NATIONAL FOREST FINANCES 



Bv T. S. WooLSEY, Jr.. ^I. F. 



Xczv Ha-i'cn, Conn. 



The management of National or State Forests can be based upon a 

 broader financial policy than that of private forests. The private 

 owner is usually intent upon the best money returns per dollar invested, 

 or upon some other special personal advantage. He may care nothing 

 for his forest from the standpoint of permanent production. Nor 

 is he willing to make any outlay for seed trees to secure natural re- 

 generation, or for planting or sowing, if propagation must be artificial. 

 His aim, too often, is to wreck the timber capital as rapidly as possible 

 so as to reinvest his money, regardless of the impoverishment of the 

 soil. Usually he finds the denuded land has a sale value for grazing 

 purposes, or for temporary or permanent agriculture. Fie cares 

 nothing about the evident influence of his forest in protecting the 

 soil, the water resources, or furnishing a place for recreation. The 

 farmer or estate owner may manage his forest from the standpoint of 

 future production simply because the wo'odlet or the forest is part of 

 his farm or country place. Under these conditions the money returns 

 are not so vital because the land will be retained in forest even if the 

 forest pays but 3 per cent on the capital invested — represented by the 

 land, timber value, crop, tax and annual administrative expenses. Fer- 

 now has rightly emphasized the comparatively small rate of interest 

 which forestry for future production pays, notwithstanding the ever 

 increasing value of land. He has shown (in his Economics of For- 

 estry) that German forests pay but 3 per cent on a conservative capi- 

 talization. But in addition to this direct income the capital value of 

 the land (in Saxon forests) increased from $100 to $150 per acre in 

 a period of but 50 years, thus bringing up the net earnings to 4 per 

 cent. Nevertheless, it is apparent that forestry for production can only 

 be permanently practiced by the public, by corporations, or by the ex- 

 ceptional private owner, perhaps as an adjunct to another business. 

 Many of the noble families of France have disposed of their forests 

 because they could not afiford this form of investment. A return of 

 3 to 4 per cent was not enough. A member of the Bulgarian Royal 

 family not long ago sold the forest of Amboise to a member of the 

 Service des Eaux et Forets of France. The new owner (Monsieur 



597 



