NATIONAL PROGRAM OF FORESTRY! COST 11 



adopted, the initial burden of producing future forest crops must be 

 borne in one of the three ways: (1) By the present forest owner; 

 (2) by the public; or (3) by the forest-owning interests sharing the 

 bill with the general public. The last seems the reasonable solution 

 and is in effect that proposed by Colonel Graves. But in what pro- 

 portion shall the division be made, and how, and when? Here again 

 the part that the public is to play seems to have been taken for granted ; 

 but is this safe assumption ? No such program as is proposed, whether 

 it be ameliorative, "impulsive," or mandatory can be put into effect 

 without there is strong public sentiment behind it, and no policy can 

 endure unless it rests on a sound economic basis. 



Methods must of course be worked out, and it is our particular duty 

 as foresters to develop them, but in getting the program started and 

 under way too great stress ought not to be laid on parts of the project 

 that necessarily must be developed gradually. My personal feeling is 

 that mandatory measures should be approached with caution and that 

 we have not yet exhausted all the other means that should precede 

 them. What, it seems to me, is needed now is to get united support 

 behind the comparatively few things on which there is substantial 

 agreement among all concerned and in favor of which a public senti- 

 ment already exists. Almost every one connected in any way with 

 forests is now in favor of fire protection. Few are opposed, except 

 as it entails expense, to the principle of public ownership of forests. 

 Many are at least open to conviction on the subject of forest tax re- 

 form. These, with ameliorative measures like extension work in for- 

 estry through Federal aid, or by the States in the way of making 

 forest planting easier, can all command public support at the present 

 time. If such measures were actually and fully put into effect we 

 should have gone a long way on the road we are traveling. 



The advantage of getting these things going is two-fold. Not 

 only are they beneficial in themselves, but naturally and readily they 

 lead into further development. Here in the Northeast were conditions 

 bettered only a little, the outlook for the practice of forestry by private 

 owners would be markedly changed. The next steps might well be an 

 extension of Government credit to owners of forest land, similar in 

 principle to the farm loans, or a Government bond issue for the 

 benefit of the forests, or even insurance by the States of standing 

 timber against fire. These things are all in the way of taking care of 

 the cost by the public, and especially of bridging over the gap until 

 forests under management become revenue producing. But in getting 

 them under way it should also be made clear that they are only a part 



