LIST OF FIGURES 1. Growth of State Agencies for Game Conservation 2. Growth of State Agencies for Forest Conservation 3. Growth of State Park Agencies 4. Development of the State Geological Surveys 5. Growth of State Agencies for Fish Conservation 6. Growth of State Education Agencies 7. Growth of State Health Agencies 8. Growth of State Bureaus of Labor Statistics 9. Growth of State Welfare Agencies 10. State Conservation Agencies, 1908-11 Page 25 30 33 40 55 70 73 77 80 96 TABLES 1. State Conservation Commission Legislation, 1908–13 93 2. Scope of Activities of the Roosevelt State Conservation Commission as Indicated by Reports 95 3. Integration of the State Management of Natural ResourcesAgencies Absorbed or Superseded 99 4. The State Management of Natural Resources-Agencies and Func tions 101-102 CHRONOLOGICAL CHARTS Main Events in New York's Management of Resources VI 10-12 INTRODUCTION This study of trends in conservation of State resources is Part II consists of four chapters dealing It is the purpose of this study to point out, in the period before 1933, some of the long streams of governmental interests and activities which, under the general term "conservation," have led to conservation and planning for resources. In their inception and early growth the antecedent ideas and practices of State conservation were naturally crude in form, limited in scope to specific resources (i. e., wildlife, forests, etc.), intermittent in duration, and largely incidental to other activities of the State government. With the general growth of State conservation activities these precedents for planning have grown stronger until State planning has officially emerged in almost all the States. In delimiting the scope of the study, the word "resources" has been used to include the conventional classification of natural resources, such as land (which subsumes forests and wildlife), minerals, and water, and also human resources, which have been treated in somewhat less detail than the former. The study is not concerned with national planning or local community planning, although certain of these aspects of American planning history have been incidentally touched upon. Conservation, in this study, is used in the meaning which Theodore Roosevelt gave it 30 years ago. It involves not just preservation but also wise use of resources. Management connotes organization, direction of policy towards specific objec tives, and sometimes prohibits or controls. In this sense, it is not to be confused with planning, which in this study as in all publications of State planning boards is strictly an advisory research and coordinating function. Planning is understood in this study in terms of the comprehensive, projective assembly and analysis of data, with a deliberate view to forecasting and devel oping alternative proposals for concerted action, as they may be fitted into acceptable public policies and may be administered as part of the prevailing VII VIII social system. As part of this task planning involves the problem of coordinating pertinent phases of national, regional, State, and local life, and may point out how coordination may be achieved, so as to effectuate in the fullest measure whatever basic policies and objectives that the duly constituted policy makers have adopted. A variety of source materials has been used in the study-State constitutions, statutes ard court decisions, legislative journals, Governors' messages, public documents and reports, yearbooks, directories and manuals, special surveys, biographies and other personal and nonofficial writings, and data obtained by interview and correspondence with public officials and by schedules sent to the State planning boards. The session laws of the State of New York have been carefully examined from colonial days to the present time, while the legislation of other States has been utilized by means of the Index of Legislation prepared by the New York State Library for the period 1891-1908 and the State Law Index prepared by the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress for the period 1925 to date. There is no comprehenisve index to State legisla tion for the intervening period 1909-24, but the Public Information Service (1914 to date) and the American Yearbook (1910–19) indicate certain prominent legislative enactments. For certain cardinal facts of the study a specific search has been made of the general statutes and session laws of each State. Extensive use has been made of such guides to State publications as Hasse's Index of Economic Materials in Documents of the States of the United States, including the States of California, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont for the general period 1789-1904. The publications of the remaining States have been checked in Bowker's Provisional List of the Official Publications of the Several States of the United States for the same general period, while the more recent State publications have been checked in the Monthly Checklist of State Publications prepared by the Library of Congress for the period 1910 to date. In tracing the development of the State conservation agencies, a special effort was made to obtain all written evidence of their activities. Where published reports could not be located in the Chicago