GROWTH AND UTILIZATION 



167 



Table 103. — Timber cut and net annual growth of live sawtimber in the West and Coastal Alaska, by species 



group and region, 1952 ' 





Total, 



West and 



Coastal 



Alaska 



Pacific Northwest 



Califor- 

 nia 



Northern 

 Rocky 

 Moun- 

 tain 



Southern 

 Rocky 

 Moun- 

 tain 





Species group and item 



Total 



Douglas- 

 fir sub- 

 region 



Pine 

 sub- 

 region 



Coastal 

 Alaska 



Softwoods: 



Doue,las-fir: 



Cut -- - -. - 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 

 11,962 

 4,431 



3,603 

 2 1, 841 



2,225 

 1,038 



609 

 535 



987 

 396 



3,069 

 2,800 



22, 455 

 11,041 



80 

 265 



22, 535 

 11,306 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 

 9, 193 

 3, 193 



1,497 

 496 



2,193 

 931 



63 

 119 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 

 8,827 

 3,022 



149 



57 



2, 172 

 911 



23 



98 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 

 366 

 171 



1,348 

 439 



21 

 20 



40 

 21 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 

 2,333 



787 



1,274 

 553 



2 

 9 



324 

 207 



987 

 396 



784 

 943 



5, 704 



2, 895 



20 

 44 



5, 724 

 2,939 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 

 393 



388 



475 

 368 



9 



27 



222 

 209 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 

 43 

 63 



357 

 424 



Million 

 bd.-ft. 



Growth - _ 





Ponderosa and Jeffrey pine: 



Cut 





Growth 





Western hemlock: 



Cut _ .. - 



21 



Growth 





71 



White and sua;ar pine: 



Cut . " . -- ... 





Growth 







Redwood: 



Cut - 







Growth 















Other softwoods: 



Cut 



1,273 

 1, 095 



14,219 

 5,834 



52 

 143 



14,271 

 5,977 



998 

 922 



12, 169 

 5,010 



52 

 139 



12, 221 

 5, 149 



275 

 173 



2,050 



824 



(3) 



4 



2,050 



828 



798 

 516 



1,897 

 1, 508 



2 

 26 



1,899 

 1,534 



149 

 190 



549 



677 



6 

 51 



555 



728 



65 



Growth 



56 



Total, softwoods: 



Cut ... __ -. 



86 



Growth 



Hardwoods: 



Cut -- . - 



127 



Growth _ - 



1 



Total, all species: 



Cut _ - . 



86 



Growth - - 



128 







• Growth-cut relations for western species mean little 

 because of the old-growth timber, which provides a large 

 base but contributes litt'e to net growth. 



'' Excludes 16 million board-feet of net growth of pon- 



incense-cedar, lodgepole pine, etc.) sawtimber 

 growth exceeds cut by 20 percent (table 103). 

 This group includes the less desirable species. 



Northern Rocky Mountain. — Softwood growth 

 in the Northern Rocky Mountain Region is 80 

 percent of the sawtimber cut (table 103). In 

 contrast to the usual situation, the relationship is 

 more favorable for Douglas-fir, white pine, and 

 ponderosa pine than for "other softwoods." 



Southern Rocky Mountain. — In contrast to other 

 western regions, sawtimber growth in the Southern 

 Rocky Mountain Region exceeds cut in all species 

 groups (table 103). This is a reflection of age- 

 class distribution and stocking conditions and 

 limited industrial development of the region. 



Coastal Alaska. — Growth in Coastal Alaska, al- 

 though confined largely to the limited areas of 

 second-growth timber, is somewhat greater than 

 the cut in 1952. This situation will doubtless be 

 reversed now that the pulp industry has become 

 established in Alaska, and will continue until 

 sufficient cutover area has restocked and reached 

 sawtimber size to balance the cut of mature old 



derosa pine in the Plains Region. The total net growth 

 of ponderosa and Jeflfrey pine in the United States is 1,857 

 million board-feet. 



3 Less than 0.5 million board-feet. 



growth. Coastal forests are just entering a period 

 of conversion from virgin to managed stands. 



The Relation Between Growth and 

 Cut Is Generally Improved Over 

 1944 



Because of factors previously cited (p. 149), 

 direct comparisons of net growth-cut relations in 

 1952 with the gross growth-drain relations of 1944 

 are decidedly misleading. Adjustment of 1944 

 data to 1952 standards corrects for this lack of 

 comparability and makes a comparison of 1944 and 

 1952 relations possible. 



One of the most favorable features of growth- 

 cut comparisons with respect to future outlook is 

 the apparent improvement in both eastern soft- 

 woods and eastern hardwoods since 1944 (table 

 104). Whereas the growth of eastern softwood 

 sawtimber was indicated to be about 10 percent 

 less than cut in 1944, it was estimated to be 21 

 percent greater than cut in 1952. For hardwoods, 

 sawtimber growth exceeded cut in both periods— 



