366 JOURNAL OF FORESTRY 



sugar pine and its associates, tlic authors have departed somewhat 

 from the hitherto commonly accepted order. Sugar pine is listed as 

 more exacting than Douglas fir as to moisture requirements and less 

 exacting as to light requirement. Wliether this divergence from the 

 general opinion is due to the locality in which the observations were 

 made cannot be determined from what is said in explanation. 



The authors state (page 9) : "The seed is disseminated principally 

 by wind, which generally does not transport it over 150 yards, because 

 of its large size and relatively small wings." Exact data as to how- 

 far the seed will carry so as to secure an adequate percentage of 

 reproduction are not given. 



Under the heading "The Wood," general notes supplemented by 

 tables and photographs are given, showing appearance and structure, 

 quality, weight, strength, shrinkage, hardness, durability and pre- 

 servative treatment. This could have been greatly improved, how- 

 ever, if the subject had been treated a little more critically, pointing 

 out the shortcomings as well as the advantages of the wood and com- 

 paring its properties with those of other similar woods. 



Logging and milling methods and costs are treated in good style 

 and great detail. Average cost per 1,000 board feet for logging is 

 given as $5.30 and for milling as $3.70. The results of a mill scale 

 study showing the percentages of the grades of lumber which can 

 be cut from different grades of logs and from logs of different 

 diameters, and also the percentage of overrun by log grades and 

 qualities, are presented. Another subject well treated is the depreci- 

 ation of sugar pine lumber during air seasoning, which presents the 

 results of a Forest Service study made in 1914, with recommendations 

 for decreasing the loss during air seasoning. 



The authors have devoted a whole page to a detailed description 

 of shake making, because of the local importance of this industry. 

 Elsewhere in the West, however, this is fast becoming chiefly of 

 historic interest because of waste involved. 



The tables of growth (pages 25 to 28) are characterized by 

 insufficient data as to locality and conditions under which the material 

 was obtained. The authors have also followed the custom of showing 

 maximum, average, and minimum growth for individual trees rather 

 than growth by sites tied up with soil descriptions which would be 

 of much more practical value. Table 17 (page 26) for diameter growth 

 is poor in that it aims to show variation in growth caused by locality 



