Relations between Government Surveys and the Mining Industry - General Discussion (Page 452)

G. F. LOUGhlin,* Washington, D. C.—With reference to Mr. Bain's paper: The scarcity of adequate geologic data on building stone reflects, among other things, a lack of interest on the part of geologists. It has been one of my duties to attend to matters relating to building stone and other structural materials that have come to the U. S. Geological Survey, but for several years my principal administrative and other duties in the Section of Metalliferous Deposits have prevented me from giving structural materials the attention that they deserve. I have felt that investigations relating to structural materials should be assigned to someone else, but thus far nobody with a sufficient interest in the subject has come forward; further, the specific calls for these investigations have been so few and far between that it has not seemed practical to draft any one for the job. The general situation is such that steady and substantial progress in the application of geology to the utilization of structural materials is not likely to be made unless someone with keen interest in the subject takes the initiative. If the start is once made, I know from experience that cooperation from the more progressive members of the quarry and building industries will be readily forthcoming. Mr. Sales' suggestions are all constructive and most welcome. A thorough, detailed discussion of them might be as long as his manuscript, but could largely be summarized with the one word "amen" qualified by the alibi that a chronic shortage of funds and therefore of personnel has prevented us from carrying out some of his suggestions already. A few of them might call for an Act of Congress before we could undertake them, and one or two, such as the preservation of mine maps, with which I heartily agree, would call for much additional space as well as clerical and supervising help. Several items in Mr. Sales' paper—for example, the question of balance between the scientific and more directly practical studies and the surveys or resurveys of the larger and smaller mining districts—have been covered in my contribution to the symposium. The suggestion of frequent reviews of progress in the study of ore deposits is excellent and can be followed without serious diversion from projects already on the Survey's program. Brief reviews by Survey men have been published in periodicals, and the contributions by several of them to the Lindgren Volume1 may also be cited as serving this purpose to some degree. The practice of publishing short papers by Survey men in outside journals rather than in Government reports is largely the result of experience and expedience. Our printing funds are limited, and considerable time must elapse between the transmittal of a paper and its publication. Time is saved therefore by sending papers to outside journals, and the editors of those journals are usually glad to receive them. Members of the Survey would doubtless prefer to have the products and byproducts of their official work appear in official Survey publications if conditions were more favorable. If we were left entirely to ourselves the balance between the more scientific and the more directly practical studies would be somewhat better than it is, but the