class of resources, which yield increased returns to an intelligent increased activity, this activity being exercised not in the direction of utilization but of reproduction.

While the virgin forest is worked, as it is in the United States and Canada, simply taking out the material wanted without any regard to its continuance, it represents, as has been stated, almost like a mine, an exhaustible resource; for although reproduction is possible, and in reality occurs, under the regardless methods of utilization not only is the reproduction very partial, but where the better kinds of timber are culled the reproduction can only be of inferior kinds, and the quality of the resource is therefore reduced.

In addition to the irrational method of utilization, which tends to deteriorate the resource, the disastrous fires which overrun the forest areas of the United States annually destroy the accumulated leaf-mould of centuries, thus reducing the fertility, killing the young growth, and, in the end, especially on the hillsides and mountain slopes where, by the baring of the ground the beating rains are allowed to wash off the soil, reforestation is made almost impossible, so that in the end the resource-whether the growth be considered as such or only the soil and its fertility, is exhausted.

But besides furnishing directly wood and incidentally other valuable products, which either as raw material or in manufactured form supply a large number of human wants, the forest at the same time by its functions in the circulation of air and water exercises an influence upon cultural, climatic and sanitary conditions, which classes it to that extent with those resources, which, like air and water itself, are, though indirectly yet most indispensably connected with material and cultural progress, and are of the greatest interest to the nation ; so that in considering the position of the State towards forests and forestry, we will have to keep in view these two aspects of the forest-its material value and its cultural function.

The value of any material resource is measured, in the first place, by its comparative abundance. Other factors which enter into the valuation are the demand for it, the ease with which it can be obtained and brought to centers of consumption, the possibility and ease of reproduction; its necessity for our present civilization or more or less easy replacement by other materials may also influence the valuation.

I. THE FOREST AS A PRODUCER OF MATERIAL.

As regards the natural reproduction and the consequent abundance of the virgin forest, it may be said that the whole earth is a potential forest. That is to say, with the exception of a comparatively small area-in elevation above timber-line in north and southward distribution beyond eternal frost line, in continental distribution, within rainless deserts and soil-less rocks-tree growth would ultimately prevail on the entire land surface, provided the interference of animal or human life were checked.

This interference, however, has reduced the forest area in all parts of the world. It has, no doubt, been largely instrumental in creating the vast prairie regions and treeless plains which are found on every continent, and which, but for the continued interference, would gradually, at least within geologic ages, reclothe themselves with tree-growth, with few exceptions.

If originally the land area represented an almost uninterrupted forest area, animal and human activity has changed the face of the earth considerably. This change has taken place partly to satisfy the needs of increasing masses of population for food areas, partly without such need by reckless destruction; so

that density of population cannot alone account for present distribution of forest areas, but historical development of the people, their progress in civilization or relapse into comparative barbarism and natural conditions of the countries have had a bearing.

Thus, while Norway and Sweden, with scanty population showed, until recently, when an active export business of wood reduced their forest areas, a large proportion of woodland; in Spain and Greece, although the population diminished with the decline of culture, reforestation has not increased in proportion, and we find small forest area together with scanty population. In Germany economic development and early recognition of the value of the resource and necessity for its rational use and management has preserved a proportionately large area.

In the United States the proportion of forest area to population since its settlement by European races has rapidly declined. Here almost one-half of the continent had by adverse climatic conditions, supplemented probably by the destructive agencies of beast and man of earlier civilization, been deprived of its tree-cover.

To such an extent has human activity reduced forest areas that in those countries where it has been most active the proportions have dwindled down to even three per cent. of the land area.

Taking Europe altogether, not much over thirty per cent. or 2 acres per capita remains in forest, and in the United States the forest area represents probably not more than twenty-five per cent. or seven acres per capita of population. The demand for forest products is perhaps nowhere greater than in the United States, probably not less than six to eight times as large as in Europe.

In Germany, with a population at least twelve times as dense as the United States-and hence the need of strict economy with all exhaustible resourcesthe annual consumption per capita may be set at round 45 cubic feet.

The annual production of the well-managed forest areas of Germany is found to average 55 cubic feet of wood per acre; there should, therefore, be 0.8 acres per capita, which very nearly is the case, (0.79 acres), the small deficiency being made up by imports, the excess of imports over exports being about 60 million cubic feet. In the United States we use simply the accumulation of material through centuries in the virgin forest, the second growth furnishing but a small part, and of management for reproduction or increased yield there is as yet no sign.

