doi:10.2489/jswc.64.2.68A Feature Hugh Hammond Bennett and the creation of the Soil Erosion Service Douglas Helms

he Soil Conservation Service (SCS) As he compared virgin, timbered sites to was created in the United States eroded fields, he became convinced that T Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil erosion was a problem not just for by an act of Congress on April 27, 1935. the individual farmer but also for rural However, an earlier date, September 19, economies. While this experience aroused 1933, should not pass without recognition. his curiosity, Bennett recalled that Thomas That date marks the selection of Hugh C. Chamberlain’s paper on Soil Wastage Hammond Bennett as the director of the presented in 1908 at the Governors’ Soil Erosion Service (SES), predecessor Conference in the White House “fixed to SCS. Creation of the SES was critical my determination to pursue that subject to the future of federal soil conservation to some possible point of counteraction” activities, the history of SCS, and Bennett’s (Bennett 1959). recognition as the “father of soil conserva- Bennett wrote increasingly about soil Copyright © 2009 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved.

tion.” erosion in the 1920s for an array of pop- Journal of Soil and Water Conservation This article discusses Bennett’s USDA ular and scientific journals such as North career, which made him the logical can- American Review, Country Gentleman, didate to lead the federal soil conservation Scientific Monthly, and the Journal of effort, and recounts the summer of 1933 Agricultural Research. He was establish- Hugh Hammond Bennett. Photo courtesy of the when the New Deal included soil con- ing himself as the USDA expert on soil USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. servation as a purpose for public works erosion and was recognized as such. His programs. During June to September 1933, campaign received quite a boost when national soil erosion program. He knew several agencies put forth plans to utilize Henry G. Knight, Chief of the Bureau of the few soil erosion researchers at the the public works funds to be devoted to Chemistry and Soils, placed Bennett in state agricultural experiment stations. soil conservation. It was by no means cer- charge of a special study of the extent of Important as their investigations were,

tain that the architects of the New Deal soil erosion and methods of control, effec- the experiments covered only a few spots 64(2):68A-74A would favor Bennett’s plan over its com- tive January 1928. on the vast agricultural landscape. In petitors. Bennett’s selection as the Director Bennett’s travels around the country Bennett’s mind a national program of soil of SES, while logical, was not a foregone and studies provided grist for his arti- erosion was needed. Bennett’s ally in cause, conclusion. cles and talks. He succeeded in arousing A.B. Connor of the Texas Agricultural www.swcs.org national attention where others had failed. Experiment Station, enlisted the aid of Bennett’s Early Career Among his writings of the 1920s, none Representative James Buchanan, who Bennett earned a Bachelor of Science was more influential than a 1928 USDA inserted a clause in the USDA appropria-

degree with an emphasis in chemistry and bulletin coauthored with William Ridgely tions bill for fiscal year 1929–1930 that geology from the University of North Chapline titled Soil Erosion: A National authorized the soil experiment stations. Carolina in June 1903 and upon gradu- Menace. Bennett expressed the motiva- (Eventually the stations would be renamed ating joined the Bureau of Soils within tion for his later actions: “The writer, after soil conservation experiment stations.) the USDA. The Bureau had begun to 24 years spent in studying the soils of the Bennett was disappointed that some of make county-based soil surveys in 1899, United States, is of the opinion that soil the funds were allotted to the Forest which became regarded as an important erosion is the biggest problem confronting Service and to the Bureau of Agricultural American contribution to the field of soil the farmers of the Nation over a tremen- Engineering (BAE). Despite this disap- science. The outdoor work suited Bennett, dous part of its agricultural lands.” The pointment, he sought out locations and and he mapped soils and wrote a number bulletin was not a manual on the meth- cooperators for the stations that he would of soil surveys. ods of preventing soil erosion; rather it was supervise from his new position in charge The 1905 survey of Louisa County, intended to draw attention “to the evils of the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils’ soil Virginia, in particular, profoundly affected of this process of land wastage and to the erosion and moisture conservation investi- Bennett. He had been directed to the need for increased practical information gations (Helms, forthcoming). county to investigate declining crop yields. and research work relating to the prob- lem” (Bennett and Chapline 1928). A Public Works Program to Douglas Helms is the National Historian, Bennett followed up momentum Stimulate the Economy USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, gained from the bulletin and well-placed FDR and the architects of the New Deal W ashington, DC. magazine articles with a campaign for a acted early in the administration to pro-

