Costs of Forest Protection 37 



be uniform and running over long periods before such an attempt 

 might be profitable. 



But we are certain that doubling the miles of road or trail 

 more than doubles the accessibility of a region. Two well located 

 lookouts can cover more country than twice what can be cov- 

 ered by one lookout, and with much greater effectiveness. Ten 

 men on a fire can put it under control more than twice as 

 quickly as a five-man crew. The explanation may lie in the 

 fact that fire tends to spread in several directions at once. The 

 damage done (and the cost of control) is in ratio to the area 

 burned over. Other things being equal, the area burned over is 

 in proportion to the time elapsed between the start of the fire 

 and the time it is attacked by an adequate crew of competent 

 men. It may therefore be said that fire damage increases geo- 

 metrically with the elapsed time between start and control. But 

 the increase in cost of maintaining the protective organization 

 would normally be an arithmetical increase. While this is all 

 very theoretical, there seems reason to suppose that there is truth 

 in it. 



It seems likely that the ratio will be something as 2:5. That 

 is, if with a cost of 2 cents per acre for protection proper, the 

 average fire burns over 25 acres, by increasing the cost of pro- 

 tection to 4 cents, the acreage of the average burn may be 

 reduced to 5 acres. Of course such reasoning cannot be carried 

 to an extreme. The variable will not reach the limit, and it is 

 to be expected that the law of diminishing returns will be 

 encountered. 



If the Forest Service is able to furnish the quality of its 

 present protection at a cost of less than 1 cent, for five cents 

 per acre it should be able to give a degree of protection under 

 which the losses would be much less than one fifth of the pres- 

 ent. For about 10 cents per acre per year, there seems reason 

 to expect that a complete and proper system of improvements 

 manned by fully equipped crews of experienced men could be 

 put in and maintained so as to reduce losses to practically a 

 nominal amount. If the capital value of the National Forests 

 were so low as to average only $10 per acre, an investment in 

 their protection of 10 cents per acre per year would represent 

 1 per cent. Where 1 per cent of the forest stock is far too 

 great an annual loss to be tolerated, 1 per cent of the present 

 capital value is practically insignificant because of the certain 



