298 MISC. PUBLICATION 218, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 
an abortive agricultural development or a decadent agriculture inter- 
spersed with a forest area there are usually tax difficulties for both 
forest and farm owners. In these regions the problem is not a 
product solely or mainly of a faulty political organization but rather 
of unwise land utilization. 
The traditional policy of government, both Federal and State, has 
been to get as much of the land as possible into private ownership. 
This policy has succeeded in a dispersion of the population and the 
building up of all parts of the country. It has, however, resulted in a 
rapid and wasteful exploitation of natural resources and an over- 
expansion of the agricultural industry. The latter effect has been 
intensified by the coincidence of the rapid disposal of public land for 
agricultural purposes with an equally rapid advance in the technic of 
agricultural production. Moreover, this rapid agricultural develop- 
ment has been characterized by no discriminate selection of land, and 
much of that brought into cultivation is of poor quality. The 
Nation’s agricultural area therefore contains millions of acres of land 
of low productivity, yielding little or no profit to the owners. 
Serious social and governmental problems have arisen out of this 
condition. As previously indicated, a scattered population necessi- 
tates high governmental costs, and the poor quality of the soil pro- 
duces small incomes with which to meet these costs. Many taxpayers 
default, and the loss in revenue necessitates a still higher tax rate. 
This, in turn, narrows the margin of solvency, causing further land 
abandonment and an accumulating volume of delinquency. In the 
Lake States millions of acres either have already reverted to the 
State or await only the final steps in foreclosure. The subject of 
delinquency has been elaborated in another part of this report (pt. 5) 
and need not be treated further at this point. 
The social aspects of the problem are no less distressing. Families 
anchored to marginal land are consigned to unremitting toil, a low 
standard of living, and blasted hopes. Their children are denied the 
opportunity to develop their faculties and thus may suffer the same 
handicaps and disappointments. The isolation of these scattered 
farms intensifies their barrenness. The limited population and the 
absence of inspiring leadership restrict and paralyze community insti- 
tutions and activities. One of the costs in the development of the land 
resources of the United States has been the dwarfed and wasted lives 
on the fringes of settlement. This sacrifice is no longer necessary. 
There is so much good land in this country that is not being used that 
it is unnecessary for farm families to be living at a subsistence level on 
marginal land. It is deplorable enough to witness one family strug- 
gling futilely year after year to wrest a living from a reluctant soil. 
It is inexcusable to permit a second family to try it after the first one 
has failed. There are areas that should never have been opened to 
settlement. However, since a mistaken land policy permitted or even 
encouraged their occupancy, the least that can now be done is to close 
them to further settlement. It even appears justifiable for the 
Government to hasten the depopulation of certain areas by aiding the 
few survivors to become reestablished in more favorable environments. 
There have.been some studies of land utilization as a basis for 
directing future settlement. In the succeeding paragraphs the scope 
and object of some of these studies will be presented. 
ES IE te AE ate a Pre to 
errs be Prnan 
