A NATIONAL PLAN FOR AMERICAN FORESTRY 737 



Maryland entered on a policy of acquisition in 1906 and now has in 

 State forests under administration approximately 50,000 acres, as 

 against 588 acres in Virginia. Maryland, with a total forest area 

 of 2,200,000 acres, appropriates annually for its forestry work more 

 than $90,000; Virginia, with 15 million acres, a little more than 

 $39,000. West Virginia, with 10 million acres of forest land, places its 

 forestry work in a department presided over by the State fish, game, 

 and forestry commission, and finances it by making available 25 

 percent of the receipts from fish and game licenses. Public sentiment 

 throughout the State regarding a program of forestry beyond fire 

 protection appears to be rather apathetic, and not particularly 

 aggressive even in the matter of protection outside of a limited group 

 of large landowners. Until 1929 the State did not have its forestry 

 work handled by a technical forester, except that an extension forester 

 was and still is provided by the extension service of the State Agri- 

 cultural College. While 15,393 acres are classed as embraced in 

 State forests, the land was acquired primarily for game protection, 

 a few years ago, and there is no program contemplating further 

 acquisition. In comparison with either Maryland or Virginia, West 

 Virginia has not paid much attention to forestry. 



DIVERSITIES BETWEEN REGIONS 



There are broad distinctions of forest policy that mark off from one 

 another groups of States having unlike conditions, natural or eco- 

 nomic. They will come out in detail as the accomplishments and 

 present status of State forestry are outlined. The character of the 

 differences may be illustrated here by comparing briefly the situations 

 in the Northeast, the Lake States, the South, and the West. 



In the Northeast, State forestry has long been firmly established. 

 Public opinion in its favor was created by the rapid cutting off of the 

 original forests as the nineteenth century advanced; the accompanying 

 and following devastation wrought by uncontrolled fires; the increasing 

 dependence of the region upon the Lake States and the South for 

 lumber and other forest products; the wood requirements of the many 

 and growing industries, and of an increasing industrial population; 

 and the scenic and recreational values in the Adirondack, Catskill, 

 White Mountain and other regions. This favorable sentiment was 

 strengthened by the unquestioned belief that deforestation would have 

 revolutionary effects upon the climate of the region as well as upon 

 streamflow and water supplies generally, that navigation and power 

 were already affected, and that the actual wiping out of the forests 

 was under way. Scientific thought played a large part in arousing 

 and shaping public opinion ; scientists were conspicuous leaders in the 

 early forestry movement, especially in the Northeast. While con- 

 siderations of sentiment were undeniably also an influence, economic 

 reasons furnished the chief impulse for public forestry. 



Timber was plainly the only feasible crop for much of the land. 

 The acreage under cultivation was shrinking, the forest area gaining. 

 The richer States were financially able to undertake enterprises of 

 public forest ownership without difficulty. Even the safeguarding 

 of mountain scenery against the unsightly results of destructive 

 lumbering and fires had a strong economic motive. In New York 

 the perpetuation of the Adirondack forest was considered essential 

 for the water of the Erie Canal, and important for the navigation of 