68A March/April 2009—vol. 64, no. 2 journal of soil and water conservation vide work for the unemployed through “about the matter of getting some of the and employ a supervising engineer for federally funded projects. Coincidental public works money for erosion control. each state. The federal government would to providing employment, these wages The president seems to be very much supply the terracing equipment while the would prime the local economic pump interested in the general problem of ero- farmer signed an agreement to provide and, it was hoped, bring the country out sion but time did not permit getting any the labor, power, and future maintenance. of the economic depression. The public detailed views from him as to action under The state extension services could help works legislation identified soil conserva- the public works bill” (Wallace 1933a). farmers form cooperating organizations to tion as one of its purposes. Roosevelt was Title II of the National Industrial facilitate the agreement process. Rexford inaugurated on March 4, 1933, and on Recovery Act, enacted on June 16, G. Tugwell, acting for Secretary Wallace, March 21 he proposed to Congress that 1933, created the Federal Emergency forwarded the plan to the Administrator, they create “a civilian conservation corps Administration of Public Works. All pow- Federal Emergency Administration of to be used in simple work, not interfering ers of the new administration were to Public Works, on June 9. Secretary Wallace with normal employment, and confining be exercised by the Federal Emergency had penned a note on the outgoing letter. itself to forestry, the prevention of soil ero- Administrator of Public Works, who could “I have had this matter of expenditure of sion, flood control and similar projects” establish new agencies, utilize federal and Public Works money for erosion control (Congressional Record). Congress passed state employees, and appoint employ- [brought] up with the President and he is the Emergency Conservation Work legis- ees without regard to civil service laws. very much interested” (Tugwell 1933). Copyright © 2009 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved.

lation on March 31, 1933. As the federal In keeping with the Ickes suggestion, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation agencies sorted out their responsibilities, FDR appointed the Secretary of the US John Collier and Cultural the Forest Service in the USDA assumed Department of the Interior, to the dual Pluralism on the Reservations general supervision of a small number post of Federal Emergency Administrator Simultaneously, another USDA branch of Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) of Public Works (Executive Order No. was cooperating with the US Department camps that worked on soil conservation. 6198, July 8, 1933). Among the eligible of the Interior on soil conservation. The Prior to the creation of the SCS in 1935, purposes enumerated in the act were the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils and their the CCC worked predominantly on pub- “conservation and development of natu- soil conservation expert, Hugh Hammond lic forest and park lands. ral resources, including control, utilization, Bennett, had come to the attention of John The CCC addressed only a segment and purification of waters, prevention of Collier, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, of the unemployed, young men aged 18 soil or coastal erosion, development of through Secretary of Agriculture Wallace. to 25; consequently, there remained the water power…” (Statutes at Large). Wallace soon had plans for Mr. Bennett to 64(2):68A-74A need for a broader public works pro- It seems likely that FDR needed little use his conservation skills to help Collier gram. The Federal Emergency Relief Act persuasion to include soil conservation in his mission to preserve and perpetuate (May 12, 1933) provided direct relief to as a purpose of the Act, given his inter- Native American cultures. states. Meanwhile, the Cabinet and “Brain est in forestry, erosion, and conservation. Before the New Deal, Collier was active www.swcs.org Trust”—FDR’s personal advisors—con- He had carried out reforestation and soil in Indian affairs and had been critical of tinued crafting a federal public works bill. conservation work on his estate at Hyde federal Indian policy and the Office of Harold L. Ickes, Secretary of the Interior, Park, New York, and on his small farm Indian Affairs. He was a potential candidate

