BUDGETENG FARM-A-ND~FOREST. OPERATING UNETS FOR INCREASED NET INCOME: AMES PLANTATlON CASES Thesis {ear the Degwe o! Fh. D. MECHSGAN STATE UNIVERSWY Aifred 939350an 3964 VJ um 1* “ Y1? Michigan .., care University This is to certify that the thesis entitled Budgeting farm-and-forest Operating units for increased net income: Ames Plantations cases presented by Alfred Pleasonton has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D. Forestry degree in _- 2 / 7(//;/;7z¢”10 2/ Majorégrofessor Date May 19, 1964 0-169 '.Iv" 4v_ Mains. 4-" PM—M-E‘uwm' «W. 1U! tlcnri‘sv Jr. D \. UM:- . . "N ,.. was Parish ' :1 by it f:'- . problem ‘.1z1on, set iii-mu: m... fits-cum opt ' ”Winn-s: .. ‘ " m‘.dutributr “at!“ mix.” v .mmz “lu r»; ._g r 'iili units. .. thme r ‘ \ Flues Y's: ’.Lr.- - 1 :1 1 .‘ I. ..\ ”a 1.0 lWlf‘ 1'43”“? :l ,‘ _ s . “Mfmmsrw-x _ , 9V " Wm. ." I; mmmwxv -' ,v 2‘— ‘. ~~q‘tfi'uu'blc ammo“ .{ 9w.“ 1..., . m. N f '1’ Nation. Firth-1m», , me a? w m ‘v- 1’ .,I r w: ‘- 0 up» - . AETRACT We FARM-AND-FOREST OPERATING UNITS FOR INCREASED NET INCOME: AMES PLANTATION CASES by Alfred Pleasonton Economic problems rooted in agriculture and forestry, and staining from tradition, seriously affect lives and welfare of people in low-income areas such as in west Tennessee. This project undertook 3 principal objectives. 1. Ascertaining how changes in forestry and farming activities can contribute to higher incomes for low-income farm- and-fm'est operating units in the area. '2. Ascertaining the regional significance of improved forestry on such units. 3. Indicating use of data permitting more accurate ap- praisals of opportunities for improved forestry on individual units. Fidget analysis to help owners decide among various al- téimtfié allocations of farm resources to increase net income fi‘not aasfiphisticated procedure. It is commensurate with the d23mrdc§3f current practicable methods of forest data collection, {Midi} and insole prediction. Furthermore, its very méi€21n€§ it} more suitable for widespread use than more mfi é'eéfiuqm'; 4‘33! m this project accmilated should constitute m men creative agencies cm develop action . . 0- :f“." .r. -. V 13: *r' ' a ' . 1 - .1 _ --"'t'-'-"5 ?c".-‘ 0“” \_._“,....-b o .II. F j \ -; 5’. 0"” '9 — 'F “9‘ n....--‘ -: . ‘ v .- . “- 00-- F‘ g {’0‘ .Ln! Hey: : 0 '0 A. "I. . .- qu: 1». '0 '- \M- 9 u." o — _ "“IQ . -qoa .. , - ‘ ' I“ "-f o---- o..- - -.. ' ’V o o .. nv‘. . I . f l“ :;.‘ 'F {'0 ov '. . u‘. -~.§. .- y,-]. -. s... ' . A V“ “-5 '1‘. d‘“.-*... O a. ‘ a _ . : .‘h-q.. Q. .-'~ s-H-.‘.':‘ -. ‘q' . . ~":':“‘ 3:.5 Va: o‘ ‘*~~. : “' -.- . :5?" .' . ' ":'“ no 0 e a. “--E'" - m - a an. n"._:_ 9‘35.:,_“ .- . ~- -4‘.;-“’: ' . ‘ _ ‘ o I h. ' h.;‘ -. ‘ ‘.a-! "'- s I... p ‘ v. .1 ‘ 1 s, Q ~ I -. . ‘I ‘9“ }“;. - u- p ‘ ~_ . :.:_ . . '..:.-;‘.-q‘ ‘ *.b’- h. o .... .t ..,._ . ‘—_ h 3-: ~;J s. -1 DA . .. h~t C‘ ~‘,_. ~‘2 ' . v“. ,1, .. ‘xd' a... "~5. at - -. N " 9.- ."'C ' h.“- . M‘u‘: a- \C ‘u. 4 ~~ ‘. a. .‘. ‘fia ‘ ‘.1 -~ 4 .1“ ‘C-Ao y‘.‘ -‘ .‘r- I :51“. _ \.V-. :‘. ‘ “A“. ._4 a“ 'x - ‘ s. ‘ a- -‘ .V. '- . “an. ~. ! 0.. ‘ -v‘;:s c-‘- h., '- | “v . v - “In“ - - n“ "\; .A e ”a '1‘...) king -‘ -‘u ‘0‘ r Q” ‘ a ‘ h~ . ' -~.. . ‘t s.: O: a "“$ \ ~ ‘ ‘0 VI.- . ’. 0‘ ‘ ‘ A ‘5‘ -c 5‘- . 4‘ ,v_ . _ \.\ ~ \ .5 .I 3‘ . “ ‘1‘».- ~ ‘ k‘» ‘ -~ Q N ' . ,~ Alfred Pleasonton “(filtrate the lot of farm families now bar-eh above Mutant-e levels of living. l" ‘é‘t' the first and second objectives primarily involved study Of MM'H‘NMimhip to problems of over-all farm manage- m‘ fully ineom goals. This project was focused on tenant Etta-mes attic Ares Plantation in southwestern Tennessee, but see m-‘ubrices all relevmt aspects of timber production and “an; Iron forests under 3,000 acres. It was designed to “rage-inference for many types of farms, aiming to suggest M’mfll in solving some of the current widespread rural We problem. aim?“- " Six hehdduled data collection phases follow: (1) Wood- M data and forty owners' attitudes towards forestry W by interview. (2) Twenty forest products buyers “u"wetiesnaires probing the markets facing woodland owners ‘ WW' attitudes toward forestry and future timber m. "“'(3)"‘m Ans Plantation's 10 ,hOO-acre forest was sampled ‘ W by forest surveying, including intensive sampling M8! the eight case study units. (1;) Agricultural input- “hta the these eight units were derived by the Antes Plan- WW (5) Specific Tennessee economic data h mum seem sources. (6) Work-performance ” WWions were recorded daily for over two Way-hm applicable to various work conditions. sum Wm'm of this project was the development of ' 1mm“ forestrydatat‘hat cube adapted to . situations in other areas. Processes \,I \/ . , .3 "-' .‘..~' ‘ -__. . *.‘ ‘ . "rl l'.‘..'.‘ j. ‘ a . M , ...oa'- "~”‘ ‘ o-. it u _. u ‘ ‘-,. ‘0 p - . -_...-e-- a 0‘ '3 O . -4 o ’a; :‘c I. “ l“ _ .J‘ ‘~'.“ r.” ~ .1' o'-- ,, ...a- «:0; u . u h .‘I. v. I..- a ' ‘ . v‘-. 'F‘: "é‘ '9“- L... w--:-""‘ - " . . v ~ ur'no 9 pg.“ " 0* ban-own. .- -“~M *. ' ‘ Wyn“. ”21"."? , waeolwu .o—ne-.a~.' . # . . ‘3‘"; "" “. ~WC ., a-.. -._ u.‘ _.“_' a .u. C “hoo- J s Q‘ ~ 5‘4-..\ -::.=:V -0 C-.. fine-d _.._ I’I a. 9A ' no. $.- ' ‘a?’ "a a U --' “‘- who—'- ‘ I s..‘ . st... ., - ...‘:.. .E‘e “ ‘L ' Va- . \‘a: '1 :5: C‘O‘- . "" sue.“ ’- u- “ ‘ ‘~ ~. 5" hr. : : 'a--~ I. no.‘ ‘ fin, :- “*-c. 'u- 1 I .. I “ '3 I“. ’ u -‘. -2 . 2-; §_..‘ 1' ‘- k‘x .~. ., a- .. w.‘ ’ - . s' " a... .— N ~ K: :‘s a ‘. s. .se: e._ .. ~‘.= 8 x t- . ‘4‘ ‘ .- : v "' :4..' e" "hn ‘ a e- I Q ‘ e. . s U‘.'-' a A. '5‘ .. e.‘ :_ . Q ‘ u u I". . I ‘ \‘ "n- gv V' ‘ .NF- ~““‘" Alfred Pleasonton Moscow and cmputation described in appendices for “him appraisals of forest income opportunities can minimum. :0 I‘m ,rTb ‘lecond product of the study was the illustration, "‘ ”Mata; of the budget method for analyzing alternative mi!” integrated farm-and—forest operating-unit resource allocation. In each of eight examples, each of three forestry h", " ’ * in management with harvesting and roadside “9».th management with stumpage sales, and extensive m with-tunage sales-«was combined with a recommended altemtrn .fln management plan. These integrated plans were m. a! to net insane with the original, traditional system “infill-Wm which disregarded woodland. Forestry data .m-mwere prodected over several decades and financial will! prepared to bring out the returns and advantages, costs 1‘. problems, and annual net farm incomes for each alternative. All three integrated plans show inImediate increases in it fir. incm over the original farm operation. The more labor- MW alternatives generally yield higher incomes. The most “m1! alternative for Units 1-7 is intensive management with m mlube‘cause harvesting provides needed wages to each film, as agricultural enterprises don't occupy them fully. Intensive managemnt with stumpage sales is financially ” M“ for the Unit 8 family having a large forest acre- a o. v“ ' '- c. v . c 4 . . 9.".‘J‘- "' . U a 4. | ' I ‘I no" " "' "; H. . -0- I z... use- , \ ..-t:“ “‘C:. 5“.' ’ ave- coo-5' ‘ ‘ T’Za“-t‘ :9.‘t- file ..a‘— ‘~|-- Us ‘a ‘ OF 0.- 0 '5 ‘- - .. ’1- e-n: d"“9 F; - '~‘a‘ h - . e .. u I. on . I '9 Cable ‘."- .. . .. .. .'~.. ; 'r‘;..: - ‘ ~._.‘ g Q- "OwA‘ . ‘. . I’ Q fi— Alfred Pleasonton fluid equilibrium is reached after 50-70 years. Stumpage value of resilual growing stock continually increases, averaging annually for the 8 units from $2hl to $6,581 closely proportionate to their forest acreages. Ayerage annual increases per acre range from $2.26 to $2.96, showing a rapid build-up in investment-- a further incentive for good management. The third forestry alternative, stumpage sales when possi- ble, without any improvement efforts--virtually the absence of manta-led". to downgrading of the forest and yielded re- latively negligible returns. The general regional significance of farm-and-forest budgeting stems from increased capital accumulation, a higher tax‘base, substantial wage income, expansion of wood-using industries and others, and higher credit ratings for forestry. 3‘1"" 0". wowonn‘ a. ring.” .m rmMMT OPERATING UNITS Wchqm; “M ll ’03 qr . g . "W‘WON CASES ”u, my be p b “m 01' PhD!‘ ':.'< y - Alfred Pleasonton M w .- NIB“- 1 . ... “1011- up pm.-.- m. ”- Dr. "Jim! 9". tin", an Am .‘ ”Whit: 231' '9_. was an er the r- a. m. m, mt Jer‘ ~,.y-'o W L Bar In Why, m “Wt std Ix,- .7 M Minus. : 4 m M1. 2' £73131," 1‘ _ ." h J. What. .4 .A -Is Chum and r . .. .. . Subuntted to Mar A. mm ”Wait ‘ ‘1 11.1. fulfillmt of the requ1rementg T m u- m of ‘MI Wimt " " ' 4" —."-‘~;.~-~. . . "- ”Ug‘. ' 2 I "‘ ,.. .‘H II .”n .7... " “no .-. "' , V ‘ - ow ‘N' “E... . covsv~s . I‘ . o- \ v“ “sin-n. A, _~~v- 3 g . I‘I: uuuh’b. b. c ‘h - Q n r- N. .‘g - ”3:4 ,_ -l. 10:. I- ‘L-—‘ .- \ b . k '_ Q. ‘. x - c h -u. ‘1‘ J.. ' 5‘ fl " Q n ‘ a. ‘ -:;’ ‘- : - .— —~ ’ I ..,..- s.. v-‘fi: . ' u u vv‘; “‘1‘“.." A: -t’F" $9.. h--.‘ ». “ .“‘ “. é. ; ’«3. .’ on.“ '. o... i . ‘ a. .w . -- vs- r ‘ ‘ k“... " - 1... ‘ | :~.:’ "e us. ‘5 n . - o 3 ‘ ‘- § «I in--.“ d _o.‘ . .3... n'.-l ’ "‘ It h‘:n‘.. alumni ‘1: .. v) . - kt... 'fi‘. fig? . -“. - \ ~3‘t-s... . c‘“. ' ‘ ..‘ 9 v& up“ ‘1'“ 1., ~ ‘~ 3; . :r- ‘~._.? ‘2‘- ‘ . ' 5"‘3: ' 9 Q q \ s .3 x'. \ '- " Q I 2‘.- . “in... s ‘- . .‘ ‘ .2. -. ‘E - :-.F‘ ’ .N.» ‘ p' “-\.‘ td‘ .~ . . — . § ‘ ‘. ‘ A — ' ‘\J .a‘ - 1 ‘ I ' J a ‘ v \. "-2 '5’ v \- v- .' . hfi ~u ‘ to“ a _ - ‘\ ‘ '0 N \ Q Eag‘w “Ra‘s -0 ‘ N» I. ‘ AKR‘ \-.