ALBERT’ R. MANN LIBRARY New York STATE COLLEGES OF AGRICULTURE AND HoME ECONOMICS AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY Cornell University Library ‘wi Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924002949455 A STUDY OF LIGHT BURNING IN CALIFORNIA A Report Prepared in the Minor Field in 2artial Fulfillment for the Degree of Master in Forestry by Frank Leo ‘puttona, B. Bs SD 42.1 aa 322827 A STUDY OF LIGHT BURNING IN CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS BA Int roduction Page Purpose of the Study -------------20+---22----4---20 7 Sources of Data ----2- 42-2222 22 nn nee nn ee eee ene 1 Review of Forest Conditions in Cabifornia +--------- General Statements --------------- Seana ema ae at a Specific Statements * 71> Forest Area reer Volume «<«<2-.--2404- 3 Ownership of Timberland -------0.=2.----.=- 4 Forest TypeS8 -----------4-2----5---- saa a cai 4 Undergrowth ------~---------.----.-------- 7 Climatic Conditions in Relation to Fire ----------.- 7 The Forest Fire Problem Types of Fires <---~-------..-.-+-- i etn cco ak ba 8 Causes of Fire ------ ae ta een ase nee eens nna 9 Need for Adequate Protection --~-------~------- 11 if : Historical Remarks The Use of Fire in Clearing Land ---~-.---.-.-- 13 Light Burning in the Southern Pine Region ----4 14 Light Burning in the Northwest < 42,86 ‘ 33.33 Pine : : : : Englenn: 26.65 : --- : 46,40 : 26.95 Spruce: : : 4 Noble : 44.12 : --- an oe) > «648,53 Fir : : : 3 Western: 9.21 : .38 : 27.60 : 62.81 Hemlock: : : : West.R.: 16.95 : 7.28 > 52.34 > 23.43 Cedar : 5 - : Thus, in the above stand, and average of 33% for all species was scarred by fire, Each recurring sur- face fire will not only deepen the scars alreads for- med, but will increase the number of fire-scarred trees, 42 V. That the scarring of trees is not confined to those of the small diameter classes is shown by the following table prepared by T. T. Munger. Table Showing the Percentage of esch Form of In- jury that Trees of each Diameter Class receive from Sur- face Fires, by T. T. Munger. D.B.H.:Burned to:Felled by:Scarred by:Apperently Inches; Death : Fire : Fite : All Right WESTERN YELLOW PINE 12-18 : 7.68 O63 % 32.22 +: 59.27 19-24 : 4.96 5,22 39.69 : 50.13 25-30 : 2.98 3.26 50.96 : 42.86 31-36 : 5.83 2,92 53.35 +: 37.90 over36: 6.31 3.16 60.00 : 30,53 DOUGLAS FIR 12-18 : 4.40 2.26 19.91 : 74.43 19-24 : 7.38 : 2.89 20.90 : 68.85 25-30 310.75 ; #23 17.92 : 68.10 31=30 2 7.34 : 13° * 35.60: = 75565 37-42 : 7.66 B.Oe eh Dee 2 O76 94 43-48 : 3.64 2.84 ; 18.62 294 200 49-54 : 1.56 : 2.49 : 17.49 > 92.50 65-60 : o--~ fo oscoce- : 2.00 : 98,00 over60: <.4- poseece- : 4.08 ; 95.92 _ This would prove that the more valuable species, Se pine, is much less fire resistant than douglas fir. [The percentage of fire-scarred yellow pine trees increases progressively as the trees become larger. In other words, the number of fire-scarred trees is in di- rect provortion to the number of surface fires the #el- Low pine has to withstand. , ye acey hinge a3 (2) Lamage to Merchantable Timber thru Heat Killing Heat killing is the form of damage resulting from crewn fires. Although crown fires are uncommon'in the coniferous forests of the Sierra region, they have been known to occur, causing considerable damage over exten- sive areas. Thus, in September 1917, 560 acres were burned on the Shasta National Forest (Howard Fire) on 250 acres of which the timber was entirely destroyed. Also, in the Palm Creed Fire in 1897, on the Crater Nat- ional Forest in Oregon,.a crown fire killed all but a few scattered trees on an area of over 800 acres. This occurred in a pine-fir forest similar to those of Nor- thern California, S. B. Show in making a study of five typical fires ¢tmentioned above) found that 3% of the total area observed had been heavily burned by local or general crown fires. The loss by heat killing on the areas thus heavily burned, averaged 8,530 board feet per acre, and had a stumpage value of $13.51 per acre. While genuine crown fires seldom occur, intense local burning:is common. ‘Southern and western slopes dry. more quickly than other exposures, as do also the heads of draws. It is here that light surface fires often flare up suddenly and destroy large trees, West- ern yellow pine and sugar pine suffer less from heat killing than do the firs, cedars and western white pine, This is due to the fact that the bark is relatively thicker, the base of the crown is higher, the foliage 44 is coasser, and the buds are covered with heavy scales and sheltered by long coarse leaves. White fir is par- ticularly inflammable due to the resinous character of the leaves and small flat buds. The cedar buds are naked and hence are easily heat killed. While the loss by heat killing or burning of the crowns is very noticeable, it is probable that in the aggregate that less than one haf of the damage is from this source as compared with that lost by the burning down of fire-scarred trees. (3) Loss thru Cull and Reduction in Grade of _Lumber Due to Fire-scars The loss through cull and reduction in the