The history of the forest managers

The text on the following pages is taken from Per Eriksson's chapter on Axel Theodor Cnattingius – forest manager and editor – from the book Svenskt Skogslexikon (2010). Fredrik Ingemarson edited the text for the Forest Managers' Association in 2012.

Swedish forestry in the 19th century
Since the 17th century, the government's interest in forests had focused on hunting, but important aspects of policy also included mining and its privileges, as well as the military's need for timber for shipbuilding. However, in the early 1800s, a new national forest policy began to take shape. The forest as a resource – not merely as marginal land or a cog in food production – played an increasingly significant role. Among some forest managers, the forest came to be regarded as just another crop. This development intensified around the mid-19th century when timber exports took off; exports increased tenfold between 1830 and 1860. This also posed a new threat to the forests compared with the farmers' slash-and-burn practices.

The advent of forest science in forest policy
The key figure in this transformation was Israel af Ström, then court forest manager and caretaker of the Royal Djurgården forest. With af Ström, forest science entered Swedish politics, and the Journal of Forest Management became a conduit and platform for this new science, presenting and discussing its findings. During the 18th century, influences came from both France and England in writings on forest management, but Germany soon took a dominant position in this area. Af Ström is most closely associated with introducing German forest science. In 1808, he summarised his fundamental approach to forest management: firstly, forests should be cultivated like a field, with sowing, maturation and harvest. Secondly, forestry is not primarily for household needs but for the market, aiming for sustainable production maximisation. Thirdly, unlike farming, forestry should not satisfy the needs of the present but those of future generations.
This type of forestry competed with the traditional multiple-use forestry and involved division and specialisation of land use. However, adopting the new forestry took time, and the matter was debated in parliaments during the first half of the 19th century.

The forest managers were corrupt
The state forest policy also had a genuinely poor reputation. The state and the forestry administration were considered poor stewards of the forests. Those appointed to manage the forests often received such low pay that the forest managers were corrupt. The peasantry was the political force most consistently opposed to the forest policy. They wanted the crown forests sold, common lands divided, and the forestry administration dismantled. This did not happen, but a significant portion of the crown forests was sold, and common lands divided. Yet the forestry administration remained, tasked with overseeing how the common lands' forests were managed. The crown forests were managed according to af Ström's ideas about forestry.

The establishment of the Forest Institute
A crucial part of af Ström's ideas was raising the knowledge level of those appointed to manage the crown forests. This was necessary to implement the type of forestry he deemed best, namely patch clear-cutting. Therefore, he proposed establishing a Forest Institute to provide higher education. The institute began operations in 1826, but formal education was established in 1828 with the founding of the Royal Forest Institute. Through the institute and af Ström's role there, he gained exceptional influence over the management of state forests. The Forest Institute trained those holding the highest positions in forestry. These individuals largely contributed to the Journal of Forest Management, which was the first continuous national publication addressing forestry issues. Its predecessor, Obbarius' Journal of Forest Management, published sporadically from 1850 to 1856, with only five issues reaching readers.

Forest manager Cnattingius's education
In the spring term of 1860, Axel Cnattingius enrolled as a student at Uppsala University, Östgöta nation. In June 1863, he began as a pupil at the Forest Institute. He completed his education a year later. The main subjects at the institute were forest management and hunting knowledge. Within forest management, studies included forest care, timber appraisal, forest classification, and forest technology. The curriculum covered biology, technology and economics. Biology included zoology and botany as relevant to hunting and forestry. Forest technology mainly addressed timber properties and utilisation. Economics was part of forest management studies; the only more independent economics subject was bookkeeping. Many students had to supplement their maths skills to cope with tree volume measurement and map drawing, as entrance requirements were quite low in this area. A few years after Axel left the institute, teaching improved and requirements increased, partly due to introducing matriculation exams at general secondary schools. Matriculation became a requirement for entry to the Forest Institute from 1866.

An exclusive education
An average age of 23 at graduation suggests most had little or no work experience before starting at the Forest Institute. During most of Cnattingius's active years, around ten students graduated annually, making it a fairly exclusive education. The increasing number of graduates reflected a changed state view on forest management and significantly raised the knowledge level in state forest administration. For private forests and company-owned forests, trained management staff were scarcer. However, education through the Forest Institute, mainly intended for state forest management, also benefited private forestry. The small comparison group in Samzelius' forestry state shows it was not uncommon for former state forest managers to move on to positions as forest managers for companies.

Forest manager Cnattingius's career path
After completing his studies at the Forest Institute, Axel embarked on a career path shared by many of his contemporaries who graduated from the institute. A typical career progression for recent graduates could start as an assistant ranger, then acting forest manager, assistant forest manager, acting forest manager and finally forest manager and chief ranger. This career ladder took six to over ten years. Often, those aiming to become forest managers moved between various crown forests in Sweden, as was the case with Cnattingius. He began as assistant forest manager in Östergötland County on 7 August 1863. Eleven years later, in 1874, he became forest manager in the Falbygden district. In between, he served as acting chief ranger in central Östergötland, acting chief ranger in Norrbotten, acting district manager within Finspång County, Gullberg and Åkerbo hundreds, and acting forest manager in the Hunneberg district. Like several Forest Institute graduates, Cnattingius also undertook other forestry duties and worked as a teacher at forestry schools. In 1869, he began teaching at Haddorp Agricultural School and that same year was appointed acting forest manager and head of Hunneberg Forestry School; he became the school's permanent head in 1870.

Forest managers held the rank of captain
Although the education was exclusive, this did not reflect in financial remuneration. Forest managers were dissatisfied with their pay. The Journal of Forest Management regularly addressed forest managers' working conditions and salaries. This issue is interesting as it also sheds light on the status forest managers held in 19th-century Swedish society. From 1836, forest managers held the same rank as lieutenants in the regiments. In 1887, they were granted the rank of captain. However, judging by pension conditions, forest managers themselves felt their pay was too low. The journal made the following comparison: in the 1880s, forest managers' widows received a pension of 450 SEK annually; provincial doctors' widows received 900 SEK, bailiffs' widows 750 SEK, and district clerks' widows 600 SEK. Nevertheless, forest managers fared well historically. By 1890, a forest manager earned between 2,500 and 3,100 SEK per year, considerably less than an assessor's salary. By the mid-1960s, these two professions were roughly equal in pay.

International credentials
A slight majority, 34 of 60, of the forest managers who contributed to the Journal of Forest Management travelled abroad to study forestry conditions. The strong German influence is clear. Germany and Denmark were the most common destinations, though trips to the USA, France, Switzerland, Russia and Finland also occurred. These journeys were often funded by scholarships or state funds.

Conclusion
The study of Cnattingius primarily aimed to highlight his work as editor of the Journal of Forest Management, but it provides an important insight into the network of foresters who shaped Sweden's forests. Furthermore, Per notes that the history of the forest managers remains to be written, and their significance in managing large parts of Sweden's forest area can hardly be overstated.