Tax delinquency of forest lands in the anthracite forest region of Pennsylvania : a county opportunity and responsibility

Historic, Archive Document

Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

Anthracite Survey Paper Ho . 3

June 26, 1941

Fovtes j~V^e.o'\V^o.\^ "5)w_v->

ca_ ^2 -

w , ' -i

TAl DELINQUENCY OF FOREST UHDS
IN THE

ANTHRACITE FOREST REGION OF PENNSYLVANIA

A County Opportunity and Responsibility

ALLEGHENY FOREST EXPERIMENT STATION

ECONOMIC SURVEY
ANTHRACITE FOREST REGION

UIIITBD STATES DSPARTIIEIIT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVICE

ALLEOHERT FOREST S}R^ERIMEI:T STATIOII ,

In cooperation r/ith the Universitj of Pennsylvania
3437 Woodland Avenue, Philadelphia, Pa.

Hardy L. Shirle^’’, Director

Anthracite Forest Rep-ion is a convenient name for
15 counties, shoYTi on the map on the back of this publi-
cation, rrhich contain or surround the hard-coal deposits
of Pennsylva.nia. The forests of this region are non badly
depleted. But preliminary estima.tes indicate that under
good management they might in time furnish most of the
forest products and services the region reo^^uires.

The Economic Survey of this region aim.s to
determine ;

(1) Hon many of the unemployed may be put to
work now to upbuild the forest?'

(2) Hovf much labor might be employed in perma-
nent industries based on 'the restored forest?

Full answers to these questions will be of utmost value
both no'f and in the period of readjustment folloving the
natio'ial defense emergency.

This paper was prepared by

DIVISION OF FOREST ECONOMICS

R. D. Forbes, Senior Forester

ECONOMIC SURVEY. ANTHRACITE FOREST REGION
Kingston Branch Post Office, Wilkes-Barre, Pa.'

Clement Mesavage, Assistant Forester
Clifford W. Beck, Agent

TAX DELINQUENCY OF FOREST LANDS IN THE
ANTHRACITE FOREST REGION OF PEIMNSYL VANIA

A County Opportunity and Responsibility

by R, D. Forbes and C. W. Beck'"'

The counties of the Anthracite Forest Region of Pennsylvania
have borne their full share of the economic and social ills from v;hich
the region began to suffer long before the depression. National de-
fense activities may make possible in some counties a partial and
temporary recovery from these ills. But a permanent cure for unem-
ployment and crippled public services can be achieved only through
® planned development of all basic natural resources, and of industries
^ dependent on the.m.

CD

UJ

^ Among these natural resources none has been more abused and

neglected than the forests. The nearly 2,600,000 acres of forest
land in the region comprise from 20 to 34 percent of the individual
counties. Over-cutting of the timber, and forest fires, have reduced
vast areas of once highly-productive forest to scrub oak, aspen, and
grey birch. Practically none of the remaining acreage is fully pro-
ductive. Tens of thousands of acres, mostly denuded,, are today in
county hands as the result .of tax delino^uency , and in some counties
are rapidly becoming a ma,jor problem.

"-'■James A. Noonan, Junior Field -Assistant , obtained much of the in-
formation collected in the early stages of this study. Dr. Edvard
LL Carter, University of Pennsylvania, special consultant to the ■
Survey, helped to plan the study and this publication. Lillian S.
Taylor, Senior Clerk, made the computations.

'.Pnat County Records Show-

The follovrai.r- tables and text present information. "b"n;..Ti from
county recorHs'-'u as to the extent, imoortance. and probable causes
of tax- delinquency.

County Forest Lands IIo Longer Subject to Redemption.

In Table 1 are shovm. forest properties - of 50 acres or more'
vfnich have been in county ownershio as a result of tax sales for
lonyer than the period allorred for redemption' ‘’m There are 343 of
them, ayyregatiny 63,000 acres, v.dth an average size of 184. acres.
They are distributed among 11 of the 15 counties as follovrs:

The records rrere consulted dui'ing 1940 and 1941 They viere placed
at our disposal hy county officials, ’.Those cooperation and in-
terest are gratefully acknowledged. Township data are, too bulky
to present here, but are on file in the field office of the Survey,
Kingston Branch Post Office, OiOces -Barre . A full •’’'escilption of
method's used in obtaining and Analyzing the information is .available
on request.

