FUTURE DEMAND FOR TEMBER 



471 



probably can be met by increasing imports, but 

 the major share must come from increased domes- 

 tic output. If domestic output keeps pace with 

 rising demand for timber products, as projected 

 here, the cut of timber associated with rising out- 

 put must increase accordingly (table 280). 



These projections are not intended to be fore- 

 casts of futiu^e consumption. Rather, their pur- 

 pose is to provide a framework for the analysis of 



future timber-supply possibilities in the section to 

 follow. Yet the obvious conclusion is that de- 

 mands for timber products, and hence the timber 

 cuts associated with those demands, will be con- 

 siderably higher in the future than they have ever 

 been in the past. Other reasonable assumptions 

 might be chosen and somewhat different estimates 

 might be calculated, but no other general conclu- 

 sion appears reasonable. 



Table 280. — Estimated domestic consumption, domestic output of timber products, and timber cut in the 

 United States and Coastal Alaska, by softwoods and hardwoods, 1952; and projections of demand, output, 

 and timber cut, 1975 and 2000 





Total 

 demand 

 (round- 

 wood) 



Less net 

 imports 



Domestic 

 output 



Timber cut ' 



Item 



Growing 

 stock 



Live sawtimber 



Consumption, 1952: 



Softwood . _- 



Billion 

 cu. ft. 

 8.6 

 3.7 



Billion 

 cu. ft. 

 1. 1 

 . 1 



Billion 

 cu. ft. 

 7.5 

 3.6 



Billion 

 3.3 



Billion 



cu. ft. 

 6. 6 

 2. 5 



Billion 

 bd-ft. 

 36. 5 



Hardwood- _ _ _ . 



12. 3 







Total 



12. 3 



1. 2 



11. 1 



10.8 



9. 1 



48.8 



Lower projections: ': 

 1975: 

 Softwood - . 



9. 9 

 4.3 



1.5 

 .2 



8.4 

 4. 1 



8.4 

 4.0 



7.3 

 3.0 



40. 9 



Hardwood 



15. 1 







Total -_ . 



14.2 



1.7 



12.5 



12.4 



10. 3 



56. 







2000: 



Softwood. - . 



12. 5 

 5.4 



1. 6 

 . 2 



10.9 

 5.2 



10.3 

 5.4 



8.9 

 3. 9 



49. 6 



Hardwood _ . . 



19. 4 







Total _ . 



17.9 



1.8 



16. 1 



15.7 



12. 8 



69. 







Medium projections: 

 1975: 

 Softwood. . _ _ 



11. 4 



4.8 



1. 5 

 . 2 



9.9 

 4.6 



9. 6 



4. 4 



8.3 

 3. 3 



47. 6 



Hardwood. 



17. 8 







Total.. .. 



16. 2 



1. 7 



14. 5 



14. 



11.6 



65. 4 







2000: 



Softwood 



15. 6 

 6.8 



1. 6 

 .2 



14. 

 6.6 



13. 



6. 7 



11.3 

 4. 9 



68. 4 



Hardwood 



26. 7 







Total 



22. 4 



1.8 



20.6 



19.7 



16. 2 



95. 1 







Upper projection, 2000: 



Softwood _ . 



17. 9 

 8.3 



1.6 

 .2 



16.3 

 8. 1 



15. 3 

 8. 1 



13. 1 

 5.8 



79. 5 



Hardwood 



31. 5 







Total 



26.2 



1.8 



24. 4 



23.4 



18.9 



in. 



' Derived from domestic output. Thus for 1952 repre- 

 sents domestic output (11.1 billion cu. ft.) less output from 

 dead trees, cull trees, noncommercial forest land and non- 

 forest land (1.7 billion cu. ft.) plus logging residues (1.4 



439296 O— 58 31 



billion cu. ft.). In 1975 and 2000 reflects due allowance 

 for improvements in utilization and quantity of products 

 from dead and cull trees and other non-growing-stock 

 sources. 



