APPKNDIX 1!. 85 



under the supervision of the Central Forest x^uthority, and a lieu 

 to be given to it over the area planted, or other satisfactory col- 

 lateral security to be provided. This method would certainly give 

 the maximum amount of land afforested for the amount of money 

 provided by the State. It possesses, however, two inherent 

 practical difficulties. Experience in the past has shown that 

 either the terms offered by the State are so onerous that the 

 landlord is unable to take advantage of them {vide Report of 

 1902 Committee), or that, if the terms suggested are sufficiently 

 easy and acceptable to the landlord. Parliamentary objections 

 are raised to the Treasury disbursing any considerable sums. 

 Further, the system has the disadvantage of being complicated, 

 and that fire, wind, or game may destroy the State's security 

 for repayment. 



\''. — Private enterprise nnder State control. It should never 

 be forgotten that, with the exception of a few acres at Inverliever, 

 planted by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, the whole 

 of the woods of Scotland (covering nearly 900,000 acres) have 

 been planted by private enterprise. Assuming a desire on the 

 part of the State to increase the woodland area, and to settle 

 more people on the land, every inducement should be given to 

 private individuals to proceed with the afforestation of their 

 properties. Wherever possible, proprietors should be encouraged 

 to place their woods under State control, and, in any circum- 

 stances, it would be the first duty of the Central Forest Authority 

 to assist them by advice, co-operation in marketing, formation 

 of working-plans, etc., free of charge. 



Though State control of the woods belonging to private 

 owners would be an entirely new departure in this country, it can 

 be seen in operation abroad, where its value has been proved. 



Provided that game coverts and pleasure grounds were 

 excluded, there appears to be no reason why landowners should 

 be unwilling to place their economic woods under State super- 

 vision, and to submit to some such regulations as every forest 

 owner in Austria-Hungary submits to, as a matter of course, 

 to the mutual advantage of the State and of himself. 



Conclusion. 



In the opinion of the writers, it cannot be too strongly insisted 

 upon that however great may be the desire of any Government 



