THE INFLUENCE OF FORESTS ON CLIMATE AND FLOODS 213 



to do, and they usually do a great deal 

 and we believe in them. As stated 

 above, the claim for the forest is that it 

 prevents washing and gullying and in 

 addition it helps to keep the soil in a 

 condition such that water can be stored 

 in the ground ; and by its tree tops, its 

 brush and debris it furnishes innumer- 

 able obstacles on every acre of ground 

 which prevent the water from gathering 

 rapidly and rushing from the slope. On 

 the Appalachian Mountains this regu- 

 lator means just these things, and 

 means not merely an occasional 

 affair of a few acres, but means a 

 cover for eighty or ninety per cent 

 of all the land and a cover which 

 is effective, winter and summer, 

 one which never fails, and one which 

 maintains and renews itself. If then, in 

 exceptional years an unusual rainstorm 

 produces extraordinary conditions, the 

 forest will still do its share and it will 

 do all that it ever does, and in many 

 cases this will mean the difference be- 

 tween a "freshet" or high water and a 

 disastrous flood. Similarly it is not 

 claimed that forests can protect reckless 

 people who are determined to build 

 their houses on flood lands and to crowd 

 the river into an impossible channel as 

 has been done in many places. The 

 forest is no panacea, but this fact in no 

 wise lessens its great influence for good. 



In his introduction Mr. Moore men- 

 tions the fact that this forest protection 

 "may involve the expenditure of hun- 

 dreds of millions of dollars and the em- 

 ployment for years to come of thou- 

 sands of public officials." 



The first part is a misstatement of 

 facts, and deals with a subject upon 

 which Mr. Moore is evidently incompe- 

 tent to speak, and the second part is a 

 play on the dislike of our people for 

 officialdom. What this sort of political 

 clap trap has to do with a scientific ex- 

 pose of forest influences is difficult to 

 see. Certainly there can be no objection 

 to an enterprise which will keep millions 

 of acres of mountain lands in a produc- 

 tive condition rather than allow them to 

 become useless waste lands, simply be- 

 cause it may give employment to many 

 people. 



Mr. Moore then proclaims himself a 

 friend of the forest, and says that there 

 are abundant reasons why they should 

 be protected. He then enlarges upon 

 the necessity of having plow land and 

 of feeding our people and says (p. 4) : 



"I beUci'c that forests should be pre- 

 served far themselves alone or not at 

 all." Just what this means the reader 

 must judge for himself ; that it is irrele- 

 vant to forest influences, is clear enough. 



Again he says (and it is also printed 

 in italics), p. 4 : 



"And there can be no valid objection? 

 to decreasing the area (of forest) 

 where homes and a well-fed people take 

 the place of wild animals and the 

 wilderness." When we remember 

 that these mountains were settled about 

 as much as they now are when Iowa 

 was Indian country, and when we 

 further remember that the real farm 

 lands in the United States are hardly 

 half used and tilled, and that millions 

 of acres of the best of lands are not 

 yet even settled, this statement gets the 

 smack of the campaign document and 

 has certainly no place in a discussion of 

 this kind. 



Mr. Moore then proceeds to discuss 

 at length the "effect of forest on cli- 

 mate ;" the "dessication of Asia ;" "local 

 climatic influences," "influences on 

 temperature" and other utterly irrele- 

 vant matter. Incidentally he makes a 

 "plea for tolerance of opinion," and 

 discredits the "recollections of oldest 

 inhabitants." 



He then takes up the "effect of forests 

 on flood" and admits, p. 15: "This is a 

 tangled problem, since the results must 

 depend upon the slope of the ground, 

 the nature and condition of the soil, the 

 nature of the forests, etc." And further 

 on (p. 16) without any real discussion 

 and without adducing a single import- 

 ant fact we see the remarkable state- 

 ment : "On the whole, it u probable that 

 forests have little to do with the heights 

 of floods in main tributaries and princi- 

 pal streams, etc." This sentence print- 

 ed again in italics for emphasis, with 

 its "probable" and "little to do" is here 

 put forth as conclusive proof and evi- 

 dently serves as sufficient scientific evi- 



