AN AUSTRALIAN STUDY OF AMERICAN FORESTRY. 85 
(2.) Lands wholly or in part covered with timber or undergrowth, or 
cut over lands which are more valuable for the production of 
trees than for agricultural crops, and lands densely stocked 
with young trees having a prospective value greater than the 
value of the land for agricultural purposes, should be retained 
within the National Forests. 
(3.) Lands not either wholly or in part covered with timber or 
undergrowth which are located above timber line within the 
forest boundary or in small bodies scattered through the forest, 
making elimination impracticable on limited areas which are 
necessarily included for a proper administrative boundary 
line, should be retained within the National Forests. 
(4.) Lands not either wholly or in part “covered with timber or 
undergrowth except as provided for in the preceding para- 
graphs, upon which it is not expected to grow trees, should 
be eliminated from the National Forests.” 
This is boundary work, and each forest in its entirety and all large units 
of forest land must meet the requirements of those four rules, or otherwise 
should be eliminated. 
The “principles and procedure governing the classification and segrega~ 
tion of agricultural lands” under the Homestead Laws of 1906 and 1912 are 
likewise laid down and set forth in the publication bearing that title. 
Here the Forest Service only was concerned ; it was “ directed and required 
to select, classify, and segregate as soon as practicable, all lands within the 
boundaries of National Forests that may be opened to settlement,” those lands 
were such as, in its opinion, might be occupied for agricultural purposes, 
without injury to the forest reserves and which were not needed for public 
purposes. 
Classification was left practically in its hands. 
The policy of classification has been minutely worked out, and carefully 
standardised. 
By “agriculture” was understood the production of farm crops under 
established farm methods. 
But “land that would produce timber may also produce certain farm crops 
in a limited way, with sufficient expenditure of money and labour.” It was 
deemed out of the question, therefore, “to attempt to segregate from the 
timber land all land having agricultural characteristics.” 
It was felt that to “warrant its segregation for settlement the land must 
have sufficient positive value for agriculture to make probable its occupancy 
and use for that purpose. The soil must be cultivable and capable of 
permanent agricultural use.” 
The requirements were, therefore, laid down— 
(1.) The land must have a positive value for agriculture. 
(2.) It must be of greater permanent value for agriculture than for 
the primary purpose for which the forests were created, viz., 
timber production or watershed protection. 
(3.) Its occupancy for farm purposes must not injure the National 
Forest. 
(4.) It must not be.needed for public purposes. 
