Almost every treatise on the economy of the forest adduces numerous facts in support of the doctrine that the clearing of the woods tends to diminish the flow of springs and the humidity of the soil, and it might seem unnecessary to bring forward further evidence on this point.[194] But the subject is of too much practical importance and of too great philosophical interest to be summarily disposed of; and it ought particularly to be noticed that there is at least one case--that of some loose soils which, when bared of wood, very rapidly absorb and transmit to lower strata the water they receive from the atmosphere, as argued by Valles[195]--where the removal of the forest may increase the flow of springs at levels below it, by exposing to the rain and melted snow a surface more bibulous, and at the same time less retentive, than its original covering. Under such circumstances, the water of precipitation, which had formerly flowed off without penetrating through the superficial layers of leaves upon the ground--as, in very heavy showers, it sometimes does--or been absorbed by the vegetable mould and retained until it was evaporated, might descend through porous earth until it meets an impermeable stratum, and then be conducted along it, until, finally, at the outcropping of this stratum, it bursts from a hillside as a running spring. But such instances are doubtless too rare to form a frequent or an important exception to the general law, because it is only under very uncommon circumstances that rain water runs off over the surface of forest ground instead of sinking into it, and very rarely the case that such a soil as has just been supposed is covered by a layer of vegetable earth thick enough to retain, until it is evaporated, all the rain that falls upon it, without imparting any water to the strata below it.