In Pennsylvania tax-delinquent land is first' adve.i'tised .and off'srec
at oublic sale by the Co'anty Treasurer, Prooerties for vrhich no
offer of purchase is received are "bid in" by the County Commis-
sioners, vdno hold them for the period, - -now tv;o years • allov-red
for redemotion by the ov.'ner-c At the expiration of the redemption
period the Commissioners are today rec|uired to offer the land
again at oublic sale; formerly this urns not mandatory. Noratoria
on both Treasurer's an-"'' Com.r:iissioners ' sales were declared in
Pe'nnsylvania ''mring 1931-39-

2

TABLE 1. FOREST PROPERTIES OF 50 ACRES OR MORE IN COITITY OLIIERSHIP
AMD NO LONCtER SUBJECT TO REDEI'IPTION . liAY I, 1941

Niomber of Average Area Total Area

County

Properties

Acres

Acres

Carbon

43

198

8,528

Columbia

17

119

2,027

Dauphin

f— '

161

2,413

Lackawanna

5

152

759

Luzerne

13

177

2,304

Monroe

21

270

5,669

Northumberland

6

94

563

Schuylkill

178-

191

34,043

Susquehanna

30

125

3,757

Wayne

2

82

165

Wyoming

13

213

2,773

Totals or Average

s 343

184

63,001

Including 66 properties, aggregating 15,010 acres,

in litigation

- 3 -

It shoult be noted that the true ucreag’e of such properties
ma:^ be considerablp less than the table indicates . In most counties
local officials have not had the resources to investigate the pro -
oerties aooearing on their records as unredeemed. Such investigations
are necessary to reveal '"''uolications , clerical errors, inadec^uate
description, and squatters' rights, nhich vrould reduce the total
area actually in county ovmership. Office 'and field studies by the
Survey in one count 3^, for examole-, nhich held no Treasurer's sale
between 1911 and 194-0, led to a 40 isei-cent reduction in the nuuber
of properties long in county ormershio. In sorae other counties, on
the advice of local officials, vre have eliminated all ^aroperties
not on recent lists. Except for one county, the above table includes

no properties vdnich becajne tax delinquent later than 1934. The Sur-

«

ve.y regards the 63,000 acres shorm in Table 1 as the best available
estima,te of forest land nov: count37‘ oomed as a result of tax
delinquency,

Count3''-owned Forest Land Still Subject to Redemption.

Table 2 shovrs the distribution of over 57,000 acres of forest
land, in properties of 50 acres or more, which vreie sol 'I to the
County Commissioners at recent Treasurer's sales, and are still
subject to redemption by the former ov/neis. There are some such
properties in ever.'r county of the Anthracite Forest Region except
Lebanon .

- 4 -

TABLE 2, FOREST PROPERTIES OF 50 ACRES OR MORE IN COUNTY OWNERSHIP
BUT SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, MAY 1, 1941.

County

Number of
Propertiee

Average Area
Acres

Total Area
Acres

Carbon

10

363

3,634

Columbia

13

87

1,136

Dauphin

3

189

1,511

Lackawanna

28

159

4,445

Luzerne

107

118

12,651

Monroe

21

168

3,539

Montour

3

96

289

Northumberland

11

90

996

Pike

9

o

r-4

1,348

Schuylkill

47

209

9,807

Sulliv'an

45

;35

6,068

Susquehanna

89

t

79

7,081

Wayne

21

2,414

Wyoming

9

259

2,335

Totals or Averages

421

136

57,254

- 5 -

In contrast with the figures in Table 1, those in Table 2
are unquestionably low. That is, although correct so far as fomal
county proprietorship is concerned, they by no means reveal the full
extent of forest land now tax delinquent. In 10 counties tax sales
have not yet covered seated lands becoming delinquent in any later
year than 1934 ■> Only in Pike, Sullivan, Susquehanna, V/ayne, and
Wyoming are such sales up-to-date, or nearly so»

How much the sales, novf mandatory, covering the seven years
since 1934 vd.ll increase the total forest area at least temporarily
in county hands is hard to estimate. Susquehanna County, which has
kept up its annual or biennial sales, found that about the same
acreage of forest land became delinquent each year from 1933 to
1937o Even assuming that the peak of delinquency has passed, it
is probable that recent additions are substantial.

