69 



will have ceased to be a threat and will have become an accomplished fact. 



So much then for the quantity of standing saw timber permanently 

 needed in this country approximately two trillion feet of distributed age 

 classes, and about half a century to accomplish the proper distribution. 



Even with the additional provision appropriate for woodlots and other 

 acreage furnishing fire-wood, posts, poles, and miscellaneous wood products, 

 it is apparent that, in this country as a whole, there is enough mountainous, 

 rough and waste land, wholly profitless for agriculture but suitable for 

 forestation, to supply its permanent timber needs. Fortunately therefore an 

 adequate forest policy need not, at any point, conflict with an equally wise 

 national policy for agricultural and general industrial development. 



What Species of Timber Should Be Perpetuated in the Forests of the 

 United States? But in the definition of forest policy, the determination of 

 necessary quantity of timber is not enough. Of equal importance is the 

 selection of species and quality. 



If nature, unaided and undisturbed, were to be the universal regulator 

 of all economic and industrial processes, then doubtless, in the long course 

 of time, most if not all of the species in the original timber stands would 

 be replaced by natural re-growth. There have been more than one hundred 

 different species of American woods having substantial commercial uses 

 and nature if given a fair chance, would in time replace nearly all of them. 

 Northern Ohio and Indiana would have some softwoods ; the Miami Valley 

 would have fine walnut; the southern counties at the big bend in the 

 river would have big sycamores. Ohio, Indiana and Illinois would all have 

 great forests of oak, elm, ash, hickory and a generous mixture of scores 

 of other species native to their soil. 



But is that what we want when we plan a permanent forest policy? 

 Is it necessarily true, because gum trees are native to Ohio soil, that the 

 replacement of gum should be encouraged? Or, because woodworking in- 

 dustries established in the state have been using hickory, that forests of 

 hickory should be replaced in Indiana? 



Conceivably might it not perhaps be wiser and more profitable for those 

 in Ohio who want gum to get it from Arkansas and Tennessee where it 

 grows to better quality? And for those wood-using industries of Indiana 

 which have been accustomed to use hickory, to learn to use, if possible, 

 ash, or elm, or other species of more rapid growth but having appropriate 

 physical properties. 



These are only illustrative of an important principle, namely, that 

 within substantial limits, the peculiar industrial advantage of using a 

 given species of wood may be outweighed by the advantage of using a 

 species of timber that can be regrown more quickly and at lower cost. 



For commercial purposes it is well known many species are readily 

 interchangeable. Practically the same useful things that have heretofore 

 been made from more than one hundred commercial species of hard and 

 softwoods may be made from ten different species wisely selected. Where 

 there is substantial similarity in physical qualities and virtual equality of 

 fitness for given industrial uses, those species should be perpetuated which 

 can be grown to commercially useful size in the shortest time at the lowest 

 cost. The entire elimination from the forests of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois 



