832 A NATIONAL PLAN FOR AMERICAN FORESTRY 



case involved cannot be dovetailed in with other forest uses satis- 

 factorily. National parks, however, are extensive areas where the 

 immaterial values are of such exceptional quality and supreme im- 

 portance that utilization of the land for the production of commodities, 

 such as lumber or livestock products, should not be considered. 



Some States make a similar distinction between "parks" and 

 " forests." In other States the terminology is misleading. Where 

 the distinction is sharply drawn, the administration of the State 

 parks and State forests may be by the same organization, or by 

 separate units in the same department, or by entirely disassociated 

 units. Popular thought in the East tends to run to the conception 

 of all public forests as maintained primarily for park purposes, and 

 this adds to the confusion. Further, the objectives of the States 

 for the areas designed to serve the purpose of timber production 

 generally emphasize strongly what may be called the park conception 

 and frequently tend to relegate to a secondary place, for the time 

 being at least, provision for making use of and increasing the valuable 

 timber growth. Thus there are elements of artificiality in the division 

 set up between State parks and State forests. Functionally they 

 often tend to merge. Nevertheless, it is believed preferable in the 

 present discussion to distinguish them. 



STATE FOREST LAND ADMINISTRATION IN THE NORTHWEST 



Another line of demarcation which involves some uncertainty is 

 that between State forests and other lands in State ownership. A 

 twilight zone has been created by State action of different kinds, 

 that has given some State-owned forest lands an in-between status. 

 A striking example of this is in three States of the Northwest. 



By legislative enactment Montana has placed 200,000 acres of 

 specifically designated land in definite administrative units not 

 subject to alienation, but to be held permanently by the State and 

 administered for purposes of timber production and watershed 

 protection. In addition, the law prescribes that all lands of the 

 State " principally valuable for the timber that is on them, or for the 

 growing of timber, or for watershed protection" are not to be dis- 

 posed of; and any timber cut from them must be taken in accordance 

 with prescriptions to assure continued timber production and water 

 conservation. The State system of fire protection covers all these 

 lands. The major difference, and indeed practically the only differ- 

 ence, between the lands included in the specifically designated State 

 forests and those not so included is that the latter are more scattered 

 and may require considerable blocking up to assemble areas of 

 sufficient solidity for reasonably economical permanent administra- 

 tion. In blocking up, a good many isolated and scattered areas may 

 eventually prove to be unsuitably located for permanent State 

 management. Yet it may be claimed, and with reason, that the 

 character of the oversight exercised by the State and the law prohi- 

 biting disposal of the lands give them better title to the name of State 

 forests than some areas so classed elsewhere. The area of these 

 "twilight zone" lands in Montana totals 236,000 acres. 



Idaho has approximately 964,000 acres of State forest land, of 

 which somewhat more than one-half is customarily classified as in 

 State forests. These latter lands are well blocked up, having been 



