The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-09-05


think 1t is wise now to attempt to
change or better them. The apex
theory of tracing title to a lode has
led to much litigation and dispute and
ought not to have become the law, but
| It is so fixed and understood now that
the benefit to be gained by a change
| is altogether Outwe1ghed by the 1ncon-
venience that would attend the intro
duction of new system. So, too. the
| proposal for the government to lease
such mineral lands and deposits and
| to impose royalties might have been in
the beginning a good thing, but now
| that most of the mineral land has been
otherwise disposed of it would be hard
/ ly worth while to assume the embar-
rassment of a radical change.
Nothing can be more important in
| the matter of conservation than the
| treatment of our forest lands. It was
probably the ruthless destruction of
| forests in. the older states that first
called attention to a halt in the waste
of our resources. This was recognized
| by congress by an act authorizing the
executive to reserve from entry and set
aside public timber lands as national
forests. Speaking generally, there has
been reserved of the existing forests
| about 20 per cent of all the timber
lands of the government. Within these
forests Qncluding 100000 acres in
two forests in Alaska) are 49,, 000, 600
acres, of which 166. 900. 600 acres are in
the United States proper and include
W1In1n Tn0lr DOu1QdTl0S SOIIoIHlH8 lIhC
%, 600 900 of acres that belong to the
state or to private individuals We
have then, excluded Alaska forests, a
total of about IA, 000, 900 acres of forests
belonging to the government which IS
being treated in accord with the prin-
ciples of scientific forestry. The law
now prohibits the reservation of any
more forest lands in Oregon, Washing
ton, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, and
Wyoming. except by act Of congress.
10 10 ~ ant IF
agriculture that the government owns
other tracts of timber land in these
states which should be included in the
forest reserves. 1 expect to recommend
to congress that the limitation herein
imposed shall be repealed. In the pres
which are not properly forest land and
which ought to be subject to home
stead entry. This has caused some
local irritation. We are carefully elm
mating such lands from forest
reserves or where their ilinl-
ination is not practicable, listing them
for entry under the forest homestead
act. Congress ought to trust the ex-
ecutive to use the power of reservation
only with respect to land covered by
timber or which will be useful In the
plan of reforestation. During the pres
ent administration 6,250,000 acres of
land, largely nontimbered, have been
excluded from forest reserves. and s.
able for forest purposes have been in
cluded in forest reserves, making a re-
duction in forest reserves OF nont1m-
bered land amounting to 2,75O,0OO acres.
The bureau of forestry since its crea-
ton has initiated reforestation on $500
acres. A great deal of the forest land
is available for grazing. During the
past year the grazing lesses number
ed 25 400, and they pastured upon the
forest reserves 100000 cattle, 81, $40
C6n
the government received 1886, 715-a de-
crease from the preceding year OF 49,
40 due to the fact that no money was
collected or received for grazing on the
nontimbered lands eliminated from the
forest reserve. Another source Of profit
in the forestry is the receipts for tim
Der sold. This year they amounted TO
81, 043, 900. an increase OF 1901 900 over
the receipts of last year. This increase
is due to the Improvement in transpor-
tstion TO market and to the greater
facility with which the timber can be
reached.
The government timber in this
country amounts to only one-fourth
of all the timber, the rest being in
private ownership. Only per cent
of that which is in private ownership
is looked after properly and treated
according to modern rules of forestry.
The usual destructive waste and neg
lect continues in the remainder of the
forests owned by private persons and
corporations. 1t is estimated that fire |
alone destroys fifty million dollars |
worth of timber a year. The manage
ment of forests not on public land is
beyond the jurisdiction of the federal
government. If anything can be done
by law it must be done by the state
legislatures. 1 believe that 1t is with |
in their constitutional power to re-
quire the enforcement of regulations |
in the general public interest, as to |
fire and other causes of waste In the |
management of forests owned by pri- |
vate individuals and corporations. Ex- |
actly how far these regulations can go |
and remain consistent with the rights |
of private ownership, it is not neces- |
sary to discuss; but I call attention to |
the fact that a very important part |
of conservation must always fall upon |
the state legislatures, and that they |
would better be up and doing If they |
would save the waste and denudation |
and destruction through private greed |
or accidental fires that have made |
barren many square miles of the old |
er states.
have shown sufficiently the con- |
ditions as to federal forestry to indi- |
cate that no further legislation Is |
needed at the moment except an in |
crease in the fire protection to nation |
al forests and an act vesting the exc |
cutive with full power to make forest |
reservations in every state where gov |
eminent land is timber-covered, or |
where the land is needed for forestry |
purposes
Other Land Withdrawals.
When President Roosevelt became
fully advised of the necessity for the
change in our disposition of public
lands, especially those containing coal,
gas, phosphates, or water-power sites,
he began the exercise of the power of
withdrawal by executive order, of
lands subject by law to homestead and
other methods of entering for agri-
cultural lands. The precedent he set
in this matter was followed by the
present administration. Doubt had
been expressed in some quarters as to
the power in the executive to make
such Withdrawals. The confusion and
injustice likely to arise if the courts