Little forest land sold at Treasurers' sales in 1940 has yet
been redeemedc Although some counties have had considerable success
in helping the former owners to resume proprietorship, or in selling
the land to others, officials in nearly all, counties inform us that
more and more effort is needed to dispose permanently of tax delin-
quent land in these waysc. Speculation^ in such land, which has become
a scandal in some other States, is appearing here. Where re-sale at
a profit proves impossible vri.thin a fev; years, the speculator strips
off every remnant of merchantable timber. He then allovrs the land
to return to the county as tax delinquent.

- 6 -

The Counties^ Opportunity

VJhen forest lands become tax delinquent and pass into county
ovmership, it is likely to be because they have been v/recked by over-
cutting and fire. Income from wrecked lands is negligible. The long
time required to restore them to productivity, the cost, and unfa-
miliarity vj-ith the forestry practices involved, discourage the indi-
vidual land ovmer. Sale by the county to the State is sometimes pos-
sible, either for State Forests or State Game Lands. The properties
must generally be of considerable size, or adjoin land already in
State ovmership, to be attractive to the Department of Forests and
Waters or the Game Commission. At present only the Game Commission
has funds for land purchase.

Fortunately there is legislation in effect to enable the
counties themselves to approach constructively the problem presented
by these lands. The County Forest Act of 1933 (P-L. 30) provides
that tax delinOj^uent lands may be continued in county ovmership and
managed as county forests. Under public control restoration of the
forest for one purpose or another is economically possible.

Forest restoration requires intensified protection against
fire, insects, and disease, and artificial planting of the worst-denuded
land with trees or other useful vegetation. Here is vrork for the
unemployed - vrork, moreover, that does not compete vd.th private
enterprise., Weeding, thinning, and pruning of the young forest,
wildlife management, and proper harvesting of the timber as it
matures, 70.11 continue to provide jobs in the vroods.

_ 7 „

I'/hen fully restored these county-OTmed forests will prove
attractive as a source of ravf material to permanent local industries.
Substantial cash returns to local governments in many parts of the
world result from sales of -wood in community forests, Even today
county forests vd.ll provide nearby communities v;ith healthful out-
door recreation; they id.ll prevent soil erosion, lessen floods, and
safeguard local ivater supplies. These benefits vri.ll in turn be re-
flected in nev; sources of public revenue, improved public health, and
larger private payrolls.

Emergency Funds May Be Used in County Forests
The Federal funds of various emergency agencies may be used
for protection and management of county forests. It is true that
their use on orivate lands has been restricted by lav: or regulations
to protection against fire and erosion. But on public lands they
may be used for all types of forestry ivork. For example, for varying
periods since 1933, 12 CCC camps of 200 men each have been employed
on the 116,000 acres of State Forests, and on certain privately-ovmed
areas, in the anthracite forest region. They have built roads, cleared
firebreaks, erected lookout tovrers, controlled insects, and developed
recreational facilities, CCC labor has been recently employed in
protection and development of the 13,000-acre National Recreational
Demonstration Area on Hickory Run, Carbon County. A $1,600,000
project to strengthen protection, and improve cover and food sup-
plies, on 140,000 acres of State Game Lands in 8 of the 15 anthracite
forest counties ivas recently approved by the VJPA. The IIYA has in the

- 8 -

past two years spent about $15,000 in forest fire prevention patrol
of private lands in the hard-coal region under the direction of the
Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Haters,

Local Administration F easib^e

The rather small average size of the county-owned properties,
and their scattered distribution, which have lessened their attrac-
tiveness for State ovm.ership, need not debar them from consideration
as county forests. An official of one county recently suggested that
custodianship of small areas could be added to the duties of certain
county employees at little or no additional expense. Chambers of
Commerce, service clubs, and other community groups — such as organ-
ized sportsmen — have already shown an interest in the development
of local forest tracts. By crystallizing such interest into effective
measures adapted to local conditions the problem of protecting and
administering relatively small areas may bo solved.

