MICHIGAN ROADS AND FORESTS 



DISAGREES WITH THE STATE 

 LAND COMMISSIONER. 



Charles B. Blair, executive agent of the 

 Michigan commission of inquiry, and who has 

 devoted much time and attention to the ques- 

 tion of state lands and forestry matters, does 

 not agree with State Land Commissioner 

 Humify Russell in his opinions regarding the 

 bill introduced by Representative J. L. Mor- 

 tice providing with the doing away with the 

 sale of state lands and planting these lands 

 tn trees for the state's use. Mr. Blair says: 



"\Ye must believe that the land commis- 

 sioner has read the report of the commission 

 if inquiry, for he says he has. An interview 

 given by him to the press shows, however, 

 that, whether he has read it or not, he does 

 not understand the elementary features of the 

 commission's plan for establishing state re- 

 serves. He objects that the labor necessary 

 to reforest would incur an expense greater 

 than the state can afford. The commission 

 thought so. too. and said as much. 1't shows 

 that the present system of selling tax 

 lands to those who want it for the little scat- 

 tered timber, is bringing on the condition 

 which will make it possible for Michigan to 

 have forests in the future only by artificial 

 planting at the great expense hinted at by the 

 land commissioner. Hence the commission of 

 inquiry argues it as one reason for taking over 

 tax lands into state reserves that by so doing 

 Michigan will avoid the necessity a little later 

 of purchasing lands for forest reserves, as 

 Pennsylvania, Xew York, Minnesota, Wiscon- 

 sin and other of our states are doing at prices 

 far in excess of the $1.08 that the land com- 

 misMoner speaks of as 'income' from the state 

 lands. But the commission does not recom- 

 mend that the state attempt to reforest their 

 reserves by planting; on the contrary, it urges 

 reliance, for many years at least, on natural 

 rather than artificial reforestation, saying that 

 all the money Michigan can spend for forestry 

 is demanded by the fire problem. It would 

 be well for the land commissioner to lay aside 

 the 'Sword of Bunker Hill' long enough to 

 enable him not only to read but to digest the 

 report he is criticizing. He will find there 

 the following among other passages bearing 

 on the above: 



"'Reforestation of the state's reserves, in 

 part at least, will be necessary by planting or 

 seeding: but such artificial reforestation should 

 be postponed rather than the furnishing of 

 general fire protection, if a curtailment of ex- 

 penses is necessary. Such reforestation by 

 artificial means as shall be resorted to for the 

 state reserves should be undertaken only in 

 a conservative, careful and deliberate way. 

 Wherever there is a prospect that nature will 

 do something herself unaided, it is wise to wait 

 and let her do it, for she works for nothing. 

 Such planting as is to be done should be under- 

 taken piecemeal, from year to year, so as to 

 bring the annual expenditure within reason- 

 able limits. 



" 'It is altogether too early, in our judgment. 

 to attempt to solve problems connected with 

 this feature of the state's work. It is not our 

 purpose to combat the opinion of expert for- 

 esters, often expressed, that the best method 

 of reforesting state reserves (at least, gener- 

 ally in the lower peninsula, where fire has had 

 longer opportunity to run) is by planting] 

 rather than by natural regeneration. But this' 

 is the minor problem, not pressing for present 

 solution. The main and immediately urgent 

 problem is the general rescue of the cut-over 

 lands and the restoration of an adequate forest 

 area for the sake of the individual benefits to 

 public welfare rather than for the ultimate 

 money profits from sales of lumber. This can, 

 as we have said, be looked for only as the 

 result of effective control of forest fires by 

 the state. Conceding as we do all that expert 

 foresters claim as to the advantages of plant- 

 ing of state reserves as against natural regen- 

 eration, we nevertheless adhere to the belief 

 that work of this sort, except experimentally. 



or in special cases for special reasons, ought 

 not to be taken up at present, if so doing in- 

 volves any curtailment of expenditures neces- 

 sary for fire protection. The securing ulti- 

 mately of adequate forests for this state is 

 fundamentally dependent upon the raising in 

 the immediate future of money enough to pro- 

 vide efficient fire protection. Xo other feature 

 of the matter should be allowed to stand in 

 the way.' " 



NEW FOREST RESERVE PLAN. 



After a long struggle before the committee 

 on agriculture of the house of representatives 

 eastern and southern members were successful 

 in securing report on a bill which provides for 

 the conversion of large tracts of forest lands 

 in Xew England, in the southern Appalachian 

 region and in other sections of the United 

 States. The measure provides for the creation 

 of a commission to be composed of the secre- 

 tary of the interior, the secretary of agricul- 

 ture, a member of the senate and a member 

 of the house. The commission's duty is to ac- 

 quire lands, where needed, to preserve the 

 navigability of interstate streams. 



The bill is a compromise growing out of a 

 contest on the part of those who advocated 

 the creation of federal forest reserves in the 

 southern appalachians and in the White Moun- 

 tains of Xew Hampshire on the one hand and 

 those in the senate and house who took the 

 stand that congress had no authority to ap- 

 propriate money for such purposes. The con- 

 stitutional objection was urged strongly by 

 the house committee on the judiciary, which 

 suggested, however, that congress had author- 

 ity to deal with all questions affecting the 

 navigability of waterways over which the fed- 

 eral government exercised jurisdiction. 



The bill reported was framed accordingly. 

