WHY THE UNITED STATES SHOULD PRACTICE FORESTRY
Of late years the demand for lumber by the world trade has been
very great. Most of the countries which have extensive forests
are taking steps to protect their supplies. They limit cutting
and restrict exports of timber. Both New Zealand and Switzerland
have passed laws of this kind. Sweden exports much lumber, but by
law forbids the cutting of timber in excess of the annual growth.
Norway regulates private cutting. England is planning to plant
1,770,000 acres of new forest reserve. This body of timber when
ready for cutting, would be sufficient to supply her home needs
in time of emergency for at least three years. France is
enlarging her forest nurseries and protecting her timber in every
possible way. Even Russia, a country with huge forest tracts, is
beginning to practice conservation. Russia now requires that all
timber cut under concession shall be replaced by plantings of
trees.
For many years, the United States and China were the greatest
wasters of forest resources under the sun. Now this country has
begun to practice scientific forestry on a large scale so that
China now has the worst-managed forests in the world. Japan, on
the other hand, handles her forests efficiently and has
established a national forestry school. Austria, Norway, Sweden
and Italy have devoted much time, labor and money to the
development of practical systems of forestry. Turkey, Greece,
Spain and Portugal, all follow sane and sensible forestry
practices. Even Russia takes care of her national timberlands and
annually draws enormous incomes from their maintenance. France
and Germany both have highly successful forestry systems.
Switzerland, Australia, and New Zealand are using their forests
in a practical manner and saving sufficient supplies of wood for
posterity.
History tells us that the forests first were protected as the
homes of wild game. Little attention was paid to the trees in
those days. The forests were places to hunt and abodes devoted to
wild animals. Scientific forestry was first studied and practised
widely in the nineteenth century. Its development and expansion
have been rapid. Germany still leads as one of the most
prominent countries that practices efficient forestry. German
forests are now said to be worth more than $5,000,000,000. France
has over 2,750,000 acres of fine publicly owned forests, in
addition to private forests, which yield a net income of more
than $2 an acre a year to the government. The French have led in
extending reforestation on denuded mountain sides. British India
has well-managed forests which cover over 200,000 square miles of
area. These timberlands return a net income of from $3,000,000 to
$4,000,000 a year. India now protects more than 35,000 square
miles of forest against fire at an annual cost of less than half
a cent an acre.
Forest experts say that the United States, which produces more
than one-half of all the sawed timber in the world, should pay
more attention to the export lumber business. Such trade must be
built up on the basis of a permanent supply of timber. This means
the practice of careful conservation and the replacement of
forests that have been destroyed. We can not export timber from
such meagre reserves as the pine forests of the South, which will
not supply even the domestic needs of the region for much more
than ten or fifteen years longer. Many of our timber men desire
to develop extensive export trade. Our sawmills are large enough
and numerous enough to cut much more timber annually than we need
in this country. However, the danger is that we shall only abuse
our forests the more and further deplete the timber reserves of
future generations as a result of extensive export trade. If such
trade is developed on a large scale, a conservative, practical
national forestry policy must be worked out, endorsed and lived
up to by every producing exporter.
The U.S. Forest Service reports that before the world war, we
were exporting annually 3,000,000,000 board feet of lumber and
sawlogs, not including ties, staves and similar material. This
material consisted of Southern yellow pine, Douglas fir, white
oak, redwood, white pine, yellow poplar, cypress, walnut,
hickory, ash, basswood and similar kinds of wood. The exports
were made up of 79 per cent. softwoods and 21 per cent.
hardwoods. The export trade consumed about 8-1/2 per cent. of our
annual lumber cut. Southern yellow pine was the most popular
timber shipped abroad. One-half of the total export was of this
material.
During the four years before the war our imports of lumber from
foreign countries amounted to about 1,200,000,000 board feet of
lumber and logs. In 1918, imports exceeded exports by 100,000,000
board feet. In addition to this lumber, we also shipped in,
largely from Canada, 1,370,000 cords of pulp wood, 596,000 tons
of wood pulp, 516,000 tons of paper, and close to a billion
shingles. Some of the material, such as wood pulp and paper, also
came from Sweden, Norway, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands and the
United Kingdom.
As a result of the war, European countries for several years
can use 7,000,000,000 feet of lumber a year above their
normal requirements. For housing construction, England
needs 2,000,000,000 feet a year more than normally; France,
1,500,000,000 feet; Italy, 1,750,000,000 feet; Belgium and Spain
750,000,000 feet apiece. Even before the war, there was a great
deficiency of timber in parts of Europe. It amounted to
16,000,000,000 board feet a year and was supplied by Russia, the
United States, Canada, Sweden, Austria-Hungary and a few other
countries of western Europe. If we can regulate cutting and
replenish our forests as they deserve, there is a remarkable
opportunity for us to build up a large and permanent export
trade.