had suggested to FDR that conservation near Warm Springs, Georgia. As gover- to be Commissioner of Indian Affairs, but of natural resources be among the objec- nor of New York, FDR had hired some so too was Harold Ickes. During the presi- tives of the bill. He confided the following of the state’s youth to reforest abandoned dential campaign, Ickes had sought support in his diary: farm land purchased by the state. His per- among fellow progressive Republicans for I made two suggestions as to this bill sonal life and public career indicate that FDR and aspired to be Commissioner of which met with the approval of the not only would he be receptive to the idea, Indian Affairs. Collier and others persuaded President. The first was that there be a but also that he would have arrived at that him to seek the Cabinet post of Secretary definite revision made to include con- thought independently. of the Department of the Interior. Collier, servation of natural resources among Within the USDA, some bureaus were perhaps the leading advocate for reform of the objects of the bill; and the other was already thinking about public works proj- government policies toward Tribes, wanted instead of appointing an independent ects that could be funded under the bill to lead the Office of Indian Affairs himself. Public Works Administrator, the new then being drafted and making its way Ickes was certainly sympathetic toward the official be assigned to some depart- through Congress. Before the bill was Tribes, but Collier regarded him as too ment (Ickes 1933a, May 16, 1933). signed, the BAE had formulated a plan for inexperienced in the area and tempera- Henry A. Wallace, Secretary of Agriculture, a national terracing program for erosion mentally unsuited to the job of reform discussed potential public works projects control. The BAE proposed that it sup- (Parman 1994). with some of his staff. On May 30, he ply the technical direction, while the state Collier’s selection as Commissioner of advised Samuel H. McCrory, Chief of the administrators in the new public works Indian Affairs revolutionized government BAE, that he had talked to the President agency would administer the program policy toward Tribes. For most of the late

journal of soil and water conservation March/April 2009—vol. 64, no. 2 69A 19th and early 20th century, Indian pol- the Bureau of Entomology, and sought establishing one. The idea of an experi- icy promoted assimilation into American their advice concerning erosion prob- ment station would find favor with the society. Collier’s experiences, especially an lems on the reservations. According to Office of Indian Affairs group. After the epiphany at Taos Pueblo, converted him Collier’s notes, Bennett believed erosion meeting Bennett departed for a five-day to cultural pluralism in which Tribes per- on the Dakota reservation could be “eco- fieldwork trip and his supervisor, Dr. A.G. petuated and strengthened their unique nomically controlled,” and offered to send McCall, chief of Soil Investigations in the cultures. Retaining their land base and George W. Musgrave, director of the ero- Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, wired economic viability was critical to the suc- sion experiment station at Clarinda, Iowa, Musgrave and Lewis to prepare for travel cess of cultural pluralism in Collier’s view to investigate and make recommendations. to the reservations (Report 1933). (Parman 1994). Concerning Oklahoma, Collier reported In viewing the potential for the reserva- that Bennett “believes that it would be Discussion about Soil tions to support a viable livelihood, Collier very profitable to undertake erosion con- Conservation on the Navajo and Ickes focused first on the Navajo res- trol in almost unlimited amounts.” Bennett Reservation ervation for some obvious reasons. The recommended H. G. Lewis, director of the Prior to asking Secretary Wallace to 16 million acre reservation was about Red Plains Soil Erosion Experiment Station arrange a meeting of the primary par- one-fourth of the acreage in all reserva- at Guthrie, Oklahoma, and endorsed even ties in USDA and US Department of the tions, and the Navajo were one-sixth of more strongly, Dr. Nathaniel E. Winters of Interior, the Office of Indian Affairs met Copyright © 2009 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved.

the native population of the United States the Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment with Bennett and McCall several times. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation (Fryer 1937). The Navajo had adapted their Station. Winters was a state, not a federal Wallace called on Henry G. Knight, Chief economy and culture to the sheep, goats, employee, but Bennett thought it might be of the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils. and horses introduced by the Europeans. feasible to get him assigned to the federal Knight held the meeting in his office After the Navajo release from captivity at project. Winters, a Kansan, had the added on June 8, and it included John Collier, Bosque Redondo and Fort Sumner and advantage of partial Indian ancestry. Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Charles their resettlement in New Mexico, the US The complement of erosion experi- W. Collier, Assistant to the Commissioner, government supplied about 15,000 sheep ment stations that Bennett supervised and Jay B. Nash, Special Assistant to the and goats and distributed food, seed, and did not include a Southwestern station, Indian Commissioner. Attending from the implements. From 1870 to the beginning and the group discussed the possibility of USDA were Knight, McCall, and Bennett of World War II, the Navajo population

grew from around 10,000 to 50,000. Their 64(2):68A-74A livestock increased from a few thousand to more than a million at times and the reservation was expanded from 3.5 to 16 million acres. By the 1930s many famil- www.swcs.org iar with the Western range, including the Navajo reservation, thought it had suffered land degradation from periods of over-

stocking (Kimball and Province 1942).

