NATIVE WOODY PLANTS OF THE UNITED STATES 
7 
It seems clear that records showing a given species to be much 
utilized can be accepted by technicians as proof of the value of the 
plant for wildlife. Poor records indicate either that a plant is worth- 
less or that we do not know enough about it. If a species is found to 
have a very poor or limited record, recourse should be had to the 
records of the genus as a whole, exclusive of specific records, or to 
records of very similar species^ for assistance in determining its value. 
Certainly, when in a genus of many species, such as Chrysothamnus 
or Aplopappus^ fevf or no records of utilization by wildlife appear, 
it is not unreasonable to exclude the species from planting programs. 
There are two available sources of information relative to the use 
of a plant by w^ildlife — stomach analyses and field observations. In 
most instances, the more reliable is a stomach analysis made by the. 
Bureau of Biological Survey or other responsible agency. The lack 
of stomach records necessitates using reports of field observations. 
These are open to some criticism since accurate determination of the 
birds or mammals and plants involved is often not made, and since 
^interpretation of the common names in which the records are so often 
made is neither easy nor certain. In this publication if the names 
were not thought to be clear, they have been referred to the genus. 
Cottam {138) has mentioned also that in an actual instance field 
observations alone were much less than 60-percent accurate in 
appraising food values in the diet of a bird. 
The exact nutritive value of any given plant food has not yet been 
determined. We are yet scarcely far enough along to examine the 
chemical composition of various fruits and seeds of wild plants and 
their place in the diet of any animal. Hosley {290) has considered 
the chemical composition of some, and has noted the obvious fact that 
fruits may furnish vitamins. The staple value of acorns and the seed 
of conifers, such as pines, is well known. This field of investigation 
should indeed be a valuable one. 
HIGHWAY PLANTING 
The increasing use of vegetation for the beautification of highways 
makes it of interest here to mention that such work can be turned to 
the benefit of wildlife as well as to the control of erosion. Indeed, 
the conservation of soil on highway cuts can very profitably be 
planned with a view to beautifying the road. 
Certain fundamental principles relating to highway planting have 
been clearly enunciated by Simonson, senior landscape architect of 
the Bureau of Public Eoads. In the following statement he sets 
forth the basic ideas to be kept in mind in such work {613^ pp. 172- 
174): 
The primary purpose of highvv^ay planting is to enhance the peculiar qualities 
in the views and scenery of the surroundings through which a highway passes 
so that the development within the highway limits will be properly consistent 
and appropriate to that which lies over the fence or beyond the highway borders, 
and will, therefore, present to the motorist the best of the landscape qualities 
inherent in it. 
The creation of landscape effects on the usually limited highway areas with 
little or almost no attention to the surroundings is not the correct approach and 
cannot be considered satisfactory roadside improvement. A systematic study 
of the native flora along and immediately adjacent to the highway will indicate 
