A NATIONAL PLAN FOR AMERICAN FORESTRY 1239 



But, as developed elsewhere in this report particularly in the sec- 

 tion Is Forestry Justified? there are cogent reasons why the Nation 

 should strive to attain the full benefits of putting all the available 

 forest land to productive use, even though this offers prospect of 

 going considerably beyond the minimum requirements for domestic 

 use. Figure 1, C, shows the possible future status of forest lands, if 

 all the available area were put to productive use in accordance with 

 the previously mentioned second plan in table 25 of the section, 

 Present and Potential Timber Resources. 



Utilizing all the available area in this way will affect primarily the 

 productive timber area. Since natural regeneration was included as 

 an essential feature of the plan for meeting requirements shown in 

 figure 1, B, planting will probably have to be resorted to, to bring the 

 remaining area of idle land (almost 50 million acres) into production. 

 It may be expected that a large proportion of the areas which may be 

 planted will receive intensive management, so that if all the land is 

 put to productive use, it seems reasonable to extend the area under 

 intensive forestry to 100 million acres. This is in keeping with the 

 thought that at any stage in development, there will be a certain 

 economic balance between areas under intensive forestry and those 

 under crude forestry or simple protection. All the remaining area 

 available for commercial timber use, except the 69.7 million acres of 

 remote or poor land which will always remain unfavorable for timber 

 production, is assigned to extensive forestry in this plan, because by 

 the time we may succeed in bringing all the land into productive use 

 it is probable that forestry practice will be generally adopted. Figure 

 1, C, therefore, represents not only a plan for complete utilization of 

 the land but also a possible ultimate practical limit in developing 

 the growth potentiality of the land through forest management. 



The only possible objection to working toward full use of the land 

 is the possibility that this policy may result in an unmarketable surplus 

 of forest products. But from the detailed discussion of the outlook 

 for foreign markets as given in the section, Trends in World Wood 

 Consumption, the likelihood of being able to dispose of a surplus such 

 as that indicated, at the time when it may develop, is sufficiently 

 strong to serve as an incentive toward every possible increase in poten- 

 tial growing capacity. Furthermore, to the extent that reforestation 

 and the practice of intensive forestry are successful, it will be possible 

 to take a liberal attitude in regard to the demand for lands for exclu- 

 sive recreational use. 



Another service which may justify public action in the reforestation 

 of certain lands beyond the actual indicated needs for forestry pur- 

 poses is the rebuilding of soils to provide for possible future demands of 

 a larger population. A considerable portion of the area available for 

 forestry has been used for agriculture in the past and is favorably 

 situated for such use, but has lost its fertility through either misuse 

 or erosion. Forest growth on such areas will in time restore the or- 

 ganic content of the soil and improve its physical condition so that in 

 the future it may again support profitable agriculture. 



But the present growth is so far short of domestic requirements that, 

 if estimates presented in this report do not prove entirely unfounded, 

 there is no possibility of developing an exportable surplus from current 

 growth for several decades. As far as a program for the next 20 years 

 or more is concerned, it therefore makes little difference which objec- 



168342 33 vol, 2 13 



