CORRESPONDENCE 



Shall Wood Prices Be Raised in Order to Secure Conservation? 



A Letter 



In considering the important problem of 

 Forestry Conservation there should be some 

 general first principles recognized by all par- 

 ties concerned. On the one hand, the tim- 

 ber owner naturally wishes to market his 

 product at the lowest possible expense and 

 the usual corporate ownership cannot prop- 

 erly recognize sentimental considerations as 

 against stockholders' interests. On the other 

 hand, we have a general public interest rep- 

 resented by political leaders and also by the 

 few altruistic citizens who give their time 

 and thought for the general interest as they 

 see it. The timber owner must first think of 

 his own interests. Is it not possible that the 

 interests of all might be conserved by one 

 happy solution of the problem? 



It is said that timber is being cut off four 

 times as fast as new growth will replace it. 

 There is very little replanting of timber in 

 the country, especially as increase in popu- 

 tion turns timber land into farm land when- 

 ever feasible. Increase in population also 

 increases the possibility of forest fires. We 

 are certainly approaching a timber famine 

 and other countries are not in position to 

 help us out in any really corrective way. 



Now, while value is supposed to be set- 

 tled by supply and demand, the supply at any 

 period as compared with the demand for a 

 series of years does not necessarily show its 

 proper effect on prices. For instance, sup- 

 posing our timber supply to actually repre- 

 sent but fifteen years' consumption, there will 

 be timber enough so that the scarcity might 

 not be actually felt for ten years at least 

 and timber owners might accept customary 

 prices during that period. Within the next 

 five years, timber might rise in value several 

 hundred per cent. 



Since we cannot, even by replanting, pro- 

 vide a proper amount of new timber within 

 any reasonable period and since the govern- 

 ment conservation policy is withdrawing tim 

 berland from the market, the only possible 

 regulating factor is the price of timber in 

 the market. Those, therefore, who are con- 

 scientiously interested in the problem 

 should favor a rise in price that will not 

 only lessen the demand but encourage the 

 use of concrete and steel construction and 

 also make it possible for the timber owners 

 to possibly use suggested methods of a pro- 

 618 



tective nature in forestry operations. To 

 bring about this result, there should be an 

 educational campaign which should make 

 the timber owners realize the true value of 

 their holdings, in view of the coming 

 scarcity, and prompt them to demand prices 

 more in conformity with the situation. 



An unthinking element of the population 

 might very naturally protest against higher 

 prices for building materials, but the public 

 could better stand a reasonable increase 

 over a term of years, rather than face prac- 

 tically prohibitive prices at some definite 

 future date. There is far more reason for 

 a legitimate increase in the price of timber 

 than for any other raw material. New 

 gold and silver deposits are discovered 

 every dav. There is no hidden supply of 

 timber. New wheat fields are being planted 

 in the Canadian Northwest but no new 

 areas of land are being planted with timber. 

 There is some talk about our coal being 

 used up within two hundred years, but this 

 is disputed by those who think that we have 

 several thousands of years' supply in Alaska. 

 Even were coal to be used up in two hun- 

 dred years, there are plenty of possible sub- 

 stitutes, while we are facing a possible fam- 

 ine in timber within fifteen years and for 

 countless uses there is no substitute. 



The writer is financially interested in 

 large timber tracts in the United States. 

 Canada and South America and thus has a 

 more or less selfish interest in the oroposi- 

 tion, but this seems to be a case where the 

 selfish interests of the timber owner and 

 the real interests of the whole country are 

 uniform. 



Yours very trulv, 



GEORGE OTIS DRAPER. 



New York City. 



The main contentions in this communica- 

 tion are two in number : First, that timber 

 owners are justified in demanding higher 

 prices for their wares ; and second, that the 

 consumer, if fully informed and enlightened, 

 should be willing to pay the higher prices 

 demanded. Let us examine the interests of 

 the timber owners and of the consumer 

 separately. 



I. The timber oumers. To justify tim- 

 ber owners in advancing wood prices, two 



