in its conservation. But primarily its conservation for a specific purpose. That purpose is education of students. Now the student himself also has an interest in this building. His span of concern is shorter than mine. Conservation of the facility is largely of concern for the period he expects it to be of value to him two years, or three, or four. Consequently, he may be far harder on it than I it can be all used up in his opinion when he is through with it. At the opposite extreme, I'm not concerned with maximum conservation. If I were, the doors would be locked, no stair would ever be worn, no seats broken or railings splintered. But neither would the building be serving the purpose for which it was conceived. There's a powerful analogy here. It indicts that short-sighted, devil-may-care interest of the casual visitor who functions as an exploiter of scenic parks, and it challenges resource managers to make explicit the role and basic purposes of public resources held in trust. I personally am drawn to the definition for conservation proposed recently by Dr. Raymond Dasmann (1967) of the Conservation Foundation the of the environment to achieve the highest of for mankind. Although rational use and quality of living introduce knotty problems of definition, the concept incorporates a broad time scale and a total range of utilization extending from total to complete nonuse or preservation. Wilderness Conservation Zon-