The Rock Island Argus and daily union. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1920-1923, 1922-01-18
Frederick Haskin's Letter
The Case of Alaska.

Washington. D. c.. Jan. 17.-That
the resources of Alaska are not be-
ing properly developed, and that
the methods and conditions Of fed
eral administration in that terri
tory are in part responsible, is a
statement which has been en-
phatically made in connection with
the proposal to take the bureau OF
forestry out of the department of
agriculture and place it in the de-
partment OF the interior.
This, of course, would give the
interior department control of the
great national forests in Alaska,
and would make the department the
chief federal arbiter of Alaska's
industrial destiny, as the interior
department already has the admin
istraticn of Other. public lands IN
Alaska
Curiously enough, he conserva-
tionists in and out of the forest
service, who are all opposed to the
transfer of the forest service, agree
with their opponents that Alaska
is in a bad way industrially and
that federal administration is in
part the reason for this. These con-
servationists claim that the move
to place the Alaskan forests under
the administration of the depart
ment of the interior is part of a
general plan for the abandonment
of the Roosevelt conservation poll
icy in Alaska, and for a freer use
OF her natural resources. Such a
policy is demanded by many per-
sons financially interested in
Alaska, and a vigorous lobby in
favor of such a policy has long
been maintained in Washington by
such interests.
These interests say that Alask a
is not developing and that the fed
eraI polio yof careful conservation
is responsible for the lack of de-
velopment. The conservationists
agree that Alaska is not developing
as 1t should, but claim that every
one of its natural resources is open
to development. This is hindered
they claim, to some. extent by the
long-range methods of federal ad-
ministration. which should be aban-
doned in favor of administration on
the spot, but mainly by the fact
that Alaska is far from markets and
has poor transportation facilities.
Our Last Frontier.
The greater American public is
Indifferent to and ignorant of the
whole matter. That is, in a sense.
the most serious and unfortunate
part of the situation. Alaska is the
last American frontier Ninety-nine
per cent of the area is public land.
1t is almost the only part of the
territory of the United States where
true pioneer conditions still obtain
that is, where the individual may
obtain land and other natural re-
sources free or at nominal cost.
Such a frontier country should
be-a valuable oVerfiow-land for our
excess population, as the frontier
west long was, Alaska should be
the haven of the hardy and adyen-
turOus man who has no capital, but
wants a chance to win a place of his
own on the face of the earth. To
some extent Alaska has been that.
and to some slight extent perhaps
it still is. But this last frontier of
ours is certainly not functioning as
it should.
No doubt harsh climate in
many parts of it has something to
do with it. Also, there is not
great deal of farm land in Alaska
and the establishment of a profit
able farm there is a difficult bust
ness. The one-man placer mining
is largely a thing of the past. All
observers seem agreed that the de-
velopment of Alaska is largely a
task for organized capital. 1t never
will be the land of Individual op-
poTtunity that the old west was.
But it is far more a land of individ-
ual opportunity than the greater
part of the states, and should be
even more SO that it is. There is
rich land to be taken up. Fur
farming is a profitable business