CHEMISTRY AND CONSERVATION 



THE attitude of American chemists 

 toward the conservation of nat- 

 ural resources is clearly shown by 

 the proceedings of the American Chem- 

 ical Society at its last (Baltimore) 

 meeting. On this occasion the presi- 

 dent of the society, Dr. M. T. Bogert, 

 of Columbia University, delivered, to a 

 large and enthusiastic audience, his 

 presidential address on the subject of 

 conservation. The address was imme- 

 diately followed by the report of the 

 committee appointed to cooperate with 

 the National Conservation Commission. 

 This report is signed by F. W. Clarke, 

 chairman; H. W. Wiley, C. F. Hertig, 

 S. W. Parr, and R. B. Dole, and reads 

 as follows : 



In May, 1908, a meeting of the gov- 

 ernors of the different states was held 

 at the White House in Washington to 

 consider the conservation of our rapid- 

 ly wasting natural resources. Follow- 

 ing this meeting, a commission was ap- 

 pointed by the President of the United 

 States to investigate the subject, and 

 the principal scientific societies of the 

 United States were invited to cooper- 

 ate with it. The committee of the 

 American Chemical Society, appointed 

 in response to this invitation, now has 

 the honor to submit the following pre- 

 liminary report: 



On December 8, 9, and 10 the Na- 

 tional Conservation Commission met in 

 Washington in joint conference with 

 the delegates of other organizations 

 and the governors of more than twen- 

 ty states. The commission, in its elab- 

 orate investigations, had, so to speak, 

 taken stock of our natural resources, 

 and its report, therefore, was essen- 

 tially statistical in character. It had 

 estimated the magnitude of each par- 

 ticular resource, and had studied the 

 rate of consumption of such substances 

 as lumber, coal, iron, etc. It discussed 

 the wastage of the land by preventable 

 422 



erosion, and its effects not only upon 

 agriculture but also in reducing the 

 navigability of streams. Questions 

 like these were treated at considerable 

 length, and their general character is 

 all that need be mentioned just here. 

 The data of the Commission were 

 mainly classified under four headings, 

 namely, minerals, forests, lands and 

 waters, and under each one the evils to 

 be remedied were pointed out with all 

 the emphasis and clearness which the 

 statistical method of investigation 

 made possible. The Commission 

 cleared the ground for study into the 

 prevention or limitation of future 

 waste ; and the problem of conserva- 

 tion can now be taken up in a more in- 

 telligent manner than has been possi- 

 ble hitherto. We now know better 

 than ever before what the evils and 

 dangers really are ; the next step is to 

 discover remedies, and then, finally, to 

 apply them. The public attention has 

 been aroused; the people of the coun- 

 try are awakening to the necessity of 

 greater prudence and economy in the 

 use of our resources^ and definite lines 

 of action can now be laid down with 

 a reasonable probability that they will 

 be followed. Fortunately, the reports 

 of the Commission are neither sensa- 

 tional nor unduly pessimistic ; the re- 

 sults of their conferences are present- 

 ed seriously, and in such a manner as 

 to compel consideration ; they are, 

 therefore, all the more likely to pro- 

 duce permanent effects of great benefit 

 to the American people. The utter- 

 ances of the mere alarmist rarely carry 

 conviction; but disclosures like these 

 made by the Conservation Commission 

 cannot be disregarded. 



Up to the present moment chemistry 

 has had little to do with the investiga- 

 tions of the Commission. Hencefor- 

 ward the chemist must be called upon 

 in many ways, for the waste of re- 



