MICHIGAN ROADS AND FORESTS. 



11 



in the eastern United States, and the demand for 

 protection of the eastern water-sheds has crystal- 

 ized into a movement which is asking for an ap- 

 propriation of $10,000,000 to buy lands on the 

 water-sheds of the Appalachian and White 

 Mountains, in the Southern and New England 

 States, respectively. A doubt as to the constitu- 

 tional right of the Federal Government to enter 

 upon this work in the different states has delayed 

 the passage of the bill. 



Delinquent Forest Lands. 



The forest lands carried on the delinquent tax 

 list in Michigan comprises about 6,000,000 acres, 

 and in California over 500,000 acres. In Wis- 

 consin very large forest areas have been forfeited 

 for non-payment of taxes, but in 1907 the legisla- 

 ture authorized the purchase of such lands for 

 forest reserves. These forest lands are not 

 worthless, but will in time yield timber again. 

 They were allowed by their owners to revert to 

 the state solely because, unprotected as the forests 

 were, the tax bills for the unproductive period j 

 made the investment too formidable and doubtful. 



Private owners of timbered lands complain 

 that overtaxation either forces destructive timber 

 cutting- or makes re-forestration impracticable. In 

 certain communities of some of the states which 

 are not fully developed it is claimed that valuable 

 farm lands which are covered bv a heavy growth 

 of timber, and which are held by a few owners, 

 do not bear their just burden of taxation. Re- 

 visions of existing state laws are being made and 

 considered for two different purposes : 



Existing Laws Being Revised. 



(1) To lower inequitably high taxation of tim- 

 bered lands M> as to encourage the growth of 

 timber, and in that way to protect the denuded 

 water-sheds and create on property now worth- 

 less a value which may be the subject of taxation 

 and an article which may furnish labor to a com- 

 munity ; and (2) To increase inequitably low 

 taxation so as to prevent the holding of large 

 tracts of mature timber merely for investment 

 purposes when business requires the .cutting and 

 removal of such timber, and when the timber 

 serves no public purpose which would justify any 

 modification of its tax burden. 



Some States Have Acted. 



A number of states have passed laws to relieve 

 lands used for timber growing from excessive 

 taxation. These laws have extended three forms 

 of relief: (1) Exemption for a period of years; 

 (2) Rebates of taxes; (3) Bounties. 



I-.xcmptimi: For this discussion it is not neces- 

 sary to recite the laws of the different states 

 which have offered exemptions. The chief objec- 

 tion to such laws are that they (1) require plant- 

 ing, and sometimes of unnecessarily large num- 

 bers of trees and do not apply to natural timber 

 areas; (2) that the terms of exemption, which in 

 no case exceeds twenty years, and in some cases 

 are not more than three years, are too short; (3) 

 that they exempt the land which should be taxed 

 to the same extent as that used for other growing 

 crops; (4) that this is an unfair discrimination 

 against owners of land growing other crops; and 

 (5) that they provide no method for continuing 

 the use of the lands for forest purposes after the 

 expiration of the term of exemption, and there- 

 fore fail to confer a permanent relief. 



Rebates: The offering of rebates is contrary to 

 the provisions of the constitutions of most of the 

 United States and where operated has not proven 

 successful, and laws for this purpose would neces- 

 sarily be difficult of administration. , 



Bounties: A number of states, not necessary to 

 name in this discussion, have passed forest or 

 timber bounty laws. Only that of Minnesota has 

 proven in any measure successful, and that was 

 operated at an excessive cost. All such laws arc 

 objectionable as class legislation. 



Watersheds Must be Protected. 



The public interest which has demanded relief 

 from excessive taxation of timber lands recog- 

 nizes that it is necessary to change existing laws 

 so as to protect the water-sheds, which in turn 

 protect navigation and farms and manufacturing 



industries along the streams ; to check the system 

 of reckless lumbering encouraged by present laws ; 

 and to prevent loss to the states by unnecessary 

 depreciation of one great item of their taxable 

 wealth. Although such legislation is necessary its 

 enactment without due consideration to other 

 property and industries in order to prevent dis- 

 crimination and injustice would be most unwise. 

 The farmer has frequently to bear the largest pro- 

 portionate burden of taxation in both countries, 

 and new forest taxation laws should not discrim- 

 inate against him; but it should not be forgotten 

 (hat one of the most important services of the 

 forest is to protect the farm from erosion and in- 

 undation. It should also be remembered that if 

 reduction of taxation on land used for promoting 

 forest growth will sec.ure the reforestation of cut- 

 over and now worthless land, such forest growth 

 mav become an item of wealth for the community 

 and a subject for taxation, and that the taxes of 

 the farmer in that community will be reduced. 



Theoretically, at least, -the potential income of 

 all property is the best basis ior taxation, but it is 

 impractical of ascertainment and could not be 

 constitutionally adopted in many of the United 

 States. While fair taxation is desired to encour- 

 age reforestation, it is much more necessary to 

 prevent forest devastation, and if relief must 

 come through constitutional amendment, which is 

 always slow, it will fail to check the ravage which 

 commercialism is now making upon the forests. 

 Some concessions must, therefore, be made to 

 practicability. 



Principles of Forest Taxation. 



It does seem to me that much improvement 

 can be made if in seeking relief from over-taxa- 

 tion of the forest the following principles are 

 borne in mind : 



(1) The tax should be based upon the earning 

 capacity of the land taxed. In accordance with 

 this principle, land upon which is located imma- 

 ture timber, which can not and should not be 

 marketed, should not be required to pay an annual 

 tax on its full value, including such timber, dur- 

 ing the time of the immaturity of the timber. 



