66 BULLETIN 149 7, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
probable yields, and returns for their particular lands. This service 
should be so extended that advice could be given not only to those 
who apply for it but also to other owners of denuded forest land, by 
active efforts to reach and interest them in forest planting. The 
advice might take the form of preparation of planting plans for 
individual owners. Assistance and education similar to this is now 
being provided through the extension foresters at the agricultural 
colleges in each of the three States. Demonstrations and meetings 
are planned to reach local groups and thus to interest and stimu- 
late them to undertake planting by their own efforts. 
Different forms of cooperation between landowners and the State 
can be worked out to overcome some of the usual obstacles to private 
planting. A plan was suggested several years ago for the formation 
of reforestation corporations by State law for the purpose of grow- 
ing forests and obtaining a profit from cutting them. The State was 
to have two-fifths representation on the board of directors. The cap- 
ital stock was to be based on the land owned. The growing timber 
would be exempt from taxes during the period of its growth. The 
State was to loan money, if necessary, to start the planting and to 
carry the enterprise through the period before the forest crops ma- 
tured and began to produce income. 
More recently, a suggestion has been made, to encourage the re- 
forestation of private land by cooperative agreement between the 
owners and State, under which the land is set apart for timber grow- 
ing. The State provides for the planting, protection, and care of the 
trees and the taxes on the land during the growing period and is 
partially reimbursed for its expenditures plus a reasonable rate of 
interest by a 10 per cent yield tax on the sale value of the timber 
products when they are cut. Actually, to provide for reimbursement 
and interest would require a yield tax somewhat higher than 10 per 
cent. 
These last two proposals go to extremes in the degree to which they 
suggest participation by the States in financing and subsidizing 
forest planting. Their justification is the necessity of reforesting 
the idle lands in the public interest. There are, however, less extreme 
modifications possible by which the States would more evenly share 
the risk and responsibility with the owner and at the same time pro- 
vide cheap credit for long periods with proper safeguards for the 
safety of the State's investment. 
FOREST TAXATION 
The high tax rates on much of the cut-over and denuded land in 
the Lake States at the present time are considered, and often justly, as 
serious obstacles to forest planting. As the timber grows and in- 
creases in value there is a tendency to increase taxes until they become 
confiscatory. It is generally conceded that some modification of the 
existing annual property tax is desirable to remove this obstacle in 
the way of private owners who wish to plant timber. 
Various plans have been incorporated in laws in different States. 
Michigan and Wisconsin have had for several years forest tax laws 
providing for reduction or exemption of taxation for small areas or 
farm wood lots which are devoted to growing trees. Similarly, 
Minnesota has had a bounty law. These laws have not proved effec- 
