Zoning to prevent indiscriminate settlement has been 

 used effectively elsewhere in the United States and could 

 'jrned to good purpose in northern Idaho. Through 

 j.ible but misguided and futile attempts to carve farms 

 '■rat of forest areas suitable only tor growing trees, the 

 settler is abusing the land and doing himself no good. 

 County zoning to prevent this would have the added 

 merit of reducing the costs of providing schools, roads, 

 and other public services. 



Cooperative Management 



On the other hand, if the forest economy is to be stabilized 

 and basic plans to that end are to be evolved, the mill 

 owner and the community must have assurance that the 

 timber in a given unit will be available when the time for 

 cutting comes. In addition to cooperation between pri- 

 vate individuals, it is necessary that the public, as an 

 important owner, be a party to the contract and make 

 binding commitments for the future. At the present 

 time, however. State and national-forest timber disposed 

 of in any quantity must be sold under a competitive bid, 

 which precludes earmarking any portion of the resource 

 for a mill or group of mills. The dangers inherent in 

 eliminating competition from timber sales and in basing 

 them on administrative decision are readily apparent. Yet 

 these dangers can be avoided in large part by subjecting all 

 transactions to full publicity, and by setting up adequate 

 checks to insure fair play. It is imperative to untie the 

 hands which manage the public timber so that future 

 commitments can be made. 



Acquisition 



In the ownership discussion, the patchwork nature of 

 the holdings was pointed out. In view ot the private 

 liquidation, it is desirable to have the public forests 

 blocked out in compact units, probably by exchange. 

 While the private operator may not be expected, under 

 present conditions, to hold back the cutting of his timber, 

 he does have a real community obligation to help block 

 out public holdings, especially since by an equitable ex- 

 change he would suffer no monetary loss. 



Regulation of cutting practices and zoning, although 

 very necessary to remedy immediate ills, are no more than 

 stopgaps in the handling ot much of the area now privately 

 owned. If any one thing has been demonstrated clearly 

 in the preceding pages, it is that private individuals are 

 not likely to continue indefinitely in the timber-growing 

 business on a very considerable portion of the private area 

 not in farms. The sooner the inevitable is accepted and 

 steps are taken to speed the transfer of such lands to 

 public ownership, the better for forest conservation in 

 northern Idaho. Acquisition by purchase is the quickest 

 and surest way of enlarging the public forests, but any 

 extensive purchases are probably beyond the means of 

 the State and the counties. In any Federal program of 



purchases, the desirability ot acquiring Idaho lands must 

 be weighed against the advantages to be derived from 

 expenditure of the same money in the South, in the Lake 

 States, or elsewhere. Therefore, it is difficult to say how 

 far the Nation can go in purchasing lands in northern 

 Idaho. This must be decided on a Nation-wide basis. 



This acquisition problem can be attacked locally through 

 the avenue ot tax delinquency. Prompt foreclosure and 

 no resale of tax-delinquent forest lands classified as unsuit- 

 able for agricultural development will save these areas 

 from complete ruination through the desperate attempt 

 of tax-sale purchasers to extract the last dollar from them 

 without regard to consequences. Instead, these lands 

 should be transferred to the State or the Federal Govern- 

 ment. They may be donated or exchanged for timber 

 which can be sold. However, the exchange possibilities 

 are limited. Any expansion of the State's ownership 

 should be preceded by the development of a well-rounded 

 and fully supported State forestry program. Since this 

 is an Idaho problem, the State should assume as much 

 of the responsibility as it can bear. 



There is the danger, often pointed out by the objectors 

 to expanded public acquisition, that the areas acquired 

 may include tracts suitable tor private ownership. No 

 such weakness can be found in an expansion program 

 primarily directed toward the acquisition of tax-foreclosed 

 lands. The same is true in the case of acquisition of lands 

 by donation from the private owner, when these lands 

 would otherwise become tax delinquent. In general, 

 prolonged tax delinquency of forest land is prima-tacie 

 evidence that the area involved has failed to meet the 

 requirements for successful private ownership. Thus, no 

 one can fairly contend that the donation of such land 

 infringes on the field of private enterprise. It the private 

 owner, with reasonable public assistance, is required to 

 treat his forest land properly as long as he holds it, and it 

 comes to the public in a producing state, no great loss is 

 involved in waiting for this process ot public acquisition 

 to run its course. 



The specter of a reduced tax base has made, and prob- 

 ably will continue to make, the county officials hesitate 

 to donate tax lands to the Federal Government. It is 

 true that a small temporary loss of revenues will result, 

 but more is at stake than a few tax dollars. The future 

 earning power of these lands is involved. The same tax 

 argument against public acquisition might have been 

 made many years ago in the Lake States. Yet tax pay- 

 ments stopped when the lands were wrecked, and many 

 acres in that region will be a liability for a long time in the 

 future. 



Summary of Action Needed 



What is the biggest cause for concern about the northern 

 Idaho forest situation.'' It is that, human nature being 

 what it is, the present trend will continue and conditions 



60 



