370 



Canadian Forestry Journal, September, 19/9 



Those who have had the chance to see the 

 national forests of France and of Germany will 

 admit with me that these figures are not ex- 

 aggerated because every spot of these forests is 

 devoted entirely to the production of trees, and 

 of good trees, whereas in this country the good 

 trees will only form, too often, an insignificant 

 proportion of the stand, the remainder being 

 occupied by swamps, inferior species or blanks. 



It would be therefore of capital importance 

 for the future operators to be assured that in- 

 stead of cutting as we do now from four to 

 ten cords per acre, they could find from twenty- 

 five to fifty cords after an interval of thirty to 

 fifty years. I need not insist upon the effect 

 that such a yield per acre would have on the 

 cost price of lumber; and also on the value 

 of the forest property. This brings us to the 

 subject of: 



' Who Must do Reforestation? 



Owing to the fact that no practical re- 

 turns can be expected before at least thirty 

 years after the plantation, it requires there- 

 fore continuity or almost permanency in the 

 possession of the property to be reforested. 

 The problem is easily solved as regards the 

 private lands: it will be a sound and profit- 

 able investment for the farmer, the towns 

 and the corporations owning some private 

 lands not fit for cultivation to go into this 

 business, as they will do a national work and 

 also create an excellent and steady source of 

 revenue for themselves. 



But when we come to the question of re- 

 foresting the timberlands leased from the 

 government, the problem is more complex. 

 Though I have studied it a long while, I have 

 not yet come to a satisfactory conclusion. 

 Will it be better for the government to do 

 this work exclusively or should they rather 

 allow or compel the limit-holder to make it 

 for and by himself or should both co-operate 

 in the plantation. The latter alternative may 

 be the more logical since the government 

 owns the soil and keeps the title of the pro- 

 perty, it might then furnish all the planting 

 material required and also the technical direc- 

 tion to do the work, whereas the limit-holder 

 would defray the expenses of replanting. 

 Someone has raised the important question, 

 "Would the limit-holder continue to pay the 

 ground rent on the parts of his limits that 

 have been reforested?" I think he should 

 continue to do so, if he wants to retain his 



lease, but 1 believe that his share of expense, 

 that is the cost of planting, should be kept 

 separate and returned to him as a deduction 

 on stumpage charges either at the moment of 

 the plantation or with the accrued interest 

 of say three or four per cent when the trees 

 will have reached maturity. This plan is 

 not altogether satisfactory to me, and I just 

 present it as a basis for discussion rather than 

 as a remedy to the difficulty. 



To Encourage Reforestation. 

 The first measure to adopt for the welfare of 

 the plantation is unquestionably to give them a 

 satisfactory protection against fires. It would 

 be ridiculous to make a plantation on a tract 

 that would not be easily reached and defended 

 against forest fires. 



Cut Down the Fires. 

 We must carry on further the policy of pro- 

 tection against forest fires; we have already 

 done a good deal in that direction, but we find 

 that much of our forests is still vanishing away 

 in smoke, and this spring we have had several 

 big fires in the Lake St. John and the St. Maur- 

 ice districts; most of them being caused directly 

 by the railways. Nobody can dispute that fact 

 as we have secured complete evidence in each 

 case .establishing that the railway engines have 

 been the cause of two large fires, one at Vandry 

 and the other at Timbrell on the Transcontin- 

 ental Railway. I firmly believe that we cannot 

 allow our forest wealth to be depleted in such 

 a manner, and the time has come to see that 

 each engine travelling through a forested dis- 

 trict will burn something else than coal or wood. 

 We have water powers in abundance and we 

 should study the electrifying of the railways in 

 the forested regions. Someone will say that 

 this may be too expensive, but it will be less 

 expensive than the burning of fifty square miles 

 of timber limits per year, and besides, we will be 

 thereby developing our natural resources and 

 diminishing at the same time our dependence 

 for coal upon our neighbors. If we cannot 

 electrify the locomotives, we could have them 

 burn oil, as is done in the Adirondacks and as 

 was done with success by the contractors who 

 built the Gouin dam.. Anyhow, the railways will 

 have to burn something else than coal or wood 

 and I hope the Pulp and Paper Association will 

 support any movement in this direction. Many 

 fires may be attributed to the poachers, the 

 fishermen and hunters. Nobody should be al- 

 lowed to roam at will in the forest. We should 

 make it a close property and oblige everyone 



