HOME   AG. LIBRARY CATALOG   TABLE OF CONTENTS   NEXT CHAPTER

   THIS chapter is written to acquaint the reader with the challenge of events which led to the formation of the Keyline (Research) Foundation, the later changes in the policy of that Foundation, and the results and altered plans for Keyline that have now been made.

   I published "The Keyline Plan" in 1954 after ten years of practical experience as a land owner and trying to develop a property in an area where the orthodox methods of pasture improvement had never been successful. If things had been otherwise, if the soil had been better or the climate a little less unfavourable and a modicum of soil improvement had followed my earlier efforts, Keyline would not now be a much-discussed and controversial agricultural subject.

   I became intrigued and absorbed in the land and the soil, and could not keep it from my mind. Then some slight success convinced me that what I had envisaged for my land was not only possible, but that I could raise my aims to something much higher. I found the work which I was continuing to regard as failure was to others great success. My water storages built in 1944 and 1945, and to my mind only the start of things, were considered as something outstanding by our visitors. My irrigated pastures of those years were to me an undertaking far from successful because of cost and time factors. To others, however, the luxuriant-looking, and at that time spray-irrigated, pastures, growing with the aid of superphosphates on our impossible soils, were astounding. Then later, whenever I had occasion to open the valves of my dams (which to me had always been the only method of getting water out of a dam), most people were fascinated with the flowing water. I became more ambitious for the property and aimed at having over a thousand acres of the best soil, a water storage capacity that would hold all the run-off water on the property, and an irrigation set-up that could use the water almost as cheaply as when rain falls directly on the soil. I did not want a scheme which only paid in the production of highly valued special crops or special high value per acre enterprises. I was interested principally in the grazing of beef cattle and sheep.

   With the first glimpses of Keyline I believed that 1 had happened on something of outstanding importance. Keyline became an absorbing subject in our home with my two elder sons, both of whom have scientifically trained minds, and their friends of like ilk, pounding the theories of Keyline with all the enthusiastic fervour and imagination of youth. Before I had given even my first talk on Keyline just about every possible attack and criticism had been introduced and talked into its proper place.

   I spent a lot of time trying out every aspect of Keyline, dropping most other things that took much of my time, probing, testing and proving. Over two years went by and every aspect was proved, or so it appeared to me. One of the last things I ever expected to do was to write an agricultural book, but, convinced of the importance of my discoveries, I then wanted to write the book as quickly as possible.

   "The Keyline Plan" was written, but when I discussed it with a publisher he said, "An agricultural book, eh! Sell about five hundred", and at my look of consternation he conceded, "Well, maybe seven hundred if it's any good". This number would have made the cost per copy very high and he suggested that only by printing ten thousand could such a book be sold at a reasonable price. Certainly he would not be the one to say that ten thousand copies of an agricultural book could ever be sold in Australia. It had not been done before.

   However, I published the book myself, printing ten thousand copies. Many were given away to friends and other people, but the book did turn out to be an agricultural best seller, and few copies are available for sale anywhere now.

   We, my family and I, awaited the first review with some trepidation. However, it was favourable and eventually we read forty other favourable reviews. Later, a few critical comments continued to promote and maintain interest in the book.

   Events then took a new turn. Farmers, scientists and students had been visiting my property in considerable numbers since 1944; now the Keyline book brought them in thousands. The book was written for farmers, but the orthodox agriculturalist and the scientist did not ignore it. Groups of scientists of many interests in parties of a dozen or of a hundred, extension officers from all over the State, land surveyors, bank valuers, teachers, students, and many others came, and I have talked to them all.

   I had known many in the professional and academic fields prior to Keyline, but when the first visit was arranged for twenty such gentlemen, all highly educated and experienced specialists in some branches of agriculture, I felt some diffidence. What I had to do was deliver them a lecture on agriculture! I just hoped for the best but hardly expected it. The visit, however, was a complete success. They were not only wonderful fellows but they treated my work with a great deal of respect. They praised the experimental work as original and very valuable. They praised my poor soil of three years earlier and described it as incredibly rich. They put their hands into it, examined it closely and got friendly with some of my earthworm population. They looked at everything, grass, roots of grasses, the nodulation of clovers and lucerne, and seemed to enjoy digging for the deeper roots with my spade. They washed their dirty hands in the big flow of water from the outlet valve of one or other of my dams and were just as interested as anyone else in seeing the water flow. They praised these dams, and liked the big supply of water, thoroughly approved of one at least of my ideas on irrigation where the outlet valve lets the water into an irrigation drain and the plow pattern on the land takes control and spreads the irrigation water evenly.

