. Climbers

today drive halfway up the mountain and camp overnight.

On August 16 he was at the Pilgrim Creek nursery looking

for cone insects. Most of the remainder of August, Miller

was based in Yreka, but the last week he cruised timber for

the McCloud River Lumber Company on insect survey. 

This was the first such work with McCloud River Lumber

Company for Miller, and it started a cooperative relationship

Figure 32—Picnic at beetle camp (after the snake killing), 1912.

J.M. Miller family
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

73

between them and forest entomologists that lasted almost

six decades. I did some insect survey work with their

foresters in the 1950s.

Early September found Miller finishing up reports. There

is no mention of Burke or others being there on September

11. “Worked on reports at Yreka and packed up for leaving.”

September 12 “cleaned up office and locked up everything

for leaving left key at McKendricks. Stored personal belongings at office, left on 2:45 train for Willow’s.” The beginning

of the end for Field Station Number 5 was at hand. In

September, Miller was working on what is now the Mendocino National Forest, and using a new mode of transportation.

September 14, “Left Elk Creek early in the morning and hired

a team and driver to take me out and catch the Alder Springs

team— rode on a load of hay [italics added] out to Alder

Springs met Rube Hartman and Mr. Godwin.” On Thursday,

September 19, “rode out to Kneecap with Rube Hartman.

Returned to Alder Springs about 4:00 pm. Shaved and talked

over control work with Godwin.” I can see Miller after a

week camping in the field all lathered up, razor in hand, 

discussing the finer points of killing bark beetles.

Miller then went to San Francisco where he met with

Dr. Meinecke at District 5 headquarters and then with Burke

at Palo Alto. Here he received instructions for examinations

of forests in the Southern Sierra. As he traveled south from

Palo Alto there is this entry: “September 27, hot, left on

Sanger-Hume stage at 7:00 am had a most delightful trip

and finally arrived at Dunlap at 7:00 pm. Team gave out on

the road.” The next day was not much better. As he proceeded by stage to Millwood in Grant Park [National Park] he

“walked most of the way.” He collected cones for insects 

for several days at Huckleberry Meadow then proceeded 

to Reedley where he arrived on October 3. After a brief

reunion with his family, he was on his way to El Portal 

on October 6.

Miller rode the stage, costing $2.50, from El Portal to

Camp Curry in Yosemite National Park and interviewed

Major Forsythe in the afternoon of October 7.7 He also

wired Burke of his plans and received advice to proceed

with his collecting cones in Yosemite. On Tuesday October

8 “ . . . saw Ranger Gaylor in the evening and discussed

plans for trip to Lake Tenaya.” He rented a horse and rode

to Tenaya Lake and Tuolumne Meadows where he spent

several days collecting cones. On the 14th to 16th of October,

he attended a meeting of the Yosemite Park Conference

(which may be why he was sent there in the first place). 

By October 17 he was back in Reedley. For the next several

days he worked over his collection of white and red fir

cones at Reedley. On October 22 he was back in his old

stomping grounds, North Fork. He met Ranger Mainwaring

and collected seed from ponderosa and sugar pines for

insects. Then it was back to Reedley where he sacked up his

cones and shipped them and himself to San Francisco. He

met several days at the District 5 office with Dr. Meinecke

and at Palo Alto with Burke. He purchased some photo 

supplies at Stanford University and was back in Yreka on

November 1st.

It is pretty obvious that by this time Miller was making

a statewide survey and collection of cone and seed insects.

A project of this magnitude had to have the blessing of Dr.

Hopkins and his keen interest. This was the start of some

entomological research that occupied Miller for the next

several years and resulted in one of his first publications

(Miller 1914). This practical little manual was the first 

published by the Division of Forest Insect Investigations

devoted entirely to cone and seed insects. It contained some

excellent photography by Miller. The unusual part of the

publication was that the insects discussed had not been identified by taxonomists. It would take a decade or more for the

naming of the insects to catch up with Miller’s collecting

and research.

One of Hopkins’ strong points was to encourage his

entomologists to publish as quickly as possible. He seemed

to believe that entomology could be of no use to the practitioner or used to solve problems unless information was

available as a publication. He certainly led by example given

his numerous and timely publications.

Miller stayed in Yreka until November 8, packing the

office materials, photos, insect specimens, and personal

household items. He met Burke at Montague that evening.

After a layover in Sisson to confer with the McCloud River

7 Major Forsythe 2nd U.S. Cavalry was the acting Superintendent of

Yosemite National Park. At that time, the U.S. Army had responsibility for

protecting and administrating the national parks (Hampton 1971).
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

74

Lumber Company, he was on his way to Sacramento and

Placerville. He spent the next several days in Placerville

looking for a house to rent for his family. It looked like

Miller was going to join Burke at the field station at

Placerville. On November 19, Burke arrived in Placerville,

but Miller spent the rest of the day packing up. Was there

going to be a change of plans? Miller went off to San

Francisco and Reedley on annual leave. During his annual

leave, he visited Palo Alto and San Francisco for several

days, then arrived back on duty at Placerville on December 7. He again started hunting for a house for his family.

He worked in the “Bug Office” as he called it, developing

photos, arranging files, and generally setting up a field 

station. He moved from one rented house to another. 

On Christmas Eve he went to “Mosquito Bridge on the

American River to collect Christmas tree.” New Year’s Eve,

1912, found him in the office at Placerville writing a letter

to A.D. Hopkins. Was there going to be another change for

Miller and his family?
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

75

CHAPTER 9: 1913—Western Forest 

Entomology Is Reorganized

The Division of Forest Insect Investigations was beginning to be noticed as a valuable source of knowledge by

Private Timber Owners and foresters in the Forest Service

and soon-to-be Park Service. Much of this respect was due 

to Hopkins promoting from Washington, D.C., and the 

caliber of entomologists he was assigning to the field offices,

but it helped to have some serious forest insect outbreaks in

many localities in the West. It was becoming obvious that the

half a dozen or so entomological assistants and rangers could

not give technical advice in the Rocky Mountains, Sierra

Nevada, Cascades, and points in between from their small

field stations in Montana, Oregon, and California. There was

also some dissent from Hopkins’ field entomologists about

his meddling and second-guessing their work on the large

bark beetle control project on the Klamath National Forest.

Also, the Forest Service was taking its insect control responsibilities more seriously, and some of their technical men,

like Ralph Hopping, were even challenging some of

Hopkins’ pet theories on bark beetle ecology.

Hopkins was not about to let his empire falter; he was

the proactive type. He therefore called all his field entomologists to Washington, D.C., February 26-March 1, 1913, 

for a conference on reorganizing the Western field stations. 

This group included, besides Hopkins, Burke, Miller,

Edmonston, Evenden, and Brunner from the West and three

of the eastern entomologists. Burke describes the reorganization with few words in his memoirs, but this was a major

policy and operating procedure meeting (Anonymous 1913).

The Station at Placerville, California

The station was continued at Yreka for only a

little more than one year. A central location in the

California pine region seemed more desirable and

accordingly Forest Insect Station 5 was moved

from Yreka to Placerville during the first part of

November 1912.

In February 1913 all of the technical men in

Forest Insect Investigation were called to Washington for a conference on plans and organization. I

spent February 27 to March 5 at the conference and

then stayed in Washington until May 29 to do some

special work on the flatheads, particularly Agrilus,

one species of which was connected with the dying

of many chestnut trees.

At the conference it was decided to place the

western forest insect work under three stations, the

Northern Rocky Mountain, the Southern Rocky

Mountain and the Pacific Slope with headquarters

at Ashland, Oregon. I was placed in charge of the

Pacific Slope but remained at Placerville to complete the investigations already started [fig. 33]. 

A sub-station on forest tree seed insects was to be

started at Ashland with Miller in charge (Wickman

1987).1

His memoirs also included a page on the Southern

Rocky Mountain Station and the personnel assigned to it

(fig. 34).

What Burke failed to mention was that Hopkins was

covering much more than Station reorganizations at this

meeting. There were 43 typed pages in the conference

report, and subjects discussed included how to collect and

ship insects to Washington, D.C., what kind of alcohol to

use for preserving specimens, who would be specialists in

various types of forest insects (Burke—Buprestids, Miller—

cone and seed insects), correspondence policy, publications,

lines of authority, and on and on.

Hopkins also decided that the field stations would no

longer be numbered; they would have names, e.g., “Pacific

Slope” for Burke and Miller’s assignment. Hopkins was also

becoming increasingly interested in doing his bioclimatic

Figure 33—Burke or Sullivan with team and wagon in Placerville,

California, 1913.

H.E. Burke family

1 Actually the research at Ashland was much broader than cone and seed

insects. Some of the earliest and most intensive studies on western pine

beetle population dynamics and epidemiology were begun there also.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

76

research on a national basis. He instructed all of the men in

attendance how to set up his phenology research stations

and take measurements, with data to be sent to him at once.

He even suggested, that as railroad travel was the main

source of transportation at the time, the entomologists

should observe forest conditions during train travel and take

notes on their observations. What he perhaps did not realize

was that the western entomologists tried to travel by night

trains in Pullman cars so they could go to work in the morning at their destinations. Miller’s diary has many references

to travel by Pullman car.

Hopkins also suggested that an organization known as

“The Society for Advancement of Forest Entomology in

America” be formed by those in attendance on the last day

of the meeting on March 1. The initiation fee was to be 50

cents and the annual dues 50 cents. “The following officers

were elected: President, A.D. Hopkins; Vice President, H.E.

Burke; Recording Secretary, T.E. Snyder; Corresponding

Secretary-Treasurer, F.C. Craighead.” The annual meeting

procedures and subjects were discussed, but there is no further mention of the society in future years. It must have died

aborning, probably because of travel difficulties at the time.

It did demonstrate that Hopkins and his entomologists saw

the need for a professional society of their peers.

Strangely, Miller’s diaries and letters do not go into any

detail about his new assignment as leader of the Ashland

field station. He assumed that his family would shortly join

him in Placerville. He had rented a house and had all of his

insect collection, field notes, and photography equipment

there. He had spent January setting up his personal and

work facilities in Placerville, when his diary, on January 18,

states, “Received letter from Dr. Hopkins relating to trip to

Washington.” Did the letter forewarn him about his new

assignment? It is difficult to tell from what Burke and

Miller have written. His diary, in a laconic manner, just

records his preparation of work on a manuscript on cone

and seed insects and much photographic work to do until it

was time to leave for Washington, D.C. (which took 5 days

of train travel). His diary is not illuminating about his meeting with Hopkins “attended conference of fieldmen at Dr.

Hopkins’ office in the Star Building.” That was the usual

diary entry until March 4, when he witnessed the inauguration of President Wilson. He returned to Placerville in mid

March.

During March, April, and May, Miller was bouncing

around between Placerville, Yreka, and San Francisco, 

shipping his supplies to Ashland; he finally arrived at his

new station on April 27. Then he left for San Francisco and

helped Burke with some bark beetle work in Placerville in

May. He was about to embark on some historic forest insect

work in Yosemite National Park, but first let us return to

Burke’s memoirs on the Placerville Station.

Before I returned to Placerville on June 3,

1913, due to the preliminary work done in 1912,

control work against the western pine beetle started

Figure 34—Southern Rocky Mountain Station, Colorado

Springs, Colorado, 1913-1919 (left to right) W.D. Edmonston,

in charge; A.B. Champlain, and B.T. Harvey. From Baker,

Oregon, Edmonston went to Klamath Falls, then to Ashland,

and in the fall of 1913 to Colorado Springs, Colorado. With

him went Hofer and Harvey. Champlain was later added to

the staff to carry on studies of the biology of forest insects

and devoted considerable time to the parasites and predators

of bark beetles. J.H. Pollock was appointed as Entomological

Ranger in 1914 and specialized in studies of forest Adelgids.

This station was closed in 1919 when Edmonston and Hofer

moved to Tucson, Arizona, and Pollock was transferred to the

Ashland station. Harvey and Champlain in the meantime had

resigned.

H.E. Burke, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

77

near Bray, Siskiyou County, and in the Yosemite.

The first, the Antelope Creek Project, was carried

on by the McCloud River Lumber Company with

the assistance of J.D. Riggs. It so convinced the

Company of the value of bark beetle control that

they made it a regular part of their operations for a

number of years. This probably was the first time

that any private timber company had adopted such

a plan. The work in the Yosemite under the direction of J.M. Miller was the first forest insect control work conducted in any of the national parks. It

also was carried on for several years.

During July and August I assisted the C.A.

Smith Company to cruise part of its timber near

Pino Grande to determine the insect loss in a

mature stand of mixed yellow pine and sugar pine.

This stand between the Middle Fork and the South

Fork of the American River was considered by 

timbermen to be one of the finest stands of timber

in California.

A careful cruise of the area indicated that

while there had been no insect epidemic for a number of years there was a constant annual loss of the

best trees. On 1,280 acres cruised in one solid

block, there were 14 killed sugar pine (77,735

board feet) and 16 killed yellow pine (55,230 board

feet) all killed in 1913 and a total of 290 killed

sugar pine (1,572,745 board feet) and 121 killed

yellow pine (327,205 board feet). The cream of the

timber was being killed. Ninety-one of the dead

sugar pine were over 5 feet in diameter and it was

these large trees with the clear lumber that made

the lumbering profitable. This probably was the

first time that a lumber company had made such a

detailed study to determine the actual loss caused

by tree-killing insects [figs. 35 and 36].

Field Trips Out of the Placerville Station, 1913

Besides carrying on this project (Onion

Creek project) I made a number of observations

on the biology of various forest insects. Among

these was the biology of the Oryssus, a

hymenopterous insect of which little was known,

but which when the biology was finally determined, changed the major classification of the

Figure 35—The Davis cabin on the tract of timber owned by the

C.A. Smith Lumber Company near Pino Grande. This was the

field headquarters for the protection work of the company and was

used as the base camp for the 1913 forest insect survey. Mr. Davis,

Representative of the company and Entomological Ranger J.J.

Sullivan made a preliminary reconnaissance in May 1913.

H.E. Burke, PSW

Figure 36—J.J. Sullivan and P.D. Sergent on a trip up the

American River Canyon near Kyburz in April 1913.

H.E. Burke, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

78

order Hymenoptera. Another project started was

a study of the oak twig girdler, a pest which

caused considerable damage to live oak in

California. This study probably aroused my

interest in the investigations of shade tree insects

which I carried on for a number of years.

I spent the field seasons of 1914 and 1915

and part of 1916 at the Pyramid Ranger Station

about 40 miles east of Placerville on the Tahoe

road. Close by were sugar pine, yellow pine,

Jeffrey Pine, lodgepole pine, white fir, red fir,

Douglas-fir, mountain hemlock, incense cedar

and Sierra Juniper [fig. 37].

Many observations were made on the bark

beetles and on flathead borers. The flathead borers of the genus Trackykele were given special

attention. Three species of this little known

genus were found and carefully studied. One

caused considerable damage to the wood of

incense cedar, one to the wood of juniper sought

for pencils and the third bored in the wood of the

tops of white and red fir.

Considerable attention was also given to the 

project “the relation of Mistletoe on living trees 

to attacks by tree-killing insects,” which had

been assigned to me. It was found that 64 percent of virgin growth yellow pine and 73 percent

of virgin growth Jeffrey pine in typical areas

near Pyramid were mistletoe infected. The conclusions drawn from the study were (a) trees

infected by mistletoe are not more subject to

attack by Dendroctonus beetles than trees not so

infected, in fact it looked as though badly infected trees were less liable to attack than trees free

of infection; (b) trees weakened by mistletoe do

not contribute to the increase of Dendroctonus

beetles.

Before and after the regular field seasons

studies were made of the insects living in the

trees and shrubs in the vicinity of Placerville.

Special attention was given to the flat headed

borers of the genus Agrilus and to the barkmining midge which causes the birdseye pine.

Many parasites and other insects were reared 

and sent to the specialists in Washington. Several

trips were made to Palo Alto to study the oak

twig girdler.

The Antelope Creek project and the Yosemite

Control project continued more or less under the

direction of the Placerville station, but due to the

poor lumber market, no new private lumber company under took any control work. The C.A.

Smith Company which had been such a good

cooperator finally failed because of too much

timber which they were not able to carry.

It is hard to determine Burke’s state of mind during this

period. His memoirs give no clue about his reluctance to be

with the men under his supervision at the Ashland station.

And, with Hopkins putting Miller in charge there, Hopkins

was apparently preparing Miller for more important 

positions. Some of this will come to light later in the story.

A.D. Hopkins notched another first in his bug-seeking

endeavors in Western forests, but this time he was not the

first to collect or study the reported needle miner outbreak.

However, he did discover mountain pine beetle killing giant

sugar pine in the Wawona area and encouraged park personnel to begin the first bark beetle control operations in any

national park.

Miller’s trip to Yosemite National Park was perhaps one

of his most important early assignments, and several “firsts”

in forest entomology resulted. The history of entomology 

in the park is interwoven throughout this story because 

both Burke and Miller had a long-term association with

Yosemite (fig. 38), both officially and unofficially during

visits with their families.

Figure 37—Burke family summer camp at Philips east of

Placerville, 1913.

H.E. Burke, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

79

Pioneer forest entomologist, John Patterson summarized

the story of forest insect problems in Yosemite (Patterson

1921). He stated (from Hopkins 1912): 

In 1903 it was reported to the Bureau of

Entomology through the Secretary of the Interior

that large areas of lodgepole pine in the Yosemite

Park were affected by a leaf-mining moth. In May

1904, Dr. A.D. Hopkins visited the Yosemite Park,

planning to investigate the conditions reported, but

was unable to reach the lodgepole pine area, as all

trails leading into the region were still closed by

heavy snow.

Next on the scene was H.E. Burke. On July 10, 1906,

he started his stagecoach ride to Yosemite probably not

knowing that a bandit had held up two stages just 3 days

before, on the same route. It must have been an exciting

time to be a forest entomologist. Eventually, Burke made 

it to the High Sierra country in the Tenaya Basin and

Tuolumne Meadows and could not find the needle miner,

but did find many lodgepole pine being killed by the mountain pine beetle.

During the next four years, there were reports of the

needle miner in Yosemite made by Professor Comstock in

1907 and by forest pathologists E.P. Meinecke in 1911 who

noted a heavy flight of moths in the Tenaya Basin. Forest

entomologists were unable to visit Yosemite at that time

because of large bark beetle control operations in northeast

Oregon and northern California. Finally, in October 1912,

J.M. Miller, in his first year on the job with the Bureau of

Entomology, visited Yosemite’s high-elevation country.

Miller found that the bark beetle problems in Tenaya Basin

and Tuolumne Meadows had intensified, and he found defoliation caused by the needle miner, but no adult moths. The

lodgepole needle miner has a 2-year life cycle, and adults

fly and lay eggs in odd-numbered years. So the collection 

of flying moths was hit or miss until more definitive studies

of the insects’ life history could be made. Miller, however,

could easily see that this was a large and important forest

insect outbreak and might also be related to the expanding

mortality of lodgepole pine by mountain pine beetle. In

1913 the moths were finally collected by Miller and sent to

taxonomic specialist August Bursck. He described them as 

a new species Recurvaria [= coleotechnites] milleri in 1914.

Miller used Yosemite Valley as his headquarters from

June 16 until August 22, 1913, although he was mostly in

the high country. When he was there, he used the semiluxurious accommodations of a tent at Camp Curry and an

office/laboratory in a park warehouse.

Miller was constantly riding horses or mules or walking

to and from the High Country at Tenaya Lake and Tuolumne

Meadows. He was not only studying the needle miner, but

he was supervising crews of laborers falling and burning 

lodgepole pine infested with mountain pine beetle. He had

the assistance of Entomological Ranger J.J. Sullivan in this

work. As a trained timber cruiser, Sullivan located infested

trees for the crew. Sullivan’s monthly travel report for June

30, 1913 (fig. 39), shows the hardships and variety of travel

in that era. His conveyances included railroads, stagecoach,

horses, and shank’s mare.

On July 29, Miller’s diary notes, “Left Tenaya control

camp at 9 am and rode to Tuolumne Meadows. Arrived at 

1 pm, began to rain about 2:30 pm and had heavy thunderstorm with rain and hail. Went to Soda Springs outpost and

camped directly across the river from Soldiers [U.S. 4th

Cavalry (Hampton 1971)] near the Sierra Club Cabin.” The

Sierra Club Cabin made of local granite stone is still used.

On August 5, Miller left on an extended horse trip with

two park employees visiting and noting “considerable dead

timber in Virginia Canyon, Benson Lake, and at Matterhorn

Canyon. Looked over some of the immense stands of 

Figure 38—Hand-built Tioga stage road along Tenaya Lake,

Yosemite National Park, 1913.

J.M. Miller family
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

80

bark-beetle-killed timber there and also in Verrick Canyon

and Jack Main Canyon.” Miller made the first map of this

combined infestation of lodgepole needleminer and mountain pine beetle that covered over 30,000 acres of the High

Sierra portion of the park.2

August 22 Miller left Yosemite for the summer and 

proceeded to Placerville to pick up his personal effects and 

supplies, arriving at Ashland on August 30. Thus began a

new phase of his life as leader of the Bureau of Entomology

Forest Insect Station at Ashland, Oregon. In September he

not only had to rent a building for the lab, but also a personal dwelling, set up the laboratory, meet with his staff of

Patterson, Sergent, Glendinning, and Wagner. During all of

this activity he received word that his father was gravely ill.

He arrived in Reedley before his father died on September

17. By September 23 he was back at Ashland with his family, studying cone and seed insects in the nearby forests and

becoming settled in the community.

An illustration of the breadth and modes of travel in

1913 is Miller’s insect-collecting trip to Pacific Grove,

California, in November. On that trip he rented a bicycle, 

a motorcycle (which broke down), and an automobile. That

year he had already used train, stagecoach, horse, mule, and

walking in Yosemite. The newest form of transportation was

still in the development stage by the Wright Brothers or he

probably would have tried it as well.

In Ashland, Miller finally had the most settled family

life of his career thus far and became more oriented toward

scientific inquiry versus continual travel to survey, collect,

and supervise insect-control projects.

2 I revisited all of these areas using the same mode of transportation in the

summer of 1953 to map a new needleminer outbreak.

Figure 39—Monthly travel report of J.J. Sullivan for June 1913, Yosemite National Park. He 

traveled by railroad, stagecoach, and horseback and walked many miles.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

81

CHAPTER 10: The Early Ashland Years,

1914-1916

By 1914 Burke was devoting most of his time to forest

insect studies in the Placerville area. It was essentially a

one-man station with intermittent help from entomological

rangers from the Ashland station. Miller and his family were

settling in at Ashland, with Miller in charge of that 

station. Most of his personal research involved cone and

seed insects.

It is odd that neither of them, Burke in his memoirs, 

nor Miller in his diaries, mentioned an important bark beetle

outbreak developing in Klamath and Lake Counties to the

East of Ashland. Jackson F. Kimball, secretary of the

Klamath-Lake Counties Fire Association, but actually

employed by Weyerhaeuser Company, was trying to instigate a cooperative bark beetle control project with private 

interests, the Forest Service, and the Indian Service (now

Bureau of Indian Affairs). In 1911 he got Edmonston, a

Bureau of Entomology entomologist, involved in a very

unsatisfactory project near Jenny Creek just east of Ashland.

Kimball promised much help from his fire association, but

delivered little, and what he did do with his men he tended

to carry out on his own unscientific terms, greatly irritating

Edmonston who bluntly informed Hopkins of the situation.1

By 1913, there was a very large mountain pine beetle

infestation in lodgepole pine on the Paulina National Forest,

just north of the private lands and the Klamath Indian reservation. Kimball and others were convinced the mountain

pine beetles emerging from these infested trees would attack

and kill the more valuable yellow pine (ponderosa pine)

stands and that the beetles should be controlled at all costs.

Kimball convinced the Forest Service that the cheapest way

to do this would be to wholesale burn the dead and dying

lodgepole pine forests. When Hopkins heard of this plan, he

was very opposed (see footnote 1) for two reasons: first, his

host selection principle stated that mountain pine beetles

would not shift their host preference from lodgepole pine to

ponderosa pine; and second, he feared that burning a forest

on a scale of 30,000 acres or more would destroy great

numbers of natural enemies of mountain pine beetles in the

infested trees. This could cause more problems in the long

run by reducing the controlling effects of natural enemies.

This controversy is worth recording here because it involved

a challenge to Hopkins’ host selection principle, it resulted

in a change in future insect control policy as it related to the

Bureau of Entomology, and it sheds some light on Burke’s

reluctance to pursue research related to bark beetle control.

Burke’s memoirs and Miller’s diaries are not a primary

source of information; almost 100 pages of official correspondence tell the story very neatly. At that time, Hopkins

was personally in charge of all Bureau of Entomology participation in control operations from his Washington, D.C.,

headquarters. In earlier chapters, Hopkins’ fervor for controlling bark beetles was noted, especially relating to the

Northeastern Oregon Project (chapter 4) and the Craggy Mt.

Project (chapter 8). Hopkins’ policy for the field men was 

to be responsive to requests from the Forest Service, Park

Service, and private timber interests for entomological

advice regarding possible control projects. Hopkins asked

his men to encourage a large control project if biologically

warranted. He probably believed this approach would result

in good publicity for his organization, thus larger appropriations and ultimately a larger more prestigious organization.

He was probably guided in this somewhat by observing,

Tidbits of information printed in the front of Miller’s

personal journal for 1914

* Woodrow Wilson was President of the United

States.

* War was breaking out in Europe.

* Most countries were on the gold standard, except

China, where it was silver.

* The Franc was worth 19.3 cents on the dollar.

* The Pound Sterling was worth $1.86.

* First-class parcel post was 2 cents per ounce.

* The population of Portland, Oregon, from the

1910 census, was 207,214, and San Francisco

had a population of 416,912.

* The first aid for being struck by lightning was to

dash cold water over the person struck.

1 Correspondence Edmonston to Hopkins, Hopkins to Glendinning,

Glendinning to Hopkins, Kimball to Hopkins, Hopkins to Kimball, in my

possession.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

82

through his association with Henry Graves, the Chief, how

the U.S. Forest Service was growing.

In the fall of 1913, Hopkins ordered Entomological

Ranger W.E. Glendinning, to make a reconnaissance survey

of the infested area covering several hundred thousand

acres, Glendinning found a serious outbreak of mountain

pine beetle in pure lodgepole pine stands on Forest Service

lands and scattered western pine beetle (WPB)-infested 

ponderosa pine on the private and Indian reservation lands.

Hopkins seemed determined to run the show, and sent little

correspondence to Burke in Placerville over what was 

transpiring. The voluminous official letter-writing was truly

amazing. There was correspondence from Glendinning at

Parker Station to Kimball in Klamath Falls and to Hopkins

in Washington, D.C., Kimball to Glendinning and Hopkins,

he in turn replying to both. Then the Indian Service became

involved, so there were letters from the Klamath Falls

Reservation to Department of the Interior, Washington,

D.C., offices. And the Forest Service Chief’s office was

writing to Hopkins and others. Eventually, of course, the 

correspondence went up the agency ladders to the Secretary

of Agriculture (Forest Service and Bureau of Entomology)

and the Secretary of the Interior (Indian Service). Next,

Oregon State Forester Elliot also became involved. Chief

Graves pledged up to $5,000 to the project (because the

most serious outbreak was mostly on the Paulina National

Forest at this point) if the private interests would pledge an

equal amount to treat WPB-killed ponderosa pine on their

lands.

At this point, Hopkins, in October 1913, finally requested Burke, who was in charge of both Ashland and Placerville Stations, to go see the situation in the field. No bona

fide entomologist had actually visited the area. For some

strange reason, even though he was in overall charge of the

Oregon area and Hopkins was his supervisor, he declined to

go. He did, however, write a strong letter to Kimball telling

him the Forest Service pledged $5,000 and was ready to

start fall control operations. He asked when Kimball’s

organization could come up with a like amount and be ready

to start the project. Burke requested an immediate reply.

Now Kimball started stalling. He wanted to pursue his pet

project of burning down the infested lodgepole pine forest,

claiming he was certain the mountain pine beetle populations would soon move to the adjacent ponderosa pine

stands. With all of the delay, several large snowstorms effectively closed the outbreak area for the winter, and no control

crews were sent out that fall.

Winter did not cool the fervor of the letter writers 

however; and Kimball started some sharp correspondence

with Hopkins telling him he did not believe in Hopkins’

host selection principle and he was certain the beetles had

already migrated from lodgepole pine to the ponderosa pine

stands, for he had seen it himself. That did it! Hopkins shot

off a reply to Kimball that Hopkins was, after all, in a much

better position to understand the habits of bark beetles

because he had studied them and published his findings. 

An excerpt from this letter of January 22, 1914, follows:

I can readily understand how the general

observer would conclude that the wide-spread

infestation in the lodgepole pine was a great menace to the yellow pine, but don’t you think that the

opinion of one [namely Hopkins] who has a comprehensive knowledge of the insects involved, with

extensive experience in many similar cases, is more

likely to be correct than that of others who are not

so informed?

The next day, January 23, 1914, a very fierce snowstorm hit the area where Glendinning was waiting for men

to arrive and set up a control camp. Glendinning wrote to

Burke: “the snow is four feet on the level and from five to

seven feet on the divides and still snowing when I came out.

The mail carrier and I broke the trail out [toward Ashland]

with ten head of horses.” This ended the proposed project

for the winter. 

By February, Hopkins was finished with trying to cooperate with Kimball and he wrote to Glendinning with copy

to Burke stating the new policy for his men in the Bureau of

Entomology to adhere to henceforth.

February 11, 1914,

I have your letter of January 31 and am much

interested in the information you convey in regard

to the situation there and your experience with Mr.

Kimball. I am much pleased with and fully approve

your attitude in the matter. I am not surprised–it is

the same old story. The more we do to help make a

control project a success, the less recognition is
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

83

given to the source of the information. For example, Kimball’s printed report: he makes no 

reference to the fact that all he or any of his men

know about the insects or methods of controlling

them is the result of the expenditure of some thousands of dollars of our limited appropriation in giving him special instructions. Now he probably

thinks he knows more about the whole subject than

we do and consequently has very little further use

for our advice or instructions. This attitude has

been so forcibly impressed upon me in this and so

many other cases that I have decided to make no

further effort in the line of direct educational work

except in cases where it is clearly and definitely

agreed that our instructions will be followed.

In the copy of my letter to Mr. Burke, to you

yesterday, which is approved by the Chief of the

Bureau, our future policy is definite. I am sending

it to you in order that it may serve as a basis for

you to make it clear to any one who wants to

know–that we are engaged in research work for 

the purpose of determining facts which will be of

practical value to private owners, state and federal

forest officials, in any efforts by them to prevent

unnecessary losses from insect depredations; and

that, while we will take no part in or assume no

responsibility for control work that is not conducted in accordance with general principles and essential details which we recommend, we will continue

to give information when it is requested, and will

give instructions in the essential details which we

recommend, we will continue to give information

when it is requested, and will give instructions of a

representative of the Branch connected with a field

station. It will be understood that men so assigned

must render enough assistance to make up for the

time and trouble in giving such instructions, and

that their salaries and expenses must be provided.

The final results were that Hopkins pulled his technical

men off the proposed project, and the Forest Service did not

spend the $5,000. Kimball’s association crews did some

haphazard efforts treating ponderosa pine infested with

WPB through the summer of 1914. Treating infested trees 

in the summer is mostly wasted effort because by the time

crews spot faded trees, the beetles have emerged and are

attacking new trees, which have green foliage and are very

difficult to spot.

While all of the activity in Klamath County was taking

place, Miller was establishing his research in Ashland. Other

than a few letters and two short meetings with Kimball in

Ashland, he seemed to play a minor role. His position as

leader is unclear as Hopkins was running the show from

Washington, D.C. Why Miller was never involved in the

Klamath fiasco remains a mystery.

In the summer of 1915, Hopkins assigned Glendinning

to work directly for him and examine the area of infested

lodgepole pine next to ponderosa pine stands to see if his

host selection principle held up. It was a good test given the

sharp demarcation of the two tree species and the high populations of mountain pine beetle. Glendinning could find no

new mountain-pine-beetle-infested trees in the ponderosa

pine, so apparently Hopkins was vindicated. I think Burke,

observing all of these maneuverings and the long-range

management of control operations by Hopkins from the

Washington office, was influenced both about the biological

effectiveness of such work and the lack of authority he had

as official leader of the Pacific Slope Stations. Subsequent

events will show how some of this played out.

Burke’s memoirs continue with information on the

Ashland station even though he did not work there and, 

in fact, only visited several times (figs. 40 and 41).

From 1915 to 1919, the Ashland station carried on a

series of studies of bark beetle infestations in the Rogue

Figure 40—The Ashland station, which was maintained from 1913

to 1924, was at first set up as a substation under Placerville.

