Concerning Site 7 



Sites Classified by Volume Corresponding Height 



Total Volume Relative Relative 



Site Cubic Feet Value Feet Value 



I 8000 100 87 100 



II 6600 82 73 84 



III 5100 64 60 69 



The soils are described quite fully, but no statement is made as 

 to the basis of classification, whether by volume or height. The 

 table itself indicates that it is well based on ample field data and 

 that height and volume in these even-aged, young and thrifty 

 stands closely correspond. In fact, it will be seen that Sterrett's 

 classification if based on the heights agrees almost perfectly with 

 the classification as represented in Schwappach's tables for pine, 

 the scale running: Schwappach: 100, 85, 69, 55, 43; Sterrett: 

 100, 84, 69. 



The fact that we deal here with stands of different age, 100 

 years, as against 50 years, is not serious in view of the fact that 

 Loblolly pine is very far developed even at 50 years. In any case 

 it is evident that Sterrett's classification is as well based on 

 height as on voliune. 



Mason, in Bulletin 154, 1915, on Lodgepole pine, page 31, gives 

 a most interesting yield table for that species as actually deter- 

 mined from sample plots on the Deerlodge Forest, taking, however, 

 "the best quality of sites." 



In preparing a normal yield table or "table of average yield per 

 acre of normal stands," he decides, on basis of observation and 

 measurements, what a fully stocked stand should be. He then 

 selects data of such stands from his material and constructs a 

 yield table. Mason makes only two sites and as he states: "The 

 original figures were sectued on quality I sites, and the yields for 

 quahty II sites have been derived by multiplying the yields for 

 quality I sites by sixty per cent which seemed a fair reducing 

 factor." 



Here, then, we have an entirely new method of classification of 

 sites, site I based on actual measurement of good stands and site II 

 arbitrarily given 60 per cent of site I values. This classification 

 is new in making only two classes and in setting 60 per cent as a 

 proper factor or making 40 per cent the proper interval. The 

 height, which is so sensitive a criterion in mountain country, is 

 not mentioned in this connection. 



Chapman, in Bulletin 139, 1914, on Norway pine, gives a yield 



