211 



Catalpa speciosa Warder Hardy catalpa 



Viburnum lentago Linn. Sheepberry. Black haw 



Viburnum ruHdulum Raf. Black haw 



Viburnum prunifolium Linn. Nannyberry. Black haw 



Foresteria acuminata Poir. Foresteria. Swamp privet 

 {Adelia acuminata Michx.) 



Ownership and Taxation of Forest Lands 



At least ninety per cent of the Illinois woodlands are owned by 

 farmers, which means that ownership is stable and favors forest 

 management. The proportion is less in some of the southern mining 

 counties, such as Jackson, Perry, and Williamson, where considerable 

 woodland is held by coal companies. There are also a few large 

 bottomland tracts in the hands of lumber companies, but, unlike the 

 mining companies, these owners are only temporarily in possession and 

 expect to sell the land to farmers when it is cleared. 



For purposes of taxation land is classified as improved and unim- 

 proved, and the assessor places a different value per acre on the 

 improved and unimproved land of each farm. This full valuation is 

 supposed to equal the actual sale value of the land, but in practice 

 often falls below this figure. The assessed value is one-third of the 

 full valuation; the rate of taxation varies considerably in the various 

 counties and townships, but it averages between three and four per cent. 

 Thus the actual tax is about one per cent, or a little more, of the full 

 value. Woodlands are usually classified as unimproved land, although 

 sometimes when fenced and pastured they may be included with the 

 improved. Very little attention is ordinarily paid to the character of 

 the timber on the land unless it happens to be exceptionally good, in 

 which case the land may be valued as high as agricultural land. 

 Scrubby cut-over woodland in rough country is worth about $5 per 

 acre, while better timberlands are valued at $10 to $30 per acre, leav- 

 ing out of consideration exceptionally good tracts. 



On the whole, the taxes levied on Illinois woodlands are not 

 excessive, and have had practically no effect on the time of cutting 

 timber or other features of forest management. Therefore it does not 

 seem advisable to change the system of taxation at present. Eventually 

 a tax based on yield will have to be substituted for the present tax 

 based on the combined value of the land and timber. This change 

 will doubtless come about with the development of forest management 

 on scientific principles and with a general reform of the present taxing 

 system. 



