A useful, though unintentional, experiment in the economics of forest fire protection has been carried out in Wisconsin. Areas that are otherwise much alike have been given two quite different intensities of forest fire protection. The relationship between costs and losses associated with high- versus low-intensity protection was found to differ greatly among three fire situations. The ratio of reduced losses to increased expenditures (for high- as compared with low-intensity protection) is some five times as great in pine forest as in either oak forest or upland grass and brush. This study develops and illustrates a method for allocating forest fire protection budgets to achieve maximum effectiveness in relation to costs.
Document Type: Journal Article
Director, Center for Resource Policy Studies and Programs, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Publication date: September 1, 1967
More about this publication?
The Journal of Forestry is the most widely circulated scholarly forestry journal in the world. In print since 1902, the Journal has received several national awards for excellence. The mission of the Journal of Forestry is to advance the profession of forestry by keeping forest management professionals informed about significant developments and ideas in the many facets of forestry: economics, education and communication, entomology and pathology, fire, forest ecology, geospatial technologies, history, international forestry, measurements, policy, recreation, silviculture, social sciences, soils and hydrology, urban and community forestry, utilization and engineering, and wildlife management. The Journal is published bimonthly: January, March, May, July, September, and November.