EDITORIAL 



303 



tant paper that has been written upon 

 it during that time in this country and 

 in Europe?" 



We do not find the committee anxious 

 to quote Major Cavanaugh, whose testi- 

 mony, we may assume, was somewhat 

 disappointing in the admissions he made 

 that were distinctly favorable to the 

 influence of forests upon the flow of 

 streams. 



These are samples of the one-sided 

 arguments running all through the re- 

 port of the minority. If it were fail 

 and honest, if they even quoted their 

 own witnesses fully and frankly, their 

 discussion might be a real contribvition 

 to the subject. But their own unfair- 

 ness precludes that. 



5^ «? 5^ 



The Case of the Hetch-'Hetchy 



UNTIL the agitation with regard to 

 its occupancy as a reservoir for the 

 city of San Francisco began a short 

 time ago, it is doubtful if many people 

 in the United States knew anything 

 about the Hetch-Hetchy Valley and its 

 wonderful beauty. Even now there are 

 many misconceptions in regard to it. 

 Because it is a national possession and 

 because a principle is involved in the 

 present fight for possession, we pub- 

 lish this month a brief description bv 

 John Muir with some illustrations which 

 suggest as well as such pictures can 

 the picturesque grandeur of this annex 

 of the more famous Yosemite. 



The Hetch-Hetch]/ Valley is dis- 

 tinct from the Yosemite Valley, but it 

 is a part of the Yosemite National Park 

 and receives practically all of the drain- 

 age of the Tuolumne Basin. The 

 Yosemite Valley had already been pre- 

 served for some time as a state park 

 when the Yosemite National Park was 

 created in i8op by Congress for the es- 

 pecial purpose of protecting the Hetch- 

 Hetchy Valley and the Tuolumne 

 Meadows. 



Some time ago the city of San Fran- 

 cisco became involved in a controversy 

 with the Spring Valley Water Com- 

 pany, which furnished the water supply 

 of the city, and cast about for a source 



for a municipal supply. The Hetch- 

 Hetchy Valley seemed to offer an op- 

 portunity to secure such a supply at 

 small expense through a national grant. 

 The building of a dam would create 

 here a large reservoir and would also 

 furnish water power that might l)e 

 made profitable for the city. An appli- 

 cation was made to the Secretary of the 

 Interior, Mr. Hitchcock, and, after giv- 

 ing it careful consideration, he refused 

 to grant the rights desired. This was 

 on the 20th of January, 1903, and a 

 rehearing was given in December of 

 the same year, when the request of the 

 city was again refused. An attempt 

 was made to overrule the Secretary's 

 decision by introducing a bill in Con- 

 gress, but the Committee on Public 

 Lands likewise refused to recognize the 

 wishes of the city. The matter was 

 taken to the President and referred by 

 him to the Secretary of Commerce and 

 Labor, Mr. Metcalf, himself a citizen 

 of California. Mr. Metcalf supported 

 Secretary Hitchcock in his denial of 

 the right of the city to enter a national 

 park. When Mr. Garfield became the 

 Secretary of the Interior, the San Fran- 

 ciscans applied again for the permit 

 which had been refused them, and on 

 the nth of May, 1908, Secretary Gar- 

 field, on the ground of the need of the 

 city, rendered a decision such as San 

 Francisco had been seeking for. The 

 ultimate authority lay in Congress, 

 liowever, and whatever power the Sec- 

 retary might have — and that power was 

 open to question — any grant made by 

 him was revocable by any other Secre- 

 tary of the Interior. In order to se- 

 cure beyond doubt the privileges granted 

 in the permit by Secretary Garfield, San 

 Francisco applied to Congress in De- 

 cember, 1908, to confirm and make per- 

 manent the Secretary's action. The 

 matter was referred to the Committee 

 on Public Lands and in the House com- 

 mittee the vote upon the question was 

 a tie. The Senate committee was 

 known to be unfavorable to the bill, 

 and therefore no attempt was made to 

 pass it in the Sixtieth Congress. The 

 bill has been reintroduced in the pres- 

 ent Congress. There will be a hearing 



