oie MISC. PUBLICATION 218, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 
lands in the process of reversion to county ownership. Most recently, 
the original 1927 law was again amended by the acts of June 28, 1933, 
July 13, 1933, and July 31, 1933 (S. L., ch. 327, pp. 683-690; ch. 411, 
pp. 877, 878; ch. 491 (sec. 4), D. 1204). 
Oregon’ S yield- tax law is that of February 20, 1929 (S. L., ch. 138, 
p. 107), which is based in part on the draft of a law then and for 
some time previously under consideration for Washington and in part 
on the Wisconsin law of 1927. 
Idaho followed closely after Oregon with enactment of the act of 
March 14, 1929 (S. L., ch. 185, p. 8329). Then by the act of March 
2, 1931 (S. L., ch. 71, p. 124), the procedure of classification was 
amended in certain particulars. 
Washington, by the act of March 12, 1931 (S. L., ch. 40, p. 117), 
finally achieved the yleld-tax goal for which State forestry. interests 
had been striving since 1910. 
Meanwhile three other States, ignoring the yield-tax idea, adopted 
legislative programs reminiscent of the old regime. Thus California, 
by senate constitutional amendment no. 10 (Laws, 1925, ch. 36, 
p. 1327, filed with the secretary of state, Apr. 17, 1925), which was 
ratified at the general election of 1926, reverted to the old-regime 
form of exemption. This was made effective on all immature forest 
trees, either planted or of natural origin, growing on land from which 
at least 70 percent of the merchantable original-growth timber over 
16 inches in diameter had been removed. Maturity was left to be 
determined by a board after the trees had been exempt for a period 
of at least 40 years. 
This constitutional amendment was unique and an innovation in 
forest-tax legislation in that it required no session law to make it 
effective and no classification of individual properties; it was uni- 
versally applicable to all forests answering the description set forth 
in the constitutional provision. 
Virginia, by the identical acts of March 25, 1930 (S. L., ch. 399, 
p. 841; ch. 421, p. 912), provided for the leasing of certain privately 
owned lands by the State for forest, fish, and game purposes, in 
consideration of a grant to the owner of the privilege of deferring the 
payment of the current property taxes thereon and paying them, 
together with interest at 6 percent, at the time the timber is cut. 
The law is in a measure similar to the Kentucky law passed 10 days 
earlier. 
Delaware, the last State to adopt a forest-tax law, enacted one of 
the old-regime type, granting a 30-year exemption. This was pro- 
vided in section 2 of the act of March 12, 1931 (S. L., ch. 72, p. 287), 
an act amending the general forestry law, namely, chapter 50 of 1927 
DEVELOPMENT OF FOREST-TAX EXPEDIENTS 
About two decades ago the yield tax began to be rather widely 
adopted. The purpose was to promote the practice of forestry by 
means of establishing a sound principle of taxation to take the place 
of such concessions as exemptions, bounties, and rebates. The sub- 
sequent history of forest-tax legislation has been marked by the 
adoption of a series of expedients, whose chief purpose was tomake 
the yield-tax principle workable. Each of these expedients, at the 
