SITE DETERMINATION, CLASSIFICATION, AND 

 APPLICATION 



By RusselIv Watson 

 University of Michigan; late Forest Assistant, U. S. Forest Service 



In the Proceedings of the Society of American Foresters for 

 October, 1916, is a note by Mr. Rechnagel which is apropos Mr. Roth's 

 article on Sites which appeared in the Forestry Quarterly, Vol. XIV, 

 pp. 3ff. Mr. Rechnagel desires to search out the relationship which 

 may exist between the site classification in use in the United States and 

 that in use in Europe. He asks if our Site II corresponds to the Site 

 II in Europe, and, if it does not agree, wherein does it differ, and, if it 

 does not altogether differ, wherein does it agree ? 



It is patent that if there were any standard of site classification in 

 this country it could be compared to that in Europe, provided the 

 methods of measuring site were the same on both continents, inasmuch 

 as the site classification in Europe (or at least in Germany) is well 

 standardized. Furthermore, in Europe sites are standardized to all 

 ways of measuring site. So it is apparent that the reason that Site II 

 in the United States cannot be compared to Site II in Europe is because 

 there is no standard site in the United States. That there is no 

 standard site classification in the United States is a pretty sad com- 

 mentary ; that there should be one is certain. 



It is the purpose of this article to indicate a possible standard method 

 of site determination and of site classification. In order to test the 

 validity of the methods herein advocated, they are applied in a practical 

 manner to a timber survey. 



The determination of sites is very important in forest management, 

 since the site is an important factor in deciding upon the species which 

 may be used to best advantage, the yield tables which may be applied, 

 the rotation which may be used, and the method of regeneration which 

 may be followed. The most important of these points in relation to 

 site is the yield tables which may be applied. Should we make yield 

 table for every possible site? Should we make yield tables for every 

 species ? Should we apply the same yield table to the species no matter 

 where it may grow, or should we make a new yield table for it in every 

 locality where it grows ? 



552 



