44: 
BTLLETIX 544. r. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
Table 18— Norway spruce 1 (Picea excelsa). Normal yield table for northern and central 
German ii. 
QUALITY 
I. 
Age. 
Number 
of trees 
per acre. 
Basal 
area.- 
Average 
height. 
Diameter 
of 
average 
tree. 2 
Yield 
per 
acre.s 
Forest 
form 
factor. 
Years. 
Sq. ft. 
Fat. 
Inches. 
Cu. Tt. 
40 
1.254 
194.8 
47.9 
5.4 
4,973 
0.531 
50 
799 
21*. 1 
61.4 
7.2 
7,067 
.533 
(30 
GO/ 
231-5 
72.4 
8.9 
S,798 
. 525 
70 
421 
241. S 
8L 3 
10.4 
10,227 
.520 
80 
340 
250. 7 
88.6 
11.8 
11, 425 
.514 
90 
2^4 
259. 2 
94.8 
13.2 
12, 457 
..507 
100 
247 
206. 7 
100.0 
14.4 
13,367 
.501 
QUALITY II. 
40 
1.924 
140.8 
30.2 
3.7 
2, 115 
0. 495 
50 
1,216 
162. 4 
42.0 
4.9 
3,673 
. 534 
60 
840 
178.9 
52.2 
6.2 
5,059 
.539 
70 
628 
189.2 
61. 
7.4 
6.274 
. 539 
80 
500 
200.0 
67.9 
8.5 
7,317 
.534 
90 
424 
209.5 
73. 5 
9.5 
8,217 
.528 
100 
380 
217.7 
78.4 
10.2 
8,960 
.522 
QUALITY ni. 
40 
3,587 
95.5 
17. G 
2.3 
638 
0.3S0 
50 
1,969 
116.3 
25. 3 
3.3 
1,410 
.479 
60 
1.270 
131.3 
33. 3 
4.5 
2,403 
.5-50 
70 
928 
142.5 
41.1 
5.4 
3,344 
.571 
80 
750 
152. 2 
47.2 
6.2 
4,161 
.579 
90 
651 
160. 6 
51.8 
6.8 
4,S23 
.580 
100 
597 
167.3 
55.4 
7.3 
5,352 
.577 
i From "Wachstum und Ertrag normaler Fichtenbestande, '' by Adam Schwappach. Berlin, 1S90, as 
translated by H. S. Graves (pp. 417 and 41S, Forest Mensuration, New York, 1906), revised on the basis of 
3 instead of o qualitv classes. 
2 At 1.3 meters (4.27 feet; from the ground. 
s Derbholz (top diameter of 2.76 inches outside the bark). 
A comparison x of trie values in Table 17 for red spruce with those 
of Table 18 for Norway spruce brings out the importance of good 
management in the development of stands. One of the first things 
to arrest the attention is the marked discrepancy between red spruce 
and Norway spruce in height and volume growth in Quality I. 
Even red spruce's advantage in having only its best growing trees 
included is insufficient to overbalance the deficiency in height. One's 
first impulse is to take this as confiiTning the widely accepted opinion 
that the growth qualities of red spruce are markedly inferior to those 
of Norway. Yet if that were so, the discrepancy would prevail 
throughout the three quality classes, which it does not do. It is 
considerably less marked in Quality II and disappears almost alto- 
gether in Quality III. To explain this difference, one must take 
into consideration the intensity of management of Norway spruce in 
the different quality classes. Thus, in Quality III, where Norway 
spruce was least intensively managed, tliinnings began late, between 
« In making the comparison it should be continually borne in mind (1) that the red spruce table i 
on the measurement only of dominant and intermediate trees in 59 volunteer stands, whereas the other 
includes all green trees in 400 ma . of which were artificially regenerated, and (2; that 
the utilization is not so close for red spruce as for Norway either in the top or at the stump. 
