I 62 TRANSACTIONS OF ROYAL SCOTTISH ARKORICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



and forestry second, and any land which is good enough to 

 repay cultivation by the plough or the spade is too good and 

 too valuable for forestry. That is a fact which we need waste 

 no time in discussing. The conflict, if there is a conflict at all, 

 is between forestry and grazing. Grazing lies, as it were, 

 between forestry and agriculture. Let us admit that there will 

 always be land on the border line between grazing and forestry, 

 whose ideal fate it may be difficult to decide. But let me add 

 that no sane man would think of planting such land now. 

 There is an ample field for forestry in the Highlands without 

 touching land of that character at all. If that decision ever 

 has to be taken, it will be taken not by us but by our grand- 

 children, who will be in a position to judge whether aff"orestation 

 does or does not bring with it the blessings which we anticipate. 

 Let me, however, add by way of illustration, if not of prophecy, 

 an observation from the little kingdom of Belgium, where 

 agriculture in all its branches is as well understood and much 

 better organised than it is here, and where the soil supports a 

 much larger population. Not only have many Belgian villages 

 planted their own common ground, but agricultural committees 

 have petitioned the Government to drain and plant the moors 

 belonging to the nation, and have even requested that the 

 planting of waste ground should be made compulsory in every 

 parish. After all, what is forestry but a branch of agriculture? 

 Who hears of a conflict between cropping and grazing? Is the 

 conflict between grazing and forestry any more real ? 



If we consider for a moment what we mean by rural develop- 

 ment, we shall perceive what a mare's nest this supposed conflict 

 is. We all want to increase the population of the Highlands, 

 to people the now empty glens, to stem the excessive stream 

 of emigration. It is in the light of this desire that every scheme 

 of Highland development must be considered. We ask of every 

 scheme how many people it will put on the land and induce to 

 stay there, and by the answer to that question we judge it. It 

 is a subject which can be argued in terms either of men or of 

 money. It is in terms of men that I want to argue it now. 

 Let us take the simplest case first. There are sheep farms in 

 Scotland, especially in the West Highlands, which could be 

 planted almost bodily and turned into splendid and profitable 

 forests. A sheep farm employs one shepherd for about every 

 looo acres and practically no other labour. The same ground 



