31 



every year, but the sustainable level of timber stand improvement 

 and pre-commercial thinning is somewhere in that 130,000/150,000 

 acres a year. So we need that 120 to 130 plus do something about 

 the 429,000 acres. 



Mr. DeFazio. Okay. And how about new activities? I notice there 

 is a page in the BLM report where they depict pruning. Are you 

 doing a significant amount of pruning in these reproduction 

 stands? Is that included? 



Mr. Robertson. In fiscal year 1992 we pruned 4,400 acres in all 

 of Region VI, and I suspect the bulk of that was on Ponderosa pine, 

 but there would be some Doug fir as well, £ind there was some fer- 

 tilization. We did about 33,000 acres of fertilization last year. But, 

 again, that is something else we could do more of. 



Mr. DeFazio. I would think that 4,400 acres doesn't sound like 

 a lot of pruning. 



Mr. Robertson. No. 



Mr. DeFazio. Is pruning a cost effective exercise, projected to be 

 cost-effective over time? I notice private industry is doing it, and 

 they are not usually involved in charitable enterprises. 



Mr. Robertson. It depends. It is marginal in places. You don't 

 increase growth, but you increase the quality of the lumber. So you 

 are looking for high-quality logs for plywood and lumber, then 

 pruning — and you have to grow them for a long period of time to 

 get your money back. In certain cases it is cost effective; in most 

 cases, it is not. 



Mr. DeFazio. I realize for an optimal sort of clear log you would 

 grow it over a long period of time, but taking something that is at 

 this point, say, 35 years of age in an area where you are going to 

 go in and do substantial harvesting, whether it is at that point a 

 heavy commercial thinning or selective harvest or light-touch for- 

 estry, whatever you want to call it, given the future characteristics 

 of the stand, I would think that in 15 to 20 years you would accu- 

 mulate some amount of clear on the outer part of that tree, not the 

 whole tree, obviously, and not as much as something that has stood 

 longer, but there would be a significant increase in value. 



Let me just recount a story. When we took Secretary Babbitt to 

 the Rosburg Forest Products Riddle, Mr. Ford, who owns the mill, 

 made the point of saying that they had recently hired and added 

 back a substantial number of employees on the clear veneer line 

 because it was cheaper for them — they made money by adding back 

 employees so they could get more discriminate sorts, so they could 

 look for very small pieces of clear veneer. 



So I would assume that the economics of this have changed. That 

 is, yes, you could say, "Well, we are looking at a very long-term in- 

 vestment activity." On the other hand, I think that maybe in 15 to 

 20 years, given the extraordinary value of this veneer and given 

 the fact that there isn't going to be much, if any, old-growth clear 

 veneer available, that it would be a prudent sort of investment, Eind 

 in fact, one whose economics have changed dramatically in the last 

 year and will continue to change. 



Mr. Robertson. I agree with you, the economics are changing 

 fast. 



Mr. DeFazio. Okay. 



