PRODUCTION OF LUMBER, LATH, AND SHINGLES IN 1918, 15 
The relative importance of the several general producing regions of 
the country at 10-year periods since the middle of the last century is 
shown in Table 6. The history of the lumber industry is traceable in 
the tabulation, since it shows the inception of lumbering in each region 
and its growth or decline during subsequent intervals. 
TABLE 6.—Lumber cut by groups of States, in per cent of the total. 
| 
Groups. 1850 1860 1870 1880 
1890 1899 1909 1918 
Per cent| Per cent| Per cent| Per cent | Per cent| Per cent| Per cent| Per cent 
100. 1 10! 10' 100. 100. 
Motalisarersiscics seeae te 0 0 00.0 100.0 100.0 
Northeastern group.........- 54.8 37.0 37.8 25.8 19.8 16.3 ME 7/ 7.4 
Centraligroupss-c..-\--25- 1 18.6 21.1 20.0 18.4 13.1 16.1 12.3 7.8 
Southern group.........----- 8.5 13.0 6.9 9.7 15.6 24.0 33.3 34.9 
North Carolina pine group. -. fia 4.8 2.5 4.1 4,7 ded 11.6 8.3 
Lake States group........... 6.3 13.6 24,4 34.7 34.6 24.9 12.3 10.1 
Pacific SLOUD sacs E eae e = 5.9 6.4 4.0 3.6 8.5 8.3 5.5 26.9 
Rocky Mountain group....-- .0 Ot .9 9 lea 1.6 2.9 4.4 
ATV OER ERS ee teense Se aeke 8 4.0 3.5 2.8 2.6 Te U 4 2 
Northeastern growp.—Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New 
Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont. 
Central group.—tillinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio, Tennessee, West Virginia. 
Southern growp.—Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Texas. 
North Caroline pine group.—North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia. 
Lake States growp.—Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin. 
Pacific group.—California, Nevada, Oregon, Washington. 
Rocky Mountain group.—Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming. 
All other.—Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota. 
LUMBER PRODUCTION BY KINDS OF WOOD. 
Table 7 shows for each of the last 10 years, 1909 to 1918, the com- 
puted cut of the different woods. In a preceding table the lessened 
cut was shown by States, while in this table the decline in output is 
revealed according to species. Only three woods on the entire list 
show a greater computed cut in 1918 than in 1917. These are Doug- 
las fir with an increase of 4 per cent, hickory with 5 per cent, and wal- 
nut with 61 percent. The enlarged cut of walnut was due entirely to 
the demand for this wood for war purposes. 
The decrease in yellow pine production from 1917 amounted to 
more than 2,500,000,000 feet, or 20 per cent. As between 1917 and 
1916 the cut of yellow pine fell off 10 per cent. The 1918 cut was 
more than 4,000,000,000 feet less than in 1916. Others of the more 
important softwoods, the cut of which declined from the year before, 
are white pine 2 per cent, hemlock 15 per cent, and western yellow 
pine 13 percent. Cypress production decreased 34 per cent. Among 
the hardwoods the computed output of oak was less by 10 per cent 
and that of yellow poplar by 17 per cent. 
Softwood production forms approximately four-fifths of the aggre- 
gate annual cut. The 1918 cut of softwoods was 12 per cent smaller 
than in 1917; the hardwood cut was 7 per cent smaller than in 1917. 
