16 



MISC. PUBLICATION 61, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 



Table 4. — Yield per acre of second-growth white pine, site quality /, New 



Hampshire l 



Age 



Volume per 

 acre 



a „ A Volume per 

 Afee acre 



Age 



Volume per 

 acre 



Years: 

 JO 



Cubic feet 



800 i 

 1,400 j 

 2, 100 



Years: Cubic feet 

 25 .. 3 000 



Years: 



35 



40.... 



Cubic feet 



5,200 

 6,500 



15. ._ 



30 4,000 



20 





' 1 





1 Frothingham, E. H. white pine under forest management. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui 13 70 p 

 illus. 1914. 



Where white pine is growing with pitch, shortleaf, or Scotch pine, 

 all the species are usually of very nearly the same size. Where there 

 is an appreciable difference the yellow pines are generally but not 

 always the larger. 



In the Lone Chimney plantation white and shortleaf pines 15 

 years old both averaged 30 feet in height, which is more than the 

 average for pure white pine stands. The tallest white pines were a 

 little taller than the tallest shortleaf pines, but, on the other hand, 

 the average diameter at breastheight of the white pines was 3 inches, 

 as compared with 4 inches for the shortleaf. Scotch pine, in the 

 one stand in which it is found, is a little larger than white pine grow- 

 ing iu mixture with it. 



Other species planted with white pine or with white and shortleaf 

 pines have sometimes been entirely shaded out or reduced to a low 

 understory. In such cases the stands differ little if at all from 

 what they would be if the trees of the understory were absent. Sugar 

 maple has been thus suppressed by white and shortleaf pines in the 

 Farmcote plantation, and the white pines of the Douglas stands have 

 greatly overtopped eastern hemlock, Carolina hemlock, and Douglas 

 fir. In the Persimmon Heights plantation western yellow pine is 

 entirely gone, leaving white pine in pure stands. 



White pine and sugar maple in mixture have given varied results. 

 In some places the pine is well in the lead; in others the growth of 

 the two species is very much the same. Again, white pine planted 

 after sugar maple has sometimes been very much suppressed b} r 

 the maple. 



In the Riverfront and Old Schoolhouse plantations, on the west 

 side of the French Broad River, two rows of white pine were planted 

 to one row of sugar maple. As at Browntown, the pines after 15 

 or 16 years were twice the height of the maples, though the pine 

 crowns were not yet closing over the maple rows. Probably the 

 fact that the maples were greatly damaged by rabbits early in life 

 had a good deal to do with the lead gamed by the pines. 



Maple is competing successfully with white pine in one of the 

 Apiary stands. (PI. 11, A.) In such instances the densely leafy 

 pine boughs suffer considerable injury from whipping by the slender 

 and elastic maple branches. 



When planted under older trees of several species, white pine has 

 grown poorly at Biltmore. Even with sugar maple and black cherry 

 planted only a few years before, it has sometimes not grown well, as 

 is exemplified in two of the Long Ridge stands. On Long Ridge, too, 

 white pine has grown very poorly under the shade of old chestnut 

 trees which were on the land at the time of planting. (PL 2, C.) 



