MARKETING TIMBER FROM FARM WOODLANDS 139 



THE MARYLAND I'LAN 



1. Examination by the forester. 



a. Full discussion with the owner or agent on the ground. 



b. Written report, with recommendations submitted, outlining prescribed 



treatment. 



2. Marking and estimating the timber. 



a. Trees for cutting selected by forester, marked and measured by helpers. 



b. Information as to logging costs, local timber prices, etc. 



3. Working up field data. 



a. Tabulation of marked trees by species and amount, showing board-foot 



contents and other units of measure. 



b. Stumpage value of timber (price at shipping point less 20 per cent profit 



less lumbering costs gives stumpage value). 



4. Sale of timber. 



a. Prospectus sheet, statement of amount and kinds of timber and condi- 



tions. 



b. Form of contract, containing provisions suitable for protection of owner. 



5. Inspection of operation. 



a. This is made where requested by owner or when convenient for the 

 forester. 



6. Cost. 



a. Owner pays travel expense of examination and travel and subsistence 



expenses and $3 per day for forester for estimate. 



b. State pays all office expenses and salary of forester. 



The net result is that the owner pays about half and the State about 

 half, making it truly co-operative. 



Under the plan above outlined, the preliminary examination of the 

 woodland is made by the forester upon application of the owner and 

 with the owner present, if possible, to discuss the problems presented 

 on the ground. This is important, as it gives an opportunity for the 

 forester to get the viewpoint of the owner, as well as to show him what 

 the problems are and how best they can be worked out. It is often a 

 case of convincing the owner what he should do and of finding out how 

 far he is willing to go in the practice of forestry in view of the condi- 

 tions presented. 



The examination is followed by a written report, with recommenda- 

 tions, submitted to the owner and prescribing a definite method of 

 treatment. It should be added that the treatment recommended does 

 not always represent what the forester feels should be done in the indi- 

 vidual cases, but is often somewhat of a compromise between what the 

 farmer wants to do and what the forester wants to do, and constitutes 

 what the forester believes that the farmer is willing to do after having 

 the situation fully explained and the proper results outlined. 