   Each was interested to talk of his own special subject, asked what I had done about this and that, and wanted my opinions on the application of some of their particular work if it were applied in a Keyline way.

   One special group later was made up of ten to twelve scientists from CSIRO, with one grazier whom they all knew, together with one of Australia's leading land valuers who had been my guest a little over two years earlier. At the conclusion of our walk and my talk the CSIRO scientists were much more interested to hear the grazier's opinion of what they had seen and heard than they were in first expressing their own. When one of the scientists, a notable soilsman, asked the grazier did he think my pastures might collapse as his improved pastures had done recently, after being highly productive for a few years, every scientist there stopped to listen to his reply. He replied, consciously addressing them all, "No! Not in your life, this is it, this is what I'll do at 'X'," naming his own property.

   One of this group had earlier asked me what a certain paddock was like two years ago. I told them the valuer saw it then and asked him to repeat to them his opinion of the area as he gave it to me a little over two years previously. He said something like this, "I told Mr. Yeomans about two and a half years ago when first I saw his work here that this land was not worth two shillings an acre, but if he kept on with his work it could then be worth two shillings an acre." Then, with a smile, "You see, gentlemen, that I am right, as usual; it's now worth every penny of two shillings an acre. Speaking seriously, though, what has happened here in a little over two years is absolutely incredible. Where you have been digging into the good earth, all I could see then was yellow sand and sandstone!" (I have since paid £50 an acre for adjoining land to improve "Nevallan" and refused double this figure for my own property.)

   The early reactions of farmers and the top-flight scientists to my Keyline approach to land confirmed my own view on its ultimate scope and importance. The fact that I personally had originated the idea and developed the plan was just one of those inexplicable quirks of chance that do happen. But having done so, then perhaps I should do something about it.

   I considered the Keyline development of land something too big and important for me to tie it to, any commercial enterprise and decided to discuss its future development with men of sufficient stature to judge of its importance and work out its future. This I did. All those whom I approached had read my book. On more than one occasion they had also visited "Nevallan", where the plan developed.

   They agreed that the Keyline Plan was of sufficient importance for us to make an effort to teach it widely, to apply it to farms and eventually to have it accepted as part of national agricultural policy. Thus was formed The Keyline (Research) Foundation. I have paid my tribute to its founders in the dedication of this book. Membership was invited. It was to be a researeh foundation, but, as the founders considered that the merits of Keyline had already been proved in my own work, they would also do something that was immediately practical and organise a Keyline service to farmers and graziers. These matters were embodied in the constitution and application was made to the proper authorities for the taxation considerations that apply to gifts of money allowed research organisations.

   Membership fees were accepted but no large donations were sought pending approval of the Foundation as a research organisation.

   I had been appointed President, and as it was somewhat my "baby", my family and I made a substantial donation initially to bring the foundation to immediate usefulness. A start was made with a service to farmer members and the foundation began to function. However, the Keyline Foundation was not approved in this manner as a research foundation for taxation purposes because the whole of the money was not intended to be used by an approved research organisation such as a University. This approval, we found, could not be given if we conducted any type of service to farmers.

   Now, it should be realised just what a great disappointment this decision was to the founders of the Keyline (Research) Foundation. We then had in our minds the picture of a real national revival in agriculture and the concept of a service to farmers was in fact the selling of an "idea" with appropriate assistance to put the Keyline concept into wide practice. It had, of course, been fully realised that the work would have been very extensive and very costly to the Foundation when applied on a broad national scale, and that this could not be done merely with the donations of the few founders. The farmers and graziers were actually being asked to assist us financially and as well to conduct, on their own properties, Keyline experiments for the good of all. We also had plans that the Keyline (Research) Foundation would endow scholarships for special student and post-graduate study of land, so that the broadest aspects would be thus assisted. Manifestly, there were extremely wide areas for research embracing the different types of lands within the Commonwealth. The whole scheme then, solidly upheld by the founders, who are all patriotic Australians, was frustrated by the narrow interpretation of the meaning of the word "research" (strangely enough determined by taxation authorities). Personally I had offered the suggestion that I close my agricultural business and devote my time to Keyline work, but the point at issue was simply that we could not function as a research organisation. (with taxation benefits) unless all moneys were handed over to an "approved" organisation such as a University, and such official research would not only have been very costly but of necessity would need to duplicate all my earlier work and over a period of years. The Foundation was satisfied that Keyline was already sufficiently demonstrated in my work and that this long delay was unnecessary. It was considered, further, that wider research would be accomplished in a very practical way on the properties of the farmers who were anxious for our early assistance.

