78 C. A. SCHENCK. 



ad 2 : Conservative forestry, where it exists, depends on large 

 holdings of timberland, the major parts of which (viz. the 

 parts not ready for the axe) are held for dozens of years, "in 

 advance of any use thereof." [Compare page 16, entire; page 24, 

 under (5); and page 26, under (10).] 



ad 3: Conservative forestry as a business can yield a dividend 

 sufficient for the owners of forests only where and as long as 

 the price of stumpage increases automatically. [Compare page 17.] 



Again : Let us hope, true patriots free from the socialistic craze, 

 that Mr. Herbert Knox Smith is correct! 



If he is correct, the dawn of truly American forestry is at 

 hand. What has "unlimited competition," practised by 45,000 

 sawmills and by 300,000 dealers in lumber, what has it done to 

 the fqrests in the East? "Limited competition preserves; un- 

 limited competition despoils the woods." It is easier also to 

 regulate, in the interest of conservation and by legislative action, 

 the limited competition of the few than the unlimited com- 

 petition of the many. Conservation is incompatible with un- 

 limited competition. 



After Dr. Fernow, 30 per cent of our woodlands are attached 

 to farms; after R. S. Kellogg (in Forest Service circular 166) 

 the figure is 36o/o, so that 200 millions of acres of woodland, 

 out of 550 millions, are owned by farmers. After Dr. West 

 (Agricultural Year Book, 1898) 36 per cent of the woodlands 

 of the country are still controlled by the United States. 