‘-.N . , =3 .. \ -‘Mj: \" .. ‘ I‘ .e x “ wk “'5: V .k‘ 1‘ .h “J _ ‘ n PREFACE Thosv‘w >'_ This project was begun at the suggestion of the late Dr. John fi‘m, leery Lee Professor Eneritus of Economics at the Harvard M‘Séhool of Public Administration, but supervisory responsi- ifiity'later was passed to Dr. Ayers Brinser, then Lecturer in Econ- d’h, while the project outline was still in an early stage of de— W- At hr. Black's recommendation, and with the concurrence ofnr. Brim, In Ans Fomdation Forestry Fellowship administered lithe University of Tennessee was applied for and received, making M11313 Inst of the field work on the Ames Plantation, in Hardeman @5817, “his, and Jackson, Tennessee, and in Corinth, Mississippi. " 1' ' ' 31'. Sales L. Barraclough, then Associate Professor of Forestry “the! University, was Resident Forester heading the Ames Plantation W Wt mid, during my 17 months of field work, gave close N W mision to all phases of the research, for which I Am M. I greatly appreciate the help and kind cooper- Mike: in. m J. Whatley, then the University's Program Dime- flu?“ Mimi and Professor of Agricultural Economics—also “if? 3a A. lam-tin, Professor of Land Tenure and Policy. ’15 M 19561‘hegsn work for the Southern Forest Experiment “WW mud States Forest Service as a research forester “W ’Wt to complete the forest survey on the W‘WW than: for unable advice on survey proce- ”W‘fimw, then Chief of the Division of rarest 1;} CO has first: .2. .~. av ‘ ‘ " q H ' 4 out. a I 3. .r 1 L ':' ... -m.c J." h S e' a. 9‘. "r ‘ I “ S .. a - 9 0 .—.¢- p.4- 0 u L. ‘ 'v t 1.‘-‘ Bot IL-“VO\I$~ us.‘ w-“~= t..'.. ‘e-fi- a“. .~ 5......‘-' ‘n‘ -’ .' .0:9-. ‘3 a... .. ‘ ' a I t-.. \t..:.;" ’ , o. ‘u 0 ~"-.--.* Oh. .:; 9-, - .. 3;...n, - . . . ‘ - .‘l..' ‘ 9.- GB: “ H- . :5 ~.( . A, ‘: 0‘ o... , s..... v. .3 .- ‘ .“‘ d- I 'zh.,_;_. - I:- ~ =“--‘. " ""‘ ‘ y E e p. (‘2‘: ‘. I.‘U ~ f 'o: I o- ~‘-~. ‘~ -~.~ ‘ ’7. ~ We! Mearch. I also owe grateful recognition to Dr. John R. mutt for his supervisory inspections to develop 1w survey accuracy. To Miss mtha E. Nelson, Mrs. Jacqueline M. Earles, Mrs. W P. Held, and Mrs. E1018. Byrd of the Statistical Services Sec— tion, Inch gratitude is due for their care and diligence in preparing I‘m and tabulations to facilitate analysis and stand projection. For his painstaking help in the monumental and tedious task of projec- ting the Macs stands, Joe D. Perry has earned a long-lasting me of IV thl‘BkS. Mrs. Elaine P. McGowan, Miss Edna M. Villere, Hrs. Janice H. Shelton, and Mrs. Margaret R. Pilie, all deserve great appreciation for the typescripts produced by their nimble fingers. + Particularly heartfelt gratitude is expressed to Sam Gutten- berg, Chief of the Division of Forest Economics Research, for his un- derstanding support, advice, and encouragement despite problems over the yen-s. Likewise, exceptionally abundant thanks are extended to Dr. Lee M. Jams, Professor of Forestry, for his guidance, encourage- nnt, constructive criticism of preliminary drafts, and unending pa- tience during the years of analysis and writing. Grateful recogni- tion is also due to Dr. Richard G. Wheeler, Associate Professor of Agricultural Econmics, for his critical analysis and recommendations for W of the semi-final draft. And a very special expression of gratitude has been more than m by mid-him, who ha given generously of her talents in Wt“ at of the tables, proofreading the entire vol- lly mmm‘bhsmgertions and criticisms, and especially in Mil; Wm thrown may difficult days. Mr final Wsh'm firmer in not or Jug—st remains my on, ,‘W on]: of the reader's forebearance and good will. r " »- n ‘ iii in . I .- ‘ .- w. l .."O q’ . Cut - ~‘ h‘-"-lv~ o s . — a \a--. '.'- v. . bv-J. .- .. . ‘- -. m7. ‘- ' IO‘ ‘ . .2... ~. .-' B. ." .- . ‘ . -‘.-~.;: -- ~I -.-.-‘ -‘ - ‘ ‘11:-M‘Lv-o - . . -‘.. . ‘ b- ( J (D ‘.‘<._ ‘_ Militia... hamper. - 81"“ 'wmsorconmrs ntlrrn. Page W . . .l‘lt‘i‘ . ..................... 11 m I Maw z .................... x WOW. -. . . . ................ xxiii m Public ; . I}. mm Al]: SCOPE or THIS STUD! .......... 1 . roam R959“ We. ..... . .............. l mum of rumors, Owners, and Others ...... 11 “Problem. . ....... . . . ..... 16 “5...... ........... 22 may ..... 25 ' Mam . ............. 27 mmmfltion ..... .. ....... 31 . ....... 35 MOI-M. ..... .........36 ": nee-no Elm for ma and Forest ........ 1&1 ’Tsoilwmmmmm. . . so Moons-soonest... 50 WWI-Museso ,' ’ "Mme. . . . . . 52 MMkm. ..55 O ev . ’7' ’ C's. ., .... o‘un en.- a o . .-;. ...; o-o'-. .. -'~' O‘r .00 v ‘ I _ ' - , .... - ‘1 =0- .. 5d.‘.s...-‘ fin...“- n« I»: Q’ ,¢ (. s. - . b.s.-¢ --...4.» . u . .. . . . \I-I- Iu- , .- a I: u...uI-..~ -. *.-I a; - .v u-v ’ bc-ov 5 Q . . . V. a .... u 2"". 6.. - ,‘ ' "' 'I- on I... O-‘- b. h-cv- .-‘—.~ g . . _ . .uqz.-:.. n.- ‘ . I v-—--...-. *.. . . “I 5“ “ I. . ‘ -..“‘ - ---'-" j '. ' ~. ‘_ ‘ - ‘Q. 7-- ' . ...-..M“ a ._ - -d- C - t ’ V. w I c . ‘ - 'I. . '- .:.° ... ‘ 1 .4 a Q ‘~ .‘ r: w- . h ‘ I _ ~ - .. r-~..,. ~ I. ‘ . . _.-‘;u-.‘ h. '--I '- ‘-,.-~‘ ‘rr 2 ‘-...“. A I ' I=‘~-‘ - U. " a- ‘v~‘ id" . . o. ' i u .9 u N I, '- . , . u... ch‘ “‘““ ' '- ' k. '. s "- .v‘ I ~.. ‘ C O ' I . I ~ 3 I L‘;: " a . .. - --.~ v '. .... v . a _ ‘ Q ,, y - I.‘. fig..- ... - ~~U ‘r- - '1‘“: '7‘ ‘ _ n-r». “ ~c' K V‘ " c- {2*- .Q“.'~ ‘. . A a h . 5. . .. a u.‘ . p . s I I‘ l W \ 'w ‘.‘ . ._ v‘ ~‘N ‘ ‘-r ‘L! “ ’—A 3:". ~. 1 - v ‘- “v"fl ~ ~ - ‘I Vt an . ~ 591% Page lb, Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 15. Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of operation for Unit 2 . . . . . . 218 15. Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 17. Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Uhit 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 18. Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of operation for Unit 3 . . . . . . 231 19. Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 29. Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Uhit 3.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 21. Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of operation for Unit h. . . . . . . 2hh 22. Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2R8 23. Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, datum. .250 -_2¥. Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of operation for Unit 5. . . . . . . 256 35, C9nflenaed.cnnual financial summaries for first and sccond decades, Unit 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 26. Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, L',J>‘-‘- ' :Wt 5 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 263 2?. Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated “value of bare land and other investments under l-iB. wuvafiauarplans of operation for Unit 6. . . . . . . 270 II. Chlgggppd annual financial summaries for first and second decades, unit 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 1.3:. Villa 0. ,1c5.3.- of Uni V i m ago-oat ans x1: v- z -4 .-.' ‘0'" C ..94;’ no *«u-‘P‘ ‘ . - :a ..-...- , . TW" ' . I . _ . o 5-... . .: - -- ‘ - r u t-"' ... " ' I I .u I -"'~ - . c . .c‘f-‘D. .1 ‘0 ...-fin”. ‘ v:‘ = " 1'- O 5 It-..’ :-" , . :‘ R_..--::‘_. :-- .- .. ...... .pv. 1‘... ....- O . . {3“‘O ‘;."_ .'. 5"»-..a‘ ‘. . a- - .- . ~ c . "nu-c" ee- 2 b. ~--—I--.~.‘ I..- H . . V - . Yv- f-f. w. -..-.-. _ . «u .l I“ ‘_ o ‘wfv- ... . '& A.-_‘._: | .‘ o - .O-nu ‘_, u , . 7- O .. . H “..-. ‘ “'VS fit. : "‘.~ - .- --.., g e i r__. ‘ «v.-. ~ - a. P" - -. ‘ --.-a--:v ~ -- ' 0“. o a‘ . a n ‘, . . Ll" .‘c ...-L «A ' - - v .. _ . -“‘5 _ ' i :v". , ‘ 5.. “a .. -~ ‘ r..& a. o. v,‘. . . - '.M.‘ C fiv u . ~--.. . - " 3‘ D ' “ “ . - 5. o . o , I. | I 0‘ .).. &It. “-6: T: , ‘ -I‘ § ~~ . .---‘; g 7‘ . ‘ an. w a-“ ‘ ““99 .. -“ _ . ..‘- ' ...“ ‘ i av: c-'“ ‘ a U .- ".‘ r‘ - "I - .. )‘I “‘ .-. on ' 0 ‘° r- s. c .. ‘v. ‘&~-: “-I 34‘ . A .“.- _ §..- r- ‘ t. '5‘- ‘ a h‘ A -\ s. b . . .. ‘d‘ {‘4 “ 0 ~ Nit :J. :-::.- u-_ a. *‘ ' this 14m. 141. 146. 1-5 . 1-61. 1—63. 1-6c. 2.2. an. 2-31. 9% Page Value of yields by decade from the 29 acres of Area A of Unit 1 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- M andstumpage sales . . . . . . 332 value of yields by decade from the 76 acres of Area B of hit 1 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- mundetumpagesales... .. . .. 333 Vllm of yields by decade from the 28 acres of Area C of Unit 1 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agemntandstmpagesales............ 33h Value of yields by decade from Areas A, B, and C of Unit 1 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management andsttmmesales................335 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1 Area A, a 29-acre loblolly pine plantation re- placing a poorly stocked large sawtimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.1; MBF per acre. 336 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1 Area B, a llé-acre poorly stocked large saw- timber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.1 mperacre............. ...337 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1 Area C, a 28-acre moderately stocked pole- timber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 0.6 Wperacre...................338 Iabar requirements and values of yields by decade from 221 acres of forest land on Unit 2, with intensive and extensive management . . . . . . . . . . 339 Labor requirements in man-days for management and for harvesting by decades on the 1|- categories of forest in wt 2 a I o o a a e I I o a e e a n o e o 0 3m maenryieids by decade from the 1M2 acres of Area A of. Unit 2 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- Mrmroadsidssales............ 3&1 “drums by decade from the Sacres of AreaB new 2 under Plan II, with intensive forest mn- mammidesales........ 