REVIEWS 643 



Pacific slope, by stampeding to cut their holdings, to cause more loss 

 to the State and the public, by maintaining an overproduction of lum- 

 ber, than can reasonably be expected from any series of bad fire 

 seasons. I do not depreciate the danger of fires. I simply desire to 

 emphasize that billions of stumpage held by financially weak holders, 

 unaware of market conditions, or determined to take their loss and 

 rescue a part of their investment, constitutes a club held over Pacific 

 Coast forest policy, which, under present conditions, will render it 

 impossible for any government to insist on clean logging or provision 

 for future crops. We all realize that it is over-production of lumber, 

 or, in other words, lack of broad enough markets, that restricts our 

 logging to the cream of the forest, and on even the best tracts leaves 

 a third of the timber on the ground. We all know that while such 

 conditions continue these, the last best virgin forests, will be destroyed 

 without being utilized. Here, then, is the problem for the forester 

 on the Pacific slope." 



There is some danger that by catering to the needs of the specu- 

 lators in timber lands, and it is these, encouraged by the shortsighted- 

 ness of the Government, who are largely responsible for the situation, 

 that the forest policy of the Province may drop into the background. 

 Is there not also the possibility for the Government of recovering the 

 excess of timber limits bartered away to be considered as an alterna- 

 tive for relieving the situation? 



We also consider it dangerous to make such a statement as occurs 

 on the first page in an article by VanDusen, on "Markets for Douglas 

 Fir," in which an argument is made for an increased cut upon the 

 assertion that an annual growth of five billion feet at a conservative 

 estimate may be estimated for the Province. In curious contradiction 

 the next sentence informs us "the difference between this annual 

 growth and the year's cut is not added to the wood capital, however, 

 but is a total economic loss." It is difficult to see what this means. 

 We have as yet not seen any rational basis for estimating the annual 

 increment over a territory like a whole province, still only partially 

 protected against fire. There is, however, no doubt that with a stand 

 of 400 billion feet, the cut of, say, 2 billion feet, can even without any 

 increment be increased considerably beyond the present mill capacity 

 by the 330 sawmills of 2>^ billion feet. 



We were disappointed in an article by Gilmour, on "Appraisal of 

 Fire Damage in Immature Timber," in which we hoped to find a prac- 

 tical short cut, but found only an elaboration of the usual school pre- 

 scription of expectancy and replacement formulae. The interesting 

 part of the essay lies in the consideration of the soil value. It is 



