776 



CONSERVATION 



the old, both in idea and practise, till 

 actually driven to the new. 



This has been proved a thousand 

 times. Largely because it was true, Na- 

 poleon for years scattered the armies of 

 Europe like chaff. 



The modern, scientific view of the 

 connection between forests and streams 

 is represented by the Forest and Rec- 

 lamation Services and the Geological 

 Survey ; the old-fashioned view is repre- 

 sented by the army engineers. 



Because, like the Chinaman, he be- 

 lieves that the teachings of the fathers 

 must control the children to all genera- 

 tions, the military engineer of necessity 

 repudiates the doctrine of these modern 

 bureaus. 



But if military advice on these ques- 

 tions is followed by America, this Na- 

 tion will go down before up-to-date 

 competitors like Germany or Japan as 

 the old regime in Europe went down 

 before Napoleon, or as wind-power 

 goes down before steam and electric 

 power. 



Galileo taught that a heavy body falls 

 no faster than a light one of the same 

 bulk. The savants of his day laughed 

 him to scorn. He proved his conten- 

 tion by dropping balls from the Tower 

 of Pisa, but the pedants were still un- 

 convinced. 



Columbus proved the terrestrial globe 

 to be a sphere ; but the wiseacres of his 

 day tapped their foreheads and smiled. 

 Descartes believed that the universe 

 is developing through evolution ; Co- 

 pernicus taught that the earth moves 

 round the sun ; Kepler formulated the 

 laws of planetary motion ; Dietrich 

 Flade repudiated witchcraft : Roger 

 Bacon taught that man may learn by 

 experimental methods ; John Barillon 

 interrogated nature by means of chem- 

 ical appliances ; Harvey taught the cir- 

 culation of the blood. 



Every one of these men flew squarely 

 in the face of the dominant sentiment of 

 his time, supported by the accepted "au- 

 thorities" in the field of truth. 



Yet in every instance the dominant 

 sentiment and the accepted authorities 

 were wrong, and the advocate of the 

 new view was right. 



The viewpoint of the military en- 

 gineer to-day corresponds with the 

 viewpoint, in their days, of the "au- 

 thorities" above referred to. It is the 

 viewpoint of the man wedded to the 

 past, and refusing to change his posi- 

 tion. 



In contending with such men, facts 

 count for little; otherwise they -might 

 again be piled mountain-high. 



The statistics published by Mr. 

 Leighton and the Forest Service might 

 again be massed. 



Mr. Pinchot's illustration before the 

 House Judiciary Committee might be 

 repeated when, by pouring water upon 

 an inclined blotter, and then upon an in- 

 clined photograph, he showed the dif- 

 ference between the action of a for- 

 ested slope and that of a denuded one. 

 Up to the point of saturation, the 

 blotter absorbed the water; the photo- 

 graph absorbed not a drop. 



But our waterways man says that 

 when the forest cover has been sat- 

 urated the water runs off. Who denie- 

 it? When the mulch is full, it is full, 

 as much so as is a barrel. 



But does this admission disprove 

 the fact that, until the mulch is full, 

 much water is absorbed, and thus kept 

 back from an otherwise possible flood? 

 Again, the full blotter and the full 

 mulch can be supplemented. For the 

 latter, we need the reservoir. 



Further, the waterways man con- 

 tends that the second growth, sprouts, 

 and brushwood found on the deforested 

 slopes restrain the water as well as the 

 original forest would have done. 



It is admitted that such a cover exer- 

 cises a restraining influence ; it is not 

 admitted that this influence is equal to 

 that of the well-kept forest. 



But suppose it were ; shall we hold, 

 therefore, that with a timber famine 

 in sight a ragged coppice, burned over 

 and practically worthless as a wood- 

 producing area, is as desirable as the 

 splendid forests which adequate protec- 

 tion ensure? 



Our waterways friend apparently 

 concedes that the second growth re- 

 strains the waters : will he then deny 

 that the first growth restrains them in 

 at least equal measure? 



