Vol. XVI 



MARCH, igio 



No. 3 



THE BATTLE FOR THE WEEKS BILL 



A.\( )THER milestone was passed 

 in the long march toward a truly 

 national forest policy on Wednes- 

 day, February 23, when a hearing was 

 given before the House Committee on 

 Agriculture on the bill for the crea- 

 tion of national forests, known as the 

 \Yeeks Bill, and popularly as the Ap- 

 palachian Forest Bill. No attempt was 

 made, as in former years, to secure a 

 large attendance at this hearing, or to 

 make a popular demonstration. For 

 three years this had been done, and 

 the convictions of the people and the 

 organizations of the country are well 

 established, and equally well known. 

 This hearing was devoted principally 

 to the examination of three expert wit- 

 nesses, and it is no reflection upon earlier 

 hearings to say that the case has never 

 had a stronger presentation. The ses- 

 sions opened in the morning and were 

 continued in the afternoon, and there 

 was a good attendance of the commit- 

 tee at both sessions. Since the opinion 

 of the Judiciary Committee of the 

 House of Representatives two years 

 ago has made it necessary to consider 

 this question with reference to its bear- 

 ing upon the navigability of streams, 

 the testimony was concentrated mainly 

 upon that point, and peculiar interest 

 was given to the discussion coming 

 from distinguished scientists who have 

 thoroughly studied the question with 

 which they were dealing, in view of 

 the fact that these men unanimously 

 controverted the conclusions of the re- 



port recently made and widely circu- 

 lated by Willis L. Moore, chief of the 

 Weather Bureau. The three experts 

 who appeared were George F. Swain, 

 professor of civil engineering. Har- 

 vard University; L. C. Glenn, pro- 

 fessor of geology, Vanderbilt Univer- 

 sity, and Prof. Filibert Roth, the head 

 of the Forest School of the University 

 of Michigan. Tims, with an engineer, 

 a geologist, and a forester, all of whom 

 stand in the first rank of their pro- 

 fessions, the case had a broad and able 

 consideration. Mr. Moore's conten- 

 tion that "forests should be preserved 

 for themselves alone, or not at all," and 

 again that "the run-off of our rivers is 

 not materially affected by any other 

 factor than the precipitation." was de- 

 clared by the three gentlemen named 

 to be not substantiated, and some of 

 his conclusions were said to be ridicu- 

 lous. 



Charles F. Scott, of Kansas, chair- 

 man of the committee, presided, and 

 the case was opened for those who ap- 

 peared in behalf of the bill by Frank 

 D. Currier, representative from New 

 Hampshire. Mr. Currier introduced 

 Andrew J. Peters, representative from 

 the eleventh Massachusetts district, 

 one of the Boston districts. Mr. Peters 

 voiced the intense public interest of 

 New Fngland in this matter, natnin- a 

 long list of business and other organ- 

 izations which have endorsed and are 

 urging the passage of the bill. He de- 

 clared that New F.ngland has paid her 



133 



