California Fire Losses

Washington.-If fire losses throughout the entire United States urere at the same per capita rate which has obtained in California cities over a period of several years our national fire losses would be reduced more than one-half and annual savings of over $200,000,000 effected, according to a survey just published by building engineers here. Total fire losses in the United States, insured and uninsured, reported to insurance interests during 1925, the latest year for which statistics are available, were $447,543,087, or a per capita loss of $3.88. This is almost double the highest per capita loss reported for any of the California cities and more than ten times as great as the lowest. As California builds of wood more freely than other states, except possibly Washington and Oregon, its low fire loss cannot be attributed to masonry construction, as is usual in explaining the small fire losses of Europe.

Santa Barbara had in 1925 a per capita loss of only fortyone cents, the lowest per capita loss of the California cities; and one of the lowest in the United States. Three other California cities, San Jose, Stockton and Berkeley, had loss of less than one dollar per capita; while Alamedal Fresno, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, Pasadena, Riverside and Sacramento all were under $2.0O per capita. San Diego was highest with a per capita loss of $2.33, unusually high as compared with $1.94 and $1.25 in the preceding years but still more than 50 per cent under the national average.

(Continued from Page 26) to coordinate the good work of the local, regional and national associations of all branches in the common interests of the whole Industry-ao engage in such activities as forestry education, through which the Industry receives splendid publicity and by which public good.will is created for lumbermen and lumber

Friendly Relations

I can cite several cities where the Lumbermen were at loggerheads and conditions were anything but pleasant or profitable. This situation was corrected by the formation of a Hoo-Hoo Club. I do not say that Lumbermen who have been exchanging wallops for years will melt immediately under the benign influence of the Hoo-Hoo Club and throw their arms around each other. But I do sav that the fraternal influence of the Hoo-Hoo Club eventualiv will overcome all barriers of business animosity if honestly and persistently employed.

You may find some executives who are atfirst cold to the suggestion of linking arms and working with a competitor, but eventually they will see the wisdom of doing this, especially if the youhg men of the Industry are the first to get behind and boost the Hoo-Hoo Club activities.

According to the National Lumber Manufacturers Association's engineers report, L925 fue losses in California cities were fairly representative, for in a very few instances in the past five years, in cities over 100,000 population have the per capita damage exceeded $z.ffi. This is remarkable in view of the large volume of construction that has taken place during the period and the great increases in national wealth.

Los Angeles isa good example of what one large city has been able to do in reducing its fire losses. In 1921 the fire loss was $2.O1 per capita; in 1922, $1.54; in 1923, $1.67; in L924, $1.61 and it 1925 it amounted to only $I.47. During this period. new build.ing was showing remarkab^le^increases, averaging in the last three years almost $150,000,000 a year.

Frame buildings in Los Angeles in 1925 represented 96 per cent ofall buildings, yet of the total number of fires in 1925, only 78 per cent occurred in frame buildings. FiSures as to the number of buildings are available for only two other California cities, Pasadena and San Jose. Pasadena with 80 per'cent of all buildings of wood, had only 72 per cent of its construction frame, had only 62 per cent of its fires in this type of construction.

Low fire losses are consistently reported in spite of the fact that there are no anti-shingle ordinances in California cities, indicating, according to the engineers that there is little foundation for the anti-wood shingle ordinances in force in cities of some other states.

Hoo-Hoo is strictly a Lumbermen's Order-devoted exclusively to the interests of Lumbermen and Lumber. It supports every worthy efiort of any branch orunit of the Industry, and the associations. It fathers a unique and distinctive work in its own right and deserves the loyal support of every man who depends on lumber for his livelihood.

Hoo-Hoo may truly be called the "public relations department" of the Lumber Industry, for the publicity we have gained for Lumbermen and Lumber, and the direct and indirect benefits of this publicity that both have gained, notably through our forestly educational movemeit, the Friends of the Forests, could not have been obtained bv the Industry through any other agency.

\Me are encouraged by the fact that interest in and sup- port of Hoo-Hoo this year have surpassed all previous years, despite unsatisfactory business conditions, yet I do not think that we can cure our "dark-brown" taste entirely until we have aroused a lively interest in every Lumberman in the organized activities which are essential to the progress and stability of the Industry.