THE FOREST POLICY OF FRANCE 



with Parliament. In the protection belt, any form of 

 land use liable to create conditions favorable to slides or 

 torrents over-grazing, cultivation, the opening of quar- 

 ries, etc. can be forbidden or controlled by the Forest 

 Service for a period of not more than 10 years, subject to 

 an annual indemnity to every owner or lessee whose use 

 of the ground is interfered with. At the expiration of 

 10 years, the landowner has the right, under the law, to 

 compel the state either to withdraw its restrictions or 

 to buy his property outright. French forest officers gen- 

 erally regard the expenditure of funds for such a tem- 

 porary control of the use of land in the mountains as of 



of the turt was destroyed altogether and bad washes, 

 gullying, and land slips became common. The Communal 

 pastures through the French Alps, covering much ground 

 above timberline and often occupying old lake beds and 

 steep slopes at the heads of water sources, were a very 

 important factor in the situation. 



The control of grazing on these areas had extended 

 on paper to some 325 Communes in 1901. In practice, 

 tenderness in dealing with the mountain settlements has 

 made it of no effect. The law of 1882 gave the Com- 

 munes an opportunity to frame their own grazing regu- 

 lations. These were to specify the land which should 



AN EXAMPLE OF FRENCH CONSERVATION 



The first photograph shows the conditions of a gorge in France from which the torrent has washed the top soil and most of the vegetation. The second 

 picture shows the condition twenty years later after the steep slopes of the gorge had been planted. 



little value in attacking the problem of erosion, and this 

 feature of the law is a dead letter. 



The attempt to control the grazing of Communal pas- 

 tures is a similar story. This was the hardest nut to 

 crack in the whole problem, but it contained the kernel 

 of torrent prevention. Owing to their common owner- 

 ship and the total lack of regulation, Communal pastures 

 apparently were the hardest grazed of any. The mem- 

 bers of the mountain communties frequently took good 

 care of their own grazing land but vied with each other 

 in getting the last bit of forage from the village com- 

 mons. The result was not unlike what took place on 

 parts of our public range in the old days. A good part 



* In this, as in all other features of the policy, the attitude of the 

 local commissions has been consistently hostile to the efforts of the 

 Government. 



be pastured each year, the driveways to be used, the 

 grazing period, and especially the number of each class 

 of stock to be admitted. If the restrictions proposed 

 by the Commune were satisfactory to the Forest Conser- 

 vateur, they were to be put into effect by decree of the 

 Prefect. As a matter of fact, the Communes have never 

 proposed any regulations for their grazing lands, and 

 this work has all fallen upon the Forest Service. The 

 grazing plan prepared by the Forest Conservateur is 

 passed upon by an advisory commission representing the 

 Commune, the county, and the National Administra- 

 tion ;* and may then be put into effect in the discretion 

 of the Prefect. 



Contrary to the principle adopted in most other fea- 

 tures of this policy, the Communes have not been indem- 



