i04 AMERICAN FORESTRY 



cussion of these propositions the Forester contributes a few observations out of 

 experience in India: 



"As regards (1) there are in India no series of reliable observations 

 carried out over a suflficiently long period to throw much light on the subject.* 

 The Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1887, Part II, No. 1, contain 

 an interesting article by Blanford. He showed that the only satisfactory 

 evidence would be that obtained by comparing the rainfall of a district when 

 well wooded with that of the same district after deforestation. He endeavored 

 to apply this principle to the southern Central Provinces. He gives evidence 

 that in that area prior to 1875, while five-sixths were nominally under forest, 

 so much damage had been done by dahya (i.e., shifting) cultivation that by 

 far the greater part of the forests had become devastated. He quotes the 

 introduction of the Central Provinces Gazetteer of 1870 where Mr. C. Grant 

 says: 



" 'The tree forests of the Central Provinces have, however, been so much 

 exhausted, mainly owing to the destructive dahya system of cultivation 

 practiced by the hill tribes that, except in one or two localities, the labors 

 of the forest oflQcers will, for many years, be limited to guarding against 

 further damage, and thus allowing the forests to recover themselves by rest. 

 By far the greater part of the uncultivated lands, belonging to government, are 

 stony wastes, incapable of producing a strong straight growth of timber.' 



''In 1875 the suppression of dahya cultivation was taken in hand and 

 with such success that in 1886 Mr. Ribbentrop, then inspector general of 

 forests, wrote: 



" 'My attention was directed, during a recent visit to the Central Provinces, 

 to the extensive growth of young forests, in areas formerly under shifting 

 cultivation. Ten or fifteen years ago, such temporary cultivation was practiced 

 throughout the country and thousands of square miles were thereby laid 

 barren, year after year. Since then, this method of cultivation was stopped, 

 and, though a great part of the area affected was subject to annual fires, a 

 more or less dense forest growth has sprung up.' 



"Blanford then compares the rainfall of the area affected by forest preser- 

 vation with that away from it; and shows that while the rainfall in the pre- 

 served area, averaging about 50 inches, was greater by 6.8 inches for the 

 period 1876-85 than it had been for the ten years before, the rainfall in the 

 remainder of the Central Provinces had diminished by 2.9 inches. Blanford 

 points out that the area in question of nearly 50,000 square miles is large 

 enough to give reliable results, that its history is well known, and considers 

 that the only points on which doubt may be thrown are the reliability of the 

 records and the sufficiency of the periods to yield valid averages. The results 

 of the different stations were so consistent that Blanford held that the 

 measurements might be trusted, and it would appear that there was an 

 increase of about 9.7 inches (or 20 per cent) due to the growth of forest. 



"There are, as far as we are aware, no other reliable data in India by 

 which the rainfall over a well wooded area can be compared with the same 

 area when deprived of its forests. Observations carried out for a number of 

 years in Ajmer go to show that the rainfall inside the forests is greater 

 than outside, but these observations are not considered reliable. On the 

 whole the general result of the enquiry is that there has been no permanent 

 alteration in the amount and distribution of the rainfall during the past half 

 century either one way or the other. During this period the government of 

 India have i)ursued a wise forest policy by which immense areas have been 

 maintained under forest and rescued from impending destruction. The area 



From information furnislied by the Director-General of Observatories in India. 



