526 AMERICAN FORESTRY 



Many farmers are handling their woodlands with great care and intelligence, 

 and some large private estates are also handled along the lines of forestry. 

 Among extensive timber tracts the number which are managed with a view to 

 continuous production of trees is very small. It is safe to say that not over 

 one or two per cent of the lumber on the market today has been cut with a view 

 to continued forest production. 



It is a matter of history that no country has solved its forestry problem 

 except through the direct or indirect action of the government. The progress 

 in all countries has been in direct ratio to the activity of the government. 



The public may deal with the forestry problem in three ways. 



1. By public ownership of forests. 



2. By assistance to private owners in taxation and fire protection, and by 

 co-operation in management. 



3. By the regulation of privately owned forests. 



PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF FORESTS 



While it is not practicable for the public to own all the forests, neverthe- 

 less direct ownership or control by the public of very extensive forests is 

 essential to the working out of the country's problem in forestry. 



The public forests constitute the foundation or nucleus for the develop- 

 ment of forestry in every country. Those countries with little or no public 

 forests are so far failing in their forestry work. It is the universal testimony 

 of foreign countries that the public forests are too small ; and that national 

 interests would be better served if they were far more extensive. The present 

 areas of public forests are in all cases what was left when the policy of 

 disposing of them to private owners ceased. All countries which have adopted 

 a national policy of forestry are trying to increase the public holdings, not to 

 decrease them. 



PAST MISTAKES IN HANDLING PUBLIC FORESTS 



It has been the policy to dispose of the public lands in the United States as 

 rapidly as possible in order to encourage the development of the country. The 

 acquisition of land by private individuals was made easy in order to secure 

 settlers. The wisdom of a liberal policy as applied to agricultural lands has 

 been proved by the rapidity with which our country has been settled. Unfor- 

 tunately, the early legislators did not display the same foresight with respect 

 to forest lands as they did with agricultural lands. It is only recently that the 

 I^ublic has come to realize that it has been giving over to private owners lands 

 that ought to be held in perpetuity by the public itself. Agricultural lands 

 ought to be privately owned, but there are certain areas in mountain regions 

 and on soils not suited for cultivation which should be kept in forest growth 

 and just as extensively as possible owned or controlled by the public. 



A NEW PRINCIPLE IN OUR LAND POLICY 



A new principal has been introduced in our public land policy, namely, 

 that there are certain classes of land whose management vitally affects the 

 public interest and which cannot be mismanaged without grave danger of 

 direct injury to the public. Recognizing this principle, the government has 

 already withdrawn from sale a large proportion of the public forest lands 

 situated in the mountains, with a view to their protection and management 

 for the permanent benefit not only of the present but also the future interests 

 of the public. In the same way some of the states for public protection are 