grade of lumber manifests itself in the following two ways, First, is the direct loss in timber value from cull due to the presence of the scars, Secondly, is the greater and secondary loss due to rot. The typed of defects caused by fire are fire-scar proper, cat-face, fire- scar and pitch, fire-scar and center-rot, and fire-scsar and stuwnn rot. Mill studies made by Swift Berry prove that fire alone is often directly responsible for one- half of the cull in logs. The lumber so kost is of ex- cellent quality as it is from the larger butt logs. (4) Loss due to Reduction in Rate of Growth of Injured Trees As the rate of growth depends upon the rate of Missing Page AG probably cause more damage to the forests of California during certain seasons than the average annual losses occurring from fires. It nas been determined by the For- est Service that fires result in a concentration of bark- beetles on areas that have been burned. Healthy trees often resist attacks by the beetles by causing an ex- cess of sap flow. Those which have been slightly én- jured, however, seem to be preferred by the beetles, as entrance is effected without trouble. Thus, in 1916, a fire occurred on the Plugias National Forest in a pole stand of yellow pine, scorching the crowns, yet not kill- ing the trees, In September 1917, S. B.. Show tallied sample plots on the burned and similar adjacent unburned areas. On the burned area he found that of 37 trees untouched by fire, three had been attacked but had re- sisted entrance by excessive sap flow; of 31 scorched trees within 50 feet of the others, 13 were attacked and the beetles had gained an entrance. On plots in the unburned timber 200 yards away, 184 poles examined had no pitch-tubes showing the entrance of bark-beetles, Studies made by J. E. Patterson on three mmaburned areas in Rogue River County, Oregon, in pine timber, also prove that bark-beetles attack en masse injured trees. On these areas only .7% of the volume of the stand was killed, 6.5% severely injured, 27.84 slightly injured, while 65% was unharmed. A comparison of the losses due to beetles before and after the fire indic- ated that the increase in destruction on the burned area was 1.177 @, while that immediately outside of the Aq burn remained constant. That the injured trees were most often attacked is evidenced by the fact that 75% of the pines attacked on the burn, had been slightly or moderahely injured by fire, 8% of the attacks were on uninjured trees, and no trees killed by the fire were touched, (6) Damage from Wood-destroying Fungi Following Fire Injury Fungi, in the majority of cases, gain entrance through open fire-scars, and the damage resulting there- from may often be much greater than that from the fire itself. Fire causes the largest and deepest wounds, frequently burning deeply into the heartwood, Such wounds expose the unprotected wood surface for long periods of time before the tree can secrete sufficient quantities of resins to resist the attacks of fungi. Hence, practically all fire-scarred timbér is injured more or less by wood-destroying fungi. Fungi damage seems to most extensive in white fir and incense cedar. Dr. J. S. Boyce of the Office of Investigation in Forest Pathology, having made a study on the Plumas Nat- ional Forest and the Stanislaus National Forest, in Cal ifornia, found that of 1,075 typical trees felled and dissected to determine the method of infection with dry- rot fungus, 646 bore fire-scars, 67% of which had be- come infected. As the entrance afforded by fire-scars A8 is practically always at the base of the tree, the most valuable timber is destroyed. Hence, it can be seen that the damage resulting from the scarring of trees by light surface fires is tremendous after wood-destroying fungi gain an entrance, (7) Reduction in Density of Stand Logging is not practicable in the Sierra region if the merchantable timber is much less than 8,000 board feet per acre. Stands which are almost on the border line of the required merchantable volume, may be re- duced below it by one or more surface fires. If a few large mature trees are killed from time to time by Burn- ing down or heat killing, and reproduction is prevented, a reduction in the density of the stand must necessarily take place. #xamples of this are found in the extensie brushy areas within the timber belt of California which today bear only scattered large trees. (8) Changes in Composition Due to variance in fire resistance of mature trees and reproduction, and in the requirements necessary for the establishment of seedlings, fires may in some cases be the controlling factor in determining which species may ultimately occupy a given site. J. V. Hoffman has indicated an area near the Oregon-California state line where, due to light surface fires repeated at intervals of 10-15 years, the original stand of yellow pine, sugar pine, white fir and douglas fir has been convert- ed into pure stands of knobcone pine. Show has found the same condition occurring on large areas in the Mc Gloud Flat Region .in California. B. Destruction