President Theodore Roosevelt Thanks Naturalist John Burroughs for Defending Him From the Nature Fakers Attacking Him as a Sham

Wrote TR, the nation’s first naturalist president: “We have no quarrel with Mr. Long for the conclusions he draws from facts. Our quarrel with him is because he invents the facts. The Outlook might just as well take the Cardiff Giant seriously as to take Long’s stories seriously.”

Rev. William Long was a naturalist whose books found a large audience and were even issued in schools under the title of The Wood Folk Series. However, his findings and observations clashed with the prevailing scientific wisdom of animal behavior, which believed animals behaved purely on instinct, and did not learn from experience: a bird builds a nest purely by instinct and is not taught the skills required. Rev. Long provided many examples, supposedly from his experience, to cast doubt on that prevailing wisdom, suggesting that in fact animals did learn, and each could become individuals within their species.

Listen to a clip of Nathan Raab discussing the letter

All this led to a belief that Rev. Long was anthropomorphizing animal behavior, blurring the lines between the animal world and humans. This came to a head when President Theodore Roosevelt’s naturalist adviser, John Burroughs, accused Rev. Long of gross exaggeration, if not outright lies, regarding his books and the reflections of nature therein. Roosevelt wrote “If he stated that he had seen a weasel kill a deer and then carry it to the top of a pine tree, I would not care how many affidavits he produced, because the feat would be mechanically impossible.” Long thus found himself at the center of the nature fakers controversy of the first decade of the century. Ultimately Burroughs claimed Rev. Long was trying to sell books to gullible readers with such lies and TR himself had Rev. Long’s books taken from all school libraries.

In July, Burroughs wrote an article in The Outlook magazine entitled “President Roosevelt, Nature Lover and Observer.” It is very complimentary to Roosevelt, and Dr. William J. Long declared that it was evidently inspired by the President himself. Long then attacked TR’s reputation as a naturalist and sportsman, saying he was a sham.

Typed letter signed, on White House letterhead, Washington, June 15, 1907, to Burroughs, whom he affectionately addresses as Oom John, praising his article and accusing Long of inventing facts. “I have your letter of the 13th instant. Yes, I saw your interview in the Times and it was so admirable that I took it as a substitute for my proposal about your writing to the Outlook. But I am glad you wrote to the Outlook. You emphasize the proper distinction. We have no quarrel with Mr. Long for the conclusions he draws from facts. Our quarrel with him is because he invents the facts. The Outlook might just as well take the Cardiff Giant seriously as to take Long’s stories seriously. I wish I could go to Poughkeepsie, but I can not. is there any chance whatever of having you come down for a night here at Sagamore Hill?”

The nature fakers controversy, with TR at the middle, had far-reaching effects in literary and scientific circles, and marked the first time that a President of the United States weighed in as a “literary and cultural critic – specifically, as an eco-critic.” This controversy was far more than a clash over the accuracy of animal stories or the question of whether animals can reason; rather, the debate signified the changing sensibilities of scientists, writers and readers at the turn of the 20th century.