460 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



an adequate return, no compulsory legislation can force private capital 

 into it, and the Federal Government and State will be obliged to acquire 

 the bulk of timberlands of the country. The mere protection from fire 

 is sufficient for the first step of stopping wholesale devastation of such 

 lands as they are cut over. If our efforts are concentrated on this one 

 phase of the problem, there is a much greater chance of success than if 

 we attempted to put over with one stroke of the pen a complete regula- 

 tion of the entire forest mdustry r-i the country, something which has 

 not been and probably never will be accomplished for any other 

 industry. 



By JoJin F. Preston 



Without attempting to review the program itself, I must proceed 

 with the criticism and argument in order to save space. 



CRITICISM 



I am willing to agree to the following principles: (1) The country 

 needs a generous supply of forests. (2) This means the keeping of 

 all forest lands productive, whether publicly or privately owned, with 

 no fine distinction as to the ultimate use of the land for agriculture or 

 forestry. (3) The devastation of privately owned forest lands now 

 going on can, and must be, stopped. (4) Ultimately, the lumber busi- 

 ness must be put on a permanent basis, which means a direct relation 

 between the manufacture of lumber and the productive capacity of 

 forests. In other words — sustamed yic4d management of forests. 



I cannot agree with the statement of principles which includes the 

 following: (1) That the timber industry has wholly failed in the 

 right treatment of forest lands, and that no help can be expected from 

 this source. (3) That the States are wholly incapable of meeting the 

 situation. (3) That private ownership of forest lands carries with it a 

 special obligation not to injure the public. (This is considerably quali- 

 fied, as will be noted later.) (4) That National control is the only 

 solution of the problem. 



ARGUMENT 



This program of forestry seems to me to be fundamentally in con- 

 flict with the democratic principles upon which this Nation was 

 founded. Individual liberty and initiative and the opportunity for the 

 . highest development of the individual are some of the foundation stones 



