96 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



all has been largely, if not wholly guess-work. Another 

 reason was that if a plantation of that kind were estab- 

 lished where it could be seen by the public at large, and 

 where the several species of our timber trees could be 

 seen in proximity to each other, deductions could be drawn 

 without having to investigate forests remote from each 

 other, and where climatic and local conditions might 

 vary, and it would have a great educational power. Be- 

 sides all this there was present in my mind the great 

 advantage to foresters of the future who could see what 

 those of the present day were unable to ascertain the 

 adaptability of certain species to certain soils, location, 

 and environment and thus have set before them an 

 object lesson of great value. 



"As there exists a difference of opinion among educated 

 foresters as to whether pure or mingled stands are best, 

 Dr. Rothrock and I arranged the planting so that one- 

 half of each compartment should be of one species only, 

 and the other half of the same compartment of mingled 

 species of various kinds, so that the forester of the 

 future can see which is best in like situations. It is but 

 proper to state that we fully agreed on all details, and 

 if there should prove to be a failure we two, alone, are 

 responsible. 



"For this good work, this painstaking, generous, patri- 

 otic, financially unremunerative work, we are indebted to 

 the farseeing wisdom of the donor of the necessary funds 

 to carry it on a donor who stands unknown to the public 

 which is benefited by that wisdom and liberality." 



Dr. J. T. Rothrock, following Mr. Elliott's comment said 

 that, in his opinion, "it was a most important educational 

 move, not simply because of its association with a great 

 educational institution, but because also of its relation to 

 the whole forestry problem of the State and Nation. 



"The soil upon which this plantation is made represents 

 fairly* the character of the millions of acres upon which 

 Pennsylvania's future forests are to grow, if grown at 

 all. It is non-agricultural land, upon which timber has 

 once grown. Whatever is possible there is possible else- 

 where in our State. Furthermore, this same plantation, 

 it is hoped, will help to solve for our region the relative 

 merits of different methods in forestry procedure, for 

 we may safely assume that they will be fully 'tried out.' 



"Our bope is that Lehigh University will enlarge the 

 area devoted to this productive line of work, because 

 there is an assurance that a well-considered plan will be 

 followed to its natural results ; an assurance which, un- 

 fortunately, cannot be positively counted upon for any 

 State operation." 



This gives the account of the start five years ago, in 

 191 5, of this experimental plantation. Now at the end 

 of 1920, Dr. Rothrock was called on by the University 

 to make a report on the development of the plantation 

 which has had, during the five years, the unremitting and 

 careful oversight and attention of the University Super- 

 intendent of Grounds, J. C. Cranmer, a forester of ex- 

 perience and good judgment. 



The following is a copy of Dr. Rothrock's report: 

 "For the purpose indicated the land on which the trees 



were planted is in many respects ideal, because poor and 

 unpromising as it is, it fairly represents vast areas which 

 the State of Pennsylvania must, in self-protection, cover 

 with such forests as it can produce, or allow it to re- 

 main an open, corroding ulcer on the surface of the 

 Commonwealth. There is no choice beyond these alterna- 

 tives. The State is now, for the first time, seriously 

 contemplating the magnitude and the importance of the 

 problem presented. By use of artificial fertilizer, and 

 by weeding out or cutting back all undesirable, compet- 

 ing growth^ a much more vigorous growth of the desired 

 species could have been obtained, but it would have 

 vitiated and rendered the experiment devoid of any great 

 practical purpose. No seedling planted was more than 

 six inches high. When it was put into the ground, it 

 was allowed to take its chance of life in competition with 

 whatever else grew there. That any of it survived and 

 outgrew and overtopped the competitors, was a test of 

 fitness for such land. 



"There is one special fact that merits full consideration. 

 The year 1919 was a locust year. In the absence of living 

 chestnut, the weight of the attack fell upon the hard- 

 woods. The oaks suffered most severely. Among the coni- 

 fers, the European larch was probably the most injured, 

 though the damage done to it was comparatively small. 



"There were twenty-two species of trees planted. 

 Looked at from the light of five years' experience, it is 

 evident that a better selection of trees could have been 

 made. There were certain trees, we felt, had a fair 

 chance. There were others about which we were in 

 doubt, but the very purpose of the experiment was to 

 remove the doubt, and to ascertain what was possible 

 under the conditions. 



"The following brief paragraphs will give the essential 

 facts concerning each species planted. 



1. The jack pine (Pinus Banksiana) is vigorous, and has made 

 an average growth of at least six feet. 



2. Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris) vigorous. Made growth of 

 six feet. When planted in combination with white pine, it 

 overtopped the latter. Traot partly burned over. 



3. White pine {Pinus Strobus) badly burned. Shows now 

 on the fire ground a growth of three feet. It may recover. 



4. Pitch pine (Pinus rigida) . In good, satisfactory condition. 

 Average growth five feet. 



5. Red or Norway pine (Pinus resinosa). Vigorous, but has 

 made only three feet of growth. Usually it is a more rapid 

 grower. 



6. Western yellow or bull pine (Pinus pondcrosa). Has 

 made slow growth ; hardly more than one and a half feet. Suc- 

 cess doubtful. 



7. European larch (Larix Europoea) . This tree has prob- 

 ably the best showing on the ground, making, in open spaces, 

 a growth of seven feet, though somewhat suppressed in places 

 by chestnut and sumac sprouts. 



8. Norway spruce (Picea Abies). Growth but twenty in- 

 ches to two feet. Seems to be healthy, and may possibly do 

 better, hut present rate of growth is unsatisfactory. 



9. Red spruce (Picea rubra). Growth one foot ("growing 

 more slowly in cultivation than any other spruce tree" Sar- 

 gent), seems to be healthy. 



"The above all are cone-bearing trees. They seem, on 

 the whole, to have been doing better than the "hardwood" 

 and broad-leaved kinds which follow, and which have suf- 



