Editor'* Note 



Tlir riillowlne artU-lp (• ll«- •■•< ■■ml nml i-^HK-luilIni: ■>ii<< !>> ('. A. Jolinnon, Cn'Pii Wny, \\'\» . mi llir utibjpct iit llii> 

 '"'--; «y«te<n Id (nrralrr. The flmt article appviir<-«] Iti lUlDWOOO ItKCOU) of Pcbruarj 23, 1010. 



Thi-" m.-thf' .;• ill tliix foiifitry linn iilwu.vs InyMi to cut tlio 



eiit .r nt one u|MT!itii>n, lonviii); only tlic hiiuiII 



wip;...^ . ....irly mI" .»- - •'•■r Uwn destroyed by flro, 



and Uim iiu'thoil lia» Ixvii |ii - of the value of tJic land 



or otber than fort-ftry urn'*, 111..1 \\iti..int n-jjard to site of trnct o|)er- 

 •t«d u|>on. If nre com|>nri' the yield of liiiiibrr from n matured tree 

 with that of n xninll one whirh would Imvi' iniitunvl in twenty to 

 forty yfnr«. Iin.l it tiof \-n-n murdered in it> youth, we will fee how 

 utt. In ore. Let us begin wiOi a northern 



Wi~ . .| forest, where trncts of from .00,000 to 



100,000 arret) are not uncommon. For convenience, diameter of trees 

 here given are taken to be nt three feet above ground ; n :i6" birch 

 will produce 1,000 feet, of whirh not lens than 400 feet will be upper 

 grade and not le>8 than 200 feet of lowest (jradc: a 30" tree will 

 produce 700 feet, of which .'100 feet will be up|ier and 140 feet lowest 

 grade: at 24" we get about 500 fwt — 180 feet upper and 100 feet 

 of lowest grn<le; at 18" we get about 250 feet — about 70 feet upper 

 and 70 feet of lowcjt gnule; then coming down to sizes that should 

 not be cut, we find a 12" tree yiehis about 00 feet, not over 20 feet 

 upper and fully 30 feet of lowest grade, and a 9" tree yields but 

 50 feot, perhaps 5 feet of narrow upper grade and fully 20 feet of 

 lowest grade. Tabulating thetw* figures, and computing on birch at 

 current price?, wo find as follows: 



In the above table prices for upper grades are given as the same 

 for all sires of trees, while in reality the product of small trees are 

 necessarily much narrower than from the larger ones, and also the 

 larger trees ailniit of cutting thick stock up to three or four inches, 

 which cannot be clone from small trees, so that if we take the average 

 run of first and (-econd clear birch to be worth $42.00 per M it is 

 reasonable to consider the jiroduct from logs 19" and up as being 

 worth not less than $45.00, as against $39.00 or less for the product 

 coming from logs under 19", making a showing still more to the 

 disadvantage of small-tree butchering, though it would be only fair 

 to admit that small trees in some instances have a higher than mere 

 lumber-value in sj>ecial uses, but this demand is now limited. 



If HO continue this comparison as regards the southern hardwoods, 

 where the trees are much larger, the result is still more unfavorable 

 to the system of cutting the small as well as the matured trees, for 

 it is not at all uncommon to find oak trees in the Mississippi Delta 

 and elsewhere that will cut upwards of two thousand feet of fine 

 cabinet wood, while the 14" tree produces less than two hundred feet, 

 and none of this small amount fit for any higher uses than construc- 

 tion work or railroad sleejjers. In the Rocky Mountain states the 

 forests are exclusively of the coniferous species, and here, also, the 

 practice of cutting the small timber along with the larger is equally 

 indefensible, except as it may be defended on the ground of imme- 

 diate necessities. In some coniferous species such as spruce and 

 hemlock there is slight if any difference in the quality of young trees 

 as compared with the matured, but in the several species of pines the 

 difference is as pronounced as it is in the hardwoods, the matured 

 trees yielding a large percentage of upper grades, such as door plank, 

 pattern lumber, piano stock and so on into a long list, while the small 

 pines furnish nothing whatever of this grade. 