of Reproduction by Light Burning The average annual loss of reproduction by fire in California on National Forests, between the years of 1908 and 1918 has been valued at $52,173.00. In general, the lumbermen consider reproduction as having no value, claiming that it detrimental to logging and increases the fire hazard. To the forester, however, reproduction is of vital importance as the source of our future timber supply. There is a particular need of favoring reproduction in the timber regions of Cal- ifornia for the forests are all-aged. It would be a poor economy that did not protect the advance growth growth in these forests so that a supply of timber will be available as soon as popsible after the now mature crop has been harveated, Qn an area Light Burned by the Sierra Iron Com- pany near Mohawk, Plumas County, Cslifornia, in the spring of 1912, and examined by Show three years later, it was found that practically all the reproduction less than 6 feet high had been killed, An examination made on 5 sample plots showed that 82% of the saplings and small poles between 2-8" were also killed. Another area was examined by Show to ascertain the damage resulting to the reproduction froni Light Burning, This was at Castle Rock, California, on an area of 8 acis. The fire was the lightest which could have spread. Af- ter examinations 4 times at varying intervals after the fire, it was learned that practically all of the seed- lings, saplings and poles of all species (yellow pine, incense cedar and douglas fir) below 2" D.B.H. and 15 years of sge, were killed, and 60% of the young trees between 15-25 years were also killed, Upon an area ideal for Light Burning, namely that of T. B. Walker, near Westwood, California, which was burned in October 1910, S. B. Show made an examination in 1915, to determine the damage resulting. Reproduct- ion mostly yellow pine and white fir, was everywhere abundant. On three areas of 2500 square feet, selected where the damage was greatest, 83% of the white fir, and 75% of the yellow pine seedlings, saplings and poles were killed. There still remained alive 436 seedlings per acre of which 75% were yellow pine. Even where the damage was heaviest, the remaining seedlingswere still equal to the number used in extensive planting. It must be borne in mind, however, that this was the-first time the area had been Light Burned. Succeeding light fires would surely reduce the remaining young growth far below that required to sufficiently restock the area, Studies of damage to reproduction in this region show that natural regeneration cannot take place if re- neated light surface fires occur. Deterioration of site vel is bound to follow if this practice is carried out. (c) Brush Fields From a memorandum obtained from the files of the United States Forest Service, District 5, San Francisco, California, was obtained the following: - “Within the timbered National Forests of Califor- nae excluding the Angeles, Cleveland, Mono, Inyo and Santa Barbara, there are 2,847,134 acres classified as brush-fields. On this area, 1,861,870 acres or 13.6% of the timbered forests, consist of brush-fields with- in the timber belt, aii the soil occupied once bore a stand of timber, and is capable in most cases of bear- ing timber again. They are surrounded by timber, is- lands of timber and scattered large trees, snags, stum- ps and roots appear eee trees planted there grow, acattered young trees slowly come in from natural seeding, and the sites are the same as adjacent timber- ed lands except that the soil is poorer due to deter- ioration.® (1) Origin of Brush-fields There can be little doubt that repeated fires cause the formation of brush fields, Brushy areas in timber belts and on soils similar and adjacent to those bearing tree growth, They are irregular in outline, often stopping at the foot of slopes, and in timber, or along ridge tops which bear scattering lines of trees, Sometimes they form fongue-like extensions up exposed ridges. Charred stumps, snags, roots and lone trees are to be found in most brush-fields. As compared with tree growth, most shrubby species are more fire resistant and prolific. J. V. Hoffman observed the sprouting capacity of manzanita after fire to be as follows:- Manzanita - (A. pungens platyphylla) Sprouting after fie. Kinney Creek Fire ~- 1915. Bush No. :Main Branches :Burned Sub- :New Shoots : of Old Stump ; Branches: 1 2 8 rs) > 48 2 : 2 : 10 : 32 3 : 5 : 15. ge 95 Sample plots measured by J. V. Hoffman after amother fire showed that common manzanita (A. manzanita) estab- lished 91 seedlings per square yard where there were but 3 bushed per square yard. Show gives the formation of a typical brush-field as follows: - "An area of 159200 acres on the Lower McCloud River and adjacent Squaw Creek watersheds supported, 50 years ago, a mixed stand of yellow pine, sugar pine, douglas fir and incense cedar, averaging 15 M board feet per acre. In 1875 a fire burned over the area from June to October and killed 50-75% of the timber, Following this, the brush spread rapidly. In 1898, another