GENERAL MANAGEMENT. 



In considering the advisability of conservative cutting the com- 

 pany had taken into consideration all factors for and against it, and 

 had formulated in their own minds what they believed was the best 

 policy to pursue in their logging work. Certain tracts where the fire 

 risk was great, especially bordering railroads, they determined to cut 

 clean. Land very expensive to operate they disposed of in the same 

 way. Other tracts not seriously jeopardized by fire, and where 

 drivable streams and the lay of the ground made lumbering fairly 

 cheap, they determined to cut more lightly, with a view to a second 

 crop, and perhaps later ones. This policy was the company's own, 

 and to everyone qualified to judge it seemed then, as it seems now, a 

 sound one. 



The logging work over which the writer had regular and immediate 

 oversight amounted to about 20,000,000 feet per year, and was scat- 

 tered among ten camps, to cover which required a round trip of about 

 150 miles. Within this area conservative cutting was to be practiced, 

 and in every way the work was to be put on the highest practicable 

 plane. What conservative cutting meant under the circumstances 

 was by no means an easy matter to determine. A general diameter 

 limit was very far from solving the problem. Things had to be set- 

 tled on the ground in accordance with the circumstances of each 

 case. The general plan followed, as nearly as it can be put on paper, 

 was this : The mountains and ridge tops were stripped of their soft- 

 wood timber because of the risk in such situations from wind. The 

 same was done in distant corners, and on very rough ground where 

 a logging operation necessarily involved great expense. There will 

 be no return to such places until the appearance of an entirely new 

 crop sufficient to make a logging operation pay. In mixed stands of 

 hardwoods and softwoods, on the other hand, the softwoods below a 

 diameter of approximately 12 inches were left standing. This 

 amounted ordinarily to perhaps 2,000 feet per acre. Bunches of 

 timber composed chiefly of young growth, with no dead or down 

 timber, were left intact. 



Spruce growth on the lower ground presented the hardest problem. 

 If large and in dense stand there was no doubt that it must be cut 

 clean. On the other hand, shorter and smaller stuff, well rooted as 

 it sometimes was, could be thinned out to any extent desired. In 

 the medium stands, however, came the opportunity for nice judgment 

 and knowledge of local conditions. To prevent windthrow strong 

 strips and bunches were left, roads were kept at least 4 or 5 rods apart, 

 and sometimes trees would be left standing which from every other 

 point of view it was desirable to cut. Frequently a third or half of 

 all the stand remained, so that a person who did not understand what 

 was going on would consider it the slackest kind of cutting. But 



[Cir. 131] 



