THE EASTERN HEMLOCK. 



13 



Table 5. — Consumption of tanning materials: 1900, 1905-1909. 

 [Compiled from census reports for these years.] 



Year. 



Consumption of bark. 



Total. 



Hemlock. 



Proportion of total. 



Hemlock. Oak 



Average price per 

 cord. 



Hemlock. Oak. 



1900 

 1905 

 1906 

 1907 

 1908 

 1909 



Cords. 

 1,616,065 

 1,104,045 

 1,371,342 

 1,214,401 

 1,127,400 

 1, 078, 910 



Cords. 

 1, 170, 131 

 799, 755 

 931, 152 

 815, 840 

 810, 231 

 698, 365 



Per cent. 

 72 

 73 

 68 

 67 

 72 

 65 



Per cent. 

 28 

 27 

 30 

 31 

 27 

 30 



$6.28 

 6.32 

 8.49 

 8.60 

 8.89 

 9.21 



$7.12 

 10.44 

 10.87 

 10.51 

 10.80 

 10.90 



Year. 



Consumption of 

 Extract. 



Total. 



Hemlock 



Proportion of total. 



Hem- 

 lock. 



Oak. 



Chest- 

 nut. 



Average price per barrel. 



Hem- 

 lock. 



Oak. 



Chest- 

 nut. 



1900 

 1905 

 1906 

 1907 

 1908 

 1909 



Barrels. 

 67, 043 

 292, 399 

 658, 777 

 729, 599 

 784, 202 

 773, 635 



Barrels. 

 12, 812 

 52, 430 

 68,811 

 80, 267 

 81,617 

 21, 725 



Per ct. 

 19 

 18 

 10 

 11 

 10 

 3 



Per ct. 

 81 

 64 



$11. 78 



S10. 14 



12.31 

 12.06 

 12.78 

 12.72 



9.91 

 10.38 

 10.60 



9.52 



$9.13 

 9.51 

 9.72 

 9.80 



This table shows that there has been a gradual but steady decline 

 in the quantity and an increase in the value per cord of hemlock bark 

 used directly by the tanneries. By far the largest part of the hem- 

 lock bark and extract used is produced in the States of Pennsylvania, 

 Wisconsin, Michigan, New York, and West Virginia, ranking in 

 importance in the order named. 



Sales of hemlock bark, though nominally by the cord, are actually 

 by the ton, and in most cases the cord must weigh 2,240 pounds. The 

 bark is peeled in the spring and piled in the woods. The peelers are 

 paid by the bulk cord — 8 by 4 by 4 feet. Trees as small as 8 inches 

 in diameter breast-high are sometimes peeled, but the bark of small 

 trees is thin and light, and rolls up when dry, so that a cord (by 

 weight) may be a pile 12 feet instead of 8 feet long. Wisconsin bark 

 is thinner and lighter than bark from Michigan, and tanners will not 

 pay as much for it. Lumbermen commonly assume that a half cord 

 of bark can be obtained for each 1,000 board feet of lumber. This is 

 about right for trees 20 inches in diameter. Smaller trees yield more 

 bark per 1,000 board feet and larger trees less. Economy in bark 

 peeling is rapidly increasing, and trees are now peeled to much 

 smaller diameters in the top than formerly (PI. II, fig. 1). 



The volume of bark obtainable from trees of different sizes is shown 

 in Tables 18, 19, and 20, Appendix. 



