EDITORIAL 



SPEAK A WORD FOR FOREST EXPERIMENT STATIONS 



fT^ HE time for talking in support of forest experiment 

 stations ought to be long past, as it is in the case 

 of agricultural experiment stations. Unfortunately, such 

 is not the case. A lot of talking remains to be done, and 

 if foresters and those interested in forestry do not do it, 

 who will? 



The fact that the need for forest experiment sta- 

 tions is obvious to the forester does not mean that it is 

 equally obvious to other people. The present status of 

 forest experiment stations is proof thereof. Ag a mat- 

 ter of fact, the conception of a forest experiment station 

 held by the man in the street is about as clear as a foggy 

 night. Appreciation of the need for experiment stations 

 is imperative because they are as necessary to the pro- 

 gress of forestry as agricultural experiment stations are 

 to the progress of farming. Without -adequate and 

 properly equipped experiment stations, we can not hope 

 to handle the forest problem efficiently and economically. 



There has been much talk pro and con about forest 

 fires, taxation, legislation, the need for this, and the 

 need for that, but relatively little has been said for 

 forest experiment stations. Perhaps it is because the 

 need is so obvious. We hope so but are inclined to be 

 skeptical in view of the present status of forest experi- 

 ment stations in this country. We have to deal with some 

 463,000,000 acres of forest land. Some of it is well 

 forested, a large part of it is poorly forested and over 



80,000,000 acres is an idle waste. We have got to learn 

 how to make this land most productive in producing 

 timber. To do that we have, among other things, got 

 to attract private capital to it. The surest way to do 

 that is to demonstrate what these lands are capable of 

 doing in the way of forest production. We could, to 

 be sure, go ahead on a guess and try plan and make 

 some very costly mistakes and encounter many delays 

 in solving the many problems involved. One may search 

 all night in the dark for a penny which he could have 

 found in a few seconds with a tiny light. 



Foresters are quite often criticized because they can 

 not make definite statements or predictions with respect 

 to forest growth and forest practice under many con- 

 ditions. They would be foolish in attempting to do so 

 where definite knowledge is lacking. Forestry and the 

 utilization of forest lands in this country must be worked 

 out through the forest experiment stations in exactly 

 the same way that agriculture is being developed through 

 the agricultural experiment stations. The area of im- 

 proved farm lands in the United States is only slightly 

 in excess of the area of forest lands. The farm lands 

 are producing annually products ten times greater in 

 value than the forest lands, but the Government is 

 spending for agricultural experiment stations and for 

 agricultural research one hundred times the amount it 

 is spending for forest experiment stations. 



FEDERAL TAXATION OF FOREST PRODUCTS 



'T'HE recent decision of the Supreme Court of the 

 United States, declaring the Child Labor Tax Law 

 to be unconstitutional, is now the subject of much specu- 

 lation among foresters because of the possible appli- 

 cation of the court's decision to certain forestry legis- 

 lation which has been proposed. That which seems 

 most likely to fall within the scope of the court's decision 

 is embraced in the Capper bill, the constitutionaHty of 

 which has been challenged by some ever since it was 

 proposed. 



A comparison of the principles of the Capper bill and 

 the Child Labor Tax Law indicate that in essential 

 points they are much alike. 



The title of the Capper Bill is "A bill to control forest 

 devastation to raise a revenue from forest products, and 

 for other purposes." It includes within its provisions 

 "all private land within the United States which is now 

 or hereafter in forest ;" and it defines forest devastation 

 as "the harvesting of a forest crop otherwise than in 

 compliance with standards established by regional and 



local regulations," which are to be made by the Secretary 

 of Agriculture from time to time "to secure a continuous 

 succession of forest crops of reasonable quantity and 

 quality." 



It requires every operator to classify as standard 

 products, or as products below standard, all products 

 produced by him during each year, and to make return 

 thereof. It imposes upon every operator an excise tax 

 on the privilege of harvesting forest crops of 5 cents per 

 thousand board feet in respect of standard products, 

 and of $5 per thousand board feet in respect to products 

 below standard. It authorizes the Secretary of Agri- 

 culture and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, to 

 cause any officer or agent designated by either of them 

 to examine records, accounts, books, papers, or memo- 

 randa. And for untrue classification or false record or 

 evasion of tax it prescribes a fine of not more than $5,000 

 or imprisonment for not more than one year or both. 



The Child Labor Tax Law provides that every person 

 operating any mill, cannery, workshop, factory, or manu- 

 facturing establishment in which children under fourteen 



