tinuous production, and encourage them to practice the best 
kind of forest management. 
The amount that some forest lands can produce is so low 
and the rate of growth so slow that private owners will not 
ordinarily attempt to grow timber on them. Other lands . 
lie in such rough or inaccessible country that they have little 
attraction for the owners after the original timber is cut: 
and still other lands have been so denuded as to offer no 
prospect of income for many decades. There are also cer- 
tain areas where acute problems of watershed protection, or 
need for protection or development of recreational and scenic 
values, or other public interest outweighs the interests of a 
single owner. For many such lands, public purchase and 
administration is a logical answer. 
A necessary corollary of public ownership, of course, is 
adequate provision for the protection, development, and 
utilization of the public forests. 
Destructive timber cutting may have far-reaching effects. 
It may dry up a neighbor’s water supply, or contribute to 
flood damage hundreds of miles away. It may undermine 
the welfare of whole communities. It may deprive us of 
material that may later be essential for national defense 
and security. (In World War II our armed forces used a 
greater tonnage of forest products than of steel.) Jt is to 
the public interest therefore that our forest lands, regardless 
of ownership, be properly handled. 
Adequate measures to keep our remaining forests produc- 
tive, and to restore the growing stock on our depleted forest 
lands, would open up new opportunities for business activity 
and develop new sources of national income. They would 
help to make the one-third of our country that is forest land 
supply a continuous abundance of products and services for 
the welfare of our citizens. 