fire occurred on the same area, killing most of the remaining timber, AN le At the present time there are only scattered trees left, and the brush is so dense that travel is extremely dif- ficult. The average stand here, is now less than 1M board feet per acre. Although reproduction is slowly coming in, it is estimated that 100 years will be nec- essary to replace the former stand, (2) Loss of Timber Producing Capacity It is estimated by the Forest Service that the brush-fields in the timbered belt ao ea eouie Nat- ional Forests should bear stands averaging at least 20 M board feet per acre. This would make the total capacity of these fields 37 pillion board feet, or enough to run all bf the pine mills in California for 25 years. (3) Increased Cost of Protection Besides being non-productive, brush areas increase the fire hazard of adjacent timber. Brush+fields make trail and telephone construction much more expensive. In 1916 and 1917, the Forest Service found that trail | and telephone construction in timber averaged $24.00 per fire, while for brush-fields it was $98.40 per fire. Lor oS D. Damage to Grazing Burning isa often indulged in to improve grazing and facilitate stock’ gathering. This no doubt will improve most browse range by increasing the number of tender shoots and rendering penetrable to stock, such brush-fields as are extremely dense. On the other hand burning the grazing area will usually result in the los of part of the grazing season. If burning is continued at short intervals, site deterioration is bound to oc- cur. Furthermore, some of the more valuable browse species as blue-brush, deer brush, California black oad, Garry oak, service berry and bitter cherry are more exacting in their soil requirements than are manzanita, chinquapin and snow brush which are much poorer browse. Hence, as soil deterioration takes place, the poorer species will replace the better ones. Thus, repeated light fires damage grazing areas condiderably. It is estimated that the annual range loss due to fire on the National Forests from 1908-1918, averaged $5,276.00. E. Damage to Watersheds Repeated surface fires on watersheds, finally re- duce the stand materially and expose the soil to eros- ive agencies. As a consequence, damage by floods. fre- quently results. This may include destruction of pro- perty and life, the comering of valuable agricultural a? land with sand and debris,the loss of irrigation water at a season when it is most needed, and the decrease of timber and forage producing capacity due to loss of soil from the upper slopes. When slopes are denuded the loss of water for power and irrigation is wery evident, For est cover on steep slopes controls the surface run-off and tends to delay the melting of, snow. The main factor in regulating the run-off is the litter and humus layer. which acts as a sponge in retaining the precipitation, Frequent fires will destroy this layer and erosion will take place. At high elevations where the soil is diredt- ly exposed, wind may be an important factor along with . water in transvorting the soil, Cost. of Light Burning Even though Light Burning afforded the protection that the Light Burning advocates Cleim, the excessive costs necessary to practice it, would prevent its ap- plication over extensive areas. To burn the area but once does not eliminate the fire hazard on most areas, This is due to the fact that lower branches and needles of reproduction, and shrubs are killed. By the next. . season, this dead material has to a large extent, fallen to the ground, new shoots spring up profusely from the shrubs, and the debris upon the ground is of sufficient quantity to form a damaging fire if ignited, Therefore on an area to be protected by Light Burning, it is prob 56 able that burning will be necessary for three consecutive years before the inflammable debris will be removed to the extent that genuine protection is afforded, Fel- lowing this period it will be necessary to burn only at intervals of three to five or seven years, depending upon the rate of litter accumulation. It is the repeat- ed cost of burning that makes the practice of Light Burn- ing pronibitive, if for no other reason. The Light Burn- ing operation carried out by the Red River Lumber Compay in 1910, cost from 8-75¢ per acre burned, the average costs being approximated at 47¢ per acre. An examin- ation of the area 5 years later by members of the United States Forest Service and State Forester's office, in- dicated that the fire hazard was just as great, if not worse, than before the area had been Light Burned, The Light Burning work done by the Weed Lumber Company dur- ing the summer of 1920, cost in the neighborhood of $1.00 per acre. It is the intention of the Company to burn tre same area again in 1921, at an estimated cost of 50¢ per acre. If this is carried out as;planned, an area of 17,000 acres of timberland will be protected from fire to a certain extent for not more than 6 years, at a cost of about$25,500.00. In order to fully protect this burned area, the adjacent timberlands must be