1112 A NATIONAL PLAN FOR AMERICAN FORESTRY 



method of administration which will permit the continued construc- 

 tive management of the properties and the fullest realization of their 

 wealth-producing capacity is far more logical. 



The true criterion of the capacity of any given class of land to con- 

 tribute to the cost of State or county government is the income pro- 

 ducing, or consequent rental or investment value of such land. 

 Experience is demonstrating that long-accepted principles of private 

 ownership of land and timber are in many cases economically fal- 

 lacious; past payments of taxes upon privately owned lands are no 

 criteria of future payments. The tax returns from privately owned 

 forest lands are continually diminishing as the timber is cut off and 

 serious question is arising in some localities as to whether the present 

 owners of uncut timberland which will not be marketable for a decade 

 or two can afford to carry the costs of its ownership for the further 

 period which must elapse before the timber value profitably can be 

 realized. Upon lands which contain stored up or accumulated natural 

 values, such as timber for which a reasonably early market can be 

 foreseen, the owners will, of course, continue to pay taxes until such 

 time as those values can be completely exploited. Lands held with this 

 object in view temporarily can pay a higher tax than lands held for 

 permanent productivity. But in many forested regions the payment 

 of taxes is discontinued as soon as the accumulated values are removed. 



In view of these circumstances it is debatable whether the national- 

 forest lands, considering their character and economic capacity to 

 produce wealth, could under any other form of ownership contribute 

 more to the cost of State and county government than they ulti- 

 mately will contribute under the existing procedure. At present, the 

 capacity of private ownership to pay prevailing rates of taxation is 

 based primarily upon the existence of accumulated natural wealth 

 created without human effort, acquired, at small expense and tem- 

 porarily preserved, pending utilization, by minimum expenditures for 

 protection. The national forests, of course, contain comparable 

 stored-up or accumulated natural values, but their importance as 

 sources of future supply, rather than of immediately marketable com- 

 modities, justifies larger expenditures than private owners would 

 make to preserve and perpetuate such values; while upon much of the 

 national-forest area the objective and requirement is to create new 

 values. Where such objectives and requirements exist, old rules of 

 taxation conceivably may be inappropriate and inimical. No equit- 

 able comparison can be made between the proper contribution to 

 costs of local government by privately-owned lands and by national - 

 forest lands until private lands are placed upon the same basis of 

 permanency in timber production, watershed protection, and other 

 stabilized land uses ; nor can an equitable comparison be made without 

 taking into account the fact that the returns from the national forests 

 will progressively increase as their resources become more fully usable 

 and more fully developed. 



These common problems aside, some variation existed in working 

 out this phase of the study. Some reporting officers classed as poten- 

 tially taxable some lands that apparently will not become privately 

 desirable for many years, while others excluded such lands from the 

 taxable category. Some reporting officers included as potentially 

 taxable all lands which might be privately appropriated even for tem- 

 porary uses others only the lands of such character as to create the 

 presumption that they would remain permanently in private owner- 



