518 DISCUSSION: FORESTS, RESERVOIRS, AND STREAM FLOW 
Mr. Chitten-cases out of ten he can write out beforehand the answers which a 
den. 
forestry enthusiast will make to a given set of questions pertaining to 
the influence of forests on stream flow, and in some of his researches into 
foreign conditions he had to. reiterate his request that his inquiries be 
referred, not to the forestry organizations, but to hydraulic engineers 
familiar with practical river problems. If the Government is wise, 
and wishes the results of any investigation that it may make of this 
question to command the confidence of the trained thought of the coun- 
try, it will place it in the hands of a body of which a majority at least 
belongs to the Engineering Profession and are not directly or indirectly 
so connected with the forestry service as to be biased in their de- 
ductions. The engineer has no cause to promote. His business is 
te direct the powers and resources of Nature to the benefit of Man- 
kind. He has no “preconceived ideas” that are likely to interfere 
with his findings. If the planting of forests can be made of prac- 
tical value in regulating our rivers, he will welcome that fact; if 
not, he will not hesitate to say so. Therefore any comprehensive 
study of this question should be placed in the hands of the Engineer- 
ing Profession if its results are to command the confidence of that 
Profession, : 
The references to China, by Messrs. Labelle and Willis, suggest 
a feature of this subject which the writer is inclined to develop some- 
what. Although perfectly cognizant of the part which historic 
allusions to Syria, Spain, China, and other countries have been 
made to serve in this forestry propaganda, the whole argument seemed 
so entirely unworthy of serious weight that he made no reference to 
it in his paper. It has, however, been prominently brought to the 
front of late, and even carried into this discussion, and it is, perhaps, 
just as well to give it brief consideration here. 
The following, from Conservation (Forestry and Irrigation), is a 
typical statement of the case: 
“Before the forests of Lebanon were destroyed, Palestine supported 
in affluence ten millions of people. The mountains have long been 
denuded. Forbidding slopes, barren and ugly, rear their weird forms 
sharply above the dismal and desolate valleys. Scarcely four hundred 
thousand remain in all the region, and most of those are in wretched, 
hopeless poverty. Syria, once maintaining a multitude of prosperous 
towns and cities * * * is at present a scene of irreparable ruin. 
The destruction of Syrian forests, begun 2650 B. C. [note the min- 
uteness of this historic detail], followed by the disappearance of her 
soil ae the decay of her industries, would alone have produced this 
result. ri 
Where is there even a shred of evidence to support any such sweep- 
ing statement as this? Anyone who has ever read the Bible knows 
that it abounds in proof that the general climate of Syria and con- 
tiguous countries was essentially the same 4000 years ago that it is 
