The unthinned pitch pine on Plot 49 has apparently stagnated although the stand does not seem at all dense. Live crowns have been reduced to the total height of the tree. Pitch pine seems fairly tolerant of shade of older pitch pine but it does not seem able to stand side crowding. On this plot all trees had an equal amount of growing space and have developed about equally with no marked differentiation into crown classes. On the south half of Plot 3 this species has grown under quite different conditions, more nearly approximating those in nature. The number of seedlings that started was very large and competition during the earlier years quite keen. The stronger individuals developed rapidly, suppressing the weaker trees, thereby obtaining more room for the development of their crowns. On the sample plot thinned in 1921, crowns are deeper and the trees are generally healthier than on the remainder of the area. Compare Plot 49 with Plots 3, 22, 23 and 28. Plot 50. Red oak. Area .9 acre. Originally an experiment with red oak but rodents kept the trees cut back so badly that the result is almost a total failure. An occasional individual has not been attacked and has made good growth but these are so scattering as to be worthless as a test of this species. A volunteer stand of birch and pitch pine has taken possession of the plot. Plot 51. Red oak and White pine. Area .9 acre. Planted in the spring of 1904 with oak 1 year seedlings and pine 2 year seedlings, spaced 6 x 6 feet, two rows of oak alternating with one row of pine. Practically all the oak are present but 2% of them have been cut back by rodents. Those not cut back are ahead of the pine but are so scattering as to make the pine appear to be spaced 6 x 18 feet. The thrifty oak averages 19 feet in height and 2 inches in diameter, and the pine 17 feet in height and 5 inches in diameter. About 20% of the pine failed. Those living have been badly weeviled and are of poor form. They have closed in the rows but not between them. Herbaceous vegetation has not been killed out except directly under the pine and there is little litter on the ground. Compare with Plots 4 and 48. Plot 52. White pine and Japanese red pine. Area .9 acre. Planted in the spring of 1910 with 2 year seedlings, spaced 6 x 6 feet, the two species alternating by rows. Loss in the Japanese red pine was heavy and blanks were filled about 1914 with white pine. The present stand is fully stocked and is 25% Japanese red and 75% white pine. Both species average 7 feet in height. Both have been weeviled, the white the more heavily than the other. plot was thoroughly cleaned of birch in 1923. Crowns are just commencing to close, much herbaceous cover is still present and there is no litter on the ground. This plot is similar to Plot 5 and has received practically the same treatment except that the The leaders on the Japanese red pine have not been pruned back but left for comparison with Plot 5. Comparison may also be made with Plot 19. Plot 53. White pine. Area 2 acre. Planted in the spring of 1905 with 2 year seedlings, spaced 5 x 5 feet. Blanks were filled in 1910 with three year transplants. All birch was removed by lopping in 1923. Several large pitch pine and clumps of birch held back or killed the white pine on part of the plot so that the stand is rather irregular and only about half the original number of trees is present. Dead branches extend for 4 feet above ground but are firm. Crowns have closed, resulting in a forest floor without vegetation and covered with 2 to 3 inches of needles. Fifty per cent of the trees have been damaged by weevil. Average height, 13 feet; diameter, 3.3 inches. Plot 54. White pine and Japanese black pine. Area .9 acre. Planted in the spring of 1910 with 3 year seedlings of white pine and 2 year seedlings of Japanese black pine, spaced 6 x 6 feet, and alternating by rows. The Japanese species was apparently not hardy and 90% of it failed. Those living are only 2 feet tall and tend to have a prostrate habit. Twenty-five per cent of the white pine failed also so that the stand is only 40% stocked. The white pine has been heavily weeviled and is bushy and of poor form. It averages 7 feet in height. The plot was cleared of birch in 1923. Pitch pine is scattered over the plot but is not sufficiently dense to stimulate the white pine. Plot 55. White pine. Area .9 acre. Planted in the spring of 1903 with 2 year seedlings from Maine, alternating in the rows with beech, spacing 6 x 6 feet. The beech failed and the experiment has become one of pure pine with a spacing of 82 x 82 feet. The stand is complete and is just closing. Lower limbs are just beginning to die