20 MISC. PUBLICATION 11, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 



CONTROL RECORDS 



Systematic management can not long continue with any degree of 

 success without some form of bookkeeping. Even the very simple 

 management prescriptions that are in many of the plans for the 

 national forests require that cumulative records be kept of opera- 

 tions in the woods. So far no entirely satisfactory set of control 

 records has been devised and put into operation in the Forest Service, 

 and this remains to be done, perhaps only as the result of experience, 

 as the next step in systematizing management work. 



Experience here and abroad has demonstrated that the best re- 

 sults in the way of keeping a record are obtained where simplicity 

 is an outstanding feature of the system used. It would seem that 

 reduced to this plane, the essentials are: (1) A progress map on 

 which is entered with appropriate symbols the location, area, date, 

 and character of each utilization or silvicultural operation; (2) a 

 control sheet for the working circle by budget periods on which is 

 entered a record for each unit of the time it was cut, the transaction 

 under which it was cut, the amounts cut, the method of marking 

 used, and the condition of the area after cutting. This may be 

 placed on the same sheet as the cutting budget, or on a separate sheet 

 facing the budget to make easy a comparison of the action planned 

 with the accomplishment. 



The above represents the bare essentials of a record for a simple 

 plan, it will not, of course, serve the purposes of a cut-over land 

 record, nor will it supplant detailed inventory or stock records. Its 

 purpose is simply to record the progress of the work of carrying out 

 the cutting budget. 



KEEPING THE PLAN ALIVE 



To the end that the management may be a progressive, growing 

 thing, responsive to changes in circumstances and taking full ad- 

 vantage of every favorable opportunity, it is essential that steps be 

 taken in a systematic way as rapidly as possible to remedy the lack of 

 information that in the first place forced the making of an admittedly 

 crude plan. As fast as greater knowledge is acquired or changes in 

 controlling circumstances occur the plan of management should be 

 amended, modified, or revised, if such action is called for. Periodic 

 revision will undoubtedly be necessary in all plans. In man}^ plans 

 the need and the opportunity for improvement and growth will 

 more nearly be continuous than periodic. To those to whom this 

 thought may be disconcerting, because of their conception of a 

 management plan as a fixed line of action to be followed through to 

 the end, it may be recalled that forest management in this country 

 is in its pioneer stage, that the transition from timber mining to 

 organized forest harvesting is just beginning, and that any plan 

 made now will be outgrown and discarded as a misfit in a few years 

 unless it is kept plastic, flexible, and in complete adjustment with the 

 ruling conditions. 



