February 13, 1903.J 



SCIENCE. 



271 



pernicious. In Germany there has been pro- 

 tective legislation since 1879, with the result 

 of decreasing importations, but the conditions 

 there and here, where forestry hardly exists as 

 yet, are so different as to render comparisons 

 of little value further than to say that the 

 protection in Germany is given to a well-estab- 

 lished forest-management against the com- 

 petition of exploited natural woods. 



The impotency of existing laws designed to 

 prevent forest fires is recognized by every 

 one who has given the matter attention. 

 Under the head of principles to be kept 

 in view when formulating legislation for 

 protection against forest fires the follow- 

 ing suggestions are given: (1) There is 

 a necessity of having a well-organized 

 machinery for the enforcement of laws, in 

 which the state must be prominently repre- 

 sented; (2) responsibility for the execution of 

 the law must be clearly defined, and must 

 ultima'tely rest upon one person, an officer of 

 the state; (3) none but paid officials can be 

 expected to do efficient service; (4) recogni- 

 tion of common interest in the protection of 

 this kind of property can come only by a 

 reasonable distribution of financial liability 

 for loss between the state and local com- 

 munity and the owners themselves. 



Passing from restrictive, or police, regula- 

 tions to the direct supervision and control of 

 forest properties, it is shown that, notwith- 

 standing the necessity of the state's assuming 

 the function of internal improvement in cases 

 of palpable jniblic benefit, as, for instance, in 

 the forcible reforestation of denuded moun- 

 tain slopes, it is found that control and super- 

 vision of private property is an unsatisfactory, 

 expensive and only partially effective method 

 of securing conservative forest management. 

 We are prepared, then, for the conclusion, 

 which seems inevitable, that here, as well as 

 in the old world, it finally becomes preferable 

 in many eases for the community to own and 

 manage forest areas. The ownership may rest 

 either in the state, or in the county, to^^■n or 

 other political subdivision which seems most 

 interested in the maintenance of the pro- 

 tective cover, and possession, if it can not be 

 had by purchase, may be obtained by the exer- 



cise of eminent domain, a right that may 

 be reasonably exercised when public safety or 

 public utility requires, as is incontestably the 

 case in so many of our states at the present 

 time. In the ideal, most highly organized 

 state, the policy would be for the community 

 to own or control and devote to forest crops 

 all the poorest soils and sites, leaving only the 

 agricultural soils and pastures to private 

 enterprise. 



From this clear and forcible presentation 

 of the principles and methods of forest policy 

 the author passes to a resume of the forest 

 policies of foreign nations, those of France, 

 England (in India), Russia, Austria, Sweden 

 and Norway, and Germany being specially 

 discussed. For the education of the lower 

 class of foresters in Germany and Austria 

 there are some twenty sjaecial schools, while 

 for the higher classes not only ten special 

 forest academies are available, but three uni- 

 versities and two polytechnic institutes have 

 forestry facilities. The forests of Germany 

 cover 34,700,000 acres, or 26 per cent, of the 

 entire land surface, a large portion of the 

 forests covering the poorer, sandy soils of 

 the North German plains, or the rough, hilly 

 lands of the smaller mountain systems, and 

 are distributed rather evenly over the entire 

 empire. The condition of the forests depends 

 largely on the amount of control exercised by 

 the state authorities. It is best in all cases 

 in the state forests, it is almost equally as 

 good in the corporation forests under state 

 control, and is poorest in the private forests, 

 particularly those of small holders. In a large 

 part of Prussia, Wiirtemberg, and Bavaria 

 the corporations provide their own foresters; 

 but these, as well as their plans of operation, 

 must be approved by the state authorities. 

 In Prussia and Saxony private forests are free 

 from governmental interference, but elsewhere 

 in the German Empire private forests are, for 

 the most part, under some state super- 

 vision; a permit is required before land can 

 be cleared, devastation is an offense, and in 

 some states a badly neglected forest property 

 may be reforested and managed by state au- 

 thorities. 



From this brief outline it is apparent that 



