262 AMERICAN FORESTRY 



land itself is not considered. It is the value of the growth upon the land which 

 indicates its sale value. Agricultural crops, being harvested annually, escape 

 taxation entirely. Forest lands, therefore, are not taxed upon the same basis 

 as agricultural lands, although there is no provision in the law for such dis- 

 tinction. Herein, of course, is one of the essential elements of injustice in the 

 taxation of forest lands, as it is applied generally in our agricultural com- 

 munities. The second and third forms of taxation, as analyzed in the state- 

 ment above, are applied in Europe to a large extent and forest taxation is 

 much more equitable there and this tends to promote good forestry. "In this 

 country," says Mr. Foster, "the system of assessing property at its actual sale 

 value and taxing it at a uniform percentage of that value works well enough 

 when applied to agricultural land; but when applied to growing forests it is 

 both unjust and unwise. It is unjust because it ignores the fact that growing 

 timber, before it is large enough for market, has only a prospective value 

 and the income or return can only be obtained at long intervals. It is unwise, 

 because the system often forces the owner to cut the timber before it is 

 mature." Later on the author calls attention to the danger of the present law 

 if it is enforced to the letter. Should it be applied to growing timber lands 

 generally, there would be, he says, a tremendous slaughter of half-grown timber. 



In this connection, there may be cited by way of illustration, a case which 

 arose a few years ago in a northern state in which a non-resident owner of a 

 thousand acres of timberland in a rural town had his valuation raised from 

 $7,500 to $22,500, that is, the valuation was tripled in one year without warn- 

 ing and the owner had no redress against this arbitrary action of the local 

 board of assessors. The laws of this state are those in common application in 

 most of our eastern states and this thing can be done almost anywhere! It 

 raised a serious question with this owner as to whether he should cut off the 

 timber and dispose of the land or not. He was a public spirited gentleman, 

 interested deeply in forestry, and had held the land rather for the public 

 benefit than for his own. 



The New Hampshire report states the requirement of the situation there 

 as follows : "WTiat is needed in this state is a method of taxing forest lands 

 which can be administered by the towns in conformity with the established 

 function and procedure of our local government; which insures an annual 

 revenue while the timber is immature commensurate with that formerly derived 

 with the low appraisal of immature timber held by farmers and others; which 

 imposes a fair burden upon the timber crop when it is cut and collects it from 

 the person who cuts and sells the timber. This burden will be a tax on the 

 yield or income and not on the land or capital. It should, therefore, be rela- 

 tively high. To prevent speculative holdings without taxing of land chiefly 

 valuable for residence, manufacturing or farming purposes, the law should be 

 restricted to lands found by the selectmen and assessors to be chiefly valuable 

 for the production of wood and timber. Timber cut from land so classified 

 should be taxed when it is severed from the land and should not be removed un- 

 til a tax of 15 per cent of the value of such timber has been assessed and collect- 

 ed by the selectmen, or proper security shall have been given to them. Finally, 

 since timber now half-grown or mature has presumably been taxed in accord- 

 ance with the present law, and since it is desirable to introduce the new system 

 gradually, the new method of taxation should be applied only to forest tracts 

 upon which forest growth has recently started, and then only at the option of 

 the land owner." Following this, the report suggests a form of act covering 

 its recommendations and this was made the basis of a bill in the New Hamp- 

 shire legislature which, however, failed to pass. 



This draft provided for the separate classification for taxation of land 

 chiefly valuable for the production of wood or timber, and occupied by a natural 



