STATE WORK 



The^Year's Forest Legislation in Vermont 



By A. F. Hawes, State Forester. 



The Vermont Legislature of 1910 has on 

 the whole taken a progressive stand in 

 forestry matters, and as indicative of the 

 growing sentiment throughout the State in 

 favor of forestry, this is especially en- 

 couraging. The law of 1908 creating the 

 office of state forester, appropriated $12,000 

 annually for the departments of agriculture 

 and forestry. By increasing this appropri- 

 ation to $20,000 the new legislature virtu- 

 ally stamped its approval upon the forestry 

 work of the first two years. These funds 

 are divided between the two departments 

 by the State Board of Agriculture and 

 Forestry; and the amount alloted to for- 

 estry was $9,000 in 1909; and $7,500 in 

 1910. The increasing demands upon the 

 Commissioner of Agriculture will make it 

 impossible for the board to grant as large 

 a proportion of the new appropriation to 

 forestry, but it is hoped that at least 

 $12,000 will be available, which would al- 

 low about $5,000 for the purchase and 

 planting of demonstration forests in vari- 

 ous parts of the state, and in the im- 

 provement of the fire warden service made 

 possible another bill passed by this legis- 

 lature. The strongest supporter of the for- 

 estry movement in the legislature was 

 Hon. Allen M. Fletcher of Cavendish, chair- 

 man of the Ways and Means Committee 

 and for a long time an active member of 

 the Vermont Forestry Association. 



The amendment of the present fire war- 

 den law provides that in addition to the 

 first selectman, who is at present fire war- 

 den, the state forester has authority to 

 appoint additional wardens in mountainous 

 towns particularly liable to fires; and to 

 pay their expenses to local meetings for 

 the discussion of forest fire topics. It also 

 provides that if any forest owner will estab- 

 lish a lookout station on top of a moun- 

 tain and connect the same with telephone, 

 that the state will maintain a watchman 

 there during a dry season. An amendment 

 was added in the House compelling any 

 railroad to establish a fire patrol at the 

 request of the state forester in danger 

 seasons, with a penalty of $25 a day for 

 disobedience. This was killed in the Sen- 

 ate by the Boston and Maine R. R. ; and 

 while it would not have worked a hardship 

 on any railroad, it is of little importance 

 since there are comparatively few railroad 

 fires in Vermont. 



In its enthusiasm for forestry the Gen- 

 eral Assembly passed one or two measures, 

 the wisdom of which may be doubted but 

 which illustrate very well the growing in- 

 terest along this line. Such a measure 

 was the bill reestablishing a bounty on 

 porcupines. The last time this bounty 

 was in force it resulted in an expenditure 

 of several thousand dollars a year of state 

 funds. Now the animals have been al- 

 lowed to breed unmolested for several years 

 and will be a profitable source of income 

 for many hunters. While it must be ad- 

 mitted that porcupines do considerable 

 damage to growing timber in certain re- 

 gions, it probably does not compare in money 

 value to that done by woodchucks and 

 house rats, yet there is no state bounty 

 on these animals. 



One of the most curious forestry situa- 

 tions has been the growing opposition 

 throughout New England to the Christmas 

 tree industry. From Vermont about 300,000 

 trees have been shipped annually to Cin- 

 cinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburg, Washington, 

 and other points west and south. All of 

 these trees could easily be grown in fifteen 

 years on 300 acres, and yet coming as 

 they do from many parts of the state they 

 have attracted undue attention. Lumber- 

 men and pulp men have made the most 

 of it to distract attention from the damage 

 done by them in cutting small trees, and 

 the press has been energetic in its attacks. 

 The result was that a law was passed 

 without opposition requiring a dealer to 

 pay a license of twenty-five cents a tree if 

 he cuts over twenty evergreen trees less 

 than seven inches at the butt on land not 

 his own. As the dealers have been paying 

 little more than a cent apiece this license 

 is intended to be prohibitive. There is 

 apparently no reason why this law would 

 not apply equally to trees cut for pulp 

 or lumber, if they were under seven inches 

 on the stump and cut by a lumberman 

 simply owning the stumpage without the 

 land. It is, of course, regrettable that 

 the farmers have not been able to get more 

 profit out of the Christmas tree industry. 



A natural sequence of this law, and one 

 which any lumberman might have fore- 

 seen, was a bill introduced by the legis- 

 lative committee on conservation, providing 

 that on certain sized tracts no spruce or 

 hemlock trees under fourteen inches on 

 the stump should be cut and no hardwoods 

 under ten inches. Of course, no bill of 

 such a nature could pass and it would 



179 



