KDITORIAL C().M.\[KXT 195 



Another elementary point which foresters, most of all, should not 

 forget is that unless cut-over land comes up naturally to forest within 

 a few years, or is prepared for agriculture or pasture, its reclamation 

 for forest purposes becomes a very difificult and expensive task. On 

 the other hand, when the practice of forestry begins with the forest 

 still on the ground, its perpetuation is in many cases a simple matter, 

 often merely at the cost of fire protection. If, therefore, we adopt a 

 laissc::-fairc policy toward private timber holdings, and the public as- 

 sumes control of them only after they have been laid waste, their recla- 

 mation will strain the financial resources of the States or even of the 

 Federal Government. England's example ought to be very instructive. 

 The plans of the United Kingdom for the next ten years provide for 

 an appropriation of over $17,000,000 to reforest about 200,000 acres, 

 and yet England, with its island climate, oflfers most favorable condi- 

 tions for tree growth. 



It is commonly believed that the older countries of Europe have 

 solved the problem of continuous forest production by government 

 ownership of timber lands. This does not entirely square with the 

 facts. In Switzerland, for instance, where forest management is highly 

 developed, the government owns only 4.6 per cent of the forest area ; 

 in Belgium. 4.8 per cent is owned by the State ; in France 12 per cent ; 

 in Austria 10.7 per cent. Even in Germany, where State ownership 

 was more highly developed than in most other European countries, less 

 than one-third was in actual government ownership. Yet most of the 

 forests of those countries are on a continuous productive basis. While 

 in our own country, with 22 per cent of the area under Government and 

 State ownership, the timber supplies are rapidly disappearing. 



It is further to be regretted that the resolution takes it for granted 

 that the practice of forestry by private timber owners is unprofitable, 

 and they should therefore not be held morally responsible for the 

 proper use of their forests. While it is true that except under special 

 conditions forestry is profitable only in the long run and financially 

 means "present expenditure or foregoing present revenue for the sake 

 of a future revenue." there is or ought to be enough profit in the exploi- 

 tation of the virgin timber, properly carried on. to leave the ground not 

 a waste, and here the aid of the Government may well come in, as 

 indicated below. Under certain conditions real forestry practice in 

 virgin forest may even be shown profitable from the start if no specu- 

 lative profits were looked for. 



The farmers of this country engaged in production of food so essen- 

 tial to the nation earn on the average less than 3 per cent on a simple 