 Under its provisions forest or other lands lo- 

 cated near watersheds and held to be neces- 

 sary to maintain the navigability may be 

 bought and reserved by the government. 



FOREST AREAS VITAL NEED. 



Forest areas are a vital need in every com- 

 munity. Public opinion has everywhere crys- 

 tallized firmly into the accepted belief that it 

 is essential to future welfare that large areas 

 be devoted to forest raising as state forest re- 

 serves. It needs no argument to show the 

 wisdom of devoting to this purpose such avail- 

 able land as the state already owns rather 

 than of purchasing other land. Xew York, 

 Pennsylvania and other states have made such 

 purchases of large extent because they did not 

 already have the necessary land. Michigan 

 now has a large area available for state re- 

 serves, and it is evident that it should use this 

 rather than, by selling it for a trifle that such 

 land brings through the operations of the land 

 office, put itself in a position where it will 

 either have to leave the future unprovided for 

 or buy land for forest reserves. 



Of course forest growing should, as far as 

 practicable, be directed to nonagricultural land. 

 But it is as true of regions that are all good 

 agricultural land as it is of those in which a 

 part of the land is not fitted for tillage that the 

 needs of civilized society require that a con- 

 siderable portion of the land be devoted to 

 growing forests both for the sake of lumber 

 and of the incidental benefits to water supply, 

 stream flow and agricultural pursuits. 



The question, however, of the location of 

 reserves and of the selection of land for them 

 has been solved for this state by the automatic 

 action of its tax law through a long period of 

 years. The forfeited tax land has been se- 

 lected as that which in general is the poorer 

 class of land in each locality, and therefore 

 that which can most appropriately be made 

 use of for state reserves. 



In its recommendations to the legislature 

 the commission of inquiry on tax lands and 

 forestry emphasizes strongly the desirability 

 of using the tax homestead land and the .state 

 tax land delinquent for taxes of five or more 

 years for forest reserves, but shows that only 

 so much of this land is available as is located 



in comparatively large and unbroken bodies. 

 The commission has prepared a map of the 

 state's present holdings of forfeited land which 

 shows that it is only in spots here and there 

 that the state owns such bodies of land of the 

 requisite area and sufficiently unbroken by 

 private ownership to be available for use as 

 state reserve except in these comparatively 

 few spots the state's holdings are scattered or 

 isolated or so much broken up by private 

 ownership or to make it impossible, or at least 

 unwise, to attempt to utilize them for state 

 reserves. For it is obvious that a body of land 

 unbrol-en by private ownership can be much 

 better and more cheaply protected from fire 

 and trespass than the same area if broken up 

 by numerous private holdings. Since each pri- 

 vate holding that is occupied requires access, 

 th's entails expense for roads, and a single 

 settler may make necessary a mile or more 

 of road otherwise of no value, or which in the 

 interest of the reserve might better be located 

 elsewhere. Travel to and fro increases greatly 

 the hazard of fire. 



In many other ways that are obvious the 

 breaking up of the reserve by private holdings 

 must operate prejudicially and against eco- 

 nomical administration and efficient fire pro- 

 tection. Moreover the objection that forest 

 reserves will isolate settlers, depriving them 

 permanently of neighbors, is effectively met 

 by forming reserves of unbroken state hold- 

 ings, for the less the tract is broken by private 

 holdings the fewer there are to be isolated.: 

 Grand Rapids Press. 



STATE FOREST A NECESSITY. 



Clear and convicing reasons are given by 

 the commission of inquiry in support of its 

 recommendation that for the purpose of set- 

 ting apart state forest reserves the state tax 

 land delinquent for taxes of five or more years 

 in the auditor general's department be treated 

 as in substance identical with the tax home- 

 stead land in the land office. This will end; 

 the useless advertising of tax sales of this 

 same land year after year. 



When land has been in the auditor general's 

 department long enough to show delinquency 

 for the taxes of five years the state already 

 has acquired four titles. The records show, 

 however, that most of this land is nevertheless 

 constantly readvertised. In many cases the 

 state's claim is for the taxes of more than 

 twenty years. This involves an obvious waste 

 of money. The commission's plan is to treat 

 the state tax land which is delinquent for taxes 

 of five years the same as the land in the land 

 office, from which it differs only in name. The 

 latter was formerly state tax land and being- 

 delinquent for the taxes of five years the 

 auditor general, as directed by the law, deeded 

 it to the state, thereby taking it off the tax 

 rolls, transferring it to the land office and 

 making it what the law designates as tax 

 homestead land. 



The latter therefore differs from the state 

 tax land delinquent for five years, only in that 

 as to it the auditor general has followed the 

 direction of the law directing him to deed, but 

 has allowed the former to remain in his office 

 where it is readvertised and sold year after 

 year. 



The commission's plan, regarding that as 

 done which under the law ought to have been 

 done, will, by transforming into tax homestead 

 land the land which the auditor general has 

 decided to deed, save much useless advertising. 

 Xo other land in the auditor general's office 

 is to be taken for reserves under the plan of 

 the commission. 



Moreover, as the land under discussion is in 

 acreage nearly as great as the acreage of the 

 tax homestead land, and as it lies indiscrimi- 

 nately interspersed with the latter, it is evident 

 that unless it be included for the purpose of 

 forming reserves the solid bodies of state 

 holdings will be so broken up as to defeat the 

 purpose of forming reserves susceptible of 

 maintenance with the most economy and ef- 

 fectiveness. Grand Rapids Press. 