During the period of its existence, the Ashland station occupied

various quarters in the town. The Ashland station occupied

Ashland Normal School from 1916 to 1918.

J.E. Patterson, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

84

River and Klamath River watersheds, which led to some

new proposals regarding control methods. These recommendations were considered in a series of conferences with the

Forest Service, which resulted in the initiation of several

experimental control projects.

Hopkins influenced the operation of the Ashland station

during this period with his personal research. It involved his

interest in plant and insect phenology or “Bioclimatics” as

he termed it. Hopkins had the staff at Ashland establish a

series of “stations” up the mountains to the west and southwest of the city at progressively higher elevations. These

stations consisted of several marked trees and, in some

cases, a crude spike camp with shelter, bedding, and firewood cached for overnight stays (fig. 42). March 17, 1915,

Hopkins visited Ashland and went to the phenology stations

with Miller (fig. 43). From January or February to late summer from 1914 to 1918, members of the Ashland Station

would visit these phenological stations at 3- or 4-day intervals to measure and record the development of tree buds

and needles at the beginning of the growing season. At some

stations, bark infested with WPB larvae and pupae was

nailed to green trees to simulate normal infested trees that

might occur at a particular elevation (figs. 44 and 45). The

objective was to determine if the development of a WPB

brood was influenced by elevation and, if so, could the phenological events of certain plants help predict the seasonal

activities of bark beetles in the same area. Everyone on the

staff participated in this time-consuming project, including

Miller, although he also collected cones during these forays

to expand on his cone and seed insect research. Hopkins had

five of the Forest Insect Division Stations in the United

States participate in this research with all of the data going

directly to him for analysis. The result was a book published

in 1938 (Hopkins 1938).

Hopkins’ bioclimatic law stated that:

The law is founded on the determined countrywide average rate of variation in the time at which

periodical events occur in the seasonal development and habits of plants and animals at different

Figure 41—Ashland station personnel, April 1915, in front of the

first office and laboratory: (left to right) Dr. A.D. Hopkins, Chief

of Division of Forest Insect Investigations; W.E. Glendinning,

entomological ranger; J.M. Miller, entomological assistant; and

entomological rangers J.E. Patterson, J.D. Riggs, P.D. Sergent, 

and F.P. Keen.

J.E. Patterson, PSW

Figure 42—J.J. Sullivan, entomological ranger, in winter camp at

phenology station near Ashland, 1914.

J.M. Miller family

Figure 43—Entomological Rangers P. Sergent and J.D. Riggs

packing supplies to one of Hopkins’ phenology stations, ca. 1914.

J.M. Miller, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

85

geographical positions within the range of their distribution. Other things being equal, this variation is

at the rate of four days for each degree of latitude,

five degrees of longitude and 400 feet of altitude . . .

later northward, eastward and upward in the spring

and early summer and the reverse in the late summer and during autumn.

The ultimate usefulness of this research relating to bark

beetle development was summarized by Miller and Keen

(1960) “No fixed relationship of western pine beetle activity

to phenological factors has been established, because of the

wide climatic and seasonal variations between localities

within the range of the beetle’s distribution.”

Even though the 4 years of research at Ashland may 

not have produced the desired results, it did have some

unintended influence on Miller’s future research and career.

In the process of dozens of field jaunts to the phenology 

stations, Miller and his assistants were observing an increasing WPB infestation in the same area. This led to the first

detailed epidemiological study of a WPB outbreak called

the Rogue River Area bark beetle project, started by Miller

in 1914.2 The phenology research seemed to have an influence on Hopkins’ career as well. He became absorbed in

bioclimatics and within 5 years resigned as chief of the

Forest Insect Division in the Bureau of Entomology and

transferred to the Division of Bioclimatics in the Bureau 

as an entomological scientist where he remained until 

his retirement. He also seemed to tire of directing the 

oftentimes frustrating bark beetle control projects best illustrated by the proposed Klamath Project, from his Washington, D.C., office. As Burke relates later in the chapter, 1916

marked the end of Hopkins’ hands-on leadership of such

projects. He allowed his field men more latitude, to the 

benefit of all.

Before proceeding with Miller’s role in the Rogue

River Project, the cone and seed insect research that

Hopkins assigned to him in 1913 should be summarized. As

noted in the previous chapter, Miller traveled over much of

southern Oregon and the Sierra Nevada in California. He

did not neglect the coastal tree species. He collected cones

and seed insects from Newport on the Oregon coast, south

through Crescent City on the northern California coast to

Pacific Grove on the Monterey Peninsula. His diaries indicate a particular fondness for Pacific Grove where he visited

almost annually for a week or two for a combined collecting

project and vacation with his family. His diary entries for

these trips are some of the most descriptive in his series.

Although his collections and biological notes were meticulous and thorough, and include some of the finest photographs of forest cone and seed insects, little of the work was

published, except for his preliminary report of 1914 when

he had barely started his research (figs. 46 through 48)

(Miller 1914). There were several reasons for this. Miller

Figure 44—Sergent and cage for western pine beetle studies at

Ashland, 1916.

J.M. Miller family

Figure 45—F.P. Keen inside cage for western pine beetle studies,

1916.

J.M. Miller family

2 Rogue River Area, 1917-1924. A bound compendium of seven typed

reports totaling 172 pages of maps, tables, and narrative by Miller,

Patterson, and Keen. On file with Wickman.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

86

was given administrative responsibility for the Ashland 

station including supervision of five or six assistants, he was

saddled with making Hopkins’ phenology measurements, he

had responsibility for overseeing bark beetle control projects

in Yosemite National Park, and it was becoming increasingly evident that WPB outbreaks were the most important

destructive agent in Pacific Slope ponderosa pine forests—

even more so than forest fires, as Hopkins had long proclaimed. But perhaps the main reason for ending the cone

and seed insect research was that Miller was simply ahead

of his time. When F.P. Keen ultimately published most of

Miller’s studies in 1958, he summarized the history of this

research (Keen 1958).3

In 1910, Miller, then with the U.S. Forest Service, 

proposed to Hopkins that a study be made of cone and seed

insects. Miller’s rationale was that there was a need to assist

the Forest Service in seed-collecting work, so collectors

could avoid areas where seed was badly infested with

insects, sometimes destroying more than 50 percent of the

seed. This in part led to Miller’s transfer to the Bureau of

Entomology in 1911 and ultimately his 5 years of research

on the subject. But as Keen points out “the work on cone

and seed insects at Ashland was so far ahead of its economic usefulness, that for nearly 40 years very little of the 

copious material collected at that time was assembled or

published.” In the 1950s and 1960s, the demand for seed for

replanting burns and logged areas revitalized the research.

The development of chemical insecticide applied to forest

seed orchards and need for life history information on seed

insects finally led to completion of the research begun in

1911.

Figure 46—Cones drying so they could be checked for seed

insects, Ashland, Oregon, 1914.

J.M. Miller, PNW 3 At least three new species were named for Miller in this bulletin.

Figure 47—Patterson using camera stand built by J.P.

Patterson for taking close-up photographs of cone and

seed insects, Ashland, Oregon, 1913. 

J.E. Patterson, PNW

Figure 48—Photograph of insect-infested sugar pine cone taken by

using Patterson’s unique camera stand, 1915.

J.E. Patterson, PNW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

87

Possibly the most important research begun by Miller

during this period was the previously mentioned Rogue

River Project involving the WPB outbreak history in the

Rogue, Applegate, and Klamath River basins (Miller and

Keen 1960). This first study of WPB epidemiology was

started at Ashland in 1914 on a 3,200-acre infestation called

the Lambs Mine Unit. (It is not coincidental that the area

was also the site of a Hopkins phenology station). The trend

and intensity of the beetle infestation killing ponderosa pine

was followed for 3 years by timber cruising the area annually. In 1916, Miller suspected that the area was too small to

provide an adequate sample of broad infestation trends;

therefore, the study was expanded that year to include 

about 350,000 acres. This area was more than half of the

ponderosa pine type in the three adjacent watersheds. This

area was biologically and geographically diverse and had a

variety of site conditions, so was considered large enough to

represent any changes in trends on a landscape scale. Miller,

in the first report for this enlarged study, stated that, “one

purpose of the study was to determine the character, periods

of time involved in, and the causes of the intermittent

increase and decrease in the annual amount of infestation”

(see footnote 2). This was probably the first landscape-scale

biological study in the West, long before such research was

in vogue.

Miller summarized the results 1914-17 as follows (see

footnote 2):

Dendroctonus brevicomis is by far the most

important enemy of the pine and is responsible for

90 percent of the total annual loss. The loss caused

by this insect does not remain constant, but is subject to great fluctuations from year to year. In this

study the D. brevicomis infestation underwent a

distinct cycle or epidemic covering a period of 4

years, during which a pronounced increase was 

followed by a corresponding decrease.

The epidemic which has been studied ran

through approximately the same cycle throughout

the entire project area of 350,000 acres. The cycle

of the infestation within each of the small tributary

watersheds which have been termed units was

nearly uniform throughout the project area. The

high-water mark of the epidemic occurred in 1915

on some units and in 1916 on others. But we do not

find a single case of any unit declining to a low

point in 1915 or 1916, but in all units studied the

epidemic started upward in 1914 and declined in

1917. This indicates that the factors which influence the rise and decline of epidemics are not 

confined to small local centers or watersheds, but

operate throughout great forest areas.

This study was continued under Miller’s overall leadership by J.E. Patterson after Miller left Ashland for North

Fork, California, until 1925. The study was expanded to

other sites as subsequent chapters will detail. It had important implications for future population dynamics research 

by entomologists and other forest biologists.

Miller also continued his trips to Yosemite National

Park to give technical advice on continuing bark beetle 

control projects there. I do not think he did this because he

was enthralled with insect control projects, but because he

loved Yosemite high country. In September 1914, he spent 1

week in the Tenaya Lake area, and in 1916 he spent almost

3 weeks in August and September in Tenaya basin and

Tuolumne Meadows. Miller encouraged, instructed, and

supervised bark beetle control projects throughout the park

in sugar pine, ponderosa pine, and lodgepole pine (figs. 49

and 50). He especially promoted control operations against

the mountain pine beetle in needle-miner-weakened lodgepole pine. Even though he worked for the Bureau of

Entomology, in reality, he became the Yosemite National

Figure 49—Treating sugar pine for mountain pine beetle, Yosemite

National Park, 1918.

J.E. Patterson, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

88

Park forest entomologist during this period and set the bark

beetle control policies that were carried out for the next four

decades.4

At the close of Miller’s 1916 diary is a very cryptic

entry that may be related to the reorganization proposed by

Hopkins earlier in the year.

Miller’s diary, Sunday, January 31, 1916: “Here endeth

the record for the year 1916. Has been fairly successful for

yours truly.”

In the next chapter Burke will shed light on changes for

both men.

4 The author along with retired Forest Service entomologist George

Downing gave technical advice for the last large mountain pine beetle 

project in Delaney, Dingley, and Conness Creeks in 1955-58.

Figure 50—Lodgepole pine killed by mountain pine beetle following the 1890s lodgepole needleminer outbreak near Tenaya Lake,

Yosemite National Park, 1916.

J.M. Miller, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

89

CHAPTER 11: 1917-1919, Burke and Miller

Change Roles as the Division of Forest

Insect Investigations Evolves

Why had Miller been so self-satisfied, as evidenced by his

diary entry for January 31, 1916? His diaries do not record

his inner feelings as a rule, and they never contained criticisms of his colleagues or boasts of his accomplishments.

Unfortunately, they also do not record many administrative

or management changes. Much official correspondence from

this period is rare or nonexistent now, so trying to interpret

the documents available will have to suffice. Continuing

with Burke’s memoirs may shed some light on events

(Burke 1946).

Ever since I had been in forest insect investigations, I had felt that my main interest was the

working out of the biology’s of the various species.

The Northeastern Oregon Control project had gotten me off of the track somewhat but several years

away from a control project area had convinced me

that I was not interested in control work and that it

would be best to return to biological investigations

if possible.

Early in 1916 Dr. Hopkins sent out a new plan

of organization for comments. This seemed an

opportunity for me to make the change so I accepted it. During 1915 the control work had been carried on by the rangers under the direction of Dr.

Hopkins in Washington. This had caused more or

less friction with the stations. In my comments on

the plan, I recommended that all of the work be

placed directly under the stations with Miller 

in charge of the Pacific Slope station at Ashland

and that I be placed in charge of a laboratory to

investigate the biology’s of tree-killing insects.

This plan was approved and it was decided to

locate my work at Los Gatos, California, with a

laboratory giving most of its attention to biological

studies with special attention to shade tree 

problems.

Probably the most important scientific work

done at Placerville was the determination that

Oryssus is parasitic. At least this is the work mentioned in such general works on entomology as

Comstock’s “Introduction to Entomology” and

Essig’s “Insects of Western North America.” The

article “Oryssus is Parasitic” was published in the

Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington in 1917. The work

done on the flatheaded borers was also published in

1917 as Department Bulletin No. 437 “Flatheaded

borers affecting forest trees in the United States.”

The Laboratory at Los Gatos, California

The move from Placerville to Los Gatos was

made in November 1916. Because of its growing

importance on the Pacific Coast, the work at Los

Gatos soon became almost entirely the study of

shade tree insects. Scientific Assistant F.B. Herbert

was attached to the laboratory from November 1,

1916, to June 30, 1920; Entomological Preparator

E.T. Armstrong from November 1, 1916, to

October 1, 1917; Assistant Entomological Inspector

R.D. Hartman from March 15, 1918, to December 1, 1923; and Entomological Ranger W.E.

Glendinning from August 1, 1919, to May 15,

1922.

Among the principal insects studied were the

Pacific flathead borer, California oak twig girdler,

elder borers of the genus Desmocerus, cypress bark

beetles, Monterey pine bark beetles, the carpenter

worm, California oak worm, penstemon caterpillar,

cypress barkscale, European elm scale,

Matsucoccus scales, madrone psyllid and the

unusual lead cable borer.

The time spent at Los Gatos was a time of

publication as well as a time of investigation.

Twenty-two papers were published on flatheaded

borers and various shade tree insects. Among these

were Farmers’ Bulletin 1076 “The California Oak

Worm,” with Herbert; and Department Bulletins

838 “Cypress Bark Scale” and 1223 “The

European Elm Scale in the West” by Herbert.

There is little other information on Burke’s activities

during this period except memories of his daughters and

family lore that they finally had a home and more settled

life in Los Gatos with Stanford University nearby for intellectual stimulus. Mrs. Burke certainly deserved this change

after bouncing around for over 10 years following her 

husband through rural communities and giving birth to

daughters Mabel Claire in 1911 in Baker City, Oregon, 

and Dorothy Eugene in 1914 in Placerville, California.

While in Los Gatos, a son, Harry Eugene Burke, Jr.,

was born in 1918 and daughter, Janet Margaret, in 1920.

Burke said, “This completed the family.” To indicate how

settled he became, he was elected member of the Los Gatos

School Board in 1919. During this period Burke also established a professional relationship with Professor Doane,
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

90

Miller’s old teacher, at Stanford University. This relationship ultimately benefited both Burke and Miller and the

Pacific Slope Station.

Meanwhile, back in Ashland, there was also activity, 

at the Pacific Slope Station and for the Miller family. The

Station moved to new quarters at the Ashland Normal

School in 1916 to accommodate the increased responsibilities and personnel. Both John Patterson and F. Paul Keen

passed their civil service examinations and became professional entomologists, there were several entomological

rangers on the staff, and the Rogue River bark beetle project

had become a sizable research endeavor. The reorganization

that Hopkins dictated actually had little added impact on the

entomologists at the station because the California District

(later Region) and Oregon-Washington District had each

assigned a forester to oversee insect control projects on the

national forests. Ralph Hopping had been acting in this

capacity since Miller left the Service in 1912, and Alex

Jaenicke had a similar assignment for District 6 (Region 6)

since 1916. However, many private timberland owners had

little trust for the Forest Service, so they preferred having

Bureau of Entomology men in technical charge of their bark

beetle control projects. This resulted in Bureau entomologists acting as a sort of buffer between private and Forest

Service interests, and it actually worked quite well on the

next large project near Klamath Falls in 1921.

The personal fortunes of the Miller family also

improved. Miller must have qualified for and received a

raise in pay because of his new position. His son’s memories of 1916 indicate the family moved to a larger rental 

residence and purchased a “new Saxon roadster (Miller,

n.d.a).”

Miller’s diary for 1917 indicated some major changes

in his work related to his new assignment of Station Leader

by Hopkins the previous year. To begin with, he rarely went

to Hopkins’ phenology field sites above town, and there is

no mention of the Rogue River Project. Other records indicate that these duties were delegated to Keen and Patterson.

In mid-January he left for Washington, D.C., and Dr.

Hopkins’ office where he spent the next 6 weeks. He was no

doubt being indoctrinated into the intricacies of the federal

bureaucracy in general and Dr. Hopkins’ operational mode

in particular. While there, his diary entries were mostly

“worked on correspondence,” except for several meetings

with Hopkins and Bureau of Entomology Chief, Dr. L.O.

Howard, at the Cosmos Club. Visiting the club, whose

Automobiles

* John Miller loved them, could repair them, knew

their mechanics, and managed to purchase new 

models on a meager salary and use them in his

official travels. Bessie Miller had a near accident

on a steep hill in Ashland and would rarely drive

after that.

* Harry Burke was not fond of autos or of driving

them and was not too knowledgeable about how

they functioned. Marion Burke loved the automobile. She was an expert driver, driving from Palo

Alto to Yellowstone National Park in 1926 with

four young children and a dog in a model T Ford 

over practically nonexistent roads. She felt the

automobile liberated her. She could even change

flat tires!

J.M. Miller family collection

Mrs. Miller by John’s new Saxon auto, 1916.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

91

membership included the political Who’s Who of Washington, D.C., must have been an eye opener for the farm boy

from California and now the entomological leader of a

research station in Ashland, Oregon.

When he returned to the west coast he was soon on his

way to the District 5 Forest Service office in San Francisco,

then to Yosemite, cruising a control project in late April,

then sick with tonsillitis and an operation in Ashland.

He returned to Yosemite and the Sierra National Forest

in June. Then in July and August, Miller and Hopping spent

over 2 weeks on a horseback survey of insect conditions in

the Little Kern and Kaweah drainages and Sequoia National

Park. In September he was again in Yosemite National Park

at Patterson’s Tenaya Lake Camp.

It appears that personnel from the Ashland station and

Miller in particular were encouraged to spend more time and

effort in District 5 National Forests and Yosemite National

Park (fig. 51). In the summer of 1917, for instance, Patterson

was assigned to Yosemite to study the lodgepole needle

miner, probably by an envious Miller.

Patterson devoted most of the summers of 1917-19 to

studying the needle miner. This resulted in the first published account of the life history of the insect in the Journal

of Agricultural Research, mapping the extent of the outbreak, some excellent photographs of the insect and infested

stands, and solid evidence that the heavy mortality of 

lodgepole pine in the high country was related to defoliation

by the needle miner from the 1890s outbreak (Patterson

1921). Consequently, Patterson expanded his studies to

include the biology of mountain pine beetle and made

important contributions to the knowledge of this bark beetle

in high-elevation lodegepole pine stands. The needle miner

outbreak finally subsided in 1921.

On October 31, 1917, the station, office, and laboratory

in Ashland moved from the old Normal School building to

3rd and C Streets in a large two-story rented house (fig. 52)

(Wickman 1987).

But how quickly circumstances can change, there is 

no mention in Miller’s diary of the United States entering

World War I in 1917. His entry for July 29 while working in

Sequoia National Park says it all “official mail was rather 

discouraging—I learned that Keen had enlisted.”1

Figure 51—Conference of Bureau of Entomology and Forest

Service men at Ashland, Oregon, June 1917. (Top row, left to

right) Albert Wagner, John M. Miller, and A.J. Jaenicke. (Bottom

row, left to right) F.P. Keen, Thomas Snyder, and Ralph Hopping.

Hopping represented Region 5 and Jaenicke Region 6 of the Forest

Service. Snyder was on a special trip from the Washington office

of the Bureau of Entomology. Albert Wagner, entomological

ranger, had just been transferred from the Missoula station of the

Bureau, which had been closed down when Josef Brunner left for

West Virginia.

J.E. Patterson, PSW

Figure 52—From 1919 to 1924, the station was housed in the residence building (shown at right) in the town of Ashland. This picture was taken in February 1920 following a heavy snow and cold

snap in the Rogue River Valley. John Patterson is on the porch.

J.M. Miller, PSW

1 Keen served in Headquarters Company of the 49th artillery, American

expeditionary Force, France until early 1919.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

92

Miller was not immune from the war fever. On March

29, 1917, he inquired about enlisting in the aviation corps

while visiting Stanford University. Because of the loss of

Keen, who had taken over the phenology research and the

Rogue River project, the Ashland station was short-handed;

Miller again helped with some of the phenology observations, although Entomological Ranger Sergent carried the

brunt of the work, and Patterson took over the Rogue River

Project. Miller, who seemed to enjoy the additional field

work, was the entomology representative on a large bark

beetle control project on Sequoia National Forest and in

Sequoia National Park. He spent much of April, the end of

August, and the first half of September on the project with

Hopping.

In 1918, new forest insect problems arose in the Sitka

spruce forests on Oregon’s north coast. Old-growth Sitka

spruce is a very light, strong, and fine-grained wood. At that

time it was the material of choice for manufacturing airframes and propellers for the fabric-covered biplanes used

as fighter aircraft during World War I. It was a strategic

material, and the resource was administered by the war

department with production supervised by the U.S. Army

engineers (fig. 53). 

Much of the Sitka spruce in that area in Oregon at the

time consisted of immense old trees, many 6 or 7 feet in

diameter at breast height. Old-growth Sitka spruce can also

be attacked and killed by spruce beetles, degraded by woodborers like ambrosia beetles attacking down logs, and the

needles eaten by hemlock loopers. Various reports of insectcaused damage to the spruce and intermingled hemlock

were coming to Hopkins from the Forest Service and private

timber owners.

In June, August, and October 1918 and May 1919,

Miller and Glendinning spent weeks trying to pinpoint the

cause of tree damage. What they found was a hodgepodge

of insect problems (fig. 54). On surveys from Astoria south

to North Bend on the Oregon coast they found defoliation

from several previous years and a moth flight at one location (possibly hemlock looper), some spruce beetle, killing

trees (but not in serious amounts); ambrosia beetles attacking logs from trees cut in June; and resulting degrade in the

wood sufficient to cause the army to reject infested spruce

cants. Miller also found an unidentified Cerambycid beetle,

Xyleborus sp. with larval mining deep in the sapwood of

spruce. But most interesting, they found that the browning

of the needles on tips of branches that was reported so widespread was being caused by an unidentified green aphid

sucking the juices from needles until they turned brown and

dropped from the branches. This caused the visual effect of

defoliation from caterpillar feeding and had everyone

fooled. Miller collected specimens of all of these insects for

identification at various times of the year. The aphid was the

spruce aphid, and it was indeed a serious tree killer.

Figure 53—Glendinning watching spruce cants and logging train

on Oregon coast. Spruce was an important war material, and 

production was supervised by the Army, 1919.

J.M. Miller, PSW

Figure 54—Glendinning checking spruce infested with spruce 

beetle, Oregon coast, 1919.

J.M. Miller, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

93

Miller mentioned the war only several times in his

diary, but the entry for November 11, 1918, summed up the

home front’s feelings, “worked at station in morning, left for

awhile in afternoon to celebrate news of the peace victory.”2

So Keen would be returning, one hoped, by next year.

In December, both Jaenicke and Hopping came to

Ashland to spend a week with Miller while they jointly

worked on reports. This was indicative of the excellent

working relation Miller had with the Forest Service and

their two entomological representatives. The year ended

cold and snowy as usual, but Miller and Hopping had

changes coming in 1919.

Miller spent most of the year traveling to California

when not catching up on manuscripts, survey reports, and

correspondence at Ashland. On April 17, Keen having 

been discharged from the Army, arrived in Ashland on the

evening train. Unfortunately, he was bearing bad news for

Miller. Keen was resigning to work the family farm at 

Julian near San Diego. This was a blow to the short-handed

Ashland station. Keen was a University of California 

graduate trained in forestry and entomology (Wickman

1987). He was doing excellent research, particularly on the

WPB, essentially running the Rogue River project until he

left for the war in 1917. As usual Miller made no personal

comment about the situation, but it did leave him with only

Patterson as his professional assistant. Requests for assistance from the station were increasing in several areas in

southern Oregon and in California, particularly Yosemite

National Park and the Sierra National Forest. In southern

Oregon just north of Klamath Falls, mostly on the Klamath

Indian Reservation, a very large pandora moth outbreak was

defoliating thousands of acres of ponderosa pine forests.

Patterson was assigned to study this heretofore little-known

insect as well as complete his studies of the lodgepole pine

needle miner and mountain pine beetle in Yosemite National

Park. Miller, as was his management style, visited the outbreak areas with Patterson, gave him some advice, then

turned him loose. This approach seemed to be successful

most of the time.

In May and June, Miller was back on the Sequoia

National Park project with Hopping. In addition he,

Hopping and entomological ranger Wagner were examining

stands at Frazier Mountain, near Tejon Pass, Figueroa

Mountain, and the coast range near San Luis Obispo. The

far northern Pacific coastal areas were also of concern, 

especially in Alaska. The Forest Service reported huge 

areas around Ketchikan, Admiralty Island, and Juneau 

being severely defoliated by caterpillars (possibly hemlock

loopers or blackheaded budworm). They requested help

from Hopkins. Miller investigated the cost of boat fare to

Juneau. Unfortunately it was $80 round trip—too much for

their strained budget, so Miller never went.

In August, on his way to Yosemite via the east side of

the Sierra, he did score a first for forest entomologists. He

recorded: “August 4, 1919—Camped at Mono Lake R.S.,

August 5 Leevining, Mono Lake, Ranger Greene states that

the “Peages” [sic] gathered by the Indians in the Fall are

species of caterpillar, very large—from a large beautiful

moth [pandora moth] Indians build a fire under the tree

[Jeffrey pine] to smoke down the larvae—gather every other

year—1 year moths fly—the next year find larvae—1919

year of flight.” Patterson was starting to study the same

insect on the Klamath Indian Reservation, only the developmental phases were not synchronized—1918 was the year of

moth flight in Oregon (figs. 55 and 56). Pandora moth larvae

2 There was a celebration in downtown Ashland as there were in towns

across America. Office and other work came to a halt as communities let

off steam and gave thanks for the end to the killing of their young men.

Figure 55—Ponderosa pine defoliated by pandora moth on the

Klamath Indian Reservation, 1924.

J.E. Patterson, PNW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

94

and pupae were indeed an important source of protein for

several Native American tribes. 

On August 8 he reported “ . . . the entire stand of lodgepole pine around Tuolumne Meadows looks as bad as

Tenaya did in 1912—7 years ago—all one can see is a 

forest of dead tops.” The needle miner had progressed 

eastward, but this was the last outbreak expansion, as 

populations waned in 1921.

The rest of August and September, Miller was almost

continually in the field with Hopping checking the control

work around Sequoia National Park and other areas in

southern California.

Miller stopped in San Francisco several times on his

return trips to Ashland and met with Assistant District

Forester Woodbury. During these trips he almost always

went down to Los Gatos to visit and confer with Burke. 

The frequency of the visits seemed to indicate he valued his

colleague’s counsel, and his diary usually says “took dinner

with the Burkes.”

On November 19-24, 1919, there was a meeting 

of entomologists at Ashland; Miller and Patterson and

foresters Hopping and Jaenicke from California and Oregon,

and Evenden, a new Bureau entomologist from Idaho. They

met to discuss the coordination of bark beetle surveys and

research in the three states. It was called the “Ashland

Conference” and it led to changes for Miller in 1920.

The team was going to lose a valuable member, however. Ralph Hopping, his long-time Forest Service compatriot and close friend, had accepted a job with the Canadian

Forest Service as a Forest Entomologist.3 On December 10,

1919, Miller met the northbound train at Ashland and rode

as far as Grants Pass with his colleague, friend, and horsepacking buddy as he passed through on his way to Canada.

The lonely return trip to Ashland must have been a reflective one for Miller. Some of his earlier diary entries record

the following memories with Hopping:

January 18th, 1917 (en route to Washington, D.C.) 

At 10:30 pm ferried the Mississippi on a flatboat and arrived at New Orleans at 11:30. Found

transfer to consist of old fashioned cab. After some

delay went to several hotels, found them all filled

up. Finally found cots in a Turkish bath with a

party of 6 others one of whom snored outrageously.

July 29, 1917 (on horse pack trip surveying insect 

conditions Sequoia N.F and N.P)

Spent day at Giant Forest working on insects.

Hopping left at noon for Three Rivers to get supplies for the remainder of our trip. Official mail

was rather discouraging for the reason that I

learned that Keen had enlisted and matters pertaining to the survey were in bad shape.

Figure 56—Jake Garrison, Mono Chief, with a handful of live

“peaggies,” pandora moth larvae. 

Guy Wray, USDA Forest Service

3 Hopping eventually retired in Canada, and his son George also became a

forest entomologist and noted taxonomist of Scolytids for the Canadian

Government. Both men had the distinction of being officers in charge of

the Vernon, British Columbia, Forest Insect Laboratory. I knew George

quite well, but we never discussed his famous father.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

95

CHAPTER 12: Burke and Miller 

Move Again—1920-1922

In December of 1919 we had heavy snows in 

the Ashland area which produced the first white

Christmas I had ever enjoyed. A new sled was 

perfect for sliding down the Bush Street hill. At

Christmas time that year, Mother and Father told

me of the impending move to California, but the

significance was lost on me. I was not impressed

with the place on our visits there and it seemed

very hot (we always traveled in the summer) and

none of it was as exciting as Ashland. Came the

days of packing our things, and then, on a sunny

winter morning in January, 1920, we were on the

train headed south. The Ashland days, alas, were

over, albeit they were very happy and secure days

for me.”(Miller, n.d.a)

The 6-year-old son of John and Bessie Miller thus

remembered the move from Ashland to his new home in

California. He knew nothing about North Fork, California,

but his father did. It was the location of the supervisor’s

office for the Sierra National Forest; the forest where he

started his professional career as a Forest Ranger in the U.S.

Forest Service in 1909-10. They were moving there so

Miller could start a new field station for the Forest Insect

Division. Miller describes the move as follows (Miller and

Keen, n.d.):

8. North Fork, California, February 1920–

November 1924

The results of research on biology and habits

of the western pine beetle at the Ashland station, in

addition to unsatisfactory results on a number of

control projects led to the development of new

ideas which offered some promise of application in

control practices. The Forest Service became interested and an agreement was reached with the

Division to test several of the proposed theories on

experimental projects. This program was outlined

in what became known as the Ashland Conference

Plan [1919] that called for a series of experiments

in the San Joaquin River drainage of the Sierra

National Forest.

A field station was provided for at the Forest

Supervisor’s headquarters at North Fork in order to

carry out the Division’s part of this project. J.M.

Miller was in charge with from 1 to 3 assistants

during the period of the project. The tests which

were run applied to the percentage principle of

control as advocated by Dr. Hopkins, the effectiveness of continued maintenance control to prevent

epidemics, and the costs and efficiency of control

work during the summer period with the use of the

newly discovered solar heat method of destroying

the beetles [fig. 57].

In addition to the experimental control program

the North Fork station carried on research dealing

with other phases of the western pine beetle problem and maintained technical service for a number

Figure 57—Mr. Kimball’s party at Spencer Creek when a test was made of solar heat control 

during the SONC Project near Klamath Falls, Oregon, 1921. 

A.J. Jaenicke, USDA Forest Service
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

96

of control projects that developed in other parts of

the ponderosa pine region.

Miller remained in charge of the Pacific Slope Station,

but his headquarters was now at North Fork, California.

The Ashland station was maintained with Patterson in

charge assisted by Sergent. In this manner, both the Rogue

River research project and new studies at North Fork on the

Sierra National Forest could be carried out simultaneously.

Although without Keen, both Patterson and Miller had

heavy workloads.

Forest Service living quarters were practically nonexistent in North Fork for the Miller family in early 1920, so

Bessie and their son remained at Reedley until something

habitable was found. After living in a tumbledown shack for

a while at the old Site Rock Ranger Station, about 2 miles

from North Fork, the family moved to slightly better 

quarters just above South Fork. This was the old Douglas

Ranger Station, and after Miller put a new shingle roof on

it, the family moved in. It was home for the next 3 years.

