• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

A HISTORY OF FOREST CONSERVATION IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST, 1891-1913 By LAWRENCE RAKESTRAW 1955 Copyright 1979 by Lawrence Rakestraw A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON 1955 TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER LIST OF MAPS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF TABLES ABSTRACT PREFACE CHAPTER 1. BACKGROUND OF THE FOREST CONSERVATION MOVEMENT, 1860-91 2. RESERVES IN THE NORTHWEST, 1891-97 3. FOREST ADMINISTRATION, NATIONAL AND LOCAL, 1897-1905 4. GRAZING IN THE CASCADE RANGE, 1897-99: MUIR VS. MINTO 5. RESERVES IN WASHINGTON, BOUNDARY WORK, 1897-1907 I. The Olympic Elimination II. The Whatcom Excitement III. Rainier Reserve IV. Other Reserves 6. RESERVES IN OREGON, BOUNDARY WORK, 1897-1907 I. Background II. The Cascade Range Reserve III. The Siskiyou Reserve IV. The Blue Mountain Reserve V. Other Reserves in Eastern Oregon VI. Reserves in the Southern and Eastern Oregon Grazing Lands VII. 1907 Reserves 7. THE NATIONAL FORESTS IN DISTRICT SIX, 1905-1913 I. E. T. Allen II. Personnel and Public Relations in District Six III. Grazing IV. Timber: Fires, Sales and Research V. Lands 8. THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE I. Background II. The Timber Industry III. Political Currents IV. The Triple Alliance V. Conclusion BIBLIOGRAPHY ENDNOTES VITA LIST OF MAPS MAP 1. Scene of the Whatcom Excitement 2. Rainier Reserve 3. Proposed Pengra Elimination 4. Temporary Withdrawals in Oregon, 1903 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ILLUSTRATION 1. Copy of Blank Contract Found in a Squatter's Cabin, in T. 34 N., R. 7 E., W.M. LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. The Public Domain, How Disposed of, Percentages 2. Roosevelt Reserves of 1907 Editorial Supervision: JOSEPH CELLINI First publication in book form 1979 by Arno Press Inc. Copyright 1979 by Lawrence Rakestraw Reproduced from a copy in the University of Washington Library THE MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC LANDS IN THE UNITED STATES ISBN for complete set: 0-405-11315-3 See last pages of this volume for titles. Manufactured in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Rakestraw, Lawrence. A history of forest conservation in the Pacific Northwest, 1891-1913. (The Management of public lands in the United States) Originally presented as the author's thesis, University of Washington, 1955. 1. Forest conservation--Northwest, Pacific-- History. 2. Forest reserves--Northwest, Pacific-- History. I. Title. II. Series. SD413.N67R34 1979 333.7'5 78-56660 ISBN 0-405-11351-X ABSTRACT The movement for forest conservation began in the United States shortly after the Civil War. A variety of people became interested in preserving and perpetuating the forests about that time. They included scientists and scientific groups alarmed over forest depletion, both because of the indirect effects of the forests in perpetuating water flow, and for fear of a timber scarcity; recreational and aesthetic groups, desiring to preserve areas of unique scenic beauty; and men disturbed by violation of public land laws and the corrupt alliance of economic interests and politics. In the Pacific Northwest—Washington and Oregon—recreational groups made efforts to preserve the Crater Lake and other scenic areas in the Cascades. The efforts of the conservationists were crowned with success in 1891, when a bill permitting the President to set aside forest reserves was passed. Through the work of local groups, four such reserves were set aside in the Pacific Northwest between 1891 and 1893. Two, the Cascade Range Reserve and the Pacific Forest Reserve, were set aside primarily to preserve scenic areas. Two others, the Bull Run Forest Reserve and the Ashland Forest Reserve, were set aside to protect city watersheds. In 1897, through recommendations of the National Academy, three other reserves were set aside in the state of Washington—the Olympic, the Rainier, and the Washington Forest Reserves. The years 1897 to 1905 were spent by the national government in trying to get an efficient forest administration. The federal forests were under three bureaus with conflicting jurisdiction. General control of the reserves was under the General Land Office, while the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Forestry had specialized functions in connection with the reserves. Administration under the Land Office was corrupt and inefficient, and conservationists desired transfer of the forests to a bureau staffed by professional foresters. After an eight-year fight, the reserves—now called the National Forests—were placed under the Forest Service in 1905, with a professional forester—Gifford Pinchot—heading the bureau. During those years, a number of local problems were met in the Northwest. A grazing policy, which later became a model for the national policy, was established in the Cascade Range in 1897. In Washington, several reserve boundaries were redrawn and the reserves reduced in size, in response to local pressures. In both Washington and Oregon, a