The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-08-15
CONSERVATION misunderstood


We are glad to see that some of the
newspapers IN the East are Weakening up
to the realization Of the Impractical
and damaging nature of the conserva-
tion policies enjoined by Mr.. Pinchot
The New York Evening Post is one of
the papers that has been a consistent
supporter of conservation, but it is be
ginning to see that conservation as APP
piled practically and as complained
of in the West, is not only an
tagonistic to every historic precedent
in the United States, but Is subverslve
of the laws and obstructive to the set
tlement and development of the coun-
try, A late editorial in that paper rec
ognizes the point IN the following
words:
4 persistent attempt has been made by
the enemies OF far seeing conservation
policy to produce the Impression that the
purpose OF Roosevelt. Garfield, and Pin
shot was simply to keep as much as
possible of the forest and coal land
of use. and to keep il out OF use as long
az possible, But the only basis there
is for this allegation is that the first
step in the programme was the making
Of extensive Withdrawals; from the very
beginning. the object In View was plain
~ the adoption of regulations that would
bring these resources into use at such
time and under such conditions as would
result in the greatest and most perma-
nent benefit to the whole people OF the
United States AS matter of fact. too
all that President Taft has thus far
found It best to do-with the exception
of some comparatively minor restorations
has been to confirm practically all the
Withdrawals made by the preceding ad-
ministration and TO Withdraw a vast
treatment of these lands, the President
and Congress shall pursue a policy which
throws open 10 use as much as can be
utilized with due regard to the permanent
be carrying out the programme whose
beginnings were made in Mr. Roosevelt's
administration. Mr.. Ballinger would do
well to content himself with getting what
credit may go with n faithful pursuance
Of such a programme. The tone Of his
interview indicates very strongly that his
real syplpathies lie in quite q. different
direction.
The truth is that what the Post says
is misunderstanding on its part The
conservation policy is meant to be per
manent, not temporary, The policy Of
Pinchot undoubtedly was to keep as
lands, and water power sites out of use.
There is not the least doubt about this,
because year after year and period af
ter period the restrictions became closer
and closer, and the difficulty of settle
ment in all this mountain region became
greater and greater. The policy seemed
to be simply to withdraw and hold out.
never to release or allow development
Where there was a release In part by
proclamation, it was usually followed
Immediately by another proclamation
withdrawing more than before.
The result has been disastrous. Take
this region, for instance We used to
get lump coal here at $500 per ton be-
fore the conservation policies set in
Then after the policies began to take
effect, we had to pay $5,25 per ton. La
ter, as the restrictions drew closer the
price was raised to $3.50 Then when
there seemed to be no relief, the price
was raised to 1915 per ton where it is
now, The general effect has been this:
The railroads and their coal companies
have acquired large coal tracts, their
title to them being undisputcd. and dat
ing back for many years. In the Carbon
and Emery County region of Utah there
were prosecutions for illegal coal en-
tries, the result being to f'compel'' the
monopolistic company to pay 100000
for land easily worth So 900 900. This
confirms their monopoly; and their mo-
th,A h.
coal companies. makes the situation
their own. There is no relief The with
drawal OF coal lands as made simply
prevents the formation of any competi-
tive companies, and confirms the mo-
nopoly of the coal supply to those com
panies which are already we'll estab
lished.
When the Post says, further, that the
idea is to bring the resources into use
"at such time and under such condi-
tions as will result in the greatest and
most permanent benefit to the whole
people of the United States.' it is pret-
ty hard to understand precisely what it
means. There is no particular benefit
TO the whole people of the United States
in any one opening a coal mine in a
local region and supplying coal to break
the grasp of a monopoly. The benefit is
chiefly local, but this is prevented by
the conservation policy, in favor of the
established monopolies: and il is diff
cult to see how the people Of the United
States are going to realize appreciably
in the opening of forest reserves to set