CHESTNUT BARK DISEASE. 401 
1912, sent us specimens of the blight, and wrote: “We are 
enclosing you sample of what we think is the chestnut blight. As 
about 50 per cent. of the trees that were burned by forest fires 
last spring are covered with this growth, we desire very much 
to learn whether or not this is the blight.” Mr. Eddy, in Feb- 
tuary of the following year, reported that he found the fungus 
abundant on the cut wood and fire-injured trees, but scarce on 
the perfectly healthy ones. 
Others have noticed this relationship of blight to fire injury, 
as shown by the following quotations. Rane (54, p. 152) says: 
“There is an unbalanced condition again where forest fires. 
have run through the state year after year, and the trees are 
abnormal, and only half alive anyway. There you find the 
disease seems to travel more rapidly than it does where the 
trees are under normal conditions, and have a forest floor where 
there is plenty of moisture and the conditions are more favor- 
able.” Buttrick, in a paper on the effects of forest fires on 
the trees (Forestry Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 2), also remarks: 
“Diaporthe parasitica, chestnut bark fungus, seems to be more 
abundant and severe on fire-injured trees.” 
Sprouts versus Seedlings. Much of the chestnut of Con- 
necticut has been cut over two or three times, being renewed 
by sprout growth. This repeated cutting has occurred not only 
in Connecticut, and in the greater part of New England, but in 
the chestnut forests of New Jersey, Delaware, and the eastern 
parts of New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland. It is generally 
admitted that this treatment has reduced the vitality of the 
coppice growth, as shown by the following quotation from R. 
Zon on the chestnut in southern Maryland (U. S. Dept. Agr. 
Bur. For. Bull. 53, p. 29): “It must not be forgotten, however, 
that a chestnut stump cannot go on coppicing forever. With 
each new generation of sprouts, the stump becomes more and 
more weakened, and hence gradually loses its capacity to pro- 
duce healthy and vigorous sprouts. Although it is impossible 
to state with certainty how many generations of chestnut can 
be raised from the same stock without impairing the vitality 
of the sprouts, the effects of repeated and bad coppicing mani- 
fest themselves in the increasing number of dying chestnuts all 
over Maryland. The immediate cause of their death can nearly 
always be traced to attacks of either insects or fungi, yet the 
