468 Forestry Quarterly 



proper unit to be used in the solution of woodlot and farm problems. 

 It is a part of the general problem to secure organization and coop- 

 eration of the farmers (who form the component parts of a county or 

 community) in which the Forest Service finds the opportunity of 

 assisting and pushing this most vital and progressive economic and 

 social work. Permanent forestry development hinges on proper 

 community organization and development all along the line. The 

 forest problems should be outlined with reference to what the 

 community should do rather than what it actually does — ^this is 

 the progressive way. Both Federal and State forestry agencies 

 may usefully join with other public agencies in this work of making 

 plans for the rural communities as they should be. 



One result of commimity organization and cooperation might be 

 in marketing of woodlot products . The present woodlot marketing 

 bulletins of the Forest Service, based on the status quo of the indi- 

 vidual farm as the unit, advise the farmer that he limit himself, for 

 the most part, to marketing of logs, bolts and billets, by which 

 method the bulk of the total volimie of material in his woodlot 

 must usually remain unmarketable because of the expense of 

 hauling. It is only by manufacture or partial manufacture in the 

 wood-lot itself, through the agency of a portable mill set up in the 

 woodlot, that the most can be got out of it, but the individual 

 farmer, under present conditions, is usually not equal to producing 

 and marketing manufactured material. It requires commimity 

 organization and cooperation in manufacture, in finding markets, 

 and in selling (in car lots) to attain this most profitable method of 

 marketing. 



A central feature of the county working plan should consist in 

 outlining a double-barreled woodlot and forestry policy: (1) the 

 policy for the individual farmer to adopt on his own land, which 

 would be determined, of course, in a particular case, by the char- 

 acter of his land; and (2) the public forestry policy for the com- 

 munity as a whole. 



Under the latter might be included some such features as these ■ 

 location of shelterbelts, with reference to the community as a whole ; 

 changing and broadening highways in places and planting trees 

 along them for park piirposes or perhaps as a part of a shelterbelt 

 plan; perhaps a plan for community forests, as in cases where 

 needed to protect a community water supply system, or for recre- 

 ation purposes. I doubt the advisability of community forests 