Assembling of larger units is not out of the question, even
without future additions to the area tax-delinquent. For example,
two or more tracts in county ovmership may be found to adjoino Again,
tracts beloviT 50 acres — omitted from this preliminary study — ■ may
enlarge the usable area. .Finally, there are many "farms” in county
ownership which do not today include 50 acres of timber, but vihich
are presumably better suited to forests than any other crop. In this
category was about 1/7 of the rural area advertised for sale in 1940
f by the Commissioners of Schuylkill County. In recent Treasurers'

sales in Luzerne and Susquehanna Counties the ratios were 1/3 and 3/4,

- 9 -

respectively. Such tax delinquent farms will be fully as attrac-
tive for certain types of county forests as properties entirely in
forest. New York State has had an extensive program of developing
abandoned farms for forestry purposes.

Are Forest Assessments and Taxes Too High?

The responsibility of county and other local governments
toward forest resources in the anthracite region does not stop with
the conversion into county forests of lands now tax-delinquent.

Public acquisition of forest land for a specific purpose - a park,
for example - may be thoroughly justified. But as a county policy
the wholesale or random acquisition of county forests as a result
of the misfortune of private ovmers is unthinkable. To prevent tax
delinquency is a major responsibility of local governments.

VJhat are the causes of tax delinquency? Excessive taxation
is one which immediately suggests itself. The Survey has therefore
made a preliminary investigation of forest land assessments and
taxes. Average county figures appear in Table 3- The second column,
by combining the information given in Tables 1 and 2, shovYs the
number of acres of tax-delinquent land in relation to the total
acreage of private forest in each county.

- 10 -

TABLE 3. TAX DELIIlQUEhCY IN RELATION
VALUE AND AVERAGE ANNUAL P

TO ESTIMATED
’ROPERTI TAX

AVERAGE ASSESSED
ON FOREST LAND.

Number of acres of
tax-delinquent for-
est'-' per 1,000 acres
County of private forest .

Averaged
assessed
value
per acre.

Average
annual tax
per acre,

Carbon

79

^?3.06

■1?0.13

Columbia

34

3.57

.10

Dauphin

37

3.40

.10

Lackawanna

43

6. 65

.21

Lebanon

0

5.27

.07

Luzerne

50

66

.11

Monroe

51

2.50

.08

Montour

17

5o03

.10

Northumberi and

16

3.63

.12

Pike

6

4.53

.08

Schuylkill

182

5.04

.20

Sullivan

57

2.87

,10

Susquehanna

65

5 . 61

1 — 1

Wayne

12

' 3.25

.10

Wyoming

52

4.72

.19

In forest properties of 50 acres or morOo

Some of the information used in calculating the values in these
columns was obtained from the State Planning Board, Penna . Dept,
of Commerce.

The above figures reveal a wide variation in both average
assessments and average taxes of forest land from county to county.
This variation may well correspond to variation in actual v/ood oro-
duction an^ accessibility of properties or to differences in their
usefulness for recreation and ivatershed protection. Lack of uni-
formity in assessment practices is also involved. It vroul-- there-
fore be unwise to conclude from the fact that some counties have
high taxes and much delinquency, and others lov; taxes and little
delinquency, that one condition is the cause of the other. Only a
careful study of the productivity and value of anthracite region
forests will make it possible to shov^ that assessments on the average
forest property in any county, and the taxes levied against them,
are too high - that is, out of proportion to income. The Survey
has such a study under way-L Even this study vd.ll reveal nothing
with respect to individual properties.

In general, well-stocked and thrifty forests on average soils
are believed to be capable of paying the average tax shown in the
above table for any county. Forests of scrub oak, aspen, grey birch,
or less are certainly incapable of paying even a fraction of these
taxes. An exception -would be tracts yielding high returns from re-
creational or watershed use.

