1919] Fernald,— Ranges of Pinus and Thuja 43 
been limited in its northward progress by the low lying lands south 
and westward from James Bay," quite overlooking the fact that W. J. 
Wilson of the Geological Survey of Canada found and recorded! 
P. Banksiana in the valley of the Kapiskau River which flows through 
“the low lying lands . . . westward from James Bay," 160 miles north 
of Hutchinson's northern limit in that longitude. 
On the other hand, by not closely following the trustworthy records 
of that wonderful authority on the Labrador Peninsula, A. P. Low, 
he has unfortunately abbreviated the northeastern limits of many 
species: Betula papyrifera by 160 miles and Picea mariana (nigra) 
and Larix each by 75 miles; while failure to get at other sources of 
information has materially shortened others of Hutchinson’s limits: 
thus Populus balsamifera, as shown by the representation in the Gray 
Herbarium, reaches Hebron in latitude 58°, on the outer coast of 
Labrador, 185 miles beyond Hutchinson’s northeastern limit. In 
fact, from Hutchinson’s map one would infer that north of Hamilton 
Inlet the whole Atlantic slope of Labrador is treeless, but of course this 
is not the case. Witness the statement of Low who intimately knew 
Labrador: “The tree-line” after skirting Ungava Bay turns south- 
southeast, then “southward to the neighbourhood of Hebron, in 
latitude 58°, where trees are again found in protected valleys at the 
heads of the inner bays of the coast. At Davis Inlet, in latitude 56°, 
trees grow on the coast and high up on the hills, the barren grounds 
being confined to the islands and headlands. . . . These barren islands 
and bare headlands of the outer coast . . . have caused a false impres- 
sion to be held regarding much of the Atlantic Coast.” ? With this 
definite statement and warning by Low, whom Hutchinson says he 
is following, it is unfortunate that he should have perpetuated the 
false impression that Atlantic Labrador is treeless. 
But, although for the sake of precision it is important to call atten- 
tion to these inaccuracies in compilation which at once alter the 
premises, the chief object of the present notes is to emphasize one 
dominant factor in determining the limits of ranges of plants, the 
neglect of which has so obviously led Hutchinson into confusion. 
Repeatedly in his paper he refers to what are described as the “anoma- 
lous” distribution of Thuja occidentalis and the “irregularities” and 
“inconsistencies?” in the distribution of Pinus Banksiana; and 
1 Geol. Surv. Can. Ann. Rep. n. s. xv. 226A (1903). 
2 A. P. Low, Geol. Surv. Can. Ann. Rep. n. s. viii. 31L (1896). 
