On Pninins: and TJiinnino; Forest Trees 



285 



arrest the mischief by free thinning. See that 

 every tree be left free and untouched by its 

 neighbour. 



If that is neglected — if the owner thinks 

 that it will do no harm to wait another year 

 or two until the thinnings shall be of a little 

 more value, and lets them stand — what next 

 takes place? A leaf once shed is never 

 replaced on the same spot. New leaves 

 come, but it is from fresh buds and new 

 branchlets ; and these are produced year 

 after year a stage further from the stem. If 

 we get up into a leafy tree, we see that almost 

 all the leaves are at the outside ; the bare 

 trunk and branches are surrounded by a leafy 

 cloak or atmosphere of foliage. Those twigs, 

 therefore, which last year lost their leaves by 

 the lashing and rubbing of the twigs of the 

 next tree, advance no further, every attempt 

 at putting out fresh buds and leaves being 

 frustrated by the friction of its neighbour, and 

 by-and-bye the branch which bears them dies. 

 The tree grows in height and years after the 

 same process is repeated upon the higher and 

 higher branches, which in turn die off, until 

 the tree has become a long pole, with no 

 leaves except at the top. While thus suffer- 

 ing from suffocation by the partial destruction 

 of its lungs, it is also suffering from starvation 

 of its stomach. The roots stretch out in the 

 same ratio as the branches, and, simul- 

 taneously with them, meet the roots of the 

 neighbour tree. There is not here the same 

 injury from friction, although interference by 

 actual contact no doubt does also occur. But 

 there is another kind of injury. There is only 

 a certain amount of nourishment in the soil in 

 which it grows. If it is enough for it, it is 

 not also enough for both itself and its neigh- 

 bour ; but both have now put their fingers 

 into the same dish, and, in consequence, both 

 suffer from lack of nourishment. 



We are told by the advocates of the old 

 system that it is that adopted by Nature 

 herself, and we are referred to the forests of 

 North America as proof that it is so. There 

 v/e know that in many parts vast forests 

 exist, consisting entirely of tall slender pines, 

 of one species and one size, growing in the 

 same fashion as our worst-managed planta- 



tions. Nature not only does everything well, 

 but ever)^thing best ; therefore, Avherever we 

 have her procedure to guide us, we admit that 

 there is no more to be said. However opposed 

 to our own ideas and reasoning, her rule must 

 settle the question. But we must be sure that 

 we really do understand her teaching. And 

 here, how do we know that Nature's object in 

 these American forests is the same as ours ? 

 If Nature has one object more at hand than 

 another, it is the preservation and propaga- 

 tion of the species — not the making of fine 

 trees and profitable timber. 



Our object, on the other hand, is to pro- 

 duce fine trees and valuable timber ; and we 

 can only learn how Nature would proceed 

 were she intent on attaining that object, by 

 first finding such fine specimens as we want, 

 and then studying the conditions under which 

 they have grown. We do not want such 

 small thin poles as are found in the American 

 forests referred to : we should pi-efer them to 

 be four times as thick and strong; and if 

 some other condition of existence than that 

 found in the American forests will make them 

 so, will any one say that we should not adopt 

 them because it is not the plan adopted by 

 Nature in these American forests ? When 

 Nature shews good specimens and bad speci- 

 mens, and we wish to have trees like the 

 good only, should we adopt the plan followed 

 by Nature in making the bad or the good ? 



Now, we know by experience that the very 

 opposite conditions of existence to those of 

 the choked-up forests of North America do 

 produce the finest and largest trees. Our rule, 

 therefore, is this : — wherever two trees touch 

 each other, down with the worst of the two. 

 This, of course, applies only to young planta- 

 tions. When the trees are old, and grow in 

 a cluster together, a different treatment is 

 necessary. Generally speaking, these should 

 be viewed as one tree. If they are oaks, the 

 removal of one sometimes proves fatal to the 

 rest. What might have been the most bene- 

 ficial step for the young and strong, is often 

 fatal, both to plants and animals, when their 

 constitution has reached such a low degree of 

 vitality as to be unable to accommodate itself 

 to any change, even although it be on for the 



