responsibilities in the use of these public lands. In talking to these people it becomes evident that they have practically no understanding of the complicated process by which a forest must be managed in order that it remain productive of the necessities which they demand. They all seem well versed in all the material things their privileges, as citizens of this country, guarantee them, but I doubt any of them have ever been briefed on the necessity of accepting their obligations and responsibilities in these matters, if these privileges of enjoying the National Forests are to remain guaranteed for the future. Among these people who come to hunt are many intelligent and responsible persons. With proper educational processes they could be developed into a much more respectable group. One wonders if the Forest Service is doing enough of the right things in educating the Forest using public. There seems to be a general disrespectful attitude among forest service personal towards those who use the National forests and with whom the forest service personal come in contact with, and whom they must serve or at least put up with. At times the thinking, or attitude, of the forest people towards those who come to use the forests, seems to reach a point where one wonders if they do not feel that the public should be prohibited from using these lands and that it be left up to the Forest Service to manage and use forest lands. One also sees the influence of economics well entrenched in forest service use and planning. Ever busy to protect their interests, economic users of the National Forest lands do little to educate the general public in any phase of forest usage except to point up the urgency of protecting timber and showing the things they produce from the —