   These matters are mentioned to show the difficulties which arose against something which we all hoped would quickly influence national agriculture. Instead of the work progressing on a rapidly accelerating scale as we had fully expected, we were forced now to approach things in a pedestrian fashion. However, time moves on, and with the elapse of time many more farmers, graziers and scientists connected with all aspects of agriculture have become more interested in Keyline. My own further experiments have widened its scope and confirmed its value, and the main aim of the Foundation, that of having Keyline accepted widely as national land development policy, has certainly not stagnated.

   However, following the receipt of the information refusing recognition of the Foundation as a research organisation, it was decided not to seek donations which would not be free of tax to the donors, and to conduct the service to farmers at a profit margin if possible.

   The farmer has so many sources of free agricultural advice from well-paid officers, in fact it is almost thrust at him, that we soon found ourselves in a very confused field. With agronomists, veterinary officers, soil conservationists, irrigation experts, forestry officers, and even road engineers discussing Keyline and expressing all sorts of views on the subject, there was naturally confusion in the minds of landmen. Even so, it soon became apparent that there was quite a large number who were willing and anxious to help and to pay for Keyline service, and especially if the service could include something more than advice. They were interested in the general planning of Keyline, the location and marking-in of the planning lines themselves, a start on the soil development programme, the siting, location, design and construction of our dams, the layout and planning of irrigation areas under Keyline, and even the management of the full development of a property.

   Several meetings of the Founders of the Keyline Foundation discussed all aspects of these matters, including the very high cost of conducting the work in which we were all so interested. Eventually it was decided that my private agricultural business organisation be asked to consider, and, if approved, draw up plans for instituting a Keyline service to farmers and graziers, a service which would include every aspect that we were capable of handling. This service would then be run as a purely commercial undertaking.

   It was fully realised that a certain stigma of "base commercialism" could attach itself to Keyline under these circumstances, but it was also considered that this straightforward practical business approach to farmers and graziers would be the best way to serve the majority of farmers.

   The decision to accept the proposal of the Keyline Foundation was an easy one for me to make, but the big and significant decision was that which the other members then made. They decided, first of all, that the Keyline Foundation, with themselves as members, would continue; that its aims of doing all things to assist in scientific research on Keyline and the placing of Keyline before Governments would continue as its main aim and policy. Under the circumstances it would have been reasonable for them to consider that, even with their belief in the principles and practices of Keyline, they had done all that could reasonably be expected of them, and that at this stage the Foundation should close. Their decision, which was unanimous I am pleased to say, was more than I could have expected.

   In deference to the members of the Keyline Foundation I have been at some pains in the past to avoid too close an association between Keyline and my agricultural business activities, but now that policy is reversed. Our agricultural business literally became a merchandising organisation to promote Keyline as a main business aim.

   We had to move forward, and so commenced to explore every avenue of Keyline service that would provide revenue to do the job properly. We limited our activities somewhat to those matters which directly assisted the main task of providing education and instruction on the various aspects and techniques of the Keyline Plan. From the Foundation's earlier experience we knew without question that the most money consuming aspect of the whole work was that of education.

