The Somerset reporter., 1908-07-16
Wild Land Taxation.
Of the Many Phases of the
Question.
BY BARTLE T. HARVEY,

Forester with the Great Northern
Paper Company.
We advocate today state forest
reserve. This is indeed good policy,
for the State would most certainly
be greatly benefited in many ways,
both now and in the future, if it could
buy and place under proper forest
management those townships of wild
land, within its border, which help to
form the chief watersheds of its
great river systems.
1t would in all probability make no
material difference to the public as to
whether the State or the National
Government should acquire these
timberlands, for they would, without
doubt, in either case, be managed in
practically the same manner, namely
SO as to give the greatest results in
the shortest space of time at the least
possible expense.
Now such a reserve must be OBJ
tanned ordinarily by special legisla-
tive action and only after public SEN
timent has become thoroughly aroused
in the matter. But this takes time.
One years time in Maine today means
zoo, 900 board feet spruce timber
ing for a special forest reserve, let us
not forget the important fact that in
the hands of the present wild land
owners lies the State of Names flu
ture forest reserve, and with them
rests the future welfare of the
forests.
The wild land owners of Maine to-
day control some 10000 square miles
he III nd
holdings represent an immense in
vestment of capital and the land
owners realize, in most cases, that a
practical system of forest manage
ment is essential, from the stand
point of economy, insurance, in
creased yield, etc, in order to obtain
the fullest returns from their forest
holdings.
In Augusta, March Is, 1908, an opin-
ion signed by six of the justices,
affirms that the State Legislature may
restrict the cutting of trees on wild
lands below a certain specified diam
eter limit. The State is fortunate i'll
having this power and the aim of the
law is not at the land owner of today,
but at that particular species known
as the Climber Wolf" whose short
sighted policy is to strip, sell out and
then move to new fields, regardless of
consequences. This may be business
from certain standpoint, but the
sentiment of the majority of land
owners is adverse to any such move,
because they realize fully what
wholesale desolati6n would surely
follow such policy.
The statement is inferred that most
land owners object seriously TO hav-
ing their timberlands heavily cut over
or stripped. They do object to it
strongly, and realize that it means
loss or them in the long run. Where
then, is the trouble? If you take the
opportunity to question almost any
land owner on the subject, he imme-
diately exclaims, Indignantly: "Be-
cause | am between the devil and the
deep sea. If allow my timber to
stand until it has reached maturity,
the profits are largely eaten up by
taxes. On the other hand, if | cut
heavily to make up for the loss OF
excessive taxation, must necessarily
seriously impair the growing stock of
my forest from the standpoint of
future CROP
There is practically just so much i'll
the State available Tor taxation.
With each years numbering this
amount must necessarily decrease
steadily, so that eventually there will
be no timberlands on which taxes
may be levied. Now, as this timber
land area decreases, to maintain the
same income from wild land taxation
the tax rate must ordinarily be in
creased on that remaining. This
policy, it is evident, could only serve
to add fuel to the fire and must un-
doubtedly hasten the forest destruc-
ton. AS matter of fact, during
the last few years the tax rate has
incre ased but slowly. Valuations
have, however, increased over 1926
per cent. Finally, when the forest
has become exhausted and there is no
more forest capital available for tax
alton the income therefrom must
cease. The State then, az well as the
land owner, must surely lose in the
end. The former from the dropping
off of tax income, lack of water pow
er, loss of industry, etc. The latter
from decrease in his forest capital
or growing stock, etc.
The land owners should be encour-
aged to hold their forest tracts and
practice forest management upon
them, and not compelled to strip
their lands on account of the burden
some taxation. Otherwise our forests
must necessarily be hard cut and
soon become thing of the past.
/ The tax income to the State and
county from our wild lands is a
source of too great revenue to lose
through an inadequate system of
taxation. And the State must GER
tainly lose much more than the kare
amount received from taxes, unless
immediate steps are taken to remedy
our present system of wild land taxa
ton. Regulate our present tax sys-
TEN, or introduce some other that
shall be equitable, and we have, in
the land owners OF the State, an
immense forest reserve which can,
under careful forest management, be
made to give practically an indefinite
future supply of forest products.
Today our assessors of wild lands
must obtain their knowledge from
cruisers, whose estimates vary, gen
eral inquiry, etc, and then rely upon
their Judgment and long association
with the work to give what Is, in
their opinion, an equitable valuation
to the property in question. They
cannot then reasonably be expected
to place correct valuation on every
township of wild land. Hence, as
might readily be expected we find
some tracts overvalued, while others
are undervalued. The assessors
practically have to guess at the valu-
alton of any tract, and their expert
l.