850 A NATIONAL PLAN FOR AMERICAN FORESTRY 



these circumstances the county should have the determining voice 

 in regard to what is done with the land rather than the State. It 

 remains to be seen what kind of division of responsibilites will be 

 worked out in Minnestoa. 



As matters now stand there does not seem to be a well-defined 

 national movement for the acquisition, retention, and development 

 of county forests as productive pieces of forest property under county 

 administration. The New York situation seems most clearly defined 

 because of the rather generous financial participation by the State 

 provided for by the law. The Wisconsin situation is clearly a social 

 and economic movement designed to assist counties whose idle and 

 delinquent tax land is simply overwhelming them. To assure success 

 of the movement, additional funds and effort must be put into it. 



Ownership and development of forest units by counties would have 

 some advantages over ownership by the smaller town unit. Funds for 

 the purpose could presumably be raised in greater amounts and larger 

 areas could be acquired and maintained. Areas large enough to 

 justify the employment of a technically trained forester might con- 

 ceivably be set up in a great many counties. The possibility of de- 

 veloping public forests through setting aside tax-reverted land for 

 that purpose is more pronounced in the case of counties than for any 

 other political unit. In about half of our States, tax-delinquent lands 

 revert to the county rather than to the State or town. Where State 

 laws permit it, such lands of suitable character could be set aside as 

 county forests. To be most effective, legislation should provide not 

 only for designating some of such land as county forests, but make it 

 easy and inexpensive for the county to take title to the land, and should 

 provide for exchange of one parcel of land for another. This would 

 facilitate blocking up a comparatively solid area of land as the county 

 forest. Precise information is lacking as to the amount of land that 

 has reverted to the counties for taxes but apparently it amounts to 

 several millions of acres. Developing part of it for county forest pur- 

 poses would be one means of putting it to a use that would make it a 

 social and economic asset. It would serve largely the same purposes 

 as the town forest already discussed, tiimber production in time, and 

 meanwhile watershed protection and an area for public hunting and 

 fishing and other forms of recreation. To be sure, all counties could 

 not do this. Some could not finance such a project, even though com- 

 pared to some other county activities, its cost would be insignificant. 

 It would be necessary for the States to provide financial aid. To assure 

 continuity of and ability in management, supervision by the State 

 forester should be provided in these cases. 



