66 roREST commissioner's report. 



first thinning was rather heavy because we wished to get some 

 lumber for use on the farm ; the next year a much lighter cut- 

 ting was made. The two operations therefore differ consider- 

 ably in the amount of material removed. 



In marking the trees to be cut the white pine was the favorite 

 species. All hardwoods were removed as faf as possible in both 

 operations. In the first operation the fir, spruce and hemlock 

 were taken whenever they were not required to maintain the 

 proper shading for the protection of the soil. Of the pine, only 

 the very poorest and most defective were cut. The conifers 

 were cut for lumber ; the hardwoods were worked up into cord- 

 wood. The spring following the cutting the brush was piled and 

 Ijunied. In the second operation no trees were cut for lumber, 

 only material for cordwood being taken. The piling and burning 

 of tlie Ijrush in this case was made a part of the operation, all 

 the refuse being cleaned up as fast as the cutting was done. 



The items of income and expenditure for each operation are 

 given Ijelow, the computations being based upon the prices pre- 

 vailing at Orono for cordwood, lumber and labor: 



First Cutting. Second Cutting. 



Returns. Returns. 



15,000 ft. lumber at $25, $375 50 cds. wood at $4, $200 



62 cds. wood at $4, 248 



Expenses. 

 $ 6 Marking trees at 75c., $ 6 



28 Cutting and piling 50 cds. wood 



at $2, 100 



Piling and burning brush, 12 



Hauling, 25 



$143 



$204 



In the first cutting the total recei[)ts were $623, deducting the 

 expenses leaves $419 as returns from the woodlot or an average 

 of $52 per acre. Allowing a .stumpage price of $1 per cord for 

 the wood and $7 for the logs or lumber and deduct from the 

 above figures leaves a net return of $252, or an average of nearly 

 $32 per acre. 



The second cutting gave less than one-third as much as the 



