38 



MISSISSIPPI S FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES 



Plants Processing Raw Products 



Sawmills are the most numerous wood-processing 

 plants in Mississippi (fig. 39). Of the approximately 

 2,000 active mills, all but 102 are small mills sawing 

 less than 3 million board feet apiece annually. Now, 

 more than half of Mississippi's lumber output coines 

 from small mills. Some 150 nonlumber plants also 

 process raw timber products in Mississippi (fig. 40). 

 Although they are only a small fraction of the number 

 of sawmills, their combined output takes two-thirds 

 as much timber volume as does the combined output 

 of the sawmills. 



Location of Timber-Cutting Operations 



Cutting of timber products by county in 1946 is 

 shown in fig. 41. Softwood sawlogs come mostly from 

 central Mississippi. All other softwood logs and bolts 

 are harvested almost entirely in the central and south 

 regions. The cut of hardwood sawlogs is spread 

 among the counties of the State more evenly than 

 softwood sawlogs, although it is light in much of the 

 Delta and south regions. The cut of other hardwood 

 products is also spread more evenly than other soft- 

 wood products. 



The central region produces about half the timber 

 cut in the State (fig. 42). This region, with 36 per- 

 cent of the forest land, produces 59 percent of the soft- 

 wood logs and bolts and 43 percent of the hardwood 

 logs and bolts. The south region turns out 19 percent 

 of the total raw products; the north, 19 percent; the 

 Delta, 1 1 percent. 



Movement of Timber Products to Plants 



With the notable exception of pulp mills, most 

 Mississippi plants using logs or bolts do not reach out 

 many miles for timber. The average veneer plant, 

 which has a wider drawing territory than most pri- 

 mary wood-using plants, gets 44 percent of its timber 

 in the same county in which the plant is located. 

 Plants manufacturing miscellaneous wood products 

 get 56 percent of their timber in their home counties 

 and cooperage plants get 61 percent. Sawlog procure- 

 ment is even more local — sawmills get 74 percent of 

 their timber without crossing a county line. 



These averages, of course, obscure large variations 

 among individual plants. The larger the plant and 

 the more specialized its wood requirements in regard 

 to tree size, species, and quality, the larger its drawing 



territory is likely to be. Among sawmills, particularly, 

 the variation between individual plants is pronounced. 

 Small portable sawmills are highly mobile, taking ad- 

 vantage of the economies of transporting lumber in- 

 stead of logs. Large mills are stationar)-, and as ad- 

 jacent stands of timber are cut out. they must reach 

 in ever-widening circles for new supplies. 



Pulp mills usually draw timber from a wide territory. 

 In Mississippi, they obtain 45 percent of their wood 

 from beyond 50 miles. 



Radius oj pulptvood 

 drawing territory Volume of pnJ-pwood 



{miles) receipts {percent) 



0-50 55 



51-100 42 



101-150 3 



151-200 (1) 



' Negligible. 



100 



For hewn ties and poles and piling, specific data on 

 length of haul are lacking, but the great number of 

 concentration yards insures that the bulk of the 

 volume moves only a few miles to the yards. Sub- 

 sequent movement, from concentration yard to 

 treating plant, is usually confined to the State, 

 although it may be for a disance of hundreds of miles. 

 Fuel wood, fence posts, and miscellaneous domestic 

 products are mostly used on the same properties 

 where they are cut. 



Except for pulpwood, most raw timber products are 

 processed within the State. In 1946, 702,700 cords 

 of pulpwood were exported from the State, but 

 imports amounted to only 42,100 cords. The net 

 export of 660,600 cords was substantially more wood 

 than was used by all the pulp mills located in the 

 State. It amounted to 10 percent of Mississippi's 

 total output of all wood products. 



How Has Timber Production Been Sustained? 



In view of large declines in Mississippi's forest re- 

 source, how has it been possible to sustain the total 

 output of timber products at a fairly high level? The 

 answer, ignoring for the present changes in forest land 

 management, lies mainly in four factors. Most im- 

 portant is the overcutting of the forest resource, the 

 inroads of the wood-using industries on the forest itself. 

 A second factor is in industrial adjustments leading to 

 the use of smaller and poorer cjuality timber and less 

 desired species for individual products. A third factor 

 is the increased output of less exacting products. A 

 fourth factor, closely related to the third, is the more 



