FOREST ECONOMICS. 253 



From now on the forester curtails his annual cut. 

 The forest does not contain hypermature trees. Only 

 that number of feet is annually cut, selected from the 

 largest and best trees left, whch will e(iula the annual 

 productiveness of the ground, say 40 million feet. A 

 large production we cannot expect on pine soil. Were 

 the soil better, producing annually 300 or 400 feet per 

 acre, then agriculture should occupy it, which on rich 

 soil, without a doubt, is the most remunerative business. 



Poor soil, rough climate, steep mountains, are the 

 domain of forestry. Under reversed conditions, agri- 

 culture ought to monopolize the use of the ground, and, 

 be it after lumbering or after forestry,the ground should 

 be made ready for the plough as rapidly as possible. 



But we must return to our example: As long as the 

 forester, after withdrawing from the forests in 12^ years 

 the extraordinary surplus of primeval trees, restricts the 

 annual harvest to the amount of the annual production, 

 the forest will act like the hen laying golden eggs. Forty 

 million feet is, we have assumed, our annual production. 



The trees grow, as sure as the sun shines and as sure as 

 the rain falls — sunshine, air, and water being the main 

 factors of wood fibre. In years of low prices the forester 

 will restrict or stop cutting; in years of good prices he 

 will double or treble the output — always, however, 

 keeping close to the average of 40 million per year. 



The lumberman is an economic nomad, shifting his 

 business from one tract to the other, and taking one risk 

 after the other. 



The forester is an economic settler, sticking to the 

 original place of investment and continuing on it a business 

 which he has once found remunerative. 



He does not, of course, stick to the original total 

 amount invested; he begins with 6,000 feet per acre, he 

 continues with, say, 1,800 feet per acre. He keeps on the 



