78 



FORESTRY AND IRRIGATION 



February- 



block one mile square and over a 

 thousand feet high. Applied as a 

 fertilizer it would cover, to the depth 

 of a quarter of an inch, an area of 

 about 340,000 square miles, or the 

 land surface of all the Atlantic States 

 from Maine to South Carolina inclu- 

 sive, with Vermont, New York, Penn- 

 sylvania, West Virginia and one-third 

 of Georgia thrown in. Its value may 

 be estimated as at least a billion dol- 

 lars. Its loss is the heaviest impost 

 borne by the American farmer. 



This soil waste is sapping a re- 

 source richer than all others combined 

 save one, namely, our inland waters. 

 These, immeasurably our richest re- 

 source, are, in great measure, per- 

 verted from a blessing into a curse. 

 And both soil wash and river ravage 

 are largely to be traced to the ab- 

 sence of forests from slopes on which 

 rivers rise. 



W. J. M'Ge^, 

 U. S. Inland Waterzvays Commission 

 and Bureau of Soils. 



_. ... . Our inland waters are 



the Rivers °"^ greatest natural re- 

 source. The water flow- 

 ing down our Western mountains far 

 exceeds in value the fabulous wealth 

 represented by all the metals and min- 

 erals lying between the Rockies and 

 the Pacific. 



To-day most of this resource is 

 wasted. Each year, at least 1,600,000 

 h. p. runs over Federal Government 

 dams. Rented at twenty dollars per 

 h. p. this would yield $32,000,000. 

 Capitalized at three per cent., it rep- 

 resents an investment of $1,066,000.- 

 000, now wholly wasted. 



Further, uncontrolled water is a 

 curse. Flood damage in the United 

 States exceeds $100,000,000 per year. 

 With our water controlled and util- 

 ized, this sum might be saved and a 

 five-fold greater value produced. 



From lack of plan present efforts to- 

 ward control are largely futile and 

 wasteful. 



Our rivers should be controlled in 

 much the same manner that we con- 



trol city water. A plan is essential. 

 It must provide for Federal action, 

 and it must infallibly include the con- 

 servation of forests upon the slopes 

 on which rise important streams. 



M. O. Leighton, 

 Chief Hydrgrapher, U. S. Geological 

 Survey. 



Where streams are subject to se- 

 vere droughts or great floods, com- 

 mercial development is practically im- 

 possible. Nature has provided for the 

 uniformity of flow by covering the 

 watersheds at the headwaters of these 

 streams with forests. . . . When 

 these forests are cut off, conditions 

 are entirely changed, and great fresh- 

 ets result. 



Chari.es a. Stone, 

 Of Stone and Webster, Electrical En- 

 gineers. 



I have known the Connecticut for 

 over thirty-six years. It drains an 

 area of over four thousand square 

 miles. Until recently the wooded hills 

 kept the flow of the river even. Now, 

 in the spring, we have floods, while 

 in the summer the water sometimes 

 will not run our mills. 



Theophilus Parsons, 



New England Manufacturer. 



T-, . It is an absolute prin- 



French . , r ^ ^ 



Experience ^iple : no forests, no 



waterways. Without 

 forests regulating the distribution of 

 waters, rainfalls are at once carried 

 to the sea, hurried sometimes, alas ! 

 across the country. After having de- 

 vastated the neighboring fields, the 

 rivers find themselves again, with 

 little water and much sand ; and with 

 such rivers, how will you fill your 

 canals? . . . The question is as clear 

 as can be : Do you want to have navi- 

 gable rivers, or do you prefer to have 

 torrents that will destroy your crops 

 and never bear a boat? If you pre- 

 fer the first, then mind your forests. 

 We can tell you, for we know. . . 

 If the Mississippi is the "Father 



