STATE OWNERSHIP OF FOREST LANDS 



973 



of the State is muddled, the private owner has certainly no alternative 

 but to follow a short-sighted policy. He cannot be expected to have 

 confidence in or to exercise greater conservatism than the State upon 

 which he must depend for protection. 



The writer reaches the following conclusion, then, in respect to State 

 ownership of forest lands : 



1. Every State ought to maintain perpetual ownership of the forest 

 lands unsuited to annual operation which are now within its possession, 

 and the burden of proof ought to be placed upon every proposition for 

 disposing of forest lands in the ownership of a State. 



2. As to projects of land purchase by a State: 



(a) In so far as the projects are intended to protect areas of esthetic 

 or recreative value, they are highly commendable if the nature of the 

 project is understood and agreed upon by the body politic. 



(b) In so far as the projects are intended to protect domestic water 

 supplies, they are also commendable if there is actual use or genuine 

 need of the water supplies in question. 



(c) In so far as the projects are intended to regulate stream-flow 

 and to prevent sedimentation, it is doubtful whether the purchase of 

 forest land gives effective or even appreciable results, except perhaps 

 in certain very mountainous regions and in certain regions very easily 

 eroded. 



(d) In so far as the projects are intended to produce timber, there 

 is no reason for considering them as other than ordinary financial in- 

 vestments, except when soil destruction is actually threatened by pri- 

 vate ownership, when patriotic considerations, if agreed to by the body 

 politic, may warrant waiver of the financial point of view. 



(e) In so far as the projects are intended to serve for the demon- 

 stration of methods in forestry, they are justifiable only when there is 

 something that can really be demonstrated most effectively in no other 

 way. In general, protection against physical destruction of forests, 

 against uncertain or unfair taxation, and against improper business 

 methods — all of which are essential functions of the State — and also 

 the collection and dissemination of information as to technical forestry 

 and markets, are more effective methods of encouraging better forest 

 administration than are demonstration areas. 



(/) The possibility of some returns from timber production may 

 render feasible projects urged for esthetic reasons — recreation, protec- 

 tion of domestic water supplies, or the protection of the productivity 

 of soils endangered by private methods — even if these returns are in- 

 sufficient to pay the cost of protection, administration, and interest on 

 the purchase. 