and ground vegetation is almost completely shaded out. Average height, 17 feet; diameter, 4.5 inches. Fifty per cent of the trees have been injured by weevil. Diameter growth has been consistently large over the whole plot and the stand is thrifty, and in good condition except for weevil damage. Plot 56. White pine and Scotch pine. Area .9 acre. Planted in the spring of 1903 with white pine 2 year seedlings and beech, spaced 6x6 feet, a solid row of beech alternating with a row of beech and pine mixed. In 1911 the beech was replaced with Scotch pine 3 year transplants. The white pine has made a large diameter growth averaging 4.5 inches, but a poor height growth, averaging only 17 feet. The Scotch pine, although 8 years younger, averages 16 feet in height and 3 inches in diameter. The mixture contains about 80% Scotch and 20% white pine. The stand has just closed and dead branches extend for 4 feet above ground. They are large and heavy on the white pine but short and slender on the Scotch. Half the white pine has been damaged by weevil. Practically all ground cover has been shaded out and 2 to 3 inches of needles cover the ground. Compare with Plots 4, 34, 35, 36 and 37. Plot 57. Red pine. Area .9 acre. Cleared of a scattered stand of large grey birches in the fall of 1923 and planted in the spring of 1924 with 2 year seedlings, spaced 8x8 feet. At the end of the first growing season less than 10% had failed. Compare with Plot 40 for a plantation of red pine made at the same time under heavy cover. Plot 58. Black locust. Area 1.0 acre. Planted in the spring of 1903 with 1 year seedlings with various spacings. As far as growth is concerned this species has done better than any other used in the plantations, attaining a height of 35 feet and a diameter of 6 to 7 inches and reproducing itself prolifically. However, damage from the locust borer (See page 105) was so great that in the fall of 1923 the stand was removed for cordwood and the experiment abandoned. During the last growing season, sprouts have reached a height of 10 feet. Plot 59. White pine. Area 1.0 acre. Planted partly in the spring of 1903 with white pine 2 year seedlings and partly in 1904 with white pine 3 year transplants alternating in the row with black birch and spaced 5 x 5 feet. A small portion of the plot was pure pine. The birch failed leaving the pine spaced about 7x7 feet on the average, although the spacing is somewhat irregular. Heights average 25 feet; diameters, 6 inches. Dead branches extend for 10 feet above ground and are moderately large and quite firm. Weevils have caused many crooked boles but in spite of this a good height growth has been maintained and the stand appears in good condition. Practically all herbaceous vegetation has been shaded out and 2 to 3 inches of needles cover the ground. This plot may be compared with Plot 39 for white pine with a wider spacing and with Plot 28 for a closer spacing. In 1922 students from the Yale School of Forestry laid off two sample plots of 4 acre each. One of these was thinned and the other left as a check. Measurements and counts were as follows: check plot, number of trees, 187 or at the rate of 748 per acre; volume, 219.1 cu. ft.* of wood or 876.4 cu. ft. per acre. Thinned plot, number of trees before thinning, 216 or 864 per acre; after thinning, 158 trees or 632 per acre: volume before thinning, 249.9 cu. ft. of wood or 999.6 cu. ft. per acre; after thinning 208.0 cu. ft. or 832 cu. ft. per acre. Both plots will be remeasured and the thinned plot will be thinned again in 1927. *Volumes computed from Table 27, Bulletin 13, U. S. D. A., revised and extended to cover the sizes of trees found on this plot. Plot 60. White pine. Area 2.1 acres. Planted in the spring of 1905, together with Plot 68, with 2 year seedlings, 3 year transplants and wild seedlings from Stafford. Spacing was 5 x 5 and 6 x 6 feet, and trees were set in old furrows and on mounds between. Both plots are the same in all respects and are described together. Both are in excellent condition. Trees average 20 feet in height and 4 inches in diameter. Weevil damage has been comparatively slight and little damage seems to have been done until the trees were 12 feet or more in height. Dead branches extend for 10 feet above ground and are small but quite firm. Herbaceous vegetation has been shaded out and several inches of needles cover the ground. Competition has not been too keen but a thinning is needed to prevent the stand becoming stagnated. These two plots contain the best growth of white pine on the tract. Plot 61. White pine. Area 2.2 acres. Planted in the spring of 1913 with 5 year transplants, spaced 5 