similarly burned, It is obvious that, costs being similar, it would be fin- ancially impossible to Light Burn areas of any great ex- tent, as the forest lands administered by the Forest Ser- vice in California, af Danger f Light Burning —v wa In practicing Light Burning, there is practically always e vossibility of the fire becoming uncontrollable. An area on a uniformly gentle slope and of but one ex- posure might be burned with a minimum of danger, be- cause the moisture content of the debris on the forest floor would no doubt be uniform, But in relatively few cases do conditions occur where the area to be burned is consistent in slope and exposure. With a diversified topography it is impossible to determine exactly when Light Burning can be practiced without danger. Nor- thern slopes will not burn if the southern exposures alone are taken as the criterion, Therefore, anly a certain percentage of the surface will be burned over dependent upon the area of the different exposures. On the other hand, if Light Burning is postponed until nor- thern exposures will burn, the southern slopes will be highly inflammable, and an intense and dangerous fire will result on the latter slopes. Hence, Light Burn- ing is dangerous, in as much that moisture conditions vary with degree of slope and exposure of the forest floor, Again, relative humidity may be the determining factor in the danger resulting from surface fires. It is generally understood that forest fires burn with greater intensity between the hours of 10 am and 4 pm than they do at other times. This is due to the fact 58 that the relative humidity decreases during the warmer part of the day. With a decrease of the relative hum- idity, the ignition point is lowered, and the fire burns more easily. Knowing this, Mr. Chas. W. King, who was in charge of the Light Burning operation of the Weed Lumber Company in the summer of 1920, waited until late afternoon before lighting the fires. The fires were allowed to burn only unti] the next morning when they were extinguished, In this way the danger from intense fires was mitigated, and the precedent of controlled burning during the dry season was established, The trouble in this connection is that the relative hum- idity of the atmosphere may be favorable at thetime the fires are started, but that it is subject to fre- cuent and sudden changes due to warm winds, &t the present time no scientific observations have been made concerning the relation of atmospheric humidity of the time of Light Burning. Another very important factor which may add to the danger of Light Burning is wind. Regulated surface fires may be fanned into fires of such intensity that they may be very destructive, if not altogether uncontrollable. These winds ere more particularly prevalent in canyons and ravines where they blow up the slope during the day time and down during thenight. No one of the above factors may necessarily be the source of danger in Light Burning, but a combination of two or more which increases the intensity of the fire and the amount of damage done. oo Failure of Protection under Prevention and Suppression Method Losses Occurring While the majority of fires occurring each year upon the National Forests of California are detected soon after they ere started, still there is always a certain amount of damage done between the time the fire is started and the time it is detected and suppressed, | Consequently, while it may seem that this loss is in- significant, it.sreadily amounts to a sum that should not be overlooked, According to Forest Service statistics, (1908-1918), there is an annual average loss of $133,431. on the lands within the National Forest boundaries. of California, of which $75,982.00 is in timber, $52,173.00 in reproduction, and $5,276.00 in forage. To this sum should be added the costs of suppression - $71,636.00, and of prevention - $164,932.00, making a total of $369,999.00, the average annual loss due to fires. This sum when apportioned over the extensive holdings of the Forest Service in California amounts to only a Little over 4$¢ per acre per year. Non-insurance of Private Holdings The private owner of timberland while afforded pro- tection to a certain extent has no definite assurance that his tree crop will remain intact during the fire 60 season, Whereas the government apnportions considerable fire losses over an extensive acreage and proves that the annual loss amounts to but a few cents per acre, the individual owner can not do this. The fact remains, al- weys, that the damage is concentrated upon the burn it- self. If the property of a private person is partially or entirely bttrned over, it will gain him hothing to proportion the incurred loss over the remaining acreage, His holdings are usually localized and of limited ex- tent. Hence, if his lands are burned the loss is dir- ect and absolute. Efficiency It must be admitted that owingto the inability to secure adequate appropriations, the National Forests of California are not in general efféciently protected.by means of preventive and suppressive measures. More fire trails, lookouts, air patrols, railroad patrols, and better means of communication and transportation are necessary. The fire risk of topographic units should be standardized. The corps of men in the detection and suppression organization should be materially increased. 