186 



FORESTRY IN THE LANDES 



to $9.26. To-day there would be natural regeneration. The cost per 

 acre for hoeing (to 8 inches deep) and clearing fire lines has been, accord- 

 ing to Bert, about $6.50, or for a fire line 33 feet wide $26 per mile. 



The price of turpentine at Bordeaux from 1861 to 1911 is shown in 

 Fig. 16. The extremely high price per barrel (340 liters or exactly 359 

 liquid quarts) in 1862 was because of the American civil war. 



According to Conservateur de Lapasse, writing from Bordeaux De- 

 cember 16, 1919, the average prices per liter (1.05671 liquid quarts) of 

 resin (re" sines ou gemmes) for the past 14 years were as follows: 



TABLE 19. PRICE OF CRUDE RESIN 



a Price up to the war. 

 6 Price August 1 to October 1, 1914. 



c In 1917 the franc ran 5 to the dollar, in 1918 about 5| to 5f , and in 1919, 5f to 

 The normal rate $0.193 to the franc has been used in conversions. 



MANAGEMENT OF MARITIME PINE FORESTS 



Objects of Management (Protection Forests). The objects of State 

 management are to protect the soil from drifting sand and to .produce 

 resin, lumber (short length), ties, mine props, paving blocks, and other 

 special wood products. The aim of the Government has apparently 

 been greater volume production, disregarding consideration of the 

 sizes in which it is produced, while private owners look to resin pro- 

 duction and to higher stumpage values involved in larger timber. This 

 is natural, because the poorer soils where State timber grows could not 

 produce tall, large saw timber. The State is now looking more to 

 receipts from resin. But according to Barrington Moore: 



"The essential difference between Government and private management is that 

 the former aims to produce a maximum volume of wood, whereas the latter aims to 

 produce as much turpentine as possible and considers the wood as secondary. As 

 might be expected, the Government must care for the needs of the community as well 

 as for revenue. The Government foresters themselves admit that turpentine is more 

 profitable than wood. . . . The silvicultural difference is, briefly, that the Government 

 thins its forests lightly in such a way as to keep a complete canopy in order to grow 



