574 Forestry Quarterly 



infected trees in a merchantable stand as to cause no incon- 

 venience or loss to the purchaser if he is required to cut all trees 

 marked, whether merchantable or not. A number of regions 

 visited by the writer would fall in this class, but still woiild repre- 

 sent a serious condition for the futiu-e health of the forest if not 

 governed by some such procedure. Management of sales on the 

 basis of requiring the purchaser to cut every marked mistletoe- 

 infected tree, whether merchantable or not, in most regions could 

 only be successfully negotiated where some form of reimbursement 

 was allowed. To determine the most practicable form of reim- 

 bursement for both the govermnent and the purchaser is a prob- 

 lem the practical forester has before him. As a first suggestion, 

 cash payment for the time required to fall undesirable mistletoe- 

 infected trees having little or no merchantable content may be 

 considered. The practicability of this would, of course, be deter- 

 mined by the time required to fall trees of varying diameter, which 

 again would be influenced by the ease with which different species 

 could be cut and by the number of mistletoe-infected trees per 

 acre. In regions where serious infection is principally confined to 

 a single species, as in the White pine belt of northern Idaho, 

 a reduction of stumpage price on the basis of all affected species, 

 would be worthy of consideration. The value of this over an equal 

 reduction of stumpage for all species, whether bearing mistletoe 

 or not, is to the effect that the price for White pine, Douglas 

 fir, spruce, cedar, and, in most cases, Yellow pine, would hardly 

 be reduced at all. The only tree affected would be larch, which is 

 in most localities seriously infected by mistletoe. Conditions 

 would, of course, vary as to the number of species affected in the 

 different National Forests. In most cases, however, some one of 

 the more valuable species woidd escape the reduction. This plan 

 would probably work well enough in regions where the most 

 valuable species is not already carrying, both for itself and its 

 neighbors, the cost of a certain amount of protective work. In 

 some regions where this is being done in the interest of the removal 

 of one or more of the so-called "weed trees" (fir and hemlock), the 

 plan may be varied so as to place mistletoe-infected trees first. 

 It seems that in some cases it may be of more importance to try to 

 reduce the activities of mistletoe on a really valuable species than 

 of the wood-destroying fungus of the weed species. Since the 

 fungus {Echinodontium tinctorium) of the firs and hemlocks is not 



