are held by a variety of individuals and companies: 
Railroads, mining and land concerns, large estates, 
institutional and private investors, speculators, and 
even a few farmers. Policies are diverse and usually 
not conducive to good forestry. In the case of 
railroad, mining-company, and some institutional 
or estate forests, ownership—though incidental to 
other aims—is reasonably stable. Here there is 
usually a sound basis for good forestry though the 
opportunities for the most part are going begging. 
In many other instances ownership—by banks, 
mortgagors, private investors, and the like—is tem- 
porary and affords poor prospect for private for- 
estry. Yet even temporary owners have a stake in 
protection and other measures that would safeguard 
their. investment. 
In assessing the progress by larger owners one 
question naturally arises: Whence has come the 
upturn in forestry practice and is it permanent? 
The declining supply of timber, growing public 
awareness of the seriousness of the forest situation, 
and a tendency to associate destructive practices 
with large-scale private ownership doubtless have 
been important factors. Spurred on by such con- 
siderations, the timber-trade and other industrial 
associations have publicized forest conservation and 
have encouraged members to put it into practice. 
But the present movement has gained momentum 
largely because of the favorable economic climate 
in which these forces have operated. Demand and 
prices for forest products have been high. Forest- 
land prices in many cases have until recently been 
low. High income-tax rates have, in effect, re- 
duced the net cost of expenditures for forestry. 
The whole movement may mark the beginning of 
a long upward trend. Or it may level off if eco- 
nomic conditions become less favorable. 
Despite these encouraging advances, the fact re- 
mains that more than half the land in medium and 
large holdings is without purposeful forestry 
management.4> ‘There are as yet few examples of 
private timber growing where long waiting is in- 
volved. A waxing private interest in forest conser- 
vation where market and growth conditions are 
favorable should not obscure the unmet challenge 
of many millions of other acres whose output is 
needed to help fill the Nation’s wood box but whose 
depleted condition or small return is unattractive 
to private enterprise unless heavy public support is 
forthcoming. 
“See section How Timberlands Are Being Managed, 
pp. 46-51. 
Forests and National Prosperity 
Small Forest Owners: The Heart of the 
Problem 
The more formidable obstacles in private for- 
estry center, however, on the more than 4 million 
small properties which total about three-fourths of 
the private land. Their large number and small 
size, the variable aims and skill with which they 
are handled, and the unstable ownership and man- 
agement of many—these are knotty factors which 
long have blocked efforts to get forest conservation 
into more general practice. 
The 139 million acres of farm woods are held 
largely in conjunction with property managed for 
other purposes. To the individual farmer, his 
woodland is usually a minor resource. Yet farm 
woodland is the largest category of forest land, and 
hence is of great national importance. 
Farm ownership generally affords a favorable set- 
ting for forestry. It is comparatively stable and 
enables a maximum of on-the-ground managerial 
attention. Farm forestry requires little cash out- 
lay. Mostly it utilizes time not fully employed on 
other farm jobs. | 
Public policy has long sought to make woodland 
management an integral part of the farm business. 
However, such management is not yet extensively 
practiced. With the greatest opportunities for in- 
tensive forestry, farmers still lack, as a class, the 
knowledge and incentives to practice it. Even with 
the advances that have been made in aiding farm 
forestry—in education, technical assistance, and in- 
centive payments—most farm woodlands are still 
the back yard of the farm, subjected to thoughtless 
cutting, pasturing, and burning. 
The 125 million acres of other small holdings 
are in many respects a more difficult problem. 
They have received little if any attention in aid 
programs, yet are an inseparable part of the agri- 
cultural problem of rural people and of rural land. 
Furthermore, forestry on both nonfarm and farm 
properties is beset by similar handicaps which call 
for much the same remedial program. 
The small nonfarm woodlands, like the larger 
properties, are held by people and companies of 
the widest diversity of purposes as owners. Many 
become owners by default, by inheritance, or in 
some other fortuitous manner. Some have put 
money into timber. Some are sawmill operators. 
Many are investors in minerals or in potential 
farming sites, and the forest to them is secondary. 
Still others hold the land for a variety of purposes, 
95 