   We had to examine the business of Keyline in the same way as any other business activity must be viewed. We knew always that we had a basis for such a business by our complete confidence in the fact that our work and services would always be very profitable to the farmers and graziers who use and employ them. But the presentation of the ideas in a manner that would provide revenue was a problem that had to be discussed and worked out in some detail. Apart from implements and services that we can provide and that will assist Keyline, we needed good men fully trained in the new work. We had a satisfactory manufacturing set-up backed by a merchandising organization with a good team of men all keen on the job they were doing, and they were capable of doing much more. One source of income from that business is the manufacture and sale of the Graham plow, which was my choice for one part of the Keyline development of my own properties and a new and revolutionary implement at the time I introduced the chisel plow to Australian farmers and graziers. I had made a chisel plow in 1945 and conducted many experiments with it, and while later the Graham plow had been in use in other countries, a completely different, or Keyline, approach to cultivation was now to be realised with the new implement. For one thing, from being merely an instrument of deeper cultivation, it now became a soil maker by being used precisely according to soil condition and climate. Then I had, from the basic overseas implement, redesigned our own make Graham plow to make it very strong and so resilient that it would work on any land where a tractor could travel. Keyline pays attention to all land, and the steeper and rougher hills are very important. There are now fifteen followers of this Keyline implement and eventually some of these manufacturers made very good chisel plows. The result now is that the best of the Australian chisel plows are superior, in my opinion, to those employed in other countries, and Australians have bought more of the new implements than the farmers overseas.

   So our Graham plow has been successful. Following its initial introduction only a short time elapsed before the sales had reached the million pounds mark. We were satisfied that every farmer and grazier who uses the Graham plow is more likely to be improving his land than harming it. Still it is only an implement, and the important thing is that it be used according to the techniques that were developed in the Keyline plan. However, since it is an important implement for Keyline we will continue to offer it on its merits to all farmers and graziers. Next arose a host of problems and we were beseiged for solutions.

   First came the problem of supervision. Since many farmers and graziers are wanting a service that will provide supervision of their work of developing their properties on Keyline methods, we are establishing a service on a basis of three years' supervision for a fee determined on the size and condition of each property.

   Next came the problem of marking out. I believe the most good can be achieved if the landman learns by doing things himself. He needs, as one of his items of equipment, a satisfactory level, which he or any of his work force can use without experience. I designed the "Bunyip Level" especially for the farmers' and graziers' own personal use.

   Then there had to be designs. Farmers have been interested in my dam designs since 1944, when they were first used agriculturally on "Yobarnie", but it is not easy, as they find, to follow the design and methods without proper plans and specifications. I have therefore drawn designs and plans for various standard farm irrigation dams and copyrighted them. They are straightforward and can be understood and used, in conjunction with instructions that have been prepared, by any farmer or grazier.

   And now for lockpipe. One of the very important design features of all my dams has been the provision of pipes beneath and through the wall for the simple and economical distribution of stored water. This type of work, simplicity itself to me, had to be made equally simple for all to handle. There was no suitably developed engineering technique with clear instructions for the layman; moreover, there has never been any manufactured equipment available to farmers for the placing of a pipe line through the wall of a farm dam, although such means of water control are always included in the design of the big community type dam. So we had to develop and present the "lockpipe system" and include every necessary item of equipment to enable the work to be undertaken by any landman. This system includes heavy steel flanged pipes, the only type of pipe suitable, with baffle plates, gaskets, strainers, valves and take-off mechanisms, together with complete instructions, including suitable illustration.

   Next we had to have maps. A Keyline map is a map of a farming or grazing property drawn to a workable scale with contour lines at a vertical interval that suitably illustrates the shape and form of the land. The Keyline map includes the keylines or guidelines marked in with all valuable water conservation sites, irrigation areas, and special or valuable land forms indicated.

   I said earlier that the most difficult, time-consuming and costly job in any new agricultural development is the educational part of it. My own earlier contour maps produced by field surveys cost then the equivalent of from ten shillings to fourteen shillings per acre at today's values. They were slow to produce and too expensive for me to recommend them to farmers.

   It is simple enough to show farmers the new Keyline agricultural values in his landforms if one can spend the time with the man on his own land, but lack of time is the difficulty. A farm contour map is one of the greatest though least used instruments for land development. But with a suitable Keyline map I could discuss with the farmer the full development of his property in under an hour, and both of us would know the property and the appropriate Keyline development. I have maps of this type for all my own properties and can explain them and their uses, but unless a farmer has a map of his own land the first discussion on Keyline may remain somewhat unreal to him.

   We are now approaching a position when we can produce Keyline maps of the farmer's and grazier's property and will be able to teach those who do not understand them fully how to read and use them. In addition, the provision of aerial photographs on the same scale as the maps may be a later development of this particular service.

