Arizona republican., 1910-06-23
FORESTS AND FLOODS
 MUTUAL RELATIONS THE PINCHoT- MOORE cONTRO- VERSY ON THE SUBJECT. Prof. Moore Fully Sustained By Pre-
 ponderance of Authority.

The discussion of the question as to how much the forests affect streamflow, now being taken up among the press of the country,
 has brought the corps of engineers, United States army, to the aid of
 Prof Willis l.. Moore. chief of the United States weather bureau, who contend that the planting of forests does not alleviate extreme flood, and
 in support of this contention the best authorities seem to agree with Prof.
 Moore d not with MT. Pinchot, who
 maintains that the planting of forests does prevent floods.
 In a recent editorial from the Out look this statement is made: The experience of the ages has crystal liZed this common knowledge into the
 common belief that, beyond question: forests do influence streamflow." The experience of the ages has not given this belief to everyone; the list of
 authorities fully agree with Prof Moore, and not with Mir. PinchOt. The question of how much forests affect
 streamflow is a colossal one and can
 not be dealt with in detail, but the
 contention between the two parties in
 the case is concerned principally with
 the effect of forests on the floods in
 the large navigable streams, and not
 floods in smaller branches.
 Referring to the claim concerning
 the experience of ages, the only way
 to refute that would be to publish all records available. Hundreds and hun
 dreds of pages, which could be re-
 peated, certainly do not indicate what the Outlook contends, and there are
 many engineers of prominence who cannot find this proof Attention is called to this fact that the belief com mon nowadays in this country re- garding the effect of forests on streamflOw, has been spread through popular publications, and not through scientific ones, and it is believed largely by people who have given the matter only. passing attention. The scientific world, neither in this coun- try nor abroad, has ever accepted this theory The broad statement that so and so lis the experience of man. kind" given without proof, is typ fcal forestry argument, and is meant for popular consumption.
 Referring now to the question of no authority agreeing with Prof. Moore, it is pertinent to ask who the au- thorities are, and which of them agree with MT. Pinchot. If a patient wanted to know the value of a patent medicine, would he ask the man who is interested in selling the patent medicine, or would he ask his doc tor, who is studying how to keep his patients well regardless of methods
 e q folnn fn lrran what caused the floods, would you ask MT. Pinchot, eX-chief of the for estry bureau, who is anxious to plant all of the trees that he can, or would you ask Prof. w. l.. Moore, chief of the weather bureau, which department for years has conducted the matter of forecasting floods, and which in this work has been compelled to study everything that caused the floods? You might also be inclined to ask the corps of engineers of the United States army, whose business is the improvement of the navigable streams which are vitally affected by the number and height of the various floods, and necessarily study them. The weather bureau and corps of en- gineerS have no axes to grind, except that if the trees would ameliorate floods, it would be a great advantage to the corps of engineers and great assistance to them in their work to have them planted in great numbers. The corps of engineers and the wealth CT bureau both want to reduce the floods, but they have no interest in trees, except for the results that may be derived from them.
 Prof Willis l.. Moores thirty eight page pamphlet, written at the request of the committee of agriculture of the house of representatives, is the result of close study and valuable scientific research. If MT. Pinchot has ever written anything as thorough and learned it has never as yet ap- peared in print.
 If there is one of the 1S0 officers of the United States engineering corps who in this day and generation be- lieves that forests ought to be planted to alleviate extreme floods, or to inn prove navigation (one of MT. Pinchot's arguments), he has never been heard from. About one year ago Lieutenant Colonel Chittenden, corps of engineers, wrote a masterly article on this sub Ject, WTlcn was presented IO the American Society of Civil Engineers, and, with the discussion, occupied about 300 pages. His contentious are quite in line with those of Prof. | Moore; and it might be added that he has, recently, been made a briga- dier general, for his excellent services to the government, of which none were more brilliant nor more con- spicuous than his recent publication. |
 M Belgrand, French engineer, who ! made an extensive study of the basin ] of the Seine, France, arrives at simi- l lar conclusions to those of Prof. Moore | and Gen. Chittenden. M. St. Clair, | French engineer, after extensive study, 1 does likewise.
 Herr Ernst Lauder, chief of the hydrographic bureau of the Austrian | government, recently made an eXten- | sive investigation of the records of | the Danube river, covering a period | of 500 years. His conclusions are that deforestation of the country has | had no effect in increasing the fre- quency or augmenting the height of