192 Forestry Quarterly. 



them will be that they assume the loss for fully stocked stands of 

 reproduction and that this is not the case in these forests. It 

 must be remembered that the stands in the woods to-day would 

 be fully stocked if it were not for the fires of the past. Parts 

 of the woods which fires have reached but seldom have on them 

 stands of young growth so dense, that they are well nigh im- 

 passible. In the case assumed the damage was done in probably 

 half an hour, while actually the damage was distributed over 

 scores of years. 



There is no need of going into discussion of the accuracy of 

 these figures here ; one thing is certain, and that is that they are 

 very conservative, and if these figures were based on what these 

 forests could do under conservative management the loss would 

 be nearer $50 per acre. These figures are oflfered principally as 

 an argument against "light-burning" and not as indisputable 

 computations in Forest Valuation. They show that reproduction 

 has a value that is based on sound mathematical principles, and 

 that its destruction means financial loss. 



I conclude then, that "light-burning," from the standpoint of 

 Forest Management is a failure. It cuts off absolutely all pros- 

 pects of raising timber in the future, after the timber has been 

 logged off. It is financial suicide. From the standpoint of 

 present day lumbering, it has been said, "light-burning" has no 

 serious drawbacks (except that it costs from 8 to 20 times as 

 much as other more efficient means of forest protection). But 

 lumbering will not be the reckless slashing that it has been, very 

 many years longer. Private timber lands are beginning to be pro- 

 tected efficiently by means of protective associations, and tax 

 reform will come, not by waiting for it, but by aggressive work on 

 the part of those who own timberlands and are growing timber, 

 and have concrete cases to bring before the Board of Supervisors 

 and the county tax assessor. The "laissez faire" policy of the past 

 which allowed cut-over lands to revert to the state for unpaid 

 taxes, must give way sooner or later to a more constructive policy 

 of applying forestry principles and trying out new forest taxation 

 theories on concrete cases. 



While in the long run timber holders will never sanction "light- 

 burning" as a means of protecting forests from fire, they will 

 heartily endorse and practice any inexpensive and efficient method 