The Survey strongly recommends that the counties and tovm-
ships review their tax procedure to make sure that present taxes on
individual forest properties are not out of proportion to their values.

Luzerne and Lackawanna Counties have so far been covered.

12

In estimating such values, full v/eight must of course be given to
capacity to produce income. He do not implj^ that the counties should
consider reducing to zero the assessment on forest lands from V'/hich
all forest grov.i:,h of value has been "skinned off," and. recreational
and 7/atershed values dissipated. If the ovmer v^ho has thus abused his
land can no longer pay taxes in accordance ivith xvhatever market value
remains, he is clearly unable to spend the money necessary/" to restore
it to productive use. The only hope of restoration lies in public
ovmership and management.

Forest Productivity is Too Lov;

Regardless of v/hether taxes on the e>dLsting forest are high or
low, everyone familiar with the anthracite region vdll agree that
forest productivity is too lov;.- The occasional tract of tall, mature
sawtimber, or dense young stand of mine props and cordwood, contrasts
vividly vdth great areas of mere brush or partially-forested burns.

The direct interest of local governjuents in bringing productivity of
private forest land to the highest point is well in'"''icated in Table 4.
hath a ma.jor portion of their surface in forest, manv counties vdll
find that forest land is today an astonishingly sma.ll part of their
ta*.^ base. It is important to realize, of course, that the forest
land assessments do not include considerable values in other forms
of property based upon the forest - such as recreational develop-
ments, Tfater works, wood-using plants, and trucks employed in trans-
porting forest products.

- 13 -

TABLE 4. ESTIMATED ASSESS^ENT OF FOREST LAND IN RELATION TO ASSESSIffiNT

OF ALL REAL PROPERTY. 1940.

County

Percent

forested

Forest land
valuation'-'"

Total real
property valuation--

Percent of
forest valua-
tion to total

Carbon

70

s^470,000

$ 26,453,000

1.8

Col'umbia

36

336,000

26,523,000

1.3

Dauphin

35

359,000

122,992,000

0.3

Lackawanna

47

811,000

167,000,000

0.5

Lebanon

20

162,000

62,771,000

0.3

Luzerne

58

1,095,000

283,364,000

0.4

Monroe

57

450,000

16,829.000

2.7

Montour

21

87,000

4,625,000

1.9

Northumberland 36

350,000

49,015,000

0.7

Pike

84

1,040,000

10,135,000

10.3

Schuylkill

60

1,262,000

106,778,000

1.2

Sullivan

66

308,000

2,789,000

11.0

Susquehanna

35

932,000

15,372,000

6,1

Wayne

46

687,000

' 13,770,000

5.0

Wyoming

51

462,000

8,552,000

5.4

Some' of the information used in calculating the values in these
columns was obtained from the State Planning Board, Penna. Dept,
of Commerce, and the Bureau of Statistics, Penna. Dept, of In-
ternal Affairs.

14 -

The foregoing table v/ill reassure those who object to any con-
siderable increase in the area of publicly-ovmed forest, because it
subtracts from the county tax base. (The State pays 5 cents yearly
to local governments on each acre of State lands, in lieu of taxes.)
Only in Pike, Sullivan, Susquehanna, '.Jayne, and Looming Counties
v;ould large -scale creation of county forests noticeably i-educe the
coimty revenue. I.Tiere such forests are created from land long tax
delinqueni:, the objection has already lost its force.

In certain lovmships, however, the immediate effect of large
scale -tax delinquency .among forest landormers vrould be a serious
loss of revenue for schools, roads, and public charities, In 34
■covmships of 8 counties for which information is available forest
land assessments are at least 10 percent of the assessment of all
real property. In 16 they are at least 20 percent of the total.

In i they _run above 30 percent. These to^mships in vfhich forest land
looms large in the tax base are by no means confined to counties in
’Which ihe county percentage is comparatively high. Luzerne- has 3
townships with 20 percent or more of their taxables in forest land,
and 1 with over 40 percent.

Obviously, it is in such tov-mships as these that the most
careful consideration should be given to the problems of tax delin-
quent forest lands, and of the effect of public o^mership on local
revenues .