3H2 mfifielflibydscade fronthe 66acres of Areac mt Shudder Plan II, with intensive forest nan- ”infirmidesales........ .. 3&3 xii-ii ...-(vu- n ‘ ’ --"’ ‘: * ' c‘ I: up '. ‘1‘- ‘J 3". he-‘ " . “ "-v ' r H‘. -..? V0 ...-O ~ ~' u or t «I rt h} gr D Q '3 . (D O ‘l 'l t .’ ' 1’. . o . I .3 ...-U , -r ...- 90 “one C ‘-“O --.;u-. ’ Q :. —’ a. ... n‘ b u.- : '.‘... n’ .':A ‘n l , .. . 3'; 'LJ. . ...—-ub -.' .. . ,- P’ a I l v- a”. \1o 0—... u ...4... . u 9 ‘_.'_p-. ‘, . : - -—..s ‘0‘ v ... \- a . ”g .. ., ...‘ . ... .~ I " ' “ LO. u. nan-Am. . C . ' -'O .... v. ...-u i.--» . ’ -‘0 . . ‘ ~ coda .. . " * d ' --.; . Q: ~"_-. A . u ’ on ‘ ’“" ~ «...- “-‘u ‘ '1‘, - ‘. a ‘. U“¢a ‘ ~ ‘peh . . ... ‘ - .... x me ~— ~. __ ... fi" a: '. . -5 in“.- |"' .‘~ _ . ea .‘“: \‘o a _ ‘ e. ' -‘ ‘3 . ‘r-. ‘ c 'N“ A. V. N P- ‘ U‘P N v. ‘A- ~' ~. ‘hd' ‘ y. ‘ :-. a~~ .-. 0 .. , \ .u V. i Q . n v . 'N ". . £ ‘ 5 " 1‘?“ : * b, “s‘ 1“.:. - _ ( .. --,~._’ ~~ a~~- ~ ”a“: - s -w Q 2.1.: x.- I K.‘ 5.“. 4 “.b->A: ._‘L ..h . __ .- . t‘ ... -‘ ‘ v. gs... \ ' c In-_ P, “.~“.. ‘ «0"..- -_.. \ I~‘. . - ‘~ a“ ~.‘ 'I A‘ Q‘ ‘~; . . Us. '—: \- . U ‘ s a. s. . H 241. 24c. 243. 2-5 . 2-6A. 2-63. 2-6C. 2-69. Page Value of yields by decade from the 8 acres of Area D of Unit 2 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- egenntandroadsidesales. . . . . . . . . . . . 3111+ Villa of yields by decade from the lid-2 acres of Area A of lhlit 2 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- lgemntlndstumpagesales........... 3&5 Value of yields by decade from the 5 acres of Area B of Unit 2 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agenntandstmpagesales............ 3H6 Value of yields by decade from the 66 acres of Area C of Unit 2 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agmntandstumpagesales............ 31+7 Value of yields by decade from the 8 acres of Area D of Unit 2 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agemt and stunpage sales . . . . . . . . 3M8 Value of yields by decade from Areas A, B, C, and D of Unit 2 under Plan IV, with extensive forest manage— unt and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . . 319 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 2 Area A, a 99-acre loblolly pine plantation re- mains a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper- slope hardwoods containing 3.5 cords per acre. . . 351 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 2 Area B, a 5-acre loblolly pine plantation re- placing a poorly stocked seedling and sapling stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 0.2 cord per acre 352 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 2 Area C, a 66-acre moderately stocked pole- tinker stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 1.5 mprmm....................353 m yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 2 Area D, an 8-acre well stocked poletimber stand of lever-slope hardwoods containing 2.3 HBF per acre 351+ _‘ rfiuirenents and value of yields by decade from m of forest land on Unit 3, with intensive “extensivemansgement..............355 Aura." -' . W“ in nan—days for management and for Meeting. by decades on the 5 categories of forest “masteel-oeo-ooeooonn~oo356 xiv ‘4 I O C "‘ ~:."; .0 .‘n .3 ’ L.-.- to .-~- I ,.. , .i .- - 1 . ' 'Y“‘n: n: a. ..., .l ‘d-‘. u. .-.- s. .. a . . o ‘ ....‘H. V. vnau fi...a-. ‘ £93.92" a-4 .‘g_ ~ ‘..*_.I -..a‘ o ‘ ..- .. "‘ .. . .o _ I‘ '4 I' ‘ fi ‘ ‘, .. . . “J I O . .v ‘ ‘0 v'e ...-. .. . ‘ &Q;-‘-C ‘_ ‘ .‘r ‘ ... $.‘ ' -_. .3 .,.I; :1 ’ - .1...‘- ‘ e A’ -.. 2 __ ‘- o—o. v ‘...n‘ , 7;‘;“. 9" fi .- ---..O ‘I. . ‘- v I‘ "-'- ” ..;-~ ;. his ‘ u .. . ‘. O- ‘ - ~ ‘ ‘ ‘ p" a ‘O .1... . ~§ d v. v -- . 9. ‘ct. hr... ._ av...‘ . _ _~‘ “.‘. . R 9' . -.. ': <-. -’ .... .‘ h “‘ I. V H ‘ ‘ o O ..--s ‘ ‘\ :5. an... b . ‘ . V .“-O . ‘- ‘. ‘— ub.‘ _ $33.1“. ~ fiPq .. ~ -_ -. ‘.. h ‘ u I W . .I- .. q .‘ .. C o _ ~ ‘ . t. n . ‘- u. . :- ‘7 . 0 "‘--._~. t a: v. . "a. a . V. ....-. q ..“...- a «.-. 9-- - n “‘1‘ ‘ gut: c. -o C I. ‘ Page ' Mile- of yields by decade from the 133 acres of Areas I. and B of Unit 3 under Plan II, with intensive Management and roadside sales . . . . . . . 357 ..m m of ”yields by decade from the 25 acres of Area C M3 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- Mandroadsidesales..... 358 3'3. Value of yields by decade from the 50 acres of Area D of unit 3 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- Mandroadsidesales............ 359 3-33: Value of yields by decade from the 10 acres of Area E of Unit 3 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agemntandroadsidesales....z. . 360 5' 3411. Value of yields by decade from the 133 acres of Areas A and B of Unit 3 under Plan III, with intensive forest management and stumpage sales . . . . . . . 361 we Value of yields by decade from the 25 acres of Area C of Unit 3 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agenentandstmnpagesales. . . . . . . . . . . . 362 343; value of yields by decade from the 50 acres of Area D ' of Unit 3 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- Wandstmpagesales. . . . . . . . . . . 363 3431. Value of yields by decade from the 10 acres of Area E but Unit 3 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- ageuntandstumpagesales............ 361l- 3-6. Vela of yields by decade from Areas A and B, C, D, and l of Unit 3 under Plan IV, with extensive forest magenntmdstmpagesales.......... 365 336‘: Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for M 3 Are: A, a 25 -a_cre loblolly pine plantation re- m poorly stocked poletimber stand of pine- eontainingO.Tcordperacre . . . . . . 367 . 0 1335“; m yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for _‘ - i Unit 3 he: s, a 25-acre loblolly pine plantation re- . ' m a “poorly stocked poletimber stand of Imper- ,If‘Jbge-i.eed3u'—hardwoods containing 0.8 cord per acre 368 Wgyleldsand labor inputs per acre by decade for mt has 3. 254cm well stocked seedling and . stand of upper-slope pinedcedar -hardwoods ' P .‘__ . ‘ 0 LOB. .-..-.- ... Fg-‘agfo w. . ' ' ~.-.. .v C 1'- ..—-'. ... .-.. ~ . " ‘ a . Lie '° - " .‘--—.¢- A: 9": ‘_ . ‘0 no... 5 l ‘ ~ . L xv. :F1 ‘- -"'"U- ‘... . we . 1:":- 4 . _. ~‘_ ... ‘. ‘\--. 1” ..-'. o b. v e ‘ n" .1 us..- -. n‘éw. S" ‘ .. .--o—_. ‘- 0‘ - i. . :- ‘- ".2 -:~ , . K‘ V , . Q | ' Q ."--.~ ~O - . . O V. v“.-. ‘ ., ea. _ “~- F‘s-"p. 54“-. :”‘ ‘ ' ‘Ifiae‘ w“, 1. ..._ q, ‘ .- y ‘ x s- , . e‘~-‘_‘ .: .. , . —.. U ‘ "--. Q ‘ . ‘ A . ..,- ‘-~ 5;. . “5,? i..-“ 5|..fi. . q «,s. . per. , 5-5" a-” Q -' ' ' A“ ~‘r'-;-‘,- v. I;; s ‘ - ' _ ... {warty-:- 3”.-. .l as vo _ . h . '0 |--‘ . .-o . ' ' a. .u ... v..-» . ' ._ . . II " 23" ' ‘ L‘ .‘f-...:' ' . - :- v,. 5‘ ..v ...n- x‘ ‘ *‘ ‘\ Q:"s:—. _ _ ‘H' r, ‘ 0‘ I ‘a ‘ ..- - Q Q | 0.. I “ “a ’9 . “ M. U“. ‘ ‘~-. ~. '-. P. L ‘- uc‘gn. \— ~A~..- i q “ W n a -.- h“: -.e -' 'u .‘c. ‘ “o. v. . E-‘ u-: . . "“v 5 .. ‘- K. :‘c‘e E... .._ . “b C-.‘ ‘ . 1:: a, ‘1 - \g .1: ~..' ‘ v. ’ L «a _ s --“ v. V--.. A“. g __ :~-‘ . "Z L—. ‘ - ‘ *-, g-" Q.“ ‘ ‘Q - 1" ~ “vos ‘3 I 5‘ ...-i . “.3 . e ~- v .-. ‘4 C . ~ ~ § 2:” “ ' d ‘h‘ na. V. ch‘ ‘-~.‘ : -\ Q W._. ".1"; \ _ k a . .‘ 'Q " _ . —. .‘f 4“ ' an 5 ‘ . .‘. ‘ a ‘- 7 - . h‘ ‘— . a . ‘ § ___‘ “~a T~ L33. Lars u-an. Ha. Ha. Page llerlgp yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 3 Area D, a 50-acre well stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 1.7 MBF per acre 370 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 3 Area E, a lO-acre moderately stocked seedling and sapling stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing l.-8]lE!'peracre...... .. 371 Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 175 acres of forest land on Unit A, with intensive andextensivemanagement...... . 372 Labor requirements in man-days for management and for harvesting by decades on the 1t categories of forest inUnith................. .373 Value of yields by decade from the 93 acres of Area A of Unit )4 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- sgenehtandroadsidesales............ 371+ Value of yields by decade from the 30 acres of Area B of Unit 3 under Plan II, with intensive forest man— agmntandroadside sales . . . . . . . . . . 375 Value 01’ yields by decade from the 20 acres of Area C of Unit 1} under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agement and roadside sales . . . . . . . . 376 Value of yields by decade from the 32 acres of Area D of Unit h under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agemltandroadsidesales......._...... 377 Value of yields by decade from the 93 acres of Area A of Unit h under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agemntandstmpagesales............ 378 Value of yields by decade from the 30 acres of Area B of Unit h under Plan III, with intensive forest man- .wtaadstunpagesales............ 379 Valm A: yields by decade from the 20 acres of Area C of Unit h under Plan III, with intensive forest man- Wandstumpagenles........ 380 Yalgpgf yields by decade from the 32 acres of Area D Unit under Plan III, with intensive forest man- VIM,“ ‘tw “l“ o o e a a o e a e a a a 381 f Uh : “ . . Mumlflfifldecade from Areas A, B, C, and D of ‘ ' ’ IV with extensive forest manage- net-fistupagewales............. 382 xvi. ‘ . c. . .. . c: .. . . e ‘H . I ..1 e .e: I a. . u 0 0.; ~ on v . e —. .“ _.. e t - V . m I.“ . e (1 pie 4 e 0 A n . ~ ... e .... s. s h ‘. ..Iw as u‘ r”! o e o.: .. .. ... ¢ _ .¢ 5 . u. n u i . —\ I .. . : r o. u .2 a: . .M e: 2. o . . &. .2 . 6.. . . o : . a. :& .... e... o v e u . a a. In ql . . o .. a. . .g \u .t . . u e v e . ‘ a. ... .. .R. . .. In... . a . ..... o. . é... _. . . u .u. u .3 to ac . .. . o . ... ... . he. ., . .. . —. II: a!» v Ina . o «I . a e ... :u .. . ~ .5 .K A .m. . cm ... . . W. . e o n a. e. ‘ a. .u .e v.