24 C. A. SCHENCK. 



2. The American method of taxation, which levies a tax from 

 the value of a taxable object, instead of levying it from the 

 revenue derived therefrom. 



The detrimental influence of forest taxation is shown in 

 Schenck's "Forest Finance," paragraph V. 



The younger the forest is, the greater is the deterrent to con- 

 servation involved in forest taxes. 



3. Experience in conservative forestry, financial statistics, and 

 object lessons exhibiting the possibilities of conservative forestry 

 are lacking in the U. S. The owners of timber-land are at a 

 loss to guess at the probable returns obtainable from a second 

 growth. 



4. Conservative forestry, in Germany now-a-days, does not 

 require as much managerial skill as does the introduction of 

 conservative forestry in the primeval woods of Hungary, India, 

 or Russia, and also of the United States. The owner of timber- 

 land, not knowing what to do, may be excused for doing nothing 

 towards the establishment of a second growth out of a first 

 growth. 



5. The owner of forest lands in Central Germany obtains from 

 an acre of forest, at the time of the final cut, as many as 500 or 

 600 dollars. Under these conditions he can readily set aside for 

 afforestation a sum of ten to twenty dollars per acre. 



The American owner does not clear, in many a case, so much 

 money from a first growth on the average acre as will be re- 

 quired for the establishment of a complete second growth. In 

 agriculture no one will raise a crop when the crop is unable to 

 cover the cost pf replanting; no one will raise wheat when it is 

 worth 30 cents a bushel, or cotton when it is worth 4 cents a 

 pound. Why should the owner of forests raise timber as long 

 as the stumpage value is low; as long as he is selling stumpage 

 at a price smaller than that at which such stumpage can be 

 reproduced? Constructive forestry and a low price of stumpage 

 are incompatible: the advocates of forestry should be advocates 

 invariably of high-priced lumber, or rather of high-priced 

 stumpage. 



6. Conservative logging is more expensive than destructive 

 logging. As a consequence, a smaller margin is left to the con- 

 servative operator during dull years of trade; the competition 



