Mr. Le Conte. 
Mr. Maltby. 
332 DISCUSSION : FORESTS, RESERVOIRS, AND STREAM FLOW 
acres on the Lower Ganges Canal, the small damage to navigation, 
caused by these great public works for a few months in the year 
only, sinks into insignificance and, in many cases, can be entirely 
ignored. 
F. B. Marrsy, M. Am. Soc. C. E. (by letter) The presentation of 
this paper now, while the agitation and interest in the “Conservation 
of Natural Resources” is at its height, is particularly fortunate, and 
the placing on record, in an available form, of facts of observation 
rather than theories or popular opinions, is of the greatest value. The 
writer is in thorough sympathy with the movement for the preserva- 
tion, and the intelligent and careful use, of forests and other resources 
vf the United States, but agrees most emphatically with the author 
that the popular belief that deforestation is responsible for floods and 
low waters is an erroneous one. 
There are ample reasons why forests should be carefully preserved 
and cared for and reforestation encouraged for the sake of future 
timber supply, without the necessity of charging to the destruction of 
the forests all the ills due to flood conditions on the one hand or the 
deficiency of water for industrial or domestic supplies and low stages 
for navigation during dry seasons on the other. 
The author has shown in detail the fallacy of such beliefs, and 
these details show the painstaking care and thought that has been given 
to the preparation of the paper. The writer, unfortunately, has no 
other facts of observation to present as an addition to the discussion, 
and only wishes to approve most heartily the conclusions concerning 
the relations between run-off and deforestation. 
During the Eighties or early Nineties, in the first days of extensive 
improvement work on the Mississippi by the General Government, it 
was impossible to secure appropriations for the construction of levees, 
except where built as an aid to the improvement of navigation, and 
one or more appropriation bills expressly prohibited such expenditures 
except as stated. There doubtless were engineers and others who 
honestly believed that the construction of levees did tend to improve 
conditions for navigation, and there is no desire to open up a discus- 
sion on this subject at present. Any one knowing the conditions and 
the vast benefits which have followed the construction of levees in the 
Mississippi Valley, however, will agree that there was ample and 
sufficient reason for their construction without any reference to 
navigation. 
It is also true that the conservation of forests, the protection against 
flood conditions, or the improvement of low-water navigation are each 
of National importance; each can stand alone on its own merits, though 
it is undoubtedly true that all should be carefully considered by a 
commission charged with a careful study, in a broad way, of the whole 
subject. 