In the virgin forest the product per acre varies to such an extent that it would be impossible to make even a reasonable guess as to available supplies; some of the pine forests of the South may cut no more than 200 or 300 cubic feet, while some areas on the Pacific Coast may yield 15 to 20,000 feet and more. If we apply the experience of Germany as to possible annual wood production per acre, we will find that our present forest area, if properly stocked and well managed, would suffice to furnish our present demands of 20 to 25 billion cubic feet. But we know that the premises do not exist. The manner of utilizing the product has also much to do in calculating the efficiency of the producing area.

While, for instance, in the forest management of various German States the percentage of entire wood material may be said to be utilized in some shape or other; in the United States a very large part is not utilized at all and left in the woods; and while in the German forests from 40 to 65 per cent. appears as building timber, we learn that less than 30 per cent. is the yield from the red woods of the Pacific Coast; and, take it all through, it is doubtful whether more than 25 per cent. of the actual wood in a tree is utilized in the United States

In comparing supplies and demand, it would be a mistake to place reliance on calculations of the wood accretion upon the areas under forest cover, for it is quality of material that is demanded, and not mere quantity. Not only do areas differ in their wood-producing capacities according to climatic and soil conditions, but their composition as to kinds of trees and quality of timber determines their value. Thus, while the area of forest in the United States probably does not diminish now at as rapid a rate as it used to, the value of the remaining area is very rapidly depreciated, not only by removing the accumulated supplies, but by culling the best and leaving the inferior material, by neglecting to give attention to the reproduction of the better kinds, or even by recurring fires destroying the capacity for such reproduction.

The forest furnishes firewood, building timber and raw material for the arts. In the United States more than three-fifths of the population uses wood exclusively for fuel, and to show the value and appreciation of this class of fuel in comparison with substitutes, it may be mentioned that in Germany during 75 years from the beginning of the century the price of coal has constantly sunk, while that of charcoal has constantly increased; showing that the substitute not only did not displace, but did not even affect the valuation of wood as fuel.

The bulkiness of the material when compared with its heating power is objectionable, but other qualities make it desirable.

For building purposes, although stone, iron and other materials are used more and more, the ease of shaping wood material, the rapidity with which it can be handled, and various other qualities, will insure the use of wood for that purpose for all time. In the arts the same qualities make the use of wood desirable, and while substitutes in many cases are even preferable, in others the necessity for using them would entail grave inconveniences. The value of sawed wood material in the United States is calculated as round one billion dollars, representing an enormous amount of material. One of the drawbacks of the material is that it is comparatively bulky, and hence it is desirable not to have to transport it too great distances, especially overland, but to produce it not too distant from the centres of consumption. In the United States, with many thousands of acres of virgin timber to draw upon, the price for lumber represents hardly more than the expense of getting it out and transporting it, the material itself representing not as yet any cost of production.

II. THE FOREST AS A CONDITION OF CULTURE.

The value of forest areas in influencing climatic soil and water conditions has been generally recognized only during the last 100 years.

While there exists, no doubt, under given conditions, a relation between forest-cover and climate, all generalizations in this respect must be taken with caution, until more proof and exact data is brought by scientific methods. Climatic conditions are, in the first place, due to cosmic and terrestrial influences, Of the terrestrial influences we know mountain ranges and water surfaces to be powerful. There is not only reason to believe, and some definite measurements sustain the belief, that as far as forest-cover interferes with insulation of the earth and the movement of air currents it renders the climatic conditions within its own borders different from what they would be were the forest-cover removed. The doubt can exist only as to whether and to what extent this difference can make itself felt outside of the forest. The claims are, that a forestcover tempers like a water surface, and, to some extent, intercepts or reduces the

force of hot and cold winds with all the consequence of such action; further, that it influences, if not the amount yet in local and temporal distribution, the precipitation of rain and snow, besides exerting various minor influences.

Whatever the truth-and neither the claimants nor the objectors to forest climatic influences have brought incontrovertible proof-it is evident that the extent, composition and location of the forest must have much significance in the matter, and also that the relation of the country towards other climatic influences must either increase or decrease the significance of this factor as a climatic element. In England, under powerful terrestrial tempering influences, any forest influence would be inappreciable by comparison; poor thirsty Spain, on the contrary, deprived by its situation of the effects of modifying ocean currents, might possibly modify the extremes of temperature under which it suffers by extensive forest areas, which it lacks. While our own North Pacific coast, if stripped of her wonderful forest wealth, would not be appreciably deprived of its abundant rainfall brought by the ocean currents; properly disposed timber belts in our arid and sub-arid interior might, if not increase precipitation, at least check the excessive evaporation under which it suffers from the incessant and unchecked winds.

