85 
an office building where people hardly know their neighbors than a depart- 
ment store or an industrial plant where everybody is fitted into a coordin- 
ate place and function. 
The Department of Conservation is an attempt on a large scale and I 
believe a successful one, at coordination. Every one of its branches is de- 
pending on and co-operating with the other. 
Charles Richard Van Hise tersely says, “The principle of Conservation 
is not a simple subject which can be treated with reference to a single 
resource, independently of others; it is an interlocking one. The conserva- 
fioneor one resource is related to that of another. * * * * * * * * * 
A complete treatment of any part of the subject in all of its ramifications 
of necessity repeats a portion of the treatment of another part of the sub- 
ject.” 
It has been the experience of those states that are in the lead of con- 
servation work—New York, Louisiana and Wisconsin—that no single nat- 
ural resource can be dealt with separately and independently from the 
other, and that only consolidation of the work makes real results pos- 
sible. 
The correctness of this theory was proven out in the first six months 
of our work. Not only did this natural support of one Division by another 
greatly facilitate work, but it also saved a great deal of time and avoided 
duplication. It made larger results possible, or, to put it in another way, 
it got more direct returns out of the moneys appropriated. 
Starting with a well defined policy of self-limitation, it nevertheless took 
the Department some time to get under way because of the difficulty of 
limiting the scope of work in a well nigh unlimited field. Requests, if not 
demands for assistance, were naturally made, which, even if the office 
force had been adequate, would have exhausted our funds in short order. 
Many of these demands were entirely reasonable and in many instances 
the people should haye had relief where we found it impossible to help 
owing to lack of personnel and funds. 
If ever proof was wanted that the State needed a Department to conserve 
its natural resources, the large and variegated correspondence in our office 
containing requests for assistance and advice would furnish if. From 
topographic survey to petroleum lands; from analyses of clays, soils and 
minerals to identification of relics; from a lonely elm tree to Sand Dunes ; 
from drainage projects to the use of cat-tail swamps as food producers ; 
from farmers’ wocdlots to flood control; from kaolin to coal; from the pro- 
tection of game and fish to that of lake levels; from stream pollution to 
fish culture; from wheat diseases to sugar supply for beekeepers, and so on 
without end. 
As the Department advances, these demands will increase. The organi- 
zation is such that it may be indefinitely enlarged and it is left to the 
wisdom of our lawmakers to make more extended work possible by legis- 
lative action. But before a legislature would be willing to appropriate 
more funds, it must needs have proof of results. Let me cite a few. 
The working agreement between the Department of Conservation and In- 
