FOEEST LANDS FOB THE PBOTECTION OF WATEBSHEDS. 117 



weight the water, and find out bow much of it runs off when inclined at an 

 angle of 5 degrees and also how much when it is inclined at an angle of 46 

 degrees, he will at once agree entirely with the author's statement. 



Referring once more to the question of filling up our streams through erosion, 

 of which so much is made in recent articles on forestry, I have to say that In 

 my paper I ch.-illeiige directly the statement so frequently made that our own 

 navigable rivers are silting np as a result of deforestation. That challenge 

 has remained unreplied to, because the facts prove the statement untrue. Very 

 interesting in this connection is a recent investigation by the Geological Survey 

 in connection with Air. Leighton's proposed reservoir system, in which it was 

 shown that under present conditions, after deforestation has progressed to a 

 very great degree, there is absolutely no danger that these reservoirs would 

 become inoperative for many hundreds and even thousands of years from 

 filling up with sediment. When this fact is considered, it is easily seen how 

 slight an influence such sediment can make upon a great river like the Ohio, 

 which can easily wash it all out and a thousand times as much, and still not 

 tax its energy to the limit. If the erosion from these watersheds is now so 

 small, after deforestation has taken place on perhaps 50 or 60 per cent of 

 the watersheds, why should we assume that it will become dangerous with the 

 removal of 15 or 20 per cent more of the forests. 



To sum up this somewhat rambling letter, I wish to say that my point in 

 the whole discussion is simply this, that it is to-day an unproveu fact and I 

 thoroughly believe incapable of being proven that anything which it is possible 

 to do in the line of reforestation will simplify our river problems in the least 

 degree. It was. in fact, the real purpose of my paper to call the attention of 

 the country to this matter in connection with its future policy in the creation 

 of our forests. The proposed Appalachian Forest Ileserve will cost many mil- 

 lions of dollars. If it is being undertaken in the interests of river improve- 

 ment, the people should be thoroughly informed as to whether the promised 

 improvement will result. If it is found, upon investigation, that the creation or 

 preservation of these forests will not simplify these problems or reduce the cost 

 of navigation works and flood protection in any degree, then, manifestly, it is 

 not a proper expenditure for this purpose. I thoroughly believe in the neces- 

 sity of inaugurating a comprehensive policy of creating and extending our 

 pieseut forests as far as it is practicable, but it seems to me th.it it ought to 

 be done for the mc purpose which these forests are to serve 



In my paper I pointed out another argument, which has so far not been re- 

 plied to by anyone, and that is that, with any practical extension of our present 

 forests it would not be possible to produce a sufficient result to make any 

 appreciable effect upon our streams, even granting the full force of the forestry 

 argument. We can not, in the very nature of things, have a greater area of 

 woodland than we now have, namely, about one-third of our total area east 

 of the Mississippi River, The necessities of settlement and cultivation will 

 rather require it to be reduced. 



If I may make a suggestion in this connection it would be this-: This im- 

 portant subject has never really been brought up for general discussion; until 

 within the last few months it has always been advocated from the pro-forestry 

 side alone. AVithin the next few mouths there will be printed the entire dis- 

 cussion of my paper, including arguments by Messrs. Pinchot, Leightou, and 

 Swain, and Professors Smith and Willis of the Geological Survey, besides 

 several prominent engineers. It will include also my closing argument on the 

 subject. 



It would seem very desirable that this information should be gotten before 

 your committee before it takes final action in this matter, and it would seem, 

 further, to be very desirable that instead of immediate action the whole matter 

 should be referred to a commission in which the engineering profession shall 

 have at least an equal representation. The trouble with the forestry advo- 

 cates is that they have a " cause " to promote, and the promotion of this cause 

 does not leave them in that free and unbiased state of mind which is required 

 for an impartial investigation of a subject like this. 



The future development of our forests is going to cost many millions ot 

 dollars, and it would seem to be a wise step to pursue the same course in this 

 as in any other great undertaking, like the Panama Canal, for instance, by 

 subjecting it first to a full and impartial investigation in order that its varied 



a See Engineering News. Dec. 10, 1908, p. 649. 



