A NATIONAL PLAN FOE AMERICAN FORESTRY 807 



Reference has already been made to the laws governing the appoint- 

 ment of the State foresters. In a number of States the position is one 

 which may be subjected to political pressure. In a few cases this 

 untoward influence may carry down through the field force of fire 

 wardens or rangers. 



The method provided for selecting the local field force differs rather 

 widely. In some States, for example, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and 

 Connecticut, the wardens are chosen by the State forester. In other 

 States, as in New Hampshire and Massachusetts, they are at least 

 suggested by town officers, and in some of the far Western States the 

 organization of the protective force is principally in the hands of 

 timberland owners' associations. There are also wide differences in 

 the method of financing the protection activity. In 18 States no part 

 of the expense is borne by the private owner. In Kentucky, West 

 Virginia, Montana, Idaho, California, Oregon, and Washington the 

 expense is divided between the public and the landowners, the public 

 share being derived partly from the Federal cooperative contributions 

 and partly from State funds. Three of these States (Montana, Idaho, 

 and Washington) confine the expenditures of their own funds to State- 

 owned lands. 



In New Hampshire, all owners of 1,000 acres or more must furnish 

 protection up to a certain cost per acre. In Vermont, owners of 

 unoccupied or unenclosed forest land may be caUed upon to meet a 

 portion of the cost of suppression when it exceeds a fixed ratio of the 

 taxes to be raised in a town. In the so-called " forestry district" of 

 Maine, the fire protection funds are raised by a 2% mill tax on all 

 property. Most of this region is timbered, so that the tax practically 

 amounts to the timberland owners bearing the burden. In Connec- 

 ticut, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Oregon, and 

 Washington, a part of the expense is placed upon the counties; in 

 California, a part may be assumed by the counties; in Maine (outside 

 the forestry district), New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, 

 Rhode Island, New York, and Wisconsin, a part is placed upon the 

 towns. Meager State appropriations rather than laws have laid a 

 large share of the cost of protection upon cooperating timberland 

 owners in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Okla- 

 homa, and South Carolina, and to a less degree in Texas. 



Except for relatively small areas, protection effort is now State- 

 wide in most regions. In the central group of States, however, only 

 about 30 percent of the area and in the southern group only 24 percent 

 are under organized protection. Lack of sufficient money and the 

 short time since protection activities were initiated are largely re- 

 sponsible for incomplete coverage of the area in these two regions. 

 Dearth of funds is of course partly a reflection of lethargic public 

 sentiment. 



Results obtained by the States. The results of organized protection 

 by the States are more real than apparent. Along with the develop- 

 ment of protection methods there has been taking place the tremen- 

 dous development of automobile travel and road systems, which has 

 brought a vast increase in the fire danger. Streams of people now 

 pour year after year into and through the wooded country. Campers, 

 picnickers, hunters, fishermen, and mere travelers along the roads 

 make up a veritable host of potential fire causers. Rarely do they 

 purposely set fire to the woods ; ordinarily they doubtless never know 



168342 33 vol. 1 52 



