98 Germany. 



most widespread condition, vanished to a large extent. 

 This was especially unfortunate in Northern and North- 

 eastern pine forests. 



A reaction from Hartig's generalization began about 

 1830 under the lead of Pfeil. He had at first agreed 

 with Hartig, and then with equal narrowness advocated 

 for many years a clear cutting system with artificial re- 

 forestation. Finally he was not afraid to acknowledge 

 that his early generalizations in this respect were a mis- 

 take, and that different conditions required different 

 treatment. 



In the development of the shelterwood system there 

 was at first under the lead of Hartig, a tendency to open 

 up rather sharply, taking out about three-fourths of the 

 existing stand, but gradually he became convinced that 

 this was too much, and finally reduced the first removal 

 to only about one-third of the stand. This was the origin 

 of his nickname of Dunkelman. In spite of the fact 

 that it was claimed that Cotta took the opposite view 

 (for which he was called Lichtman), he, too, grew to 

 favor a dark position, and, as he progressed, leaned more 

 and more towards more careful opening up. Hartig 

 originally recognized only three different fellings: the 

 cutting for seed; the cutting for light; and the 

 removal cutting. By and by a second cut was made 

 during the seed year, and the number of fellings to 

 secure gradual removal were increased so that by 1801 

 this system seems to have been pretty nearly perfected 

 to its modern conditions. The best exposition of this 

 Femelschlaghetrieb (shelterwood system), as then de- 

 veloped, is to be foimd in Karl Heyer's Handbook, 1864. 



The method was unfortunately extended to the North- 



