Editing 78-13-B1 (section)

= Needed: Better Use of National Forests =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
That phrase, "as sound as a dollar" may come across with a dull
thud in some parts of the world right now, but the American economy --
and the system that fosters it--continues to be the envy of the world.
Sheiks, Greeks, Germans and Japanese are all investing in the United
States. It's still the land of opportunity.

We gained our position among nations by being highly productive:
a combination of hard work, widespread ingenuity, enthusiasm and the
willingness to use our abundant natural resources. If we expect to
retain this economic prominence based on productivity, we must ask
and answer -- a couple of hard questions: Can we afford to let our
productivity decline? And, is it possible to meet the rising
expectations of the poor among us if we reduce the willingness of people
to work and if we inhibit the use of our natural resource endowment?

Our national forests dramatize that last question. They are now
being managed much less effectively than they could and must be if we
are to meet rising demands for wood and paper products. Forests, unlike
many other raw material resources, can be renewed. When properly
managed, as is being demonstrated on the lands of more progressive
forest industry companies, the productivity of forest land s can be
doubled.

But there is no government policy to encourage this kind of
increased productivity from forests, public or private. It is clearly
profitable for industry to grow its raw material resources at an
efficient and rapid rate. But, for some reason, it is considered
improper for the public to realize comparable profit returns from its own
timber-growing lands.

Not only do public forests lag behind well-managed private ones
in productivity, but the government is also adopting measures that
remove large areas of land and volumes of timber from our industrial
resource base. Under one program alone, now in process on the roadless
lands of the national forests, some six billion feet of timber (enough
to build half-a-million homes a year) may be put into the National
Wilderness Preservation System and thus lost forever to productive use.

One study of the economic impact of this land--withdrawal program
estimates that within a few years it could cause the median price of
a single family house to go up almost $1,800. The same program could
cost some 29,000 forest industry employees their jobs and increase
the general inflation rate nationwide by one per cent. And these
effects relate to the timber volumes withdrawn from use. In addition,
under these lands are coal and oil and natural gas and mineral
deposits which, turned to productive use, could improve our economy and
help strengthen the dollar. The unavailability of these public resources
to provide jobs, wages and yes, taxes, undermines the who l e system that
has made us prosperous. Though the issue is not quite so simple as
being a matter of wilderness for the few versus a good standard of
living for the many -- it's not far from it.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2">&nbsp;</TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/19/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-011-2024.pdf#PAGE=10 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>