CHESTNUT BARK DISEASE. 401 



1912, sent us specimens of the blight, and wrote: "We are 

 enclosing you sample of what we think is the chestnut blight. As 

 about 50 per cent, of the trees that were burned by forest fires 

 last spring are covered with this growth, we desire very much 

 to learn whether or not this is the blight." Mr. Eddy, in Feb- 

 ruary of the following year, reported that he found the fungus 

 abundant on the cut wood and fire-injured trees, but scarce on 

 the perfectly healthy ones. 



Others have noticed this relationship of blight to fire injury, 

 as shown by the following quotations. Rane (54, p. 152) says: 

 "There is an unbalanced condition again where forest fires 

 have run through the state year after year, and the trees are 

 abnormal, and only half alive anyway. There you find the 

 disease seems to travel more rapidly than it does where the 

 trees are under normal conditions, and have a forest floor where 

 there is plenty of moisture and the conditions are more favor- 

 able." Buttrick, in a paper on the effects of forest fires on 

 the trees (Forestry Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 2), also remarks: 

 "Diaporthe parasitica, chestnut bark fungus, seems to be more 

 abundant and severe on fire-injured trees." 



Sprouts versus Seedlings. Much of the chestnut of Con- 

 necticut has been cut over two or three times, being renewed 

 by sprout growth. This repeated cutting has occurred not only 

 in Connecticut, and in the greater part of New England, but in 

 the chestnut forests of New Jersey, Delaware, and the eastern 

 parts of New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland. It is generally 

 admitted that this treatment has reduced the vitality of the 

 coppice growth, as shown by the following quotation from R. 

 Zon on the chestnut in southern Maryland (U. S. Dept. Agr. 

 Bur. For. Bull. 53, p. 29) : "It must not be forgotten, however, 

 that a chestnut stump cannot go on coppicing forever. With 

 each new generation of sprouts, the stump becomes more and 

 more weakened, and hence gradually loses its capacity to pro- 

 duce healthy and vigorous sprouts. Although it is impossible 

 to state with certainty how many generations of chestnut can 

 be raised from the same stock without impairing the vitality 

 of the sprouts, the effects of repeated and bad coppicing mani- 

 fest themselves in the increasing number of dying chestnuts all 

 over Maryland. The immediate cause of their death can nearly 

 always be traced to attacks of either insects or fungi, yet the 



