494 JOURXAL OF FORESTRY 



1. Only true forest land should be leased — that is, land which is 

 better suited to growing timber than for any other use or which for 

 reasons of public policy should be forested (protection forests). 



2. Since the principal is absolutely safe and the return regular, sure, 

 and devoid of risk, the private owner should be content with a rate of 

 return comparable with the rate received from Government bonds, 

 possibly between 3 and 4 per cent of the value of the land. If he does 

 not practice forestry on such land, he does not under present conditions 

 receive any return whatever on his investment except in the way of 

 unearned increment through rise in land values. If it should seem best 

 to allow him this unearned increment under the leasing system, it could 

 be provided for by periodic reappraisal of the land value. 



3. The rental should be paid only on the value of the bare land in 

 case of "skinned" land, or on the value of land plus growing stock in 

 the case of land already stocked with growing forest. In the case of 

 mature forests, the actual stand would in most cases be greater than 

 the normal growing stock. Rental should not be paid on this surplus 

 stock, which should either be bought by the public at its present ap- 

 praised value or removed under restrictions within a definite period by 

 the owner. The former course would probably be preferable, since it 

 would allow the publicly operated forests to be put on a sustained yield 

 basis from the start. 



4. Leases should run for at least a rotation, but should probably pro- 

 vide that the owner might recover his land at his option by the payment 

 of all costs incurred by the public if the forest on it should be so young 

 that the timber would not repay the public for its investment. If the 

 owner should pay all costs, he should of course get his land plus what- 

 ever forest might be growing on it. 



5. The public should pay taxes on the forest and probably also on 

 the land itself. This might be done by direct assessment or by some 

 such arrangement as now obtains in the case of the National Forests. 

 If the public should take over payment of taxes on the land, the owner's 

 investment would be comparable to a tax-free Government bond, so 

 that he should be contented with a minimum rate of return. 



6. Leasing should probably be voluntary on the part of the owners, 

 except in flagrant cases of forest destruction, where the owner refuses 

 or neglects to restore the land to productive condition. 



7. Exploitation of the forests could be carried on by private enter- 

 prise under restrictions, as is now done with the National Forests, or 

 it could be done by the public, especially in places where private con- 

 cerns might for any reason hesitate to go in. 



