FORESTRY COMMISSION. 49 



should lead the urbau population to heartily support a moderate and 

 equitable tax rate for the farmers' woodlots. 



This article, however, is intended to refer especially to the woodlot con- 

 ditions us I have found them in Jlichigan,. It is perhaps hardly neces- 

 sary to say that these conditions are exceedingly unsatisfactory. A very 

 few farmers, indeed, have made any real effort to improve this portioii of 

 their farms, ond those who ha-\e done so have in many cases made very 

 serious mistakes. Such mistakes "were inevitable, for the farmers have 

 not had access to information regarding correct methods of handling 

 woodlands. The necessity itself for better methods is a comparatively 

 recent development. The average ]Michigan farmer of today well remem- 

 bers when the trees were regarded as the natural enemies of the tiller of 

 the soil, and their removal was the farmers' greatest labor. The change 

 in the times has come without bringing the knowledge necessary tO' meet 

 the changed conditions. It is a most unfortunate fact that knowledge of 

 correct methods of woodland management cannot be learned experiment- 

 ally by the average farmer, as is the case to a greater or less extent with 

 almost all other farming operations. Time element alone makes this a 

 practical impossibility — years and even decades being often required for 

 a demonstration, instead of days or weeks. Aside from this, few, if any, 

 farmers have had the requisite training to enable them to carry out any 

 really careful forestry investigation. The result has been that in the 

 absence of instruction almost every etfort for improvement has been merely 

 guess W0'rk,while the great majority of farmers have not interested them- 

 selves in the matter. 



The average Michigan farm contains about SG acres. Of this area 58 

 acres are recorded as improved and 28 acres as unimproved. It is probable 

 that three acres per farm would on the average be a liberal reduction 

 from the unimproved land for such waste areas as are unsuited for tree 

 growth. This leaves an area of 25 acres which is at present occupied by 

 trees or capable of being so occupied. This gives a woodlot area of over 

 5,000,00(1 acres on the 210,000 farms of the State. As already suggested, 

 it is sadly true that the term "unimproved" is not inaptly applied to these 

 5,000,000 acres, for there is nearly or quite one-half of this area, which, 

 in its present condition, is all but wholly unproductive, and on the remain- 

 ing portion, as already indicated, there has been, but little effort expended 

 til at would entitle any considerable portion to be classed as "improved." 



The value of the woodlot product of Michigan has already been referred 

 to as amounting to 17,530,000 in 1899 — a sum which compares favorably 

 with the combined products of the orchard, grapery and small fruit gar- 

 den, which in the same year totaled |5,860,000 for the State. When we 

 recall that about one-half of the unimproved area of the farms is at present 

 all but wholly unproductive, it will be seen that the producing area has 

 yielded about |3.t)0 per acre to the woodlot owners in 1899. Michigan 

 enjoys the distinction of having a lai'ger return acre for acre from her 

 woodlots than any other State in the Union. Were this assuredly a hona 

 fide income, it would be a matter for congratulation. That it is largely 

 a result of the stripping of the land at an unusually rapid rate is evi- 

 denced by the very unsatisfactory conditions for wood production ob- 

 taining on the average woodlot, and by the rapidity with which the wood- 

 lots are disappearing in the four southern tiers of counties. 



This view of the importance of the woodlot as a producer of future tim- 



