nets, the equitable taxation of growing forests, and 

 any other factors bearing upon the actual establish- 

 ment of timber crops on all forest lands. It should 

 make continued Federal co-operation, from time to 

 time, conditional upon the adoption of such further 

 regulations of private forest lands as are shoAvn to be 

 necessary and equitable under the conditions existing 

 in that State. And it should aid the States liberally 

 in the education of forest owners, in the demonstra- 

 tion of good forest practice, in tree planting, and in 

 any special phases of the entire movement which the 

 particular needs of any State call for. 



It is far from my thought to assert that such a 

 plan as I have outlined is the last word in our nation- 

 al forest policy. To me it is the most direct and 

 practicable road to immediate results as represented 

 by acres of growing forests. But whether State rather 

 than Federal control of private forest lands is the 

 final word or not, I can see no reason why our States 

 should not be encouraged to go just as far as they 

 will in reforestation, or why any State that is pre- 

 pared to impose restrictions upon its forest owners 

 should not be given a clear field with the co-opera- 

 tion and advice of the Federal government in doing 

 so. Every local interest that can be aroused, every 

 real development toward better forest practice that 

 can be brought about through local agencies and 

 local action, represents so much ground gained. Many 

 of the States have established forest organizations 

 which are accomplishing real results in reforestation. 

 I do not believe that our national policy should dis- 

 card these organizations, in preventing forest devas- 



24 