- 15 -

Further Responsibility of Lo cal Government ^

The immediate purpose of the Survey in presenting information
on county forest ovmership resulting from tax delinquency has been to
point out that idle land is now available on v\rhich idle men may be
put to vrorkc It has recommended that local governments make sure
that inequitable taxes are not increasing the area of idle land. These
governments, Y/e believe, have further responsibilities tovYard the
forest landoiATner v^rho vrould like to put or keep his land in shape to
produce earnings, hence taxes. lie are collecting information on
Yirhich to recommend from time to time hovY these responsibilities can
best be redeemedo

In Paper No. 2 of this series the Survey recommended that the
counties and toYmships of the anthracite region cooperate with State
and Federal agencies in an intensification of forest fire protection,
Without successful protection against fire neither public nor private
forest oYvners can make their properties pay. It should be pointed out
that by creating county forests, the counties vYill go far toward im-
proving fire protection. Everywhere forest land in which the oYmer
takes no interest burns over more often than neighboring land. Com-
munity effort to protect and develop county land YYOuld greatly increase
respect for forest land, regardless of OYmership. Such respect is a
long step toward full and sustained development of one of the region's
greatest natural resources.

- 16 -

ALLEGHENY FOEEST ES?Ef\RCH ADVISORY COUNCIL

Francis R. Cope, Jr., Chairman

J. R. Schramm, Vice-Chairman

Charles E. Baer

Victor Beede

F. W. Besley
E. 0. Ehrhart

S. W. Fletcher

0. E, Jennings

Paul Koenig

Louis Krumena.cker

D. C. Lefevre

V/illiam H. Martin

H. Gleason Mattoon

Stanley Mesavage

David W. Eohinscn

M . B . Saul

George L. Schuster

J. Spencer Smith

W. S. Taber
Ezra B. Whitman

C. P. Wilber

Abel Wolman

Proprietor, Woodbourne Dairy and Orchards,
Dimock, Pennsylvania

Head, Department of Botany, University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

Deputy Secretary, Department of Forests
and Waters, Harrisburg, Pa.

Head, Department of Forestry, Pennsylvania
State College, State College, Pa

State Forester, Baltimore, Maryland

Forester, Armstrong Forest Company,
Johnsonburg, Pa.

Director, Pennsylvania Agricultural Exper-
iment Station, State College, Pa.

Head, Department of Biology, University of
Pittsbu.rgh, Pittsburgh, Pa.

Vice-President and General Manager, T. H.
Glatfelter Company, Spring Grove, Pa.

Manager, Krumenacker Lumber Company,
Stoyestown, Pa.

Superintendent of Lands, Clearfield

Bituminous Coal Company, Indiana, Pa.

Director, New Jersey Agricultural Experi-
ment Station, New Brunswick, N, J.

Secretary, Pennsylvania Forestry Assoc-
iation, Philadelphia, Pa.

Forester, Wyoming Valley Chamber of
Commerce, Wilkes-Barre, Pa.

Executive Secretary, Interstate Commission
on the Delaware River Basin, Philadel-
phia. Pa

Counsel, The Morris Foundation, Morris
Arboretum, Philadelphia, Pa.

Director, Agricultural Experiment Station,
Newark, Delaware

President, New Jersey Board of Commerce
and Navigation, Tenafly, New Jersey

State Forester, Dover, Delaware

Engineer, Whitman, Requardt and Smith,
Baltimore, Maryland

State Forester, Department of Conservation
and Development, Trenton, N. J,

Professor Sanitary Engineering, Johns
Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md,

Hardy L. Shirley, Secretary Director, Allegheny Forest Experiment

Station, Philadelphia, Pa.

"nlo^

I

NEW YORK

4l‘-Otf

/ (

K \

C'^X ^ I

^ .^ONTOUfTt COLUMBIA
/• / ! '

SCHUYLKILL

COUNTIES OF THE ANTHRACITE FOREST REGION
OF PENNSYLVANIA

TTtocf

MILES
9

I I 1 < > M M 1 i 1

0 9 le

Li.i I

W.P.A. OP. 165-2-23-634
T.Colemen 6-26-41