x 6 feet. A few clumps of chestnut sprouts still persist from a previous experiment. A moderately dense stand of grey birch covered the pine until 1923 when it was entirely removed by lopping. This cover does not seem to have been sufficiently dense to protect the pine from weevil as 30 to 40% of the trees have been damaged. Practically the entire planting survives. The stand has not yet closed, and bunch grass and other herbaceous growth still persists. The pine averages 9 feet in height and, in competition with birch sprouts that have come up since the cutting in 1923, should make a good height growth and produce only small side branches. Plot 62. White pine and Scotch pine. Area 5.1 acres. Planted in the spring of 1907 with 2 year seedlings of white pine, spaced 5x5 feet. In 1922 a fire destroyed about 50% of the plot facing Plots 61-64 (measurements and counts exclude this burn). stand has just closed and some herbaceous cover still persists. Plot was cleaned of birch in 1919. Weevil damage has been quite heavy averaging 35%. Average height, 17 feet; diameter, 3 inches. The The burn was replanted in the spring of 1924 with white and Scotch pine 2 year seedlings. The season was dry, the fire had reduced the tract to a barren sand plain, the stock was small and a very heavy loss resulted during the first growing season. Plot 63. Red pine and White pine. Area 2.6 acres. Planted in 1917. The species were planted alternately 6 feet apart, in rows 10 feet apart with the idea that at some later date Scotch pine or some other species would be used as a late filler. This has not yet been done. The plot was cleaned of a heavy cover of birch in the spring of 1923. About 95% of the original trees are living. The red pine appears more thrifty and of better form than the white because the latter has been severely injured by weevil. Both species average 5.5 feet tall. The stand is just closing in the rows but not between. Plot 64. Scotch pine. Area, 1.3 acres. Planted in the spring of 1910 with 2 year seedlings, spaced 6x6 feet. Subsequent loss has been rather heavy, due partly to failures at the time of planting and partly to suppression by birch. The birch was thinned in 1923 and completely removed by lopping in 1924. A number of medium sized pitch pines were girdled in 1924. This should be the final release cutting as the Scotch pine can probably take care of itself from now on. The stand is just closing but is rather ragged. Trees average 15 feet in height and 2.5 inches in diameter, and have dead branches for 3 feet above ground. Herbaceous cover still persists and there is little litter on the ground. The extreme intolerance of Scotch pine and the effect of cover on this species are well illustrated. Plot 65. Red pine. Area .8 acre. Planted in the spring of 1917 with red pine, spaced 5 x 5 feet. There were practically no failures and the stand is quite thrifty except on a few sterile spots (described under Plot 16). A small fire in 1922 destroyed about 75 trees near Plot 66. A heavy birch cover was removed in 1923 but the red pine does not seem to have been held back to any extent by its shade. A few medium sized pitch pines were girdled in the fall of 1924, thus removing the last of the cover from the red pine. Plot 66. Western yellow (bull) pine. Area 1.5 acres. Planted in the spring of 1908 with 2 year seedlings, spaced 5 x 5 feet. This plot is similar in all respect to Plot 6 except that the blanks, which amount to about 45%, have not been filled. The trees average 11 feet tall, somewhat larger than on Plot 6 but in general development has been similar to that on Plot 6. Bull pine seems to be quite intolerant. Individuals growing in the shade are stunted and, even when growing in the open, the lower branches die from the shade of those above. A ground fire burned over a small area in this plot in 1922 killing the bull pine completely. This species appears to be at least as susceptible to injury by ground fires as red pine. Plot 67. Native pitch pine. Area .1 acre. No treatment. Plot 69. White pine and Norway spruce. Area 3.6 acres. Planted in the spring of 1905 with 2 year seedlings, spaced 5 x 5 feet, the two species alternating in the row. Ninety per cent of the pine and 60% of the spruce lived but the pine has grown much the faster of the two and has overtopped about 90% of the spruce completely, making the plot in effect one of pure pine with a spacing of about 7 x 7 feet over an understory of spruce. In a few instances the spruce has grown rapidly and will probably catch up to the pine. The latter has long, heavy side branches which have died for 8 feet above ground but still persist. Weevils have |