94 



TIMBER RESOURCES FOR AMERICA'S FUTURE 



EASTERN HARDWOODS 



22.0 



1952 



LOWER 



EASTERN SOFTWOODS 



1952 



WESTERN SPECIES 



LOWER 



MEDIUM 



2S.0 



1952 LOWER 



figures ore billions of boord-teet 



Figure 44 



MEDIUM 



differs from growing capacity (table 55). Timber 

 removal is distributed to the three species groups 

 in accordance with the ability of each group to 

 support removal during the next half century with 

 the least impairment of prospects for future 

 growth. On the other hand, needed growth is a 

 distribution of the national totals of timber re- 

 moval estimates between species groups in accord- 

 ance with the relative realizable growth. Differ- 

 ences in timber removal and needed growth are 

 important and apparent in the softwood species 

 groups, but are not important in hardwoods. 



The differences between needed growth and tim- 

 ber removal for selected species groups are brought 

 out by the percentage comparisons for sawtimber 

 as shown in table 58. The basic estimates from 

 which these percentage comparisons were drawn 

 come from table 55. 



Table 58. — Proportion of sawtimber removal and 

 needed sawtimber inventory and growth by selected 

 species groups 



Item 



Needed 

 inven- 

 tory 



Timber 

 removal 



Needed 

 growth 



1952: 



Eastern softwoods 



Western species 



Percent 



> 12 



> 70 



Percent 

 2 29 

 2 46 



Percent 

 '36 

 3 24 



Aggregate 



82 



75 



60 







Medium projected demand: 

 1975: 



Eastern softwoods 



Western species 



35 

 38 



27 

 46 



41 

 32 



Aggregate 



73 



73 



73 







2000: 



Eastern softwoods 



Western species . . 



35 

 38 



31 

 41 



41 

 31 







Aggregate 



73 



72 



72 







' Actual inventory as of Jan. 1, 1953. 

 2 Actual timber cut in 1952. 

 ' Net growth during 1952. 



For all softwoods combined (eastern softwoods 

 and western species) the needed growth should 

 increase from 60 percent of all species in 1952 to 

 72-73 percent in 1975 and 2000. On the other 

 hand, softwoods hold fairly steady from about 75 

 percent of the cut in 1952 to 72-73 percent of the 

 timber removal in 1975 and 2000. 



Changes between the eastern and western soft- 

 wood groups are also significant The needed 

 growth of eastern softwoods in 1975 and 2000 will 

 make up a higher proportion of needed growth of 

 all species (41 percent) than it does of timber 

 removal of all species (27 and 31 percent). The 

 reverse is true for western species. With the 



