The Environment. 



Here there is a range in numbers of plants from 2,400 to 75,500 

 plants per hectare, but the meaning of these figures can not be under- 

 stood unless the size of the plants is taken into consideration. From 

 the point of view of business opportunism, a stand of 2,400 plants per 

 hectare may be better than one of much higher figures, while for one who 

 is looking for a basis for permanent investment other questions of rela- 

 tive sizes and numbers of plants arise, the answer to which involves an 

 explanation of the rate of reproduction in the field. This subject will 

 be treated in detail in Chapter IV, it being our purpose here to show 

 the actual condition as viewed by one who is estimating the tonnage per 

 unit of area. 



If we refer back to table 4, we will observe that the two quadrats 

 contained 1,371 plants, the average weight of which was a little over 3.5 

 ounces. Of these, however, only 80 were large enough to be gathered, 

 namely, those about i pound or over in weight; though if the land were 

 being exploited smaller ones would be taken, say those weighing above 

 half a pound. This would include all of the plants in classes i and n, 

 weighing in the aggregate about 58.75 pounds, or 5,875 pounds per hec- 

 tare, assuming the quadrats to be fair samples, or about 2.67 tons (long). 



Treating the remaining tables similarly, we have the following 

 figures: 



TABLE 14. 



It will need but a glance at the above summary to show that, from 

 the business point of view, the acreage of large but comparatively few 

 plants is the more valuable to the purchaser who is not looking to the 

 future, for the reason that the cost of harvesting a small number of 

 large plants will be less than if the available plants are large in number 

 and of smaller size, and because the larger plants can be handled more 

 readily and therefore more cheaply. Furthermore, it is much easier 

 to determine the tonnage with fair accuracy where the plants are few 

 and large. The error due to applying data taken from small sample 

 areas to an extensive area within which the sample area falls, must of 

 necessity be large, for the number of plants as well as their character 

 must be considered. Taking the question of number alone, the size of 

 the error on this score will be appreciated when it is known that on an 

 area of 42.7 acres at Station 2 (plate i) 181 bales of guayule, or at the 



