§ 
‘ 
8 
: 
i 
; 
| 
‘ 
Fuelwood—now one of the major uses of 
hardwood timber— comprises 27 percent of 
hardwood harvests, compared with 30 
percent for sawlogs, and 39 percent for 
pulpwood. 
Construction of several new oriented strand board plants in 
the region has been announced. In addition, there will be 
further substitution of hardwood for pine in pulping and 
some other products. The recent increase in fuelwood use 
also seems likely to continue. Between now and the year 
2020, hardwood supplies are projected to increase to 1.9 
billion cubic feet annually, 72 percent above current levels. 
Annual supplies are then projected to level off. 
By ownership, most of the projected increase in hardwood 
supplies comes from other private and public lands. Very 
little increase is projected for forest industry land. Increases 
in hardwood supplies are projected for each hardwood 
management type. As the acreage in natural pine declines, 
hardwood supplies from this type decrease to about one- 
third of current levels by the end of the projection period. 
Trends in the South Central Region 
Total hardwood roundwood supplies in the South Central 
region were stable from the 1950’s through the mid 1970’s, 
then increased rapidly to 1984 (app. tables 3.50 and 3.64). 
The recent turnaround is due to large increases in hardwood 
pulpwood and fuelwood consumption. Hardwood pulpwood 
production rose from 900,000 cords in 1952 to 4.4 million 
cords in 1970, and then declined a bit before rising to the 
current level of 7.4 million cords. Hardwood fuelwood use 
declined through most of the period but then jumped from 
187 million cubic feet to 308 million cubic feet between 
1976 and 1984. Hardwood sawlog production has fluctuated 
moderately and is currently at about the same level as 
1952, 2.5 billion board feet. Hardwood veneer production 
continues to decline. 
In 1952, fuelwood comprised about half of all roundwood 
hardwood supplies. Most was cut from mixed pine— 
hardwood, upland hardwood, and bottomland hardwood 
types under private ownership. Production by State was 
generally determined by population level and forest area. 
The major change that occurred by 1962 was a big increase 
in hardwood pulpwood consumption. This was offset by 
declines in the other hardwood products. The proportion 
supplied from each management type changed very little. 
The 1970’s saw further increases in hardwood pulpwood 
consumption and a reversal of the downward trend in sawlog 
production. Hardwood fuelwood use was at its lowest point 
in the 20th century. In 1976, fuelwood totaled 13 percent 
of hardwood production, sawlogs 40 percent, and hardwood 
pulpwood 42 percent. 
In response to increases in the demand for hardwood fuel- 
wood and hardwood pulpwood, harvests rose by 31 percent 
between 1976 and 1984. The largest proportion of this 
increase occurred on upland hardwood types owned by other 
private individuals. Fuelwood now comprises 23 percent of 
all hardwood production, sawlogs 32 percent, and pulpwood 
44 percent. 
Tennessee leads the South Central region in the use of 
hardwood fuelwood by a wide margin, followed by Missis- 
sippi, Alabama, and Arkansas. Hardwood fuelwood 
comprises a significant proportion of hardwood supplies in 
all South Central States. Traditionally about 30 percent of 
fuelwood supplies originate from sources other than growing 
stock, such as fencerows, wooded pastures not classified 
as timberland, and rough or rotten cull trees. 
The increase in hardwood supplies projected for the South 
Central region is similar to that projected for the Southeast. 
A 64-percent rise is projected with most of this increase 
occurring between now and 2010. Most of the increase is 
on other private land, where hardwood supplies are projected 
to go up by 75 percent. Most of the additional timber 
comes from upland hardwood stands, where supplies ar 
projected to more than double. 
Trends by State 
In 1952, Mississippi, Georgia, North Carolina, Arkansas, 
and Tennessee were the leading suppliers of hardwood 
roundwood. Collectively, they provided 58 percent of the 
region’s total (figs. 3.36 and 3.37, app. tables 3.51-3.62 
171 
