40 



THE STATE REVIEW 



Officers of the Michigan Forestry Association 



The Michigan Forestry Association was organized in Grand Rapids August 30,1905, having for its object the promotion of a rational system of 

 forestry in Michigan. The society is managed by the following roster of officers: President, John H. Bissell, of Detroit; Vice President, 

 Thornton A. Green, Ontonagon; Secretary, T. M. Sawyer, Ludington; Treasurer, J. J. Hubbell, Manistee; Board of Directors, Mrs. Francis 

 King, Alma; Charles J. Monroe, South Haven; L. L. Hubbard, Houghton; S. M. Lemon, Grand Rapids; H. N. Loud, Au Sable; George 

 B. Horton, Fruit Ridge. THE STATE FORESTRY COMMISION Charles W. Garfield, Grand Rapids; Arthur Hill, Saginaw; and William H. 

 Rose, Lansing. 



Stop The Forest, Fires 



By Filibert Roth, Forest Warden 



Will it pay? That is the question which 

 our materialistic and speculative age will 

 naturally ask first. 



To answer this question we must first 

 determine if the damage is really so great, 

 and next if it can be sufficiently lessened to 

 warrant the expense. 



The damage from forest fires in Michigan 

 is very large every year. In the minds of 

 most people it is only the terrible fires 

 like those of 1871 and 1881, in Michigan, the 

 terrible Peshtigo lire in Wisconsin, or the 

 Hinckley fire in Minnesota, which count as 

 serious and are believed to have done great 

 damage. This is a serious error. Each year 

 hundreds of fires burn up many thousands 

 of dollars worth of property in our state, and 

 even the many small fires which injure our 

 farmers' woodlots every year do, in the 

 aggregate, a damage which runs way up 

 into the thousands of dollars. 



"Why don't your state authorities do 

 something? There are more young trees 

 being destroyed east of here (Roscommon) 

 than you and all the forestry people of the 

 state will plant in a Uptime." This was 

 said to the writer in Arrll, 1905, when he 

 stepped off the train on his way to the 

 Forest Reserve. The same conditions pre- 

 vailed in 1904; they were repeated in 1906. 

 Smoke in all directions, dozens of fires in 

 plain view from a single point; hundreds 

 of acres of young growth destroyed every 

 day. The damage is great and the damage 

 from the regular yearly fires is as great 

 and greater than that produced by the few 

 great fires. But let us assume that even 

 with a good fire patrol we would still have 

 numerous small fires, and that only the large 

 fires might be prevented thereby. In this 

 case we need only consider the damage by 

 large fires. The fires of 1881 in the "Thumb" 

 are estimated to have destroyed about four 

 billion feet of what was then merchantable 

 timber, and the loss of property aside from 

 farm property was estimated at ten million 

 dollars. As we now know, these estimates 

 were far below the truth and twenty mil- 

 lions would not make good the actual losses 

 of merchantable material alone. 



A Little Calculation 



But suppose we take the ten million dol- 

 lars of this one fire (really many fires) and 

 leave out all other fires and losses. If 

 these ten millions were put at interest at 

 four per cent the income would be $400,000 

 a year. Suppose the state of Michigan had 

 divided in 1871, after its great lesson, to 

 spend this $400,000 per year in protecting 

 its forests. There is not a particle of doubt 



but that we should never have had the fire 

 of the "Thumb" nor the disgraceful affair of 

 1906, and in addition the state would have 

 saved millions of dollars burned up by the 

 thousands of other smaller fires. 



It would seem, then, that it would have 

 been good business for the state to have 

 organized a service even at the yearly ex- 

 pense of half a million dollars, to protect 

 its greatest available resource against its 

 chief foe the never-failing foe of city and 

 forest alike, the most serious foe of the 

 material welfare of our people. 



Of course we should hear at once that it 

 would be paternalism for the state to spend 

 half a million a year in the defense of what 



which may have a population of 15 indigent, 

 pioneer settlers, who clear land part of the 

 year and work in distant camps and saw- 

 mills the rest of the year, is hardly the 

 proper agent to protect the millions located 

 within its confines. The county in which 

 Ihe average tax rate is over ?50 per fl.OOO, 

 and where 99 per cent of all land is forest 

 or wild lands, is unable to do this work 

 which the state as a commonwealth really 

 makes its own duty as soon as it takes a 

 man's money. 



Can Xhey Be Stopped ? 



"But can these forest fires really be 

 stopped?" it will be asked. No, they can 



FIGHTING FOREST FIRES 



is largely private property. To this we can 

 only say that, the state now maintains a 

 costly militia for this purpose; that it stands 

 ready at any time to spend thousands to 

 protect a factory or a mine against a few 

 strikers or other troublesome people; that 

 the state stands ready to vote money as 

 free gift, to sufferers from forest fires, and 

 that really the fundamental duty of all gov- 

 ernment is to protect its people in their 

 lives and property. Every city maintains a 

 costly fire service, ready to work, irrespec- 

 tive of the nature or ownership of any prop- 

 erty. Then why should not the state main- 

 tain a fire service in districts where millions 

 of dollars worth of property is exposed to 

 the danger of fire? , , 



"Yes, but the city pays for its own serv- 

 ice; let the towns do the same." This argu- 

 ment is equally fallacious. Any civilized 

 government in all affairs of life steps in 

 where other effort fails. The township 



not. As long as we have cities and dwell- 

 ings we have conflagrations, and the same 

 is true in forest and farm. But just as we 

 reduce the city fires so the forest fires can 

 be reduced to a point where they are no 

 longer serious, to a point where they no 

 longer prevent forestry; to such a point that 

 it still pays to own and maintain forests as 

 a business enterprise. In discussing this 

 point we usually hear the broad gauge state- 

 ment: "Forest fires can't be stopped; it is 

 nil nonsense. Why, what can you do with a 

 fire running faster than a man, when smoke 

 and heat prevent your going even near it?" 

 True, and not true. When a city fire once 

 gets to certain proportions, we quit fighting 

 it. We merely defend the other parts of the 

 city, and we may even dynamite buildings 

 to prevent the spread. Does this fact pre- 

 vent any city from establishing a fire 

 service? 



Continued on page 43 



