CHESTNUT BARK DISEASE. 397 
in itself, but was a culmination of a period of dry summers. 
During this dry period blight has been most conspicuous in its 
development and spread in Connecticut, culminating in I911 
with by far the most frequent complaints of damage and spread 
to new localities. Its unusual prominence in 1911 was not con- 
fined to Connecticut, for according to Rane (57, p. 49), Met- 
calf wrote him: “During the past summer the disease has 
spread more than in all its previous history.” As we have 
already stated, the winter and spring of 1912 were so wet that 
much of the depleted moisture was restored to the soil. As the 
result, the general aspect of fruit and forest trees, including 
chestnut, showed great improvement over 1911, and along with 
this came a more or less apparent let-up in the spread and 
severity of the blight. 
The particular situation of the trees, according to our observa- 
tions, often makes a big difference in the development of this 
disease. Those on the edge of the forest, specially on the 
southern exposure, have often showed the disease first and 
most severely. Isolated clumps of sprouts in the open are very 
susceptible. Forests that have been opened up by removal of 
trees, especially if on hillsides with southern exposure, are where 
we find the blight most prominent. Also we have sometimes 
found it bad in the lowlands. All these represent conditions 
where the trees suffer most from lack of moisture under con- 
tinued severe drought. 
We have especially in mind a forest in Middlebury on a hill- 
side with southern exposure where the blight became very 
prevalent. There the trees unquestionably suffered severely 
from lack of moisture due to the droughts and the opening up 
of the forest by the removal of diseased trees. Many of 
those left finally showed sun-scald cankers with accompanying 
development of blight, at their base on the southern exposure, 
while the protected northern sides did not. Young nursery 
trees on this hillside also developed similar sun-scald cankers 
the first summer they were set out. While this part of the 
forest was being severely injured, trees on the northern exposure 
showed very little of the blight. 
This. observation agrees with the statement of Ashe (Tenn. 
Geol. Surv., 10 B, p. 11), who writes: “For many years the 
chestnut on the lower mountains in the southeastern portion of 