   Still, maps were not enough. With the assistance of some of my academic friends we have succeeded in producing very fine models of farming properties. I believe these models will find their most valuable use in universities, agricultural colleges and schools, but I have been very interested to find that many farmers and graziers, after seeing my models, express the desire for a model of their own property.

   In the educational and scientific field Keyline is not without recognition. It has appeared in the examination questions of agricultural colleges and is on the curriculum of at least one college. It was stated to have been the only subject chosen by more than one student as the subject of an agricultural talk which each student had to give as part of the fourth year Agricultural Science Course at Melbourne University in 1956. Queensland University has maintained a strong interest. Sydney University asked me to be guest of honour and deliver the address at the graduation dinner of the Faculty of Agriculture of Sydney University. Agricultural colleges have requested a text book on Keyline and thousands of students and their teachers visit "Nevallan", and many have returned each year. A goodly number of scientists have expressed a great interest in Keyline. Sir C. Stanton Hicks, Professor of Human Physiology and Pharmacology, Adelaide University, and a founder of the Keyline (Research) Foundation, has said, "After all the gloomy prognostications of the pioneers of soil erosion control--Jakes and Wyte, Bennett and others--it is with a feeling of relief and renewed hope in national development that I see the entry upon the scene of the realistic and practical optimism of Keyline", and, further, "I have seen soil similar to this (on 'Nevallan') before, but it took over twenty years to make. The big thing with Keyline is that it only took three years". Sir Stanton, after two earlier short visits, spent ten days on "Nevallan" studying and investigating every aspect of my work. An agricultural scientist who had been engaged for many years in the academic teaching of agriculture, and who is now continuously occupied with the broad advisory field to farmers and graziers, said, "Yeomans has discovered in the Keyline concept itself something of great importance that has somehow eluded scientists all these years." The distinguished chief of a national research organisation said to me after a world trip, "Keyline in Australia is the most interesting development in world agriculture". He had also expressed interest and a further measure of approval of my work when he had earlier visited "Nevallan". Such opinions surely indicate something worthwhile. It must, therefore, be our aim to help in providing facilities for the teaching of Keyline in these most important institutions--the Universities and Agricultural Colleges--wherever such assistance is asked of us. For instance, the supply of a series of Keyline maps, aerial photographs and models would be a great aid in students' study of the land forms and shapes for the planning and development of land.

   We needed more experiment and demonstration farms. Nothing is more convincing than the accomplished fact. Immediately the Foundation had made its decisions on my firm's function in Keyline I considered the acquisition of new properties, and it became necessary for us to control such ventures, and therefore we had to buy more land ourselves. But the decision to buy more land was an easy one for me, since many of my activities in recent years have been dictated by my great interest in land and in the development of the Keyline Plan. The whole wonderful consistency of the land forms that Keyline discloses are there to be discovered on every farming property, and the study and development of land could become much too easily an all-absorbing hobby. Of course, such work always involved considerable financial outlay if the work was to be done properly and also enjoyed. Fundamentally, both the farmer and myself have to make the work pay. Experimental farms are never expected to pay. Our farms must do so, because that is the meaning of development. For us now, happily the large and more costly experiments are finished. It is just a matter of applying the techniques of Keyline planning and development of which we are completely sure and to be varied only against the climate and the land shape of the newer properties. These new farms will be acceptable because they vary widely in land form, climate and soil types. But doubts have been expressed as to the success of Keyline soil development technique if applied to light soil such as poor granitic and then sandstone soils. Therefore, we bought 1,500 acres of sandstone shelf country at the back of Wedderburn, some few miles from Campbelltown, New South Wales. It appears all sand and sandstone. The land form consists of high flattish shelves, breaking out to sandstone gorges up to six hundred feet deep. The land was cheap and close to Sydney.

   For similar reasons, a property, which we have named "Pakby", of 2,000 acres of the lowest-priced granitic country we could find close to a good town, was also acquired near Bathurst, New South Wales. Nine miles from Bathurst, on a main bitumen highway, it presents a typical picture of the deteriorated landscape of the poor granitics with big erosion gullies, with much surface soil removed, and it is an unfavoured property locally.

