SPRUCE, SCOTS PINE AND JAPANESE LARCH. 3 I 



varying from 86 cubic feet to 107 cubic feet per acre. With 

 rather more care given to the establishment of the crop, up to the 

 period when a complete canopy is obtained, better results by 

 at least 20 or 25 per cent, should be secured. With regard 

 to the question of the most profitable length of rotation, larger 

 experience is necessary before expressing a definite opinion. 

 It would seem, however, that on poor soils such as K (spruce) 

 the rotation for a first crop of timber should not be long. It 

 will be noticed that at the age of 41 years the mean annual 

 and current annual increments are already approaching, which 

 would indicate the most profitable age for felling to lie between 

 50 and 60 years. 



The two Scots pine areas are examples of good and bad soils. 

 The crop I (Scots pine) has been over-thinned. It will be noticed 

 that the results of the two areas are very similar, and both the 

 mean annual and current annual increments are poor. This 

 merely confirms what is evident from an inspection of the relative 

 growth of spruce and Scots pine in the district — that the former 

 as a timber producer is worth at least twice as much as Scots 

 pine. 



The results obtained from Japanese larch are very remarkable, 

 but they have not yet continued long enough to draw any exact 

 conclusions. Growth is, however, marvellously rapid, and it 

 seems probable that whole areas could, if wished, be cleared for 

 pitwood between the ages of 15 and 20 years. 



There are no crops of Douglas fir or Menzies spruce which 

 are as yet sufficiently advanced to make measurements possible. 

 On fairly good soils the growth of Douglas fir should be equal to 

 or exceed that of Japanese larch. Menzies spruce is not likely 

 to give quite so high a yield, unless after the age of 20 years, 

 but the growth considerably outstrips that of the common 

 spruce. 



There can be little doubt that the importance of fairly accurate 

 information regarding growing stock, annual increment, and 

 annual fellings, in terms of cubic feet per acre, has been 

 insufficiently studied by those having charge of the management 

 of woods in Scotland, and comparatively few foresters could give, 

 even approximately, correct information upon these points 

 regarding the whole woods under their charge. So far as 

 coniferous woods are concerned, it seems fairly clear that the 

 minimum return which should be expected is 60 cubic feet 