Bennett and Cooperation of Bureau of Chemistry and Soil with the Office of Indian Affairs John Collier’s eldest son and assistant in the Office of Indian Affairs, Charles W. Collier, took on the mission of identifying the people to be consulted on conserv- ing and rehabilitating the reservation lands (Collier 1963). Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. Wallace suggested cooperation with Hugh Hammond Bennett and others in the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils. On or before May 24, 1933, an employee of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, President Franklin Roosevelt visited with CCC enrollees near Camp Roosevelt on August 12, 1933. probably Charles Collier, met with Seated from left are Major General Paul B. Malone, Louis M. Howe, Harold L. Ickes, Robert Fechner, Bennett, W. Ridgley Chapline of the US FDR, Henry A. Wallace, and Rexford Tugwell. Image 35-GE-3A-5 from the National Archives, College Forest Service, and Frank Craighead of Park.

70A March/April 2009—vol. 64, no. 2 journal of soil and water conservation of the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils. Soils. C.E. Ramser, Senior Drainage for experiments and education (Parman Attending from the BAE were Samuel Engineer, and L.M. Winsor, Division of 1976; Kelly 1985). H. McCrory, Chief, and Lewis A. Jones, Irrigation, represented the BAE. Ramser The next day, July 8, the Council Division of Drainage and Soil Erosion also had researched and written on terrac- approved the government’s selecting a rep- Control. William Ridgely Chapline, who ing and on gully-control techniques. The resentative area for the “Erosion Control had coauthored Soil Erosion: A National Indians Service’s representative from their Station.” The resolution stated that “unless Menace with Bennett and who was in Division of Irrigation was H.C. Neuffer. sound plans for the control of this erosion charge of range land investigations for the Representing the Forest Service was C.K. are developed and carried into practice Forest Service, also attended. Cooperrider from the Southwestern without further delay, the greater por- At the meeting Collier and colleagues Forest and Range Experiment Station, tion of the reservation will be damaged expressed an interest in developing a who was also in charge of the erosion and beyond repair” (Navajo Tribal Council research station to study erosion problems streamflow research. Resolutions, p. 151). After approval, CCC on reservations in the Southwest. This idea During the brief tour Bennett noted crews started fencing the area at Mexican probably developed from the earlier dis- observations in his field diary about range Springs almost immediately. Bennett had cussions with Bennett and others. For this conditions, erosion, and grazing by goats chaired the committee that wrote the reason, Bennett, with his experience setting and sheep. Bennett met the people knowl- report on the conservation work needed up the soil erosion experiment stations, edgeable about reservation conditions on the reservation. The committee report Copyright © 2009 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved.

was a logical collaborator. Additionally, and collected oral tradition stories about became the blueprint for the action pro- Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Collier saw the station as an educational changes in land conditions and the names gram that Collier proposed to Secretary center to which Navajos would travel for of other contacts that could be help- Ickes. instruction in soil conservation methods. ful. Some of these people, such as E.A. Knight understood the objective would Johnson, forester for the Office of Indian Assistance to Other Indian be to develop “local leadership among the Affairs at Albuquerque, would later work Reservations Indians themselves.” The group decided with SCS on the range program. Bennett While Bennett traveled to the Navajo res- that a team of representatives from the noted citations for further reading such as ervation, some of his experiment station Office of Indian Affairs and USDA would the works of anthropologist Alfred Louis superintendents traveled to other reser- meet at the Harvey Hotel, Gallup, New Kroeber and Ancient Life in the American vations and wrote reports to the Office Mexico, on June 26 to study the condi- Southwest by Edgar Lee Hewett. Toward of Indian Affairs on the erosion condi- tions, especially the areas of eroding land. the end of the trip when he was no doubt tions and needed conservation methods. 64(2):68A-74A The group would select tracts where vari- looking forward to writing the commit- George W. Musgrave, superintendent of ous known control measures would be tee report, Bennett stated what he termed the Clarinda, Iowa, station surveyed the utilized. “The Problem,” in his field diary: “We find Rosebud and Pine Ridge reservations. The Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, that the Navajo Indian Reservation has Musgrave explained that the reservations www.swcs.org at the request of the Office of Indian suffered so seriously from overgrazing that were “so large and the problems so diverse Affairs, assumed leadership of the project range areas now have little present value” that a minimum of several days seems nec- and Bennett was made chairman of the (Bennett 1933b). essary to do anything like an adequate job.”

