236 FOREST VALUATION 



insufficient time has elapsed since logging began on the virgin 

 forest, the fact that young timber will grow into a valuable 

 merchantable stand, or second growth, is not generally appreci- 

 ated. The forester, a specialist on appraisal of growing timber, 

 can estimate this value on its true basis. But the public will 

 place a much lower estimate on the property, or may ignore 

 altogether the element represented by the young timber and 

 value the land itself on an arbitrary basis not related to its 

 use for forest production, but based on grazing or other uses. 



Purchasers of land follow a sound policy in acquiring it at as 

 low a value as possible, and if bought for forestry they gain 

 by this condition of undeveloped sale values. But as a basis for 

 classification, the acceptance of existing sale values of land and 

 young timber, merely because the public are not familiar with 

 true values, is wholly inexcusable. When this condition is 

 further aggravated by accepting an inflated agricultural value 

 for unimproved stump lands, the comparison is unfavorable to 

 the securing of a true and lasting classification. 



246. Discrimination against Forest Values. Where eco- 

 nomic pressure is strong for the listing and opening of lands for 

 new settlers, the tendency is to deliberately ignore the expec- 

 tation value of young timber as well as of the land, and to con- 

 sider only the mature timber as indicating the sum of forest 

 values. Or, perhaps, the forest value of the land is recognized, 

 but not that of young trees. This is even more inconsistent 

 than the first plan. The argument is advanced that the value 

 of young timber will not be realized for many years while that 

 of agricultural crops applies to the present moment. But if 

 these timber values are based on present stumpage prices ( 195) 

 and properly discounted to the present, it must be evident from 

 the discussion in Chapter VI that expectation value is a true 

 present value, strictly comparable with that for agriculture 

 ( 244). Rejection of such appraisal can be justified only in two 

 ways, when forest values are actually less than agricultural 

 values for stump land, or on the basis of political expediency. 



247. Discrimination in Favor of Forest Values. The rec- 

 ognition of increasing future prices brings an element of specu- 