Eventually, a one-room shingle shack (ex-tool house) was

moved from the Douglas Station to the North Fork supervisors’ headquarters (fig. 58). This became the office and laboratory of the forest entomology station until Miller left in

1925. Miller’s son, Harold, wrote a delightful description of

his new home and North Fork through a child’s eyes (Miller

1997).

Miller’s entomology work during this period was varied

and far flung. From April through July 1920, he was cruising timber for bark-beetle-killed timber and checking 

control work from camps on the Sierra National Forest. 

This was called the San Joaquin project and extended from

near North Fork south to the Sequoia National Park area

(figs. 59 and 60). It involved much horse riding and camping, which Miller always enjoyed. However, according to

Figure 58—Former tool shed that served as the first forest entomology station office and laboratory for Miller at the supervisor’s

headquarters, North Fork, California, 1920s.

J.M. Miller family

Figure 59—Insect control crew at Chiquita Basin, Sierra National Forest, 1920s.

J.M. Miller, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

97

his diary, on June 1, he gave important testimony to a meeting of the California Forestry Committee in San Francisco

(see next page).

Miller supervised or assisted with many other projects

as well. In late August, he was in northern California helping Patterson with the Antelope Project near Weed. Next he

went to Klamath Falls to check a test of fuel oil sprayed on

the bark of infested trees, and then ignited. The method was

visually spectacular, but failed to kill the beetle brood in the

bark. In September he was the first forest entomologist to

visit the Warner Mountains in northeastern California. He

examined the Sugar Hill burn of 1917 where extensive tree

killing was taking place around the burn. (This area was

again studied by C.B. Eaton in 1940 and by myself in 1957

for outbreaks of mountain pine beetle in second-growth

ponderosa pine). Then he proceeded to the Lassen National

Forest near Bogard Ranger Station and was the first forest

entomologist to visit Butte Lake (probably to fish) in Lassen

National Park. By late September he was in the Chiquita

Basin and the San Joaquin project. In October and

November he was mostly in North Fork with his family; his

diary for November 17-18 notes he “shingled and repaired

roof of the Douglas Station.” During these months he also

had two meetings with Burke in Los Gatos. They were not

working together on any projects at that time, but it was evident he valued Burke’s counsel.

The year 1921 again resulted in some changes for

Burke and the Forest Insect Station’s future status and 

location. Burke’s recollections continue.

The Laboratory at Stanford University, 

California

A reduction in the appropriations for the fiscal

year 1921 caused the resignation of Herbert and I

decided to look for a new location where laboratory expenses would be small. Stanford University

offered laboratory space rent free so I moved to

Stanford in March 1921. Officially the move was

made November 1, 1921.

For the first few years the work at Stanford

continued as at Los Gatos. The investigations of

the Pacific flathead borer and the lead cable borer

were completed. Bulletin 1107 “The Lead-cable

borer or Short Circuit Beetle in California” was

published December 4, 1922, and reprinted July

1923 with R.D. Hartman and T.E. Snyder as coauthors. The work on the Pacific flathead borer was

submitted as a thesis to Stanford University and I

received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June

15, 1923.

What Burke’s memoirs do not mention is that Professor

Doane at Stanford University was also an important 

colleague of Miller’s from his earlier student days and likely

of Burke as they were probably the only two entomologists

in the immediate area. It would be interesting to learn more

about the details of Burke’s move to the Stanford campus,

because it foreshadowed a move of Miller and of all the

entomologists to Stanford University within a few years.

Perhaps Burke was doing the political groundwork convincing Stanford University administrators that such a move

would benefit both parties.

Before this happened, however, there was one more

field station established by Keen at Klamath Falls in 1921.

Keen had returned to the Bureau of Entomology the previous year finding entomological science more to his liking

than farming. This was fortuitous, because Kimball,

Hopkins’ nemesis from a few years earlier, was again 

raising the alarm. Only this time the western pine beetle 

was indeed killing trees in the Klamath Basin in alarming

numbers, on private as well as Forest Service and Indian

Reservation lands. Miller describes the situation as follows

(Miller and Keen n.d.):

Figure 60—Cook at the Shuteye insect control field camp, Sierra

National Forest, 1920s.

J.M. Miller, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

98

9. Klamath Falls, Oregon, January 1922–

November 1925

Since the closing down of the first station at

Klamath Falls [Parker Station, actually] in 1912,

increasing western pine beetle infestations in the

Klamath Basin of Southern Oregon from 1918 to

1920 had impressed the private timber owning

agencies with the need for action. As a result pressure was brought upon the U.S. Department of

Agriculture for an aggressive program of surveys

and control. A meeting was held at Klamath Falls,

Oregon in April 1921 sponsored by the Klamath

Forest Protective Association which included all of

the large holders of ponderosa pine timber in that

section, and was endorsed by representatives of the

leading pine owners throughout the western states.

Stewart Edward White Takes on 

the U.S. Forest Service Fire Policy

Miller became involved in a fire and bark beetle 

controversy when a noted author, Stewart Edward

White, wrote an article for the April 1920 issue of

Sunset magazine (White 1920b).

The article touted the benefits of “light” burning in

California forests. White was acting as an articulate

mouthpiece for the proponents of light burning (what

we would call underburning today). Most of the profire

advocates were private timber owners who thought

that burning the underbrush and smaller trees promoted tree growth, facilitated logging operations, and

killed bark beetles, which many believed spent part of

their life cycle in the duff under trees. White contended that the Forest Service was not doing enough to

control tree-killing bark beetles and argued that

underburning the forests would kill beetles by smoke

and heat in the litter and even in infested standing

trees.

Sunset magazine published a rebuttal in May 

by Chief Forester Graves, who very diplomatically 

depicted the use of fire in such a manner as both

dangerous and counterproductive to sound forest

management (Graves 1920). (This was just one

decade after the terrible forest fires of 1910.) He 

further pointed out that White’s biological facts concerning the control of bark beetles by burning them 

in the forest litter and infested trees did not match the

knowledge of the Bureau of Entomology professionals. He did not say it bluntly, but the inference was

that White’s wild claims on the use of “light fire” to

control bark beetles was utter nonsense.

Sunset published a short reply by White in the

May issue (White 1920a). White was courteous and

claimed he didn’t want to start a controversy, but he

did not back down on his claims over the benefit of

fire either. He asked that the Forest Service participate in some burning experiments on the Southern

Pacific Railroad Company’s forest lands.

At this point, District 5 Assistant Forester

Woodbury and State Forester Hodge formed the

General California Forestry Committee chaired by

Donald Bruce with several others, including Dr. E.C.

Van Dyke, a professor of entomology at the University

of California. The committee seemed to be formed for

one purpose: that was requesting J.M. Miller to come

to San Francisco on June 1, 1920, and give them a

briefing on the relations of fire and bark beetles. Miller

was called on very short notice and came directly

from fieldwork on the Sierra National Forest. He gave

a summary of his research on bark beetle relations to

wildfire, the biology of bark beetles, and current methods used to control them. He essentially demolished

the claims made by White in his Sunset magazine

articles, and he was further backed by Professor Van

Dyke over the particulars of bark beetle life histories.

The minutes of the meeting (Anonymous 1920) claim

that White was invited to attend the meeting but did

not show up.

After almost 3 hours of presentation by Miller 

and questions and general discussion, the meeting

adjourned. Miller never alluded to the subject again 

in his diary or publications.

The premise that prescribed fire could be beneficial for the health of some pine forests was correct,

but the reasons given for practicing it as a forest 

management tool were wrong. It took another three

decades before Professor Harold Biswell of the

University of California Forestry School started 

experimenting and promoting the use of “light fire,”

and his was a lonely voice for three more decades.

Now prescribed fire is not only an accepted forest

management tool, but is recognized as an integral

part of many fire-dependent pine forests in the West.

The Sunset magazine articles, however, had a

positive side in that they publicized the growing 

problem with bark-beetle-caused pine mortality in

California. Miller also must have taken note, because

he used self-described “propaganda” a decade later

when the bark beetle problem was reaching epidemic

proportions, and he was seeking increased appropriations from Congress for research.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

99

As a result of this meeting, action was initiated to

secure Federal appropriations to enable the Forest

Service and Indian Service to conduct control work

on their own lands and to cooperate with the private owners in a comprehensive control operation

embracing 1,267,000 acres of ponderosa pine

forests.

In September 1921 A.J. Jaenicke was assigned

to Klamath Falls to work on this situation. The first

step was to run surveys to determine the extent to

which the infestation involved the multiple ownerships of the Klamath Basin. In the survey program,

Jaenicke was assisted by F.P. Keen from the North

Fork station, J.E. Patterson of the Ashland station

and J.C. Evenden of the Coeur d’Alene station.1 As

a result of the information that was secured and the

recommendations that were made, a special appropriation of $150,000 was secured for control work

on Federal lands and for the necessary technical

service by the Bureau of Entomology. The Klamath

Forest Protective Association assumed the obligation for financing the work on private lands. This

program which extended over a period of 3 years

became known as the Southern Oregon-Northern

California Pine Beetle Control Project.

Control work was started in the winter and

spring of 1922. A field station to carry out the functions of the Bureau of Entomology was established

with project funds early in 1922 with F.P. Keen in

charge. General administration, coordination of

work and fiscal control of the project was handled

under a Board of Control consisting of a representative of the Forest Service, Indian Service, private

owners and Bureau of Entomology. Keen as

Bureau of Entomology representative was elected

chairman of the Board. Keen recruited a staff of

men and trained them as spotters in the details of

survey and control methods. The Klamath Falls station was continued until November 1924. By that

time the original appropriation was exhausted and

the private owners decided to continue the work on

a more independent basis.

Miller was involved in the planning of this project and

establishing a temporary station from the beginning. Even

though he was deeply involved in his own research on the

Sierra National Forest, he made every effort to visit and

become a leader of his men in this new venture. By midAugust 1921 he was on his way to Klamath Falls where he

met with Patterson, Keen, Jaenicke, Kimball, Pollard, and

King. These men were the principal leaders in this new 

project and it was the first time they had all met together.

For the next several weeks Miller was in the area visiting 

pandora moth infestations with Patterson at the Sprague and

Williamson Rivers on the Klamath Indian Reservation. He

was also trying to catch up with a motion picture crew led

by a Mr. Perkins who were filming insect outbreaks and

control actions in the area. This was a first in the efforts to

publicize the timber losses caused by insects at the time.

Miller frankly mentions in his diary the intent of this “propaganda.” Miller eventually caught up with the movie film

crew on the Sierra National Forest where they spent a week

filming the insect control project and affected stands of

trees. The strategy must have worked because as Miller 

has already mentioned, a large special appropriation was

secured from congress to undertake an insect control project

in southern Oregon and northern California.

Miller’s management style was commendable given 

the poor communications and transportation of the era. He

rarely failed to visit his entomologists and entomological

rangers in the field as new projects developed. He delegated

authority to these men to get the job done, but he also provided technical advice on the ground and was not shy about

camping and doing physical labor as needed. An interesting

notation in his diary refers to “The Burch bed sheet, tent and

sleeping bag. E.G. Burch Mfg. Co., Pueblo, Colo.” He probably spent more time during this period sleeping in a tent or

on the ground than at home. The amount of travel he undertook was prodigious. For instance, starting March 1922, a

time when he could normally remain in North Fork writing

his reports and doing research, he spent 2 weeks giving

technical advice to the Forest Service on a bark beetle 

control project at Arrowhead Lake near Los Angeles, but at

least he could take his family with him to spend time with

his mother who lived in Pasadena.

Miller’s work in the remainder of 1922 followed a

familiar pattern. In May he went to Klamath Falls for meetings with Patterson, Keen, and Kimball; in June, more

examinations of the Figueroa Mountain and Arrowhead

Lake projects; and, in October, a 2-week trip to check a very

large bark beetle infestation on the Mendocino National 1 The hiring of Evenden and formation of the Coeur d’Alene station has

been described in Furniss and Renkin 2003.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

100

Forest extending in patches of dead trees from Alder

Springs in the North to Upper Lake and the Eel River in 

the South. This outbreak was the result of large amounts of

windthrown timber from a storm in January 1921 (Miller

and Keen 1960).

But on November 1 there is a mysterious diary entry as

follows:

Went to the forestry school at Berkeley,

California, met Professor Metcalf and made

appointment with Professor Mulford [Dean of

School of Forestry, University of California] 12:15

discussed the matter of occupancy of room in basement of Hilgard Hall. Mulford advised putting

material or furniture in room so that there would be

no cause for complaint from the University because

of demands by others for space.

What was going on? Burke was located at Stanford

University, in supposedly free quarters, Patterson was renting a house in Ashland as a substation, Keen was located in

a substation at Klamath Falls, and Miller was in an old tool

shed at the Sierra National Forest Supervisors office. A

pretty far-flung and expensive quarters proposition for a

poorly funded federal agency. In further comment on the

Berkeley development, Miller wrote on November 15 and

16: “Drove to Berkeley stored breeding material from North

Fork in room in Hilgard Hall–looked for house in Berkeley.

He spent the entire next day looking for housing. Did

Miller feel that some kind of headquarters change was going

to be forthcoming from the Washington, D.C., office? Was

he a little jealous of Burke’s ties to Stanford University and

felt that quarters at the University of California Forestry

School were more appropriate than the tool shed? Was he

just testing the waters with Hopkins? Was change, which

seemed to be the order of the day for the forest insect station, once again on the horizon?
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

101

CHAPTER 13: A New Chief in Washington,

D.C.–More Reorganization, 1923-1924

Government workers often live by a mantra that budgets

rarely increase though workloads usually do, and whenever

a new “Chief” takes charge, reorganization closely follows.

In 1923, this was not necessarily true on the first count

because half of the Forest Insect Station staff was benefiting

from the new $150,000 appropriation for the Southern

Oregon–Northern California (SONC) project. But, on the

second count, a new organization was in the works. Burke

tersely describes the coming change in his memoirs. “In the

fall of 1923, Dr. Hopkins retired as chief of Forest Insect

Investigations and Dr. F.C. Craighead replaced him. This

caused some reorganization of the work and the discontinuance of shade tree insect investigations in the west for a

time.”

Probably because of the impending change in leadership, the first large-scale conference of forest entomologists

and foresters concerned with insect depredations was 

organized by Miller and others. It took place at Berkeley,

California, February 5-10, 1923. It was simply called “The

Forest Insect Conference,” and it was held at the University

of California Forestry School (Anonymous 1923). Interestingly, no Washington office staff attended (fig. 61).

Miller was elected the program chairman and presided

over a series of papers summarizing all of the control projects and knowledge and research to date on the most important Western forest insects. Because many of the reports

involved studies in progress and older studies never completed, it was not intended for publication. The meeting was

informational for people working on forest insect problems

in the West with question-and-answer sessions after each

paper. The intent was to get all involved workers updated

and familiar with the status of the forest insect problems, the

state of current knowledge and research programs, and where

the next logical steps might be taken. The attendees also

made detailed recommendations on the future organization

of Western Forest Insect Division stations and presented

them as a resolution to Hopkins. Such a gathering was valuable for a new leader coming on board, and Hopkins and

Craighead’s subsequent approval of the reorganization of

Western Stations in December 1923, indicate they paid

Figure 61—Attendees of the 1923 Forest Insect Conference, University of California Forestry

School, Berkeley, California.

PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

102

attention to the report.1 Included in the resolutions was one

recommending Miller be chosen as leader of Western Forest

Insect Investigations.

The conference was timely because the number of 

forest insect infestations in the West was rising, and, in the

case of bark beetle control efforts, thousands of dollars were

being spent. Were the benefits justifying the costs? This was

the underlying question and it motivated much future

research on the effectiveness of control projects to reduce

subsequent timber mortality.

Some of the study reports presented during the conference would be crude science by today’s standards, but there

were few statistical methods available at that time, and

sometimes a study could not be completed because of other

pressing duties or lack of funds. What is evident in the

reports is the tremendous amount of raw data accumulated

on bark beetle counts, infested trees per acre, cruises of

infestations, and followup examinations after control projects (fig. 62). All of this work was done with primitive

transportation and living conditions. What the study reports

lacked in statistical and ecological sophistication they made

up for in sheer volume of raw data related to a new specialty in entomology.

The question-and-answer sessions also indicated that

these men were professionals of good will; trying to

advance their science not themselves.

The Berkeley conference may also partially explain

why Miller needed a room in Hilgard Hall on the university

campus. Perhaps he needed it to store materials related to

the conference. But it doesn’t explain why he brought insect

breeding material to the room or spent a day looking for

housing in Berkeley. Perhaps he felt that one result of the

conference would be a recommendation to locate the Forest

Insect Station at the University of California School of

Forestry and the newly formed Forest Service Experiment

Station there. If so, he was to be temporarily disappointed.

There were several policy recommendations posed 

during the conference. The first was a reorganization of 

the Western stations; the second, was the establishment of 

a Western forest insect newsletter.

To present the first proposal, Keen was posted to

Washington, D.C., in March to work with Dr. Hopkins and

confer with Bureau of Entomology and U.S. Forest Service

and Park Service officials. While there he also updated people on the status of forest insect problems in the West by

giving a series of illustrated presentations. At that time

Craighead had not been officially declared chief of forest

insect investigations, so there was a movement by Western

Timber Company people to promote Miller for the job.

Probably, unbeknownst to the Westerners, Craighead had

been the choice for some time by the Washington, D.C.,

establishment. Hopkins and L.O. Howard, the Chief of the

Bureau of Entomology, approved the reorganization in 

principle, but there were no final decisions made about the

reorganization while Keen was there. Keen did prepare a

confidential memo to the Western entomologists upon his

return, which clarifies some of this. 

Keen’s memorandum follows verbatim.

Figure 62—Parade float of the SONC Pine Beetle Control Project,

October 1923.

F.P.

Keen, PNW

1 Frank C. Craighead was born in Pennsylvania in 1890. He obtained a

B.S. degree from Penn State College in 1912 and Ph.D. degree in entomology from George Washington University in 1919. Hopkins first hired him

to work in the Forest Insect Investigations Division in 1911 while he was a

student. Craighead spent several summers working in various regions of

the United States including assisting in a postcontrol survey of the N.E.

Oregon Project (fig. 13). Hopkins appeared to be grooming him for a permanent position in the Division, but in 1921 Craighead took a position

with the Canadian Department of Agriculture. In 1923 he returned to the

Division as chief, replacing Hopkins. He retained that position until he

retired in 1950. His retirement was in name only for he continued to publish numerous articles and five books on various environmental subjects.

He was a consultant and collaborator for the Everglades National Park. 

In 1969, the U.S. Department of the Interior gave him the Conservation

Service Award. He died on May 14, 1982, at his home in Naples, Florida

(May 1982 obituary, in my possession, from an unknown Florida 

newspaper).
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

103

Memorandum for Western Field Men 

Confidential

My trip to Washington, which was decided

upon at the Berkeley Conference, came at a most

critical time in the affairs of Branch, namely, at a

time when a change of administration was under

way. It was filled with thrills and many lurid

moments, many of which cannot be incorporated in

a report of this kind. However, I shall try to give an

idea of what transpired, but will of necessity have

to leave out some of the most interesting details.

On arriving in Washington I soon found that

this was to be my biggest task. Very few had heard

of what the Branch was doing or that we even

existed.

My first interview was with Dr. Quaintance,

Acting Chief of the Bureau. He was very much 

surprised at the size of the Southern Oregon Project

and at the support which was being accorded to 

it by the Forest Service and the private timber 

owners.

I next had an interview with Dr. Ball, Assistant

to the Secretary, accompanied by Dr. Quaintance

and Dr. Howard. This was a most unsatisfactory

interview. Following this there were interviews

with Col. Greeley, of the Forest Service, J.B.

Kinney of the Indian Service, and Dr. Marlatt of

the Federal Horticultural Board. They all showed a

most active interest in what we are doing and were

very much surprised in the comparative losses from

fire and beetles which was illustrated on pictorial

poster which I had prepared for the Berkeley

Conference.

Dr. Ball did not know last year that beetles

were of any importance whatever as tree killers.

Dr. Marlatt was not acquainted with the methods

used to combat them. This goes to show how great

is the need for adequate publicity and educational

work, for if members of our own Department are

not conversant with what we are doing how can we

expect the general public to be informed?

I gave a short talk at the meeting of the

Washington Entomological Society using the firebeetle poster and colored maps of the project to

illustrate the work.

On March 22, I gave a scheduled talk before

the Washington Section of the Society of American

Foresters using slides and diagrams as illustrations.

The talk seemed to arouse a great deal of interest

as it was followed with about fifteen minutes of

rapid fire questions from the foresters on all phases

of the work.

For some time Dr. Hopkins has wanted to be

relieved of the administrative work of the Branch

in order that he may devote his entire time to

research in bioclimatics. On arriving in Washington

I found that Dr. Swaine of Canada had been offered

the position, although Dr. Hopkins had not been

consulted. I felt that, should Dr. Swaine not accept,

some consideration should be given to the effect of

a change of policy upon the Western work, so did

what I could to bring to the attention of those concerned the fact that we had accomplished a great

deal here in the west, were doing a great deal now,

and had assumed a lot of responsibilities that

should not be overlooked when such a change was

made.

The private timber owners, with whom we

have been cooperating, upon learning of the contemplated change took an extremely active interest

in the affair and deluged the Secretary’s office with

telegrams advocating Mr. Miller’s appointment to

this post. This, of course, reacted unfavorably

towards Miller and under protest from Dr. Howard

and myself the propaganda was stopped in-so-far

as it applied to Miller, but they are continuing to

endorse the work that we are doing as they feel that

any change of policy might affect their pocketbooks. So far no decision has been reached as to

who will be named as Dr. Hopkins’ successor. We

have hopes, however, that it will be someone who

is not antagonistic to the present policies.

I could write a book on this subject, but am

not going to. Other matters taken up during the

detail are given in the Western News Letter.

I must not neglect to mention one very important result of the trip which was the development of

a closer friendship and more cordial relationship

with the men in the Eastern Division. Contact with

Dr. Hopkins was a real inspiration, and I could not

help but regret that I had not known him better in

the past.

Mr. Snyder is a square shooter and thoroughly

in sympathy with our Western work. I hope that he

is selected to succeed Dr. Hopkins. We could not

wish for a better friend.

Middleton is a fine clean cut fellow with a lot

of splendid ideas and a very likable personality. I

was glad to be able to know him better.”

Mrs. Carter proved herself a real friend in

straightening out my fiscal troubles (and they were

bad ones at that). She is a very capable and efficient clerk as you probably all know, and one to tie

to if you expect to try any funny business with the

fiscal regulations.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

104

The others in the office included Mr. Murray,

who is helping Dr. Hopkins with his bioclimatic

studies, and Miss Ritchie and Miss Gass, the stenographers. They were all very cordial and pleasant

to know.

I met a great many other pleasant people both

in the Bureau and on the outside. But for

Washington in general, the less said the better.

The proposal for a Western newsletter was approved by

Hopkins and L.O. Howard. The first issue was prepared by

Miller at North Fork; a facsimile follows:

North Fork, California April 16,

1923

NEWS LETTER–WESTERN DIVISION

Forest Insect Investigations–Bureau of Entomology

U.S. Department of Agriculture

As the plan of organization for a Western

Division of the Branch of Forest Insects as accepted at the Berkeley Conference, February 5-10,

1923, has been approved by Dr. Hopkins and the

Chief of the Bureau, it is desirable to get the organization underway as soon as possible.

The plans for some sort of a news letter as a

medium for keeping the widely separated western

stations in touch with each other and in line with

policies was favorably considered at the Berkeley

Conference. There is little doubt but that this letter

will serve a most useful purpose and its success

will depend upon the cooperation of the Western

field men. We will try to get this out at least

monthly to include such items as the following:

1. Movements of personnel at Western 

stations.

2. Accounts of special field trips or 

investigations.

3. Progress of projects.

4. Discussion of topics and policy matters in

which all stations are interested.

Contributions of this nature can be sent to

North Fork in pencil draft and we will try to take

care of the typing here. Suggestions as to the name,

form, or contents of these news letters will be welcome. This issue represents our first attempt. As no

announcement has been made news matter from

the other stations did not come in. 

Let’s make the next letter a real one.

Although the exact details of reorganization remained

to be worked out, the newsletter Summarized Keen’s understanding of the Washington office plans to date as follows:

THE WASHINGTON DETAIL

Mr. Keen gives the following account of his

Washington detail which followed the Berkeley

Conference:

1. Western Organization.

At first it seemed rather useless to go ahead

with our plan of western organization since the

administration of the Branch seemed so uncertain.

However, upon advice from Mr. Miller steps were

taken to secure the approval of this plan and with

some modifications suggested by Dr. Hopkins it

was approved by him and Dr. Howard, and can

now be considered as in effect.

Under this plan it will be best to take up all

matters affecting policy, administration, advice,

criticism of reports, cooperation, etc., thru Mr.

Miller; matters which before have gone direct to

Washington should be handled thru Mr. Miller,

since he is better informed as to local conditions

than is the Washington office, and Dr. Hopkins

cannot afford to spare the time from his bioclimatic

research work to go into all these details.

It will be best to take up matters of allotments,

increases of authorization, station needs, etc., thru

Mr. Miller as he can then keep track of the funds

available, and use our meager appropriations to the

best advantage.

Under the advice of Dr. Ball authority has

always been granted the field men to publish articles of local interest in local papers or periodicals

after approval by the District Office which in our

case is Mr. Miller. Periodicals such as the Timberman is especially included in this category. (Par.

171 Administrative Regulations).

So Miller’s suggestions, with support from other

Western forest entomologists and state and federal cooperators, played a major role in how the Western stations would

be reorganized.

There is no inkling in his diary that he was now leading

the pack, but from Keen’s comments in the newsletter, it

was obvious that Miller was going to be playing an expanded role in the management of Western forest entomology.

His title had even changed from “assistant entomologist” to

“entomologist.” Nary a word in his diary about his promotion. He was not one to toot his own horn; he had been 

too busy quietly leading by example. By October 1923,

Craighead had officially replaced Hopkins, and he wrote a

short article for the Western newsletter describing his goals.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

105

A newsletter facsimile follows. Notice that the newsletter is

addressed to “men.” No women were in the profession in

1923!

NEWS LETTER–WESTERN DIVISION

Forest Insect Investigations, Bureau of Entomology

U.S. Department of Agriculture

North Fork, Cal.–Oct. 1, 1923.

TO THE MEN OF THE WESTERN DIVISION.

I suppose you have all been wondering what is

going to happen next, now that a new head of the

Division has arrived in Washington. Just to relieve

any anxiety right at the start, I am going to say it

will be nothing radical; whatever changes do take

place will be after we have all gotten together and

seriously discussed the work.

In accordance with Mr. Miller’s suggestion 

I decided the use of the official organ (Western

News Letter) of your well-organized Western

Division would be the best manner of putting

before you some ideas I have for the future. It will

be less formal than a letter to each of you and you

can all come back (as I see you do at one another),

which is just what is wanted.

In the first place I feel that our Division is primarily a research organization with the object of

rendering service. We have a part to play in the

development of an efficient forest policy for this

country and as time goes on it will become a more

and more important part, as has that of field crop

and horticultural entomologists in agriculture.

The Forest Service and the private foresters,

particularly those of the Northeast, are coming to

realize more and more the importance of the entomological problems in their efforts to manage the

timberlands. This argues well for us and will continually open larger fields for our endeavors.

Another angle of all this is that we should not lose

sight of a bigger and broader objective when digging down into the details of our pest problems.

To accomplish such results it is necessary, with 

our limited resources, to do thoroughly everything

we undertake. We should not take anything for

granted until we have a sufficient array of data and

facts to substantiate it and present it in such a manner that it is open to fair criticism. It may be well

to limit our projects to a relatively few in number

and hammer away at these from all angles. As an

example, I might suggest a serious defoliation,

since I have been particularly interested in such a

problem the past three years and feel that in the

future after our mature forests are gone such

insects will be our most serious pests. It is first

necessary to know in great detail the seasonal history and feeding habits of the insect–not only on

individual hosts or under laboratory conditions but

in its broader ecological aspects, in relation to all

forest environments. It is necessary to know the

physiological effects of defoliation on the tree, the

relation of secondary insects to the current annual

growth of the tree, and the relationship between the

vigor of defoliated trees and recovery. Such ramifying ends will immediately suggest the question,

how can we do it? The answer is cooperation. We

must seek help from the forester for his conception

of the forest types and quality sites, as well as on

the relationships between tree growth and defoliation; from the plant physiologist and plant mycologist we can get assistance on his phase of the 

problem.

We are endeavoring to establish a forest insect

station in the Northeast to cooperate with the New

England Forest Experiment Station. Mr. Dana will

represent the Forest Service and Mr. Pierson the

Division (for the present in a temporary capacity).

From the start the effects of budworm defoliation

on the current annual growth will have to be considered in the yield studies undertaken by the

Experiment Station. I cite this as an example of

how we can be of service right at the opening of

the station.

In selecting our problems in the future I feel

that we should consult the Forest Service and

endeavor to undertake lines of investigation that

will be of most immediate and direct importance in

carrying out their policy for that particular region.

I hope we can develop a spirit of endeavor for

the Division as a whole, such as that developed in

the West. We should endeavor to let the other fellow know what each of us is doing and come back

at one another with constructive criticism and suggestions. I feel myself that the result of any problem I undertake is not so much a personal creation

but that it is merely my interpretation of natural

events. Any suggestions that will help to get nearer

the truth of the situation will be welcomed.

Although the preceding discussion relates

more directly to purely forest insect problems, the

same general principles will equally apply to our

other lines of work–forest products, shade tree

insects and nursery problems.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

106

I feel that I am not saying much that is new to

all of you. From reading your News Letters during

the past summer I have been greatly impressed

with the excellent manner in which you all are

undertaking your various investigations. I look forward to meeting you all at the conference this fall

and to a thorough discussion of our policy for the

future. – F.C. Craighead.

For the remainder of 1923, Miller was headquartered in

North Fork but was there only intermittently. He continued

his field work on the San Joaquin Project; in May he was 

on a demonstration trip to the SONC project (fig. 63) near

Klamath Falls with Chief of the Forest Service, Colonel

Greeley, and in late July and early August he was in the

Grand Canyon National Park and the Kaibab Plateau on the

north side of the canyon.

An outbreak of the black hills beetle (now mountain

pine beetle) north of the Grand Canyon was resulting in the

death of thousands of pole-sized ponderosa pine. Miller

went to examine the outbreak because the plan of reorganization also placed him in charge of the southwest region.

The north rim of the Grand Canyon was very difficult to

reach at that time. It meant a long trip over rough roads

from Kanab, Utah, or taking the Santa Fe train to Williams,

Arizona, then another train to the south rim, horseback or

walking down to the Colorado River at Phantom Ranch,

then up the trail to Bright Angel and the north rim. Miller

chose the latter route. He walked down to the Phantom

Ranch where horses awaited to ride to Bright Angel. On 

the return trip he reversed the mode of transport. He said it

was an interesting trip, but he would not care to repeat it.

In the fall he spent time on the SONC project with

Keen and Kimball helping to smooth operational problems.

Miller had been a football fan since his student days at

Stanford University. The end-of-the-season game between

the University of California, Berkeley, and Stanford has

always been a big rivalry match called the “Big Game.” 

On Saturday, November 24, the day of the “Big Game,” his

diary notes “went over to the game in p.m.” He had conveniently scheduled a meeting at the Forest Service office in

San Francisco the day before. His diaries note attendance at

quite a few Big Games.

During the half-dozen years before the reorganization,

Burke had been running a one-scientist laboratory at Los

Gatos and then at Stanford University as already noted. He

had really become isolated from current forest entomology

problems at his own choosing. He was doing some 

Figure 63—Forest Service Chief Colonel Greeley (far right) with entourage at the SONC Project,

1923. (Left to right) J.F. Kimball, Hal H. Ogle, A.J. Jaenicke, S.R. Black, George Cecil, Gilbert

D. Brown, W.J. Rankin, J.M. Miller, E.E. Carter, Colonel William B. Greeley.

F.P.

Keen, PNW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

107

noteworthy research on the biology and control of a number

of shade tree and ornamental tree insects, but this kind of

work had limited political appeal when bark beetles were

killing hundreds of thousands of forest trees in the West.

Shade tree entomology had a mostly urban clientele but was

not considered “forest entomology” by most forestry professionals. The end of the Shade Tree Entomology Laboratory

at Stanford University was on the horizon. The ending two

paragraphs of his memoirs are rather sad, but on the other

hand, the new organization needed his talents, as Miller well

knew. Burke’s last entries follow (Burke 1946):

Several new shade tree insect pests became

important and were investigated. Among these

were the live oak leaf gall, Andricus bicornis,

Bakers mealy bug and the Monterey pine sawfly

which defoliated numerous trees in the native

forests near Monterey. The importance of the work

done by the laboratory on shade tree insects is indicated by the fact that the State Highway Department took up pest control for the trees planted

along the State highways and selected W.E.

