406 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



Under my third head, that of influence on the industries, I can say 

 that the going industries which require wood as a raw material are 

 unquestionably finding Government ownership advantageous to their 

 interests. The conditions of the Forest silviculturally is such that it 

 is desirable almost everywhere to do some cutting. Consequently the 

 Government has manifested its purpose of making sales of timber in 

 all localities where there is need for it and where there is a market 

 for the products. Therefore, the Forest, the local industries, and the 

 local people are all benefited by carrying on continuous timber oper- 

 ations. To the industries is thus guaranteed a steady and permanent 

 supply in volume such as can be permanently maintained or increased. 

 There is promise of satisfactory increase in the productiveness of these 

 forest lands. Lands which six or seven years ago gave little promise 

 of furnishing much forest growth for years in the future have, under 

 fire protection, already produced a vigorous oncoming growth of young 

 trees which has surpassed the expectations of the most optimistic of 

 us. On the other hand, the improved market conditions now enable 

 us to take from the woods much material that had no/ value ten or 

 even five years ago. Hence the industries are getting much more 

 material than we figured would be available for them, while at the same 

 time improvement cuttings and a general cleaning up of the forest are 

 possible to an extent beyond our expectations. 



Another influence is discernable, namely, the influence of these pub- 

 licly owned lands on private lands. First, let us consider the matter 

 of fire protection. It is directly due, in my judgment, to the presence 

 of Government lands under systematic fire protection in northern 

 Georgia that a system of protection has been put into eftect on large 

 private holdings which cover with the Government lands more than 

 75 per cent of the mountain section of northern Georgia. This ac- 

 complishment has been brought about without any forestry law or any 

 systematic efforts on the part of the State of Georgia to promote fire 

 protection. In States like North Carolina, Virginia, and West Vir- 

 ginia, where there are State foresters and systematic efforts at fire- 

 protection, the Government lands have been the most effective centers 

 for organizing the fire-protection work. The experience of the Gov- 

 ernment on its own lands has been invaluable and the aid of the rep- 

 resentatives of the Government has been greater than the aid secured 

 from any other source. 



When we turn to the subject of conservative cutting on timberlands 

 the influences are less tangible. In one instance the holder of extensive 

 timberlands in western North Carolina adopted completely the Gov- 



