FORESTRY AT NEHASANE PARK 687 



On the hardwood lands large decaying hardwoods remain, which 

 prevent the productive utiHzation of the area under their crowns. 

 (See Table 3.) A much heavier cutting of hardwoods which would 

 include the cull trees would improve the productive power of the 

 forestJ The possibility of accomplishing this will be discussed under 

 point No. 6. 



It is an open question whether in the case of beech and maple a 

 lower cutting limit, namely, the lowest possible from the economic 

 standpoint, should not be usedj^ in order to favor yellow birch and 

 spruce and to prevent loss which now occurs among the maple and 

 beech after cutting, through the dying of medium sized trees left 

 exposed. 



It is possible that a higher limit might be used to silvicultural ad- 

 vantage with spruce on hardwood land. The objections are, that: 



(a) The cut per acre already is low under the present limit, and 



(b) Most of the spruce over 8 inches diameter are mature. 



The average age of spruce 8 inches in diameter was found to 

 exceed 150 years. 



Criticism No. j. — The diameter limits are too rigidly applied. 



This is not true for hemlock because it is an undesirable species. 



In the case of spruce, balsam and hardwoods there is something to 

 be said on both sides. 



. The rigid application of a diameter limit is recognized quite gener- 

 ally as unsound in principle. Its use in controlling cuttings on private 

 lands is favored because it is the easiest and cheapest method for the 

 forester to enforce and use of any other method required a more 

 capable personnel. The alternative methods are careful control of 

 cutting by frequent inspection, or, better than this, marking^ all trees 

 to be cut. 



The advantages of employing a diameter limit elastically rather 

 than rigidly are too well understood to require discussion here. In- 

 stances have been observed on the park both where trees above the 

 limit could have been left and those below could have been cut to 

 advantage. The operation of leaving above and cutting below the 

 limit is susceptible of being so handled as to make little difference 

 one way or the other in the total amount of timber removed from a 

 given area. 



While in theory a rigid diameter limit is unsound, yet in practice 

 there may be found types, divisions within types, or individual tracts 