[Illustration: YOUNG WHITE PINE SEEDED FROM ADJOINING PINE TREES]
The Central and South American countries now have to depend on
Canada, the United States and Sweden for most of their softwoods.
Unless they develop home forests by the practice of modern
forestry, they will always be dependent on imported timber of
this type. South Africa and Egypt are both heavy importers of
lumber. Africa has large tropical forests but the timber is hard
to get at and move. China produces but little lumber and needs
much. She is developing into a heavy importing country. Japan
grows only about enough timber to supply her home needs.
Australia imports softwoods from the United States and Canada.
New Zealand is in the market for Douglas fir and hardwoods.
In the past, our export lumber business has been second only to
that of Russia in total amount. The value of the timber that we
exported was larger than that of Russia because much of our
timber that was sent abroad consisted of the best grades of
material grown in this country. In the future, we shall have to
compete in the softwood export business with Russia, Finland,
Sweden, Norway and the various states of southeastern Europe
which sell lumber. In the hardwood business, we have only a
limited number of rivals. With the exception of a small section
of eastern Europe, our hardwood forests are the finest in the
Temperate Zone. We export hickory, black walnut, yellow poplar,
white and red oak even to Russia and Sweden, countries that are
our keenest rivals in the softwood export business.
Europe wants export lumber from our eastern states because the
transportation costs on such material are low. She does not like
to pay heavy costs of hauling timber from the Pacific Coast to
the Atlantic seaboard and then have it reshipped by water.
Our eastern forests are practically exhausted. Our supplies of
export lumber except Douglas fir are declining. Most of the kinds
of export timber that Europe wants we need right at home. We have
only about 258,000,000,000 feet of southern yellow pine left, yet
this material composes one-half of our annual shipments abroad.
We are cutting this material at the rate of 16,000,000,000 board
feet a year. Some authorities believe that our reserves will
last only sixteen years unless measures to protect them are put
into effect at once. At the present rate of cutting long-leaf
pine trees, our outputs of naval stores including turpentine and
rosin are dwindling. We cannot afford to increase our export of
southern yellow pine unless reforestation is started on all land
suitable for that purpose. Our pine lands of the southern states
must be restocked and made permanently productive. Then they
could maintain the turpentine industry, provide all the lumber of
this kind we need for home use, and supply a larger surplus for
export.
Although our supplies of Douglas fir, western white pine, sugar
pine and western yellow pine are still large, they will have to
bear an extra burden when all the southern pine is gone. This
indicates that the large supplies of these woods will not last as
long as we would wish. To prevent overtaxing their production, it
is essential that part of the load be passed to the southern pine
cut-over lands. By proper protection and renewal of our forests,
we can increase our production of lumber and still have a
permanent supply. The Forest Service estimates that by protecting
our cut-over and waste lands from fire and practicing care to
secure reproduction after logging on our remaining virgin forest
land, we can produce annually at least 27,750,000,000 cubic feet
of wood, including 70,000,000,000 board feet of sawtimber. Such a
production would meet indefinitely the needs of our growing
population, and still leave an amount of timber available for
export.
Our hardwoods need protection as well as our softwoods. Ten per
cent of our yearly cut of valuable white oak is shipped overseas.
In addition we annually waste much of our best oak in the
preparation of split staves for export. At the present rate of
cutting, the supply, it is said, will not last more than
twenty-five years. We ship abroad about seven per cent. of our
poplar lumber. Our supplies of this material will be exhausted in
about twenty years if the present rate of cutting continues. We
sell to foreign countries at least one-half of our cut of black
walnut which will be exhausted in ten to twelve years unless
present methods are reformed. Our supplies of hickory, ash and
basswood will be used up in twenty to thirty years. We need all
this hardwood lumber for future domestic purposes. However, the
furniture factories of France, Spain and Italy are behind on
orders. They need hardwood and much of our valuable hardwood
timber is being shipped to Europe.
Experience has proved that correct systems of handling the
private forests can not be secured by mere suggestions or
education. No ordinary method of public coöperation has been
worked out which produces the desired results. It is necessary
that suitable measures be adopted to induce private owners to
preserve and protect their woodlands. The timberlands must be
protected against forest fires. Timber must be cut so as to
aid natural reproduction of forest. Cut-over lands must be
reforested. If such methods were practiced, and national, state
and municipal forests were established and extended, our lumber
problem would largely solve itself. We not only should produce a
large permanent supply of timber for domestic use, but also
should have great reserves available for export. Under such
conditions, the United States would become the greatest supply
source in the world for lumber.