61 The Light Burning Committee It is the function of the Light Burning Committee to determine whether or not Light Burning is a practicable method of fire protection to be émployed in the forests of California. The solution will be arrived at by ob- serving comprehensively and impartially the results of Light Burning on typical areas. Representatives of the Committee examine the areas go burned and carefully de- termine the damage done to mature timber and reproduction and the probable decrease of increase of the fire haz- ard resulting from the burning. In this way, it is hoped that an unprejudiced and scientific decision regarding the practice of Light Burning will be reached, and that in the near future. Light Burning vommittee Report on the Bray Operation In a report entitled "Controlled Burning at Bray, California", by Wm. C. Hddge, Jr., Chairman of the Light Burning Committee, stated that on this typical area, Light Burning as a protective measure, was a failure, the positive results being but temporary and the cost considerable. He said that fully as good pro- tection might have been gained by patrol and suppressia, and this for a very few cents per acre as compared with the one dollar (approximately) which it did cost. Fur- thermore, he wrote, that only ¢ of the reproduction had 62 been killed, while the object of the burning was to re- move all of the reproduction, and hence eliminate con- siderable fire danger to the mature timber. A fire of sufficient ieeasiiy to remove all of the reproduction would necessarily have been a severe summer fire - an uncontrolled rather than a controlled burning. Mr. Hodge judged that it was extremely doubtful if even a third or fourth burning would serve to clean up the ground sufficiently to afford genuine protection, Investigation of the Walker Tract - January 1921. Mr. Hodge and a number of Forest Service officials made a survey of the damage done by a light surface fire which burned over a considerable area on both Nat- ional Forest land and a portion of the holdings of the Red River Lumber Company,*in northern California. It was ascertained that the loss due to the burning down of previously fire-ecarred trees was 600 board feet per acre, The loss by heat killing amounted to 1600 board feet per acre. The total loss from thin surface fire on 20,000 acres burned was 40,000,000 board feet, hav- ing a value of over $100,000.00. That the several small separate fires which finally resulted into the one big one, could have been controlled by an efficient protective organization, is the opinion of the men who examined the area, As a result of this examination, the Red River 63 Lumber Company has decided to cooperate with the Forest Service in preventing fires on its holdings. A news letter published by the United States Forest Service of California, on April 29, 1921, quoted an article which appeared in the “Westwood Sugar Pine", a paper printed by the Red River Lumber Company, which is the largest private timberland holder within the state. The ar- ticle quoted reads:- "A very important step forward was taken a few days ago, when aniagreement was signed by Vice-Pres- ident Willis Walker of the Red River Lumber Co. and the United States Forest Service. ; “Under this agreement the entire fire protection of approximately 800,000 acres of timberland owned by the Company will be undertaken by the government. The cost will be about $12,000.00 per year. "This will mean that every. precaution known to the Forest Service both for preventing and fighting forest fires will be employed. Airplanes will patrol the timberlands; every ranger will be a fire warden, endowed with the powers the rangers now possess, and woe be to the careless camper whb leaves a camp fire burning, or who does not use every precaution to dafe- guard the forests he is permitted to use, "This agreement will do much to help preserve the forests, as lumbermen aftermmany months of discussion have decided to abandon the habit of Light Burning in the woods as the fires so started are hard to control." 64 CONCLUSION In viewing the results obtained from the practice of Light Burning, and by making a comparison with the costs entailed in protection through prevention and suppression, it is obvious that Light Burning in Cal- ifornia is not a practicable method of forest protect- ion. The impracticability of Light Burning is basea@ upon the following points:- 1. Damage resulting to the mature stand, repro- duction and soil. 2. Excessive cost. 3. Conditions governing a. Uncertainty of atmospheric conditions b. Impossibility of securing uniform moisture content of the forest floow. 