“ a . u * .... e! v” .. . a - .... a. b .4‘ . ... u. t.» o a. "E .- - a o t a ... . . 3. t. . 0.. o — m . o e p. 55 0» v w C .u. \ ~ . . o v . arr- . . .w I... ‘ o .0 . =~ ‘4 .. M In. “s. h u s _ a. “a“ fig .% on. c an .. “.5. a. ~.‘ i. ...... 2 ._ . ._ .. e. . o. ... u. . .v e. “or" ex" .Cn m.“ "we for" q . W. 5 to 2.. u U C. a: A . ‘ Jr“ .p . .2“ ix urn—lb “III- Llu o 0 “III N‘ ...: on..- .nnu .. u . on . .5. . c.- avlw or a. .1 .ea .. . ... .. .m... ..t. . . . o i . . . . I e e e O . . o o L“. k-Gn. h-6C. L61). 5-1. 5-2. 5~3¢ . 5-31. Page Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit I, Area A, a 93-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper slope hardwoods containing 2.9 cords per acre . . . 381+ Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1‘ Area B, a 30—acre well stocked seedling and sapling stand of shortleaf pine containing 2. 7 MBF peracre........ ... .......385 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit h Area C, a 20-acre well stocked large sawtimber stand of shortleaf pine containing 8.0 MBF per acre 386 Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1+ Area D, a 32-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 1.9 MBF per acre 387 Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 92 acres of forest land on Unit 5, with intensive and extensivemanagement................ 388 Labor requirements in man-days for management and for harvesting by decades on the h categories of forest in Unit 5.. . . . . . 389 Value of yields by decade from the 1+5 acres of Area A of Unit 5 under Plan II with intensive forest man- egennntandroadsidesales. . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 Value of yields by decade from the 30 acres of Area B of Unit 5 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- egeuntandroedsidesales. . . . . . . . . . . . . 391 Yell! of yields by decade from the 12 acres of Area C of Unit 5 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- euemnt and roadside sales. . . . . . . . . . 392 Yelm of yields by decade from the 5 acres of Area D of Unit 5 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- egnmtandroadsidesales............. 393 Yum of yields by decade from the 1&5 acres of Area A of Mt 5 under Plan III, with intensive forest nan- entmdstmpagesales...... . 39h Wottyieldebydecadefronthe30acresofAreaB oft-i t5 uder Plan III, with intensive forest man- “flamesales.... .......395 xvii vi - e . ... -J .,.‘ ... 0‘ fl ' . .w .* e. -.- O U‘ ~ ' -. v-e § _.'_H w-" I ...-o... no 2’. F. ‘. .. an... .‘ . -.-_ -‘ u “‘--— ‘ F ’ . Iv. ~ . .... -0 . ‘ a, .. ‘b o E“: ..- . . . ' e ., ’ e _ . do. “1.3-:‘3 .- 1 l u y“. - . - vv-:- - A ‘V-v. v“.. - .‘. I ‘5 .0 e ‘e 54). 5-5- 5-6A. 5-60. 5-6D. 6-1. 6.2, 6-31. Page Value of yields by decade from the 12 acres of Area C of unit 5 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agenentandstmpagesales......... 396 Value of yields by decade from the 5 acres of Area D of Unit 5 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- age-ant and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 value of yields by decade from Areas A, B, C,and D of Uhit 5 under Plan IV, with extensive forest manage- ment and stumpage sales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 Axerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for unit 5 Area A, a MS-acre loblolly pine plantation re— placing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper- slope hardwoods containing 2.6 cords per acre. . . hOO Ayerege yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area B, a 30-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 1. l MBF per acre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MOI Ayerege yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for unit 5 Area C, a l2-acre well stocked poletimber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 2. 3 MBF per acre h02 Ayerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area D, a 5-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 2. 5 cords paracre............ .. . . 11.03 Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 17h acres of forest land on Unit 6, with intensive andextensivemanagement... 1+0h Labor requirements in nan- days for management and for harvesting by decades on the 2 categories of forest Olfmt 6 e e e e e a a e a a e a a a a a a 1‘05 value of yields by decade from the nu acres of Area Of Unit 6 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agenntandroadsi'desales......... 1+06 Ville of yields by decade from the 130 acres of Area B of‘Uhit 6 under Plan II, withfintensive forest man- Mendroedsidesales............ l+07 Ville of'yields by decade from the hh acres of Area A «Unit 61mderPIanIII, with intensive forest man- ”ammonium” xiiii 0 pa. . a 0! ~ ,. J ..._ c , ’ v I----- D. u-‘~ O‘ . r ' .u- ._ ..'.e;.. a a G . I. . V ‘-A-e b ...e ‘. -. -. . o 9' . _ 9 '2-.. ....o "“ v a ' . .‘_V‘ .0 ...: e: h" I‘_.‘- I- ....o- on 3 -~ 0.0 _" ~—-;v - ' ‘ . i but. I-" . C a C. *r‘; 1'; r... ..-, a u---— 0 . I ' . . ..;_c-a e ..‘. a: L' c o'—.d- .'.---~ ... 4 n - I... . 1.5: t n to... .. I- A no. 0 e- :s u. s , -a a-' rut..-) ‘ eon J . _ o - -~-a. --- '9 . 0‘ r "‘ . ‘Dtne coy-iv -o~‘- - o. e . e . - a J' , . $“.:‘ ‘ ' . o» 0‘»...- .. 5, ... . "h - '-~‘ g. _.___ -.. a ‘5; 5.. ' . . .‘ . . e. ’9‘.-. , i . an A ~~ “,‘,~‘,re - .e .-.e.. ._.“_~ . A -.. z ‘ ‘ awe: a :. , -... -. _' C" 're. .: as hn‘ e “he. ...‘.I* r“. -r . . --.A a. . e .' e... , e. c Q\ .._‘ “" a...‘“~ car" _‘ o . ""' .5 . Fu‘.,.. a ‘ ”... -\.‘I\v he. ' ."'..~ bl a... ‘ ' ca. RV ' I7 -.. L ...- . . . In ~. "1. 12w; ..~ ... c ‘ no- . -.. ‘. .-E u... --. ' “"‘ '- 0 Q: ' u . v-e "P o a. '“-v or .I.‘ *e.‘ :~: ‘9. «I'uel :“ ‘ . ' " a...‘ . ¢ -4- a ... ~ . '2 "p q " “‘-: e ‘ .. n. R " . a k. ". 'V . a..-‘ "en-o, ‘- ‘4 * -- F~< - ~ ‘- re ' e 5"... an" F ' “ s - I.” ‘e .l I" a .. Ft \ a‘{ ‘ . I'I i' .. a Q n. n a ‘93 \ . u‘e -- - - . “a ‘ . . ~*~ ‘- Ve l"'e -, H‘L “v.: F‘ I *‘e““ ‘ I m:‘£,.‘ ‘ “'~.. fip.‘ v . ..u‘ u.., . . -uo a. 0" ’I _ a o. s , -c .. . ‘ — v I- v. w. t. -.' ~ 4“? '7 . ~ " I ‘v- ~ ‘.""‘ ~‘g -_ . ~Ve . v “v." “‘4 us,“ h», . " 6.1.3. 5.5. 6—6A. 6-6B. 7-1. 7-2. 7-3A. 7~3B. 7-3c. 7-33. Page Value of yields by decade from the 130 acres of Area B of Unit 6 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agement and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . l$09 Value of yields by decade from Areas A and B of Unit 6 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpagesales..... 1410 Awerege yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 6 Area A, a ltit-acre loblolly pine plantation re- pdacing a 26-acre poorly stocked poletimber stand of uppernslope hardwoods containing 0.5 cord per acre and 18 acres of brush or idle land . . . . . . LL11 Ayerege yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 6 Area B, a l30-acre poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 1. 2 MB]? per acre............. ......hl2 Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 2,505 acres of forest land on Unit 7, with intensive and extensive management . . . . . . . . . . 1&13 Labor requirements in man-days for management and for harvesting by decades on the 6 categories of forest onUnitT... . . . .. hlh Value of yields by decade from the 1,123 acres of Area A of Unit 7 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agement and roadside sales . . . . . . . . . . l+16 'Valne of yields by decade from the 27 acres of Area B of Unit 7 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agement and roadside sales . . . . . . . . . I+17 Value of yields by decade from the 768 acres of Area c of Unit 7 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agemntandroadsidesales . . . . . . . . . . . ., l#18 Value of yields by decade from the 160 acres of Area D of Unit 7 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- agexnntandroadsidesales............ l+19 Value of yields by decade from the 267 acres of Area E ofmit 7 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- 'e‘g‘eaentandroadsidesales . . . . . . . . . . . . lL20 um era'yiem: by decade from the 160 acres of Area P of Unit 7 under Plan II, with intensive forest man- egenentandroadsidesales. . . . . . . . . . . . h21 xix Q , - ‘ on ‘.- .0 ‘ 0' '1 s ".- ..--4' a ’0. ...-5' " e vs - ... vv ’ ... ‘ u “ .‘ -o “' ‘ ar-‘ ‘ d v v _ Q ‘ ‘. - . W. .- .0 r w . i, p . --— o ..--n- .o . -.. . H ... a .o . ‘ ,. ..... _ - - . o o-_;n_"" 5" “-..... ‘a‘ h .s ""H., ., a -.x .Lfi- v. ..----” o- w .0 9 0 e . v. u-.. ‘- 4 c, a w. ‘.4 n u o '- - o. _ .. u: "3 "us .- ‘t ‘0-“ .. J-‘--_. N" - ~ 0 i O 1 . U. -—ou _ ...... ~‘- 0 . 9 J g 4 ~ --‘.. so... . ‘0 -’ ‘-~', L. ~¢ ' >- .---a. -.. '7 -- . 5- co... .. t 3‘». .. , “-4 f; 5 "' o. L " w e I - Q - Q - . an ' CI . 0- . .‘ “¢~ ' ' b . -- . --~ . .. ‘ ..‘, w \r. - ..-. . L‘.‘_-_. ‘ as:_‘ 5' ~ . s 5‘. *.‘ ~ ~- ~ " ~ 0 tr . :' " :- -.~ 69-. ‘ ‘ ‘ . . - u. I "" ‘ 0 “-a; h . p ‘ ...- -" Q -.‘ ~- ‘ho‘ ‘ . a- ~_. .. u— .- 5.". '_ ~," - «g, . . - a L 2‘0-.. . I -__ .. _ ~ . a ' so ‘— b“.. I”. H _ ‘ . a- ' W q u .. ~ Q ..‘~ '- n‘u- -. ~= -& ... ~ V¢ . .-xn.‘ '-~.G e.) . . , -‘ u o- ._ ‘- .‘Vw‘ . "~s J ‘§ 5 R‘ ' h_' . ‘5..- a, ‘¢ U h.“ \I-i A. ‘c N 7 ~ o-‘ ‘ ..- ‘-. e‘ ‘0- .r“: ‘ v. _ v" I t. O ‘- rf‘ ...’ “V I u— \ :‘r‘. ‘. ~“. --‘QV| ‘¢ .\ ‘P‘ u I ‘x. V v, c m (I A" T—MB. 7—hc. T—MD. T-Ma. T—Mr. 7—63. 75%. ‘9‘. 