44 CIRCULAR 4 71, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



Furthermore, from the standpoint of the State Forest Service or 

 other forest owners, the work is cheap, because they put up only part 

 of the cost — generally quarters, tools and equipment, technical super- 

 vision, and a small cash contribution per man per day. 



From the beginning, the Labor Service has carried on projects on 

 both public and private forests. Projects on private land have to be 

 approved and sponsored by some public or quasi-public agency, such 

 as a commune or, usually, the local agency of the Reichsnahrstand, 

 the national farm organization. They must involve work that the 

 owner would not and could not do with his own resources, and must be 

 directed primarily toward benefiting the public rather than the private 

 owner. He is expected to pay as much of the cost as he can. The 

 policy in the last year or two has been to work mostly on public lands. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 



In central Europe generally, and in Germany particularly, securing 

 of the economic and social stability and well-being of the rural popula- 

 tion is definitely regarded as a major objective of forest-land manage- 

 ment. 



Forests managed so that they are continuously productive afford a 

 large volume of work, which recurs more or less regularly, year after 

 year. 



Forest work, much of which can best be done between late fall and 

 early spring, is especially suitable for supplementing farm work and 

 other rural employment. It is the major source of cash income for 

 large numbers of small farmers, especially in those parts of the country 

 where there are few other opportunities for outside employment. 



Besides the regular work required to operate the forests and utilize 

 their products, the development and improvement of forests affords 

 a huge reservoir of opportunities for socially useful emergency 

 employment. 



The experience of Germany and other countries of central Europe 

 demonstrates the advantage, from the social standpoint, of having 

 forests and forest industries widely distributed and in close proximity 

 to rural settlements. When that is the case, it is possible to have a 

 settled force of permanent workers, living in their own homes and 

 making their living partly from the forest and partly from their 

 farms or other occupations. Such workers are likely to take a keen 

 interest in maintaining the productivity of the forest. 



Large-scale mass production may be less desirable, from the social 

 standpoint, in forestry and most of the forest industries, than produc- 

 tion in relatively small and widely scattered units. Incidentally, 

 production in small units is usually better for the forest, because it is 

 less likely to involve excessive cutting over large areas. 



Woods work in Germany affords employment at the rate of one 

 person fully employed for approximately 100 acres of productive 

 forest land. Several times as many are actually employed, on a part- 

 time basis. Manufacture, processing, and distribution of forest 

 products employ perhaps twice as many persons as forestry and 

 logging. 



It is not likely that the forests of the United States, which has 4 

 acres of productive forest land per capita of population, can in the 

 near future provide employment at anywhere near the same rate as 



