A NATIONAL PLAN FOR AMERICAN FORESTRY 1261 



principle can be scrutinized from the standpoint of what public agency 

 can best undertake the job, and the feasibility of providing the neces- 

 sary money, but not with a question as to whether the public should go 

 in at all. 



The break-do wn of private ownership is forcing public ownership of 

 forest lands on a scale previously not anticipated. In the future, 

 involuntary public ownership appears certain to be more and more 

 widespread and extensive regardless of deliberate public acquisition 

 programs. 



THE BASIS FOR DIVISION OF PUBLIC OWNERSHIP 

 BETWEEN AGENCIES 



HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 



Ownership of forest land by the smaller political subdivisions 

 towns, cities, and counties is described in detail elsewhere. The 

 total area now owned and managed is not large (about 1 million acres) 

 and is to a considerable extent for park or water supply rather than 

 forest purposes. Title to the large area of land abandoned by private 

 ownership through tax delinquency lies in the counties in many of the 

 States, in towns in others, or in the States directly. For the most 

 part, counties in which land abandonment is active are little able to 

 undertake constructive management under the principles of forestry. 

 Depreciated forest land is generally a net expense for many years and 

 the very process of land abandonment reduces the local government's 

 income. Thus at the time when additional expense is required to care 

 properly for the land, local government usually is least able to under- 

 take new jobs. 



In a few States a systematic effort is under way, sponsored by the 

 State government, to make management of forests possible for the 

 counties, and even the towns and cities. But in the main and with 

 relatively few exceptions, public ownership must be either by the 

 State or Nation. 



As to the division of ownership of forest land between the States 

 and the Federal Government, the question of what is theoretically 

 best or most desirable in terms of our history and political thought is 

 much confused. A strong element of political theory would leave the 

 problem to the several States. But in most of the regions where 

 national forests have been managed longest, public opinion supports 

 fully this Federal venture. Federal forests, even though established 

 to meet national needs, have come to be recognized as giving important 

 benefits to the States in which they are located. 



In law, and to a large extent in public opinion, forest lands needed 

 for the protection of navigable or otherwise important interstate 

 streams have come to be held as a major class of land of peculiar 

 Federal interest. But in a few States, notably New York, the State 

 forest programs have undertaken to acquire all of the forest lands of 

 this character for which public ownership is needed, although the 

 primary purpose for State acquisition may be something else. In 

 other States, as for example Pennsylvania, both State and Federal 

 forests contain lands of similar character and equal value for watershed 

 protection. Even though Federal ownership of important watershed 

 areas has become reasonably well sanctioned, individual States have 