7-430. \1 u; L‘. Page Value of yields by decade from the 1123 acres of Area A of Uhit 7 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agement and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . . . M22 Value of yields by decade from the 27 acres of Area B of Uhit 7 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agement and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . . . M23 Value of yields by decade from the 768 acres of Area C of Unit 7 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agement and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . . M2M Value of yields by decade from the 160 acres of Area D of Unit 7 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agenmtandstumpagesales............ M25 Value of yields by decade from the 267 acres of Area E of unit 7 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agement and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . . . M26 Value of yields by decade from the 160 acres of Area F of unit 7 under Plan III, with intensive forest man- agement and stumpage sales . . . . . . . . . . . . M27 Value of yields by decade from Areas Aa, Ab, B, C, D, I and F of Unit 7 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales. . . . . M28 Awerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Uhit 7 Area A, a 1,123-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper- slope hardwoods containing 0.9 cord per acre and M83 acres of brush or idle land . . . . . . . . M31 Awerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Uhit 7 Area B, a 27-acre loblolly pine plantation re- placing a poorly stocked large sawtimber stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 3.3 MBF per acre . M32 Awerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Chit 7 Area C, a 768-acre moderately stocked pole- timbEr stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.0 Inns per acre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M33 Awerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Ufiif 7 Area D', a 160-acre moderately stocked large aawtinber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing \ 23h,llr per acre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .P‘J .- I“ a' - l . . ,o f "I ',--o- .... - .-'.. «- '_' n .'__-. o- . - ..F ' . § .- -..-- - ' - can'- u‘..- 0 O . . .l . -n ‘0— -- . " - CF ‘ L... cv"-- o .— - O\—_‘ n D ’ on ----‘ p-- -w.—~ v ~ — —. .‘-. . no-.--o '-.. . . ..s u“...--J . q . .' I ‘. -.. _ -— ~_.. .. . 'v .7 a ‘g F;- ‘0‘ ., . ' - .‘ ...‘.-- U . A -' ...... '0 v... _ :“--—o ' -.:_~_ !' ' V “D ‘g‘ .. U f “ :‘ w . I‘ I‘ b \- c -.~ - 5. H .. v' _ ‘U “' _ '- v..-- ‘flrra- «a — A- . -~-... 2. h. .u .-.. 'I $-3 §| ' ‘ .s- '- ‘ a 1‘ 'c ‘ I .\ . 7.6:; 7-61'. 8-3b. 844. 8-Ma. 8%, 84w. Page Ayerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Uhit 7 Area E, a 267-acre poorly stocked large saw- timber stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 2. 5 MBF per acre . . . . . . . . . . . . M35 Ayerage yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Uhit 7 Area F, a l60-acre well stocked poletimber stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 1.9 MBF per acre............. .. ....M36 Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 1,95M acres of forest land on Unit 8, with intensive and extensive management . . . . . . . M37 Labor requirements in man-days for management and for harvesting by decades on the M categories of forest in Unit 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M38 Value of yields by decade from the 518 acres of Area A of Uhit 8 under Plan II, with intensive forest man— agement and roadside sales . . . . . . . . . . . . M39 Value of yields by decade from the 990 acres of Area B.of Unit 8 under Plan II, with intensive forest moment and roadside sales. . . . . . . MMo Value of yields by decade from the 20M acres of Area C of Unit 8 under Plan II, with intensive forest management and roadside sales. . . . . . . . . . . MMl Value of yields by decade from the 2M2 acres of Area n of Unit 8 under Plan II, with intensive forest management and roadside sales. . . . . . . . MM2 Value of yields by decade from the 518 acres of Area A of Unit 8 under Plan III, with intensive forest management and stumpage sales. . . . . . . . . . . MM3 Value of yields by decade from the 990 acres of Area 3 of Unit 8 under Plan III, with intensive forest management and stumpage sales. . . . . . . . . . . MMM Value of yields by decade from the 20M acres of Area C of Unit 8 under Plan III, with intensive forest management and stumpage sales. . . . . . . . . . . MM5 Value of yields by decade from the 2M2 acres of Area D of Unit 8 under Plan III, with intensive forest management and stumpage sales. . . . . . . . . . . MM6 ”13 Page 8.5. Value of yields by decade from Areas Aa, Ab, B, c, and D of Unit 8 under Plan IV, with extensive forest man- agementandstumpagesales. . . . . . . . . . . . MM7 8-6A. Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 8 Area A, a 518-acre loblolly pine plantation re- placing a l98-acre poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2. 3 cords per acre and 320 acres of brush or idle land . . . . . . MM9 8-63. Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 8 Area B, a 990-acre moderately stocked seedling and sapling stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing lflomperacre... .. . M50 8-66. Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 8 Area C, a 2OM-acre well stocked large sawtimber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 3. 3 MBF per acre........ . . . ..M51 8-63. Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 8 Area D, a 2M2-acre well stocked poletimber stand of bottom-land hardwoods containing 2. 5 MBF per acre M52 B-l. Labor requirements for work performance in forestry operations on the Ames Plantation, range of require- mnts in 1955- 1957, and estimates for future performance. . . . . . . . . . M59 3-25. 'Projected 10-year d. b. h. growth for hardwoods on the Ames Plantation. . . . . . . . M76 I 313’." AW prices for pine and hardwood logs and pulp- wood in west Tennessee expected during the next 50 yearsM82 is e- ..r flux: 13.; . ~ .-.-v -- \ - --I_-~--' " ‘ n g . to -- o‘-- -.- . ..- .---.. ._. _ .. - ‘ . '. - : n . ‘ " . - . ..- a. v Q Duo-o - . .. ,_ .5 '1 . ’ —. ‘- -.. ... _ - v 0‘. -.,_' ‘9. vv é... __ . : .... -‘.-. . Q . 1‘ L- 9. v1 . r ...“; I u . ... Ova U..-' - 0 9 .. -.. a“ w. ., '5 ob. U..-. a V . - ' " J v. ... " A » -.: -.." ...- . Va.-. v ‘ ; Ns.‘ \. ’~ ' A ~9.’ :‘ k ‘ V ‘f’ ‘ ‘ A “-“ a . “-H‘_ -‘ ' ‘l V._.-.- ?. ." tr..- ‘K‘. v ‘ ‘4‘; w 0 . '9‘- -5' ‘~ 0“ \. " :‘r _ - H -‘ .‘. ‘d “t.““‘ ~ O~~ ! ‘w " ., sg‘. '— L . -u . u ‘~ - a ~0- n‘h‘s-f ‘U' , ‘eag 1‘. v s‘ c ‘_ e... ‘n .2». \‘ ‘,. . n - v Q I ‘ .3‘. h 1" 5" t -‘ ‘- ~ .b~- ' .0 \a ‘ e . _\ a ’$_ ‘ ‘dH'W‘b ‘ . ‘- - " ‘fi LIST OF APPENDICES Page Am A. STATISTICAL APPENDIX. TABLES OF MANAGEMENT- , " m DATA FOR OPERATING UNITS ANALYZED IN CHAPTER Ix ................ 322 Tables for Unit 1 ................... 327 Tables for Unit 2 ................... 339 Tables for Unit 3 ................... 355 Tables 1:t‘or Unit M ................... 372 Tables for Unit 5 ................... 388 Tables for Unit 6 ................... _ MOM Tables for Unit 7 ................... M13 sum for Unit 8 ................... M37 may. Int-sons, PROCEDURES, RELATED INFORMATION, AND _ 3 GLOSSARY ................. M53 Section , i. Suns! or MET LAND OWNERS ........... M5M 2. SURVEY OF TIMBER MARKETS ............. M56 3. WORK-PERFORMANCE DATA ............... M57 Planting .................... M60 Timber stand improvement ............ M61 lax-vesting pulpwood ............... M6M ”vesting sawlogs ............... M65 Twat urking ................. M68 . , hncing . . . . ................ M68 ' ' Protection from fire ...... . ....... M69 mii VI I‘j‘f‘r 1"?" " "' o o-Anu‘ '0... ct'r'n' '- fiv- .. U Lowsa.a-o. ... . $112221“ £179.21 2 .... 0‘ .3 -. ~' "’ POO--.. to... ~. ' . on H .9 .1-“ H' &_ , O 41?... 'Ov'u ... ‘ ' I ‘P‘;uceov su~‘*._ . . on... ..Oa'c;n“; '_ —.> .vO ~~~-\ ..g‘nc.c; f‘ '5‘- ?.=". 93" I; w. .-v“ v. v :o .1“. .' - E ‘v- Uk.-.-..s 0 a I Mr... l ’-" d-'~.U' I ...-H. . n <. ' -—h.o . I ‘ "v - ‘ o Um...‘ . . . ““‘J J: a . 4 Q I V. ‘ . a. ~ "‘ A“ _ “. ng " v: . o Page lactic: M.HAW-HEIDDATA.................M70 Ans Plantation procedures; intensive survey . . . . M70 Extefiffi”~tdrest~survey............... M73 Application of U. 3. Forest Service Survey data . . . M7M Win]! at decadnl yields related to management intensity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M7M Intensive forest management . . . . . . . . . . . . M78 Extensive forest management . . . . . . . . . . . . M79 Btilation of potential yields using Resource mtm u I 0‘ I a l a n s o o a a n o n a o I ”'80 mwml‘m-IIDATACOLIECTION.......... M93 For]: I z . - mm 01' FOREST PROWCTS: DATA FROM PROHJCERS . . M9M 1.. 2.1mm 0F FORET PROMICTS: DATA FROM FIRST BUYERS . M97 3. WORK-PERFUMEDATARRORDCARD 501 h A” MARION FORBT SURVEY FIELD RECORD SHEEP . . . 502 " "7‘73” V' F - l A - ‘ sum :1" oiling" 'n the area. I? is intent-0‘. .I which creative mgnr ' ‘ waning) can demiu'y a ‘- ‘W MU which present ‘W MW in kind t~;; main ' i ' g 22.22 3:117 .. wv-u-n‘ vlu—ec-‘J v . .u-ty...‘.-....,_ t“; '.~-.-vo.. ‘- . v-. .. ‘ . o h—‘_' .- "“ -‘--.. u '5 .. . A ‘ -- ‘. =-' “ *‘ '2‘.-. “‘ — ‘fi‘ \ -~ ' I " “- -o“--.~. a. " -.. .1 ‘ . --. ~ g ‘ n»_ , ‘ v s “~ 3 v . N'- “.u .—’ ~ ‘5 a un’: - ‘0 V. -‘V'- Va‘} ha y ‘. ‘g _ ' ~¢ x ‘0 < \.,‘ a ’ \ u =- 0 ’eg -‘:._ ‘- n h ‘u: . h . " ‘ - v “A N -‘~:‘3 ‘ “ - s.‘:. r - ... ' ‘-~ ~» 0 a. ‘.=--.~ . ‘~‘ v- I \‘ s ‘- q -.. ._:. 4 K. ‘I‘“ . ‘! .\‘ ..- ‘ ‘ \ .f‘ \v '9’: ‘ b I . .