   Then we ventured more ambitiously and bought "Kencarley", which is some seven miles from Orange, New South Wales. This property contains 3,000 acres of what was described to us by the Orange folk as "tiger" or "biddy-bush" country--poor country. Biddy-bush covers those parts of the property where the soil has all been lost by soil erosion, nevertheless biddy-bush does have roots and is much better to start with than nothing.

   Now on "Kencarley" the land form is the most varied of our properties. There are high slates and schists, all "end-on", as it were, standing nearly upright and rising to 850 feet above the lowest point of the property. These metamorphic rocks contain intruded igneous rock formations. Although many kind friends were sympathetic toward us for our bad judgment and misfortune in acquiring the property, I am quite sure that it will not only be a rich, highly-productive area in the shortest time, but also one of the most beautiful farms.

   These new farms, together with "Nevallan" and "Yobarnie" at North Richmond, New South Wales, give us five fair-sized experiment and demonstration properties. We intend to develop these farms fully on Keyline planning, and they should enable us to give the answer to any query the farmers might bring to us.

   There was the question of an earth-moving equipment service, because now the development of the experiment and demonstration farms required the use of some big mechanical equipment. This became a personal problem, since I had disposed of all my heavy equipment of the type which would have been suitable and which was earlier available for my experimental work on "Yobarnie". Therefore, about this time I acquired the control of a reasonably-sized contracting business to do our major work and to undertake Keyline earthworks for farmers. It was expected that many farmers would be able to use these services, and learn the technique and methods of dam construction with lockpipe and irrigation and for them to use other contractors to continue our work. However, we found that very often a farmer would contract the firm for a job of a few days or a week, but having seen the manner of our work he wanted to have a lot more done. jobs of a few days turned into months, and all our plant became tied up, with a bad effect on our own developments. What we require now is many contractors with good plants, and because we intend to teach farmers our methods we hope to be able to achieve greater results.

   This also must be said--there is no question of our plant competing with other contractors, because there is so much financial advantage to the farmer in this work that if all available contractors were working with us there would be, in my opinion, more work for the next ten years or so than all of us combined could do.

   Now the question arose of the insurance of farm dams. I have investigated the insurance of this most valuable asset, the farm irrigation dam, in various countries of the world, and farm dams seemed to be the most unpopular type of risk from the insurance company's point of view. Only one country was prepared to quote a rate that slightly approached what I consider to be a practical insurance premium to the farmer. A detailed study of our own registered design farm dams with the lockpipe system was made from the point of view of the risks involved in insurance. With the increased factors of safety automatically provided in our designs and construction we have been able to work out a practical insurance scheme at a low premium, and so it was decided to undertake the insurance of farm irrigation dams. Consequently, a new company is in process of formation for this purpose, so that we are now in the insurance business and can offer rates of premiums to farmers and graziers for the insurance of all their dams built to the design of those described in this book. This coverage by our insurance is a practical business proposition to the landmen.

   Then, of course, we welcome new business associations. Because we need help in our work we will make new alliances with suitable business organisations who are closely associated with the farmers and graziers. This part of our work has recently been commenced, but it will entail the training of staffs before the alliances become effective. We believe that by undertaking the programme of Keyline as a straightforward business, and that by providing valuable services to agriculture, these allied organisations will reap a satisfactory business reward.

   There is no doubt that the work will be influenced by the attitude of Government Departments to the Keyline Plan. If the Agricultural, Soil Conservation, or Water Supply Authorities oppose Keyline with outright condemnation, agricultural business firms who would otherwise be willing to assist would then be very reluctant to participate in our work. Their very business existence can often depend on the continued approval of these Government Departments. Agricultural businesses consistently accept or reject new implements and merchandise according to the approval or otherwise of these authorities.

   On the other hand, if Keyline received a measure of endorsement from the appropriate State authorities new associations which we could make would soon have a widespread effect.

   These various Government Departments have, up to this date, treated me and my work very well. They have gone to a great deal of trouble to organise visits by their various officers. For instance, the assembling of a large party of agronomists from widely scattered country districts for a visit of several hours at "Nevallan" calls for considerable organisation on their part.

   There have now been dozens of such group visits to my properties, if one includes those also from universities, agricultural colleges, schools, many farmers' organisations, teachers, technical and church college societies, land valuers from banks, Lands Department staff surveyors and special touring 'bus parties from interstate. All have expressed their thanks to me, and I, in turn, appreciate the compliment to my Keyline work.

