JOURNAL OF AGRICDLUML RESEARCH 
Vol. XXX Washington, D. C., April 15, 1925 No. 8 
THE USE OF LIABILITY RATINGS IN PLANNING FOREST 
FIRE PROTECTION 1 
By W. N. Sparhawk 
Forest Service, United, States Department of Agriculture 
INTRODUCTION 
Two main objects were in view in 
undertaking this study. In the first 
place, it was desired to ascertain if 
some scientific method could be found 
by means of which it would be possible 
to determine how much money can 
justifiably be spent for fire protection on 
the national forests. The second ob¬ 
ject was to provide a basis for the 
proper distribution of available pro¬ 
tection funds between the different 
units of the organization. 
The results of the study seem to in¬ 
dicate that so far, with the inadequate 
data available, no absolute mathema¬ 
tical rules or formulae can be estab¬ 
lished to fulfill either' of these pur¬ 
poses. Scientifically accurate formulae 
require accurate basic data, which can 
be gained only through years of in¬ 
tensive research, and through detailed 
records, carefully kept for a consider¬ 
able period. Moreover, the correct 
application of such formulae would 
require accurate detailed knowledge of 
the resources that we want to protect, 
which can be gotten only by means of 
intensive survey and mangement plans 
for the entire national forest area. 
It is believed, however, that the 
study, even though based on ad¬ 
mittedly unsatisfactory data, has 
yielded some material which, sup¬ 
plemented by a fire plan reconnais¬ 
sance, will be of considerable value 
both in helping to determine the total 
amount of expenditures justifiable, and 
in distributing allotments within the 
organization. As better data accumu¬ 
late, upon which to base more reliable 
figures than those worked out in the 
following pages, they will become more 
useful for these purposes. It is ex¬ 
tremely important that such data be 
collected and kept as permanent re¬ 
cords so that they may be utilized as" 
the basis for future research. 
BASIC PRINCIPLE GOVERNING 
EXPENDITURES 
The best measure by which to 
judge the sufficiency of any fire protec¬ 
tion organization is the net result ac¬ 
complished. This net result may be 
expressed in terms of cost of protection 
plus losses incurred in spite of protec¬ 
tion; and the smaller this sum, the 
more efficient the protection. As one 
factor, cost of protection, goes up 
when the other, loss, goes down, it is 
evident that there will always be some 
point below which the sum can not be 
reduced. Up to this point, expendi¬ 
tures for protection are justifiable. 
Since the object in view is to reduce 
the sum of cost plus loss to a minimum, 
and not to eliminate all loss, regardless 
of cost, it is evident that justifiable costs 
should be determined by weighing 
against them the losses likely to be 
incurred. 
Protection costs are in two distinct 
categories. One, which may be called 
primary protection, includes the cost 
of the organization for prevention, 
detection, and suppression (including 
personnel, equipment, and improve¬ 
ments), and is determined in advance. 
The second includes actual costs of sup¬ 
pression, such as temporary labor, 
subsistence, and transportation, as well 
as the time of forest officers taken off 
from other work. These costs, like 
losses, can not be determined in ad¬ 
vance, but together with the losses 
depend upon the occurrence of fires. 
They can not, or should not, be limited 
by the arbitrary allotment of funds in. 
advance, because with exceedingly few 
exceptions all fires must be fought, 
the question of “how soon” being an¬ 
swered by Weighing probable losses 
plus suppression costs against the ex¬ 
penditures fequired to attack them 
within given periods. Even in the 
case of open lands with low liability, it 
1 Received for publication June 30, 1924; issued June, 1925. 
Journal of Agricultural Research, 
Washington, D. C. 
Vol. XXX, No. 8 
Apr. 15, 1925 
Key No. F-12 
19978—25f-1 
(693) 
