382 



TIMBER RESOURCES FOR AMERICA'S FUTURE 



For covering interior walls and ceilings, the 

 trend has been away from wood-lath-and-plaster 

 to gypsum board and other sheet materials. 

 Displacement of wood lath is almost complete. 

 There is, however, a counter trend of some im- 

 portance in the use of lumber panels, particularly 

 panels with knots or other "character marks" 

 which give an interesting decorative effect. Lum- 

 ber-panel interior finish has become especially 

 popular for basement recreation rooms, dens, and 

 even in living rooms and dining rooms. It is a 

 favorite material for use in the "do-it-yourself" 

 projects that so many homeowners have under- 

 taken. 



Other displacement of lumber has occurred in 

 coverings for kitchen and bathroom floors, fram- 

 ing and sash material for windows (especially 

 basement windows), framing material for screens 

 and screen doors, and a number of other items. 

 The old panel door is rapidly giving way to the 

 flush door, which contains less lumber. Covered 

 porches are not often seen in new housing. 



When these various trends are taken into ac- 

 count, it appears more than likely that average 

 lumber use per house will continue to decrease 

 somewhat. That decrease would, however, be 

 offset in part by the expected moderate increase 

 in the average size of dwelling unit. 



Average Lumber Use Per Dwelling Unit Is 

 Decreasing 



Estimates of the average amount of lumber 

 used per dwelling unit, built at various times in 

 the past, have been made by several agencies 

 based on sampling surveys. The most recent 

 survey, conducted by Stanford Research Institute 

 in cooperation with the National Association of 

 Home Builders,^^ shows that average use per unit 

 (for all kinds of housing, including that on farms) 

 decreased from 18,900 board-feet in 1920 to 10,500 

 board-feet in 1953 (table 215). That decrease, 

 of course, reflects not only the substitution of 

 other materials for lumber, but also the reduction 

 in average size of unit, and the notable shift 

 away from the multi-family to the single-family 

 house. 



An approximation of the trend in lumber use 

 per dwelling unit, disregarding change in size, 

 can be derived from the Institute's figures by 

 averaging the indexes of average square feet of 

 floor space and of average cubic volume per unit, 

 described above, and applying this resulting 



" Stanford Research Institute. America's Demand for 

 Wood, 1929-1976, p. 31. Weyerhaeuser Timber Co 

 Tacoma, Wash. 1954. 



Table 215. — Stanford Research Institute estimates 

 qf lumber use per dwelling unit by hoxise com- 

 ponents, specified years, 1920-53 



[In board-feet per unit] 



Component 



1920 



1930 



1940 



1950 



1953 



Foundations 



Floors 



Ceilings 



Roofs 



Exterior walls. ._ 



Interior walls 



Millwork 



Accessories ' 



1,700 

 4,300 

 975 

 2, 800 

 2,500 

 2,950 

 2,600 

 1,075 



1,350 

 3,700 



825 

 2,250 

 2,350 

 2,300 

 1,950 



675 



1,300 

 3,300 



800 

 2,550 

 2, 100 

 1,700 

 1,400 



750 



1, 100 



2, 550 

 750 



2, 600 

 1,750 

 1, 500 

 1,050 

 400 



900 

 1,950 



800 

 2,400 

 1,600 

 1,500 



950 



400 



Total 



18, 900 



15,400 



13, 900 



11, 700 



10, 500 



1 Includes detached garages and miscellaneous other 

 accessories. 



Source: Stanford Research Institute. America's Demand 

 for Wood, 1929-1975, p. 35. Weyerhaeuser Timber Co., 

 Tacoma, Wash. 1954. 



average size-of-unit index to the 1953 estimates in 

 table 215, as follows: 



Average lumber 

 use per unit 

 Size-of-un it at constan t 



index 19}3 size 



(1900=100) (board-feet) 



1920 - 100.0 13,608 



1930 86.0 12,894 



1940 80.5 12,432 



1950 72.0 11,697 



1953 72.0 10,500 



According to this method of estimation, the dis- 

 placement of lumber b}' other materials during the 

 period 1920-53 amounted to 3,100 board-feet 

 per unit for dwelling units at constant 1953 average 

 size, or 23 percent. These estimates of lumber 

 use, of course, are averages for all types of new 

 residential construction — multi-family housing as 

 well as single-family houses, farm as well as 

 nonfarm. The displacement of lumber in the 

 average single-family house has doubtless been 

 somewhat greater than the average for all types. 

 A part of that displacement from single-family 

 houses has been offset by the sizable shift away 

 from multi-family types of construction. 



The Stanford estimates for 1950 are apparently 

 somewhat higher than those obtained for the 

 same year by the U. S. Housing and Home Finance 

 Agenc3^'** The latter came from an inventory 

 of materials used in construction of a 5,000-unit 

 sample of single-family houses distributed tlu-ough- 

 out the country. Farm and multi-family housing 

 were not sampled. Neither did the inventory 

 include the normal single-family house accessories, 

 such as detached garages, porches, and the like. 

 Millwork was included, but the quantity of mill- 



"' U. S. Housing and Home Finance Agenc.y. The 

 Materials Use Survey. Washington, D. C. 1953. 



