Periodical Literature. 93 



It is also pointed out that the sudden increase of cut will in- 

 fluence prices and make the calculations untenable. It is stated 

 that in the 20 years ending 1906 prices had advanced at the rate 

 of 4.7% per annum in the average. The question is raised 

 whether the wood merchants, who confirmed that the most mar- 

 ketable trees were those of 10 to 14 inch diameter, were not 

 really "laying for the old stock" that was to be slaughtered. In 

 opposition to the hotly contested proposition that natural regenera- 

 tion is cheaper than artificial, the reviewer asks the question : 

 Is the advantage of a method of reproduction to be measured only 

 by the cost of plant material and labor? Do the advantages of 

 the natural regeneration outside the cost count for nothing? 



The reviewer refers to a similar onslaught on rotations which 

 30 years ago was waged in Bern, when a financial deficit made an 

 extraordinary cut desirable, but better counsels prevailed, although 

 later here and there rotations were reduced ; yet 20 years later 

 an increase was allowed without resistance. 



The most significant outcome of these discussions is the de- 

 claration of the highest representative of forestry science in 

 Bavaria, that he considers the return to natural regeneration a 

 retrograde step and not a progress, because this method leads to 

 large losses in increment. 



Thaler investigates how such surplus of stock, if any, may be 

 utilized without loss. He points out that neither the Bavarian 

 nor most of the other German State forest administrations could 

 tell whether they have a surplus of stock or not, since their or- 

 ganization is based on area or volume allotment methods, which 

 do not determine the normal stock or necessary wood capital. 

 Only in Baden and Hesse (lately) is the regulation of the budget 

 based on the normal stock idea, at least as one factor. 



In using up surplus stock the question arises how large an 

 area may be cut without financial or silvicultural disadvantages. 

 This, in Hesse, is answered by limiting the area to what with the 

 means (nurseries) and labor at disposal can be reforested. This, 

 for any one district has hitherto limited the felling area to 20 

 or 25 acres. 



With a long time regeneration method it is almost impossible 

 to control the size of felling area and of normal stock, ocurrence 

 or failure of seed years preventing regular progress. Such long 