libraries or the Library of Congress, inquiries were made of the secretaries of State, with a copy thereof sent to the State library. Where this search uncovered no reports, it has been concluded that the alleged conservation agency did not function. The data for the table on present State agencies engaged in the management of natural resources were obtained by inquiries addressed to the State planning boards, National Resources Committee consultants, and (for Delaware) local research agencies. In rough form the data had already been collected from the official manuals and directories issued by the individual States and from direc tories of special State agencies prepared by the United States Biological Survey, Geological Survey, Forest Service, and Public Health Service. These provisional data were transferred to one-page schedules (Appendix) which were then sent to the executive officers of the State planning boards with the request that they correct and supplement the schedules and return them to Chicago. The schedules have been tabulated as a Check List of State Agencies and Officials Concerned With the Management of Natural Resources, which is believed to represent the first attempt at a comprehensive listing in a single source of all the State agencies that are engaged in the various phases of the management of natural resources. Acknowledgments.-This study has grown out of an original suggestion of Prof. Charles E. Merriam. Profs. Leonard D. White and Harold F. Gosnell, of the University of Chicago; Charles S. Ascher, secretary of the committee on IX public administration of the Social Science Research Council; and Walter H. Blucher, executive director of the American Society of Planning Officials, have all painstakingly read the manuscript in its entirety, saving the author from many mistakes of fact, interpretation, and style, and helping him to sharpen both the focus of his study and the method of his analysis. Prof. John Gaus, of the University of Wisconsin, made the author aware of the unique role of personalities in American planning history and has also read most of the manuscript in its earlier stages. The land chapter has been read by Prof. A. O. Craven, of the department of history; the mineral chapter by Prof. E. S. Bastin, of the department of geology, and by F. G. Tryon and E. A. Berquist, of the United States Bureau of Mines; the water chapter by the staff of the water section of the National Resources Committee; the legal section by Prof. Kenneth Sears, of the law school. The author has also benefited from consultation with T. V. Smith, M. C., of the department of philosophy, Prof. H. H. Barrows, of the department of geography, Prof. Paul Douglas, of the department of economics, Profs. Newton Edwards and H. G. Richey, of the department of education, Profs. William F. Ogburn and Louis Wirth, of the department of sociology, Dr. V. O. Key, Dr. Marietta Stevenson, of the American Public Welfare Association, Miss Martha Hamaker, of the School of Social Service Administration, Dr. Albert Lepawsky, of the Public Administration Clearinghouse, Dr. Joseph Pois, of Public Administration Service, Lewis Meriam of the Brookings Institution, and Under Secretary Harry Slattery of the Department of the Interior, in addition to numerous officials of the Federal and State governments, especially in the Forest Service, Biological Survey, Bureau of Fisheries, Geological Survey, Bureau of Mines, Office of Education, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the National Park Service. The staff of the National Resources Committee-including Charles W. Eliot, Harold Merrill, Robert H. Randall, Robert Hartley, and Charles P. Dake-was remarkably patient with and helpful to the author. And finally the author wishes to acknowledge the cumulative importance of the daily repartees with his vigorously-minded associates in the social sciences in the University of Chicago on the nature of planning in particular and the world in general. Where errors, omissions, and exaggerations still remain, the fault lies exclu sively with the author, not his counsel, who have striven mightily to keep him off the wrong path. NIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LIBRARIES The American conservation policy is "a consciously designed plan for preserving the natural resources of the country. This rested partly upon the desire to avoid evident waste of assets, and partly upon desire to prevent control by special as opposed to general interests. The broad policy of preserving and protecting the Nation's water power, timber, minerals, and other similar resources, is an illustration on a large scale of drift away from opposition to State interference." -Charles E. Merriam, American Political Ideas, 1865-1917 (1920), page 332. "The idea of conservation by the government of interests belonging to the whole society has been extended to the conservation of human resources as well. Having familiarized the public with the idea of conserving timber as a matter of national economy, it was an easy step to the idea of conserving human beings and human energy as a matter of practical economy as well as humanity." -Charles E. Merriam, Outlook for Social Politics in the United States, American Journal of Sociology, XVIII, page 684 (1913). |