AN EXPERIMENT IN LOGGING LONGLEAF PINE.* 

 By Herman H. Chapman. 



At the suggestion of John L. Kaul, of Alabama, the conserva- 

 tion committee of the Yellow Pine Lumber Manufacturers' As- 

 sociation, at its session held in May in Tyler county, Texas, de- 

 cided to recommend the cutting of yellow pine in two operations 

 separated by a period of years, instead of removing the entire 

 stand in the first cut as at present. 



The chief argument presented in support of this change was 

 that small timber that is now unprofitable to log, would, if left 

 twenty years, have grown to valuable sizes, and, with the in- 

 creased price of stumpage, would pay a fair interest on the in- 

 vestment, and make it possible to prolong the operation over a 

 second period nearly equal to the first. 



This suggestion, coming from lumbermen, is of great value, 

 for it agrees perfectly with the method of cutting which seems 

 to be demanded by longleaf pine to secure reproduction and per- 

 petuate the forest. Timber land owners can undertake only such 

 measures as promise a reasonable interest on the investment. 

 For this reason lumbermen can not be expected to develop long- 

 leaf pine lands at a financial loss for the sole purpose of getting 

 a crop of seedlings started which will mature in eighty to one 

 hundred years. But if a new crop of seedlings can be secured 

 as a side issue with very little extra expense, the future value 

 of the land so stocked would be very much increased and the 

 final disposition of the land by its present owners probably will 

 be much simplified if it is seen to be in good productive condition. 



At present the probable value of the second cutting is the im- 

 portant factor. This will depend, first, on the amount left stand- 

 ing from the first cut ; second, upon the growth secured and, 

 third, upon the increase in stumpage values. 



Longleaf pine, growing as it does upon the driest and sandiest 

 soils, matures more slowly and produces less timber in a given 

 time than either shortleaf or loblolly pine. Growth figures 



*This article appeared first in the American Lumberman, July 10, 1909, 

 and is reprinted at the request of the author. 



