A NATIONAL PLAN FOB AMERICAN FORESTRY 777 



to enlarged State appropriations for fire protection. The law embodied 

 a principle the validity of which many State legislatures had up to 

 that time been hesitant to accept. Always, of course, any proposal 

 for a State to enter upon a new form of public activity encounters 

 the resistance of inertia and conservatism. Reluctance to set up a 

 new form of demand upon the State treasury that will be bound to 

 grow greater is not only understandable, but a course of prudence, 

 unless the justification of the new undertaking is clearly seen. That 

 the cost of protecting forest properties in private ownership against 

 damage by fire should be borne in whole or in part by the public, 

 because public values and public interests were involved in addition 

 to the property interest of the private owner, was a principle which, 

 following the passage of the Weeks law, rapidly gained general 

 acceptance. Federal leadership in laying down the principle largely 

 brought the change. Not only did the law cause ^ the States which 

 had forestry departments to assign them the function of administer- 

 ing organized fire protection; the attention of other States was at- 

 tracted, and as the benefits and practicability of fire control became 

 clearer many new States set up systems and created forestry depart- 

 ments primarily for this purpose. In consequence, outside of New 

 York and Pennsylvania, where land administration had from the 

 outset held a leading place in the State's forestry work, the admin- 

 istration of fire protection has been the backbone of State forestry. 



Federal cooperation influenced and strengthened the State forestry 

 departments, however, in other ways than by leading them into fire 

 protection and helping finance it. The Federal cooperative funds 

 were not in the nature of a subsidy to State enterprises of fire pro- 

 tection. They were made in recognition of definite national interests 

 and purposes to be served, in addition to purely State interests. 

 Therefore, the way in which the money was used was a matter of 

 direct Federal concern. Failure on the part of a State organization 

 to function efficiently would not only constitute a waste of funds 

 supplied in part by the Federal Government, but also would mean 

 a falling short in the attainment of the national objective of the law. 

 The duty therefore devolved upon the Forest Service, as the agency 

 charged with administration of the Weeks law on behalf of the Fed- 

 eral Government, to inspect the workings of the State systems and 

 do its best to help bring them to as high a standard of efficiency as 

 possible. The Forest Service was able to be of assistance to the 

 States in their effort to build up good systems of fire protection 

 principally in three ways. 



As the agency charged with the duty of protecting the national 

 forests, the Forest Service had been compelled to study intensively 

 the whole fire problem and was making steady progress in the devel- 

 opment of the technique of fire control. Its ability to serve as adviser 

 was increased by the fact that, coming into contact with the work 

 in all the cooperating States, it was able to bring to bear on each 

 State the experience that was being gained elsewhere. It was also 

 a means of strengthening the hands of the State foresters against 

 political pressure to put or keep on the pay roll inefficient men. 