committee (Knight 1933). Importantly, Musgrave assured the Office of Indian the proposed cooperation had the enthu- Navajo Tribal Council Approves Affairs staff that the entire soil survey divi- siastic support of Secretary of Agriculture Experiment Station sion staff, including director A.G. McCall, Wallace. He responded to Knight’s report John Collier called a meeting of the Navajo were interested and would “endeavor to on the meeting. “Thanks for your prompt Tribal Council at Fort Wingate on July 7 give to you the very best possible service” and thoroughgoing cooperation with and 8, toward the end of Bennett’s trip. It (Musgrave 1933). Commissioner Collier and his associates. was Collier’s first appearance before the J.M. Snyder, superintendent of the This work has my very great interest and it Council as Commissioner of Indian Affairs. erosion experiment station at Statesville, is a pleasure to see how you have responded The reformer and outside critic was now North Carolina, wrote a report on erosion to the suggestion of cooperation” (Wallace center stage at the meeting of the Council conditions on the Cherokee reservation 1933b). John Collier cleared the plan with and another 1,200 Navajo Tribal members. (Rice 1933). H.G. Lewis of the Guthrie, Secretary Ickes, who was “powerfully Indian Service officials from the Southwest Oklahoma, station was an advisor on the interested” and Collier expressly asked and Washington, who had previously been Indian Civil Conservation Corps camps that Bennett serve as “informal chairman the objects of Collier’s criticism, attended. in Oklahoma. He wrote a technical bul- of this composite group” (Collier 1933a, Collier’s primary objective for his first letin “Emergency Conservation Soil June 10, 1933). meeting with the Council was approval of Erosion Control Work on Indian Lands Late in June 1933, the committee met the experiment station. Bennett spoke to in Oklahoma.” The request from John at the Navajo Reservation. Bennett rep- the Council and emphasized the fact that Collier was to give McCall, Bennett and resented the Bureau of Chemistry and erosion that had taken place and the need the experiment station superintendents an

journal of soil and water conservation March/April 2009—vol. 64, no. 2 71A was premature. In early June as the Colliers Reacting to the national terracing were meeting with USDA officials, but proposal, Bennett repeated his familiar before the passage of National Industrial arguments for interdependent, mutually Recovery Act and before the committee supporting practices for soil conserva- had studied the Navajo reservation, Samuel tion. Terraces certainly contributed to soil H. McCrory, Chief of the BAE, drafted a conservation when designed properly plan that called on the Federal Emergency and when built on the appropriate soils. Administration of Public Works to fund However, terraces were no panacea, and a national terrace-building program. In should be supported by strip cropping, con- the letter that Acting Secretary Rexford tour plowing, crop rotations, and grassed Tugwell sent to Harold Ickes, USDA rec- waterways. The soil conservation experi- ommended that the BAE be designated “to ment station under Bennett’s supervision handle the administrative and engineering had been researching soil-conserving effi- features of this work.” Secretary Wallace ciency of all these practices. Furthermore, penned a note to the outgoing letter. “I Bennett feared that this propitious moment have had this matter of expenditure of for a national soil conservation program Public Works money for erosion control might be squandered if a narrow approach

Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. Wallace and Copyright © 2009 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved. Undersecretary Rexford T. Tugwell. Image RG- up with the President and he is very much were taken. As recounted through Brink, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 16-G-85-18-45497-B from the Records of the interested” (Tugwell 1933). Tugwell agreed saying, “That sounds rea- O ffice of the Secretary of Agriculture, National sonable to me…. I’ll see what I can do to Archives, College Park. Bureau of Agricultural direct the use of the money approved by Engineering Proposal and the public works board under Secretary opportunity to achieve one of their objec- Bennett’s Anger Ickes.” Further, Tugwell assured Bennett tives, seeing that their research findings The announcement of the BAE’s pro- that he would have a leading part in the were utilized. posal evidently touched off the episode program (Brink 1951; Tugwell 1977). recounted in Wellington Brink’s Big Allotment of Public Works Funds Hugh and in Rexford Tugwell’s Roosevelt’s P lans of the Office of Indian for Soil Conservation Revolution: The First Year—A Personal Affairs

