On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
FOUR-FIFTHS of the timber in the United States is in private hands. Its preservation depends absolutely upon what the owners choose to do with it. The owner of any part of it may allow his trees to stand uncut; or he may cut them under the prevailing method of destructive lumbering, so that a new forest will not replace the old; or he may consider his timber land as a permanent factory of wood and apply [he principles of forestry. This last is what the public welfare requires that he should do; but less than two per cent of the privately held timber lands of the United States are now being conservatively handled. With the threat of a timber famine so clearly before us that no man can deny the danger, we are treating four-fifths of our timber in the way best calculated to bring (n that famine with the least possible delay and in the most aggravated form. It is by no means wholly the fault of private timber land owners that they do not practise forestry. To practice forestry is to engage in a manufacturing business, the product of which is wood. Now no manufacturing business can succeed unless the products of the factory will bri n g more in the market than they cost to produce. This is not generally true today of the product of the forests. The e n orm o us accumulation of raw material (standing timber) which cost us of this generation nothing to grow in the first place, is the chief reason why the finished product (lumber, etc.) sells to-day in the United States for less than it would cost to grow, harvest, and manufacture it. This is not true in France, Germany, or other countries where forestry is practised. Under the laws and economic conditions which there obtain, a timber land owner who grows wood for th: market makes a reasonable interest on his money. Forestry, like any other industry, must become financially attractive before business men will take it up, and several basic conditions must be supplied before it can become so, Fo:' example, there must be a reasonable security against forest fires. As long as there is excessive danger that the investment may go up in smoke, the attractiveness of a long-time investment in growing wood must be very seriously reduced. There must be reasonable taxation. under which there will be a fair chance to make the business pay. The land upon which the trees grow should be taxed annually; but the growing forest crop itself should be taxed only when it is ripe for cutting. Other crops. like corn, pay but one tax before harvest. Unde:-present methods of taxation the timber crop may pay fifty or one hundred. There must be fairly uniform conditions imposed upon all competitors in the S:me market. While the difference in cost between conservative lumbering and ordinary destructive lumbering is but small, it is often sufficient to give one of two competitors control over a market which both are seeking. Thus if a State should require its lumbermen to burn their slashing, protect young growth, and generally to keep their forests in productive condition, while the State which imposed such conditions would be at a great permanent advantage, the lumbermen who were obliged to practise them would be 't a slight and temporary disadvaatage, as compared with those of a neighboring State whir! did not require these precautions. Since We must have lu.ber, it is clear that (Cn/lthue
