ISO 



FOKESTKY AND IRRIGATION 



April 



pective values. It is real ones, actual 

 ones, present ones that should be the 

 subjects of taxation. 



It is pertinent to remark that there 

 is more or less land in every county 

 in our State that is unsuited for the 

 general purposes of agriculture land 

 from which all merchantable timber 

 has been removed or killed by fire. 

 All such is subject to taxation under 

 our Constitution, and, as the law upon 

 stands, any trees that may now exist 

 there, or may come to grow upon it in 

 time, may be considered by the assess- 

 or as having a value, when, in fact, 

 the only value that can be conceived 

 is a prospective one. The assessor 

 may assume such value as he sees fit 

 and add it, increasing it each year, to 

 that of the land for the purposes of 

 taxation. That in our present system, 

 right in the face of the fact that no 

 revenue can be received for many 

 years, and the further fact that this 

 prospective value may be wiped out at 

 any time by fire or disease. At the 

 very best, land devoted to tree-grow- 

 ing cannot escape bearing a heavy bur- 

 den. It should be placed in a separate 

 class from that devoted to the general 

 purposes of agriculture. A little com- 

 putation will show how unequally it 

 stands when compared with others. 



It is certainly fair to assume that 

 three dollars per acre is the net annual 

 income from cultivated land after 

 taxes and all legitimate charges in cul- 

 tivating it have been considered. In 

 forty years the time required for 

 nearly all our valuable timber trees to 

 grow to be at all suitable for mer- 

 chantable timber, and most of them 

 require sixty or more years the sum 

 received will amount to $120. As the 

 owner gets the money each year he has 

 the use of it, and it is but right that 

 interest should be added. Simple in- 

 terest of five per cent would increase 

 the sum to $240, while compound in- 

 terest and that is what should be 

 reckoned would make it amount to 



$376.14- 



Now, take an acre upon which trees 

 shall be planted. No income at all 

 equal to cost of planting and care, up 



to forty years, can be received, except 

 in the case of one or two species of 

 quick -growing trees used for special 

 purposes, and, should no additional 

 tax consequent upon the growth of the 

 trees be put upon it, and a tax of only 

 three cents per acre be levied upon it 

 to meet the requirements of the Con- 

 stitution, the owner will, in forty 

 years, have paid out $1.20 in taxes, 

 and putting compound interest on this 

 the amount will be $3.76. One case 

 shows a gain of $376.14, and the other 

 a loss of $3.76, to say nothing of the 

 use of the money invested in planting 

 trees and caring for them. One shows 

 an annual net return of five per cent, 

 on land valued at $60 per acre that in 

 all probability was not assessed at one- 

 half that amount, and the other a loss 

 of three cents per acre on whatever 

 sum you choose co value the land at. 

 One must look in vain for uniformity 

 here. 



But what can be said in defence of 

 adding to the burden of the timber 

 land by assessing an assumed, pros- 

 pective value upon it? If such Shall 

 be persisted in it will amount to abso- 

 lute prohibition of reforestation in this 

 State. Under the very best system 

 that can be devised the owners of land 

 will not be eager to engage in an en- 

 terprise that will take so long a time 

 to materialize. 



But can a better system than that 

 now in vogue be devised ? That is the 

 problem before us, and it is a very 

 serious one. Taxation is a profound 

 and perplexing question and, at best, 

 must be a matter of compromise. 

 However, the task of reforming our 

 system will never be accomplished un- 

 less some plan shall be proposed, and, 

 claiming that a better plan is possible, 

 the following is put forth for consid- 

 eration : 



Let a board of competent freehold- 

 ers of the county be appointed by the 

 court, or elected for that purpose, 

 whose duty it shall be to fix a valua- 

 tion on any and all lands which the 

 owners thereof shall elect to devote 

 exclusive to growing trees of such 

 species as are suitable for merchant- 



