bills they were obliged to neglect their orchards
absolutely, without plowing, fencing or spraying. Suppose further
that the public should also destroy a large portion of the orchards,
as the forests are by fire, and also overtax the land so as to
complete the discouragement. Clearly apples would immediately go
up. A few growers would doubtless escape absolute destruction and
these, as long as their orchards lasted, would demand a price
overbalancing many times the saving the consumer made temporarily
while he was destroying the industry. Everyone concerned would be
worse off than if prices had remained just high enough to maintain
an adequate supply.

It is improbable, however, that the consumer will ever voluntarily
pay more than he has to, even if it is to his ultimate advantage.
The most that can be hoped is that as the public at large comes
to understand the situation, it will not support him in the claim
that injustice is being done by the rises he is forced to meet
as conditions adjust themselves. His reluctance will retard, but
not stop, the progress of good forest management.

STATES WILL TAKE A HAND

On the other hand, it is reasonable to suppose that the people of
the timber-producing states will gradually come to see that their
interest, as well as that of the lumberman, is to be furthered
by placing the industry on a sound basis. Selling more lumber than
they consume, they will not rejoice over low prices any more than
a wheat state does over the fall of wheat because it uses some
flour, but they will be equally unable to exert much stiffening
influence on the price. Consequently they will probably attempt to
sustain the industry by increasing production. But in this attempt
they will consider immediate community advantage first, future
community advantage next, and the lumberman's advantage only as it
is incidental. And such measures as they endorse they are likely
to enforce by law.

We see, then, that two forces are making for the better handling of
our forest resources; the economic necessity of the public and the
business advantage of the owner. Both demand the maximum production.
Obviously, since their aims are identical, each has to gain from
earnest cooeperation. Neither can succeed alone, for the owner cannot
go far against hostile laws or sentiment, and the public cannot
accomplish half as much by compulsion as by encouraging the owner.
But the great danger to each lies in mutual distrust, w