82 Forestry Quarterly. 



timber lots, that this part of their property is a detriment to them, 

 is undoubtedly often true. But they would make the same com- 

 plaint of their gardens if they left them also to Nature's erratic 

 care. In the latter case, no one would feel pity for the " shiftless" 

 owners. It seems to be difficult for a layman to grasp the idea 

 that Nature must be improved upon in the wood-lot as well as in 

 the garden. 



The problem nivolved in the management of a wood-lot located 

 comparatively near market is essentially different from that of the 

 remote and extensive mountain area. A Connecticut farmer 

 would be justified in entering into a degree oi finesse in his silvi- 

 cultural operations which would probably be impracticable at 

 present to the American forester at work in a mountain region, 

 where the margin of profit in handling timber is relatively small. 

 On the other hand, the carefully developed working-plan for 

 the mountain area, necessitating perhaps many series of compart- 

 ments for the proper execution of the ideas involved, requires to 

 be radically changed when it is applied to the small forest of an 

 agricultural region. Under exisiting American conditions the one 

 appears to be largely the problem of extensive supervision ; the 

 other, that of intensive detail. It is the Dakota wheat farm as 

 contrasted with the New Jersey market-garden. 



There is a great dearth of definite knowledge as to the best 

 methods of procedure in this market-gardening forestry. Here as 

 well as in other lines of forest work, we in this country are ham- 

 pered at every turn by lack of definite American experience, of 

 clear-cut American object-le.ssons, and of concrete, reliable Ameri- 

 can data. General principles we may take as our heritage from 

 Old World toilings. Details of feasible methods of procedure 

 adapted to our conditions we must learn for ourselves, and the 

 work has barely begun. 



It appears, then, that a large proportion of the general public 

 still either misunderstands, or is entirely without any understand- 

 ing of, what forestry really is, and what it aims to do. On the other 

 hand, if a woodland owner does understand the forester's aim, 

 and takes him to the wood-lot to ask, " What is best here ? '' or 

 ' ' Just what should be done there ? ' ' can that forester give clear- 

 cut definiteness to his answers ? Does he know of an}' actual ex- 