Ickes typically sought FDR’s personal Perspective. Tugwell was writing more than Another problem with the national ter- 64(2):68A-74A endorsement of projects approved by the 40 years after the incident and Bennett’s racing plan was that it did not seem to Special Board for Public Works. On July recollections were obviously the source accommodate the work John Collier 17, 1933 the board allotted $5,000,000 for for Brink’s account. While somewhat dif- wanted done on the reservations. Collier soil erosion prevention work on public and ferent in details, the two accounts comport requested $2,500,000 for work on the www.swcs.org private lands under the direction of the in the essential elements. reservations which would be handled by Public Works Administration. McCrory In an agitated state, Bennett ignored The Office of Indian Affairs, “rather than and Lewis A. Jones, head of BAE’s Division protocol and went straight to the Assistant through the Department of Agriculture”

of Drainage and Erosion Control, believed Secretary’s office, where Tugwell invited (Ickes 1933b). Collier remained enthu- that their Bureau would be given leader- him in. Tugwell had the various plans laid siastic about Bennett. In response to an ship of the erosion control project. The out on his desk. He tried to assure a skepti- inquiry he wrote to Congressman Will project would be operated as outlined cal Bennett that he, Tugwell, had planned to Hastings, “I have seen a good deal of Dr. in their plan of June 9, which had been consult Bennett before making a decision. Bennett in recent months and have devel- sent forward a week before the National The two knew each other, at least through oped the highest regard for him” (Collier Industrial Recovery Act was signed (Jones correspondence, before Tugwell, a profes- 1933b, July 28, 1933). Collier understood 1933). Acting on the same supposition, sor of economics at Columbia University, that improved range management, in addi- USDA’s Daily Digest of news stories became Assistant Secretary on March 7, tion to water development and control of on July 25 reported on the allotment of 1933. Tugwell also served in FDR’s “Brain erosion, would be needed on the reser- $5,000,000 for soil erosion prevention. It Trust,” the personal advisors selected more vation. He saw the wisdom in Bennett’s quoted the Special Board for Public Works for their expertise and commitment than interdisciplinary approach. In recom- as saying the plan “provides for the practice for their political connections and acumen. mending Bennett to Ickes, Collier lauded of terracing, which agricultural engineers Bennett had supplied material on soil ero- Bennett’s interdisciplinary approach that have found to be the most effective means sion for Tugwell’s American Economic Life had no place for blinkered allegiance of controlling erosion.” Funds were to be and the Means of Its Improvement. Both to engineering, agronomy, ecology, or allotted to the states in proportion to their Bennett and Tugwell, from their different animal husbandry as panaceas” (Helms, cultivated acres (Daily Digest 1933). perspectives, had come to view soil as a forthcoming). As it turned out, the announcement kind of public trust.

72A March/April 2009—vol. 64, no. 2 journal of soil and water conservation Tugwell’s Influence suggestion to Barrows that Bennett should the best-qualified person to lead a con- Rexford Tugwell’s actions confirm the have a prominent role in the organiza- certed federal action for soil conservation assurances given to Bennett in their meet- tion. At Ickes’s request, Barrows travelled was probably correct. Preparation and ing. Tugwell held a conference on July to Washington where Ickes offered him opportunity intersected in his selection 24 and directed changes in the Bureau the job on August 30, 1933 (Ickes 1933a, as Director of the SES. The events of June of Agriculture Engineering plan that had August 30, 1933). After conferring with through September of 1933 were particu- been submitted to Ickes on June 9. The the Dean of the Physical Science Division larly decisive, demonstrating the role of revised plan bears Bennett’s handiwork. and the President of University of Chicago, contingency in historical developments. The work would be limited to approxi- Barrows declined the job (Barrows 1933). In this case those events were criti- mately ten large areas where, “Terracing, Ickes, dismayed at the delay, wrote to cal to the history of the SCS and Hugh strip-cropping and seeding to permanent Wallace; “I am anxious to have this mat- Bennett’s recognition as the father of soil pastures are to be the principal control ter undertaken at once, as I know you are, conservation. measures employed on the crop land, with and I regret the delay due to our waiting possibly some tree planting on the steep- for Dr. Barrows, since, in the end, his deci- Acknowledgements est and most severely washed slopes.” Each sion was in the negative. How about H.H. The first part of this article is based on Douglas project would include specialists in agron- Bennett of the Bureau of Chemistry and Helms, “Hugh Hammond Bennett,” Modern American omy, engineering, range or forestry and Soils, of your department?” (Ickes 1933c). Environmentalists (forthcoming from Johns Hopkins Copyright © 2009 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved.