Glendinning of the laboratory staff to have charge

of the work. This was May 15, 1922. Another

member of the staff, R.D. Hartman, was taken by

the State Department of Agriculture, December 1,

1923, to head its nursery service.

To carry this story further would be going

beyond the first years in forest entomology. During

the period that I have covered thus far in this

account of my experiences, the Division of Forest

Insects was concerned mainly with finding out

which were the most important forest insect problems, determining the taxonomy and biologies of

the insects concerned, and developing direct methods of control. In later years the trend in forest

insect investigations has been to place more

emphasis on ecological studies and the control of

insects through forest management practices. Since

1923 I believe that the western field laboratories

have been larger, better equipped and staffed with

more technical men. The story of these developments belongs to another period and since I started

out to give my recollections of the first years in

forest entomology this seems to be a good point at

which to close this autobiographical sketch.

Miller wasted no time getting Burke back into “forest

entomology.” In October 1923, Burke examined the Lake

Arrowhead Project, which was being financed entirely by

private property owners, including work on several thousand

acres of Forest Service land. Miller felt it was important for

Bureau entomologists to give technical aid for such a project, as private funds were being donated to control Jeffrey

pine beetle on Forest Service land. Perhaps this was an

appropriate first assignment for Burke, as he had first discovered the Jeffrey pine beetle as a new species in Yosemite

National Park in 1906. Even though there were some

research elements to the project, Burke’s feelings about control projects in general were not diminished as evidenced by

his November 1923 contribution to the Western Division

Newsletter (Burke 1923):

Are we not putting the cart before the horse in

insect control? We are spending a lot of time and

money trying to keep the insect away from the tree

when we do not know why it is after it. Would it

not be more sensible to spend considerable money

to find out why the insect attacks the tree in the

first place? If we knew just why an insect attacks it

might be a simple matter to make a valuable tree

non-attractive and a worthless one more attractive.

Close cooperation with a good chemist should

solve the problem.

This was a very prophetic statement. By the 1960s,

entomologists and chemists were studying precisely what he

suggested. Research on the chemistry of primary attractants

of host trees and insect attractant pheromones, were hot

research topics. Advances were made to the point of attracting beetles to certain “trap trees” by using aggregating

attractant pheromones just as Burke had suggested almost

half a century earlier.

From this point on in the story, there are few documents

or memoirs left by Burke. There are some interesting contributions that he made to the Western Division Newsletter

until it was discontinued in 1926. His daughters and grandsons also wrote some of their recollections about their

father, and those will be used later in the story.

On December 1, Miller and Burke left on the train for

Klamath Falls. Enroute, in Weed, California, they met

Craighead who had been appointed chief of the Forest

Insect Division in April, and Evenden, from a new field station in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. The next 2 days they showed
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

108

Craighead bark beetle control being carried out by crews of

the SONC project near Beatty, Oregon. Unfortunately,

according to Miller, they found some trees abandoned by

the insects that were being treated, and the burning of western-pine-beetle-infested bark not very thorough. Luckily a

big storm arrived before the chief from Washington could

see any more poor work, so they high-tailed it to Klamath

Falls (fig. 64).

Actually the purpose of Craighead’s trip to Oregon was

to meet with the Western entomologists and facilitate the

new organization of the Forest Insect Division in the West.

The only reason he held the meeting in Klamath Falls was

that the SONC project was the highest funded project to 

control forest insects under the auspices of the Bureau of

Entomology, so many of the entomologists were working

there. And he wanted to see first-hand this important project.

Craighead gathered Miller, Burke, Patterson, Keen,

Edmonston, and Evenden (fig. 65) for the next 5 days, and

by December 10, the organization was drastically changed.

The changes are best described by Miller who was there

(Miller and Keen, n.d.).

THE REGIONAL FOREST INSECT

LABORATORIES.

Up until 1924 the locations for western field 

stations of the Division had been selected largely

from considerations of easy access to areas where

control or investigative work was undertaken, and

the stations were discontinued or moved whenever

it seemed expedient to do so.

With the rapid development of automobile

transportation after 1920, it became apparent that

the projects with which forest entomologists were

concerned could be handled over a wide field from

permanent stations centrally located as to regions.

Such centralization offered many advantages from

the standpoint of research programs, such as the

grouping of men near educational centers where

library facilities and contacts with other research

agencies were available. It also offered the opportunity for the Division to build up well equipped

laboratories for its work with the assurance that the

installations would be permanent.

In 1923, F.C. Craighead succeeded A.D.

Hopkins as Chief of the Division of Forest Insect

Investigations. Craighead held conferences in 1923

and 1924 with the men engaged in western pine

beetle work and took into consideration the consolidation of a number of the small western field stations that were then being administered. There were

then 6 stations working on bark beetle projects

located at Coeur d’Alene, Idaho; Klamath Falls and

Ashland, Oregon; Stanford University, and North

Fork, California; and Tucson, Arizona. At a general

conference held at Klamath Falls, Oregon, in

December 1923 the decision was reached that all of

the stations except the one at Coeur d’Alene would

be consolidated and grouped at Stanford University.

This would bring together all of the work concerned

with the western pine beetle in the Pacific Coast

Figure 65—Craighead’s Klamath Falls conference, December

1923. (Left to right) Burke, Evenden, Keen, Miller, Craighead,

Edmonston.

J.E. Patterson, PSW

Figure 64—Craighead party checking beetle control work, 

SONC, Bly, Oregon, December 5, 1923. (Left to right) Evenden,

Craighead, Keen, Patterson, Burke, Person.

J.M. Miller, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

109

region and Southwest. The Coeur d’Alene station

was to be continued and developed as the center of

work for the Northern Rocky Mountain region with

the mountain pine beetle as the main problem. 

This move provided for 2 centers of work of

the regional laboratory type for the western pine

regions. For practical purposes, the California laboratory provided for the bark beetle work in the territory included by Forest Service Regions 3, 5, and

6; the Coeur d’Alene laboratory for Forest Service

Regions 1 and 4. As funds permitted, it was contemplated that more adequate service would be

provided by setting up additional laboratories,

especially for Regions 3, 4, and 6. The title of

Forest Insect Laboratory was not officially adopted

by the Division until 1933.

The Forest Insect Laboratory at Stanford

University went into effect in December 1924. The

consolidation of personnel from the former field

stations brought together a staff of approximately

12 technical men, and it was possible to concentrate man-power on the more important leads of

research which will be discussed in the following

sections. The program of the laboratory included a

wide range of problems in forest entomology other

than the western pine beetle. It’s most important

function was the maintenance of technical service

work wherever control projects were undertaken by

federal, private and state forest agencies throughout

the Pacific Coast and Southwestern pine regions.

The year 1924 became a period of transition and

moves. Miller was spending less time at North Fork and his

family was spending more time at Bessie’s family farm—

“The Brose Ranch.” The attraction of Yosemite continued

its hold on Miller. He spent a week there discussing plans

for an exhibit of forest insects in the museum, and the use 

of his lantern slides, and a new pine beetle movie to show

summer visitors. The Bureau of Entomology was actively

promoting insect control to the public now, especially since

Keen found on his trip to Washington that the Assistant

Secretary of Agriculture didn’t know that bark beetles killed

trees. Miller and the park naturalist took some time to 

photograph the “Giant Yellow Pine,” the largest ponderosa

pine in Yosemite Valley (fig. 66).

Although Burke was going to be more active on forest

entomology problems, the research on shade tree entomology was continuing on a reduced scale. In January 1924,

Burke, Miller, and Edmonston took Craighead to visit

Monterey pine forests owned by the Del Monte Corporation

that were being seriously defoliated by a sawfly. And, as if

it were expected of him, Burke wrote a several-page essay

on the wisdom of insect control in national parks when it

was his turn to contribute the lead article for the Western

Division Newsletter (Burke 1924).

One paragraph tells the gist of his feelings:

Insect killed timber is as natural to the

primeval forest as are the trees themselves. The

first law of nature is ceaseless movement. All is

change. Nothing stands still. Trees grow and die

from many causes, destructive insects, being one of

them. All of this is as nature intended and mere

man should be careful how he interferes if he is

going to carry out to the fullest extent the purpose

for which the parks are created. Is there any real

necessity for controlling insect infestations in the

parks? [Italics added].

Figure 66—At giant yellow pine in Yosemite Valley, California,

1927. (Left to right) H.E. Burke, F.C. Craighead, and J.M. Miller. 

J.M. Miller, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

110

Of course, probably as he intended, he stirred up a 

hornet’s nest of replies from entomologists and foresters

who made their living killing insects in national forests and

national parks. As a matter of fact, Crater Lake National

Park had just requested funding a month before to start a

control project against the mountain pine beetle, which was

killing thousands of lodgepole pine (Wickman 1990).

The far-flung forest insect outbreaks that Miller now

had administrative responsibility for included increasing

problems in Yellowstone National Park (Furniss and Renken

2003) and a control project in the Kaibab area (fig. 67).

Luckily the SONC project was winding down as the timber

losses were on a downward trend, and Congress failed to

provide funding until late in the year. This meant Keen’s

presence was not required, and this was lucky for Miller

because the only other entomologist available was Patterson

who was working on the Antelope Control Project with

McCloud River Lumber Company, examining the bark beetle outbreak at Crater Lake, and finishing up his research on

the pandora moth.

To top it off, Miller was trying to complete studies on

the San Joaquin project, which had drawn him to North

Fork several years earlier. This project covered a large 

area on the Sierra National Forest and was centered in the

Chiquita Basin. The objective of the research was to see if

continued summer treating of infested trees could supplement and improve the overall effectiveness of the winter/fall 

normal treatment periods. Summer is a difficult time to

locate and treat bark-beetle-infested trees. The beetles are

flying and making new attacks, and the needles are green

for some months after attack. The only way to identify

newly attacked trees was look for “pitch tubes” or resins

mixed with the boring dust of beetle attacks exuding from

the bark. It takes a very experienced eye to identify these

new attacks.

Then a new research opportunity presented itself at

North Fork in July. A ranger’s house caught fire and resulted

in a fire of several thousand acres of ponderosa pine forests.

There was much interest at the time of the interrelations of

forest fires and insects. Observations by entomologists

revealed that bark beetles and wood-boring insects were

attracted to scorched trees and trees killed by fire, but there

was little quantitative information on what degree of scorch

resulted in bark beetle attacks, how successful brood survival was in fire-injured trees, and whether beetles emerging

from fire-damaged trees would kill green trees nearby. Some

work of this nature had been started by Patterson and Miller

after the mistletoe burn near Ashland in 1914, but results

were inconclusive. Here was a serendipitous event in the

back yard of Miller’s research station. Even though he was

scheduled to relocate to Palo Alto in 6 months, he started a

study in the burn and left his assistant Wagner stationed in

North Fork to follow up (Miller and Keen 1960). Miller also

started a dendrochronology study on the increment growth

of various classes of pine trees in the San Joaquin project.

Everyone was so busy that summer that Miller suspended

the newsletter from August through November.

Burke was helping as needed, but the sawfly infestation

near Monterey was so serious that he developed a gasolinepowered sprayer to attempt control measures and undertook

some tests of this new approach for forest insects. To 

complicate matters, the new chief of the Forest Insect

Division wanted to get a crash course on Western forest

insect problems.

In July 1924, Craighead was back in Oregon meeting

with Burke, Miller, and Patterson. Craighead was no

stranger to Oregon. In 1913, as a student summer employee

of the Forest Insect Division, he made a posttreatment

Figure 67—At cabin in VT Park, Kaibab National Forest, Arizona,

1922. (Left to right) Chief of Division Dr. F.C. Craighead, W.D.

Edmonston, George Hofer, F.P. Keen. 

F.P.

Keen, PNW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

111

examination with Sergent of the northeastern Oregon project

that Burke supervised (Burke and Wickman 1990).

Now, 11 years later, he was in charge of forest 

entomology throughout the United States for the Bureau of

Entomology, Department of Agriculture. Because California

and Oregon had the preponderance of forest insect problems, control appropriations, and funding, Craighead had

been getting information on Western forest insect problems

from politicians and Forest Service people in those states. 

In July he also visited the pine forests north of Klamath

Falls recently defoliated by pandora moth. After viewing

these forests, he went with Patterson and Miller to Crater

Lake National Park to meet the Superintendent, Colonel

Thompson, and apprise him of the increasing infestation of

mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine mentioned earlier.

After discussing the fate of the Ashland station with

Patterson (it was to be closed in 1925), Miller and

Craighead headed to Yosemite National Park. They met

Burke there, and Craighead was taken to areas in the high

Sierra where Burke and Miller had carried out the first

research and surveys of the lodgepole pine needle miner 

and mountain pine beetle a decade before (fig. 68).

Craighead probably spent a very pleasant 10 days in 

the Yosemite high Sierra.

Finally, in the fall, Miller was requested to examine 

tree killing in the Lake Tahoe area by Nevada State Senator

Oddie. Miller found white fir, Jeffrey pine, and lodgepole

pine being killed by various bark beetles. He also reported

root disease, probably for the first time in that area, to Dr.

Meinecke, Forest Pathologist for District 5 of the Forest

Service.

Summer turned to fall, Keen’s SONC office closed,

Sergent resigned at Ashland and was hired by the McCloud

River Lumber Company (the loss of a faithful, hard-working

assistant), and the demand for insect surveys declined.

Miller spent more and more time at Palo Alto. He was there

consulting with Burke, the new oldtimer, on the upcoming

consolidation of the entire Forest Insect Division staff at

Jordan Hall on the Stanford University Campus.

A new era was opening with the New Year. Burke and

Miller were working together again in the same office for

the first time since 1913.

Figure 68—(Left to right) H.E. Burke, H.L. Person, F.C. Craighead

at Tenaya Lake, Yosemite National Park, 1924. 

J.M. Miller, PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

112
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

113

CHAPTER 14: The Forest Insect Division

at Stanford University, 1925-1929

The year 1925 brought some lasting changes to the Forest

Insect Division Station and to the career of H.E. Burke. 

As he put it in the newsletter on January 1 (Burke 1925)—

“After a year of peace and quiet the Palo Alto Laboratory is

in the midst of great confusion and turmoil preparatory to

settling down into permanent headquarters for the western

work,” the great confusion and turmoil was described by

Miller in the December 1, 1924, Newsletter—facsimile of

page 1 follows: 

WESTERN DIVISION NEWS LETTER

Forest Insect Investigations, Bureau of Entomology

U.S. Department of Agriculture

(not for publication) 

Palo Alto, California–December 1, 1924.

THE PALO ALTO STATION.

This issue of the News Letter is coincident

with the centralizing of the activities of the Western

Division of Forest Insects in one central station at

Palo Alto, California. A move of this sort has been

considered for several years because of the need

for correlation of the work throughout the western

field. This could only be accomplished by unifying

four small field stations in Oregon and California

at one point central to the general area to be covered. The stations involved in this move are the

ones located at North Fork, California, Palo Alto,

California, Ashland, Oregon and Klamath Falls,

Oregon.

This station is the first effort on the part of the

Branch to establish a permanent regional field station with an organized staff and facilities to carry

out the various lines of investigation involved by

the forest types of the general region. The area

which this new station will attempt to serve is represented by Forest Service District 5, the southern

half of District 6, District 4 and District 3. Palo

Alto is central of the transportation facilities for

this territory and is accessible to the District

Forester’s office at San Francisco. The Department

of Entomology of Leland Stanford Jr. University

has provided the housing necessary for laboratory

and office quarters together with the use of library

and other facilities.

Two of the stations affected by this consolidation will be continued as substations to facilitate

the handling of special project work. These are the

ones located at North Fork and Ashland in connection with the studies of the San Joaquin and

Southern Oregon-Northern California project.

The personnel of the Palo Alto Station will be

J.M. Miller, Dr. H.E. Burke, F.P. Keen, J.E.

Patterson, O.J. Hauge, H.L. Person, Entomologists,

E.A. Morrow, Assistant Scientific Aid, and R.M.

Tatro, Clerk. Albert Wagner, Senior Scientific Aid,

will be located at the North Fork substation during

the progress of the studies on the San Joaquin project [fig. 69].

Western News Letter

Beginning with this issue we will plan to get

the paper out on the first of each month from the

Palo Alto Station. Due to the necessities of the field

season, this is the first issue to appear since July 1,

1924. During September the question of whether it

would be advisable to renew the News Letter at all

was raised and a poll was taken of all the western

men and others interested. There was a consensus

of opinion that the paper should be kept up as it is

the most available medium for this exchange of

ideas and record of progress.

Miller went to Washington, D.C., for most of January to

meet with Craighead and various people in the Bureau of

Entomology, Forest Service, and Park Service. During his

absence, Burke was in charge, so he bore the brunt of organizing the new station for the first month as well as his new

responsibility for editing the Western Division Newsletter.

Figure 69—Staff of Pacific Slope Station in front of Jordan Hall,

Stanford University, 1926. (Left to right) J.M. Miller, F.P. Keen,

O.J. Hauge, Jean Tatro, E.A. Morrow, H.L. Person, H.E. Burke,

and J.E. Patterson.

PSW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

114

Perhaps all of this turmoil was not especially pleasing to

him after spending the last 12 years as a one-man station,

but for the science of forest entomology it was very 

important. Burke was back in the fold again with his colleagues, old and new, as a “forest entomologist.” His work

as a shade tree entomologist was productive and resulted in

new knowledge and publications about his specialty, but the

emerging science of Western forest entomology would benefit by his pioneering experiences, academic relations, and

maturity, as events would demonstrate. He became the elder

statesman of the newly organized station, and the fact that it

was located on a university campus where he had contacts

with professors and the campus administration must have

helped the station get settled rapidly.

The focus of station work now started to shift from a

preponderance of technical assistance for control projects

with some incidental research to an increased emphasis on

research. The technical assistance for control projects would

continue because the Forest Service and Park Service needed such work. Their political assistance also helped with

appropriations to fund the Forest Insect Division stations.

But the entomologists in the station were trying to fit

research into their projects to satisfy their own curiosity and

to try and get a basic understanding of insect dynamics as

they related to timber losses. Their new chief, Craighead,

was a strong proponent of this approach.

Miller well understood this when he wrote an essay for

the February 1, 1925, Western Division Newsletter titled

“Investigations” (Miller 1925). In the first paragraph he

wrote:

The impetus to any research work carried on

by a public agency is the result of economic pressure. To a great extent this is true of forest entomology in the United States. The demands of timber land owners for information and scientific service have largely determined the amount of funds

available for the entomological work of protection.

This pressure has also determined the regional

problems to be first considered. The forest entomologist has had little opportunity to choose his

path. Lines of research that appealed to his fancy or

that in his judgment offered the most promising

field for discovery, have been sidetracked for the

immediate projects in hand.

He went on to explain the situation in the West.

In the west, interest has turned largely to the

protection of mature pine against bark beetle infestations. This is due to the fact that losses are often

severe, that high values are at stake, and that methods of control have been developed which have

yielded some measure of success. The requests of

owners for information, advice and demonstration

of methods has been the first obligation which we

have attempted to meet.

Later in the essay he explains some of the research

needs as related to bark beetle problems.

In the meantime, what about our investigative

program? No one realizes better than the man in

the field the need for more information and a better

conception of the underlying causes of our bark

beetle infestations. Such a matter as the ability to

forecast the increase or decline of a bark beetle epidemic would have much to do with plans of protection. The tropisms of certain bark beetles, the distance which they fly to reinfest the areas that have

been cleaned, the possibility of reducing losses

through methods of forest management are some of

the studies which have been considered.

This was all very well, but it was focused almost entirely on bark beetles and their depredations of pine forests.

Other forest insect problems were becoming important,

especially defoliating insects like the pine butterfly and

Douglas-fir tussock moth in Idaho that Evenden worked on

and the lodgepole pine sawfly and the spruce budworm in

Yellowstone National Park (Furniss and Renkin 2003).

Within a few decades, pine beetle problems were decreasing

in significance in ponderosa pine stands as a spruce beetle

outbreak erupted in Colorado in 1949-50. On the heels of

this came Westwide spruce budworm outbreaks in fir 

stands in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. The move to a

University setting was fortuitous because entomology 

professors like Doane and others to follow became part of

the research equation. Burke had already been associated

with academia for over a decade, and it showed in his

research and broad intellectual curiosity. Having him on the

station staff and participating in forest insect research, even

if such research continued to emphasize control methods,

was a timely stroke of good fortune.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

115

As the Stanford University years unfolded, there were

changes in research emphasis by the station staff and

increased participation in professional meetings and societies, but in 1925, a paradigm shift dedicated to increased

basic research was still a few years away. 

Miller spent most of 1925 dividing his time equally

between Stanford University at Palo Alto and his research

field station at North Fork where Wagner kept the fire study

going. In May he became a pioneer in a new technology to 

rapidly assess forest insect outbreaks over a wide area. His

diary entry for May 26 states, “Left Crissey Field [U.S.

Army Airfield at Presidio of San Francisco] flew to North

Fork in 1 hour 25 minutes. Return 4:30 p.m.”

Lieutenant Taylor of the U.S. Army was the pilot on

this historic flight to examine and photograph bark-beetlekilled trees and research plots near North Fork and Bass

Lake. Evidently, this was the first aerial photography of

insect-killed trees in the West. Several photographs were

taken by Miller during the flight (fig. 70) (Miller 1926).

Miller may have been occupied with making the switch

of operations from North Fork to Palo Alto, but he still

found time to visit his beloved Yosemite National Park 

and make a hike from Booth Lake, down to Lyell Fork of

Tuolumne Meadows checking for lodgepole pine needle

miner and mountain pine beetle infestations.

The remainder of the station staff was very busy 

giving technical control advice to a new customer for their

services. The National Park Service received a $25,000

appropriation in 1925 to control forest insects in the Western

parks for the first time in their history. As already noted,

Patterson was giving technical advice to Crater Lake

National Park, which was spending its share of the appropriation combating the mountain pine beetle (Wickman 1990).

And Burke, even though he was not a strong proponent of

controlling insects in National Parks, was in Yellowstone

National Park that summer and the following one studying

control methods against a needle tier, and a sawfly defoliating lodgepole pine (Furniss and Renkin 2003). Burke was

experimenting with a lead arsenate spray, delivered from

trucks loaned by the Eastern Gypsy Moth Division, to kill

larvae in the foliage (Burke 1932). Only 250 feet on each

side of a road could be treated by this method so the result

was purely cosmetic. The objective was to prevent defoliation and perhaps death of trees along scenic roads, not to

reduce populations overall. Burke probably saw this as

something of a wasted effort, but like a good soldier carried

out the project with his usual dedication. The project did

allow him to have his family with him for the summer in a

beautiful setting that his wife and children enjoyed (fig. 71).

The year 1924 was the driest on record to that date in

many localities in the West. This resulted in a very serious

fire season. There was much interest by forest managers on

the effect of bark beetles, following the fires, killing

scorched trees and even nearby green trees.

Figure 70—Aerial photo taken by Miller of his study area near

Bass Lake, Sierra National Forest, 1925.

J.M. Miller, PSW

Figure 71—The Burke family camp at Yellowstone National Park,

1926.

H.E. Burke family
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

116

TRIP TO YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK 1926

by Claire Burke

The Yellowstone trip was another example of her 

derring-do [Mrs. Burke]. Not one of us would ever forget it or fail to place it foremost in our memories. It

was not exactly a wilderness experience, but perhaps

more formidable than the High Sierra was good old

Highway 66. As I have often heard her say, “Even

Dad looked at me as if I were crazy,” when she insisted on driving all five kids and the dog in an open [it

had a cloth top] Model T Ford nearly 1,000 miles from

Palo Alto to West Yellowstone.

We lost various articles of clothing out of the open

windows and went over bumps that tossed us to the

ceiling as we sped along at a maximum of twenty-five

miles per hour. Skimpy, the terrier mix jumped out

once to chase a squirrel, but was just dazed for a few

minutes and ran to catch up. Mother insists that we

were never so well behaved; she kept Marion and

Bud up front and Janet, Dorothy and Me in back for

sociological reasons. I suppose Marion and Bud were

a little too close to headquarters to get anything

going between them. In hotels, we often had two 

double beds and the interrelationships were again

carefully thought out.

Skimpy drove the whole way with hind feet on

knees in the back seat and forepaws near Mother’s

shoulder. His face was always in the rear view mirror.

He would drop exhausted whenever the car stopped,

but immediately resume his post when the engine

started.

The car was fantastic. Mother seemed to understand its every sound. After all, it was HER car. It

bothered Harold [Claire’s future husband] when we

first met that the family car was always referred to as

‘Mother’s car’, but every car we had as a family car

replaced the first one which was a gift to my Mother

on her birthday. Dad did eventually get a Model T

long before they became fashionable to commute to

work because he was never able to master the shift.

Even in the Model T, he was apt to start out like a

jack rabbit. But Mother and cars were made for each

other.

It was not very far out of Wells, Nevada, when

Mother discerned a strange sound in the engine.

“Something is wrong with the timer”; so we turned

back and got a new timer. I have always been

impressed with her sensitivity and understanding of

cars. She and Marion could both change tires. Our

horn failed but I provided a stentorious imitation of

one of those musical horns on the outside of very

expensive cars. It was gratifying to see the car ahead

rapidly pull out of the way and the occupants stare in

amazement as we hurried by. Our light weight and

our ruxtle axle, something very special that Mother

had put on our car, carried us through mire where

many Buicks and such were hopelessly stuck. As we

passed triumphantly, we would lean out and yell, “Get

a Ford”.

It was a happy moment when we entered the line

up to go through the gate into the park. For miles we

had been in a long chain of cars in two ruts in deep

gravel. There was nothing to do but follow no stopping, no passing. One of the Rangers at the gate recognized us way back in the line and made the cars

move a little to let us out. We were trying to hide

Skimpy under a blanket as we were aware of the nodog law in the park. We had permission to bring him

because we would be at a ranger station far from the

tourists, but we weren’t sure that this Ranger would

understand.

“Will your Dad be glad to see you!” he said, and

waved us through the gate reserved for buses and

other park vehicles. From that moment on, we owned

Yellowstone.” —Claire Burke (date unknown).

Mrs. Burke and her birthday Model T Ford on the way to

Lake Tahoe from Placerville, “my first long drive” (date

unknown).

H.E. Burke family
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

117

As mentioned earlier, a 6,000-acre blaze was started

adjacent to the North Fork station when a ranger residence

caught fire. This fire was in mature ponderosa pine and

Miller immediately established study plots in the burned

area to study the entomological relations. This research led

to some important publications to be reported later.

Keen and Edmonston spent the summer of 1925 on the

Kaibab Plateau continuing to help with the Black Hills beetle outbreak. They even had a local character called “Windy

Jim” [Jim Henry] build a laboratory-insectory for them out

of beetle-killed lumber sawn at a local mill. Professor

Blackman, on leave from New York State College of

Forestry, used the facilities to carry out biological studies.

Patterson, besides his work at Crater Lake, was also

cruising the SONC project and finishing up his research on

the pandora moth in south-central Oregon (Patterson 1929).

Patterson was also using increment cores to study the effects

of defoliation by pandora moth on tree growth and the relation of growth rate of ponderosa pine to susceptibility of

attack by bark beetles. This was the beginning of studies

that resulted in a breakthrough in the silvicultural management of western pine beetles. It was also indicative of the

new dedication of at least some of the stations in aiming

resources at basic research. As pointed out in the previous

chapter, in the May 1925 Western Division News Letter,

Burke wrote a prophetic short essay on the need of an

attractant for western pine beetle. He asked, “Why do 

beetles attack one tree and not an identical one nearby?”

This was a fundamental question that research by Hubert

Person was starting to elucidate. Person was a young

forester who had just joined the staff at the Stanford

Laboratory. His research assignment was studying host

(pine) susceptibility to bark beetle attack.

On a less enlightened note, the station hired the first

female entomologist in June, 1925. Therese Beckwith, 

formerly a clerk at the Entomology Department of Oregon

Agricultural College [Oregon State University], passed 

the civil examination for Junior Entomologist. But she was

hired at the station as a temporary office clerk. Times were

changing, but not that fast. She resigned a few months later,

I hope to pursue a more professionally fulfilling career.

The year ended at Palo Alto with Burke back at his

newsletter editor duties, Miller and family in a new residence in Palo Alto, and Patterson, Keen, Person, and Walter

Buckhorn (a scientific aide) filling out the staff. Hauge had

resigned in November and moved back to Klamath Falls.

Measuring the radial growth of trees by using increment

cores taken at breast height was in vogue. Almost all of the

entomologists were making these measurements to either

determine the effect of insect attacks on the trees (Patterson

studying pandora moth and Burke the lodgepole needle

miner), while Person, Miller, and Keen studied the relations

of tree growth rate on susceptibility to beetle attack. Person

alone measured over 7,000 cores in 1925 and early 1926.

Measuring growth rings to about 1/100th of an inch was

tedious and exacting work requiring a microscope and

steady hands. Patterson devised a micrometer sliding stage

that he called an “increment core comparator” (fig. 72)

(Patterson 1926).

This device improved the efficiency and accuracy of

measuring increment cores, and for the next decade many

thousands of mature pine trees were cored and measured to

determine the cryptic patterns of their growth rates.

In March 1926, the Western Division News Letter’s

masthead changed to “Western Forest Insect News.” The

subscription had swollen from only a dozen or so copies to

over 100. The newsletter was increasingly calling the Palo

Alto headquarters a laboratory and the other locations field

stations.

Figure 72—Patterson’s original increment core micrometer, which

I still use.

B.E. Wickman
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

118

In June, Miller lost his trusted field aid, Earl Morrow

who transferred to the Sierra National Forest. Also, that

month, the field season officially began with Burke and

family going to Yellowstone National Park and Miller 

traveling to all of the field sites with Craighead who was

making his annual field visits from Washington, D.C. He

differed from Hopkins in this regard, perhaps because rail

travel was improving; he visited all of the field stations at

least annually and sometimes twice a year. Burke’s daughter

Janet, remembered one such visit to Yellowstone Park as

starting with a not-too-pleased discussion of his impending

visit by her parents.1 When he arrived she distinctly 

remembered his wrinkled seersucker suit; he was probably

disheveled from a long, hot train journey. Being a child, she

did not understand this, but thought it was strange apparel

for a Yellowstone Park campfire. The Burkes had quite a

few VIP visitors that summer, including the Assistant

Secretary of Agriculture, R.W. Dunlap.

Miller continued his annual trips to Yosemite and the

Mono Lake area where extensive wind-thrown Jeffrey pine

had become infested with Jeffrey pine beetle. By 1926 there

was a large infestation of this insect in the area, but by 1927

it had greatly subsided. Because of the diversity of timber

types and climates between the west side of the Sierra and

Cascade Mountain ranges and the east side, there was never

a shortage of forest insect problems to show to Craighead.

Miller took full advantage of these outbreaks to propagandize the diverse problems and the station’s need for more

funding. Miller seemed to be a very astute leader who could

discern and understand not only the research needs, but also

how to publicize them and politick the right people. Under

his leadership, the Forest Insect Station steadily grew in 

personnel and importance.

The next entomologist hired by Miller was George R.

Struble, a senior entomology student at Stanford University

hired to be a part-time worker at the station headquarters in

Jordan Hall. Struble describes his first introduction to the

station (Struble 1953):

I was introduced to forest entomology at

Stanford University in the fall of 1926, as a senior

student in biology and zoology. I had taken several

courses in entomology under Professors R.W.

Doane, G.F. Ferris, and Isabel McCracken and

decided that a career in economic entomology

might be worth while. These courses were given in

Jordan Hall, which housed the School of Zoology.

At this location also was the Pacific Slope

Laboratory of Forest Insect Investigations, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Entomology.

This laboratory was the headquarters station for

forest entomological research and surveys covering

the Pacific Coast States, Arizona and New Mexico.

A tour of the laboratory by a group of entomology students had been arranged between

Entomologist John M. Miller, in charge, and

Professor Doane. The long trek by stairs led from 

a small headquarters office on the ground floor

upward four floors into an attic section of Jordan

Hall. An expanse of skylighted corridor lined by

rearing cages of various designs led into a large,

darkly paneled room at the north end. Some were

for Dr. Isabel McCracken’s studies of silkworms.

Many were used in studies of forest Cerambycid

larvae by Dr. H.E. Burke, a leading forest entomologist. Burke had been associated since 1901 [sic]

with Dr. A.D. Hopkins, pioneer chief of forest

insect investigations in America.

The laboratory room was about 20 feet wide

by about 40 feet long. It was lighted by a center

light well and heated by a single steam radiator.

