'M ^";^a^.'ro!iTOit!>imm'amm»B !TO^^ 



mimimim^mmmmmmimmm'K-mi^AiyM.^^ 



Crossties and Poles in Canada 



The output of poles and crossties in Canada for 1912 has been 

 tabulated by E. G. Lewis and Guy H. Boyee of the Canadian 

 Forestry Branch of the Department of the Interior, and published 

 by the Dominion government. As far as the records show the 

 whole demand for poles is met by softwoods, except the use of 

 612 chestnut poles, which are less than one-tenth of one per cent. 

 The total number of all kinds purchased in 1911 was 585,703, at an 

 average value of $1.80 each. In 1912 608,556 were bought at an 

 average cost of $1.83. The following table shows the number of 

 poles and kinds of woods in 1912: 



Number Av. ^'aluo 



Totnl 608,53G .$1.83 



Northern White Cedar :i78,369 .$1.62 



Western Cedar 144,222 2.83 



Balsam Fir 38,000 .80 



Tamarack 36,158 1.29 



Spruce 9.127 1.13 



Jack Pine 1.790 1.31 



Douglas IMr 612 1.62 



Chestnut 228 .64 



Northern white cedar or arborvita? supplies more than half of 

 all, and western red cedar, or the shingle cedar of the Northwest, 

 is second in importance. 



Many of the pole-line companies use preservative treatments of 

 different kinds to prevent decay and insect injury. These include 

 impregnation of the butts of the poles with creosote, zinc chloride 

 and other chemicals. In some eases the bark is left on that 

 part of the pole which comes into contact with the soil, and this 

 tends to increase the life with some kinds of wood. Painting 

 the butts of the poles with hot tar or creosote will increase their 

 life by several years. Many companies have found that the in- 

 creased life which is secured by preservative treatment brings 

 about a considerable saving in the annual cost of the upkeep of a 

 pole-line. By thorough treatment with preservatives many non- 

 durable woods, such as balsam fir, are being used satisfactorily 

 where their use in an untreated state would not have been possi- 

 ble. 



The number of crossties of all kinds purchased in -1911 was 

 14,389,242, at an average cost at point of purchase of thirty-nine 

 cents each. Twenty-one woods were represented, but jack pine 

 supplied more than one-third of all. The purchases for 1912 

 exhibit a large increase in number and value over those of 1911, 

 as the following table shows in detail: 



Number Av. Value 



Total 21,308,571 .$0.4 4 



.Tack Pine 7.783,034 .$0.41 



Cedar :!,332,]0.i .45 



Douglas Fir 2,183.334 .30 



Hemlock .■ 1 ,947,474 .38 



Tamarack 1,803,696 .45 



Western Davch 1.196,184 .43 



dak 933,486 .67 



Eastern Spruce 835,121 .40 



Hard Pine 638.096 .66 



Cli.stnut 266,082 .50 



IJeeeli 103,583 .68 



Western Cedar '. 82,357 .35 



.Maple 51.465 .77 



White Piue 44.408 .35 



Liircb .' 37,943 .60 



Ited Pine -. 26.646 .48 



Balsam Fir 12,469 .13 



Western Spruce 8.000 .58 



l-:im 2,868 .47 



The increase in the number of ties purchased was well dis- 

 tributed over Canada, and was particularly' noticeable on the trans- 

 continental lines. The place occupied by .jack pine is important. 

 It is by all odds the leading crosstie wood of Canada at present, 

 and there is no apparent reason why it should not remain so. It 

 is abundant in a wide expanse of country, and grows as far north 

 as railroads are likely to be built in that country. It is a small 



—34— 



tree and was formerly little thought of, but its real value has 

 been learned. It flourishes under the arctic circle, and southward 

 to northern Indiana. 



Many Canadian railway companies are now beginning to realize 

 the value of preserving at least a part of their tie material from 

 decav and insect injury. The practice of chemical treatment of 

 railwav ties has been carried on by railwaj's in the United States 

 for some years with apparently satisfactory results. 



The practice in Canada is just beginning, but is increasing rap- 

 idly with the increasing cost of tie material and the constantly 

 decreasing supply. In 1910 practically no treated ties were used 

 by Canadian railways. In 1911 some 206,209 ties received chemical 

 treatment before being placed in the roadbed. This number, while 

 forming only 1.4 per cent of the total number of ties used, was, 

 nevertheless, an indication of the increase in this particular form 

 of conservation. In 1912 a total of 1,818,189 ties were chemically 

 treated. This number forms 8.5 per cent of the total number of 

 ties purchased. Steam railways used 1,798,189 of these treated ties 

 and electric roads used 20,000. 



The treated ties were mostly hardwoods, as it has been found 

 more economical to treat the heavier, stronger woods than those 

 which are liable to fail from mechanical wear before they have 

 time to decay. The greatest actual saving bj' preservative treat- 

 ment is found in the use of the so-called "inferior woods," pro- 

 vided that these are properly protected from mechanical wear. 

 Until the price of the durable woods becomes excessive the rail- 

 way companies will not resort to expensive treatment of inferior 

 woods on account of this cost of protecting them from mechanical 

 wear. 



A Good Example 



That the lumber tr-i.'.e is :nvakcini>g to tlio ill efVccts resulting from 

 the falsely founded opposition on the ])art of people who are in a 

 I)Osition to ascertain true facts as to the safety of steel car construc- 

 tion, is proven in the following letter which enters an emphatic pro- 

 test against the circular sent out by a prominent association of trav- 

 eling men to its members. The effect of such a circular upon the 

 traveling public, of which a large percentage are commercial travelers, 

 is apparent. 



A united protest along the lines suggested in this letter will surely 

 help a great deal. The letter follows. 



Cincinnati, O., Oct. 7. 1913. 

 It. .\. ("avenauiih, .Sec'y.. 



Illinois Con^nierciai Mi-n'.-; .\ssociation. 

 Cbieaso, III. 

 Dear Sir : 



I notice in your notice of assessment No. 77 just received, a circular 

 supposed to illuslrate vividly what happens to wooden cars in railroad 

 wrecks and I am surprisi d that a man who is supposed to be as well 

 posted in the facts of this matter ns you, should take the position that 

 you are taking in this circular, when the fact remains that wooden cars 

 properly manufactured are more safe and cause less accidents than the 

 steel cars. 



You are evidently misled by the popular clamor and newspaper articles 

 which the steel people haye beiMi having published for the past few years 

 lo boost their ganii and cause ib.' public to demand steel ears, and have 

 not gone into the merits of tlie tw-i classes of equipment. 



If you will refer to H. II. Gibson, editor of the II.VBDwoon Record, 

 Chicago, you can secure the actual facts and data showing that steel 

 equipment is not what the steel trust have represented It to be. 



As I know you intend and desire to work entirely for the interests of the 

 traveling public and not for the steel trust. I am calling your attention 

 to this matter and wiM bo glad to have you investigate and ascertain the 

 facts and not lx> guided l)y tlie articles appearing in the daily press 

 which are inspired for selfish motives. 



Yours very truly. 



W. S. Starrctt. 



This letter comes from tlic sales manager of one of the largest 

 lumber concerns iu Cincinnati. H.-VBDWOOD Kkcord feels that Mr. 

 Starrett's reference to its ability to otfer substantial proof of the 

 frailty of steel ears is warranted and stands ready at all times to 

 back up such protests. 



