2. _Development of Forest Policy._

No doubt, in some parts the first beginnings of care for forest property

and forest use date back even to Roman times. Charlemagne had his forest

officials here as elsewhere, and the number of ban forests seems to have

been especially great, some 400 “bannbriefe,” documents establishing

them, having been collected at Bern. The first forest ordinance

regulating the use of a special forest area in Bern dates from 1304. But

the first working plan seems to have been made for the city forest of

Zürich, the so-called _Sihlwald_, in 1680-1697, and to this day this

corporation property, with its intensive and most profitable management,

is the pride of all Switzerland. The Bernese cantonal forests were first

surveyed and placed under management from 1725 to 1739, and fully

regulated by 1765.

An excellent forest code for Bâle was drawn up in 1755 by Bishop Joseph

William; and in 1760, through the propaganda of the two scientific

societies of Zurich and Bern, the teaching of forestry was begun, and

forest organization in the two cantons secured in 1773 and 1786. The

canton of Soleure (Solothurn) was the first to start a regular system of

instruction, two citizens from each woodland district being given the

opportunity to qualify themselves as foresters.

Each canton had, of course, its own laws protecting forest property

against theft and fire; in the latter respect especially great care was

exercised and burning of brush could only be done by permit and under a

force of watchers.

The example of Zürich and Bern in organizing the management of their

forest areas was followed more or less by other cantons, but a real

serious movement is not discernible until the beginning of the 19th

century, when with the impetus of modern life and trade the value of

forest property increased, and most cantons issued regulative forest

laws.

Forest ordinances had from time to time attempted to prevent the

decrease of forest area by forbidding clearings, regulating pasture, and

forbidding wood export to other villages or cantons, a local timber

famine being dreaded. But, only when a severe flood, in 1830, had

accentuated the protective value of forest cover, were the forest

ordinances more strenuously enforced, and a general movement for better

management began in the various cantons. This was partly signalized by

sending young men to the forest schools of Germany.

Largely through the influence of a lively propaganda carried on by such

men as _Landolt_ and _Coaz_, backed by the Swiss forestry association,

(founded in 1848), and through the increase of torrential floods,

especially in 1834 and 1868, was it made clear that a central power

would have to be clothed with authority to regulate the use at least of

the alpine forest.

In 1857, the Bund ordered an investigation of the mountain forests in

all parts; this was made by Landolt. But opposition by the cantons

against restrictive measures prevented any legislative result. At the

same time, an annual vote of $2,000 was made to the forestry

association for reforestation and engineering works in the Alps. This

grant was changed, in 1871, by voting an annual credit of $20,000 to be

expended by the Bundesrath for similar purposes. The floods of 1868

brought such distress in certain cantons that contributions from all

other parts were required to assist the flood sufferers; and $200,000 of

the collections were appropriated for reforestation. Finally, in 1874,

through the effort of the forestry association, it was determined to

create a central bureau of forest inspection for the whole Bund in the

Department of the Interior, and an article was inserted in the

constitution declaring the superior right of oversight by the Federation

over the water and forest police in the high Alps, at the same time

proposing to aid in the engineering and reboisement work necessary to

correct the torrents, and to take measures for the preservation of these

works and forests.

The result was the installation of a federal forest inspector with one

assistant, in 1875, and the enactment of a law, in 1876, which

determined the area within which the federal government was to exercise

supervision. The execution of the law was, however, left to the

cantons--the jealousies of State rights as against federal rights being

even more strongly developed in Switzerland than in the United States.

Each canton proceeded in its own way, or neglected to proceed, and hence

no uniform progress in applying the law was made. Indeed, not a single

prescription of the law was applied within the prescribed time, although

again and again extended, and even to-day some cantons have not yet

complied. Stubborn opposition to the law continues even to date in some

cantons.

Besides the unwillingness to submit to federal authority, the lack of

technically trained foresters--their employment being a requirement of

the law--and the objection to their employment by the cantons, who

looked on them as disguised policemen, impeded the progress of the

reform. Until 1884, each canton held its own examinations for forest

officials, but in that year a standard was enacted for employment within

the federally supervised territory.

The most frequent quarrel was as to what was to be considered forest and

what pasture, so that finally as a compromise a classification between

the two, called pasture woods, was introduced.

It will be noted that the federal surveillance was to extend only to the

High Alps above a certain limiting line. This limitation was removed, in

1898, by resolution of the Council, and change of the constitution, by

which the federal exercise of water and forest police was extended over

the whole country, and a bill to carry this into effect was introduced.

Finally, in 1902, a revised law was passed establishing fully the

present Federal forest policy.

This law places the surveillance of all forest police in all forests of

Switzerland in the Bund, the private forests as well as the public,

i.e., State and communal or corporation forests. But, as there are

distinctive differences in the manner of this surveillance, a

differentiation of ownership conditions and forest conditions was to be

made by the cantons within two years.

The forests are to be divided into protection and non-protection forests

(by the cantons with sanction of the Bund), the former being such as are

located at headwaters or furnish protection against snowslides,

landslides and rockfalls, floods, and climatic damage. Most of this

segregation had already been made and mapped in consequence of the law

of 1876. In 1904, 71% of the total forest area had been classed as

protective forest; nearly 80% of the communal, and over 50% of the

private forest property.

All public forests are to be surveyed and their corners permanently

marked by the cantons according to instructions by the Bund, the latter

furnishing the needed triangulation survey, and inspecting and revising

any older surveys free of charge.