The cool and humid forest-cover situated on the slope toward the moisturebearing winds may unnecessarily increase the tendency to condensation to which the currents by their mere descent are subject, while if situated on the leeward side might recuperate itself from the moist forest air, the drained current coming over the mountain. Here, by obstructing the gentle south wind, it may keep a valley longer in the rigors of winter; there, by cutting off the cooling breezes, it may make less bearable the heat of summer. So that an objectionable influence may be shown as well as a favorable one, according to local conditions.

With more assurance can we speak of the influence which the forest-cover exerts upon the soil and water conditions. Again, it is the location with reference to the configuration and geologic formation which imparts the value to the forest, and hence, again, generalization is not permissible. Here, where an excess of moisture due to subsoil conditions used to be removed by the process of vegetation, deforestation induces the formation of marshes, and in consequence unfavorable sanitary influences on the surronndings may result; there, under different conditions, where evaporation had been checked by the forest, its removal reduces the humidity of the soil and the size and continuity of springs. Remove it from the shifting sands of the coast and the formation of sand dunes encroaching on the agricultural lands is induced; burn the forest floor on the sandy gulf coast plains and you destroy its fertility; burn the litter that accumulates under the forest-cover on the mountain slopes and the waters will run riot and gully the ground; torrents, landslides, snowslides, avalanches are induced, washouts filling the valley and the river with debris, causing stowwaters and increasing, if not producing, floods.

The significance then of the forest under given conditions as an important factor in the general conditions of a country cannot be denied.

Lastly, when we consider that forest-growth is capable of producing values on ground which cannot be utilized profitably in any other way, its significance as a national resource may be considered sufficiently established by this brief exhibit. This latter capacity of forest-growth is of the more significance when we look over the world and count the waste places which man has produced. There are in France and Germany alone over 500 square miles of sand dunes, which France has shown by a reforestation of nearly 300 square miles can be profitably utilized. In Austria the waste places capable of reforesta

tion are nearly 2,000 square miles; in Italy, 1,500; in France, nearly 10,000 square miles; in Great Britain and Ireland, over 11 per cent.; in Greece, over 15 per cent. of the area is waste, while in Germany only 2.7 per cent.

Hence, of late, all these governments strive to bring these vast unproductive areas into useful occupancy. Prussia spends $250,000 yearly in that direction. France has spent round $30,000,000 within the last 25 years in recuperating devasted forest areas, and even Prussia has, since 1843, reclothed over 50,000 acres of her steppe.

We have seen that, as a meteorological and cultural element, the location of the forest is all-important, and its most pronounced value as such element is found on the mountain-sides, on shifting sands and on the poorest soil, in general; that is to say those locations where the material product must be necessarily inferior to that of better situations and where, therefore, forestry is least profitable. They are the very areas where private activity can find satisfaction only, by reaping the natural crop. Yet here the danger from mis-management-that is a management in which no regard is taken of the simultaneous or immediate reproduction when the crop is harvested-must be the greatest, since the baring of the slopes and sand soils may mean destruction of fertility, not only of the bared but also of the adjoining areas, and increasing dangers from flood waters. Hence the interest of the community must be centered upon these forest areas.

It has been contended that the reproduction of forest-growth takes place of its own accord, and hence the interest of the State as far as material production is concerned, need be only of that general character which it has in all products and industries of the nation.

This contention, however, is erroneous if considered from an economical point of view. While culled and denuded areas do reproduce a wood-growth, this-in quality and especially in quantity per acre-is only in rare cases satisfactory and economical. The reckless squandering of material, the disregard to the condition of the area after being left by the lumberman, the practice of firing and thereby destroying the young growth as well as the fertility of the soil, are to a large extent detrimental to the reproduction of the resource, and experiences all over the world have shown that by such reckless policy recuperation can be rendered almost impossible.

As far as the production of material constitutes the forest as a resource, it is not tree-growth merely but quality of the growth that makes it valuable, just as as it is not the presence of iron but its sufficiency and quality in the ore, that makes the iron mine of value. The forest primeval contains much material which is of little or no value and large areas are required to produce small amounts of good timber, but in its reproduction it can be improved in value and yield, and that without anything but proper use and management.

From agricultural and horticultural products of the soil the forest distinguishes itself, in so far as the former in most cases are improvements upon the natural product in kind by means of human ingenuity and labor, while the natural product as it is found in the virgin forest satisfies the needs of man.

An important difference, too, and one which makes the use of the soil for forest-growth as an economical element desirable, is, that while agricultural crops exhaust soils of their fertile elements, wood-growth does not rely on these to any extent, returns the larger amount of those utilized by the fall of leaves and branches, and improves thereby the soil for agricultural use.

The production of starch or sugar and albuminoids, which is the object of agriculture, takes place at the expense of the minerals in the soil which are carried off with the yearly crop, while forest products, being in the main cellulose and its derivatives, are formed at the expense of the inexhaustible carbon of