removals was used for timber products, 13 percent was left 
as unused logging residue, and the remaining 9 percent was 
left unutilized after timberland clearing for nonforest use. 
These proportions have not changed significantly since 
1952. 
Removals from growing stock that are used for timber 
products account for 89 percent of all timber supplies. The 
remainder comes principally from nongrowing-stock sources 
such as rough and rotten cull trees, trees that are found on 
nonforest land, and portions of trees such as limbs that are 
not classified as growing stock by forest survey standards. 
Hardwood removals on other private timberland showed 
the biggest gain among ownership groups, especially in 
Tennessee. Again, this reflects the increased consumption 
of hardwood fuelwood. Consistent with this trend is the big 
increase in hardwood removals from upland hardwood 
types. By 1976, hardwood removals from upland hardwood 
types exceeded hardwood removals from bottomland hard- 
wood types. This is related to activity in Tennessee, which 
is covered primarily by upland hardwoods (fig. 3.41). 
Annual removals of hardwood growing stock in the South 
Central region are projected to increase 46 percent above 
current levels. Most of this increase will occur between now 
and 2010. By ownership and management type, the increase 
in hardwood removals follows the same trends described 
for hardwood supplies. 
Trends by State 
Generally, the historic trends in hardwood removals by State 
parallel those described for hardwood supplies (figs. 3.40 
and 3.41, app. tables 3.51—3.62 and 3.65—3.76). During the 
period from 1952 and 1984, there were sustained upward 
trends in hardwood removals in Virginia and Texas. In 
Arkansas, hardwood removals increased sharply between 
1952 and 1970 but have since declined. The Tennessee 
trends are just opposite from those in Arkansas. In 1984, 
the largest amounts of hardwood removals were in Virginia, 
North Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia. 
Because of assumed improvement in hardwood utilization, 
the percentage increase in hardwood removals is less in 
every State than the percentage increase projected in hard- 
wood supplies. Otherwise, the prospective increase in 
removals by State is similar to the trends described for 
supplies. In terms of volume, the largest increases are 
projected in North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Arkansas, 
and Louisiana. The smallest increase is projected in 
Alabama. Projected hardwood removals exceed projected 
softwood removals in only two States—Virginia and 
Tennessee. 
179 