Housed here were the forest insect collection,

desks, files, and personnel. Two side doors led to

large areas of unfinished attic space which were

used mostly for storing field equipment and various

tools. A section at one end was equipped and used

as a photographic darkroom [something Miller

always insisted on having].

Our tour guides included Walter J. Buckhorn,

Hubert L. Person, and John E. Patterson; others of

the “bug” staff included Paul Keen and W.D.

Edmundson. I was impressed by the many kinds of

bark beetles in western forests and their damage.

This was my first awareness of the western pine

beetle.

Struble failed to mention Dr. Blackman who was writing up his biological studies of the Black Hills beetle from

the Kaibab Plateau project before returning to New York.

Miller and Keen were also in a small competitive

endeavor over the use of “Aeroplanes” to survey and photograph insect infestations. As noted earlier, Miller was the

1 Correspondence from Janet Burke Eglington, 2002-2003.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

119

first to get into the air and observe and take several photographs of bark-beetle-killed trees at Bass Lake near North

Fork, California, but Keen was the first to actually experiment with aerial photography as a survey method to map an

outbreak. His description of the adventure on the Modoc

National Forest was written up in the Western Forest Insect

News, titled, “Shooting Bugs from the Air” (Keen 1927).

In September I had the opportunity of making

such a flight over the Happy Camp District of the

Modoc National Forest. The District 5 air-patrol

plane, piloted by Captain M.S. Boggs, was detailed

to the project through the courtesy of the Forest

Service, and to the Forest Supervisor, George W.

Lyons, was allotted the task of serving as weather

prophet and to advise Mather Field when air and

light conditions would be satisfactory for the flight.

Monday, the twenty-sixth, dawned bright and

clear, and Supervisor Lyons, trusting to his luck as

an amateur Father Ricard, telephoned the field for

the plane to come on. In the next two hours, while

I negotiated forty miles of mountain road from

camp to Alturas, the plane covered the two hundred

miles from Sacramento to Alturas and landed on

the field only a few minutes after me. Following a

hasty lunch we donned helmets and goggles,

strapped on the “chutes,” wound up the DH-4, and

in a moment Captain Boggs had it climbing skyward, like a Chalcophora [a wood boring beetle]

scared from a bug tree, and heading toward Happy

Camp Mountain.

On reaching the area we circled Happy Camp

lookout tower and headed toward Timber

Mountain. When over the plots to be photographed

I unbuckled the safety belt, knelt on the seat and

hung out over the side of the fuselage in preparation to shoot at the proper moment. Captain Boggs

maneuvered the plane over the plot and at a given

signal shut off the motor, turned the nose up, tilted

the plane to the side (a most disconcerting procedure), and as the plane settled and the vibration of

the propeller ceased I clicked the camera and

climbed back to safety to change plates and prepare

for the next shot. After taking a dozen exposures,

both vertical and oblique, we headed back to

Alturas and landed safely at the field, after spending an hour and a half in the air and covering an

area that would have taken a week to survey on the

ground.

The first day we used a “G” filter with ordinary panchromatic plates, but upon developing

them found that the negatives were too weak for

light conditions that prevailed on the area. You see,

the Supervisor was almost as good a prophet as a

Native Son, and so it started to cloud up by noon

and was quite overcast by four o’clock.

And the next day it rained.

Keen’s exciting flight must have cooled Miller’s ardor

to be a pioneer in aerial photography of forests for there are

no further references to this activity in his diaries, but he did

take a last flight over some of his study areas just before he

retired.

February 8-16, 1927, there was a meeting of all

Western forest entomologists in the United States at the Palo

Alto Station. J.M. Swaine, in charge of Western Forest

Entomology in Canada, had suggested the year before in the

Western Insect News that such a meeting be scheduled for

1927. However, no Canadian entomologists were included

in the list of Burke, Evenden, Jaenicke, Miller, Blackman,

Keen, Patterson, Person, and Craighead from the Washington office. Either the Canadians experienced some difficulty

arranging the visit or they were not invited. For several

years, Evenden and sometimes Keen had been attending 

the annual Western Forestry and Conservation Association

meetings that were joint U.S. and Canadian. A forest entomologist from each country was invited to give an update

on Western forest insect problems at every session of the

association. As these “insect” sessions became more popular

there was some interest in expanding the entomology portion to a full-day meeting. Swaine was most likely thinking

of this when he proposed a meeting of forest entomologists

only. The joint meeting never seemed to pan out, so entomologists from Canada and the United States continued 

to meet for brief sessions at the Western Forestry and

Conservation Association annual meeting for another 20

years. In 1949, entomologists from both countries split off

from the association meetings and formed their group called

the Western Forest Insect Work Conference which is going

strong today.

The meeting in Palo Alto was a lengthy one, 10 days,

so it probably included a lot of bureaucratic chaff along with

the technical wheat. In 1927, Miller’s diary mentioned 

an ever-increasing number of trips to Berkeley without 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

120

mentioning why or precisely where. They were too numerous to involve only football and baseball games between

Stanford and the University of California. Changes were on

the horizon again for the Forest Insect Division, Pacific

Slope Station. As recounted by Eaton (1953):

The original proposal to locate at the

University of California the forest insect investigative work of the then Bureau of Entomology’s

Pacific Slope Field Station at Stanford University

was made by Walter Mulford, (Professor of

Forestry) in a letter to J.M. Miller, dated April 15,

1927. Mulford suggested that this work be located

with associated forest research being brought

together on the Berkeley campus. Miller favored

the proposal (letter to Craighead, April 22, 1927),

and F.C. Craighead (then in charge of the Division’s Washington office) fully approved (letter to

Miller, May 9, 1927).

Miller must have had mixed emotions about this proposed move, because his family had their first permanent

residence in Palo Alto where their son Harold (Dusty) was

in high school and daughter Betty in grade school. However,

Miller probably saw that the future of forest entomology lay

with the newly established Forest Experiment Station and

the Forestry School, both located on the University Campus

at Berkeley. Before the San Francisco Bay Bridge was built,

it was a shorter trip from Palo Alto to the Forest Service

District 5 office in San Francisco, but the science of entomology and forestry lay in a different direction, across the

Bay in Berkeley.

Miller wasted no time in establishing political ties with

the Berkeley people. The December 1, 1927, Newsletter

noted an important first step.

FOREST ENTOMOLOGIST ASSIGNED TO

CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION

Assistant Entomologist H.L. Person took up

quarters with the California Experiment Station at

Berkeley [now Pacific Southwest Research Station]

on November 1. Mr. Person’s assignment will provide for an important phase of coordination of

work between the Bureau of Entomology Station at

Palo Alto and the California Experiment Station of

the Forest Service. The greater part of Person’s

time will be given to entomological studies in

which the Experiment Station is immediately interested. The Experiment Station has provided funds

for a temporary assistant to work with Person in

the compilation of the results of the western pine

beetle tree selection studies. George R. Struble,

who worked with Person last season, has been

appointed to take up the assistant work in January.

What Person felt about this move is unknown. He had

just recently married and according to Struble, his assistant,

the couple was a popular part of the station (Struble 1953).

Several months after the transfer, Person had an essay in the

Western Forest Insect News that seemed critical of the

research of his erstwhile colleagues at the station (Person

1928) (fig. 73).

The selection of an 80-acre sample plot in

1926 and the addition of two 40-acre plots in 1927

may be taken as one mark of the change in the

nature of forest insect investigations that has taken

place within a short space of time. Much of the

cream of discovery has been skimmed off the field

of forest entomology, and the day of short-time

studies on a great variety of insects, and of promiscuous wanderings through the forests for the taking

of notes on life histories and habits of miscellaneous insects, has largely passed for the scientific

investigator. There is still much to be gained by

this type of study, but by most of us it will have to

be followed as side line or as a form of recreation.

The more evident habits and points in the life histories of our most injurious forest insects are

known. What is most needed now is a knowledge

of the fundamental relationships that result in

increases or decreases in the loss from insects.

He presented a summary of his research to date, which

was unique and proving valuable, and made a case for the

use of permanent plots for this type of research. However,

he seemed to forget that Miller, Patterson, and Keen had

been using long-term permanent plots since 1914 and that

his Cascadel plot was actually one of Miller’s long-term

study plots that was graciously offered for Person’s use.

Miller and the others must have been at least mildly

stung by this young scientist’s assessment of forest insect

research. Miller took exactly 30 days to reply, but he did it

in his usual thoughtful way, without getting personal. The

reply explains the need to remember the insect in the developing science of forest entomology in this era so well that it

is worth including the entire essay (Miller 1928).
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

121

An Informal Letter of

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY

FOREST INSECT INVESTIGATIONS

(not for publication)

423 Jordan Hall, Stanford University, California, 

March 1, 1928

FOREST ENTOMOLOGY STILL

ENTOMOLOGY

By J.M. Miller

In Person’s article in the February issue of this

paper he very appropriately introduces the change

in emphasis that has come about in our line of

attack upon certain problems in Forest Entomology.

Instead of devoting our entire attention to finding

out what the insects are, how they live and what

they do, we are concerned as well with the way in

which they fit into the scheme of things in the forest. Through the large sample plot and with various

types of surveys we are trying to determine the

type of forest and other environmental conditions

that are favorable or unfavorable to the beetles. The

tree rather than the insect becomes the basis of our

attack on the problem.

The shift of perspective, in which entomology

becomes primarily a phase of forestry, now offers

the most promising developments in the solution of

our more important bark beetle’s problems. But

there is an obvious danger in carrying this line of

approach to an extreme. First of all we are still

entomologists, and a sound knowledge of the

insects, their life histories, distribution and ecology

is the first consideration in this science. It is in the

application of this information that the title of “forest” entomologist becomes significant.

The purpose of these comments is not to start a 

discussion of “Why is a Forest Entomologist?” but

to emphasize to the field man the necessity of

keeping up the systematic collections and note

records that figured so prominently in the early

work of the Division of Forest Insects. I know that

on control projects, and even on our sample plot

and brood study work, we are prone to let this

activity go by the board. This is largely due to the

pressure of recording an immense amount of survey data, and to the fact that the need for insect

collections and notes is not obvious at the time.

The real advantages of gathering this material usually come later, when we want to check up on some

particular point in the study and refer to the note or

the original material if necessary.

The ‘Hopk. U.S.’ numbered note system,

planned by Dr. Hopkins in the early days of the

Division, has stood the test of considerable neglect,

abuse and flagrant liberties on the part of the field

men. It is still possible by this system, even though

the notes have been poorly kept, to obtain any

worth while information regarding any particular

insect in any locality that has been recorded in the

system. All the information so kept can be adequately indexed, summarized and made available to

any other worker in the group. Such references are

really indispensable to the field station files.

The most glaring violations of this system are

where field men do not collect at all, or else take a

large series of the insects connected with some particular study but fail to enter these or the appropriate data in the numbered note series. The information so recorded is available only to the collector

himself, and in time will probably be lost even to

him.

Although on some projects it seems best to

work with the tools and methods of the forester, it

is still part of our job to maintain an orderly accumulation of information about the insects that concern our problems. In doing so let’s stick to the

system we now have until a better one has been

devised and adopted.2

Figure 73—Field party at Mt. Hamilton, California, 1928. (Left to

right) H.L. Person, W.J. Buckhorn, F.P. Keen, J.C. Evenden, J.M.

Miller, H.E. Burke. 

PSW

2 The Hopkins U.S. numbered note system for collected forest insects was

recently computerized by the Forest Service Washington office led by

retired entomologists Mel McKnight and Torolf Torgersen, thus vindicating

Miller’s faith in the importance of the system. The system can be found at

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/bmnri/hussi1.html.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

122

The June 1, 1928, issue of the Western Forest Insect

News was its last. It contained an index of all previous

issues and a list of subscribers. There were 132 people and

organizations receiving copies at no charge. There was no

reason given for its demise, but Burke, the editor, must have

been sorely pressed to assemble the monthly news and get it

mailed out on time even though he had some good clerical

assistance in Mrs. Bushey, who even did the artwork 

(fig. 74).

Burke was very involved in preparing reports on his

control work in Yellowstone and Glacier National Parks for

a conference held in Berkeley in 1928. There were apparently no volunteer editors forthcoming, so a valuable historical

newsletter ceased publication. 

The plans for moving to Berkeley were progressing in

1929 even as the station staff went about their duties in the

field (Eaton 1953).

In a letter to Mulford dated April 9, 1929,

Miller described the amount and kind of space that

would be needed for forest insect investigations if

the Palo Alto station were to move to Berkeley. In

reply (April 17, 1929) Mulford stated that the

University was committed to the plan of having all

or nearly all of the forest insect group housed in

Giannini Hall at Berkeley; that C.B. Hutchison

(then Dean, College of Agriculture) approved of

arrangements planned; and (in effect) that most of

the needs of the forest insect group could be met.

The Pacific Slope Station was about to take the most

significant leap to date by moving to Berkeley. Continual

change seemed to be part of the Station’s role since its

inception. Organizations are always changing in different

ways, but the changes occurring in forest insect research

seemed to be extraordinary in such a short period from 1910

to 1930.

Figure 74—Cover of the Western Forest Insect News showing

Mrs. Bushey’s artwork.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

123

CHAPTER 15: The 1930s–A Momentous

Decade for the Forest Insect Division

The decade beginning in 1930 was an extraordinary period

for the Division of Forest Insect Investigations on the

Pacific slope. Some of the more significant changes that

affected Burke and Miller included the relocation of the

Palo Alto lab from Stanford to the University of California

at Berkeley; creation of a new Forest Insect Laboratory at

Portland, Oregon; establishment of the first permanent

Forest Insect Field Stations in California; many personnel

changes; an extreme drought in the West that greatly exacerbated bark beetle problems; the first aerial control operation

against a defoliator; and, one of the most notorious forest

fires in the Pacific Northwest, with attendant insect 

problems.

In this chapter, the professional careers and personal

lives of both Burke and Miller are tied directly or indirectly

to the unfolding events of the period.

The relocation of the Palo Alto lab to the University of

California School of Forestry influenced many of the coming changes. Miller described the move in a very sparse

paragraph (Miller and Keen, n.d.):

In September 1930 the California laboratory

was moved from Stanford to the University of

California campus at Berkeley into laboratory and

office quarters provided by the School of Forestry.

This move established close contact of the research

work with the Forest Experiment Station of the

Forest Service, the School of Forestry and

Entomology Division of the College of Agriculture.

Luckily Eaton prepared a summary of the move that

provided a little more detail, as first noted in the previous

chapter (Eaton 1953).

Formal invitation for the Forest Insect

Laboratory to move to Berkeley was made by R.G.

Sproul (President of the University) in a letter to

F.C. Craighead dated July 2, No commitments were

made regarding what the University would provide;

simply that the University would be glad to have

the Forest Insect Laboratory establish permanent

office and laboratory headquarters with the

University of California at Berkeley. This invitation

seems to have been acknowledged at the Division

and Bureau levels in Washington (no copies in the

Berkeley file). Craighead wrote Mulford on

October 10, 1930, thanking him for his efforts in

behalf of the laboratory. The decision was to accept

the invitation, and the move to Berkeley was made

during the last week of September, 1930. Recommendations on assignment of rooms in Giannini

Hall for forest insect work were made by Mulford

to Hutchinson in a letter dated October 14, 1930.

It appears that no formal agreement was drawn up 

specifying the conditions under which the Forest Insect

Laboratory would occupy space at Berkeley. Allusions to

the need for an agreement were made in correspondence

between Craighead and Miller in the spring of 1930, but

apparently no definite action was taken. In a letter to

Craighead dated April 4, 1930, Miller makes the following

comment: “Apparently a formal agreement would have to

be renewed from year to year, and for that reason would not

have any great advantage over an informal understanding.”

The logic of this relocation had been developing for

several years and was evidenced by Person’s and Struble’s

detail to the Forest Service Experiment Station in 1928.

During summer and fall of 1930, various Forest Insect

Division staff members made the move to six rooms on the

top floor of Giannini Hall on the University of California

Campus. And as related by Struble, the attic area was used

for storage, and by the mid-1930s three additional offices

were acquired, one of them outfitted as a photographic 

darkroom (Struble 1953).

This move was affected by some personal hardships for

Miller, whose family did not move their home to Berkeley.

Palo Alto was the only permanent home the Miller family

had experienced. There were probably some serious family

conferences about this, but Bess stood firm. There was

reluctance on the part of Miller to give up this residence.

Consequently, Miller found bachelor quarters in Berkeley

and commuted to his home across the bay on weekends. As

Miller had no small children at home and he traveled a great

deal anyway, he probably viewed the situation as a temporary inconvenience. 

Burke’s case was somewhat different. In February

1930, shade tree investigations were made a special project,

and Burke was assigned to work in a laboratory at Palo

Alto. Then in 1932, his shade tree lab was transferred to 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

124

the division of Fruit and Shade Tree Investigations. Burke

describes the new assignment as follows (Burke, n.d.):

January 1, 1932 Shade Tree insects investigations was transferred from the division of Forest

Insects to the division of Fruit and Shade Tree

Insects. The work continued as before. Special

attention was given to the bark beetles infesting the

Monterey cypress and the Monterey pine. A number of experiments with various materials were

conducted to determine the best methods of preventing attacks by cypress bark beetles on the

twigs of living trees. It was found that sprays of

lime sulfur and arsenate of lead give the best

results.

How this new assignment was arranged through Miller

and Craighead is not known, but to the great loss of forest

entomology, Burke left the Division of Forest Insect

Investigations for good this time. By this time, Burke had

such strong ties to the Palo Alto area that it is doubtful he

would have sold his home and moved his family to

Berkeley or even commuted on weekends like Miller.

The forest insect problems in Oregon were becoming

increasingly acute. Ever since the SONC project near

Klamath Falls, Keen had been spending the majority of 

his time in Oregon. For several years Kimball, head of the

Klamath Forest Protection Association, along with other 

private forest interests, the Forest Service, and State

Forester Elliot, had been lobbying to have a permanent

Forest Insect Division Laboratory in Oregon. Through the

influence of Oregon’s Senator McNary, a $15,000 appropriation was secured to establish such a lab in Portland,

Oregon (Maunder 1974). In 1930, Thornton T. Munger, 

the first director of the Forest Service Pacific Northwest

Experiment Station, helped Keen obtain quarters with his

organization in the Lewis building in Portland. Keen was

appointed head of the lab by Craighead, and moved there

from Palo Alto with his scientific aid, Buckhorn. 

This new lab relieved Miller of much responsibility, but

it also deprived the new Berkeley lab of the entomologist

most knowledgeable concerning bark beetles. In addition,

Patterson decided to resign from the Bureau of Entomology

and go into a family business building and operating a resort

hotel at Pinehurst, Oregon (Wickman 1987). This also

dashed any hope Keen may have had for Patterson to be

assigned to his Portland lab. (Patterson was still commuting

between Ashland, Oregon, and Palo Alto on weekends 

and was still in charge of the Crater Lake National Park

Mountain Pine Beetle project during the summer.) Miller’s

description of the Portland laboratory follows (Miller and

Keen, n.d.):

The need for a separate laboratory to conduct 

control surveys and investigations in Region 6 had

been realized for some years prior to 1930.

The Western Forestry and Conservation

Association, representing both the owners of

Douglas-fir and pine timber throughout the west

was active in enlisting support for such a project.

The entire eastside pine belt of Oregon and Washington had been sustaining high losses of timber

resources from beetle infestations and both private

and federal owners were vitally interested in seeing

an adequate survey and research program undertaken. As a result of this support, a substantial increase

in the appropriation for the Division was secured

for the fiscal year 1931 and the decision was

reached to apply this to a new laboratory to be

established at Portland, Oregon, to serve the territory of Oregon and Washington. F.P. Keen was selected to take charge of this new laboratory.

The most important phase of the program of

the Portland laboratory was the western pine beetle

survey and research for the eastside pine type

extending from southern Oregon to northern

Washington. This was carried on with the cooperation and financial support of the Forest Service,

Indian Service and private owners. Problems of

defoliation and fire injury in the Douglas-fir region

developed, however, soon after the laboratory was

established and have absorbed a considerable part

of the attention of this laboratory.

In the 1930s, there were two historic phenomena taking

place: the “Great Depression,” which was human-caused,

the other, the greatest Western drought ever recorded to that

point. The Depression brought drastic decreases in appropriations and personnel levels in government agencies. The

drought affected tree health, and bark beetle problems were

rapidly increasing.

Alas, Burke’s Division of Fruit and Shade Tree Investigations was also affected by budget reductions. Even though

part of his assignment included forest insect problems in
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

125

recreation areas such as national parks and he was still

doing some consulting in Yosemite National Park in 1932,

shade tree entomology was on the chopping block. As Burke

put it (Burke, n.d.):

Due to lack of appropriations for shade tree

insect investigations, the laboratory at Palo Alto

was closed June 30, 1934 and Burke retired from

Government Service. His youthful ambition was

still realized, however, since every month he

received a government check for $100.00 minus

$3.50 for retirement.

After retirement, Burke was for some time a consulting

entomologist for Freeman-Meyers Co., arborists of Santa

Barbara. He was also a member of FAX Service, a consulting company on termites, fungi, and other pests of timber 

products and buildings. 

Southern California and city life, however, did not

appeal to Burke, and as soon as he could, he moved to a

small acreage near Los Gatos to enjoy the simple life.

Family lore has it that Burke was not really keen on

retiring, in fact, he was somewhat depressed for a while,

worrying his wife.1 He was still active in entomology giving

talks to garden clubs and other organizations. In 1936, the

American Forestry textbook series published Forest Insects

by Doane and several authors, including Burke (Doane et al.

1936). He was the only experienced forest entomologist of

the four authors, although Miller and Keen both made large

contributions to the book and were originally to be coauthors. A misunderstanding about federal regulations and private book publishing caused Miller and Keen to drop their

share of the authorship (Maunder 1974).

One can’t help but wonder what additional contributions Burke would have made to the science of forest entomology if he had moved with the others to Berkeley. On the

other hand, although he never shirked his responsibilities

and willingly shared his knowledge, he sometimes seemed

to be a reluctant part of the Forest Insect Laboratory. Some

of that can possibly be attributed to Hopkins’ iron-fisted

control of his field entomologists during the northeastern

Oregon and Craggy Mountain control projects in 1910-13. 

It was not until late 1913 that Hopkins loosened his control

of field operations enough that entomologists like Miller

could run their own projects.

The economic impact of the Depression had a severe

effect on Patterson. He had resigned to run the new family

hotel enterprise just as the economic downturn began. The

Pinehurst Inn suffered the fate of many resorts during the

Great Depression. It was closed in 1933 before all the

upstairs guestrooms were completed, and the main building

burned to the ground a few years later.

Patterson returned to the Pacific Slope Forest Insect

Laboratory at Berkeley in early 1934 and was put in charge

of a Works Progress Administration (WPA) project to document, with photographs and drawings, research and control 

activities on the western pine beetle. He also provided technical leadership on bark beetle control projects carried out

by one of the first Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC)

camps in the Sierra Nevada of California (Wickman 1987).

The reason he did not go to the new Portland laboratory

was probably related to the level of funding the new lab had

at that time because Patterson still maintained his permanent

residence in Ashland, Oregon. He became a weekend 

commuter with Miller and, in fact, the two shared various

bachelor quarters for many years. When I first met him in

August 1948, he was using a cot in his office in Giannini

Hall as his sometimes quarters. Patterson was welcomed

back by Miller; several, new young entomologists were

beginning their careers in the Berkeley lab, so Miller and

Patterson were now the only “old hands.” 

With the departure of Keen to head the Portland 

lab, Craighead hired Ken Salman, a recent Ph.D. from

Massachusetts A&M, to replace Keen at the Berkeley lab.

According to Keen, this appointment was made without

Miller’s input or knowledge and related to Craighead’s

desire to move more Eastern entomologists to the West

(Maunder 1974). Salman’s assignment was to be in charge

of the newly developed regional program of insect surveys

and control in California. His research project was a continuation of the tree susceptibility classification that Keen had

started. This was to cause some competitive relations with

Keen, as two different tree classifications were ultimately

researched, tested, and published by Keen and Salman

1 Personal communication from Janet Burke Eglington (daughter), 2002.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

126

(Keen 1936, 1943; Salman and Bongberg 1942). Keen’s

research on tree classification continued in Oregon and was

called the “Keen Ponderosa Pine Tree Classification.” The

Salman-Bongberg approach was called the “California Pine

Risk-Rating System.” Both systems evolved from research

on tree susceptibility to bark beetle attack that had been

conducted in the 1920s by Miller, Keen, Patterson, Person,

and Struble. Tree growth rates were a particularly important

area of the studies, with Miller and Person proposing that

slower growing mature ponderosa pine were more susceptible to attack by the western pine beetle than younger more

vigorous trees (Smith et al. 1981).

The rating systems resulted in a silvicultural approach

to managing the western pine beetle instead of the direct

control method of felling infested trees, then peeling and

burning the bark. This was a breakthrough for forest managers that allowed them to capture the economic value of

susceptible trees before they were killed by bark beetles,

and at the same time resulted in decreased beetle populations or at least seemed to prevent outbreaks. The SalmanBongberg California risk-rating system identified susceptible trees by assigning penalty points to crown and stem

characteristics of a tree. This was followed up by a logging

practice called sanitation salvage (Smith et al. 1981). The

Keen system, involved four classes based on age and four

vigor classes within each age class. It was oriented more

toward identifying the susceptibility of individual trees to

insect attack. Keen also assigned penalty points in his 

system. It was slightly more complex to use and was not

directly tied to the sanitation salvage concept, but a certain

level of logging of susceptible trees was generally followed.

Keen’s classification was more widely used in ponderosa

pine stands of eastern Oregon, and the California system

was used for both ponderosa pine and Jeffrey pine stands 

in eastern California.

One important result of sanitation-salvage logging was

the longevity of its effectiveness in reducing high losses 

in stands to bark beetles. In a study at Blacks Mountain

Experimental Forest, the removal of as little as 10 to 15 

percent of the stand volume in high-risk trees reduced 

subsequent losses by an average of 82 percent for more than

20 years (Wickman and Eaton 1962). As study results were

published in the 1940s, McCloud River Lumber Company,

Collins Pine, and the Forest Service quickly adopted sanitation salvage as a silvicultural practice in east-side California

pine forests (Smith et al. 1981).

Miller should be recognized as probably the first 

entomologist to study how tree growth rate (as an indicator

of stress) was related to susceptibility to bark beetle attack.

He measured tree growth on thousands of increment cores

as part of his studies on the Sierra National Forest in the

1920s. Further, his encouragement to younger scientists 

like Person to follow his lead to fruition of their own ideas,

demonstrated unselfish leadership on his part.

The drought-related stress to trees on million of acres of

ponderosa pine forests in the inland West caused dramatic

levels of tree mortality that could not be ignored by politicians (fig. 75). Miller, Keen, and Patterson also played a

clever propaganda game to procure appropriations to

increase the research efforts on the western pine beetle.

During the depression, government agencies provided some

level of support for artists, cartographers, and draftsmen 

as a “make work” program. These artisans were eagerly

employed by Miller at bargain prices to produce handcolored photo albums showing the extent of the tree mortality caused by bark beetles, what was being done, and what

was needed in the form of research programs to curb this

wasteful tree loss (fig. 76) (Struble 1953). Miller got the

PSW

Figure 75—Ponderosa pine killed by western pine beetle during

the 1930s outbreak, Modoc National Forest.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

127

message across by supplying these albums to trade associations, chambers of commerce, politicians, and universities.

The appropriations increased during a period when many

agencies and laboratories like Burke’s were shut down. The

increased funding helped get the tree selection research of

Keen and Salman operational within a decade, a short turnaround time for such research. It also resulted in an increase

of scientific research at the Berkeley Laboratory. Struble,

who started in 1928, was made a permanent employee in

1930. Other entomologists and foresters hired included Phil

Johnson (1931), Jack Bongberg (1934), Jack Whiteside

(1935), Stu Yuill (1935), A.S. West, Jr. (1937), Ralph Hall

(1938), Howard McKenzie (1938), and J.W. Johnson

(1940). Other entomologists who spent some time at the

Berkeley lab during this period and then transferred elsewhere included R.L. Furniss, C.B. Eaton, N.D. Wygant,

W.D. Bedard, and D. DeLeon (Furniss and Wickman 1998).

The appropriation increases triggered by the bark beetle

outbreaks also resulted in forest insect research reverting 

to a mode of operation used before the move to Stanford

University. That is, field stations, strategically located out in

the forests, were once again being considered to house entomologists and provide laboratories closer to their research

sites. And the wherewithal to build such stations was available through depression-era programs like the WPA and

CCC. A rather crude station was built at Hackamore in the

Modoc National Forest. It consisted of small cabins and a

small lab and rearing building for study of the western pine

beetle. Some early forest entomologists like Robert Furniss,

A.S. West, Jr., Jack Whiteside, and Jack Bongberg, worked

there under Salman. The buildings at this site were the temporary type, probably because it was not at a convenient

location (fig. 77).2

The next two field stations established were more 

elaborate, however, both in size and quality of construction.

Struble described the establishment of these two field 

stations (Struble 1953).

Extensive bark beetle infestations and losses in

California by 1937 offered convincing proof of the

need for research data season by season in the field.

Centers having common features of climate, topography, soil and stand were believed important.

Differences in infestations between trees in eastside

and westside (Sierra) forests were recognized, and

insect control would of necessity depend on an

applicable information base.

Public support for establishing permanent field

centers of research (California State Chamber of

Commerce) had reached a climax of interest by the

fall, 1937. Funds totaling $7,000 were allocated by

the USDA’s Bureau of Entomology & Plant

Quarantine to the U.S. Forest Service. Representing

eastside conditions, a laboratory was located near

Hat Creek Ranger Station, Shasta County on the

Lassen National Forest. A second laboratory, typifying westside forest conditions was located near

Miami Ranger Station, Mariposa County on the

Sierra National Forest. Both facilities were erected

by CCC crews under Forest Service supervision and

in operation by summer of 1938. Each consisted of

Figure 76—Beetle propaganda for the making of lantern slides,

1937.

PSW

Figure 77—Hackamore Field Station living quarters and Salman’s

daughter, Joan, 1933.

Joan Salman Rhodes

2 Personal communication from Joan Salman Rhodes, who also provided

photos, 2004.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

128

office, laboratory, rearing facilities, shop, garage,

and camp living facilities.

The Hat Creek Laboratory served initially as a

study base for developing improved methods to

control the western pine beetle. The identity and

use of visual tree difference indicators of risk

against attacks were being tested and refined at

Black’s Mountain [Experimental Forest] nearby

under the direction of Salman and Bongberg. 

The flathead [flatheaded woodborer] and survey

improvement studies at Hackamore were transferred to the Hat Creek base.

Robert Z. Callaham, who was a graduate school student

assistant for Miller, described the unique log dormitory built

by the entomologists in 1943 at Hat Creek.3

Ralph Hall told me that logs used to build the

Hat Creek Lab were cut from trees that had been

subjected, before felling, to injection of preservative chemicals. Using techniques pioneered by H.L.

Person and Nick Mirov (1928-1930), workers had

girdled each tree with an axe creating a frill just

above the stump height. Just below the frill, a

reservoir made from an inner tube from a truck or

auto tire was sealed with nails around the trunk.

The rubber reservoir was rounded upward resembling a doughnut and chemicals were placed inside

to flood the frilled area [fig. 78]. The tree’s conduction system moved the toxicants upward in the

exposed outer annual rings. The result was that

logs subsequently cut from injected trees, when

placed vertically to form walls, were never successfully attacked by insects or fungi [fig. 79]. The

bark clung tight rather than peeling off as it would

have if wood-boring insects had been able to penetrate. For all I know, those log walls may still be

standing with bark intact.4

By 1938, Forest Insect Investigations had come full circle from field stations in 1910-23, to laboratories at Stanford

and then California Universities back to having the best of

both types of facilities. Permanent laboratories located on

major university campuses provided access to libraries, laboratory equipment, and interaction with other scientists. It

also provided for stable residences in cities amenable to

family life. The permanent field stations were usually used

only spring, summer, and fall and allowed the entomologists

convenience to their field studies with some laboratory

facilities. It also allowed many families of entomologists to

3 Personal correspondence from Dr. R.Z. Callaham, 2004.

Figure 78—Civilian Conservation Corps crew injecting

girdled tree with chemicals, 1930s.

PSW

Figure 79—Staff building bunkhouse with treated logs as an

experiment, Hat Creek. On wall, R.C. Hall, P.C. Johnson; on logs,

J.E. Patterson, G.R. Struble, 1943.

J.E. Patterson, PSW

4 I reexamined the logs periodically for bark retention and rot when I was

in charge of Hat Creek 1956-67 and found the logs sound and bark tight.

