25 



not over one-quarter of what is cut each year. This means that the 

 forests are progressively losing ground with considerable rapidity. 



This deficit is due. only in part to the clearing of land for agriculture. 

 It is due also to the failure to handle the lands in a way to secure good 

 reproduction and properly to protect the young trees that become estab- 

 lished. With better care and management the forest lands of these states 

 should yield from two to three times the present growth, and this would, 

 I believe, be possible without checking the extension of cultivation over 

 lands suited to that purpose. 



These central states should not, however, consider that their respon- 

 sibility ceases with promoting the production of home grown timber. Even 

 with that production, it will be necessary to look to other sources for a 

 large part of the annual requirements of the industries, of the farmers, 

 and of other consumers. If these states complacently expect that there 

 will be an indefinite supply in the general market of the kind of material 

 they have been securing, they will be gravely disillusioned, unless the 

 present methods of handling forests are changed. They may not be able 

 to act directly in altering conditions outside their own boundaries. Where 

 interstate interests are involved the nation itself must take the leadership 

 and direction. Individual states may, however, express their demand for 

 the protection of their industrial interests and support the government in 

 the necessary action to secure it.' 



The National Problem. We have throughout our history drawn chiefly 

 upon the original forest growth for the bulk of the material used in the 

 industries. Though in certain localities we are now beginning to use 

 second growth for certain purposes, most of the lumber in the general 

 market comes from so-called original growth, that is, from trees one hun- 

 dred and fifty to two hundred and fifty years old. As one region has been 

 exhausted railroads have been extended into new centers and material in 

 abundance has been furnished the general market. After the softwoods 

 of the northeast and the lake states were largely cut, we looked to the 

 southern pine forests, and the country felt secure in the knowledge that 

 there are still large quantities of timber on the Pacific Coast. Many 

 economists still think in terms of our original supplies, largely ignoring 

 the high prices that result from the transport of material for two or three 

 thousand miles, ignoring the consequences of the withdrawal of competition 

 from the older and more accessible sources of supplies, ignoring the 

 effect on communities of exhausting the resource that has constituted the 

 chief basis of their industrial prosperity. All these, and other matters too, 

 must be included in considering the economic problems of forests and 

 forestry. 



The lumber industry has been built up to exploit old growth timber. 

 The belief that there is a plentiful supply left somewhere further on has 

 made the country complacent, and the result is that our forests have 

 been cut without reference to restocking with new growth. The interest 

 in protection has been chiefly centered on the old growth timber. Little 

 progress has been made in restoring to productiveness lands laid waste 

 by destructive lumbering and fire. 



The consequence is that most of the eastern states are in a position 



