632 Journal of Agricultural Research Vol. 34, No.7 
stands, especially on the more favorable sites, advance reproduction 
was inadequate to restock the area at once. This, together with the 
presence of dense underbrush, suggested the possibility that the 
regeneration of desirable species might be long delayed, even if the 
value of the future forest were not permanently impaired. 
OBJECT OF 1924 STUDIES 
The 1920 study was followed in 1924 by somewhat similar but more 
intensive field studies of blight-depleted stands in the regions of 
earlier infection in southern New England and New Jersey. In 
addition, limited studies were made in Pennsylvania of the progress 
of replacement. The 1924 studies were extended to cover representa- 
tive stands of different ages on the more important chestnut sites. 
The primary object of these studies was to determine the progress 
of the natural replacement of the chestnut by other species, and to 
forecast as nearly as possible the impending changes in the compo- 
sition of the stand. 
In these studies the stands were examined for restocking and were 
then analyzed to determine the extent to which the replacing species 
are silviculturally desirable and economically valuable. These 
species were accordingly arranged in three classes. 
Class 1—Desirable species: Red oak (Quercus borealis); white oak, 
(Quercus alba); black oak (Quercus velutina); chestnut oak (Quercus 
montana); hickory (Hicoria spp.); white ash (Fraxinus americana); 
sugar maple (Acer saccharum); sweet birch (Betula lenta); black 
cherry (Prunus serotina); yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera); 
basswood (Tilia glabra); northern white pine (Pinus strobus); pitch 
pine > (Pinus rigida). 
Class 2—Less desirable species: Scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea); red 
maple (Acer rubrum); beech (Fagus grandifolia); black gum (Nyssa 
sylvatica); aspen (Populus tremuloides); largetooth aspen (Populus 
grandidentata); eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides). 
Class 3—Undesirable species: Dogwood (Cornus spp.); gray birch 
(Betula populifolia); bear or scrub oak (Quercus ilicifolia); sassafras 
(Sassafras variifolium); blue beech (Carpinus caroliniana); hop horn- 
beam (Ostrya virginiana); witch-hazel (Hamumelis virginiana); 
service berry (Amelanchier canadensis). 
REPLACEMENT IN SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND 
Three areas were selected in Connecticut as representative of 
southern New England: 
1. The Maltby tract of the New Haven Water Co., west of New 
Haven. (Figs.1and2,A.) This tract has been under management 
since 1907, and has been described by Hawley (8, 9). 
2. The Meshomasick State Forest, north of Portland. Conditions 
in this forest have been described by Filley and Moss (2). 
3. The Whittemore estate, adjacent to Lake Quassapaug, east of 
Woodbury—studied by Frothingham in 1910 (3). 
Hawes (7) and Frothingham (3) have also described conditions in 
the second-growth forests of Connecticut before the chestnut was 
killed by the blight. 
In Pennsylvania and New Jersey pitch pine is a class 1 species, hut in New England it is very seldom 
associated with chestnut. 
6 Various other shrubs large enough to appear i the records were also included in this class. 