An examination by a historical archaeology consultant in 2004 reported

similar conditions.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

129

spend very memorable summers at the Hat Creek and

Miami Field Bases.

Further north in Oregon, Keen was also fighting his

battles against forest insects, only with fewer resources

available to him than in California. A young entomologist,

Robert L. Furniss, was assigned to him from the California

laboratory in 1934. The disastrous Tillamook Fire burned its

first quarter million acres in 1933. Subsequent fires and

reburns occurred over the next decade. Attempts to salvage

huge amounts of fire-damaged timber were complicated by

woodborer attacks that were causing degradation of lumber

sawn from the fire salvage logs. Furniss’ first assignment in

1934 was to study the species of woodborers attacking the

dead trees. He also made a fine photographic record of the

insect damage and salvage operations (fig. 80) (Wickman 

et al. 2002).

Some other Berkeley personnel moved to Portland,

Oregon, to help Keen, including Jack Whiteside and

William Bedard, Sr. Whiteside and Bedard assisted Keen

with surveys and studies of the western pine beetle outbreaks. Furniss mostly studied insects associated with

Douglas-fir (fig. 81).

Miller’s diaries for this period indicated a change in his

field work. In 1930, because of the move from Palo Alto to

Berkeley, he spent most of the year traveling back and forth

between the two stations. As one would expect, he had much

equipment to move, new offices and laboratories to outfit,

and the need to establish working relations between the

Forest Insect Laboratory and the University of California

Forestry School, and California Forest Experiment Station

(now the Pacific Southwest Research Station). The terms,

“Forest Insect Investigations” and “Forest Insect Laboratories” seemed to be used commonly from this time on.

By 1931, Miller was able to make about half a dozen

field trips to Grant Grove National Park, Pinehurst, and an

entomology camp at Harvey Valley and the Pickering Mill

in Alturas. There was no mention of a trip to Yosemite, and

this was unusual because until 1930 he was there several

times a year.

However, Miller was not deskbound long at the new lab

in Berkeley. From 1932 to the end of the decade, he traveled

constantly from March to November, from the San

Bernardino Mountains in southern California to the temporary Hackamore Forest Insect Field Station in the Modoc

National Forest near the Oregon border. He also went to

Portland several times to confer with Keen at his new lab,

but there is no mention of Keen reciprocating.

He made up for missing 2 years of visits to Yosemite

National Park by going there as many as eight times in

some years and usually at least half a dozen times a year.

Diary entries are sparse on the purpose of various trips,

but reports and publications indicate he was doing research

on bark beetles at Eight-Mile (Yosemite National Park),

Bass Lake, Harvey Valley, Hackamore, and other localities

Figure 80—Felling dead trees after the Tillamook burn, 1930s.

R.L. Furniss, PNW

Figure 81—R.L. Furniss pointing out larval galleries of woodboring insects in fire-damaged Douglas-fir, Tillamook Burn.

R.L. Furniss, PNW
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

130

as well as supervising a growing group of young entomologists. The supervisory duties alone must have been daunting. His entry for November 5, 1935: “Paid Bongberg’s

Doctors bill—$2.50.” Bongberg, being one of the new 

entomologists, may have been a little short before payday.

Miller also went farther afield to Yellowstone and Grand

Canyon National Parks, Prescott, Arizona (McKenzie was

there studying the Prescott scale on ponderosa pine) and

Fort Collins and Estes Park, Colorado. He even left on

Christmas Eve, 1936, on a trip to Washington, D.C., to see

Craighead. That seemed a little beyond the normal call of

duty.

He was almost constantly on the go for an 8-year 

period. His daughter, Betty, noted that she did not see 

much of him at times.5

As described earlier, the building of two new field 

stations at Hat Creek on the Lassen National Forest and at

Miami on the Sierra National Forest in 1938 took up an

inordinate amount of his time and travel. And all of this as

the most damaging bark beetle outbreaks on record were

occurring throughout California. Miller’s leadership and

entomological and political acumen resulted in increased

support for the Forest Insect Investigations Laboratory at

Berkeley and some breakthrough research being carried out

by relatively inexperienced, young entomologists. Miller

sums up the decade as follows (Miller and Keen, n.d.):

The setting up of the Portland Laboratory in

1931 was the most recent step of the Division in

establishing new centers of work for western pine

beetle investigations. For the next decade a great

amount of research was centered around the laboratories at Berkeley and Portland and their outlying

field locations [fig. 82]. It is the accumulation of

the results of these and proceeding studies which

calls for the summarization of this review. [The

published book: Biology and Control of the

Western Pine Beetle, with Keen].

It was during this recent period that a very

active interest in the problem was developed by

certain public agencies such as the Western Pine

Association and the California State Chamber of

Commerce which includes many large owners of

pine timber in its membership. This interest can be

attributed to a period of very heavy beetle-caused

losses in commercial pine areas beginning in 1927

and continuing until 1938. The groups concerned

brought considerable pressure for an expanded program of research and surveys by the Division and

in 1937 increased appropriations were secured.

These new funds were applied mainly on a forest insect hazard survey of the eastside pine region

in Northern California. Additional personnel were

added to the Berkeley laboratory until in 1939 it

had a staff of 15 permanent employees in addition

to summer field crews of about 20 foresters and

entomologists.

But changes of a different kind were on the horizon.

The challenge of keeping forest entomology research on

track through World War II would test Miller again.

Figure 82—Portland, Oregon, conference, 1936. Front row (left to

right) R.L. Furniss, J. Beal, J. Evenden. Back row (left to right)

F.P. Keen, J.M. Miller, A.J. Jaenicke, F.C. Craighead, and W.

Buckhorn.

PNW

5 Correspondence from Mrs. Betty Miller Moore, 2002.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

131

CHAPTER 16: Miller Closes His 

Bureau of Entomology Career

By 1940, Miller was at the apex of his career. He had the

largest forest insect laboratory in the West, working on some

of the most important forest insect problems in the United

States; consequently, he probably had the largest budget.

Bark beetle problems were being researched by 10 professional foresters and entomologists at Berkeley. They were

developing improved survey methods and determining pine

forests and individual trees most susceptible to outbreaks.

However, the Congressional appropriation for fiscal year

1941 cut $27,000 from the Berkeley Lab’s budget. This

caused considerable strain on the program of work including

cutting back on the hazard survey.1

Continually working long hours, Miller still must have

found the weekend commutes from Berkeley to his home in

Palo Alto irksome. On New Year’s Eve, 1939, the family

rented out the Palo Alto house and moved to a rental in

Berkeley. It lasted only 1 year, partly because Bess missed

her garden and familiar surroundings.

In 1940 and 1941, Miller made many field trips to the

crude Hackamore Field Station located at a Pickering

Lumber Company Camp to check Salman’s stand hazard

survey conducted by Phil Johnson. This was an ambitious

attempt to map 2 million acres of pine stands in northern

California at risk to western beetles. At the new Hat Creek

Field Station and Blacks Mountain Experimental Forest,

Bongberg, Patterson, and Hall were studying the western

pine beetle and pine engraver beetle. At the new Miami

Field Station, Struble was busy with mountain pine beetle

and other insects attacking sugar pine. It is interesting that

Miller only recorded one meeting with Keen at the new

Portland Forest Insect Lab during these 2 years. Keen was

hard pressed with many insect problems in the Pacific

Northwest and a much smaller budget that initially supported only two entomologists. 

Miller’s diary entry for Sunday, December 7, 1941,

read: “ . . . at 12:15 P.M. just heard the report of the attack

on Pearl Harbor.” On that day the lives of everyone in the

United States changed in some manner. And only those

Government bureaus demonstrating a contribution to the

war effort survived, but most did so with reduced budgets

and personnel. The Bureau of Entomology was no 

exception. Miller’s diary for 1942 indicates meetings in

Washington, D.C., February 18-21, and Portland, Oregon, 

in March. In May, Mr. Whitney of the Budget Bureau made

a visit to the Berkeley lab and was given a tour of several

field projects by Miller. The Berkeley lab survived, no

doubt because of its ties to the Forest Service and the

importance of forest protection and lumber production 

needed for the war effort, but research programs were

affected as Miller noted (Miller and Keen, n.d.):

In the spring of 1942 the impact of World 

War II began to have its effect upon the plans and

personnel for the western pine beetle program.

Although there were substantial cuts in the appropriations for the fiscal years of 1942 and 1943, the

need for funds soon became less important as the

call for men at both laboratories for military duty

reduced the staff and replacements were no longer

available. Priorities of the war program eliminated

a number of projects and the restrictions placed

upon travel made it difficult to continue the essential jobs on an adequate scale.

Bongberg and Yuill joined the U.S. Navy as officers 

in medical entomology, and Bedard was transferred to

Berkeley from Coeur d’Alene to help fill the vacancies. 

On the personal side, Miller’s son Dusty (Harold), a naval

officer, left for duty at Pearl Harbor on June 15. Miller did a

lot of travel to Hat Creek and Miami during the 1942 field

season no doubt helping Patterson, Hall, and Struble who

were still on duty, but very short handed.

And matters came to a head in Salman’s resignation in

1942, which involved Craighead in the Washington office.

Although Salman and Keen had some competitive studies

relating to different tree classification systems, both systems

were scientifically valid. As mentioned earlier, their use by

forest managers was related to geography, and Salman 

and Keen did not seem to take the situation personally.

However, at this time Craighead thought that chemicals

could be injected into high-risk trees, perhaps preventing

beetle attacks and thus preserving them until they could be

logged. Salman evidently objected to this idea heatedly, and 1 Correspondence to Miller from Craighead, Chief of the Forest Insect

Investigations, Washington, D.C., in my possession.
a controversy developed to the point that Salman resigned

from the Bureau of Entomology in 1942.2

Miller describes an important reorganization of the

Berkeley and Portland labs as follows (Miller and Keen,

n.d.):

In order to better mobilize what resources were

available in men and facilities for continuing the 

essential phases of the western pine beetle program,

a reorganization plan was decided upon by the

Division to take effect in August 1942. The

Berkeley and Portland laboratories were combined

under a joint administration in order to effectively

integrate the program in both regions. Each laboratory was continued at its established location to

continue the assignments and local contacts of the

over-all program, but the Portland laboratory was

brought under general direction from Berkeley. The

more important personnel changes brought about by

the reorganization were the assignment of F.P. Keen

as coordinator of the 2 laboratories with headquarters at Berkeley, J.M. Miller being relieved of

administrative work in order that he could give full

time to a summarization of western pine beetle

studies prior to his retirement, R.L. Furniss assigned

as Administrator for the Portland Laboratory, and

J.E. Patterson for the Berkeley laboratory.

Miller had some inkling of the impending change

because Mr. Annuad, acting chief of the Bureau of

Entomology in the Washington office, had just visited with

Miller in Berkeley. Miller’s handwritten note to Keen in

Portland is included verbatim.3

Berkeley, Cal.

Aug. 3, 1942

Dear Paul Keen,

I have just perused two memoranda which

came in the mail this afternoon and they look like

memorable documents for both of us. At last

Annuad has settled something, and the tone of

these notifications seems to indicate that it is final.

You are going to take over here. 

I imagine that you are trying to guess what my 

reactions are to the change mainly because I am

trying to guess yours. I might as well relieve any

misgivings you may have by telling you that this

was just what I wanted. In fact it looks too good to

be true as to last very long.

Both documents say a lot with unusual clarity

and brevity. It pleases me beyond measure that

along with change you are to have “full responsibility to make all personnel assignments under the

combined program.” It is my feeling that the

change is going to be welcomed by most of the

personnel here.

It looks as though you are going to have an

expensive luxury on your hands in the form of a

high priced “technical advisor.” Well, I am not

going to take the title too seriously. I only want to

smooth the way for you to come in here as well as 

I can, and to cause you as little embarrassment as

possible. I will fit in anywhere you think I can be of

the most usefulness, and if I can’t be of some help

to you it is my intention to go ahead with plans for

early retirement soon after I become eligible.

Apparently you will need to come down here

soon to get the lay of the land. We are in the

process of a clerical turn-over since LeBallister

[the office clerk] is due to be called by the Navy

within 15 days. There are a lot of other loose ends

since about half of our force has left or is leaving. 

I have several field trips projected within the next

three weeks, but will hold these up pending your

plans. Please let me hear from you as soon as you 

recover from the shock.

Anyway it is a long lane that has no turning–

and this seems to be it.

Sincerely,

John M. Miller

In Keen’s oral history he stated (Maunder 1974): 

I arrived in Berkeley on November 10 [from

Portland, Oregon]. The Berkeley station consisted

of a well run organization with the following men:

J.M. Miller, in charge and ready to retire; John

Patterson, Ralph Hall, Jack Bongberg, Phil

Johnson, George Struble, Stu Yuill, Charles Eaton,

Don DeLeon, and Howard McKenzie; plus the

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

132

2 Both the Author and Malcolm Furniss have searched official files for

information on this controversy. Furniss found one memo April 20, 1942,

from Craighead to Miller regarding personnel changes, e.g., Salman on

leave until May 11 and Craighead waiting for Salman to decide what action

he will take. Both Furniss and the author have heard various hearsay stories

from entomologists in Berkeley on this situation. Suffice to say Salman felt

strongly enough to resign in 1942 and take up farming in the central valley

of California. Salman’s daughter Joan, believes it was an accumulation of

actions by management over some period of time that caused him to resign

because he had moved his family to his farm the year before he resigned.

Personal letter, Joan Salman Rhodes to me August 22, 2004.

3 A handwritten letter from Miller to Keen on August 3, 1942, in 

possession of Malcolm Furniss.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

133

administrative staff of the chief clerk, M.L.

LeBallister and secretary, Lois Weaver4 [fig. 83].

There were hints of Miller’s possible retirement in

1943, and Keen even thought he retired in 1943 (Maunder

1974). But Miller actually remained as part of the Berkeley

staff as an independent scientist or “technical advisor” for 

9 more years.

Unfortunately, Miller developed some health problems

in 1943, so perhaps the administrative change was timely.

These problems continued for the next 3 years. Notes at the

back of his 1944 diary state: “spots, I can recognize pressure, some days better than others, ultimate use of drug.”

Consultations with half a dozen physicians and eye specialists continued until he had an apparently successful eye

operation on December 14, 1946, in Palo Alto.

There were many weeks and days of sick leave 

taken during this period, but though he must have been

uncomfortable during many of his field trips, he continued

to help the personnel at the Berkeley lab during the manpower shortage at the height of World War II. He also did

not neglect trips to Yosemite National Park (fig. 84). Most

of his office work consisted of working on a manuscript of

the grand summary of 30 years of research on the Biology

and Control of the Western Pine Beetle. Another task he

took on was encouraging Burke to write his memoirs, then

spending months editing the manuscript drafts. Miller’s

diary for Sunday, March 15, 1944, states “Keen and

Patterson [with Miller] made a trip to Los Gatos and spent

part of the day with the Burkes.” This was the first diary

entry mentioning Burke for years, and I highly suspect that

his three old comrades made a semiofficial visit to the

Burke farm to talk him into writing up his recollections.

This was an important visit for the history of forest

entomology in the Western United States. Miller’s diaries

for the next several years described working on the 

“Burke Summary” as he termed it. On June 28, 1946, 

Figure 83—Work conference in Berkeley, 1941 or 1942. Front L to R, Gibson, DeLeon, Lois

Weaver, Eaton. Second row, Evenden, Keen, Struble, Wygant, Yuill. Third row Miller, P. Johnson,

Johnson, Hall, Patterson. Fourth row, LeBalister, Salman, Hagle, Bongberg, McKenzie. 

PSW

4 Keen’s memory was a little off. Miller had not decided to retire,

LeBallister was in the Navy, and Bongberg and Yuill were about to enlist as

Naval officers.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

134

My Recollections of the First Years in Forest Entomology by

H.E. Burke was issued in small numbers as an unpublished

report by the Berkeley Forest Insect Laboratory. It was

printed by using an old mimeograph process with gelatin

plates producing blue print that got fainter with each 

succeeding copy. Needless to say, after about 100 copies 

the print was pretty light. Photographs, mostly from the

Berkeley photograph file, were reproduced and glued in the

report. Only about half of the copies were assembled in final

form for distribution and they disappeared rapidly.

In the winter of 1948-49, I was working part time as a

student aid at the Berkeley laboratory while attending the

university. My first job was to assemble the remaining loose

pages, hot-iron photos in place, and staple on covers. This

was my introduction to forest entomology history in the

West and resulted in my only introduction to Burke, who

came by to pick up a few copies. He was a kindly and distinguished-looking gentleman who thanked me and left. I

have had regrets ever since that I did not have him sign the

copy I was allowed to keep. Burke’s personal history, My

Recollections . . . ended in 1923, but it set the stage for all

that followed relating to forest entomology on the Pacific

slope.

In 1946, Miller became involved in research on breeding pines resistant to forest insects. Dr. Palmer Stockwell,

Director of the Institute of Forest Genetics (IFG), a field 

station of California Forest Experiment Station (now Pacific

Southwest Research Station), asked Keen for assistance of

an entomologist to investigate resistance of IFG’s pine

hybrids. Keen negotiated with Miller, who had just completed his part in production of the “Burke Summary,” and

Miller agreed to take on this assignment. Located near

Placerville, in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada, IFG was

moving toward mass production of interspecific pine

hybrids for outplanting on national forests in California.

Miller’s task was to determine whether some of these new

hybrids might be resistant to troublesome insects.

Miller, until he retired 6 years later, became for all

practical purposes, the resident entomologist at IFG. He had

his own office, spacious laboratories, and opportunities for

insect rearing in the progeny test plantings. One of IFG’s

scientists happened to be Dr. N.T. “Nick” Mirov, a plant

physiologist with a colorful past. Nick, a university-trained

forester in Czarist Russia, had served as a naval cadet in the

White Russian navy. After Russia’s Revolution, Nick

escaped through Siberia and China and made his way to 

San Francisco and Berkeley. Miller probably came to know

Mirov in 1928 and 1929 when Mirov was hired to assist

Hubert L. Person’s studies on the Modoc and Lassen

National Forests on host selection by bark beetles.5

Miller was researching the susceptibility of certain

crossbred ponderosa pines to the pine reproduction weevil.

This weevil had been described by C.B. Eaton and named

for him (Eaton 1942). Before WWII, it was causing extensive problems in ponderosa and Jeffrey pine plantations. 

It was killing many trees before they could outgrow old, 

established manzanita brush fields.

There were thousands of acres of manzanita brush

fields in northern California resulting from fires in the 19th

century. Most of these areas were completely devoid of trees

because trees were not able to become established. The

Forest Service, in an attempt to reclaim these brush fields to

valuable timber lands, planted thousands of acres especially

around Mount Shasta. Unfortunately, the tiny weevil

5 Personal communication from R.Z. Callaham.

Figure 84—Entomology staff, Berkeley, California, 1946. Front

(left to right) Paul Keen, Edith Edmonston, John Miller; back (left

to right) George Struble, Ralph Hall, John Patterson, and Philip

Johnson. Bongberg was probably still in the Navy.

P.C. Johnson, PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

135

attacked most of the trees several years after planting. Some

brush fields were planted several times. The new insecticide, DDT, sprayed from helicopters was the very latest

technology used to try to control the weevil. Because the

weevil spends much of its life cycle under the bark or in the

wood of attacked trees, aerial spraying resulted in inconsistent control. In tests at IFG, Miller found by forcing attacks

on young trees that Jeffrey pine-Coulter pine hybrids were

resistant to weevil attack. Several students including Robert

Z. Callaham, were introduced to the intricacies of genetic

experimental designs as a result of Miller’s mentoring at the

Institute. Callaham was assigned by Keen to assist Miller

while taking graduate studies in botany and genetics.

Callaham related his research with Miller at the IFG 

in a letter to Malcolm Furniss in 1993 (copy in my 

possession).

After reporting on my work in the Lagunas,

Keen assigned me during the winter of 1950-1951

to assist John Miller at the Institute of Forest

Genetics (IFG) at Placerville. In 1946 Dr. Palmer

Stockwell, who was in charge at IFG, had requested the Berkeley Forest Insect Lab to study resistance of pine species and species hybrids to forest

insects. Miller was assigned to work at IFG. What

follows is taken from a paper that I presented in

1953.6

Miller soon discovered by forcing attacks on

these trees that each pine species varied in its

inherent resistance to the pine reproduction weevil

[Miller 1950]. This resistance ranged from complete resistance on the part of coulter pine through

intermediate resistance on the part of Jeffrey and

ponderosa pines to a very high degree of susceptibility on the part of Apache pine and Rocky

Mountain ponderosa pine. F1 and natural hybrids

between resistant and susceptible species usually

exhibited a degree of susceptibility intermediate

between that of the two parent species. Miller

expended considerable time in studying the entire

problem; however, up to the present time, we have

not been able to determine the cause of resistance

or to determine why resistance varies from season

to season in trees of certain species and between

races of the same species . . .

The pine reproduction weevil had decimated

the Jeffrey pine plantations on the west flank of

Mt. Shasta, close to Mt. Shasta City. Some of my

earliest recollections of work with JM in the field

were of going to that location where trees had been

planted about 12 years before in strips punched

through the brush by bulldozers. We collected

infested stems, hauled them to IFG in his “sedan

delivery,” and spread them throughout the rows of

two- to four-foot-tall pine progenies. These had

previously been enclosed within large zippered

screen cages. The weevils emerging in the spring

went about their business. By summer trees were

fading and John suddenly retired. That left me

alone during the winter of 1951-1952 to tally the

resulting mortality and produce a report on our

work [Callaham and Miller 1952].

That report also included results of our first

attempts, during the summer of 1951, to determine

resistance of larger, 20-years or older pines to

Dendroctonus species. John and I planned and conducted the first forced attacks of D. brevicomis

(D.b.), D. Jeffreyi (D.j.), and D. monticolae (D.m.)

on various pine species and species hybrids. John

had wanted for many years to force Db to attack

Jeffrey pine and its hybrids and to force Dj to

attack ponderosa pine and its hybrids. He and I

planned the work, but I carried it out alone when

he suddenly retired in 1951.7

Miller was truly a versatile and inquisitive scientist 

who very late in his career pioneered searching for inherent

resistance to pine-infesting insects.

To demonstrate his practical side, Miller spent October

25 and 26, 1950, on some aerial survey flights in the

Armstrong Lookout area on the Stanislaus National Forest.

His eyesight and vertigo problems must have improved

because spotting bark-beetle-killed trees from the air

requires good vision and a settled stomach.

Miller’s last diary was for the year 1950. The last

entries for that year were; November 5–“air flight over

Stanislaus and Eldorado Country,” and November 18–

“Stanford-Army game.” He didn’t say who won, but Miller

was still a dedicated football fan. He went to high school

games when living in Ashland, and he rarely missed a “Big

Game” between Stanford and California. In addition to 6 Callaham, R.Z. 1953. Studies of the resistance of pines to beetles.

Presentation to the Entomological Society of America, Pacific Coast

Section, South Lake Tahoe, 9 p. 7 I remember assisting Callaham with some of these studies when I was a

student aide at the Forest Insect Lab.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

136

playing and watching football, as a young man he enjoyed

trout fishing and deer hunting. He progressed from traveling

by horseback, stage coach, and shank’s mare to being one of

the first forest entomologists to own and use an automobile

for field trips. In the process, he became an auto repairman

of note, developing the ability to fix brakes, flywheels, 

radiators, water pumps, oil pan punctures, and innumerable

flat tires, and to pound out dents caused by errant pine trees.

He was the first forest entomologist in the West to take 

photographs of bark-beetle-killed trees from an Army Air

Service biplane. His personal science was exemplary. 

He was a father figure and mentor to many young entomologists and foresters. He was a soft-spoken politician who

knew how to get funding for his lab. There are no documented remarks disparaging him in any way—he was 

considered a gentleman, a scholar, and a leader by his 

contemporaries.

Keen sent letters to “Friends of John Miller” announcing John’s retirement on November 1, 1951, after 44 years

of government service.8 In his usual modest way, Miller did

not want a “fuss” made, but if a party was to be given by

the Forest Insect Lab “please keep it simple.” An informal

goodwill luncheon on October 30 at the El Dumpo restaurant in Berkeley ended his official career. Farewell letters

from colleagues and friends filled a little booklet presented

to him. One typical letter stated “I can honestly say you

treated me more like a friend than underling. You were one

swell boss!”9

Ironically, the Bureau of Entomology Forest Insect

Division, converted to the Forest Service, California Forest

and Range Experiment Station just 3 years after Miller

retired. He almost went full circle back to the U.S. Forest

Service.

At nearly 70, Miller had no intention of just fading

away. He was actively seeking an assignment with the Food

and Agriculture Organization as a consultant to the Mexican

government helping with their bark beetle problems. If that

did not materialize, he planned to continue his research at

IFG on genetics of bark beetles in a volunteer status. John

Miller just could not stop being an entomologist.

8 Letter in possession of Malcolm Furniss.

9 Retirement letters, bound, in my possession.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

137

Epilogue

Harry Eugene Burke 1878-1963

Burke retired ahead of his time in 1934 at age 57 (fig. 85).

After several years of consulting on shade and ornamental

tree entomology, giving talks to garden clubs, and helping

write a textbook on forest entomology with professor Doane

at Stanford University, he realized his professional career

had ended. This was unfortunate because, of all of the forest

entomologists of his era, he was perhaps the one most sensitive to the natural long-term role of insects in forests. This

ecological bent sometimes put him at odds with other professionals who believed that most forest insect pests were to

be destroyed or at least reduced to population levels as low

as possible. Growing trees, not insects, was the order of the

day. Burke saw insects as just another disturbance agent in

the forests–neither good nor bad, but playing a long-term

role in a forests’ life history. Even though he sprayed trees

with chemicals in Yellowstone National Park and other

places to kill tree-damaging insects, he became increasingly

critical of insect control projects, especially in national

parks where trees were not managed for their economic

value as saw logs. He was a good 50 years ahead of his time

in this philosophy. If he had worked another decade or so

there is no telling what influence he would have had on

insect control policies, especially in national parks where

today insect outbreaks are not treated.

Burke authored 63 publications during a period from

1905 to 1940. This was a noteworthy publishing record for 

a field entomologist during that era. He was also president

of the Pacific branch of the Entomological Society of

America in 1935, several years after he retired.

With his creative instincts thwarted, Burke directed his

energy toward agricultural pursuits. David Pratt, his grandson, remembers his retirement as follows:

My grandfather’s primary hobbies after he

retired were gardening and reading. In late 1938,

my grandparents and parents moved into a large

two story home in Los Gatos (where I spent the

first 13+ years of my life). The home was situated

on a two acre lot which had approximately one

acre of fruit trees (apricots, prunes, almonds and

who knows what else). There were three chicken

coops, occupied by ducks, geese, chickens and 

rabbits. There was a large vegetable garden, lots 

of berrys and loads of other stuff. The place was

ringed by a four foot hog wire fence and every post

had a grape growing up it. This kept him very busy

until about a year before he died.1

Burke greatly enjoyed all of his grandchildren and no

doubt taught them much about the natural world. His daughters remember hikes with their father in Yosemite National

Park, where he continued to camp after he retired. They

took off on these adventures not for distance or speed, but

learning all kinds of things about flowers, trees, bugs, and

nature in general.

Family members say his mind was sharp and memory

excellent in old age. When he died at age 84 on March 26,

1963, in Los Gatos, California, C.B. Eaton, a newcomer

when Burke retired, and F.P. Keen, the first entomologist

Burke hired, wrote the following about him in his obituary

published in The Journal of Economic Entomology (Eaton

and Keen 1964):

Dr. Burke was gifted with a friendly, affable

personality. He was a good conversationalist and 

an interesting storyteller. He enjoyed a broad

Figure 85—Harry Eugene Burke 1878-1963.

PSW

1 Correspondence from David Pratt in 2002.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

138

acquaintance with men in his field and always

spoke well of them. He was held in esteem as an

entomologist for the intimate details of knowledge

concerning large numbers of insect species. His

leadership was recognized and respected in applied

forest insect control.

It is interesting to note that they memorialized his insect

control activities. But I maintain that he was also one of our

profession’s earliest forest ecologists. Regardless of either

viewpoint, Burke was liked and respected as an entomologist and a person. Burke was cremated and his ashes found 

a fitting resting place. His daughter deposited them in the

Sierra Nevada Mountains near Lake Tahoe.2

John Martin Miller, 1882-1952

To sum up John Miller’s career in a few sentences is 

difficult (fig. 86). He was the second university-trained forest entomologist on the scene in California and Oregon after

Burke. Luckily for our profession, Burke and Miller became

friends and coleaders of the fledgling science of forest entomology in the second decade of the 20th century. Miller’s

coworkers, subordinates, and professional colleagues

remarked on his work ethic, his care for people’s wellbeing, his quiet demeanor, and his firm convictions. He had

the ability to analyze problems and pursue a course of

action, but not at the expense of animosity, even when the

problems were controversial. His relationship with A.D.

Hopkins before he joined the Bureau of Entomology is a

good example. 

Having started his career as a ranger in the U.S. Forest

Service, he had great empathy for the field manager. His

personal and unit’s research projects were oriented first and

foremost toward assisting forest managers with their insect 

problems. However, this did not prevent him from encouraging basic research or from following his own curiosity

like using airplanes in forest insect surveys or studying the

role of tree genetics in managing forest pests.

He produced many important technical reports on a

timely basis, and this sometimes precluded more formal

publications. However, his book with F.P. Keen, Biology

and Control of the Western Pine Beetle, summarized over 

50 years of research (Miller and Keen 1960). It is a classic

and still the basic reference for entomologists studying bark

beetles. He was also an excellent photographer who continuously improved his equipment and techniques. He usually

had a darkroom in both his home and at work.

Miller was at his best when in the field. He was noted

for his walking ability, and many young workers struggled

to keep up with him. In his later years, he became a little

forgetful when afield. He usually carried quite a bit of 

photographic equipment, and it became normal to assign

someone in the field party to follow Miller and pick up his

glasses, notebook, or camera filters he may have left on a

log or a rock. This, of course, was done most discreetly.3

When Miller retired, he had already applied for a job

consulting with the Mexican government helping with their

bark beetle problems. This assignment was under the auspices of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the

United Nations.

Just before retirement he made an exploratory trip to

Mexico to examine the prospects. Of course he always 2 Grandson, Paul Pratt, remembers that his mother, Marion Burke Pratt,

took her father’s ashes up the KT-22 ski lift at Squaw Valley and then

walked around the south side of the peak looking out toward the Rubicon

River to scatter them. E-mail to me July 20, 2004. 3 I know, because I had one such assignment.

Figure 86—John Martin Miller, 1882-1952.

PSW
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

139

carried a camera, and the Mexican police accused him of

taking photographs in a prohibited area. Miller was briefly

detained (some say in the local jail) until the matter was

resolved in Miller’s favor. Of course when he returned to

the lab at Berkeley and the story was leaked he was in for

much good-natured ribbing by his colleagues.

Since the Mexican assignment was international, Miller

was in competition with an Italian entomologist for the job.

When he took his physical examination, the doctor said he

had some heart problems. Miller found another doctor who

gave him a passing physical. He also had glaucoma and

feared this would end his Mexican job if exposed. He was

accepted for the assignment and in 1952 went to Mexico

accompanied by his wife Bess.

The next news received about Miller’s Mexican assignment saddened everyone who knew him. F.P. Keen sent

word on April 1, 1952, to all forest insect laboratories

“...that John Miller had passed away in Mexico City.

Details were lacking, but John had returned from Yucatan

and had come down with a chill. Mrs. Miller had been with

him but had returned recently to the bay area.”4

In addition to family, many of Miller’s old colleagues

and current coworkers attended the funeral. His brother, a

long-time pastor, presided over the service.

Miller was such a dedicated and hard worker and

enjoyed his profession so much, it is not hard to think of

him passing away as he lived, curious and active to the end.

Mrs. Burke and Mrs. Miller

This story cannot end without a tribute to two remarkable

women. Mrs. Burke and Mrs. Miller were integral parts of

their husbands’ successful careers. Both of them spent their

honeymoons on official trips with their husbands studying

insects in the wilderness. Most of their children were born

in small mountain towns, usually while their husbands were

in the field working. It is understandable that when they

acquired their first permanent residences near Stanford

University they never moved again. The offspring of both

families were highly educated and very successful; both

women raised their children well with sometimes minimal

help from often-absent husbands.

Marion Armstrong Burke’s biography was not included

in Burke’s memories in the early chapters, so I will add it

here. H.E. Burke met his future wife in Washington, D.C.,

in 1906 (fig. 87). The following excerpts were from a short

biography written by one of the Burkes’ daughters.5

Marion Armstrong was the oldest child of

Luther Kelly Armstrong and Marion Rebecca

Brown. She was born March 15, 1887, in Culpeper,

Virginia. Both her parents were natives of that state

with ancestry that, in the case of her mother, went

back to 1617 in the Jamestown colony and in the

1650s in Maryland. 