‘ .. \- -.. \n_ a. ... ’2 g ‘ ‘ '§ \‘ I ~. ‘1‘" 'e N k 2 ‘I ‘~ g . “c u” a. '" -: .. ~- CHAPTER I OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THIS STUDY Objectives Economic problems rooted in agriculture and forestry, and. stem- Iing from tradition, are seriously affecting the lives and welfare of people living in low-income areas such as are found in west Tennessee. The present study was undertaken as the first link in a chain of action needed to relieve the problems and to improve the conditions described in Chapter III. The three principal objectives for which this project was in- tellled are as follows: 1. To ascertain how changes in forestry and farming activi- ties can contribute to higher incomes for low- income farm-and- forest Operating units in the west Tennessee area. 2. To ascertain the general significance (for this area) of intend forestry on farm-and—forest units. A t 3. To indicate a use of data that will permit more accurate W of opportunities for improved forestry on individual -It is intended that this knowledge constitute a fmmdation T ineflfit‘r". ..—~- W with creative agencies (in such fields as education, credit, tun OX‘ d8'-1"‘ ill M) can develop action programs to improve the lot of the We}! BPd < 7. ”ml: which presently receives but little cash income and only hunted em 5‘ ; - m in kind to maintain a level of living slightly above “110131011 am' Pvc . -'-¢ - 0...; ~ .:. ...- - _. .-‘"‘ » ;,_,._- .. .»-- ,d. ' c . "3vo :s-w“.:’ __ '.- ..._ -.....— 1‘0! n ' ‘6' ‘ . .‘ ao-~- _ .' ,9 -.l.-s .. ~ "‘ ’ .3 ‘ ‘ - as ”-..-I -.. ..__ D O. ‘ - “ : ‘ -" '3'. \ .., .... U.‘ b”.“ A- . ‘LNI - ‘ t- u n‘.‘ ‘ ..~v.-_ ~- __-.‘-. ‘ ‘ a , -~. .r:.. u-‘U. '8“. -." u s ‘0. s . . 'e .. . ‘ QAI. -... -a ‘f. ‘0‘» :— . _ -.-. -~-‘ 'V 0 ‘v- - '. ‘“ ".. Q ‘ Q -TI"5 I. :s“n-v-’ ‘ ‘95 \-_ a“ -~~~-..‘_~ ‘ \ Nun... _ ‘n- ‘~‘—-e :a T v '-s. 9.. -- k l ‘ 3‘. ‘15 “a.-." . ~~ a -- -‘v‘ R .. we . ~ . ‘ \- id, .5. ‘~.;- ..q " .: \~- _ ‘¢_,_ ‘ “.‘ ....- 5.. ' \ ‘.:. -v - -‘ a... .... s’ ‘. 'F" s. ._.~‘C -_ . _~~ » . .— \‘ - \t“‘~ '-‘-' s ‘4‘ 5 v- I: - a. -. ~ - A u - H*-‘:‘ . 4 ~‘\ ‘-. “-. ’. .. . V \ -I .- ‘ ~‘--‘ ‘\ ~ ~ ' ‘. ‘ - u :4 t. _. l . :w: ‘-‘ 95‘, lg ‘\~ \ ‘- ‘ '\ 74—; “ - a ‘ ‘s .- vs ._- - \_‘ _". § — . ‘5' u- ‘N‘ r——— 2 m subsistence needs. These agencies may be governmental or mm,firith ecOnomic, social, political, or religious goals and “Mint the impact of their programs at the local, state, regional, 6r 'fltional level. The min elemnt in the first and second objectives involved ‘th study of the relationship of forestry to problems of overall MI “gamut and family income goals. This study was focused on ”mt mm units on the Ames Plantation in southwestern Tennessee, but its scope embraces in general all relevant aspects of timber production and marketing from small forest properties (ownerships having less than 1,000 acres in woodland). The assumption is made that it is desirable to take steps to improve the welfare of low- inc" families in our society if these steps can be made to cause little or no lessening of the welfare of other segments of our socitty. Furthermore, development steps are assumed to be an over- all ilprovenent if by taking them the lot of low-income families clnbe improved to some small degree gr_e_n E there is a consequent utter-tel reduction in the welfare of persons not in the low-income . With these points in view, several pertinent aspects of the mill m of a selected area around the Ames Plantation in west of page; c Muse investigated to obtain historical data and to ascer- “WOW '--“" ‘ m or TOW-clap steps in the appropriate methodology applicable to Mafia ertension education in this field. Analysis of the data or -. flat the problens investigated had as a general goal the "led by mans .. and eventual dissemination of improved intelligence on 1:. ‘- I . v .4 ). qzo‘. ... ...- . ‘9 rs; ..v- c p .v- C Jae“ ‘“ ., o'v'". “*..c”- ' " b . . . - raw :2 I). ..‘__.' ... ~ ‘- o . .v. ..-,‘.: a: ~ 1"“? m.- :; .":.....n _'..o-. _ ‘ . :J' " "LI. I ”H - . I ... .e .. I... 5“ 5.0 ~ . n . - ..-.o .9. “.5“ Q . . V ‘ u . Q ~. n-mw «w ~1— . «a. v..-»_a :g-.-- .. . n v . 1' '.‘9:5 ‘0 .3: ...-1“! 'i.‘ l . _“-.u-O~‘. ... . - ’vl-o (t. We....--. .. .g - . ‘v n. .- . . _ . H”... D: a r: .. v "‘ ' Iva-- ‘_ - ‘n...‘ e P“ " 31;. ‘ “ r-.. - - u ‘. ... .N r . .M’ "w- . .“ ... 5 . ~e sq . . '\ ... “.. I. ...‘s. ..‘~ :u: 9' " .. O "* “.... ‘ "'--_1 . ...: . .: - 'n‘ O ' I. 0 ~\..'\. - x‘;‘. ‘ ~A o" 5&- V . ." ‘ «‘5. Q ‘\~.“—=‘;’ ... ”:0 r 0 . ". ... I O I I? .‘I 3 {I place of forestry in the economy of this low-income area and , mm as pertimnt inferences can be drawn, on the opportunities for rarestry in low-income rural economies in general. The breadth of the stifly was especially designed to provide inferences for many. types of farms in west Tennessee and elsewhere. The intention was to suggest methods useful for helping to solve some of the current ml We problems within the context of the dynamic economy of flu. united States . Scope and Method Appropriate populations were selected for the purpose of data collection so that the objectives of this project could be achieved. hphssis has been placed on the operating-unit approach involving a nunber of case study farms in order to proceed from general informa- tion on the problems and background setting to specific, individual cases of farm-and-forest resource use, to more general conclusions for a whole area. All the six phases of collection were considered in relation to their roles in piecing together a unified word-picture 01’ the liinnndiate area within the scope of this study, namely south- “stern Tennessee. The intention responsible for the design of the “kl-collection plan was the spreading of limited research resources ofPeople equipment, time, and money in Just adequate intensity and thfiu ‘1 ~ Wists areas to accomplish the objectives. ”Wu-d Lo: In: six phases of data collection were scheduled in the "high Lf'.‘ '- ‘. carrier. (1) Woodland ownership data and owners' attitudes .%d of 81 ".T_‘,"" ‘3 ml. by mans of a personal interview questionnaire survey. u in Widens; I ._ t'x‘ l '.- -‘.’1. ’ .. q .,‘- fi" ‘ :‘o.*..: ‘ N" g ‘- “'" I ‘e ‘.-". w . ‘9 '~.~ ...“.-- ‘ q c .. a? :z"? C ' E . uh . . .’ 132 3-vn: ...-:23- ,' ol- .I. .....«v-0 0 ’ us ‘ r ~«apc er. OF: :4“ " ~l>---" ‘ 9.05 -U . -.. . ’:‘-O Vs-O ‘ ' " c . ..c o‘ .-.-so b.a‘rv \r c . V. q \ , _ o :l 0.. ‘ q::~‘, - c .. . . — ad. ‘ ‘~U\. .- ¢-—-~ . - . g is. - . a. . ve- ‘- U.- ‘-tu~~ .‘hk‘ “‘ A»... _- U . O :ffi ~uo--” .-fi. tvvb.-. .. .‘ ..-ka . a u‘ vo- a ,. “ ’ v... 5‘ " _~"~‘ c ...“: w. ., cwua- I-.V . D s ' sh‘ -~f ‘Aiv‘... ‘ . . av“ ~' '1'“ . w “‘ 5.. . Fo“ - .N c 1";-.‘ . .— v ’ha . . .E a“ ." ..- U 1"“ J_ a ‘ A ‘w.§~‘lv-_'. '- cg Q“ .. “ 'cf 0‘. " v“ \0 .. ‘. I " : ... O I ‘~ an». ‘5, c; ‘0 - en‘s -. ... u 'H :“ . ‘s‘ "W... U‘v-c‘len q . fi‘: ’ n . 'v N.- ‘ 4‘ ‘ ‘ . \ "zhé_‘ “‘C‘Ic‘r‘ N 3 ~._‘ h (2) m of stumpage and cut forest products were similarly surveyed. (53) ' .Mling aid site-mapping of woodlands were accomplished by a WW. (3‘) Agricultural input-output data were derived from m of several small farm operating units having woodland areas. (5) Specific econcnic data on Tennessee, especially west Tennessee, hrs accumulated from various sources. (6) Concurrently with all this five phases, work-performance data were collected from forestry ”exertions on the fines Plantation over a two-year period. Tm first phase of data collection was intended to provide a basis M a description of a range of west Tennessee landowner sttitfles tel-all forestry. The data necessary for a sufficiently reliable description were readily obtainable from a random—block lawn.“ of landowners in Herdsman County. Owner attitudes are to Immune related to forest type. Due to this fact, Hardeman County flawed as typical of west Tennessee because the forested areas 01' m the county and the region are similar. Most of the area is in th wland hardwood type. A fraction of the total area carries .131 hardwoods characteristic of lower slepes and minor bottoms. ”MMM! pine land constitutes a small portion of the area. “ 493 second phase was the collection of data to be used for Wthe sort of forest products markets facing west Tennessee Mum and the forest products industries' attitudes MW” and their future timber supply. The population from M tn mists" strata of wood-using industries were sampled con- WW of timber and rough products made from wood 3..-. 0" r q. ‘ .‘gc fl... . nut. nt‘I‘ “'C‘; .-.-‘e * b ....~. ...b 'n—-‘ - ' " . .9'.‘ .- " " ...u a I . ... ':'_ ‘.e.‘ 3 ---..I‘ - .-....u-t- ~. I a 0" -’ " D -1 "was: 7' w 3.2: . -.. A ‘u- do. ovsv —v 7 k»op:‘ o-Vs as: 0“: a. -... fies-b. v i- n- O—o- v-) .- . , . -.. .n‘: a-‘---_ .. _, 0 . t as ...-4 Ana-st... ...-o. u. -0. ‘J , . vs~ . mac v ,'."f.‘ y.-. ‘-~.-~~—h-.. 4' , - _' a . q.‘_o Apt 0.. . ”a _‘:. ' .‘ "_"-¢-.v..~ ... -‘ v ‘ v e— .n g ' . £‘§C“:C fl“ ‘0" .. E .. 6-“~_~ 5‘ _ ‘~ I‘Vh‘; ‘ - - t- has--. p_ relyh.‘ U o- . (0' . ." ad. ,, .4 s' a . _’ A L.";\ N:~v—h~ Q- ‘ ‘ «no! . _ (5"- Q ~ - I D . .‘v- ‘u. ‘. h~~- H ..., ‘ ~ “3'. ‘v- V—- vu- v; . t: ' .‘e e. ‘ klv: ‘03:"- ‘ U ‘» .-. n ." . F ~‘Ou. ‘3' ,Q “-- "‘1. , h I e-.. a ‘5" "‘1 .1: «a 3“; 3 u -\ —~. .; M : a. '7 - .' ,2 v-a ' ~‘. a ’:~. - c \. .