\3. OF M. SEEKS ACTION. 



They want to know what denudation of North Michigan lands has 

 to do with lumber costs and the shortage of houses in big towns and 

 little, and they want to know why fence posts are costing so much in 

 a "timber state," and so on. But assembling these facts as to ownership 

 of lands in detail, as to the precise character rather than the market 

 value only, of the lands and their hereditaments, is no part of the state 

 assessors' business. They haven't any appropriation for such work. 

 They think the matter might well be attended to. 



But one concrete suggestion was encountered in a rather lengthy 

 inquiry into this matter. It appears that the University of Michigan 

 extension department, sensing the interest in and importance of this 

 nation-wide inquiry into forest products and the forest industry, wants 

 to do something. If money could be found to finance the job, the 

 assessors at Lansing would be more than willing to let the skilled 

 students the University sends out have the use of the field books. It 

 seems to be up to the University Board of Regents. 



Outside of areas which the state acquired from Government land 

 grants in the old days, and virtually all of which went long since in 

 sales to lumbermen and homesteaders, and grants to educational 

 institutions, the state's land as we find them today, the million acres 

 spoken of at the beginning of this article, are lands forfeited to the 

 state since 1893, when the state tax homestead law went into effect. 



MANY ACRES FORFEITED. 



By operation of this law, turning back to the state land once deeded 

 to private persons but on which they failed to pay taxes, a total of 

 2,300,000 acres have passed through the auditor-general's hands. He 

 has resold to homesteaders since 1895 a total of 445,798 acres. So much 

 for the first effort of the colonizer and land developer to develop for 

 agriculture and allied industries the cut-over lands left by the lumber- 

 man. How well it succeeded in the palmy development days may be 

 judged from the fact that 190,598 acres were later forfeited to the state 

 again for non-payment of taxes. Homesteaders retain title to this day 

 in the remaining 255,200 acres. 



The reversions that are going on now, adding to the state's owner- 

 ship land at the rate of 3,000 acres a month come, some of them, from 

 these retained homesteads, but the largest part now, as formerly, from 

 the old-time lumber companies or their successors who are holding 

 their cut-over lands hoping for what, who knows? Exploitation for 

 agriculture grows annually less hopeful, and yet prices for cut-over 

 lands are rising. If you ask why, the answer is that, still hoping to 

 ^ell, the owner must double his sale price every 10 years to catch up 

 with his tax outlay and the compounded interest on his investment. 



The state lands are in the hands of the auditor general, as "land 

 agent." He sells when he can, trades with other Governmental owners 

 when they have land the state wants, and turns the rest over to the 

 Public Domain Commission to run as a business undertaking for the 

 state. 



REPLANTING IS TASK. 



He has turned over the 650,000 acres spoken of above, and adds to 

 it virtually all of the 3,000 acres that are coming in every month. The 

 Public Domain Commission, like the auditor-general with the residue 

 of the state lands, carries on a business of buy, sell and barter, to con- 

 solidate its holdings and organize them for business administration. 

 The real business of the commission is to conserve what resources are 



16 



