STATE FORESTKY. 15 



STATE FORESTRY. 



The considerations which require the Nation to adopt a conserva- 

 tive forest poHcy require the State also to adopt such a poHcy. They 

 are chiefly: The need of wood; the need of protection to stream flow, 

 to the soil, and to agricultural crops; the economic advantage of 

 putting all the land to its best use; the tendency of private action 

 to conflict with the public interests unless education, cooperation, or 

 regulation is provided by the State ; and the duty of handing on the. 

 resources of the State, the common property of its people, to the 

 citizens of the future, unimpaired by reckless use. 



In comparison with the great need disclosed by a study of present 

 forest conditions, the States have done exceedingly httle toward the 

 solution of the forest problem. Good work has been accomplished 

 here and there, but in reviewing State forestry one is more impressed 

 with the work that has been left undone. 



LINES OF STATE ACTION. 



The past hnes of State action fall naturally under the following 

 heads: (a) Protection of the forest against trespass; (b) protection 

 of the forest against fire; (c) the promotion of forestry by various 

 means ; (d) the establishment of State forests and forest organizations 

 charged with their care. 



TRESPASS LAWS. 



In general, the State laws against forest trespass aresuflicient, but 

 they are not enforced, and never have been, in any State. The non- 

 resident forest owner is frequently so great a loser from trespass that 

 he finds it cheaper to cut the timber before it has reached financial 

 maturity — that is, before it is the best business to cut it. In order to 

 recover damages and punish the trespasser, he must go to court and 

 secure a jury that will convict, while the local interests are all on the 

 side of abusing or at least neglecting the land in question, from which, 

 nevertheless, they often derive a large proportion of the taxes. 

 Though the trespass laws have helped to check large and continued 

 trespass, the general laxity of their enforcement has seriously dis- 

 couraged forestry. 



FIRE PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS. 



Eighteen States have organized fire protective systems. These are: 



Alabama. Maryland. Oregon. 



California. Michigan. • Pennsylvania. 



Connecticut. Minnesota. Tennessee. 



Louisiana. New Hampshire. ' Vermont. 



Maine. New Jersey. Washington. 



Massachusetts. New York. Wisconsin. 

 [Cir. 167] 



