142 CONTROL OF EROSION IN THE MOUNTAINS 



Historical Summary of Legislation. — The first complete law on re- 

 forestation dates from July 28, 1860.^ Up to that time methods of pre- 

 venting flood damage had been tried out locally and sporadically, "most 

 active when the catastrophies took place, weakening as the remembrance 

 became effaced." 



The disastrous inundation of 1840 brought the problem to the front. 

 In 1846 a proposed law "relative to the reforestation of the mountains 

 and the conservation of forest soil" failed to pass the Chamber of Depu- 

 ties. It was considered too drastic and provoked numerous objections 

 because of economic questions, aiming especially at the grazing industry, 

 which it aroused and antagonized. The bill was retired several months 

 after it was presented, and for ten years a means of combatting inunda- 

 tion was not considered further. A veritable cataclysm was necessary 

 to bring up the question anew. In June, 1856, terrible floods ravaged 

 the valleys of the Rhine, the Loire, the Rhone, Garonne, and the Seine, 

 causing the loss of a great number of lives and doing damage amounting 

 to more than $38,600,000. A law had been made in 1858 for the defense 

 of towns against floods, but it was not until July 28, 1860, that the law 

 on the reforestation of the mountains was passed. It was received with 

 great disfavor by the grazing interests. "The reforestation," they said, 

 "would do away with grazing; the forest would everywhere replace the 

 pastures." Very vigorous objections were made, even to the extent of 

 armed resistance. After the law of June 4, 1864, was passed, which 

 authorized forestation, they learned very quickly that they were mis- 

 taken. But the law of 1864 could not produce results. Grassing alone 

 was not in itself sufficient to fix the sliding land where it was heavily 

 eroded, land whose preservation affected the pubHc interest. Besides 

 the law of 1864, which included the same principles as the law of 1860, 

 also contained some faults — "a collection of defects, any one of which 

 was enough to kill it." The appropriations were too small for the work 

 to be accomplished, but the main defect of the law was that the com- 

 munal lands could be taken over without pay7nent. The dispossession 

 was only temporary, to be sure, but the conditions governing the return 

 of the land were onerous and inequitable. "Since 1874 a devoted repre- 

 sentative of the mountain population, Doctor Chevandier (of the Drome) 

 was asking, if not the actual repeal of the legislation on reforestation, 

 at least a very material modification of its provisions." 



In 1876 the Government proposed a law destined to replace the laws 

 of 1860 and 1864. The Chamber passed it in 1877, but the Senate com- 

 mittee opposed it with a counter project, which included the regulation 

 of grazing. The Government withdrew the bill and sent to the Senate 



2 " Restauration et Conservation des Terrains en Montagne," Premiere Partie, 

 pp. 1-4. 



