AN AUSTRALIAN STUDY OF AMERICAN FORESTRY. a7 
near each forest unit, but a forest should not be shredded by alienations to a 
point making protection, general administration or application of forest 
management unpractical. In the progress of settlement a point is ultimately 
reached where a choice must be made between refusing to list additional areas 
or abandoning the entire forest unit, regardless of the character of the 
remaining lands. 
“Not always will it be either possible or practicable to fairly appraise 
the agricultural or forest value of a given tract of land by the apparent value 
of each small unit of area for a given purpose. Agricultural lands are most 
valuable when subdivided into reasonably small farm units, but forest lands 
are most valuable when handled in large unbroken units.” 
“Because of this, care should be taken where great forest value is at 
stake, to define the boundaries of the forest unit,” which will then become a 
permanent retention area, even though certain tracts therein when valued 
without relation to the surrounding area, appear to have agricultural possi- 
bilities. : 
In a few special cases, it will be necessary to appraise the land by large 
units and define such units as permanent retention areas. By classes such 
cases may be— 
(1.) Where the listing of the land without agricultural soil would 
shred a large area of forest land without resulting gain 
sufficient to offset the loss which must follow because the 
remaining-forest area cannot be practically managed. 
(2.) Where a considerable area of forest is clearly of great economic 
value to the nation or State, and an attempt to transform it 
into an agricultural country might result’ in irreparable 
disaster by disturbing a well established climatic or economic 
equilibrium (as in the case of the Pilliga Forest of New South 
Wales). 
(3.) Where small areas in their present condition are found to be of 
little forest value and but slightly greater agricultural value 
when viewed without relation to the surrounding area, but 
are entirely surrounded by forest lands of a very valuable 
type, they should be retained if necessary to preserve, the 
integrity of the area as a practical forest unit. Such areas, 
by a little work or expense, may often be made a producing 
part of a well-rounded and logical forest unit and thereby 
greatly increase its value for that purpose. 
Watershed protection is'one of the dominant purposes of the forest. 
Under no circumstances should land be released which is necessary for this 
purpose. 
“This refers not only to the alienation of slopes which should be retained 
as a whole under public control, but to the bottoms of gulches where the 
removal of the tree or brush cover would, in the long run, result in a scouring 
by the flood waters with disastrous effects on the waterflow. Watersheds from 
their very nature must be handled and considered as large units. 
“Under no circumstances should land in an important watershed be listed 
if the slope is so great that the soil is certain to-be washed to such an extent 
as to destroy the fertility of the land.” 
The law prohibits the alienation of land “where such action would injure 
the National Forest,” or where the land is required for public purposes. 
