1919] Fernald,— Ranges of Pinus and Thuja 49 
In fact, it is most difficult to comprehend how a phytogeographer, 
who must have seen a geological map of North America, can read 
Robert Bell's account of the broad northern range of Pinus Banksiana 
without suspecting the truth. Here is Bell’s statement somewhat 
condensed: “from the head of the Bay of Chaleur,” it extends north 
to Lake Mistassini, “from which it runs west to the Moose River, 
keeping about 100 miles south of James’ Bay. . . . It does not touch 
either James’ or Hudson’s Bay. Southward it is common on the 
north shore of Lake Huron and around both shores of Lake Supetior, 
whence it is met with all through the country to Lake Winnipeg." 
“From [the upper] Moose River it runs north-west to the Mackenzie, 
which it erosses about the Arctic Circle" (Bell, Rep. for 1879-80, 46C). 
The southern outliers of Pinus Banksiana, too, are exclusively on 
acid and hopelessly barren rocks and sands or in acid bogs, for, 
although the species is commonly found on dry uplands, in the sterile 
southeastern area of New Brunswick it sometimes occurs on the acid 
bogs so that in that region at least “water” is not “the limiting factor.” 
Although Bell has made the wholesale statement that Pinus Banksiana 
“occurs throughout Nova Scotia and New Brunswick" (Bell, Rep. for 
1879-80, 46C), the Banksian Pine is, as a matter of fact, a highly local- 
ized tree in those provinces, Fernow correctly stating that in Nova 
1 The loose and inaccurate generalization above referred to is an illustration of a type of 
statement which, when depended upon by others, at once leads to erroneous conclusions and 
which, most unfortunately, floods our so-called phytogeographic and ecological literature in 
America. Consequently those who have *'a first-hand unfamiliarity” with the facts (for this 
apt phrase we are indebted to Dr. D. F. Jones's refreshingly straightforward review in Science 
for October 4, 1918) — consequently, those who are not in a position to weigh the values of 
statements are bound to be misled. Thus, in a recent sumptuously illustrated publication 
issued by the New York State College of Forestry and therefore bound to be considered *''scien- 
tific," the state of New York is divided into a number of *' Zones,” the first the ‘‘ Zone of Willow 
Oak, Sweet Gum, Persimmon, etc.” “ continuing along the Connecticut coast" (to New Haven, 
as indicated on the accompanying map). This ‘“‘ Zone” which is said to occupy the western 
coast of Connecticut is reported by Bray to be characterized by the following 
*' Indicator Species. 
Short-leaf pine = (Pinus echinata Mill.). 
Willow oak = (Quercus phellos L.). 
Oak = (Quercus pagodaefolia (Ell.) Ashe). 
Black-jack Oak = (Quercus marilandica Muench.). 
Laurel magnolia = (Magnolia virginiana L.). 
Sweet gum = (Liquidamba: styraciflua L.). 
Hop tree = (Plelea trifoliata L.). 
Mistletoe = (Phoradendron flavescens (Pursh) Nuttall). 
Virginia spiderwort = (Tradescantia virginiana L.). 
Day flower = (Commelina virginica L.).”’ 
Now, the disheartening features of this list of ‘‘ Indicator Species" are that, while 6 out of 
the 10 are locally indigenous in southeastern New York, 3 of the others (Pielea, Tradescantia, 
