524' JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



apparent duplication in the statement of certain projects which might 

 be taken to imply an actual duplication of work. For example, projects 

 207-210 in forest pathology are also covered by the general project 

 262, project 125 a-n by projects 264-5, etc. It should be explained that 

 in each of these cases the same work is referred to, the duplication of 

 entry being due to the fact that statements of the same projects were 

 received from both central and local sources. Under the pressure of 

 conditions involved in publishing this report the apparent duplication 

 was not noticed. By relating the detailed statements under projects 

 207-10 and 125 with the more general ones under projects 262, 264, 

 and 265, a better understanding of the scope and character of the Gov- 

 ernment co-operative work in forest pathology can be gained. 



Earle H. Clapp. 



Christmas Trees Cut Without Destroying the Parent Tree 



In 1912 Supervisor Rush of the Wichita National Forest started a 

 red cedar plantation of about 17 acres, the trees used being natural 

 stock dug from surrounding territory. The plantation was a decided 

 success, fully 95 per cent of the trees living. During the last two 

 winters Rush has sold Christmas trees from this plantation — 80 in 

 December, 1919, and about 150 in December, 1920. In cutting these 

 trees Rush has made it a point to leave one whorl of branches below 

 the point at which the tree was cut ofif. A very interesting phenomenon 

 has resulted. Physiologists would possibly say that it is due to helio- 

 tropism or to the force of gravity, but personally I rather imagine it 

 is due to some natural force inherent in living things of which physi- 

 ologists know little or nothing. Regardless of the reason this is what 

 happened. Following the cutting of the trees, Rush in most instances 

 cut off close to the trunk all but one of the living branches which re- 

 mained on the stump. This living branch in every case has abruptly 

 turned upward. On some trees it has reached a height of six feet, 

 and there is the beginning of a new stand of cedar. Where Rush did 

 not cut off all but one of the branches but left them as they were, the 

 tendency for one or more of the branches to assume an upright growth 

 has been much less apparent. This phenomenon is not only of scientific 

 interest, but it may develop into something of considerable practical 

 interest. If a crop of Christmas trees can be cut from a stand with- 

 out actually destroying the parent tree, it certainly will have practical 