\- . ‘~ '\~‘ . ' ‘s 4' . c -a ‘ fl ‘6 ‘¢.C--- '5‘ ‘O-n. -‘(a . “ u 5 " *" .Ilerthird and fourth phases consisted of detailed data col- We}: the bee Plantation in Hardeman and Fayette Counties._ In tkthird uses t1: entire woodland area of lO,1+00 acres was sampled, with intensified sampling of the woodlands on six of the eight case stfiy areas on the Ames Plantation delineated by the University of m Agricultural Experiment Station as farm operating units. (h other two of the eight areas are primarily forest farm units.) mural enterprise data were needed for the fourth phase. The University‘s Amen Plantation Program Director made prospective budgets of amrhions for these eight units, using agricultural input-output data and soreness of areas best suited to agricultural enterprises. I! proposed budget for each farm consisted of an improved farm huge-ant alternative based upon University experience with similar Ill]. m havim diversified enterprises. He also provided an We]. budget" or reconstructed record of production reported for tenet recent combination of "traditional" land uses on each M‘ (such land management was characteristic of farming without ”unity advice on farm planning and enterprise operation.) ‘ ‘b fifthphase involved the gathering of data other than by f1“Finlayohexrvation or sampling survey: numerical and descriptive Mm of‘specific economic nature obtained from earlier “W, mm statistical reports, and correspondence and Writ]: (number of existing agencies. mphiczlfthe flit]: phase input-output data on work of the Amos Wear; Inpartmnt crew were recorded daily according to mm It Job into which nan-hours or other resources . .-. I. no: . - a \I '- *‘ J; ._ .o " o.od"‘ v. Ebo' 9 ....g'. i ‘ s. ' I ‘...-. -.. c -..: a” ‘ - ‘1} ‘9'“. ....u -o I’d",.\‘. pi. i e ‘ 1"?“ ..o‘ -.-—-»o ..w-. v. b‘-"" - Ke'.fi'-. i‘ut‘! a o.‘ s. .so I... . a , "-0 .0 Q... q fl "‘--9 '5' a. n..- -.."- O l. ‘ ‘-‘--°‘ 9.. - .3; - ...-‘9 we‘ve. ,‘ b a . '“C '15“-.-'.'~ ’5‘". §--;:. \ . ~ A ' ‘ V'G""‘-: .v .-. 0 .-;e- , *---"’ ‘ ... . I.“' a“ 'e.~‘)‘ - a v , a T, " b ...—v... .I Q 9 " n‘ ‘vv--..e "F t‘ g y. - g o -"€'."',_‘.I- o-..l _. . ‘ ’ ‘9..- ., -‘ Ob. . .. 4:4:Ww-p *»~,._~' a.“ 6 “fit during the years 1955-57. (The crew varied in size and W101: depending on the type of task and research objective W as veil as the mnnber of men available and their experience.) Nth-performance data were computed following accumulation of the dad]: input-output records for over two years. The records listed ti tuber of input units of labor, machinery, equipment, and capital “fines or components uSed in each specific task. They also re— puted the output (produced at the time the work was done) as a unit of the inputs used. The daily records included special remarks if ti inputs were applied in a particular combination according to ”in conditions or as a result of research-oriented instructions cfth supervising forester or the crew foreman. filtl‘thods used in the various phases of data collection are It‘llist'partially described in the relevant chapters, with details W in the appendix as needed. For the purposes of this chapter, itiindéqua’te to state that forty woodland owners were interviewed in t5 that phase and twenty buyers of forest products, stratified ”1H tips-of industry, in the second. The forest survey in the Wm its based on point-sampling at the intersections of a W system of grid lines 30 chains apart covering the Ames Mont fie topographic-forest-site mapping was accomplished mmlpfihlished topographic maps and field-recorded site Wu delineate boundaries betveen the three major topo- MW“Wudz upper slopes and ridges, lower slopes, M‘*M‘flm' streams. lo special explanation is nec- ‘ .- We: in the fourth and fifth phases. Intonation ‘ - o¢v . .\.: «p 00" .‘M‘.-". . .. u~ .. 2': .... t .’ O‘ii "'«-. , -.nflc" ul‘ .‘ ~. 7 ‘;:x_l.y.. b. ' a at. o . .. u' w-o I Q. — - ' -... '~ "" s. .. . ...-s v'v.‘-o o — a s 4' Q . ‘ . . '- ‘ ' 7." .'£ '9: -u .. ‘- ov -~- .5 auto. ..o. a -5 A. . - --. u . . . ‘ .... .o . . , . . _ S —"' '. ‘9 ‘ 'ea.-.‘roo~ h-..‘ .... ‘ -‘|~ _. I; " ~°“-tv-v J...“ 2 : ...... ’ ,. I. *‘O--m ... .. ~u. DI l in .. ‘ 1 . I. II A.“ a .:-" ‘g', 5‘ a». .:F:"Q_ ~'--Ha -a. -‘-‘M.' s. a o'.. . -..-c. “u . ‘5. I o I ~ 5' a. a "a t“ :u- ~ u.‘ .-. . .‘v. n‘ V“. n ‘0 v ru“.‘ . c ‘c -Q 5.. \N“ g...‘ K... "' h i c ._ a. any..; . _‘. . - - v ‘ v... -. :2‘.: w, a ““4; “no 3‘ o‘e“- a: a ‘ “~u ‘— \A . .M. : V" Q Q‘ '- -.r: 3“ 3“»! I~ \ ... ": ghr‘ \Q. It *- .... a‘. H ye. \ . ‘-.:~7 ._. N u" "~ e. aw: . ‘ 5 - 0 ‘r‘sC: ... . g. '1 . . ~_. "I \i Q ~ ~\ g. F- -' a P. .- I'._ ~ , u.‘ po- . 1 “‘-‘ \ ‘ ‘.‘ I I ~ —9 N,» v- ‘: k u I\ "1- ' 0‘“ - . a.’ \- .. - ~ - g. :sfi. - A" . \I ‘n‘ ‘ l- u ‘4“: g“ ‘ U~"~ ‘ ‘u‘ .- . . 'v 7 m Decorated on the input-output cards used in the sixth phase by 15;. War of each crew of forestry department workers, and total hours per mu permitted an accuracy check (on labor input per Job) at least weekly by the departmental secretary. The overall reason for the research strategy adopted in this project is that the research resources available were believed to be are efficiently allocated in this kind of case study approach than in any other type or types of research method. While following basically a budgeting case studyr method, this project has elaborated in the custom method in that it has incorporated some supporting tcjahniqms in order to establish the case studies firmly in the W of regional economic and social situations and problems. This integrated farm—and-forest study used the procedure of mining a few reasonable alternatives for overall operating-unit "caustics, forest products marketing, and forest management over 8 long enough period of time to bring out the advantages and costs 01’ each alternative. A study of potential alternatives for pro- dming and marketing forest products in conjunction with other farm Enterprises requires a knowledge of existing alternatives actually “played by farmers in the area. For this reason the first phase involved intensive analysis of forest production and marketing alter- mtm being applied by owners of a total of 18,602 acres, 11,881+ 0:! which were in woodland uses. The case study method was selected is to the usefulness of information applied to a detailed case m in analyzing the economic consequences of chosen alternatives. “M data tend to be both (1) precise and reliable, and (2) .. .1" on ’"o3 '_, r” " "' ~ 1“' ..cl‘ taut—"5‘ .5 ' ',...‘ .. '. 0 -e : :.. ’c—c :9 w " o3? ' g.) v-.--"‘ . .... -1 . ' P. ....f "O" f a. ..—',-.‘:i ' ,p A. V. -s‘o V" - w A“, .9 oh; fi"’$' . r " I ... a.» a. ...» " ‘c “r. . ...-fi‘ ‘I I pa. 0 v . . a . a e . 1' \a- ‘ . f n 2‘ \ a“; .:~I‘. ~. .n- ab ‘- 8*-AO ‘a —- .., " u‘ ‘0; wwgsO-‘g H 4.‘ a a. u» :.u-~.--‘- .— 9 W L”"' I':V :.',' ' fl , . 'U-vod é"... .‘ ‘2' so ‘- . . h. .. 2‘0. . .. Ha u-‘ so“ 6" .C; i‘~h‘i’-. -‘ -... ,- " C .0 8 amtly applicable to the study area. In this project the eight use “1331 far-I selected in the fourth phase comprised a sizable Ital: nee, totaling 6,957 acres, with 1+,669 in woodland. m of the advantages of actual case studies over purely theo- retical mdels is that case studies can be completely realistic, as “.1 are not limited by the simplifying assumptions upon which theo- Mica]. models are based. Also the realism of case studies can be put toiDmte practical use through the choice and subsequent applica- tio; of a "most #ferable" alternative for future operation of the W. hta collected in case studies, especially subjective data, tend to be sure accurate than those obtained from a large number of “areas because a single investigator can have a personal knowledge of th operations under study. In addition, economy of travel is W and problems of commication, especially misunderstandings, ‘21—}? i an final-1m. ' ."_"‘u.: . Weasel Hui? ' “I! tore strg c I. . fibflmd this in "a ‘06 - 4. .. c w... '... a 'I-‘-~- ‘¥_-: ..-...-. ' . Us: ~~‘..a .. ..-. ‘ a *‘ '“”p~u .. —..U l u. on b. I I ~..._ ~' . .'- LV ‘ v1.-- "“b‘v— ....-_.., - .. ....-.-.... b in lo-‘o. -' v-O - ° v... . '0 ~d. ,_ I ...- a. 0 0. ~... . IOA- A .A i ‘ ---‘ .‘ ‘..'a . -. .. ‘c. ..., _ - ' -... “.... ,' .. \-,.. 'L‘ -. . N 'k--. -v - I "of" " i 1-. . .. 4-,“ _ . _,, ... -~.§-~‘.- - ‘.~~ ‘fi. - o- -: .,“ :1" ‘2.- O .:‘-“‘-T .. ' 2 -. . *5 a- V. . 8-. ... -‘ M‘ . ~\\. I, I. ' v. s..' . ‘ '\.‘ fi.‘. . ‘ n‘ _' .‘5 by . 'v.. ~— 7 ‘ - . . ac‘b. . .p ‘ ‘ I . N I K“. a d., l -. ‘~. ~__‘ U... "G. \. -.‘\ \nviyfl ... . " 5 'h-..~ w._ L ~. '. Q. _ - ‘l \ ‘>c x, s “ —‘§ ‘I. ; ho, : 'a' = " ' ‘U in. . c. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE lany authorities have investigated and discussed various as— pects of forestry pertinent to the economies of farms and other slll woodland ownerships. In a review of the writings of these previous workers a number of interesting and helpful points are found worthy of mention. To be sure, some conflicts and areas of contention exist, but this is to be expected among persons of dif- ming backgrounds, motives, and points of view. In the references to Id quotations from the statements of these various authors the need. became obvious for a clarification of facts, assumptions, and mes if future endeavors are to be worthy of the cost and effort W in them. It is hoped that the present study will make a vorthIhile contribution in integrating facts and methods useful for practical application toward improving human welfare. One of the most prolific authors in the field of farm forestry is John F. Preston, retired chief of the Soil Conservation Service's Forestry Division. The focal elements in Preston's attitude are W smcimtly in his statement, "The approach to integrated 7 fan mestry is through farm planning rather than forest planning."1 5 W this as "not how much timber can be cut, but how can the film best serve the farmer," indeed a proper objective from Sikh! 1'. Preston, "Integrated farm forestry," Journal of finm,8 (Aug. 1916), p. 577 '-—>‘-0 b‘~___ a .0 - v *-.r‘ g n 1“,“: . ' I ’ -§u- ' l ‘.. a. ‘ ... .'