   While some of the official groups have repeated their visits it is nearly impossible to obtain a full view of all that is involved in Keyline from these visits. Keyline work often impresses visitors according to that aspect most evident to them at the time of their visit. If the earthworm populations are casting on the surface, then earthworms and soil are likely to occupy a lot of discussion time. A visitor may ask the name of the trees in one of our planted tree belts. As a result, an hour or so later I am discussing, on the soil of the tree area, a fungi which someone says he has not seen outside a tropical rain forest. In a group, one who has been to "Nevallan" before wants to see a certain area he has been discussing with his friends in the group. So time passes and we do not see the spillway of a particular dam someone else wanted to inspect. We may be watering, so the course of the visit is dictated by the flowing water which everyone wants to follow as it flows slowly along the irrigation drain. It may have been decided that a group who arrived by special 'bus will visit vantage points by 'bus and at each stop a discussion will take place. The size of the conveyance may limit the inspection to four spots, but only two are seen. A famous trace-element expert with a group of soil scientists is anxious to see the paddocks on which I conducted my trace-elements experiments. The scientists see many soil samples, try to reconcile my results with their own experiments and experience, but do not see the Keyline land shapes, the pattern of the planning, the locations of dams or the reason for the trees.

   Some people see Keyline as a Graham plow because I introduced the chisel plow to Australia, when what I really did was to introduce an implement to play only a part in the whole plan of Keyline. Other folk understand Keyline as a technique and manner of cultivating land to make it hold a lot more rainfall or as a way to clear land that makes land look well; again they may see it as a new way to build nice-looking dams, or a tap to turn water from a dam, but may not see that the water was there for the purpose of using it to the best advantage. Many folk, on their first visit, are amazed to see our large water storages and extensive irrigation areas and to learn that we have had some of the country's largest farm irrigation dams for fourteen years.

   These impressions that miss the complete approach of Keyline are perhaps natural and understandable, but they do suggest that much more than one or two visits by agricultural authorities may be fully justified. There has been no instance as yet of any real attempt at a full investigation of Keyline by such authorities. But a committee or representative group could be detailed to investigate and study the work to report on Keyline as an effective or otherwise agricultural development plan.

   It has always been an object of the Keyline (Research) Foundation to subject Keyline to such a test for the purpose of having the whole concept widely understood and then accepted. For my part, I have always been willing to give my time to such a project. The wide educational and agricultural background of the officers of our Departments of Agriculture ensure that any representative group would be fully competent for this task. I would suggest that such an investigation could start by the members spending one week with me, when a detailed study of the theory and technique of Keyline would be made. Chapter by chapter the Keyline publications could be read with every officer of the investigating Agricultural Committee attacking every smallest detail he did not understand or with which he did not agree. The films, maps, photographs and land models which I have could be studied and discussed in the same manner. When points were reached in these discussions where studies of land form or Keyline technique on the land itself was necessary we could go to our properties. The committee members must learn Keyline to be judges of Keyline, and part of this knowledge would be gained in performing the various operations themselves. And the members of the committee do not have to be engineers; it would be as well if they were not, but they must certainly be agriculturalists. There is engineering in Keyline, but it is quickly learned by the layman. The committee could do this part of the work as we suggest a farmer does it. They can follow the methods of location, design and construction of our farm dams by selecting locations, sketching and dimensioning the plans and designs, and then they could supervise the construction of a dam themselves. I can at least arrange this. Inspections could be made of all our dams. Farmers owning orthodox dams would no doubt permit inspections, and discussions would soon disclose the value of the different approaches. If any member of the committee held the view that such "engineering" matters were beyond him he would soon be convinced otherwise.

   At this point visits to random farms and grazing properties where no Keyline work had been in progress could be made to enable the committee members to check their knowledge of Keyline by summing up the Keyline applications on each property, and to check its application on any type of property.

   If the report of such an Agricultural Committee was completely favourable and was immediately acted on, the work of our State agricultural officers would soon transform the countryside.