other disciplines. The outline generally fit University Press). Journal of Soil and Water Conservation with the future organization of the dem- Selection of Hugh Hammond onstration projects that Bennett would Bennett as SES Director References initiate as director of the SES. Also, the Secretary Wallace called Bennett in to Barrows, H. 1933. Letter to Rexford Tugwell. Folder: idea of large work areas accommodated discuss his transfer to the SES, and they “Positions-Outside,” General Correspondence, Collier’s plans for the Navajo Reservation. reached an agreement that it was best he Record Group 16. College Park, MD: National The Navajo Project was destined to be the take leave without pay from USDA while Archives and Records Administration. September second demonstration project initiated and working on the soil conservation project. 1, 1933. the largest in real extent of all the projects Bennett asked that a number of the spe- Bennett, H.H. 1933a. Letter to Harold Ickes. File 1- (Memorandum 1933). cialists at the experiment stations under 275 Soil Erosion, Central Classified Files, Record Tugwell had influence with the his direction be detailed to the work, and Group 48. College Park, MD: National Archives

President and with Secretary Ickes. Ickes Wallace agreed. Although the job had ini- and Records Administration. September 18, 64(2):68A-74A would soon be making his ill-fated case to tially been offered to Barrows at Tugwell’s 1933. Roosevelt to transform the Interior depart- suggestion, Wallace assured Ickes that “I Bennett, H.H. 1933b. Navajo diary. Hugh Hammond ment into a Department of Conservation have the feeling that Mr. Bennett is the Bennett Papers, Southern Historical Collection. by wresting the Forest Service from best qualified man available to take over Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina. www.swcs.org USDA. Ickes regarded Tugwell’s ability these duties. He has devoted more study Bennett, H.H. 1959. The Hugh Bennett Lectures. highly and hoped to entice him to assume to the problem of erosion than any other Raleigh, NC: Agricultural Foundation, North the chief administrative position in the man in the country…” Wallace 1933c). Carolina State College. Bennett, H.H., and W.R. Chapline. 1928. Soil

new Department of Conservation. Given Bennett prepared a plan for the new ser- the conflicts in USDA over supervision of vice, and discussed it with Ickes on Saturday, Erosion: A National Menace. US Department of the soil conservation work, Tugwell rec- September 16 (Ickes 1933a, September 16, Agriculture Circular No. 33. Washington, DC: ommended placing the soil conservation 1933). The following Monday Bennett US Government Printing Office. operation, based on Bennett’s plan, in the wrote Ickes trying to persuade him that Brink, W. 1951. Big Hugh: The Father of Soil new Public Works Administration. Tugwell the best name for the agency would be Conservation. New York: Macmillan. thought Ickes had agreed to this arrange- the Soil Conservation Service. Bennett Collier, J. 1933a. John Collier to Wallace. Records of ment. While on a trip in the West, he was favored the more optimistic, positive term. the Civilian Conservation Corps, Indian Division, surprised to learn that Ickes had placed The term in fact more accurately described 194141-1933, Control of Erosion 344, Record the new SES in the Department of the the interrelated methods used to conserve Group 75. Washington, DC: National Archives Interior on August 25. and improve soils, not just hold them in and Records Administration. June 10, 1933. Tugwell was more successful in rec- place. Ickes would not relent, and Bennett Collier, J. 1933b. John Collier to William Hastings. ommending the first director. He favored became Director of the Soil Erosion Chronological File, John Collier Papers, Harlan Barrows, professor of geography Service. The SES was moved to USDA at Microform of the Original Papers in Yale at the University of Chicago. Barrows President Roosevelt’s direction in March University Library. Sanford, NC: Microfilming taught courses in conservation and natural 1935, and an act of Congress on April Corp. of America, 1980. July 28, 1933. resources and, reputedly, the first course in 27, 1935, created the Soil Conservation Collier, J. 1963. From Every Zenith: A Memoir and historical geography in the United States. Service (Bennett 1933a). Some Essays on Life and Thought. Denver, CO: True to his word, Tugwell passed along the Wallace’s assessment that Bennett was Sage Books.

