taxes, protection, and land and stocking, at ages of 50 and 90 years, under 

 Cases 1 and 2, are given in Table 7. 



Table 7. Proportion of total cost of growing timber caused by different factors under 



conditions specified in Tables 1 to 6. 



CASE 1. 



FIFTY-YEAR OLD TIMBER NINETY-YEAR OLD TIMBER 



Administra- Administra- 

 tion and Land and tion and Land and 

 Taxes, protection, stocking. Total. Taxes, protection, stocking. Total. 

 SPECIES Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. 



White Pine 25.9 7.5 66.6 100 50.5 5.4 44.1 100 



Loblolly Pine 29.6 7.1 63.3 100 ... .. 



Longleaf Pine . . ... ... 19.8 8.7 71.5 100 



Red Oak 18.4 8.2 73.4 100 29.6 7.7 62.7 100 



Yellow Poplar 18.6 8.2 73.2 100 31.3 7.5 61.2 100 



Douglas Fir 18.6 8.2 73.2 100 28.2 7.8 64.0 100 



CASE 2. 



All species 20.0 8.1 71.9 100 20.0 8.7 71.3 100 



These percentages show unmistakably that with the exception of old 

 white pine, taxed according to present methods, much the largest proportion 

 of the total cost is due to land and stocking, as it should be. On the other 

 hand, if present methods of taxation are strictly carried out, they take an 

 increasingly larger share as the timber grows older. For 90-year white, 

 pine they amount to more than one-half the total cost, due to high stumpage 

 prices, and for red oak, yellow poplar, and Douglas fir of the same age the 

 taxes come to 28 to 31 percent of the total cost. The low percentage of 

 taxes for longleaf pine at 90 years is because at that age it has not yet 

 reached either a high yield or great value. 



The statement for Case 2 emphasizes the point previously made that 

 in some instances young growth is undertaxed by present methods, while hy 

 the same methods older timber is almost invariably overtaxed. It maj 

 easily happen, therefore, that while land and stocking usually constitute 

 much the largest proportion of the cost of growing timber, the present 

 system of taxing may be the determining factor in the decision as to 

 whether or not forest conservation shall be practiced in a given region. 

 With the tax on yield alone, the proportion of taxes to the total cost is 

 the same in all ages. 



The cost of administration and protection is low throughout. In no 

 instance does it equal 9 percent of the total cost of growing the timber, 

 and usually is less than 8 percent. Timber can be protected cheaply, and 

 the cost of protection should not be a serious obstacle to forest conservation. 



CONCLUSIONS. 



The purpose of this paper is to outline a method of investigation into 

 the cost of growing timber rather than to say definitely what the costs, 

 yields, and stumpage prices will be for the various species in particular 

 localities. 



Certain general conclusions, however, can be drawn. It is evident 

 that present stumpage prices of white pine are at a point where the growing 

 of this timber should yield from 4 to 6 percent compound interest for a 

 40 to 70 year investment, with land and stocking costing not more than 

 $10 per acre. The growing of loblolly pine should now offer a return of 

 4 percent compound interest for investments of from 30 to 50 years, with 



15 



