a JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



propriatioii which does not total $20,000 can only be looked upon as a 

 sorry persiflage, entirely inadequate. It is not in disparagement of the 

 efforts of the worthy men who act as State foresters that we pronounce 

 this derogatory judgment regarding State forest policies, but merely 

 to note the historic fact, that considering the importance of the in- 

 terests involved, we are still only puttering with the problem. 



Outside of providing in a manner for fire protection, the various 

 State forest services, excepting Pennsylvania, have hardly passed be- 

 yond the stage of exercising educational functions; advising private 

 owners, furnishing plant material, or planting themselves on a small 

 scale; and managing small demonstration areas. 



Perhaps we do not realize that the Eastern forests and forest lands 

 — the absolute forest soils in the East- — represent three to four-fifths 

 of the total forest area of the country ; they serve the largest con- 

 tingent of the population, and their proper management for continuity 

 is almost more important than that of the Western forests, for which 

 the Federal government has made such good beginning. 



The fact that these Eastern forests are practically altogether in the 

 hands of private owners and can, therefore, become State forests only 

 by purchase for hard cash, is sufficient explanation of the slow, almost 

 negligible progress in this direction. Even if the desirability of a 

 policy of State forests were clearly recognized, financial inability would 

 in most cases be inimical to its adoption. 



This leads to the inquiry how far the interests of the private owners 

 may be relied upon to take care of these forest areas. 



If we think of forestry as a management of forest properties under 

 a sustained yield management, i. e., for continuity, under a purposeful 

 method of reproduction, we may claim that private forestry does not as 

 yet exist. Some economies have been introduced in the exploitation of 

 forests, conservative lumbering has been and is being practised here 

 and there, small plantations have been made, more or less efficient pro- 

 tection against fire, with or without State aid, has been inaugurated. 

 But it would be difficult to find any considerable tracts of privately 

 owned timberland managed under anything that could be designated 

 as a working plan for continuity. 



We come here to the same expression as in the case of State 

 pdicies, we are still merely "puttering" with the problem. 



Nor can we expect much change. We may as well recognize noW 

 as later that forestry is in the main a business for the State, and only 

 under very special conditions for private enterprise. The long time 



