6 



BULLETIN 152, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



a rule, however, the stumpage value of most of the old-growth timber 

 in a region is uniform enough to justify comparison with other regions. 

 Table 7 gives such a comparison of average stumpage values of hem- 

 lock in 1889, 1899, 1907, and 1912, within the States where it is 

 commercially important. 



Table 7. — Stumpage values per thousand board feet of hemlock in different States, for 

 1912, 1 1907, } 1899, and 1889. 





1912 



1907 



1899 



1889 



State. 



Average 

 values 

 (sales). 



Reports. 



Average 

 values 

 (esti- 

 mates). 



Reports. 



Average 

 values 

 (esti- 

 mates). 



Average 

 values 

 (esti- 

 mates). 



Northeastern group : 



$4.72 

 5.57 

 5.40 

 6.44 

 7.46 

 7.35 



30 

 10 

 5 

 9 



29 

 21 



$4.48 

 5.22 

 4.03 

 6.10 

 5.48 

 7.38 



33 

 17 

 32 

 24 

 33 

 62 



$2.52 

 3.19 

 2.01 



$1.63 



New Hampshire 



Vermont 











2.98 

 2.75 







1 45 







Average (weighted) 



6.28 





5.72 



















Lake States: 



5.07 

 3.21 



14 

 32 



4.22 

 3.31 



85 

 63 



2.25 

 2.16 



1 05 





96 









3.78 





3.83 



















Southern States: 



2 4. 25 

 2 3.17 

 6.00 

 2.50 

 2.50 

 2.17 



24 

 23 

 1 

 2 

 3 

 6 



3.88 

 2.98 

 3.26 

 2.14 

 2.07 

 1.43 



4 

 13 

 45 



9 

 11 

 7 





2.50 











2.19 





























3.05 





2.84 



















1 The figures for 1912 and 1907 are averages of reports collected by the Forest Service. For 1912, reports 

 of both estimates and sales were collected. The averaged estimates (not shown for 1912) were slightly 

 higher for almost every State than the averaged sales. 



2 Estimates. 



The table shows that recently the rate of increase in value of hem- 

 lock has fallen off, at least in the Northeastern and Lake States. In 

 Pennsylvania, for example, the stumpage value increased more than 

 fivefold between 1889 and 1907, but during the next five years there 

 was practically no increase. In 1889 hemlock was as yet practically 

 unmerchantable in many parts of its range, and its cheapness and low 

 taxable value assured large profits. At present, however, the 

 increase in stumpage value is hardly rapid enough to yield a large 

 profit, while taxes, insurance, and other annual charges often add 

 substantially to the cost. To yield a return of 6 per cent compound 

 interest it would be necessary for the stumpage value to double at 

 least every 10 years. This, of course, applies only to old stands in 

 which growth is very slow or is entirely offset by decay. In young, 

 tliirfty stands there is an increase in the amount of stumpage which 

 may make the investment profitable without a great increase in 

 stumpage value. 