number of new reserves were created after survey by the bureau of Forestry and the Geological Survey. Local sentiment varied greatly toward given reserves; in general, support or opposition depended on whether the reserve helped or hindered local interests. Administrative decentralization of the National Forests began in 1905 and was completed in 1908. Under the district foresters, the local administration had a great deal of self government. The first two district foresters, E. T. Allen and C. S. Chapman, put administration of the forests on a professional basis; made the beginning of a policy for timber management and helped establish a grazing policy for all the forests in the district. The period between 1905 and 1913 was marked in the region by a series of attacks on the Forest Service by a coalition of conservative politicians and land looters. The people, as a whole, however, supported the Forest Service, and efforts to undermine or end the federal forest policy failed. More important than these attacks was the growing cooperation—the triple alliance—of state, federal and private timberland owners, expressed through a variety of guild asociations, among which the Western Forestry and Conservation Association was the most important. By 1913 the Northwest set a model for the rest of the country in cooperative fire protection, and was ready to extend their work into other forest problems. PREFACE There are three approaches possible in studying the history of forest conservation. It may be studied as part of a world movement, as Fernow studied it in his History of Forestry; or from the standpoint of the nation, as did John Ise and Jenks Cameron; or from the standpoint of a given region, as did Charles McKinley in his administrative study of Federal land resource policies in the Pacific Northwest. As a world movement, forest conservation offers an interesting story. Forest conservation practices were well established in Europe by the beginning of the nineteenth century; and that century marked the spread of the movement to the overseas colonies of Europe and to the new countries of the world. Developments in governmental forest control and management in the United States were paralleled by similar developments in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and India. There was a great deal of interdependence in the movement, for science recognizes no national boundaries. Much of the early forestry work in India was done by the German forester, Diedrich Brandis. Foresters in France, England, and Italy were influenced by the publication in 1864 of a book by an American, George Perkins Marsh's Man and Nature. Bernhard Eduard Fernow was born and educated in India, Germany, and became the leader of the movement in both the United States and Canada. Gifford Pinchot owed much of his training to Brandis and Fernow, studied carefully the Indian system of forest control as a model, and himself initiated forestry practices in the Philippines. Californians and Oregonians looked to the Australian system of range and forest management for solutions to American problems. The comparative history of the movement offers interesting possibilities for research. Yet though the movement was a world one, its fortunes varied from country to country. Such matters as federal or unitary governments; political, historical or cultural traditions; and differences in soil, topography and climate all effected the movement. The movement for forest conservation started in Canada at almost exactly the same time, and with the same men and voluntary association taking part, as in the United States; but the movement there has followed a different course. Each country has its own history of forest administration. The third approach is the regional one, which is used in the present study. Federal policies of resource management have never had a uniform impact on all parts of the United States. The government is federal rather than unitary, with local governments jealous of their own powers. The country has a variety of physiographic provinces, so laws of general application may not work equally well in all parts of the country. A standard and often quoted example is the poor suitability of land laws framed in the humid east to the semi-arid Rocky Mountain West. Finally, land policies are apt to become partisan political issues, aligning party against party, section against section or state against state. For example, continued Federal control of Indian and public grazing lands was a vital issue during the Congressional election of 1954, in Montana, Oregon and Wyoming. From a second point of view the regional approach is useful. Administration in all federal bureaus having to do with resource management is to some degree decentralized. Each of the administrative districts have powers of self-rule, that is, of making decisions without going to Washington for approval. In administration of national forests, the Pacific Northwest—the states of Oregon and Washington—was recognized as an administrative region to some extent as early as 1897; and complete decentralization took place in 1908.

Load more

  175

Copy Link