History of the Forest , 293 



As in the United States, the forests in Canada are lo- 

 cated on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts with a broad 

 stretch of treeless prairie in between. There is one great 

 difference. In the United States the forests extend to 

 the northern boundary; in Canada there are millions of 

 acres which lie within the grasp of the frozen north beyond 

 the limit of merchantable tree growth. Moreover, this 

 great tundra region is incapable of ever producing any 

 merchantable forests and the same is true of a considerable 

 portion of the northern plains. 



There is also a great difference in the composition of the 

 two forests. Owing to the northern latitude and conse- 

 quently severe climate of Canada, the number of species 

 in the forest is much smaller than in the more southern 

 country. Spruce becomes the predominant genus in the 

 coniferous forests instead of pine, and the hardwoods are 

 confined to the less desirable species such as birch, poplar 

 and elm. The magnificent hardwood forests of oak, 

 hickory, yellow poplar, walnut and buckeye found in the 

 southern Appalachians and the Ohio valley are entirely 

 lacking. Nor is the development of the northern species 

 with the single exception of white spruce as good as in the 

 South. On the Pacific coast the forests more nearly com- 

 pare with those of the northern Cascades. 



As in the United States, the first settlements along 

 the Atlantic coast were made in a country of unbroken 

 forest, and the movement westward to the treeless prairies 

 was much slower. Hudson Bay trappers brought in many 

 reports of the vastness of the northern country, but failed 

 to give any detailed account of the timber there. The 

 natural inference was that the whole country was timbered 



