286 , APPENDIX 



code practice was generally very good, considering the complex and diversified 

 structure of the industry and the newness and vast size, of the undertaking. 



Forest conservation under the code was intended to be a joint enterprise, fol- 

 lowing the recommendations of the forestry conferences held in Washington late 

 in 1933 and early in 1934, in conformity with Article X of the lumber code. 

 While industry was to carry forward its own activities, it was expected that the 

 federal Congress would enact a broad legislative program, intended to pave the 

 way for private forest management on an economic basis, by setting up a forest 

 credits system comparable with the Farm Credit Act; that federal aid in fire 

 protection, already granted to private timberland owners under the Clarke- 

 McNary Act of June 7, 1924, would be extended in scope; that forest research 

 would be broadened and directed at problems vital to forest production. 



Organization. Most of the provisions of the lumber code were put into effect 

 through local or regional lumber manufacturers or similar associations, based 

 either on geographical location or similarity of species or product. There were 

 128 administrative agencies of the various divisions, subdivisions, and groups. 

 For example, of the many subdivisions, the hardwood division had 7, Southern 

 Pine 1, the West Coast Logging and Lumber Division 4, the Woodworking Divi- 

 sion 3, Wooden Package Division 8, the Red Cedar Shingle Division 1, the 

 Veneer and Plywood 3, the Cross Arm Division 4, the Pole and Piling 11, and 

 the Cross Tie Division 7. 



The governing body or agency responsible for the administration of the 

 lumber code was the Lumber Code Authority, with headquarters in Washington. 



Production of forest materials varies widely with each section of the country 

 from structural timber and construction lumber to poles and piling and railway 

 cross ties, from round-edged box lumber as in New England, to small squares of 

 hardwood dimension from which are manufactured spools, bobbins, and chair 

 rungs. 



Article X of the lumber code sought to assure for all regions a continuous 

 supply of forest products, continuity of operation, stability of employment, and 

 permanence of communities depending upon forests and forest products for em- 

 ployment. This is the very essence of sustained yield forest management. One 

 of the most important functions of the Lumber Code Authority was control of 

 production, based upon expectation of market requirements. By the exercise 

 of this function, it was expected that forest output would be balanced with 

 growth, and that under wise management, promoting greater growth, a larger 

 output would be obtained without impairment of forest capital. 



The minimum lumber prices which were in effect shortly after the code was 

 adopted were suspended by the Administration in December, 1934. 



Under Schedule C, the Forest Conservation Code and Rules of Forest Prac- 

 tice were put in effect through the following agencies: 



1. Northeastern Lumber Manufacturers Association of New York City, in- 



cluding the Northeastern Hardwood Subdivision and the Northeastern 

 Softwood Subdivision. 



2. The Northern Hemlock and Hardwood Association of Oshkosh, Wisconsin, 



including the Northern Hemlock Division and the Northern Hardwood 

 Subdivision. 



3. The California Redwood Association of San Francisco, California, includ- 



ing the Redwood Division. 