(2) Public necessity requires that the water- 

 sheds of streams should be protected by a growth 

 of timber. In accordance with this principle, the 

 legislature would be justified in exempting from 

 taxation such areas of matured timber upon the 

 water-sheds as are necessary to protect them by 

 insuring a permanent growth of timber upon 

 them. 



(3) Taxation upon land should be as nearly 

 equal as practicable. In accordance with this 

 principle land upon which timber is grown should 

 be assessed at its real market value in the same 

 way as land upon which other crops are grown. 



(4) Growing timber should not be subjected 

 to a rule of taxation higher than or different 

 from that applied to other growing crops. Since 

 other growing crops are either actually or prac- 

 tically exempt and are really subject to taxation 

 only when severed from the land, timber should 

 be given the same exemption while growing and 

 unmerchantable, especially since the time of reali- 

 zation upon timber is necessarily deferred for a 

 much longer time than from other crops, and 

 since the timber owner takes additional risk from 

 fire and depredation. Persons investing money in 

 any enterprise desire certainty of the conditions 

 of their investments, and any exemption of imma- 

 ture timber should be based upon reasonable 

 certainty as to duration, but the state should be 

 protected from undue extension of the time of 

 exemption. 



(5) 'Matured or merchantable timber not needed 

 for water-shed protection should be subject to 

 taxation whether the owner cuts it or not. If a 

 scheme of exemption for growing timber is 

 adopted it should contain a safeguard against the 

 exemption of matured or merchantable timber 

 held for speculation and investment purposes. 



(6) It is within the legitimate province of tax 

 laws to encourage the growth of timber for the 

 purposes of insuring a future timber supply for 



the public needs, and of protecting water-sheds 

 of navigable and unnavigable streams. 



(7) The owner of any property exempted from 

 taxation for reasons of public oolicy may justly 

 be required to relinquish to the public, during 

 the period of exemption, any rights therein which 

 do not interfere with the purposes to which the 

 property is devoted. Large tracts of timber land 

 on water-sheds which may seek relief from over- 

 taxation might also be held for private parks and 

 pleasure resorts. The owners, in return for the 

 benefits bestowed by exemption of the timber, 

 might well be required to allow such use of the 

 lands by the public for health and pleasure as 

 might reasonably be stipulated. 



This additional concession to the public would 

 certainly justify additional consideration by the 

 taxpayers on the forested lands from the legisla- 

 ture and prevent such consideration from seeming 

 .to be a discrimination against the public. 



Separate Timber and Land. 



The separation of timber and land for taxa- 

 tion purposes would tend to promote accuracy in 

 valuation. 



The constitutions of some of the states do not 

 permit the exemption of timber from taxation. In 

 such states a further concession should in my 

 opinion be made to expediency, and if such states 

 permit the classification of property for taxation 

 purposes it would be entirely reasonable to place 

 immature or unmerchantable timber upon land 

 chiefly valuable for timber growing or water-shed 

 protection in a separate class and to tax it at 

 longer than yearly intervals or at a lower rate 

 than other property which does not perform a 

 commensurate public service. 



In other states relief can be given only by con- 

 stitutional amendment. In my opinion it would 

 be easier to secure amendment along lines for 

 which there are precedents, and since exemption 

 has been so often given for property which per- 

 forms a public service, and since the right of 

 classification is allowed in many of the states for 

 reasons of public policy, I believe it would be 

 easier to secure amendment along those lines and 

 on the principles here announced than to under- 

 take to revolutionize the entire theory of the 

 taxation laws. Unless the law to allow classifica- 

 tion should also allow a variance of the intervals 

 between payments, exemption is preferable. 



It _is not forgotten that it will be necessary to 

 provide efficient officers to determine what timber 

 property can give the public protection which is 

 desired and what land is not more valuable for 

 some other purpose; also to fix rules to deter- 

 mine when the timber becomes merchantable and 

 should be taxed. Similar difficulties have been 

 encountered in administering the laws which pro- 

 vide facilities for taxing public service corpora- 

 tions, but they have not been insurmountable ; and 

 since forest education is making great strides in 

 the different states of both countries, it is be- 

 lieved that foresters may be secured who can 

 administer and improve forest law along the line 

 indicated. 



State Can Regulate Private Cutting. 



The Supreme Courts of the United States and 

 of the States of Maine and New Jersey have re- 

 cently announced decisions which indicate a belief 

 that the state has a right to regulate cutting upon 

 private lands or protect forests and stream flow 

 on such private lands because of the public service 

 of the forest and the streams. 



The President last year called in conference the 

 governors of the different states for the purpose 

 of formulating plans to conserve the natural re- 

 sources of the United States. This action was 

 not taken because such resources have been ex- 

 hausted, but because they are being wasted, and 

 because there is a tendency to their monopoly. 

 The importance of this question entirely sur- 

 mounted party politics. A voluntary, unpaid, and 

 patriotic congress will meet in Washington in the 

 early winter to formulate and recommend conser- 

 vation legislation. 



It is the duty of each generation to prepare' 

 for its successor at least as favorable an oppor- 

 tunity for success and happiness as it has enjoyed. 

 The forests and streams, the fuels and the meals 

 will be as necessary to succeeding generations as 



