744 AMERICAN FORESTRY 



State conservation must cover soils, forests, water powers, minerals, and 

 flsh and game, and will include state activities in education, ownership, and 

 regulation of tlies resources. The problem before states is twofold — first, to de- 

 cide what lines the activities of the State should follow, and, second, to create 

 the most efiScient form of commission or organization for doing the work. 



At first glance it would seem in the interest of economy and efficiency to 

 centralize and combine the field of operation in one commission, and in certain 

 States the tendency is to do so. But this may not prove the best policy. The 

 field of soil conservation is chiefly educational, and this is best handled by the 

 agricultural experiment stations, free from conti'ol of state officials. The sys- 

 tem of game and fish protection in most states is organized on the basis of 

 state wardens, and is usually self-supporting from fines and other revenues. 

 The management is tested in a state game warden or a state commission". 

 Forestry includes fire protection, and the management of state forest lands. 

 These duties are in most states placed with a forestry commission, or state 

 forester. State lands not devoted to forestry are handled by state land com- 

 missioners whose duty is limited to the sale of such lands or of the timber 

 and other natural produce as wild hay, and to more or less efficient efforts to 

 prevent theft and fire. The state land oflSces have also been responsible for 

 mineral resources on state lands and in a few instances these mineral lands 

 have not been sold outright but mined on lease. 



So far no states have done much towards regulating private business, the 

 chief lines along which this may be possible being forests, minerals and water 

 powers. 



Consolidation of these activities should be advocated only if it makes 

 toward efficiency as well as economy. In a certain stage of development of a 

 new line of work, it is often best to concentrate attention on it and give it 

 every encouragement by freeing it as far as possible from alliance with or 

 subordination to other interests. An illustration of this principle is found in 

 the relation between forestry and the protection of fish and game. The two 

 subjects are closely related. By combining the work one commission takes the 

 place of two. In European countries the forester is the game warden. And 

 in this country the question of fire protection and game protection each call for 

 a set of wardens employed at least in part by the state. Why should the two 

 functions not be combined under one office and save duplication and expense? 



This question cannot be answered on the grounds of economy. No one 

 questions the necessity in cities of a fire department, entirely separate from 

 the police department though it may double the expense. Efficiency is the 

 object, economy being secondary. 



Although not so clearly distinguished as in the case cited, the duties and 

 responsibilities of a forest fire warden follow a different trend from that of a 

 game warden. His effectiveness depends upon the impression he can make on 

 the community, and the sentiment he can arouse against setting fires, for the 

 duties of a fire warden should be to prevent fires, not merely to put them out. 

 He should be well versed in local methods of fighting fires, and a good organizer 