Axioms Stated 

 As illustrating the temlency in consumption as between the two 

 distinct species of wood, the following propositions may be set down 

 as axiomatic: 



I A) .\ new comiiiiiiiltjr will ukc a Inrsi- amount nf bulhllng lumUrr iikI n 

 ■'•■niiinmllvrly uninll nniount of raliliicl wood*. 



(U) An olil t'Kininiiiiliv will iiM- n Inrgp amount of cabinet wood and 

 iitlicr hardU' iimuuut of l/ulldlnu luml>cr. 



(C) .Ml ' < the iimuuni of iiulldlnit lum- 

 ber u>e<l In .' I <> iii..,. lO full u«e In nuuic lluea, iiiid 



In Mime mnull decri'i- tvlll llml new uieii for thin kind <i( wood. 



It seems clear that there ia urgent need of conserving oil kinds of 

 forests, with the hnrilwoud forest* being most in danger of extinc- 

 tion, and as present efforts in the direction of forest conservation, 

 such as firo prevention and similar activities, while admirable and 

 necessary, are nevertheless inadequate, it then seems in order to try a 

 more coinprrhensive method in forestry practice. 



As against the present wasteful method in logging operations, the 

 writer submits as the only scientific and iiractiiiil procedure the adop- 

 tion of such selective cutting as would leave the young and half -grown 

 trees for growth into a future supply of matured timber; in other 

 words, adopt and continue a syttein of cropping the timber, to the 

 cml that the forest* so handled will become self perpetuating. 



Overstatement always weakens an argument, and it is here cheer- 

 fully admitted that the (Topping syi-tcm has its limitations, for it 

 could not be applied to all timber land, some of which is too valuable 

 lor agricultural u>cs to te long held as forest reserve, and in many 

 instaiici'8 where the timlicr tract is not large the owner could not 

 to any great extent practice selective cutting, because with a largo 

 plant already built, financial considerations necessitate a quick opera- 

 tion, even though the land may not be well fitted for agricultural uses. 

 Hut the cropping fystem is not therefore impractical; it is on the 

 contrary emphatically rational and sound, because it can be prac- 

 ticed in localitiet* where topography or toil condition dearly sets 

 apart large areas as natural forest reserves, and can be withheld in 

 localities where soil condition or press of population demand that 

 the land 1 e put to more productive uses. 



A Sample Operation 



On tracts ot .jii,imju acres of northern hardwoods, the annual lum- 

 ber output is usually about 20,000,000 feet, and on this or larger sized 

 tracts the cropping system could be used without materially lessening 

 the immediate financial returns, and with very much larger profits 

 in the. future. A northern hardwood forest will average about 8,000 

 feet to the acre, so that to get an output of 20,000,000 feet the lum- 

 berman will cut over about 2,500 acres each year; a change to the 

 cropping system, taking 2,000 feet per acre in only the largest 

 trees, say five trees to the acre (instead of taking all there is from 

 8" and up, which may be as high as fifty trees), it would be necessary 

 to go over 10,000 acres per year in order to keep up the former 

 amount of production, or, in other words, go over a 50,000-acre tract 

 once in every five years to keep up an output of 20,000,000 feet 

 annually; this would not perpetuate the forest, but would greatly 

 prolong its life, and a reduction of one-half in output would insure 

 a supply for all time. 



It is, of course, understood that logging expense under the crop- 

 ping system would as a rule be more than in clear cutting, since more 

 ground must be covered; let us say it would be nearly doubled in a 

 hardwood operation with railroad transjiortation of logs, then to 

 offset this there would be the higher value of the product from large 

 timber and the lower cost in sawing and handling. On small tracts 

 the extra cost in using the cropping system would be comparatively 

 small ; in coniferous forests where the yield per acre is many times 

 that of hardwood the extra cost would not be large, and in many 

 localities where floatable timber is near the streams there would be 

 no added cost. 



It seems unlikely that lumbermen will voluntarily change to 

 selective cutting to any great extent, partly because old habits are 

 strong, and besides most of them would balk at the initial expense. 