Marion and Gene [H.E. Burke] were married

April 8, 1907, in Washington, D.C., and their honeymoon was definitely an eye opener for her. He

had a field project scheduled that summer in the

wilds of Utah, Kamas and Panquitch Lake. Marion

had little experience cooking, let alone over a

campfire. Like most white southerners, she was

used to black servants doing the menial work. That

first wilderness camp experience was a near disaster. Gene was no more experienced with cooking

than she. It was a great relief months later as the

4 Correspondence in possession of Malcolm Furniss. He remembers bringing pine boughs from the Sierra Nevadas to put on Miller’s casket. Robert

Callaham remembers bringing pine cones from IFG to place on his casket.

5 Author and date unknown. Probably written by the Burkes’ oldest 

daughter, Marion. Copy provided to me by daughter Janet Burke Eglington.

Figure 87—Marion Armstrong Burke, 1887-1984.

H.E. Burke family
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

140

weather turned real cold, that the Mormon farmer

who had brought them to their campsite decided he

should check on them as they had seemed greenhorns to him to begin with. Thus he rescued them,

as they were by now almost out of supplies.

This experience did not discourage Marion,

however. She remained ready and willing to live in

whatever western lumbertown or field camp Gene’s

work took them [to], whether she was pregnant or

not, or with the five children they eventually had.

After Harry Burke retired, Marion Burke continued her

automobile trips, taking the family to Yosemite or the mountains every summer and doing the driving because Harry

still did not like automobiles. She was active in the community of Los Gatos and lived in a large house, helping raise

two grandsons for 13 years in the 1940s and 1950s. She was

active to the end and lived alone until a week before her

death on July 26, 1984, at the age of 97.6

Bessie Miller remained at her residence in Palo Alto 

after John Miller’s death (fig. 88). She had long before lost

her ardor for camping in the mountains (her daughter Betty

remembers often accompanying the Burkes on their annual

camping trips because her own mother was through with

camping), and she definitely did not like driving an auto.

Mrs. Miller became a flower gardener of note, a hobby John

Miller was not too fond of because he couldn’t do it in a

photographic dark room.

Raising and educating their son and daughter became

Mrs. Miller’s priority. Her daughter remembers her mother’s

life and wrote the following (Moore 2003):

Bess lived on after John’s death, until 1987.

She died at the age of 100 years and 8 months. All

but the last 6 years of her widowhood were spent

in Palo Alto at the only “permanent” home they

ever owned. Bess likewise had hobbies to fill lonely hours. She learned sewing when she was very

young, and made clothes for her brothers and sisters and herself as a part of her family duties. She

continued to sew for her own family. She had

learned the piano when a traveling salesman came

to the farm in Missouri and traded his piano for

one of her father’s horses. Music was something

she shared with John. One of the first items bought

for the Palo Alto home was a new Steinway piano,

and I remember as a child that after dinner, they

often played music together—he on the instrument

he called a “peck horn” and she on the piano. Bess

came from a large family and it was close knit. She

enjoyed visiting her relatives and did so whenever

she could. She was of a “social” nature and

enjoyed social functions in the community, mostly

church groups and the “Women’s Club.” However

in later life she became involved with the group of

Palo Alto artists and took up lessons in watercolor

painting.

Burke and Miller were extremely lucky men to have

had such devoted wives. It couldn’t help but have played an

important role in their successful professional lives. Behind

these two good men were two good women. 

6 Undated letters to me from David Pratt and Janet Eglington.

Figure 88—Bessie Brose Miller, 1886-1987.

J.M. Miller family
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

141

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to the many people and organizations who

made this book possible. I am especially indebted to the

descendants of H.E. Burke—grandsons David and Paul Pratt

and daughters Janet Burke Eglington and Dorothy Burke

Walker—and of J.M. Miller—daughter Betty Miller Moore

and granddaughter Susan Miller Lowenkron. Their encouragement and offers of personal diaries, letters, and photographs were invaluable. Joan Salman Rhodes provided 

information about her father and photographs of the

Hackamore field station. Pat Pepin, librarian (retired), Sara

Garetz, librarian, and John Dale, entomologist (retired),

helped me locate material in the Pacific Southwest (PSW)

Research Station and Region library as did Patricia at the

Shasta Historical Society in Redding, California. I especially appreciated PSW library staff allowing me access to

reports as they were preparing to ship the library to Ogden,

Utah. Malcolm Furniss, research entomologist (retired) 

and brother of entomologist Robert L. Furniss (deceased),

searched Portland lab files from the 1930s and 1940s and

located several important letters in addition to commenting

on an early draft. Richard Mason, research entomologist

(retired), and Robert Z. Callaham, retired Forest Service

Deputy Chief of Research, provided much appreciated technical reviews. Callaham also provided valuable information

from his genetic research with J.M. Miller. The work of

preparing the drafts for publication was greatly assisted by

support from research entomologist Jane Hayes of the La

Grande PNW lab and by Amy George who cheerfully typed

several drafts. I am grateful to Cindy Miner, Station

Communications and Applications Director, who sponsored

the preparation of this book as a PNW publication and to

Lynn Starr and Carolyn Wilson for editing, and Pamela

Martin for layout. Finally, I thank my wife, Gail, for her

encouragement and patience as she endured three winters 

of writing clutter throughout the house and listened to my

complaints and victories.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

142
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

143

References

Anonymous. 1913. Branch of Forest Insects conference,

February 16 to March 1, 1913. Report of the proceedings. Part II. Unpublished report. On file with: B.E.

Wickman.

Anonymous. 1920. Proceedings at a meeting of the General

California Forestry Committee at the New Call building, San Francisco, California, Tuesday, June 1, 1920.

60 p. Unpublished report. On file with: B.E. Wickman.

Anonymous. 1923. Proceedings of the Forest Insect

Conference, Berkeley, California, February 5-10, 1923.

257 p. Unpublished report. On file with: U.S. Forest

Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station Library,

Ogden, UT, and with B.E. Wickman.

Berisford, C.W. 1991. Andrew Delmar Hopkins—a West

Virginia pioneer in entomology. Blacksburg, WV: 

West Virginia University, Agriculture and Forestry

Experiment Station. Circular 153(14): 20-26.

Burke, H.E. [N.d.] Autobiography. Typed manuscript 

provided by Dorothy Burke Walker, March 2, 2002. 

On file with: B.E. Wickman.

Burke, H.E. 1912. Craggy Mountain bark house and Moffat

Creek forest insect control project: Klamath National

Forest and vicinity. Typed manuscript, June 14, 1912.

On file with: B.E. Wickman.

Burke, H.E. 1923. Western Division Newsletter. November

1, 1923.

Burke, H.E. 1924. Western Division Newsletter. February

1, 1924.

Burke, H.E. 1925. Western Division Newsletter. January 1,

1925.

Burke, H.E. 1932. Two destructive defoliators of lodgepole

pine in Yellowstone National Park. Agric. Circ. 224.

[Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Burke, H.E. 1946. My recollections of the first years in

Forest Entomology. On file with: Pacific Southwest

Research Station library, Ogden, Utah.

Burke, H.E.; Wickman, B.E. 1990. Northeastern Oregon

bark beetle control project 1910-1911. Gen. Tech. Rep.

PNW-GTR-249. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research

Station. 49 p.

Callaham, R.Z.; Miller, J.M. 1952. Studies of the resistance of pine hybrids to bark-beetle attacks, season of

1951. Office Report. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research

Station. 8 p.

Clary, D.A. 1979. Historic structure report: Grey Towers.

FS0327. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service: 1-7, 40-41.

Davies, G.W.; Frank, F.M., ed. 1992. Stories of the

Klamath National Forest: the first 50 years 1905-1955.

Hat Creek, CA: History Ink Books. 436 p.

Doane, R.W.; VanDyke, E.C.; Chamberlin, W.J.; Burke,

H.E. 1936. Forest insects. New York: McGraw-Hill.

463 p.

Eaton, C.B. 1942. Biology of the weevil, Cylindrocopturus

eatoni Buchanan. Injurious to ponderosa and Jeffrey

pine reproduction. Journal of Economic Entomology.

35(1): 20-25.

Eaton, C.B. 1953. Resume of history on the location of the

Forest Insect Laboratory at the University of California,

Berkeley. Correspondence. On file with: B.E. Wickman.

Eaton, C.B.; Keen, F.P. 1964. Harry E. Burke 1878-1963.

Journal of Economic Entomology. 57(4): 613-614.

Furniss, M.M. 1997a. American forest entomology comes

on stage. Bark beetle depredations in the Black Hills,

Forest Reserve, 1897-1907. American Entomologist.

1997(Spring): 40-47.

Furniss, M.M. 1997b. Forest entomology in the northern

Rocky Mountains: 1901-1917, as reflected in the correspondence between Josef Brunner and A.D. Hopkins.

American Entomologist. 49(2): 102-111.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

144

Furniss, M.M.; Renkin, R. 2003. Forest entomology in

Yellowstone National Park, 1923-1957: a time of discovery and learning to let live. American Entomologist.

2003(Winter): 198-209.

Furniss, M.M.; Wickman, B.E. 1998. Photographic images

and history of forest insect investigations on the Pacific

slope 1903-1953. Part I California. American Entomologist. 1998(Winter): 206-216.

Graves, H.S. 1965. Early days with Gifford Pinchot.

Journal of Forestry. 63: 585-586.

Graves, H.S. 1920. The torch in the timber. It may save the

lumberman’s property, but it destroys the forests of the

future. Sunset Magazine. 1920(April): 37-40, 80-90.

Guthrie, C.W., ed. 1995. The first ranger: adventures of a

pioneer forest ranger. Glacier Country 1902-1910.

Redwing Publishing. 169 p.

Hall, J.R. 1913. Final report: Insect Control, Craggy

Mountain and Seiad Projects, September 10, 1913. 6 p.

Unpublished report. On file with: B.E. Wickman.

Hampton, H.D. 1971. How the U.S. Cavalry saved our

national parks. [Place of publication unknown]: Indiana

University Press. 246 p.

Hodgson, A.H. 1911. Reconnaissance report on representative section infested with Dendroctonus brevicomis

(western pine beetle) on the Klamath National Forest,

May 18, 1911. Unpublished report. On file with: B.E.

Wickman.

Hopkins, A.D. 1912. Insect damage to standing timber in

the national parks. Curcular 143. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Entomology.

Hopkins, A.D. 1938. Bioclimatics: a science of life and climate relations. Misc. Publ. 280. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Agriculture. 188 p.

Joslin, L. 1995. Uncle Sam’s Cabins. Bend, OR: Wilderness

Associates. 252 p.

Joslin, L., ed. 1999. Walt Perry an early-day forest ranger

in New Mexico and Oregon. Maverick Publications,

Inc. 190 p.

Keen, F.P. 1927. Shooting bugs from the air. Western Forest

Insect News. December 1, 1927.

Keen, F.P. 1936. Relative susceptibility of ponderosa pine

to bark beetle attack. Journal of Forestry. 34: 919-927.

Keen, F.P. 1943. Ponderosa pine tree classes redefined.

Journal of Forestry. 41: 249-253.

Keen, F.P. 1958. Cone and seed insects of western forest

trees. Tech. Bull. 1169. U.S. Department of Agriculture.

168 p.

Maunder, E.R. 1974. Oral history interviews with F.P.

Keen. Santa Cruz, CA: Forest Historical Society.

Miller, H. [N.d.a]. Recollections and reflections, the

Ashland years 1914-1920. Unpublished memoir. In:

Snapshots of a 20th Century Family 1906-87. 53 p. 

On file with: B.E. Wickman.

Miller, H.B. [N.d.b]. Snapshots of a 20th Century Family

1906-87. Unpublished manuscript. On file with: B.E.

Wickman.

Miller, H.B. 1997. The twenties: North Fork. In: Davies,

G.W.; Frank, F.M., eds. Forest Service memories, past

lives and times in the United States Forest Service. Hat

Creek, CA: History Ink Books: 111-113.

Miller, J.M. 1911. Report of forest insect investigations,

Klamath National Forest. Unpublished report. On file

with: B.E. Wickman.

Miller, J.M. 1914. Insect damage to the cones and seeds of

Pacific Coast conifers. Bull. 95. U.S. Department of

Agriculture. 7 p. 

Miller, J.M. 1925. Investigations. Western Division

Newsletter. February 1, 1925.
Miller, J.M. 1926. Aerial photography as a method of mapping yellow pine areas to show losses caused by bark

beetles. Results of tests carried out on the Sierra

National Forest May 1925 by the 15th Photo Section,

Air Service, in cooperation with the Bureau of

Entomology. [Palo Alto, CA]: Bureau of Entomology;

Stanford University. 6 p. On file with: Rocky Mountain

Research Station Library, 324 25th Street, Ogden, UT

84401, and with B.E. Wickman. 

Miller, J.M. 1928. Forest entomology still entomology.

Western Forest Insect News. March 1, 1928.

Miller, J.M. 1943. Tin types of a pioneer family.

Unpublished manuscript edited by Moore, B.M. 1993.

On file with: Betty Miller Moore, Lafayette, CA, and

with B.E. Wickman.

Miller, J.M. 1950. Resistance of pine hybrids to the pine

reproduction weevil. Forest Res. Note 68. Berkeley,

CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Southwest Research Station. 

Miller, J.M.; Keen, F.P. [N.d.] Biology and control of the

western pine beetle. Unpublished report. On file with:

Rocky Mountain Research Station Library, 324 25th

Street, Ogden, UT 84401 and with B.E. Wickman.

Miller, J.M.; Keen, F.P. 1960. Biology and control of the

western pine beetle. Misc. Publ. 800. Washington, DC:

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 381 p.

Moore, B.M. 2003. The courtship letters of our parents

John and Bess Miller. A Family Book. Privately 

published. On file with: B.E. Wickman.

Patterson, J.E. 1926. Micrometer slide adapted to core

measuring. Journal of Forestry. 24: 691-693.

Patterson, J.E. 1921. Life history of Recurvaria milleri, the

lodgepole pine needleminer in the Yosemite National

Park, California. Journal of Agricultural Resource.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture: 

27-145.

Patterson, J.E. 1929. The Pandora moth, a periodic pest of

Western pine forests. Tech. Bull. 137. U.S. Department

of Agriculture. 19 p.

Pendergrass, L.F. 1985. The Forest Service in California: a

survey of important developments and people from

1905 to the present. Draft report. On file with: USDA

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station

Library, 324 25th Street, Ogden, UT 84401.

Person, H.L. 1928. The use of permanent sample plots in

western pine beetle studies. Western Forest Insect

News. February 1, 1928.

Pinchot, G. 1947. Breaking new ground. Island Press. 522 p

Pyne, S.J. 2001. Year of the fires—the story of the great

fires of 1910. [Place of publication unknown]: Viking.

322 p.

Rowher, S.A. 1950. Obituary, Andrew Delmar Hopkins.

Proceedings of the Entomology Society of Washington.

52: 21-26. 

Salman, K.A.; Bongberg, J.W. 1942. Logging high risk

trees to control insects in pine stands of northeastern

California. Journal of Forestry. 40: 533-539.

Smith, R.H.; Wickman, B.E.; Hall, R.C.; DeMars, C.J.;

Ferrell, G.T. 1981. The California Pine Risk-Rating

System: its development, use and relationship to other

systems. In: Hedden, R.L.; Barras, S.J.; Coster, J.E.,

coords. Proceedings, Hazard-rating system in forest

insect management. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-27.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service: 53-69.

Struble, G.R. 1953. Reminiscence in forest entomology.

Unpublished manuscript. On file with: B.E. Wickman.

White, S.E. 1920a. Getting at the truth. Is the Forest

Service really trying to lay bare the facts of light burning? Sunset Magazine. 1920(May): 79-82.

White, S.E. 1920b. Woodsman, spare those trees: why fire

protection does not really protect our remaining timber.

Sunset Magazine. 1920(March): 23-26, 108-110.

Wickman, B.E. 1987. Early forest insect research in the

Pacific Northwest: Ashland field Station, 1912-1925.

Oregon Historical Quarterly. 1987(Spring): 27-48.

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

145
Wickman, B.E. 1990. The battle against bark beetles in

Crater Lake National park: 1925-34. Gen. Tech. Rep.

PNW-GTR-259. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research

Station. 40 p.

Wickman, B.E.; Eaton, C.B. 1962. The effects of sanitation-salvage cutting on insect-caused mortality at

Blacks Mountain Experimental Forest, 1938-1969.

Tech. Pap. 66. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest

and Range Experiment Station. 39 p.

Wickman, B.E.; Torgersen, T.R.; Furniss, M.M. 2002.

Photographic images and history of forest insect investigations on the Pacific slope, 1903-1953. Part 2 Oregon

and Washington. American Entomologist. 2002(Fall):

178-185.

Williams, G.W. 2000. The USDA Forest Service—the first

century. FS-650. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service. 154 p.

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

146
Other Sources

In addition to the references cited, which were mostly

processed reports, published reports, and books, there were

other important sources of background material on Burke

and Miller. A list of the important sources that are not 

readily available in archives follows.

Interviews—I had two personal interviews with Burke’s

grandson, David Pratt, in 2003 and 2004. I spent a very

rewarding several hours with Betty Miller Moore, John

Miller’s daughter, in May 2004. The interviews did not provide specific historical details, but rather gave me a flavor

of family life of the two men beyond what I could obtain

from written records. In addition, David Pratt organized an

index of Burke’s photographs, which he shared with me,

and which was helpful for choosing illustrations.

Correspondence—I had a spate of letter writing (for 3 years)

with the following people once they were aware of my biography project: Janet Burke Eglington and Dorothy Burke

Walker (H.E. Burke’s daughters), Betty Miller Moore

(Miller’s daughter), David Pratt, and Paul Pratt (H.E.

Burke’s grandsons) who lived with the H.E. Burkes for 13

years, and Joan Salman Rhodes, Ken Salman’s daughter,

who provided photographs and family history.

Dr. Robert Z. Callaham, retired Deputy Chief for Research,

USDA Forest Service, who was the last person to work with

J.M. Miller on research projects at the Institute of Forest

Genetics, Placerville, California.

Except in the case of Dr. Callaham, the letters mostly related to family affairs, like how the families lived at isolated

field locations during the summer and anecdotes and family

legend. This type of information may not be historically 

precise, but does add color to the everyday lives of the two

entomologists.

Unpublished family documents—Both the Burke and Miller

families have saved documents, correspondence, drafts of

memoirs, photographs, several privately published Miller

family histories, and a compliation of letters from Miller to

his future wife. I was allowed to use portions of these 

letters, and they are included in several chapters covering

Miller’s Forest Service career before he joined the Bureau

of Entomology.

Official government correspondence—Unfortunately, 

official correspondence often gets purged from government

files every several decades. Correspondence dating back to

the period of these biographies is rare and, if archived, 

difficult to locate. I used official correspondence from several sources: Pacific Southwest Region/Pacific Southwest

Research Station library, now located at the Rocky

Mountain Research Station in Ogden, Utah. The correspondence of Robert L. Furniss (deceased), who was leader of

the Portland Forest Insect laboratory. Malcom M. Furniss,

retired forest entomologist, Moscow, Idaho, inherited his

brother’s correspondence file and provided me with valuable letters. The historical forest entomology files at the 

La Grande Forestry and Range Sciences Laboratory, Pacific

Northwest Research Station. And perhaps, most important,

historical correspondence I have been collecting since the

early 1950s. Particularly important to this story is official

correspondence of A.D. Hopkins to H.E. Burke and others

from 1910 to 1914. These letters were somehow found and

saved by Robert Dolph (deceased) and Charles Sartwell,

retired Forest Service forest entomologists, and given to me

over 25 years ago.

Western Forest Insect News—this newsletter was suggested

at the 1923 Berkeley conference on forest entomology. It

was approved by Hopkins and the Chief of the Bureau of

Entomology in March 1923. The first issue was dated April

16, 1923, and was called “News Letter—Western Division.”

A year later, the title was changed to “Western Division

Newsletter.” On March 1, 1926, the name was changed

again to “Western Forest Insect News.” 

Initially, this informal newsletter had a limited distribution

of several dozen copies sent to Western forest entomology

workers. The distribution list in the last issue, June 1, 1928,

included over 120 people, libraries, universities, and government agencies. The demand for the newsletter became so

great that Miller and Burke (the editor) could no longer

devote the necessary time and money to its production and

distribution. 

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

147
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

148

I know of only three complete sets: mine, Malcolm 

Furniss’, and a set at the Federal Records Center, Seattle,

Washington. There may be individual issues scattered in 

private collections or university libraries. There is a wealth

of information over a 5-year period on personnel, research

and control projects, and philosophical discourse on forest 

entomology in the newsletters.

Personal experience—Historians may wince at the mention

of a writer using his personal memories as a source for a

biography, but I used all information available. To my

knowledge, there are only three scientists still alive who

worked with and for J.M. Miller. They are Dr. Robert Z.

Callaham, Malcolm M. Furniss, and me. Both Callaham and

Furniss provided valuable memories of their association

with Miller. In my case, during a period from summer of

1948 until Miller’s retirement, I did field and office work

for Miller, Patterson, Keen, Hall, Bongberg, and Struble.

After my professional appointment in 1956, I worked for

Hall and C.B. Eaton. All of these pioneer forest entomologists were storytellers. Long automobile rides and campfires

tend to loosen tongues. I hope I captured some of the rich

flavor of their reminiscences.

Oral histories—The oral histories of Keen and Hall are 

referenced in the text and available at the Forest Historical

Society in North Carolina. However, I want to insert a

caveat here concerning the accuracy of oral histories. Age

may play tricks with one’s memory, and sometimes longforgotten slights or criticisms seem to resurface. As one

example, in Keen’s interview, he claimed Miller retired in

1943 when he took over as leader of the Berkeley Insect

Laboratory. In fact, Miller worked for almost 9 more years

as an independent scientist (or technical advisor) for the

Bureau of Entomology in Berkeley. These were some of

Miller’s most productive research and publishing years. He

even took over as lab leader in the occasional absences of

Keen, as I recounted in the preface. Another point is that the

contributions of others is sometimes forgotten. From 1943

until his retirement, John Patterson was the administrator of

the Berkeley lab, and Robert L. Furniss of the Portland lab

with Keen in overall charge. That this arrangement functioned so well was mainly due to the excellent leadership 

of Patterson and Furniss. There is not much in the oral histories on this aspect. I used the oral histories with caution,

cross checking statements with other sources whenever 

possible.

Miller’s diaries—Miller developed a daily dairy habit as

soon as he joined the U.S. Forest Service. A daily dairy was

required of forest officers, so his dairies started with his

Forest Service appointment in 1909 and continued until his

retirement. He actually kept two diaries for many of the

years between 1910 and 1920. One diary tracked travel and

expenses, and the second contained biological notes wherever he was working at the time. The early diaries contain

more detail of his travel, mode of travel, and kind of work

he was doing. As the years went by, the entries became very

brief; for example, the Tuesday, May 23, 1950, entry is

“Berkeley.” For Saturday, November 18, 1950, the entry 

is “Stanford-Army game.”

Unfortunately, the diaries do not go into administrative or

personnel details, but from 1910 to 1940, they do faithfully

record his travels, who he met with, and why. This information was valuable for relating Miller’s work habits, his

prodigious amount of travel, and the primitive transportation

and living conditions in the field. The information also was

used to crossdate reports on various projects.

There was one serious problem with his diaries. Many were

small, 4- by 6-inch USDA field diaries, or even smaller stationery store diaries. Miller’s handwriting was small and

tight to begin with, and often he wrote even smaller to get

all of his entry into the designated diary space for the day.

Consequently, I had to read most of them by using a magnifying glass. Then to top it off, he wrote most entries in light

pencil. But my complaints are trivial compared to the value

of having 40 years of a person’s daily journal when preparing his biography.

We can thank Miller’s wife for keeping his letters and

diaries and his son, Harold Miller, a career Forest Service

forester, for recognizing their value, saving them after his

mother died, and then entrusting them to his daughter, 

Susan Lowenkron when he died. Susan, in turn, entrusted

the diaries to me in 2003.
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

149

Burke also kept a daily journal his entire life, according to

grandson David Pratt. Unfortunately, Mrs. Burke thought

her husband’s diaries and correspondence should be kept

private, so she destroyed them after he died.
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

150
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

151

Appendix

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

AGRICULTURE, BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY,

BRANCH OF FOREST INSECT INVESTIGATIONS,

WASHINGTON, D. C.

TO OWNERS AND OTHERS INTERESTED IN 

THE PROTECTION OF THE PINE TIMBER OF

NORTHEASTERN OREGON FROM 

DEPREDATIONS BY BARK BEETLES.

Extensive investigations carried on by experts of the

Bureau of Entomology, assisted by officers of the Forest

Service and interested owners of timber, have revealed the

fact that a large percentage of the pine timber in northeastern Oregon has been killed during the past five years by an

insect known as the mountain-pine beetle.

While heretofore this beetle has confined its principal

depredations to the lodgepole pine, it is now gradually

adapting itself to the yellow pine, thus threatening the best

trees and stands of this timber on and adjacent to the

Wallowa and Whitman national forests.

According to the conclusions and recommendations of

the expert of the Bureau of Entomology in charge of forest

insect investigations, based on the reports of the representatives of the Bureau, of the Forest Service, and of private

owners, who have conducted special investigations to ascertain the facts relating to the technical and practical features

of the problem, it is evident that unless the proper steps are

taken to control the depredations, many millions of dollars’

worth of the best yellow-pine timber of the area will be

killed within the next few years.

It appears that it is not practicable to undertake at this

time to control the depredations in the lodgepole-pine areas,

but it does appear to be entirely practicable to control them

in the principal yellow-pine areas in and adjacent to the

eastern part of the Whitman and southwestern part of the

Wallowa national forest at a cost of from $30,000 to

$100,000, and thus prevent, within the next five or ten

years, the further death of timber, which, judging from the

history of similar depredations by this beetle in other sections of the Rocky Mountain region, is certain to be worth,

in stumpage values, several millions of dollars.

The depredations in and adjacent to the yellow-pine

areas are so extensive and the number of infested trees is so

large that control work, if attempted with any prospect of

success, with the limited funds that might be available from

all sources and the limited number of laborers who could be

secured for the work, must be by the methods of cutting and

barking, and cutting and burning, the required number of

infested trees at direct expense. It is also certain that unless

there is a very general cooperation, by all of the principal

owners and interests involved, in an energetic effort to carry

on the work according to a plan of procedure definitely

agreed upon and based on established principles and

requirements, nothing of importance can be accomplished.

Extensive experiments with methods of controlling this

class of beetles have been conducted, according to the

requirements and instructions of the experts of the Bureau of

Entomology, by private owners and by the Forest Service

direct, or in cooperation with other interests, in five different

areas in Colorado and two in Montana. All of these have been

successful in controlling the depredations, and all have

demonstrated conclusively that such work will pay, in the

timber protected, an enormous profit on the money expended.

These demonstrations and experiments have also shown

that if from 35 to 75 per cent of the infested timber in the

principal centers of infestation within the radius of one or

more townships is felled and barked or otherwise disposed

of within the required period to kill the broods of insects in

the bark, the remaining living timber will be protected from

depredations for many years after.

The direct expense of cutting and barking and cutting

and burning the infested trees has ranged from 15 cents to

$1 per tree, or an average of about 50 cents per tree.

Whenever the beetle-infested timber has been utilized within the required period, the desired control has been affected

without ultimate cost. When the timber is felled and barked

at direct expense, the merchantable timber thus treated is

usually available for utilization for two or more years after

it is cut, and the amount that can usually be sold and converted into lumber will yield enough revenue to cover a

large percentage, and in some cases all, of the original cost.

The Bureau of Entomology has no funds that can 

be devoted to direct control work, but it will devote all
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

152

available funds and men toward locating the infested timber,

directing the operation of marking the same for cutting, and

giving technical advice and instructions on the essential features of the control work, provided it has sufficient assurance from the owners and others directly concerned that its

recommendations will be adopted and carried out, so far as

it is practicable to do so.

The Forest Service has given assurance that during the

months of October and November it will devote all available funds, amounting to at least $5,000, to direct control

work in an important center of infestation located by the

experts of the Bureau of Entomology in the yellow pine on

one of the national forests; also, that it will endeavor to

secure a special emergency appropriation to continue the

work next spring in the same or other centers, provided the

principal private owners of affected or threatened timber in

or adjacent to these centers will give similar assurance that

they will cooperate in an attempt to dispose of the required

proportion of the infestation on their property.

Therefore, if you are interested in the protection of the

timber from further depredations by the beetle, are you willing to join the Forest Service in an organized cooperative

effort to adopt and carry out the recommendations of the

Bureau of Entomology for the treatment of the required 

percentage of infested trees and to take the necessary action

relating to the infested timber which may be located and

marked on the property in which your are directly or 

indirectly interested?

If the timber on the lands in which you are interested is

found to be healthy, are you willing to contribute to a general fund to assist in the disposal of the important centers of

infestation, which are found to be a menace to it?

Will you make an effort to attend, or have a representative of your interests attend, a meeting to be held at Baker

City, Oregon, on September 1, 1910, to discuss and adopt a

definite policy of procedure toward the protection of the

timber of northeastern Oregon from insect depredations?

An early reply is important, in order that the Bureau of

Entomology may judge whether or not it can proceed with

its efforts to bring about the required action, or whether 

it will be necessary to abandon the project and turn its 

attention to other sections of the country in which similar

depredations demand attention.

Correspondence relating to organization for cooperative

control work and the general methods of procedure in such

work should be addressed to the District Forester, Portland,

Oregon. 

Correspondence relating to the insect and methods and

recommendations for control work should be addressed to

Mr. H. E. Burke, Agent and Expert, Bureau of Entomology,

Sumpter, Oregon.

A. D. HOPKINS,

In Charge Forest Insect Investigations.

Approved:

L. O. HOWARD

Chief, Bureau of Entomology.

