d have been working for a very long
time. They show such influences do not result in refusal to pay the
cost of growing all the wood that can be grown. Wood consumption
in European countries is increasing at a rate of from 1-1/2 to 2 per
cent a year. In other words, the consumers are actually willing to
pay for more wood than they have found necessary, and are warranting
the growers in adopting still more expensive methods to increase
the output. Nor has forest growing proved to be possible only by
the State or Government. In Germany 46.5 per cent of the forest
area is owned privately, in Austria 61 per cent, in France 65 per
cent, in Norway 70 per cent. While it is true that the European
private owner has better tax and fire conditions, it must also
be remembered that the value of the land on which he makes the
growing crop yield a good dividend is about ten times as high as
it now is in the United States.

The prospective grower of new timber in the American West can expect
equal profit here at some time. His chief concern is whether its
foreshadowing influences are sufficiently strong at present. To
determine this he must consider the probable attitude of the public
and of the lumbermen themselves.

WHAT IT MEANS TO THE CONSUMER

To the consumer the principles previously outlined mean that the
price of lumber will rise somewhat. Indeed, he must expect that,
regardless of the production factor, for the timber owner cannot
pay taxes, prevent fire, and keep his money tied up, all for a
considerable period, and still sell the material as cheap as he
could before these expenses accrued. It also means that if the
consumer fails to recognize and concede these principles it will
be at his own sacrifice. Too low prices now merely mean too high
prices in the early future, for they will not permit protection,
economy or reforestation. He must eventually, and not far hence,
pay the total cost of production. It is urgently to his interest
not to add to this by preventing production and thus permitting the
owner of the timber already produced to speculate on the approaching
shortage.

The danger of this can be illustrated by a comparison. Suppose
three-quarters of the apple growers of the country, either through
ignorance of the principles of their industry or through shortage
of money with which to pay their debts, should be forced for a
considerable period to accept a price for their crop so low that
after paying current