4. Danger The damage resulting from the practice of Light Burning and the excessive costs which it necessitates, are the two main reasons for its impracticability. Damage to Mature Crop and to Reproduction First, of all, Light Eurning eventually does the very thing which the method desires to prevent - that is, it surely destroys the forests of California, hy destroying the mature stand and the potential forest. 65 Instead of having no fire protective system at all, and merely leaving the forests to withstand as best they may, any and all fires, the Light Burner deliberately sets fire to the forest floor and thus reduces still more, the chance of the forest cyop to continue its life and perpetuate itself. Damage ie inevitable to the mature stands within the state es they have already had to with- stand innumerable light surface fires, and a great many of them bear fire-scars,. In firing the forest floor, absolutely the only way to prevent these fire-scarred trees from igniting and finally falling, is to protect the individual trees - a procedure which is naturally impossible due to exhorbitant costs. In the practice of forestry, the development of the future crop takes an important place. Light Burn- ing prevents this development, for it eventually leads to a mature etand with no reproduction. Consequentiy, some day, Light Burning will have to be discontinued to allow reproduction to come in and establish itself. Formation of Brush Fields Light Purning causes brush fielda to replace tim- ber gpowth in California. Through long and untold cen- turies, by the process of plant succession, the trees were finally able to dominate the other vegetative grow- th in the Sierra region. This was not as a result of fires, but in spite of them. Now, if man steps in and 66 disturbs the balance, the plant vegetation of Calif- ornia will tend to revert to the brushy types. The extensive brushy areas within the state at the present time show what continued surface fires will do, It must be borne in mind that this region is not a nat- ural tree region, but one in which brush competes strong- ly with the trees. Fire disturbs the balance in favor of the brush, Costs The excessive costs alone, incurred in Light Burn- ing are sufficient to render it impracticable. To con- etruct fire lines at close intervals, to scatter debris which is at the bases of the trees, and maintain a crew of men sufficient to adequately patrol the fires, will acount to a consideratle cost item for the very first burning. Then, as burning must be engaged in for at least three successive years in most cases, and there- after at intervais of 3-5 years, in order to keep the inflammable debris of such limited extent that a dam- aging fire cannot occur, the cost per acre will be ex- cessive. There follows, herewith, a table showing com- parative costs of fire protection methods in California. 67 Fire Protection Costs per Acre per Year. (Based on estimated average costs) Light Burning : Prevention and Suppression : “Government i “Private Hire Prot. Assoc, lat YPeseeee $. 75: $.006 per acre $.05 per acre 2d ieioce Owe per year per year a Le @eeeane«eeses ° 0: een " eo eeeees Zhi Sth " eecees -=) 6 nsec =e TE Oe wa ewig OOS Sth ™ , -- Cth ® see te Geet 16th” ...... .50: 10 years ~ 85-95: l year - $.006: l year - $0,275: ‘ . . . e a e . . ° e . eeceone ° e o ° 1 year - $.05 As hese is a gradual accumulation of litter within the forest after each burning, the owner can never be certain that the inflammable material is of such limited extant that a damaging fire cannot occur, unless he burns each season. It is obvious that Light Burning costs as compared with those of prevention and suppress- ion of fires, renders the former method impractitable. Damage to Grazing and Watersheds The damage occurring to grazing, to watersheds and the soil, are also of vital importance. This is particularly true in California, where grazing is pre- valent and irrigation is employed extensively. 68 Conditions Governing Burning Another undesirable feature of Light Burning is that its practice is rendered ¢xtremely uncertain by atmospheric conditions, In many instances after the men are assembled to proceed with the burning operation, storms arise which preclude all possibility of a sur- face fire burning. Thus, a needless expense is incur- red which gains nothing. Then, too, there is practic- ally always the impossibility of securing a complete burn due to the variance in topography, and hence, in moisture conditions, Danger When fire is deliberately introduced into valuable forest growths,the owner who permits such a procedure is taking unnecessary risks with his invested capital. Because atmespheric and topographic conditions are so ehangeable, the Light Burner can never by certain that he can keep the fire under control. This is particular- ly true when the fire burns up-slope, where its in- tensity and rapidity of movement are increased. Fire in the forests, burning over the éntire fhoor, are a grave menace to the life of the ¢rees therein. For which reasons the writer concludes that Light Burning is ineffective as a method of fire protection in California, and in order to properly safeguard the forests of that state, the method of fire