EEMOVAL OF LEAVES. 369 



hood of many public and even large private forests ; but it is 

 generally regarded as a serious evil. To remove the leaves and 

 fallen twigs is to withdraw much of the pabulum upon which the 

 tree was destined to feed. The small branches and leaves are the 

 parts of the tree which yield the largest proportion of ashes on 

 combustion, and of course they supply a great amount of nutri- 

 ment for the young shoots. " A cubic foot of twigs," says Vau- 

 pell, " yields four times as much ashes as a cubic foot of stem 



wood For every hundredweight of dried leaves carried ofi 



from a beech forest, we sacrifice a hundred and sixty cubic feet 

 of wood. The leaves and the mosses are a substitute, not only 

 for manure, but for ploughing. The carbonic acid given out by 

 decaying leaves, when taken up by water, serves to dissolve the 

 mineral constituents of the soil, and is particularly active in dis- 

 integrating feldspar and the clay derived from its decomposition. 

 .... The leaves belong to the soil. "Without them it can not 

 preserve its fertility, and can not furnish nutriment to the beech. 

 The trees languish, produce seed incapable of germination, and 

 the spontaneous seK-sowing, which is an indispensable element in 

 the best systems of sylvicultm-e, fails altogether in the bared and 

 impoverished soil." * 



Besides' these evils, the removal of the leaves deprives the soil 

 of much of that spongy character which gives it such immense 

 value as a reservoir of moisture and a regulator of the flow of 

 springs ; and, finally, it exposes the surface-roots to the drying 

 influence of sun and wind, to accidental mechanical injury from 

 the tread of animals or men, and, in cold climates, to the destruc- 

 tive effects of frost. 



* Vaitpell, Bogens Indvandring i de Danske Skove, pp. 29, 46. Vaupell 

 further observes, on the page last quoted : " The removal of leaves is injurious 

 to the forest, not only because it retards the growth of trees, but still more 

 because it disqualifies the soil for the production of particular species. When 

 the beech languishes, and the development of its branches is less vigorous and 

 its crown less spreading, it becomes unable to resist the encroachments of the 

 fir. This latter tree thrives in an inferior soil, and being no longer stifled by 

 the thick foliage of the beech, it spreads gradually through the wood, while 

 the beech retreats before it and finally perishes." 



Schleiden confirms the opinion of Vaupell, and adds many important ob- 

 servations on this subject.— i^iir Baum und Wcdd, pp. 64, 65. 

 16* 



