570 JOURNAL OF rORESTRY 



the axe and saw. The story of forest devastation in Great Britain 

 has been much the same as in the United States with the only differ- 

 ence that it began much earlier and has been carried much farther. 

 As early as 1543 fears began to develop in England as to the supply of 

 timber for home consumption. The period from this date to 1880 

 when attention was drawn to the possibility of utilizing uncultivated 

 lands to better advantage for forestry than for agriculture can scarcely 

 be described as effective in the development of a government forest 

 policy. 



Even after 1880 down to the outbreak of the war Great Britain 

 depended more and more upon imports for her forest products. It 

 appears that during the second half of the nineteenth century and the 

 first decade of the twentieth there was a steady decrease in the area 

 of forests in Great Britain. In Ireland alone the recent annual de- 

 crease has been placed at one thousand acres. 



The outbreak of the war found Great Britain with an almost neg- 

 ligible forest resource and chiefly dependent on shipping for her forest 

 supplies. Her annual bill for these imports was nearly one hundred 

 and fifty million dollars. The advent of the submarine campaign 

 showed Great Britain for the first time the economic insecurity of 

 placing sole dependence upon imports for essential forest products. 

 This had almost immediate effect from the forest policy point of view, 

 and soon the country came to recognize the fundamental fact that 

 forests are sources of wealth, that timber is a necessity for commercial 

 development and consequently all risk of interruption in supply must 

 if possible be avoided. This recognition has been accompanied by cor- 

 responding legislative activity in the realm of forest policy. It is ap- 

 preciated, however, that even as yet guiding principles are struggling 

 for expression. 



Nearly four years ago in the midst of war a forestry reconstruction 

 sub-committee was set up. A year later this sub-committee presented 

 its report. This report is a comprehensive summary of the forestry 

 situation in Great Britain and embodies certain definite recommenda- 

 tions. It is interesting to American foresters and others who are now 

 discussing the re-shaping of our own forest policy that the English 

 committee recognizes the inviolability of private forest property and 

 did not recommend mandatory laws governing the control and regula- 

 tion of such property. This committee placed its dependence upon 

 increasing the area of public forests through purchase, public control 

 through leasing and cooperation and financial assistance in making the 



