Mountain Home maverick. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1906-1911, 1908-03-19


the United States spent on the ma
tional forests last year 81, 400, 600 |
and secured a net return of less 1
than $3.50, 900.
In Switzerland, where every foot I
of agricultural land is of the great
est value, forestry has made it pos
sible for the people to farm all land
fit for crops, and so has assisted |
the count to support larger pop
ulation, and one that is more pros |
porous, tnan would be the case if
the valleys were subjected to de-
structivc floods. In country as
small as Switzerland, and one
which contains so many high and
rugged mountains, this is a SER
vice the benefits of which cannot
be measured in dollars. 1t is in
Switzerland also, in the Sihlwald,
that forestry demonstrates beyond
contradiction how great yield in
wood and money it may bring about
it applied consistently for a number
OF years.
A circular entitled "What For
cstry Has Done,' just published
by the forest service, and obtainablc
upon application to the Forester,
| Washington, reviews the work OF
forestry of the leading countries
foreign. The chief lessons that
may be lcarnc1 from them are sum-
| ~
What forestry has done in other
countries shows, first of all, that
forestry pays, and that it pays best
where the most money is expended
in applying 1t. The United States
is enormously behind hand in its
expenditure for the management OF
the national forests, but neverthe-
less returns have already increased
with increased expenditure for
management.
A second lesson early brought
home by foreign forestry, is the
need of timely action, since forest
waste cannot be repaired only at
great cost. Third, private initi-
alive does not suffice in itself to
prevent wasteful use. England, il
is true, has so far consistently fol-
lowed let-alone policy.
; However, England has been de-
, pending upon foreign supplies OF
, wood. Now that all Europe is
running behind each year in the
production of wood-2, 600, 600 tons
. and there are unmistakable sign:
8 that countries which lead as ex
porters of wood will have to curtai
. their wood exports, England is a
g last feeling her dependence and il
specializing uneasily as to where sh'
: can certainly secure what wood sh'
= needs in the future.
Fourth, when the forest countrie
are compared as to wood import
and exports, and when it is realizes
:. that a number of the countric
which practice forestry are evei
!, now on the wood-importing list
the neeo of forestry in the cxpor
countries is doubly enforced.
Russia, Sweden, Austria-Hunn
gary and Canada, for instance
are making good the wood defici
:. of a large part of the world. Swe
: den cuts 100, 900, 900 cubic fee
more than she produces; Russis
in spite of her enormous forest re
q sources, has probably entered tn
:. road; England, the leading i'm
and more on Canada. But tn
United States consumes every yea
three to four times the wood thu
- re SITS produces and in due tim
- will doubtless take all the woo
=, that Canada can spare. In othe
" words, unlo7s the countries of TT
w estern hemisphere apply forestr
L promptly and thoroughly, they wi
ao one day assuredly be held respon'
IN IDLE for worldwide timber famir
10 Fifth, in comparison with foreig
or countries the prospects for forestr
t in the United States are particula
he ly bright for the following reason
on 1. We start with the assuran
sc that success can certainly
Is gained.
ry 2. We have few handica
ire which have trammeled other coul
", tries. We have no ancient fore
nd rights or usages with which TO CO
ey tend, or troublesome property que
DR. ton to settle.
3. The results that other Ian
'ed have achieved by long strugel
ch often with bitter costs, are free
err us to use as we chose. We have
las is true, our purely national a