4 TRANSACTIONS OF ROYAL SCOTTISH ARBORICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



field we have for forestry and its attendant industries in the 

 Highlands alone ! We have heard many lamentations over the 

 i/t'-population of the Highlands : here is a unique chance for 

 /■(^-populating them. I trust the chance will not be allowed to 

 slip. But if it is, I venture to say that it would be a discredit 

 to the Government, as well as a real misfortune to the country. 



2. Co-operation between the State and Private Owners 

 for Afforestation of Barren Land. 



By Captain Sydney Gammei.l. 



The object of this short article is to put forward a concrete 

 proposal, accompanied by some figures, for increasing the amount 

 of forest land in the United Kingdom. I think it must be obvious 

 to every one who has considered the subject that, if the formation 

 of new forest areas is to be left entirely to the State, it can only 

 be accomplished very slowly ; and that, in order to get a more 

 rapid increase in our home timber areas, the importance of 

 which is now being so forcibly brought home to us, it will be 

 necessary to enlist the services of many private individuals and 

 corporations, and especially of the owners of large tracts of 

 afforestable land. One hears people talking glibly of co-operation 

 between the landowner and the Government for this purpose, 

 but the difficulties are many, and only become apparent when 

 one comes to definite proposals, and I am not aware of any 

 proposals having been put forv/ard which have found any favour 

 with those whose interests are affected. 



The proposals put forward here are in no way authoritative, 

 and may be criticised as freely as possible. It is only in this 

 way that any workable scheme is likely to come about. One 

 criticism which I have no doubt will be immediately levelled at 

 them is that they are too favourable to the owner of the land, 

 and the fact that they are put forward by a landowner will 

 perhaps be looked on as giving a handle for such criticism. 

 May I be allowed to point out that the landowner, like a man 

 in any other profession, must be considered as a business 

 man, and that, like others, he is expecting, and is entitled, 

 to make what profits he can by the investment of his money 

 on prudent lines. Like any other business man, he cannot be 



