422 COMPARISON OF MODES OF TltANSl'OKT. 



liermissible, and actually practisecl, aloii^jj some of the weaker 

 mountain-streams. 



Although much thought has been expended on the advisability 

 of abandoning chutes in mountainous countries, as they need 

 constant rej^air and are known to be prejudicial to forests, they 

 cannot as yet be dispensed with in high mountain districts. 

 At the same time they may be gradually replaced by sledge- 

 roads and improved floating- channels. Log-slides along made 

 roadways will, however, always prove a useful method in moun- 

 tainous districts, whilst in the Alps and other neighbouring 

 countries floating has always been a prevalent mode of transport, 

 and will remain so for many districts. Floating is much less 

 followed in the plains and hills of North Germany, and even 

 then chiefly for firewood, whilst rafting is extensively pursued in 

 large rivers and canals. It is much easier to lay-out and use 

 forest-roads and tramways in the plains than among mountains, 

 but recent experience in the Yosges and elsewhere shows 

 that the fact of a district being mountainous need not exclude 

 these modes of transport, [which are gradually superseding 

 floating.— Tr.] 



2. ]\'()()(l-Ai^.s()rt))i('nts. 



Although every felling-area yields a number of ditlercnt wood 

 assortments, yet only a few form the great majority of its pro- 

 duce ; frequently one single assortment determines the revenue of 

 a forest, and may therefore have a decisive influence on the choice 

 of the mode of transport. Butts and firewood may be transported 

 in various ways, but logs, poles and coppic(!-wood cannot be floated, 

 though susceptible of all kinds of land-transport, whilst logs 

 form the chief object of rafting. 



In mountainous districts there are many forests which produce 

 splendid long pieces of timber, but which at present only yield 

 saw-mill butts, the stems being cut into lengths of 3 to 4 

 meters (10 to 13 feet) for floating, because, rightly or wrongly, 

 the forest owners consider this mode of transport alone justifiable. 



3. Cost of Tr< (11 sport. 



The cheapest transport is also the best if it is sufficiently 

 expeditious, and neither prejudices the forest nor the wood which 



