THE DOUGLAS FIR IN SCOTLAND. 239 



Under a rotation of fifty years Scots pine may even"yield a little 

 more material than the Douglas fir, but later on it drops consider- 

 ably behind. 



Quality of the, Timber. — The next point of importance is the 

 quality of the timber. The wood of the Douglas fir has a great 

 reputation, and in America its quality is believed to be equal to 

 that of larch timber. In how far the Douglas fir grown in this 

 country will come up to that standard remains to be seen. The 

 larger sized trees so far cut on the Scone estate have been freely 

 bought at the same rates as those usually paid for larch, but 

 sufiicient time has not elapsed to show the comparative merits of 

 home-grown Douglas fir and larch timber. 



A few words must now be added with regard to the safety of 

 production. First of all it is an undisputed fact that Douglas fir 

 can, in this country, only be successfully grown in sheltered 

 localities, because its leading shoot, and even the lateral branches, 

 are very liable to be broken by wind. This reduces the area 

 suitable for its cultivation very considerably. 



Then there can be no doubt that the Douglas fir, in order to yield 

 large volume returns, requires good fertile and fresh or moist soil, 

 in fact, soil on which any other species will produce a large volume 

 of timber. Such land can, moreover, be used to greater advantage 

 for field crops. What we specially require are species which will 

 do well, or at any rate fairly well, on lands which are not suitable 

 for field crops. 



Finally, it has been said that the Douglas fir is not exposed to 

 any disease, while the larch, for instance, suffers so much in this 

 respect. With regard to this point, it will be as well not to shout 

 until we are safely out of the wood. It will be remembered that the 

 larch disease did not show itself in Scotland until about sixty 

 years ago. Only quite lately Mr M'Gregor, who has been on His 

 Grace the Duke of Athole's estates for more than forty years, 

 pointed out to me, that he has never seen the larch cancer on any 

 of the old larch trees, except on those parts of the trees which 

 have been formed during the last sixty years. This certainly 

 seems to indicate that the disease did not exist before about the 

 year 1S20. 



No doubt exists now that the larch cancer is the result of the 

 ravages of a fungus {Peziza Willkommii), the spores of which 

 enter the tree through wounds which were caused by insects (aphis), 

 frosts, violence, etc. Only a few days ago, and after I had com- 



