74G AMERICAN FORESTRY 



supplement the work of the fire wardens. But there never has been an attempt 

 to consolidate these two field forces, for it is well known that efiSciency in 

 either direction would suffer by it. 



The State of Michigan has placed the enforcement of her fire laws in the 

 hands of the State Game Warden with his field deputies. Michigan has faced 

 for years one of the worst fire problems in the country and so far has failed 

 to solve it. No reflection is intended on the State Game Warden who has 

 made a strong effort. But the oflBcial who must cope with the fire problem 

 in Michigan should be relieved of the burden of administering the fish and 

 game law if he is to ultimately succeed. And it is only througn forestry that 

 success will ever be secured. A few southern states, as Alabama and Kentucky 

 have, for purposes of economy, utilized their game warden force as fire wardens. 



The conclusion drawn fi'om the present condition of forest fire legislation 

 is that the functions of State Fire Warden and State Game Warden, and of 

 local fire and game wardens, should not be consolidated, and that this con- 

 solidation if efl'ected will tend to seriously dimiuish the efficiency of the fire 

 laws and the ultimate chance to secure the practise of forestry on a proper 

 scale. 



Further questions of consolidation will arise regarding forestry and state 

 lands, minerals and water powers. The natural lines of organization will tend 

 to the control of state lands and their resources by one body. This has already 

 occurred in Michigan, where the Public Domain Commission now has charge 

 of all state lands, and has superceded the Forestry Commission. In other 

 states, as Wisconsin and Minnesota, the State Land Commissioner, or corre- 

 sponding official, continues to handle all state lands until they are officially 

 designated as forest reserves, when their control passes into the hands of the 

 Forestry Commission. A division of responsibility similar to this exists in 

 the national organizaton where the Dejmrtment of the Interior retains juris- 

 diction over all public lands except those reserved for forestry, which are ad- 

 ministered in the Department of Agriculture. And the same suggestion for 

 consolidation has recently been made publicly by the Secretary of the Interior, 

 the plea being that of economy and the avoidance of duplication of work. 



In states where conservation commissions may in the future be established, 

 as in New York at present, and in Louisiana, such commissions will undoubt- 

 edly combine forestry with the subjects of control of state lands, water powers 

 and minerals. What effect this form of consolidation will have upon the 

 development of forestry in these states is not a foregone conclusion. Forestry 

 far more than mere forest fire prevention, demands trained services. Both 

 for education, which the people, land owners and others need, and for the 

 creation and management of State Forest reserves, the department should be 

 so organized that there shall be practically no possibility of political appoint- 

 ments. 



At present several states have Forestry Boards composed of members se- 

 lected in such a way that the party in power cannot control them politically. 

 In Wisconsin the board of five members is made up of the president of the 



