N((iiiii-ir ATiox OK sori II aikua.n KAIMAI.I.. 3JI 



"t the utmost ini|)ortancc, hccausc the fi,!:::ures given give otily 

 the actual (|uantities o\ rain ])reoij)itate<l. and give no indica- 

 tion whatsoever as t(> the manner of its precipitation. And the 

 manner of its ])recipitation is of ])erhai)s greater moment to the, 

 future welfare of Soinh Africa than even the actual decrease 

 in (|uantity of precii)itated moisture. This f|uestion of the 

 manner of precipitation I will refer to later. 



To refer again to the tirst conclusion reached, namely, that 

 the rainfall throughout South Africa has decreased, it may be 

 fitting to explain a little further how one arrives at this. To 

 do so 1 would again refer to the evidence which proves that at 

 «-.ne time a more or less continuous belt of forest existed from 

 George to Cape Town. Our indigenous high forests recjuire a 

 rainfall of between 30 and 40 inches per annum. Alanv places 

 between George and \\'orcester to day do not enjoy a rainfall 

 of more than two-thirds of this. Ihn at one time they must 

 have done so, not merely because we can prove that forests 

 existed there, but also becau.se the forests in the first instance 

 spread there. Our indigenous forests are an offshoot of the 

 great equatorial forest belt, and were not in the first instance 

 indigenous to the present South Africa. They slowlv advanced 

 down the East Coast along the Cape coastal belt, displacing an 

 older flora — ^a flora to which the heatiis, sugar-bushes and cedars 

 still to be found in the Western Province belonged. .\nd as 

 this advance of the indigenous forests was continued until they 

 reached the Cape Peninsula — and we still find ijatches of them 

 even in the gulleys of Table Mountain — the conditions all along 

 the coastal belt must ha\e been sucii as allowed them to spread 

 —not only a rainfall of at least 30 inches, but also a sufficiently 

 damp and cof)l condition of the soil to allow the ^(^cd to ger- 

 minate. Hut now the forests are dying out — the individual 

 trees are perishing, the forest streams are becoming more and 

 more liable to flood and less and less sure in the perennial 

 character i>f their flow. No surer indication could be obtained 

 of the decrease of our rainfall. 



Throughout South Africa we can obtain from the older 

 inhal)itants — English, Dutch, or native — endless statements of 

 how the rainfall has decreased. But without proof one can 

 value this no more than one would value hearsay evidence in 

 law — the more so as we almo.st invariably find, when we en- 

 quire into these statements that they have their origin not so 

 much in the decrease in rainfall as in the change in the character 

 of the rainfall, and the consequences of this change. This 

 brings me to my next point, and, as I said before, it is one 

 C(jually im]iortant with tiie actual decrease of rainfall. 



The eci')nomic importance of rainfall to a coutitr\- lies not 

 in the actual amount of moisture i)reci|)itate(l. l)Ut in the amount 

 of moisture which, when precipitated, the ground is al)le to 

 absorb and again yield U]) to the plant life growing on the sur- 

 face. Eor, as all animal life on the land is dei)endent in the 



