December. 1958 



Mills: From 1838 to 1958 



101 



field, as a separate discipline, was new. 

 He was instrumental in organizing the 

 Midwest Wildlife Conference, the initial 

 meeting of which was held in Urbana in 

 1035. Also he was a charter member of 

 the Wildlife Society. 



The staff of the Natural Historv' Sur- 

 vey increased from 16 in 1930 to 38 at 

 the beginning of World War II. 



In intellect and aggressive enthusiasm, 

 Prison was a worthy successor of Forbes. 

 He made many contributions to knowl- 

 edge. He was a member of many learned 

 societies and was given positions of re- 

 sponsibility in them. Beyond that, he was 

 a golf and tennis pla\'er, a fine violinist, 

 and had a great interest in art, histor\ , 

 and current afifairs. 



It was a loss to the Natural History 

 Survey, and to science, when he passed 

 away December 9, 1945, after 15 profit- 

 able vears as Chief. 



On December 10, 1945, Dr. Leo R. 

 Tehon was appointed Acting Chief, a 

 position which he held until February 28, 

 1947. Tehon was a meticulous scholar. 

 He was not only a fine plant pathologist 

 and mycologist, but also a good linguist 

 and musician (Carter 1955, Avars 1956). 



On March 1, 1947, Dr. Harlow^ B. 

 Mills, the present incumbent, took over 

 the duties of Chief. 



THE FUTURE 



Throughout its century of existence, 

 this organization has attempted to meet 

 the needs of the economy of Illinois with 

 an eye to the state's future requirements. 

 The Board has appointed scientists with 

 broad views and excellent training, men 

 who were not satisfied with the present 

 but who had a strong interest in the 

 future. A half century ago Forbes 

 (1907r:892) wrote, "I shall be governed 

 by the reflection that we are to-day look- 

 ing forward and not back — that we are 

 preparing for the future and not studying 

 the past — . . ." The same fresh view 

 should govern us at the end of 100 years. 

 The problems in nature are ever chang- 

 ing, or, rather, our needs from and ap- 

 proach to nature are ever changing. There 

 are new demands and new approaches. 

 New research techniques require re-eval- 

 uation of what has been done. In agricul- 



ture there are new crops and new meth- 

 ods of raising them. New plant diseases 

 appear. New insect pests invade the state. 

 New demands are made for recreation. 

 New advances in pure scientific knowl- 

 edge must be made. All of these demands 

 and approaches require the attention of 

 the research specialist. All are inextri- 

 cably bound up in the future. A scientist 

 who looks only to the past is professionally 

 dead. 



Perhaps the greatest challenge of the 

 future lies in the indisputable fact that 

 human populations in the world — and 

 that includes Illinois — are increasing. 

 The demands which these people make on 

 their environment are increasing more 

 rapidly than are the people themselves! 

 For most of our food and living room we 

 are dependent on that surface which 

 marks the boundary betw^een the earth 

 and the atmosphere, on that surface upon 

 which the sun's rays strike. We are de- 

 pendent on it for our food and for our 

 relaxation. More people mean greater 

 food demand and greater need for remov- 

 ing ourselves periodically from the intri- 

 cacies of a complex civilization. More peo- 

 ple mean a reduction in space for both 

 of these necessities. This is the dilemma 

 of the future. As the years roll by and 

 the population statistics pile up, our de- 

 pendence for existence on our living re- 

 sources constantly becomes greater, and 

 our dependence on the research scientist 

 in fields of interest to the Natural His- 

 tory Survey becomes a complete necessity. 



Now, in 1958, we are concerned about 

 the great strides made by the physical 

 sciences. These advances have great po- 

 tential for good and tremendous potential 

 for human destruction. International 

 scientific competition has raised its head. 

 If the deleterious side of this physical 

 science development is kept in check, we 

 can be sure that the need for sustaining 

 humanity, both physically and spiritually, 

 will be colossal in the years ahead. 



We hear in 1958 of "crash programs" 

 to develop in the shortest possible time 

 certain phases of physical science applica- 

 tion. When the collective human popula- 

 tion of the United States has to tighten 

 its collective belt just one small notch, 

 we will hear of a "crash program" the 

 like of which has not as yet even been 



