above the one-half-million-foot production level. Segregation of knotty pine 

 lumber by sawmill owners in the two lowest production size classes was 

 negligible. These owners sold lumber by the appropriate Common grades. 



Some 3 percent of the No. 3 common and better quality square edge was 

 manufactured into dimension lumber, i.e., yard lumber of any width that 

 is from 2 to less than 5 inches thick. The proportion of dimension lumber 

 produced did not vary appreciably with owner size class. In this form the 

 white pine competed mainly with local hemlock for framing purposes. A 

 few timbers, thicker than 5 inches in least dimension, were sawn for special- 

 ty purposes, but their total volume was negligible. By far the major pro- 

 duct was 1-inch boards for general construction. 



Evidently 50 to 75 percent of the square-edge eastern white pine lumber 

 produced is now being planed before it is first sold, and an even higher 

 proportion of planed lumber (one or more sides) reaches the consumer. 

 Much of the rough lumber produced and sold by owners of smaller saw- 

 mills is planed by wholesalers and retailers before it reaches the ultimate 

 buyer. Owners of larger sawmills, those averaging over 3 million board 

 feet per year, planed over 90 percent of their square-edge lumber out- 

 put, double the proportion planed by smaller producers. (See Table 3.) 



Table 3. Relationship of Sawmill Owner Size Class to Proportion of 

 Square-Edge Lumber Graded and Planed 



Basis 



1 Graded according to "Standard Grading Rules for Northern White Pine and 

 Norway Pine", as adopted and published by the Northeastern Lumber Manufacturers 

 Association, Inc. N.Y.C., New York. Knotty pine paneling volumes are included. 



Nearly three-quarters of all the square-edge lumber was graded according 

 to standard grading rules. Grade recovery percentages were based on the 

 experience of sawmill owners handling a total of 75 million feet of square- 

 edge lumber. The sample results, in percent of total square-edge volume, 

 were 4 percent D and better, 13 percent Nos. 1 and 2 Common, and 83 

 percent No. 3 Common and poorer. Although No. 3 Common and poorer 

 was not separated into Nos. 3, 4, and 5 Common on the interview schedules, 

 some sawmill owners supplied these data. On the basis of 15 million board 

 feet, No. 3 Common is estimated to be 38 percent and Nos. 4 and 5 Com- 

 mon 45 percent of the total square-edge production. 



Small producers said they preferred to sell their lumber mill run to 

 larger producers or wholesalers rather than incur the extra expense of 



