seme taxons much greater than one is led to expect. Also, as noted in the 

 Manual, the taxonomic problems in the genus Crataegus have not yet been 

 solved. 



The plan has been to canvass all herbaria thoroughly and criticallw to 

 acquire personal familiarity in the field with nearly all s])ecies and varieties 

 in the area, and finally to become thoroughlv familiar with the literature 

 dealing with our woody flora. The chief herbaria examined were those of 

 the New England Botanical Club, (irav Herbarium, Arnold .\rboretum. 

 Dartmouth College (Jesup), St. Anselm's College. Brewster Academy 

 (Sargent collection), The Manchester Institute of Arts and Sciences ( F. 

 W. Batchelder collection ) , and the University of Xew Hampshire. The field 

 work has invoh-ed continuous effort in southeastern Xew Hampshire and 

 the central and southern parts of the White Mountains and northern Carroll 

 and Grafton counties by one or both authors working separately, as well as 

 a number of extensive joint forays to selected areas in each of the counties, 

 the objective being to pe^-fect and complete the check lists for the entire 

 state, county l)v county. In particular, Sullivan, Belknap, and Merrimack 

 counties had been inadequately botanized. This, we have been able to re- 

 medy in major part so far as the woodv ]:)lants are concerned during the 

 past three years. The objective of the field work has been, not only to obtain 

 range records of taxons, but to gain a critical understanding of the extent 

 of variation, habitat-preference, and abundance of each. 



Above all it has been the intention to know each taxon intimately even 

 in such difiicult groups as Sali.r. Rosa. Aiiiclanchicr, and J'acciiiiuiii. Only 

 in Crataegus have we failed to achieve a feeling of reasonable field compe- 

 tence in identification. N'o help from authorities has been sought in the 

 identification of any species, but, for the most part, the identifications on 

 the sheets of herbarium specimens made by specialists in the above groups, 

 as well as in many others, have l)een accepted without question and have 

 been most helpful in educating us in field identification, ^^'here there has 

 been difficuk with specimens in the field, these have lieen c'»llect?fl and 

 checked carefully against herbarium sheets. Although there probably have 

 been errors, for which the authors must bear sole responsibility, every 

 effort has been made to keep them to a minimum. 



We have constantly leaned upon Professor Pease's l^ascular Flora 

 of Coos County (1924). It is much to be regretted that his revised flora 

 which has no\y been awaiting a publisher for several years is not available. 

 The Vl^oody Plants of Maine by Fay Hyland and F. H. Steinmetz (1944) 

 has proven of great reference value and also has served as a guide to the 

 organization of our work, while the Cheek List of J'aseular Plants of Maine 

 by E. C. Ogden, F. II. Steinmetz. and F. Hyland has suggested part of the 

 format for this treatment. 



This work is inteufled to C(jmprise all of the woody ])erennial plants 

 occurring naturally in Xew Hampshire. The distinction between low or 

 weak shrubs or herbs must Ijc made somewhat arbitrarily since there is no 

 abrupt line of demarcation between them. Epigaea repcns and Linnaea 

 horealis are included chiefly because they are in plant families in which 

 nearly all of the members are woody. MitcJiella repens seems to be more 

 herbaceous than either of the foregoing but. occurring as it does in some- 

 what similar habitats or assuming a habit somewhat similar to them, it 

 also was included. Diapensia lapponiea belongs ecologically to an alpine 



