FIRE PROTECTION TO SAVE OUR FORESTS 



711 



forced, would have prevented the catastrophe. It was 

 against the law for people to set fires during this period. 

 It was against the law to run locomotives or threshing 

 rigs that set fires. It was against the law for people 

 to ride along the highways throwing burning cigars, 

 cigarettes, or matches into the dry tinder alongside. But 

 public opinion was not united in support of the law. 

 Many persons believed fire a beneficial agency, or at 

 least, not harmful. Public opinion had denied State 

 Forester Cox an adequate number of men to enforce the 

 law and extinguish fires while small. When the wind 

 came up the result of this situation was the catastrophe 

 which shocked the whole country and left thousands 

 homeless and destitute. It is a curious circumstance 

 that these fires burned over part of the area swept by 

 the Hinckley fire of 1894, in which 418 lives were lost 

 and enormous damage inflicted. 



If a foreign army should cross over the international 

 boundary and kill 300 Minnesota people and destroy 

 20 million dollars worth of property, something would 

 be done about it promptly and vigorous measures would 

 be taken to prevent a recurrence of the disaster. Will 

 public opinion any longer continue to look with indiffer- 

 ence, or with only a mild and temporary concern, on the 

 fires that are robbing us of the productivity of our for- 

 est lands and hastening the day when Michigan can no 

 longer secure even from Louisiana and Mississippi the 

 oak and hickory she once supplied to her industries, but 



will be forced to depend on Siberia and South America? 



Pending the enactment of the new legislative program 

 outlined later in this article much may. be done by a 

 vigorous enforcement of existing laws prohibiting care- 

 lessness and misuse of fire. 



It is now possible in many regions to observe the- 

 symptoms of a house divided against itself. Public 

 opinion, in its better moments, has secured the enact- 

 ment in many States of reasonably good laws regarding 

 the starting of fires. Often these laws could be improved, 

 but it is surprising what efficient fire laws are to be 

 found in most States; no law is self-enforcing however, 

 and after securing the passage of good fire laws public 

 opinion has often relapsed and refused both the funds 

 and the sentiment that are necessary to enforcement. 

 State fire wardens, State foresters, and National Forest 

 supervisors are often found struggling valiantly to detect 

 and suppress fires that would never have been started 

 but for the indifference or secret encouragement of local 

 opinion. The result of such a clash of forces is not a 

 happy one. The resulting fire protection is very im- 

 perfect. A house divided against itself can not stand. 



But in all this confusion there is to be found a clue 

 to one of the most notable recent developments in prac- 

 tical fire protection. Fire laws have usually been con- 

 sidered unenforceable in so far as they relate to the 

 apprehension of the persons immediately responsible for 

 fires. Professional detectives and police officers have 



A MAGNIFICENT STAND OF TIMBER COMPLETELY DESTROYED BY FIRE 

 This example of utter destruction is on the Oregon National Forest and it would be difficult to estimate the total loss. The area has now 

 been artificially planted to Douglas fir, but the old snags and logs will long constitute a serious menace to the growing stand of timber. 



