CHAMONIX WORKING PLAN 



249 



preliminary data, includes a very detailed review of area changes (Art. 2)/^ 

 the present area being 4,733 acres; brief allusions to, (Art. 3) boundaries; 

 (Art. 4) rights and servitudes; (Art. 5) topography; (Art. 6) soil; (Art. 7) 

 climate; (Art. 8) composition and condition of stand; the per cent of 

 each species is calculated on the basis of the volume of all trees calipered, 

 namely, 5 inches and over; the per cent given in even hundreds was 

 found to be: spruce 78 per cent; larch 20 per cent; fir, Scotch pine, and 

 cembric pine (with alder, birch, and service tree) 2 per cent; (Art. 11) 

 roads, paths, means of logging; besides some 22.5 miles of new trails 

 many of thfe old paths which had faulty alignment had been recon- 

 structed; (Art. 14) pasturage, gathering needles. The practice of 

 gathering the dry needles, the moss, and even the humus, has led in some 

 cases to the impoverishment of the stand and the commune is, therefore, 

 urged to put a stop to it at once in view of the aesthetic value of the 

 stands bordering this great tourist center. 



Part II. — Management in Force. — The fourteen working groups are 

 listed in numerical order and by name with the area of each as for example : 

 first working group, " Argentiere-Nord," 508 acres. The working groups 

 vary in size considerably, one with 23 acres, six with from 99 to 247 

 acres, three with 249 to 494, and four with from 496 to 581 ; M. Schaeffer 

 believes a working group in the mountains should not be more than 

 1,000 acres. Then follows the felling scheme for the period dating from 

 March 9, 1892. This table is headed as follows: 



Working group 



Method of calculating 

 the yield 



First, working group 

 of Argentiere-Nord. 



First lot: 

 A, B, C, etc. 



Transfer of trees 

 from 5 inches up 

 in the "average 

 wood." 



" Art. I is "name" (see official outline for working plans given on page 247 for the 

 list of other project headings not included in the revision). According to W. B. Greeley: 

 ". . . it is probable that the greatest pubhc encouragement to the private owner 

 to keep his timberland productive has been the stimulus and example of the pubhcly 

 owned forests. These are scattered through practically every section of the country. 

 In every forest region, the private owner has seen good forestry practice demonstrated 

 for scores of years on State or communal holdings. He knows the forest officers in his 

 locality and consults them on the methods applicable to his own woodland. The 

 widely distributed public forests have not only set the standards of good management 

 but have made the local silviculture a part of farm lore of the region. The rural popu- 

 lation of France knows how to grow trees just as it knows how to grow potatoes or 

 care for its vineyards. . . . And, by a law passed in 1913, the expert services of 

 the State are offered at cost to owners of timberland who wish to cut their holdings on 

 a conservative basis corresponding to the requirements of the "regime forestier" and to 

 obtain the special forms of protection against trespass now accorded to public holdings 

 by the forest code. This law is of too recent origin to have yet demonstrated its value." 