journal of soil and water conservation March/April 2009—vol. 64, no. 2 73A Congressional Record. 73rd Congress, 1st Session, Conservation Corps, Indian Division, Record Statutes at Large. 48 Stat 195, 201. 77:1,650,659-660. Group 75. Washington, DC: National Archives Tugwell, R.G. 1933. Rexford G. Tugwell, acting Daily Digest. 1933. Vol. 50, No. 20, July 25, 1933. and Records Administration. secretary, to administrator, Federal Emergency Copy in Civilian Conservation Corps, Indian Navajo Tribal Council Resolutions, p. 151. Administration of Public Works. File 19414-1933, Division, 194141-1933, Control of Erosion 344, Parman, D.L. 1976. The Navajos and the New Deal. Control of Erosion 344, Records of the Civilian Record Group 75. Washington, DC: National New Haven: Yale University Press. Conservation Corps, Indian Division, Record Archives and Records Administration. Parman, D.L. 1994. Indians and the American West. Group 75. Washington, DC: National Archives Fryer, E.R. 1937. The Navajo service. In Proceedings Bloomington: Indiana University Press. and Records Administration. June 9, 1933. of the First Navajo Land Management Report. 1933. Report on interviews with H.H. Tugwell, R.G. 1977. Roosevelt’s Revolution: The Conference, March 2-6, 1937, Falstaff, Arizona, Bennett, W.R. Chapline, and Frank Craighead. First Year, a Personal Perspective. New York: 1-8. Soil Conservation Service Region Eight (Stamped received in Bureau of Indian Affairs, Macmillan. Records, Center for Southwest Research, May 31, 1933, Jay B. Nash, Director, Indian Wallace, H.A. 1933a. Henry A. Wallace to S. H. University of New Mexico. Emergency Conservation Work. J. Collier McCrory. File 3-20-C Soil Conservation, Helms, D. Forthcoming. The first part of the essay wrote to A.G. McCall on May 24, requesting General Correspondence, 1931-1939, Record is based on Douglas Helms, Hugh Hammond Musgrave’s and Lewis’s assistance. The meeting Group 8. College Park, MD: National Archives Bennett. In Modern American Environmentalists. took place on or before that date). File 19414- and Records Administration. May 30, 1933. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. 1933, Control of Erosion 344, Records of the Wallace, H.A. 1933b. Henry A. Wallace to Henry Ickes, H.L. 1993a. Ickes Diary, Papers of Harold L. Civilian Conservation Corps, Indian Division, Knight. File 37017, General Correspondence, Copyright © 2009 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved.

Ickes, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress. Record Group 75. Washington, DC: National Record Group 54. College Park, MD: National Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Diary entry date is listed in each citation. Archives and Records Administration. Archives and Records Administration. June 14, Ickes, H.L. 1933b. Ickes, Federal Emergency Rice, A.G. 1933. A. G. Rice to A. G. McCall. File 1933. Administrator of Public Works to Colonel Waite, 19414-1933, Control of Erosion 344, Records Wallace, H.A. 1933c. Henry A. Wallace to Harold File 1-275 Soil Erosion, Central Classified Files, of the Civilian Conservation Corps, Indian Ickes. Folder: Positions Outside, General Record Group 48, National Archives and Records Division, Record Group 75. Washington, DC: Correspondence, Record Group 16. College Administration, College Park, August 9, 1933. National Archives and Records Administration. Park, MD: National Archives and Records Ickes, H.L. 1933c. Harold L. Ickes to Henry A. October 10, 1933. Administration. September 12, 1933. Wallace, Folder: Positions-Outside,” General Correspondence,” Record Group 16, National Archives and Records Administration, College

Park. September 3, 1933. 64(2):68A-74A Jones, L.A. 1933. Lewis A. Jones to S. H. McCrory, July 19, 1933, and Jones to C. E. Ramser, July 20, 1933. File 3-20-C Soil Conservation, General Correspondence, 1931-1939, Record Group www.swcs.org 8. College Park, MD: National Archives and Records Administration. July 19, 1933. Kelly, L.C. 1985. Anthropology in the Soil Conservation Service. Agricultural History

59(2):136-147. Kimball, S.T., and J.H. Province. 1942. Navajo social organization in land use planning. Applied Anthropology 4(1):19-20. Knight, H.G. 1933. Letter to Henry A. Wallace. File 37017, General Correspondence, Record Group 54. College Park, MD: National Archives and Records Administration. June 9, 1933. Memorandum 1933. Memorandum in regard to erosion control project of the United States Department of Agricultural under authority of the National Industrial Recovery Act, July 31, 1933. File 1-275 Soil Erosion, Central Classified Files, Record Group 48. College Park, MD: National Archives and Records Administration. Musgrave, G.W. 1933. George W. Musgrave to J. B. Nash, June 29, 1933. File 19414-1933, Control of Erosion 344, Records of the Civilian

74A March/April 2009—vol. 64, no. 2 journal of soil and water conservation