AUGUST 5, 1910.
Index

1910 fires, 11, 98

Acer, Dr., 26

Acker, A.V., 26, 37

Admiralty Island, 93

aerial photography, 115, 119 

Agrilus, 75, 78

Allen, Shirley W., 68

ambrosia beetles, 92

American River, 74, 77

Anaconda, MT, 9

Andrews, W.T., 19

Andricus bicornis, 107

Angeles National Forest, 18

Angell, A.G., 17, 63, 68

Annuad, Mr., 132

Antelope Creek project, 77, 78, 97, 110

Anthony Creek, OR, 13-15

anti-saloon league, 31

Applegate River, 87

Armstrong, E.T., 89

Armstrong, Luther Kelly, 139

Armstrong, Marion, 139 (see also Burke, Marion

Armstrong)

Arrowhead Lake, CA, 99, 107

Ashland Conference, 91, 94, 95

Ashland Field Station, ii, 15, 64, 72, 75, 76, 78, 80-87, 89-

96, 99-100, 108, 111, 113

Ashland Normal School, 83, 90

Ashland, OR, 16, 64, 72, 75, 76, 80-87, 89-96, 100, 108,

110, 111, 113, 124, 125, 135

Baker, Alford C., 1

Baker City, OR, 11, 13-18, 63, 64, 76, 89, 152

Baker Field Station, 11, 13, 14, 63

Baker Forest Protective Association, 14-18, 64

Bakers mealy bug, 107

Baldenweck, R.A., 60

Baldwin, ranger, 65

Ball, Dr., 103, 104

Bannock Indian War, 1

Barber, H.S., 65

Barber, Victor S., 65

bark weevils, 7

Barkhouse Creek bark beetle control project, 66-69

Barnes, Ephriam, 15, 16, 18

Beal, J., 130

Beatty, OR, 108

Beckwith, Therese, 117

Bedard, W.D., Sr., 127, 129, 131

Berkeley, CA, ii, 36, 70, 100-104, 106, 119, 120, 122-125,

129-134, 136, 139, 148

Big Creek, 23, 30

Big Game, 106, 135

Big Humbug, see Craggy Mountain

Big Trees, 9, 29, 31, 45

Billy Brown Meadow, 25

bioclimatic law, 84

bioclimatic research, 75, 76, 84-85, 103-104

Biswell, Harold, 98

black check, 7 

Black Hills beetle, 2, 4, 9, 106, 117-118

epidemic, 4, 9, 12, 117

Black Hills, SD, 2-5, 12

Black, S.R., 106

blackheaded budworm, 93

Blackman, professor, 117-119

Blacks Mountain Experimental Forest, 126, 128, 131

Bogard Ranger Station, 97

Boggs, M.S., Captain, 119

Boise, ID, 2, 4

Bongberg, Jack, 126-128, 130-134, 148

Boothe, family, 46-48, 50, 53

Bootjack, CA, 41, 51

Bray, 77

Bretz Mill, 27, 29

Bristow, Mr., 31

Brose, Bessie, 21, 140 (see also Miller, Bessie Brose)

Brown, Gilbert D., 106

Brown, John, i

Brown, Marion Rebecca, 139

Bruce, Donald, 98

Brunner, Josef, 15, 17, 75, 91

Buckhorn, Walter J., 117, 118, 121, 124, 130

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

153
Budget Bureau, 131

Buprestidae, 4, 9

Bureau of Entomology; see USDA Bureau of Entomology 

Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine; see USDA

Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, 

Bureau of Forestry; see USDA Bureau of Forestry

Burke, Dorothy Eugene, i, 10, 116, 141, 147 (see also

Walker, Dorothy Burke)

Burke, Harry Daniel, 1

Burke, Harry E.,

death, 137, 138 

early life, 1

education, 

Stanford University, 97 

Washington State University, 1, 2

federal employment, 

Bureau of Forestry, i, 2, 4

Fruit and Shade Tree Investigation, 124

USDA Division of Entomology (later Bureau), ii, 2, 4, 

5, 7

insect control projects, 

Lake Arrowhead Project, 107

Northeast Oregon Bark Beetle Control Project, 13-16,

63, 79

Yellowstone National Park, 116, 137

laboratory assignments, 

Baker, OR, Field Station, 11, 14

Elmore, SD, 2

Forest Insect Field Station, Yreka, CA, 17, 63

Pacific Coast States, Hoquaim, WA, 7, 8

Placerville, CA, 17, 75 (see Placerville, CA)

Shade Tree Entomology Lab, Los Gatos, CA, 89

Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, 97, 106

marriage, 10

photos, 5, 8-10, 13, 16, 64, 108, 109, 111, 113, 115, 121,

137

publications and reports, biographical 

My Recollections of the First Years in Forest

Entomology, 1946, ii, 1-2, 7-10, 134 

Harry Eugene Burke, an autobiography, 1-2 

retirement, 125, 137 

Burke, Harry Eugene, Jr., 89

Burke, Janet Margaret, 89, 116, 118 (see also Eglington,

Janet Burke)

Burke, Mabel Claire, 1, 89, 116

Burke, Marion, 116 (see also Pratt, Marion Burke)

Burke, Marion Armstrong, 89, 90, 116, 138, 139, 149

Bushey, Mrs., 122

C.A. Smith Company, 77, 78

Calder, W.C., 13, 17, 18, 

California Forest Experiment Station, 120, 129, 134, 136

(see also Pacific Southwest Research Station)

California oak worm, 89

California Pine Risk-Rating System, 126

California State Chamber of Commerce, 127, 130

Callaham, Robert Z., 128, 134, 135, 139, 141, 147, 148

Camp Curry, 73, 79

camp meeting, 47, 48

Camp Scott, 1

Camp Seven, 15, 27, 29, 30

Canadian Forest Service, 94

Carnot debate, 36

carpenter worm, 89

Carter, E.E., 106

Carter, Mrs., 103

Cascade Mountain, 118 

Cascadel Ranch, 40

Case, 60

Cecil, George H., district forester, 15, 18, 106

cedar pole borer, 8

Cerambycid beetle, 92, 118

Cerambycidae, 4

Chalcophora, 119

Champlain, A.B., 76

Chapman, C.S., district forester, 12, 15, 18

Chiquita Basin, 96, 97, 110

Civil service, 22, 35, 39, 45, 63, 90

Civilian Conservation Corps, 64, 125, 127-128

Clark, forest guard, 58

Clerus (Thanasimus) formicarius L., 3

codling moth, 2, 4

Coeur d’Alene, ID, 99, 107-109, 131

Coffman, 72

Cold Springs, OR, 14, 15 

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

154
Coleman, 70

Coleotechnites, 79

Collins Pine, 126

Colorado River, 106

Comstock, J.H., 8, 79, 89

cone and seed insects, i, 73-76, 80, 81, 84-86

Conover, 70

Cosmos Club, Washington, DC, 11, 12, 90

Craggy Mountain (Big Humbug) bark beetle control project,

66-69, 81, 125

Craighead, F.C., 16-17, 76, 101, 102, 104, 106-111, 113,

114, 118-120, 123-125, 130-132

Crater Lake control project, 110, 115, 117, 124

Crater Lake National Park, 110, 111, 115, 124

Crescent City, CA, 85 

Crocker Ranger Station, 60

Cummings Ranger Station, 44, 45, 57

Custer, SD, 9

cypress bark beetle, 89, 124

cypress barkscale, 89

cypress, Monterey, 9, 22, 124

Dale, John, 141

Dana, S.T., 66, 105

Davey, Mr., 51-54, 57

Death Trap mine, 39

Deer Creek, 15

Del Monte Corporation, 109

DeLeon, D., 127, 132, 133

dendrochronology, 110, 117

Dendroctonus, 8, 22, 78, 135 

D. brevicomis, 61, 87, 135

D. jeffreyi, 9, 135

D. monticolae, 135

Derby, Mr., 60

Desmocerus, 89

Devil’s Gulch, 42, 58

Diamond Match Lumber Company, 65

District Rangers Convention, 40, 54

Division of Entomology; see USDA Bureau of Entomology

Division of Forestry, 12, 22 

Doane, R.W., 21, 33, 46, 58, 60, 61, 89, 97, 114, 118, 125,

137

Dolph, Robert, 147

Douglas Ranger Station, 96

Douglas-fir, 7, 78, 124, 129

Douglas-fir beetle, 7

Douglas-fir tussock moth, 114

Downing, George, 88

DuBois, Coert, 70

Dudley, Prof., 37

Dunlap, R.W., 118

E.G. Burch Mfg. Co., 99

Eastern Gypsy Moth Division, 115

Eaton, Charles B., 97, 120, 122, 123, 126, 127, 132-134,

137, 148

Eccles family, 17

Edmonston, Edith, 134

Edmonston, W.D., 13-17, 63, 75, 76, 81, 108-110, 117

Eel River, 100

Egan, Mr., 45

Eglington, Janet Burke, i, 118, 125, 139, 140, 141, 147

El Portal, CA, 44, 50, 58, 73

elder borer, 89

Elliot, state forester, 15, 82, 124

Ellis Meadows, 60

Englemann spruce beetle, 15

Essig, 89

Estes Park, CO, 130

European bark beetle, 3

European elm scale, 89

Evenden, 75, 94, 99, 107, 108, 114, 119, 121, 130, 133

F.A. Kribs, 15

Farnum, Hamilton, 17

FAX Service, 125

Ferguson family, 46

F.F. & Irr Co. (Fresno Flat Irrigation Co.), 28

fir, alpine, 8, 9

fir, grand, 7

fir, red, 78

fir, white, 9, 78, 111

fir tussock moth, 9

Fish Camp, 9

Fiske, W.F., 4, 8

flathead woodborer, 8, 67, 75, 78, 89, 97, 128, 129

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

155
Food and Agriculture Organization, 136, 138 

forest fires and insects, 110

Forest Insect Conference, 101-104

Forest Insect Investigations Division; see USDA Bureau of

Entomology

Forest Insect Laboratory; see USDA Bureau of Entomology

and Plant Quarantine

Forest Insect Newsletter (or Western Division Newsletter),

iii, 5, 102, 104, 105, 107, 109, 110, 113, 114, 117, 120,

122, 147 (see also Western Forest Insect News)

Forest Insect Station, 1, 15, 17, 80, 97, 100-102, 105, 118

Forest Insect Station 5, Yreka and Placerville, CA, 17, 62-

64, 73-75

Forest Insect Station 6, 17

Forest Insect Station 7, 17

Forest Insects, American Forestry textbook, 125

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest District, ii

Forester’s Convention, 1907, 25, 40

Forestry Club, 21, 35

Forsythe, Major, 73

Fort Tejon, 65

Frazier Mountain, 93

Freeman-Meyers Co., 125

Fresno, CA, 21, 25, 39, 41, 52, 53, 60, 61

Fruit and Shade Tree Investigations, 124

Furniss, Malcolm, 132, 135, 136, 139, 141, 147, 148

Furniss, R.L., 127, 129, 130, 141, 147, 148

Garrison, Jake, 94

Gass, Miss, 104

Gaylor, ranger, 73

General California Forestry Committee, 98

genetic breeding; see Institute of Forest Genetics

Gerber, E.L., 14, 15, 17, 18

Giant Yellow Pine, 109

Gibson, 133

Glacier National Park, 122

Glendinning, W.E., 61, 66-69, 80-84, 89, 92, 107

Gnat Meadows, 60

Godwin, Mr., 73

Goodpasture, C.C., 17

Gott, ranger, 70

Grand Canyon National Park, 106

grand fir bark maggot, 7

Grant National Park, 60, 73

Graves, Henry S., 10-12, 63, 69, 98, 144

Grays Harbor, WA, 7

Great Depression, 124, 125

Greeley, Col. William B., 103, 106

Greene, ranger, 93

Grizzly Giant tree, 42

Grub Gulch, 38

gypsy moth, 8

Hagle, 133

Hall, Jesse R., 61, 66, 72 

Hall, Ralph C., 127, 128, 131-134, 148

Happy Camp District, 119

Happy Camp lookout, 119

Hartman, Rube D., 73, 89, 97, 107

Harvey, B.T., 14, 76

Hat Creek Field Station, 127, 128, 130, 131

Hat Creek Ranger Station, 127

Hatch Act, 3

Hauge, O.J., 113, 117

Hayworth Ranch, 72

Headley, Roy, 57

hemlock bark maggot, 7

hemlock loopers, 7, 92, 93

Henkel, 16

Henry, Jim (Windy Jim), 117

Herbert, F.B., 89, 97

Highland Mines, 15

Hite mine, 42, 58

Hodge, William, 61, 66, 98

Hodgson, A.H., 67

Hofer, George, 17, 76, 110

Holly, Mason, and Marks, 17

Homans, G.M., 66

Hopkins, Andrew Delmar, i-iii, 2-5, 7-13, 15-16, 19, 22, 60-

63, 65, 67-76, 78, 79, 81-90, 92-93, 95, 97, 100-104, 108,

118, 121, 125, 138, 147, 152

Hopping, George, 94 

Hopping, Ralph, 59-61, 63, 68, 69, 75, 90-94

Hoquiam River, 7

host selection principle, 81, 82, 83

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

156
Hotel Clarendon, 62

Howard, L.O., 4, 61, 63, 90, 102, 104, 152

Howard, Mr., 38, 39, 42, 44

Howard, Bert Estes, Rev., 36

Hoquiam, WA, 7

Huey, 37

Humbug Creek, 61, 66, 67-69, 71, 72; see Craggy Mountain

Hummingbird Ranger Station, 60

Humphrey's Station, 26

Hutchison, C.B., 122

Hymenoptera, 78

Imnaha National Forest, 13

incense cedar, 78

increment core comparator, 117

Indian Service, 81, 82, 99, 103, 124

Inland Lumber Company, 15

Insect control projects, i, 12, 19, 87, 90, 137

Antelope Creek project, 77, 78, 97, 110

Barkhouse Creek bark beetle control project, 66-69

Craggy Mountain (Big Humbug) bark beetle control 

project, 66-69, 81, 125

Crater Lake control project, 110, 115, 117, 124

Kaibab control project, 110, 117, 118 

Klamath bark beetle control project, 19, 85

Lake Arrowhead project, 107

Moffett Creek bark beetle control project, 63, 66-68

Northeast Oregon bark beetle control project, ii, 3, 9-11,

13-15, 17, 19, 63-64, 67, 79, 81, 89, 111, 125, 151-152

Onion Creek project, 77

San Joaquin project, 96, 97, 106, 110, 113

Southern California insect control project, 65, 94

Southern Oregon-Northern California (Klamath) pine 

beetle control project, 99, 101, 103, 113 

Yellowstone National Park control project, 115

Yosemite control project, 77-78

Institute of Forest Genetics, 47, 134, 135, 147

Ips oregoni, 65, 67

Ireland, Henry, 15, 18

Italian Bar Trail, 24

Jackson, Bert, 70

Jaenicke, Alex, 90, 91, 93, 94, 99, 106, 119, 130

John Day River, 13

John Muir Wilderness, 59

Johnson, J.W., 127

Johnson, Morgan, 70

Johnson, Phil, 127, 128, 131-134

Jones, Sarah Eugonia, 1

Jordon, Dr., 35 

Joseph, OR, 9, 13, 14

Juneau, AK, 93

juniper, Sierra, 78

Kaibab control project, 110, 117, 118

Kaibab National Forest, 110

Kaibab Plateau, 106, 117

Kaiser Pass, 23

Kaweah, 91

Keen Ponderosa Pine Tree Classification, 125, 126

Keen, F.P. (Paul), 1, 84-87, 90-97, 99, 100, 102, 104, 106,

108-111, 113, 117-121, 123-127, 129-139, 148

Kellogg, Professor, 37, 58

Kelly, ranger, 59

Kent, WA, 1

Kimball, Jackson F., 81-83, 95, 97, 99, 106, 124

King, 99

Kings Canyon National Park, 59

King’s River, 46-47

Kinney, J.B., 103

Klamath bark beetle control project, 19, 85

Klamath Falls, OR, 15, 76, 82, 90, 93, 95, 97-100, 106-108,

111, 113, 117, 124

Klamath Forest Protective Association, 98, 99, 124

Klamath Indian Reservation, 81, 82, 93, 99

Klamath Lake Counties Fire Association, 81

Klamath National Forest, 19, 58, 60, 61, 64, 66, 70, 72, 75

Klamath River, 67, 70, 84, 87

Kneiff, Hugo, 15, 17

Lake Arrowhead project, 107

Lake Tahoe, 111, 116, 135, 138

Lake Tenaya (or Tenaya Lake), 9, 73, 79, 87, 88, 91, 94, 111

Lane, Tom, 68

Larsen, J.B., 15

Lassen National Forest, 60, 62, 97, 127, 130, 134

lead cable borer, 89, 97

LeBalister, 133

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

157
Lee, 5

Leevining, 93

Little Yosemite, 9

lodgepole pine sawfly, 114

Long, William, 15

Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, 18

Los Angeles, CA, 21, 99

Lowenkron, Susan Miller, ii, 57, 141, 148

Lyons, George W., 119

Maberry, E.J., 14-16, 18

Mace, Mr., 48

MacKenzie’s Mill, 28, 30, 32, 33

Madrone psyllid, 89

Mainwaring, ranger, 73 

Mann, Mr., 60

Mariposa Grove of Big Trees, 9, 29, 31

Mariposa, CA, 38, 39, 41-43, 45, 48, 49, 53

Marlatt, Dr., 103

Mason, Richard R., 141

Matsucoccus scales, 89

McCloud, 60 

McCloud River Lumber Company, 15, 73, 74, 77, 110, 111,

126

McCracken, Isabel, 118

McKenzie, Howard, 127, 130, 133

McKnight, Mel, 121

McLeod, ranger, 52

McNary, Senator, 124 

McRanger's Mill, 27

Medical Springs, OR, 14

Meinecke, E.P., 59, 60, 62, 73, 79, 111

Melanophila gentilis, 65

Mendocino National Forest, 99

Merced River, 42, 44, 48, 58

Merritt, M.L., 18

Metcalf, 100

Mexico, 138, 139

Mexico City, 139

Miami Mill Site, 22

Miami Ranger Station, 127

Miami, CA, 43, 47, 48, 52

Miami Field Station, 127, 128, 130, 131

Middle Fork American River, 77

Middleton, 103

Miller, Ardalissa Dryer, 21

Miller, Bessie Brose, 21, 57, 59, 69, 90, 95, 109, 139, 140

Miller, Harold (Dusty), 57, 69, 95, 96, 120, 131, 148

Miller, Ike, 16, 17

Miller, John M., 

death, 139

early life, 21

education, 21

Stanford University, 21, 22, 26, 27, 32, 35

federal employment, 

USDA Forest Service, i, 5, 21, 22, 27-28, 32, 35 and 

following

USDA Bureau of Entomology, i, ii, 5, 19, 22, 63, 

65

insect control projects, 

Colorado Spruce Beetle Project, ii

Klamath, 19

Moffat Creek [Moffett Creek], 66

(also see “insect control projects” above)

laboratory assignments, 

Ashland Field Station (Pacific Slope), ii, 72, 76, 90, 95, 

96

Forest Insect Investigations, Bureau of Entomology, i, 5,

102, 148 

North Fork Field Station, Placerville, CA, 74, 95, 96, 

99, 106, 108, 113

Stanford University, 113

University of California, 120, 123

Yreka Forest Insect Station 5, Yreka, CA, 62, 64

marriage, 53, 55, 57

Mexico assignment, 138, 139

photos, 29, 38, 41, 69, 84, 91, 106, 108, 109, 113, 121,

130, 133, 134, 138

publications and reports,

Biology and Control of the Western Pine Beetle, 130, 

133, 138

Rogue River Area, 1917-1924, 85

retirement, 136, 148

Miller, Martin, 21 

Minam National Forest, 18

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

158
Mineral King, 59

Mirov, Nick T., 128, 134

mistletoe/bark beetles, 78

Mistletoe burn, 110

Modoc National Forest, 119, 126, 127, 129

Moffett Creek, 61

Moffett Creek bark beetle control project, 63, 66-68

Moffett Creek Lumber Company, 61

Mono Lake, 93, 118

Mono Trail, 23

Monterey Peninsula, 22, 85

Monterey pine bark beetle, 89, 124

Monterey pine sawfly, 107

Monterey, CA, 38, 110

Moore, Betty Miller, i, ii, 120, 130, 140, 141, 147

Morrow, Earl A., 113, 118

Moscow, ID, 2, 7, 147

Mount Rainier, 8

Mount Shasta, 60, 134

mountain pine beetle, 3, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15-17, 60, 78-83, 87,

88, 91, 93, 97, 106, 109-111, 115, 124, 131

Mount Pinoche, 50

Mount Shuteye, 40

Mulford, Walter, 100, 120, 122, 123 

Munger, Thornton T., 124

Musgrove, 70

National Park Service, 11, 115

needle tier, 115

needleminers, 9

New England States, 8

Noddin, Ranger, 27

North Fork Ranger Station, 21-27, 29, 31, 35, 38, 39, 43-46,

48, 49, 51-52, 54, 57-58, 60, 61, 66, 99, 104-106, 113,

115, 117

North Fork, CA, 22, 24, 25, 36-41, 58, 60, 61, 73, 87, 95,

96-97, 99, 109-110, 119 

North Pacific Region (Region 6), 18, 64, 90, 91, 124

North Powder, OR, 15

Northeastern Oregon bark beetle control project, ii, 3, 9-11,

13-15, 17, 19, 63-64, 67, 79, 81, 89, 111, 125, 151-152

Northern Rocky Mountain Station, 64

Notolophus oslari, 9

oak leaf gall, 107

oak twig girdler, 78, 89

oak, live, 78

O’Brien, Howard, 13

Ochoco National Forest, 18, 50

Oddie, State Senator, 111

Office of Forest Insect Investigations; see USDA Bureau of

Entomology

Ogle, Hal H., 106

Onion Creek project, 77

Oregon Forest Fire Association, 15, 18

Oryssus, 89

Pacific flathead borer, 89, 97 (see also flathead woodborer)

Pacific Grove, CA, 9, 21, 35, 80, 85

Pacific Northwest, 8, 9, 123, 131

Pacific Slope stations and laboratories, 2, 63, 75, 83, 86, 89,

90, 96, 113, 118, 120, 122, 123, 125, 134

Pacific Southwest Research Station, 120, 129, 134, 141, 147

Pacific station, 8, 90, 96, 113, 120, 122

Page (writer from World’s Work), 25

Paiute Indians, 1

Palo Alto, CA, 7, 9, 57, 60-62, 73, 74, 78, 90, 110, 111, 113,

115-117, 119, 120, 123, 124, 129, 131, 133, 140

pandora moth, 93, 94, 99, 110, 111, 117

Paradise Valley, NV, 1

Park, Maud Wood, 36

Parker Station, 82, 98

Parkinson, Bill, 31, 32, 38, 53

Parlier, CA, 21, 31, 45, 52, 69

Patterson, John E., 27, 79, 80, 84-87, 90-94, 96, 97, 99, 100,

108, 110, 111, 113, 115, 117-119, 121, 124-126, 128,

131-134, 148

peaggies, 94

Pearl Harbor, 131

Pennsylvania Railroad, 65

penstemon caterpillar, 89

percentage control principle, 63, 69

Perkins, Mr., 99

Pernot, forest assistant, 50

Person, Hubert L., 108, 111, 113, 117-121, 123, 126, 128,

134

Petersen’s Mill, 27

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

159
Phantom Ranch, 106

Philippines Bureau of Forestry, 3, 18, 37

Philippines Bureau of Science, 4

Phillips, 8

Pialschie, WA, 7, 8

Pickering Mill, 129

Pilgrim Creek nursery, 72

Pinchot, Gifford, 3, 4, 11, 12, 22, 25

pine butterfly, 114

pine reproduction weevil, 134, 135

pine, Jeffrey, i, 9, 65, 78, 93, 111, 118, 126, 134, 135

pine, lodgepole, i, 8, 9, 13-17, 60, 78, 79, 81-83, 87, 88, 91,

94, 110, 111, 115, 151

pine, Monterey, 9, 109, 124

pine, ponderosa, i, 4, 13, 16, 40, 47, 61, 73, 81-83, 86, 87,

93, 96-99, 106, 109, 110, 114, 116, 117, 126, 130, 134,

135

pine, Rocky Mountain yellow, 2, 135

pine, sugar, i, 8, 9, 23, 24, 26, 29, 45, 77, 78, 87, 131

pine, western white, 8

pine, white-bark, 15, 17

pine, yellow, 2, 4, 7-9, 13-18, 23, 61, 66, 77, 78, 81, 82,

109, 151, 152

pine engraver beetle, 131 

Piper, C.V., 2, 3

Pissodes, 7-9

P. burkei, 9

Placerville, CA, 47, 64, 73-78, 80-83, 89, 116, 134, 135,

147

Pollard, 99

Pollock, J.H., 76

Portland, OR, 11-13, 15, 17, 64, 66, 81, 123, 124, 129, 131,

132, 152

Pratt, David, i, 137, 140, 147, 149

Pratt, Marion Burke, 138, 139

Pratt, Paul, 138, 140, 141, 147

Prescott scale, 130

Presidio, San Francisco, 43, 115

Prineville, OR, 18

Pullman, WA, 1

Pyne, Stephen J., 11

Pyramid Ranger Station, 78

Quaintance, Dr., 103

Rankin, H.B., 18

Rankin, W.J., 106

Recurvaria milleri, 79

red cedar, Pacific, 7, 9

Red Mountain Lake, CA, 29

red turpentine beetle, 9, 17

reorganization, 75, 88, 90, 101, 102, 104, 106, 132

Rhodes, Joan Salman, 127, 132, 141, 147

Richardson, 73

Rider, W.B., 61, 66, 67, 69

Riggs, J.D., 17, 63, 64, 67, 69, 70, 72, 77, 84

Ritchie, Miss, 104

River Bend Place, 21

Rocky Mountains, 4, 75

Rogue River project, 85, 87, 90, 92, 93

root disease, 111

Rubicon River, 138

Ruggles brothers robbery, 70, 71

Sacramento, CA, 61, 66, 74, 119

Sage Mill, 27

Salman, Ken, 125-128, 131-133

Salman-Bongberg, see California Pine Risk-Rating System

San Bernardino Mountains, 129

San Diego, CA, 93

San Francisco earthquake, 9, 36

San Francisco, CA, 35, 49, 52-53, 57, 59, 61, 65-66, 69, 73-

74, 76, 81, 91, 94, 97, 98, 106, 134

San Joaquin project, 96, 97, 106, 110, 113

San Joaquin River, 23-25, 95

sanitation salvage, 126

Santa Barbara, CA, 125

Santa Barbara Forest Reserve, 65

Sartwell, Charles, 147

Sawmill Mountain, 65

Scolytidae, 4

Seattle, WA, 1, 148

Secret Springs Ranch, 72

Sellers, W.B., 15

Sequoia, 9

Sequoia National Park, 59, 91-94, 96

Sergent, P.D., 15-17, 77, 80, 84, 85, 92, 96, 111

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

160
shade tree insects, 78, 89, 105, 107, 124

shade tree laboratory, 107, 123

Shasta Historical Society, 141

Shasta National Forest, 62

Shaver Lake, 24, 27, 29

Shaver, CA, 23-29, 31-33, 48, 53

Shelton, L.D.W., 15, 16, 18

Shelton, W.C., 36

Shevlin Lumber Company, 15

Shinn, Charles T., 23, 26, 27, 31, 33, 35, 38, 39, 42-49, 51-

53, 58, 59

Shinn, Julia, 23, 38, 43

Shuteye, 26, 28, 40, 97

Sierra Club, 60, 79

Sierra National Forest, 21-23, 26, 33, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46, 47,

54, 57-60, 91, 93, 95-100, 110, 115, 118, 126, 127, 130

Simpson, C.B., 2

Simpson Meadows, 60

Sisson, CA (Mt. Shasta City), 60-62, 72-73

Site Rock Ranger Station, 96

Siuslaw National Forest, 19

Smith, R.E., 12, 14, 18, 27, 28

Snyder, T.E., 76, 91, 97, 103

Society for Advancement of Forest Entomology in America,

76

Society of American Foresters, 103

Soda Springs, Yosemite National Park, 79

solar heat method, 65, 95

South Fork American River, 77

South Fork of the Merced River, 42, 44

South Fork, CA, 38, 39, 41, 58, 96

Southern California insect control project, 65, 94

Southern Oregon-Northern California (Klamath) pine beetle

control project, 99, 101, 103, 113 

Southern Pacific Land Company, 66, 67

Southern Pacific Railroad, 21, 66, 98

southern pine beetle, 3

Southern Rocky Mountain Station, 75, 76

span worm, 7

Sprague River, 99

Sproul, R.G., 123

spruce aphid, 92

spruce beetles, 92, 114

spruce budworm, 114

spruce, Engelmann, 7, 15

spruce, Sitka, i, 7, 92

stand hazard survey, 131

Stanford University, 21, 22, 25-26, 32, 33, 35-37, 43, 57,

60, 61, 70, 73, 89, 90, 92, 97, 100, 106-109, 111, 113,

115, 118, 120, 121, 127, 137, 139

Forestry School, 36, 98, 100, 101, 120, 129

State Agricultural Experiment Stations, 3

Stendarts camp, 51

Stephens, bachelor, 59

Stirling, E.A., 65

Stockburger, 16

Stockwell, Palmer, 134, 135

Stout, Mr., 40

Strauss, J.F. , 8

Struble, George R., 118, 120, 123, 126-128, 131-134, 148

Sugar Hill burn, 97

Sugar Pine camp, 22

Sullivan, J.J., 14, 16-18, 63, 64, 67, 69, 70-72, 75, 77, 79,

80, 84

Summerdale, CA, 9

Sumpter Blue Mountain American, 13

Sumpter, OR, 13-18, 152

Sutton Creek, 15

Swaine, J.M., 119

Taft, President, 12

Tatro, R.M., 113

Taylor (attorney), 61

Taylor, Lt., 115

Teet, R.A., 60

Tehipite Trail, 60

Tejon Pass, 93

telephone, 43, 47-49, 54, 58

Tenaya Basin, 79, 87

Tenaya Lake, 9, 73, 79, 87, 88, 91, 94, 111

Thomas, Lew, 15, 17

Thompson, Col., 111

Tillamook Fire, 129

toll house, 52, 53

Tomkins, 27

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

161
Torgersen, Torolf, 121

Trachykele beetle, 8

T. blondeli, 9

T. opulenta, 9

Trimmer, CA, 38

Tully, Mr., 39, 42, 47

Tuolumne Meadows, 9, 73, 79, 87, 94, 115

Turner, W.B., 12-15, 17

U.S. Army, 73, 115

Cavalry, 43, 73, 79

engineers, 92

U.S. Congress, 3, 15, 98, 110

U.S. Department of Agriculture, ii, 2, 3, 5, 98, 104, 105,

113, 118, 121

U.S. Navy, 131

United Nations, 138

University of California, ii, 32, 36, 70, 93, 98, 100-102, 106,

120, 123, 129

Entomology Division, 123

Forestry School, 98, 100-102, 120, 123, 129 

USDA Bureau of Entomology, i, ii, 2-5, 7, 8, 10-15, 17-19,

22, 27, 31, 40, 60, 61, 63, 65-67, 69, 70, 72, 79-82, 85-

87, 90, 91, 97-99, 102, 104, 105, 108, 109, 111, 113, 118,

120, 121, 124, 127, 131, 132, 136, 138, 147, 148, 151,

152

Division of Forest Insect Investigations, i, ii, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10,

11, 13, 17, 60, 73, 75, 84, 89, 101-102, 108, 123, 124,

136

USDA Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, ii, 127

Forest Insect Laboratory, ii, 94, 109, 123, 125, 127, 129-

135, 139, 148

USDA Bureau of Forestry, i, 2-4, 7

USDA Forest Service, i, ii, 5, 10-19, 21-23, 27, 28, 32, 35,

37, 40-43, 48, 50-52, 57, 58, 60-64, 66-72, 75, 81-84, 86,

90, 92-99, 102, 103, 105-107, 111, 113, 114, 119, 120,

123, 124, 126, 127, 131, 134, 136, 138, 147, 148, 151,

152

District 5, 11, 18, 49, 52, 53, 57, 59-63, 66, 67, 69, 70, 73,

91, 98, 111, 113, 119, 120

District 6, 15, 18, 63, 90, 113

Van Dyke, E.C., 98

Van Horn, 8

VonSchrenk, Hermann, 5

VT Park, 110

Wagner, Albert, 15, 17, 80, 91, 93, 110, 113, 115

Walker, Dorothy Burke, i, 141, 147

Wallowa National Forest, 13, 14, 18, 151

Wallowa Timber Company, 13, 15, 17-18

Warner Mountains, 97

Washington Agricultural College and School of Science

(later Washington State University), 1

Washington Entomological Society, 103 

Washington State Oyster Experiment Station, 2

Washington State University, i, 1, 2

Washington Territory, 1

Washington, D.C., iii, 2, 9, 11, 12, 65, 67, 76, 83, 118

Wawona Big Tree; see Big Trees, 42

Wawona, CA, 9, 42-44, 78

Weaver, Lois, 133

Weaverville-Hayfork, 70

Webb, J.L., 2-5, 8

Weed, CA, 97, 107, 108

West Virginia Experiment Station, 3

West, A.S., Jr., 127

Western Division Newsletter, see Forest Insect Newsletter

and Western Forest Insect News

Western Forestry and Conservation Association, 119

Western Forest Insect News, 117, 119, 120, 122, 147 (see

also Forest Insect Newsletter)

Western Forest Insect Work Conference, 119

western oak spanworm, 7

Western Pine Association, 130

western pine beetle, 2, 3, 7, 9, 13, 17, 61, 63, 65-69, 75, 76,

82, 85, 95, 97, 98, 108, 109, 117, 118, 120, 124-133, 138

Westfall, C.K., 47

Wetmore, E.D., 15, 18

Weyerhaeuser Company, 18, 81

White Russian Navy, 134

White, O., 70

White, Sam, 70

White, Stewart Edward, 98

Whiteside, Jack, 127, 129

Whitman National Forest, 12-16, 18, 63, 64

Whitney, Mr., 131

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

162
Williamson River, 99

Willows, CA, 73

Wilson, President, 76, 81

Wind Creek, 14

women’s suffrage, 36

Wood, E.C., 5, 8

Woodbury, assistant district forester, 94, 98 

Works Progress Administration, 125

World War I, 91, 92

World’s Work magazine, 25

Xyleborus, 92

Yellowstone National Park, 90, 110, 114-116, 118, 122, 130,

137

Yellowstone National Park control project, 115 

YMCA, 36

Yosemite control project, 77-78

Yosemite Falls, 9

Yosemite National Park, CA, 43, 70, 73, 76, 78-80, 86-88,

91, 93, 107, 111, 115, 125, 129, 133, 137, 140

Yosemite Park Conference, 73

Yosemite Valley, 8, 9, 41, 42, 44, 45, 77, 79, 80, 109, 118

Yreka station, 17, 19, 60-68

Yuill, Stu, 127, 131-133

Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

163
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-638

164

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw

Telephone (503) 808-2592

Publication requests (503) 808-2138

FAX (503) 808-2130

E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Pacific Northwest Research Station

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890
Harry E. Burke and John M. Miller, Pioneers in Western Forest Entomology

165

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 SW First Avenue

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300