Editorial 



THE BUSINESS SIDE OF FORESTRY 



F(.)IvHSTRY means iliHcrL-nt things to diti'erent 

 persons. Each individual is interested most 

 directly in the things which in some wav add to 

 Iris personal enjoyment or income. The forest contributes 

 to our welfare in three distinct ways: first, as trees and 

 woods to be enjoyed by the eye and as breathing sjuices 

 for recreation and escape from civic confinement; sec- 

 ond, as a great protective mantle to preserve our mountain 

 slopes, regulate the flow of streams and ameliorate the 

 climate: third, as a source of wood for the many and 

 comijlex needs of our modern ci\ilization. 



At first glance, this last object is utterly opposed to 

 the first two. histead of forest preservation, it calls for 

 lorest destruction — for how else can wood be obtained 

 than by felling the forest? The strong appeal which 

 sentiment makes to the town-dweller thus tends to arrav 

 him against the economic use of wooil and in favor of 

 exclusive devotion of the woodland areas to the single 

 l>urposes of recreation and [jrotection. 'S'et if this theoreti- 

 cal conception slmuld be practically applied, resulting in 

 the cessation of the use of wood, an industry occupving 

 second rank in value of output in the United States and 

 representing an investment of over six billion dollars 

 would be paralyzed, 7 00,000 men forced to seek other 

 employment, and untold suffering and pri\ation caused 

 tc! millions of our peojile. So extensive and intimate is 

 our dependence upon wood products that there is not a 

 man, woman or child whose comfort and well-being would 

 not be directly and materially injured by such a calamitv. 

 When the facts are faced, no one can honestly oppose 

 the felling and utilization of the forest as an abstract 

 proposition. Hut short-sighted and zealous nature lovers, 

 l>utting their personal feelings before their common 

 sense, actually and whole-heartedly lielieve that forest 

 ''destruction" is an unmixed evil and that everv acre con- 

 secrated to petrpetual "preservation" free from the ax is 

 so much clear gain for human welfare. So we have the 

 spectacle of a great state devoting 1,800.000 acres of 

 wild and largely inaccessiljle land to periietual wilderness, 

 and by constitutional restrictions preventing the utilization 

 of the timber. 



But this sentiment is not altogether blind. The public 

 have for generations witnessed the eft'ects of hnnliering 

 on privately owned lands, by men whose acknowledged 

 object was to strip the land of all forest values and then 

 abandon it to fire or taxes. "Destructixe" lumbering had 

 for its sole purpose the conversion of the raw material, 

 trees, into products foi the many uses and needs of our 

 expanding civilization, at a cost which would leave a 

 living profit. The conception of commercial forcstrv. the 

 actual growing of trees to replace those removed, was 

 looked on by these practical men as fantasticallv imiiossi- 

 1124 



ble. This con\ictiun, although based on the soundest of 

 business reasons, reacted to strengthen the sentiment of 

 others in favor of preserving the standing timber from 

 similar destruction, and furnished a psychological expla- 

 nation of the outbursts of hostility to the lumber busi- 

 ness which have tended to create an atmosphere of strain 

 and resentment. I^umbermen feel that they are in most 

 cases doing all they can afford to do for the forest. Their 

 service to the public does not consist in growing the tim- 

 ber, biU in bringing it to market in the form of useful 

 commodities. 



It is the misfortune of the lumbermen that in most 

 cases they have been forced by necessity to acquire and 

 own timber stumpage. The care of timber lands is a 

 Inisiness in itself. Public welfare demands that these 

 lands be kept productive — that timlier crops succeed the 

 present virgin forests. This the hnuberman is ill-e(|uippe(l 

 to do. His in\estment, his training, his business, lie along 

 v.diollv different lines. In most cases he can see nothing 

 but financial loss in expending large sums upon tree 

 planting, thinnings and other measures of forest produc- 

 tion. We should not blame him; but we do. The sooner 

 we realize our error, the l)etter it will be for all concerned. 

 forest production is a business in itself. And it is not 

 the business of the lumberman, unless he voluntarily 

 chooses to undertake it. The gmwing of commercial 

 forests is fundamentally a business for landowners, large 

 or small, who intend to hold the land in perpetuity. If 

 lumbermen could be guaranteed a sufficiently large and 

 permanent supply of timber, they would be far better 

 off if they did not own an acre of timberland, but pur- 

 chased their raw material as they needed it, from the pro- 

 ducers. This startling truth is just being realized in part 

 by the lumbermen of the west coast today, who are being 

 slowly crushed beneath the burden of carrying charges on 

 wast ^■olumes of stumpage, once eagerlv acquired, and now 

 hanging like mill stones about their necks. 



We cannot escape the conclusion that the business of 

 growing tiniljer and of owning timber laiuls is one in 

 which the puldic must be directly and largely interested 

 and that one solution is offered by the existence and cre- 

 atiun of national and state forests. The Aineriean For- 

 estry Association stands primarily for forestry, which 

 means the Intsiness of producing forests upon forest land, 

 anil any rational measures, pulilic or private, which will 

 further this economic result, will receive our unquali- 

 fied support. 



r>ut economic furestrs', or connuercial timber growing, 

 will ne\er be profitable unless wood continues to be re- 

 garded as indispensable and the demand for forest prod- 

 ucts is ni;iintained. 'J"he business of forestrv is de- 



