STATE OWNERSHIP OF EOREST EANDS 963 



supplies. We can see, all correlated, diminishing supplies of the nat- 

 ural stand of timber, increasing prices of forest products, increasing 

 substitution of cheaper or more satisfactory materials, constantly 

 greater economy in the utilization of timber in all steps of the lumber- 

 ing operation from the forest to the consumer, more and more care in 

 the protection of growing stands from fire or other destructive agen- 

 cies, and finally, when prices warrant, the employment of special meas- 

 ures for securing natural or artificial regeneration, beginning and ex- 

 tending from the regions of most rapid growth, easiest protection, and 

 most profitable markets. We can see the future because these processes 

 have clearly been going on during the last few decades. 



A timber famine is out of the question, because long before the fifty- 

 five years granted us in 1910 have elapsed the various factors outlined 

 which tend to prolong the duration of our timber supplies will have 

 postponed the evil day so much longer. But just as our timber supplies 

 are being reduced only by a small fraction year by year, so the effort 

 of the nation to renew them likewise needs to increase only gradually. 

 At the worst the problem of future timber supplies is simply a local 

 problem, worthy of consideration only where the cost of freight from 

 the important timber regions of the country exceeds the cost of timber 

 production at home. Even for military needs, unless our military ex- 

 perts advise us to the contrary, the private forest lands as ordinarily 

 managed, together with the National Forests which have been estab- 

 lished, assure us of sufficient timber supplies. 



There is, then, no economic necessity for State production of timber. 

 The State has, to be sure, two obvious advantages over the private 

 owner, one the fact that it can secure loans at lower rates than the 

 private borrower and the other the fact that in all belief it will live 

 forever. The ability of the State to secure loans at comparatively low 

 rates of interest enables it to undertake projects which would pay 

 insufficient interest to attract capital for private enterprise. The 

 longevity of the State permits it to await with equanimity the maturing 

 of the timber crop, whereas the private owner feels that if he is to 

 realize upon his investment during his own lifetime he will, very prob- 

 ably, become a vender perforce and will have to accept the forced 

 vender's usual lot in a transaction. 



On the other hand, allowance must be made for the fact that Amer- 

 ican governmental organization is relatively less well suited for the 

 conduct of enterprises of production than are private concerns. Public 

 work is generally more costly than private, and the maintenance of 

 efficient and honest administration is less certain. These difficulties are 