   I have met most of the agricultural officers of the New South Wales Department of Agriculture and many outside this State. Many of them are my personal friends and not antagonistic in any way to Keyline. They are, moreover, an outstanding body of men. The members of our proposed Agricultural Committee would, by the time they were ready to make their report, constitute a solid core of Keyline knowledge and be fully capable of quickly training all agricultural officers in this new facet of their work. The selection of the particular officers for such an investigating committee could logically be influenced by their suitability for the possible later teaching of the Keyline work. They could be maintained as instructors for some time at least, though not for the purpose of training farmers but to train all departmental officers and other agricultural educators, who in turn would be in contact with farmers on the new work.

   The acceptance of this whole proposal for the investigation of Keyline appears to be a relatively easy matter. It would certainly be simple enough to the stage of the committee's report, and, if this was acceptable of Keyline, to the further stage of the training of all agricultural officers. Here, however, it must become a Cabinet matter for the rationalisation of the work of the other two authorities--Soil Conservation and Water Supply--who would be concerned.

   As already mentioned some purely agricultural matters have been taken away from agricultural control. Agricultural water conservation on the farm could quite easily be placed under the control of the proper agricultural authorities. However, the soil conservation authorities, because of the strong agricultural background on which they insist for their officers, would be in a position to supply a very powerful force of men with an eminently suitable background for training to the new work. However, this authority has always fought to maintain its complete independence of Agricultural Department control in this State, and in Victoria the position is similar. Again, in another instance in Queensland, the Soil Conservation Department does very excellent work and lives happily under the control of the State Department of Agriculture. This in my opinion is the proper method of administration for as long as soil conservation is considered an important function of agriculture. When the various State Governments do not agree on the province of soil conservation in agriculture it is not much to wonder at that others are also confused.

   As far as Keyline is concerned some soil conservation authorities alone have appeared to consider Keyline as cutting in on their preserves. Because of the fact that they generally may deal only with soil erosion problems and not water conservation, they suffer, in my opinion, an extreme disadvantage when they consider Keyline a rival doctrine to soil conservation. There have been occasions of mild arguments between Keyline supporters and soil conservation officers, when the soil conservationist, feeling the weight of argument a little heavy, has claimed that he tested Keyline and it didn't work. No doubt a very junior officer. The alleged secret test of Keyline must have been a major undertaking--if indeed such foolishness was ever even contemplated--and as such could only have as its purpose a petty condemning of Keyline. If tests were to be made genuinely of Keyline technique to produce a "right or wrong" verdict I would naturally be invited to participate. Keyline also has been damned with faint praise, and also included as "just another part of soil conservation". Some Government and educational authorities have borrowed descriptive terms and followed methods from "The Keyline Plan" and used ideas of my own without acknowledgment. It is said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but I am not flattered by imitations that ignore principles or that copy engineering procedures and ignore vital life concepts. While our object always is to have farmers and graziers adopt Keyline on their properties, we do not wish to see some of its applications lose their usefulness and identity by being accepted wrongly into general agricultural methods.

   We all view Keyline as a complete plan for agricultural land development based on wide new concepts and principles, and therefore it is the desire of the trustees of the Keyline (Research) Foundation that it should be fully investigated officially and accepted or rejected as such.

   Any of these departments may condemn, belittle, praise, or ignore Keyline, but I, as the originator, cannot adopt any other attitude than the course I follow. I believe it is my right, privilege and proper function to report factually on all present agricultural methods (which include the soil conservation approach and the present farm water supply question) with which I am well conversed. I do not think that I should be influenced by the magnitude of any authority or opposition where I believe my experiments and experience discloses faults or misconception in orthodox methods and approaches. However, Keyline is now to be run as a business and we hope to stay in the business of Keyline until the principle aim of the Keyline (Research) Foundation is achieved.

   Personally, my main interests lie in the wide implementations of the Keyline plan, in continuing with my experiments and in running our own properties. I am interested in Keyline as a business, only as a necessary stage to assist in its wide acceptance as part of official agricultural land development policy in Australia.

   Many of the new business aspects of Keyline are protected by patents, copyrights and registered design and in the meantime these will be protected as our own. However, any farmer or grazier has permission to use, for his own purposes on his own land, any of the methods and techniques that are covered in this and other Keyline publications, and he can rest assured that I have thought this thing through and that I have worked it all out to a successful conclusion on my own properties. As far as I am concerned, the challenge of events of the last few years has been accepted.