Your notes from a man who has never lived on the prairies, brings to my mind discussions of ten years ago, when a good friend of mine, an excellent man, stated in an essay that the willow, the cottonwood, and the soft maple must pioneer the way for many generations on the prairies, and fit the soil and sub-soil for more valuable woods. When I took exceptions, and undertook to show that these three trees had the advantage of other trees only in the way of distributing their seeds, to account for their being more abundant than others, as the willow and cottonwood seeds were carried everywhere by the wind, and the soft maple seeds floating on the streams so that they could be gathered by bushels in the "bayous;" they could take hold and root in places where the fires could not reach them; that all three of them ripen their seeds in early summer and germinate immediately. He squelched me by saying he was brought up on the prairies.

I was so much interested in this matter that I wrote him afterwards, wanting it discussed in the Prairie Farmer. He replied giving the names of several men who stood high as geologists, etc, who entertained his view of the matter, and so it ended.

When I first came West it was the opinion of the pioneers that "tame grasses" would never succeed on the prairies. At that very time "tame grasses" were seen coming up along the roadsides where, a chance seed got scattered, and the fires were kept out so as to give it a chance to spread; for be it known that neither tame grasses, nor hardly anything else, will bear the fire and thrive on it like the indigenous perennial prairie grasses; they grew more luxuriously when burned once every year than since the fires have been kept out. The roots of the prairie sod are well protected from fires; indeed, it would take a hot fire to burn them after being dug up; but you will find that after the tame grasses have begun to work their way they will stay there. It is just so with trees, not only cottonwood, poplar and willow, but oaks, hickories and walnuts, etc, as well. While some men "brought up on the prairies" have fallen in with the views of Prof. Whitney and others, seemingly not taking the trouble to look at the trees already growing on the prairies, you find all the practical experienced men holding your views.

Arthur Bryant, in his work on forest trees, says that "the black cherry, Prunus serotina, is rarely found of so large size in the prairie regions of Illinois and Iowa, although they are well suited to its growth; the reason appears to be that the fires that formerly ravaged these regions destroyed it more easily than the oaks and hickories."

This Black cherry is seen along the fence rows now far into the prairies, of large size, bearing seeds that are dropped by birds alighting on the fences far into the prairies, and, by the way, I think it one of the most valuable rapid growing trees for the forester.

How any man can see Mr. Bryant's avenues of sugar maples, over two feet through and meeting across a four-rod road, and fancy that prairie land will not produce valuable trees without first being fitted for it by growing generations of cottonwood, poplar and willows, is beyond my comprehension. A great deal of this talk about only planting trees on such ground as you find them growing on naturally, will not bear very close scrutiny. Such trees as cottonwood and elm are only found naturally in moist places, because the seeds ripening in spring can only germinate in moist places; but plant them on dry ground they make an excellent growth. You will see fine, large elms in New England and elsewhere, growing on dry ground, but naturally you only find the seedlings on moist ground.

But what is the use of calling people's attention to little seedlings if they cannot be convinced by seeing valuable timber trees, two to three feet through, and forty to sixty feet high, that have sprung up on the prairies within the past fifty years?