CONTINUOUS FOREST PRODUCTION 25 



where it is operating to increase the spread between the price the pro- 

 ducer gets and what the consumer pays, the benefits of organization 

 seem doubtful from the pubHc standpoint. 



Another serious defect in the field of distribution is the serious lack 

 of consumer's education in the use of wood. He has been weaned 

 away from the use of wood by aggressive advertising, which in some 

 cases has resulted in substituting less economic materials for wood. So 

 long as the public fails to give impartial education in the use of materials, 

 through the schools and other means, which would enable the public 

 to know which is the most economic material for a given need, it is 

 obviously necessary for the lumber industry to educate the pubHc 

 through advertising. 



5. Competition of substitutes. — The U. S. Forest Service is authority 

 for the statement that substitutes have displaced wood to the extent of at 

 least 8 billion feet b. m. per annimi. Great as this loss to the industry is, 

 it may not be an economic loss to the community as in the case of the 

 cost of competition. If the substitutes better serve the purpose at no 

 greater cost, then the community is benefited; otherwise, not. There 

 is no doubt that, although some of them serve better, many are less 

 serviceable. This is, however, a point which space does not permit to 

 discuss here at length. 



Great as this competition may now be, it has probably only started. 

 The increased capacity of steel plants resulting from war's demands 

 will leave them with tremendous siirplus capacity when these demands 

 cease. Since these concerns have unlimited capital and complete 

 organization to oppose against disorganization in the lumber industry, 

 the results of this future competition bid fair to be disastrous. It is, 

 for example, entirely possible to put on the market small standardized 

 buildings for farm purposes, built of standard steel shapes and corrugated 

 iron. These buildings would, of course, be most susceptible to interior 

 fires and shorter lived than wood buildings, because rust in small 

 members acts more rapidly than decay in properly constructed wood 

 buildings, yet they will no doubt be claimed to be both fireproof and 

 absolutely permanent. Can the public afford to let an industry based 

 on a resource, use of which leads eventually to its complete destruction 

 (as steel is based on iron and coal resources even if that destruction 

 be long delayed), destroy another great industry which is based on a 

 perpetually renewable resource as the forests ? It must be borne in 

 mind that the forests are not only renewable, but may without appreci- 

 able expense be made continually more productive by the mere selec- 



