Current Literature. 439 



paid for the principal woodlot products and shows how they can 

 be marketed to advantage. 



The illustrations and drawings are unusually well selected and 

 convey at once to the layman reader their illustrative purpose. 



Altogether it is a most commendable contribution to our litera- 

 ture and it has shown the results of painstaking effort on the part 

 of one who has familiarized himself on the subject. 



N. C. B. 



Silvical Characteristics of Canadian Trees. Compiled by For- 

 esters' Club, University of Toronto. 19 14. P. 63. 



The members of the classes of 1913 and 1914, Faculty of 

 Forestry, University of Toronto, Canada, have recently put out 

 a publication entitled, "Silvical Characteristics of Canadian 

 Trees." Fifty-six species in all are discussed. The silvical 

 characteristics taken up are the size, growth, root system, crown, 

 tolerance, wood, reproduction, range, soil, and association of 

 each species. In addition, under a heading entitled ''General," 

 the commercial importance, technical features, supply, common 

 enemies, and management recommended, are given some atten- 

 tion. The silvical characteristics are first taken up by descrip- 

 tive words, or short concrete expressions or sentences under each 

 heading. Then on a table they are shown in a comparative form 

 by giving to each silvical characteristic heading three grades rep- 

 resented by numbers. Thus under the heading "Growth" species 

 of slow growth are designated by the figure i, of medium growth 

 by the figure 2, and of rapid growth by the figure 3. Under the 

 heading "Tolerance," the same figures represent intolerant, me- 

 dium, and tolerant trees respectively, etc. 



The conception of the publication is good in that it attempts 

 to bring together in concrete form for easy reference the main 

 silvical facts in regard to these species. The publication is a 

 compilation of data from various sources and similar to much 

 other compilation work, it impresses the reader as not being en- 

 tirely a finished product. This is without doubt due to a lack of 

 knowledge of some of the species, to a lack of published knowledge 

 of some of the others, but it appears to be due also almost unques- 



