Page:Report of the Oregon Conservation Commission to the Governor (1908 - 1914).djvu/256

 A change of view was indicated when in 1899 an act establishing a State game and forestry warden, with deputies, included among their duties the enforcement of statutes for. "the protection of forests and timber lands from fire," But although this was significant in reflecting a more modern attitude, and undoubtedly had a restraining effect upon carelessness in some localities, the act was primarily a game law and by emphasis discouraged its executives from any fire work not easily incidental to their more specific duties in localities determined wholly by the requirements of game protection.

In 1903 a measure recognizing the duty of the State to enforce any forest laws on its statute books was passed by the Legislature largely upon the insistence of the timber interests. It provided for a state forest commission of five members from as many districts, for county fire wardens paid by the State, for additional rangers paid by the Counties, and instituted a close season and burning permit system. This bill was vetoed by Governor Chamberlain (who later became an advocate of forest protection) because it involved expense to the tax payer.

In 1905 many features of the bill vetoed two years before were returned to the Legislature in one which abandoned hope of State aid, but authorized county courts to appoint wardens paid by timber owners and required burning during the close season to be done under permits from county clerks. This was passed and became the State's first serious fire law.

During the following two years, considerable opposition to the law grew up, because while it required settlers to get permission for burning to clear land, this was obtainable only at the county seat and was good for so limited a time that much difficulty resulted. When the Legislature of 1907 convened nearly a dozen members were pledged by their constituents to introduce bills repealing the law. This threatened to destroy all forest protection in Oregon. Those most interested in preserving it, the forest owners, could do little on their own initiative for they were regarded as responsible for the objectionable permit section, and consequently shared in the hostility against the measure.

At this juncture one or two representatives of the federal Forest Service, naturally desirous of promoting forest protection, took the opportunity afforded by the agitation, and visiting Salem quietly proposed to some of the interested members the substitution of a measure which would meet all objections to the old one yet contain many new elements of advance. The result was the bill introduced by Senator