protection as practiced by the United States Forest Service - that of prevention and suppression of forest fires? - should be the only method employed. Probable Outcome of the Light Burning Question While the Light Burning question is not as yet conclusively settled in favor of the method of fire prevention and suppression, the statement made above by the Red River Lumber Company - the Company which was particularly instrumental in maintaining the Light Burning theory - will do much to disped the belief that surface fires at frequent intervals will adequat- ely protect the forests from further ravages from fire. Thus, after eleven years of tpros' and 'cons', it is evident that the method of fire protection advocated by the United States Forest Service, and successfully practiced for thirteen years, will most certainly con- tinue to be used, not only by the Forest Service it- self, but increasingly by private timber holders as well. The practice of Light Burning will be quickly discontinued in favor of the former, better established, more widely used and more efficient method,- that of protection by prevention and suppression of all fires within the forest, with the exception of spot fires for the disposal of brush and snags. XXXMKXXKKXKXKXKXKKAAKA 70 BIBLIOGRAPHY Andrews, BE. F. Agency of eine in Peopgeess68 of Long- leaf Pine, Botanical Gazette Vol. LXIV: 497- -508. 1917. Boerker, RF. H. Light Burning Versus Forest Management in Northern California. Forest Quarterly Vol. X: 184-189. Bowman, Isaiah. Forest Phy siography. Brown, J. C. Modern forest Fconomy. Pp. 131-137. Gifford, - . Practical Forestry. Pp. 157. Graves, H. S. Prindiples of Hanilling Woodlands. Pp. 265- ents Hammatt, R. F. Forest ry and Agriculture. Unnumbered Cir- cular. U.S.F.S., San Francisco, Calif. Three Centuries of Forest Fires. Unnumbeed Circular. U.S.F.S8., San Francisco, Calif. Headley, Roy. The dhoontrol lable Fire. Unnumbered Cir- cular. U.S.F.S., San Francisco, Calif. Hoffman, J. V. How Fires Destroy Our Forests. American Forestry Vol. XXVI. No. 348. 1920. Jepson, W. L. Silva of California. Kitts, J. A. Forest Destruction Prevented by Control of Surface Fires.” American Forestry, Sane 1926, Prevention of Destructive Forest Fires, Re- print by Southern Pacific Company of Paper Presented before the American Society of Civil Engineers. Mulford, W. Light Burning. Sierra Club Bulletin, Pg. 89, 192 Munger, T. T. Damage by hight Surface Fires in Western Yel- low Pine Forests, Proc, Soc, Am, For, Vol. IX. pp. 235- 230. a Munger, T. T. Western Yellow Pine in Oregon. U.5S.D.A. Bul. 416. _ . . Pearson, G. A. Brush Disposal in Western Yellow Pine. Journal of Forestry. Vol. XIX, No. I. 1920. Effect of Ground Cover and Litter. Jour nal of Forestry. Vol. XVIII, No. 3% 919s Redington, P. G. What is the Truth? Sunset iacanine, Vol. XIV, No, 6. 1920, . aces: P. Se) Light Burning is a ‘ivatake, American For~ estry, Vol; XXVI, No. 314. 1920, ; Roth, Filibert, Another Word on Light Burning. hea Forestry. Vol. XXVI. No. 321. 1920. Schenk, C. A. Forest Protection. Show, S. B. Climate and Forest Fires in Northern Cal- ifornia. Journal of Forestry. Vol. XVII, No. 8; pp. 965-979. 1919. Light Burning At Castle Rock. Proc. Soc. Amer, For, Vol. XY, pp:.426-433, Show and Hammatt. Will Fire Prevent Fire? Unnumbered Forest Service Circular. U.S.F.S, San¥ranciaco, Calif. White, S. E. Woodsman, Spare those Trees. Sunset Mag- azine. Vol. XLIV, No. J. 1920, Getting at the Truth, Sunset Magazine. Vol. XLIV, No, Ce 1920. California, Fifth National Conservation Congress, pp. 23-29, Third Biennial Report of the State Forester. 191 oe a i Re Fifth Biennial Peuort of the State Forester. 19: Sixth Biennial Report of the State Forester.191' 72 California. Unpublished Memoranda in the Files of the District Forester's Office, District V. United States Forest Service, San Francisco, California. Capper Report, Senate Resolution #311. Pg. 62. Cut-over Land Conference of the South. 1917. Fire Prevention Day. State Board of Forestry of Calif. 1914 Piute Forestry. ei een Lumberman,. Aug. 23, 1919. Proceedings of the Southern Forestry Cohgress. 1916. Rainfall of the U. S. U.S.D.A, Weather Bureau Bul. D. Sunset Magazine. The Torch in the Timber, by H. S. Grave, Vol. XLIV, No. 4. 1920. XXXXXXXXXKKAKKX The most valuable lumber is lost when the tree is scarred by fire, Fire-scarred incense cedar, 74 When once scarred, each succeeding fire burn deeper into the tree, finally causing it to.fall. Fireescarred in- cense cedar, 75 76 ie A aN Nae: ; Pe De. See small ame Light surface fires scarred these Sugar pine type with trees. ount of incense cedar and yellow pine. The effect of repeated surface fires tf It is obviously dangerous to permit fires to run broadcast in dense stands. Sugar Pine. 78 The Forest Service burns by spot fires only. logging. Disposal of brush after 79 80 Reproduction can establish itself itself if fires are kept out. Fir reproduction, 81 The Forest Service protects the standing tim- ber by preventing or suppressing all fires within the forest. Yellow pine and cedar timber.