COMMENT 



On p. 524 we have given a very full abstract of a highly inter- 

 esting article by Biolley on normal stock which is certainly novel 

 and thought compelling, although we are not at all convinced of 

 the soundness of his argimients and, indeed, find it desirable 

 to point out briefly a number of fundamental misconceptions. 



The author has singularly failed to secure a proper conception 

 of normal stock and its application as current among German 

 foresters; he misunderstands the meaning and value of yield 

 tables. Even the biology of the forest on which he lays so much 

 stress in the interesting expose is, we believe, not quite clear in his 

 mind ; nor is the object of thinnings. We may also find some flaws 

 in his conception of the business of forestry in general. 



The gist of the whole discussion is to make prominent the need 

 of silviculture and to substitute for a regulated organization free 

 will and judgment of the manager. 



It is an organic mistake of the French in general, at least in their 

 literature, to mix up silviculture and organization. The laudable 

 endeavor to join the two in practice leads to unclearness, especially 

 as to the function of organization. There is hardly a German 

 forester who would not admit that silviculture — production — ^is 

 the important branch of forestry, and that it can be practised 

 only through recognition of biological laws of development. 

 There is no sane German forester, on the other hand, who considers, 

 as the author asserts, that normal stock is the object and not a 

 means to an end — sustained production. Least of all can any 

 one admit that the normal stock is "determined by official 

 prescription." 



Yield tables from which normal stock may be figured are not 

 constructions of the brain, but are records of actual occurrences and 

 accomplishments in nature and vinder certain treatment. They 

 are not mathematics to which the management must conform, but 

 attempts to measure what silviculture under given conditions can 

 accomplish, a standard measure of ovir silvicultural endeavor. 



The concededly best formula method was elaborated by Karl 

 Heyer who took great pains to warn against an attempt to rely 

 upon a normal forest formula or to consider the formula anything 

 but an assistant guide. Biolley overlooks that the normal forest 

 and normal stock idea contains a normal increment, i. e., a best, 



562 