The surveyed public forests are to be fully regulated according to a

sustained yield management, under working plans made according to

instructions by the Cantons, to be sanctioned by the Bundesrath. For the

unsurveyed forest areas at least a provisional felling budget is to be

determined, as nearly as possible representing the sustained yield. In

protection forests the working plans must conform to the objects of

these forests, and clearings in these are as a rule forbidden. The

fellings are to be made under direct supervision of foresters, and,

after being cut, the wood must be measured. Sale on the stump is

forbidden, otherwise no interference in the management is intended.

Up to 1902, under the law of 1876, working plans for 540,000 acres had

been made. In 1907, 90,000 acres of State forest, and over one million

acres of corporation forests were under working plans.

For other than protection forests the law provides a number of

restrictions, such as the following: Pasture woods may not be decreased

in area except by permission of the cantons. Communal forests are not to

be subdivided without consent of the cantonal government, except where

two or more communities have joint ownership, nor are they to be sold

except with such permission. Rights of user in public forests,

especially in protection forests, may be forcibly extinguished by the

cantonal government, but under appeal to the Bundesrath. Money

equivalents are to be the rule, territorial equivalents to be given only

by special permission. By 1902, over $300,000 had already been spent in

extinguishing 2,842 different rights of user. The establishment of means

of transportation, roads, etc., is encouraged by subventions from the

Bund and in other ways.

Private forests as far as they fall under the classification of

protection forests are subject to the same supervision and rules as the

public forests as regards their survey, the prohibition of clearings

except by permission of the Federal Government, of diminishing pasture

woods, the extinguishment of rights of user, the prevention of damaging

use, and assistance in establishing means of transportation. The

cantonal government is obliged to insure the execution of these laws.

In addition, while the law encourages co-operative forest management of

small holdings as larger units, the Bund paying for the cost of

effecting such co-operation, it empowers the canton or the Bund to

enforce such co-operative management of protection forest areas in

specially endangered localities as at the headwaters of torrential

streams. Otherwise, in the non-protective private forests, only the

prohibition of clearing except by permission of the cantonal government,

the obligation of reforesting felling areas within three years, and of

maintaining existing pasture woods is ordered. Wherever on private

properties conversion of forest into farm or pasture is permitted (after

report of the forest administration of Canton or Bund) an equivalent

reforestation of other parts may be ordered. Wherever by the

reforestation of bare ground protective forest areas can be created,

this may be ordered, the Federal or the Cantonal government contributing

towards such work; or else, if the owner prefers, he may insist upon

having his ground expropriated by the Canton or other public

corporation; the federal government assisting in the first case to the

extent of 30 to 50% of the cost, and in establishing new protection

forests to the extent of 50 to 80%.

Before 1902, under the law of 1876, some 16,000 acres had been

reforested and put in order at an expense of over one million dollars,

the federal government contributing just about fifty per cent. In 1910,

the area of planted protection forest had grown to 25,000 acres.

Besides the various restrictions with provisions of penalties for

disobedience (from $1 to $100 for each transgression) and enforced

execution by cantonal government, there are a number of directions in

which the Federal Government makes contributions for the purpose of

encouraging conservative management. For the salaries of the cantonal

higher forest officials 20 to 35 per cent. are contributed, for the

higher corporation and co-operative association officials 5 to 25 per

cent., for the lower forest service 5 to 20 per cent. The Federation

participates to the extent of one-third in the accident insurance of

forest officers; a minimum salary of the officials and also their proper

education being made conditions. To secure the latter the Federation

pays for teachers and demonstration material under prescribed

conditions.

In 1901, the federal contributions amounted to $100,000 in all. In 1903,

the total appropriation was $126,000, namely, $9,000 for the

Inspector-General’s office; $26,000 towards salaries of cantonal

foresters; $80,000 towards reboisement; $8,000 towards survey. The

cantonal governments contributed about the same amount outside of the

cost of their forest administrations. It is estimated that the budget

will have to be increased by $50,000 annually for some time to come. By

1910, the federal government had altogether contributed $2 million in

the 35 years towards the execution of the law, outside its

administrative office.

* * * * *

The organization which is to carry out this forest policy is still the

one which originated with the law of 1876, somewhat modified by the law

of 1892, namely, a forestry division in the Department of the Interior,

with one Superior Forest Inspector and three assistants.

The Cantons have their own administrations, mostly under one forester of

higher grade (called variously Oberförster, Forstinspektor,

Forstmeister, Oberforstmeister). Bern has three co-ordinate

Forstinspektor. The Cantons are or are to be districted into forest

circles (Forstkreise), the subdivision to be approved by the Bundesrath,

and some are further subdivided into ranges (Unterförsterei). These

forest districts, from 7,500 to 45,000 acres each, are to be managed by

properly educated and paid foresters elected by the people. The

eligibility depends upon an examination, the theoretical part of which

is conducted by the forest school, the practical part, after a year’s

practical work, is conducted by a commission of foresters, after

completion of which the candidate becomes eligible; the election being

for three years, and re-election being usual, unless there are good

reasons against it.

In 1903, there were employed as administrators or managers 119 State

(Cantonal) foresters and 33 Communal foresters, besides 11 Federal

forest officials. In 1909, the total number had grown to 193, besides

1091 under-foresters, to whose salaries the Bund contributed. The State

foresters are allowed to manage neighbouring communal properties.

A Brief History of Forestry. In Europe, the United States and Other Countries · 第 71 / 157 题