116 FOEEST LANDS FOE THE PEOTECTION OF WATEBSHEDS. 



tain that, if all these demands for various purposes were to be shut off com- 

 pletely, if such a thing were possible, our springs and wells and little streams 

 would show a material increase in flow. These losses are, of course, not at 

 all due to the presence or absence of forests and can not be affected by anything 

 which may be done in the planting of trees. 



In like manner, the assumption that the little mill of former times was 

 abandoned because of low water is entirely erroneous. Take any one of these 

 mills and trace its history, and in nine cases out of ten business and not physical 

 conditions will be found to be the explanation. The advent of steam and 

 cheaper methods of manufacture have done away with the little mill, and if 

 steam were abolished to-day the little mill would most assuredly come back 

 again without delay. So in all these cases, whatever the diminution of the 

 flow of small streams may be, it can not be chargeable entirely to forests, but 

 has other good and more important explanations. 



There is, however, one thing which undoubtedly increases the dry-season 

 flow in the open country somewhat over that in the forest, and that is the 

 summer showers. The roads and ditches, the pavements, and roofs of houses 

 do shed such showers more effectually than the forests at such times, and un- 

 doubtedly the summer run-off in the streams is then greater in the open country 

 than in the forests. This is precisely what I referred to when I said that 

 the Increased run-off from showers very likely made up the difference in the 

 low-water flow of springs. In proof of this I appeal to the records of our 

 large rivers, which show that the low-water flow under present conditions is 

 no lower than it used to be when forests covered the country. In fact, to cite 

 an example of the Monongahela River, if all the demands for water upon 

 that stream which have grown up since 1856 (a very low-water year) were 

 cut off, the flow of that stream in the great drought of last fall would undoubt- 

 edly have been greater than it was in the year above mentioned. 



I will not go at length into Doctor Swain's criticism of my argument in 

 regard to the influence of forests on snow melting, as this applies mainly to 

 the Rocky Mountain region and the Pacific coast and has a relatively small 

 bearing upon the Appalachian forests. As to the argument itself, I believe it 

 will come out of this discussion as permanently established as any fact in 

 science. You will find, when you come to read some of the papers which it has 

 called forth, that the state engineer of Wyoming confirms it in its entirety; 

 certain engineers of Los Angeles give comparisons of four rivers in the Sierra 

 Nevada Mountains and show that the deforested watersheds have the most 

 regular and most copious supply, and you will also see another paper in which 

 the same results are set forth in the mountains of Nevada. 



The annunciation of this theory has caused some surprise and a good deal of 

 opposition, but it has not been shaken by anything that Doctor Swain has said, 

 and I am perfectly willing to rest upon the simple statement of facts put forth 

 In my paper. 



The same is also true as to the forests of this coast. In nothing have I been 

 so much surprised as in becoming acquainted with the torrential character of 

 these streams. If there is a place on the face of the earth where forests 

 ought to regulate stream flow, it is right here. As a matter of fact, these 

 streams respond to storms in a way that I have never known to happen in any 

 country cleared of forests. It is undoubtedly due to the effect of the forests 

 In spreading the snow out in such vast areas, so that the rain and warm 

 weather get at it in all directions; and also to the fact that through long 

 periods of time the water has created little channels underneath the debris, so 

 that it finds its way to the streams much more readily than one would imagine. 

 The fact stands out very clear and undisputed that, in this region of pro- 

 tected watersheds, floods and low waters are just as pronounced as in our 

 eastern cultivated country, except where low water is kept up by the supply 

 from the glaciers. 



In regard to the caving of our river banks, I would expressly request that 

 my statement of that case be studied carefully, because I believe it to be sub- 

 stantially correct. Of course, the great moving of silt in our rivers is from 

 the local caving of banks, but it is always in the nature of picking up here and 

 putting down there. It does not contribute to the total outflow from the 

 mouths of the rivers, because these valleys, from year to year, are gathering 

 sediment all the time. 



As to the statement on page 19, second paragraph, which is criticised by 

 Doctor Swain, I will simply say that if any one will take a board and put 

 sand, soil, or any other absorptive material on it, and saturate it with water, 