.- .«J -‘ ' . — ... .- a ....- II .. o o, _ IC". 3... po'o-U‘N- ai.-—V. . . 1' .‘ .. . .3 ‘ 1%"..3 L 0..-. 1. ..‘-~ . ‘. .-.,....,_.‘ .-. "- . a _ - '3..- y‘-‘-~.. ... . . . . ‘1' “..., :‘-'._ -‘ a... d..... ....."H . _ . ... - t - ‘ on .- H\.. ,. an. *‘ ~‘ . ... 0... . __ _ . . 4 .1—... . ‘ 9"I \l:_..;‘ . . "‘ 05-." H 5‘. a .2 E. =fl>~-_‘ "~ «a ;—- at. v.--_ h.‘:h . .. a . ‘ .~“ : “‘ "‘P‘~' ‘-¢. ' n ‘, «_“ . . u . n~‘~- ~. ~ ~‘Q ‘. ~~.. '~ ‘ \ = "I . \- N‘ I ‘:.~ ~-.- -‘ C \- - v 0...}. .a "’ i. Q‘ ' Q“ ‘;’T-_ ‘\~'- . V. .~~“... ....V “3:.“. ‘ . '5 ’fi‘ _ a--:.‘ , 10 fl- M's point of view. His procedure in achieving this aim m briefly described as follows: "One of the first steps in preparing a farm plan involving integrated farm forestry is to find out what farm labor is available, how it can be used in the produc- tion of woodland. products, and how much additional local labor the funn- night profitably employ in the processing of woodland prod- tts. Thus, he will secure for himself the returns for stumpage, labor, “the business of logging." For a farm plan to be made “m1, of course, "at first the job is to get a farm plan, involv- is; the woodland, accepted by the farmer, and in operation." Preston m mt adoption of a plan and assured that "if the farmer m cutting on an annual basis, there is plenty of time for re— WB as the result of which the annual woods operation may be W changed." For mking the farm plan to start with, however, Preston advised that "The farm planner needs some rule-of-thumb will about woodland productiveness." In evident contrast to this recommendation Dr. Richard E. lurdle warned small forest owners when, as Chief of the Forest m, he addressed the Slat annual meeting of the American Wfl‘hsaciation, "Designing a practical plan of management for ”in: good timber . . . requires at least as much skill, experi- Once, lad technical knowledge as does the production of any crop. mwmmrs youneed . . .byattemptingtouse some 1113.01?“ guide. 80 don't underrate or undervalue the technical It's easy to make . 9 ‘ ' ‘ av . ' - .. "9 I--- ‘1'”;ih .“J' ',‘w- ..f “w . Q. " - D: {to o.‘ ..- .. . .... . ,4 .-- ' - . :oasfy .‘ '\l " __. ~.‘ t: _. ... 34-“ -. " o ...-k. ' . . II. , ...... ~~~;‘ S . - a.-- ..- . O u- "‘ v- -- :‘2‘3‘ . . - . l .....un d . ....u‘.‘ * ..-“: g, . '---c H; - .. ‘_ 6.0 -~.. cu.--.. -- -- . , . ~ ~ ' " ‘ v- ’. ". ’;~ \ 9- v-q "‘ "" ““-~ to ... - , . . o I . . h ‘vao ‘: .... -0. c. < e .. u ' I _. u «as... -. .... -. .- _ . . . ‘ a Q ~-- “ ~ "N: *sv-c . :..~\ .. ._M_‘-. -‘ -’ o ' 1 'na‘ cr" .. U ' . "“§‘..‘ ' ' v ' Cacao , ‘ a ‘ fit‘:;.... L ‘d~‘ V~L'_,,‘_.- .. .n.‘ . ~ "I. D . a ‘Q‘E Q g. s .n‘- G. “-b "““ '0‘; c . . - .._ . 's. 4‘5‘. . “a-.. a ., "'n ‘-. A . ' ‘ “' "o. ..,, . U ‘h ‘ 5..- 11 “i that will cut your long-time income to a third or a fourth on com have. "2 - he} of these opposing viewgis abbreviated to a generaliza— ‘ .h“ 1 result of the compromising of conflicting intents in order ' figmwhat each of the proponents considers the most important aim -. fi-wnnder his assumptions of circumstances. Assumptions should fiffirlym‘bed to provide the full content. A non-e balanced and complete statement on this point has been “bylaws as follows. ". . . farmers . . . can also learnto 53131; the basic principles of forest management. However, the mini- W of knowledge required to develop a satisfactory forestry Wise is considerably beyond that currently possessed by the IWM woodland owner. The services of a professional for— with almost essential, therefore, to aid him . . . until such ‘3“ fi‘he is able, through continuous learning and experience, to " easy bimelf."3 _; ' 5” " 'Mctivee of Farmers, Owners, and Others Ek‘AWWMII woodlands are at all a subject of interest stems from ‘ «'am of the various people who are concerned. A variety ' on intents of farmers and others have been made by a Fortland, 0re.: Divis on 0 State and e - -' W mm, Government andthe small fomstholding' a "~41” 3P overnmentEI .1.'-' one for m a We . Inpublis-ed ‘1» - sse : ion, ...- State University of New York, v.- . ... ...' :‘LL .- ,. . C ‘ "J- 3 “'-IO " ' v . vi" " . . 0'- " -0"! ..F 8...“. .- ' V. "b . ...- . Q I n o - ' . 1 -..-0" "S ' ..z- _‘ .x -.;--_,,__,. ~. .o-‘ID'-' _ s .. ‘.....-..-. a .. .... .. I I’»" c '1‘ " , . __ , _. ‘ .i‘... . v t e . ‘. ~ 0 - ug; a: ::~-:'"‘~ FF”. 0 ‘3. 0"».O- b~.o-o~ > . . '. A no:., 0-; ‘ o. A ant--..u‘o-.. loo-v-0 . u - '- ‘ 1 R "g 'o‘I— '0 ‘-,.. o ... 0‘!“ a. .‘........o. 4- "":fi 9‘» :“sp 'v ‘ v. on“ in-.. . . - - ID.- ’ V - “ ‘F 0: --- o . . , . ., A“ “- ‘n-£ x, h - . \- ...- u ““.;.“ r'roiob‘. Iv ' -—“C 'f." K; w» u . hous.b ...... U- A “3‘: .2- ‘- o -.. \ s .. _ M "V‘ ‘1‘...: a MA... . :ba, . ~ ~ .‘ o, . ~ ' s..&_ a. ‘I-s-‘ g3“ .b-4H -- “\L . v . to,“ “§‘, . a. - t h. ‘ fi‘~u, \ue- ‘ 2“. .3 s ‘fil .1- a. I ... _‘ ~ .-l': n:.. ... - m. s. O ~~ 12 name md'nosner stated simply that "The objective of most is a good, steady income combined with the best current for tlu family. "1+ Elaboration on this point was made in an Wide generalization by Murphey and Simonds . '. ‘11 The farm woodland grows a crop, capable of replacing itself . 0H; initely. It responds to cultural treatment like any other crop and the benefits derived from it depend largely on 30.33)}! manner in which it is managed. Until recently woodland was considered a source of supply for woodland timber only. a tow, however, farmers consider it a crop that may yield them any one of several benefits. For instance, there are those persons the militant their woods primarily for beauty. Their harvest is in a form of continuous enjoyment. The occasional yields of WWI frail such a woods are incidental only and not to be com- med in value to the year-long satisfaction gained from it by the :_ r;!-£:4;:rietor. ‘ " Others may be managing their woods primarily for the pro- fiction it renders their property from storms and wind, for the flutter it affords wildlife, or for the soil and water it con- 1‘.” for: their use. Such benefits are often vital to a happy flit; life on the fagm and may far outweigh in value the pos- 3m, yields of wood. ‘ flare has. long been a desire on the part of many researchers {3‘ ' «...; managers to quantify woodland values solely in monetary v " I v ‘Wfi thatan observer can obJectively evaluate any single wood- “WW and compare a number of sepm'ate situations. The mgjknfim may be roughly applicable in the motives existing ‘ I 7mm forestry, but especially great departures com- it. the management of small woodlands. ,A,. ..4 Lu. th» L\ {7‘ 7 ha. Iflncklar and John F. Hosner, How to farm your forest, . .m rarest Experiment Station Miscellaneous Release no. 11 ‘1“ 1.956111?!" 5.:lmrphey and Walter W. Simonds, ing the farm . Extension Service Circular tate Co ege, » State University College of Agriculture, .o n O Q ~ v‘ 9 b ... . u. at? .-fi" fi. ,.--0; ‘ .. ..-. _-—- '1“ v .— ' .0‘ ~' 05-” . u"' .' "_. . . . . .-.o'e 5' ... EL...- 4- " " 2 e :,.-. p; ng"_,",’ :’ 7,. .. -..... - I'V- -a-‘ron-- -- 0 v . s -.~- ...-- .-.—..-. you'. ‘gaoo ." p - .. . ~ . .5“ ..‘C‘ ~O- I a .- .' ‘ ‘ ’ " II - . . . . b 5‘ Q o '- - .... ...-“u.-- I l,' ‘V" .‘ 9’.~on -r 1-‘- ... " y--..; .11.... "...-... - . II A - ’ r. K“... h . - a..- 5‘- . _ . a“ a 's c." .-‘T .. “-. . -..-5--- . .‘ v I. e I. h. _ V “as..." ‘\ '- e . a a A. . '- ..3 an. ‘. -.‘ n ‘V ~ . ‘ 'Io "*1 c"’A-'.’" . 5 ~.~ ‘ ' a '--.- n i.“ I 3‘ n .o n._ .p '0. I. ‘- h ‘I:“ \' '0‘: “a n a. ' P .‘I “‘*1_ -. . . . ‘O . - 'v '- ' ": . :2 o . \’. ' v‘ I“ u _ . ‘._ ‘u I ‘9 -1 I ‘e. “‘a A‘v.‘ ‘ ‘ ... ‘¢. '\ . -‘a_ .‘._ ., ‘ - , ‘I \ ~ -‘_tl I. ' .- ‘e' ‘\ ‘. 13 t i For purposes of academic consideration Gregory has started fl'lm‘the cm asstmption that "Our growth goal will be that M pattern of stumpage output . . . which maximizes the present . M worth of the forest, under the set of expected conditions."6 m, he hastened to qualifir this for practical purposes. "An Mm shortcoming to such an intent is that we can consider only Entity costs and revenues. Yet we know that many non—monetary items enter the calculations of most forest enterpreneurs. A second short- coming to profit maximization as an intent has its basis in uncer- taintiec. The planning agent can calculate only egpected costs and Mrs-venues.” ' Likewise, Ciriacy-Wantrup suggests that profit maximization for farmers is constrained by their appraisal of intangibles and cute oi" flexibility to adjust for uncertainly.8 I: further complication in the area of woodland owner objec- the: is the fact, recognized by few authors, that many owners have M Wt specifically about what their objectives really are. hit fatt was indicated, however, by K. E. Barraclough in his report i‘IW‘hitiation of the pilot woodland management program involving 71.539.“ ‘ . , -' squat-y Robinson Gregory, Develo economic owth oals fu- Méat- , ‘ nation (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Berkeley: mix r "of gm°mia,‘l953), p- 95. ham {MC- .18 1:: Wiley—flantrup, Dollars and sense in conservation, +4 ‘ ~ ~ W;WMt Station Circular rkele : 1 1, 4;. a o ’ He— —6to:‘_:L m '11, 1 _... 1. - 3 (Minn.h 3.1.; , . . __ v .. . r “ .. l :“4 . .“ . .0 .‘S |"'...>.ob “ ...-P" 1 n ‘ ',. -0 . . p ..-: ~. ,5 .- -. ... -.-‘.b .. -. . 0.. . ... ,w1; ". .'o-'—_-“ . . w '. L,‘ ”...—.0 0 v 1 I ‘ I ‘ ..~.;-v-~1p ." " |,.V‘ , _’ 1““. .. .. , .n. . .. 5. 3'" \‘w- van--r‘ , -.r. 1 a \v‘ we. ... ..., up. . “ "". ' . I ... u I- ‘_;~ \‘ .’Q .0-».-‘.‘.“, . "fi. .5 s . ( '0 I D ’V O “F .' o .... _U. L- “.2. . '_ _- . . . u r :«Jf' ... . Q... ‘ . , nu.-.“ ‘\ rh‘ ‘ 2' .-; “H .1 .."i'" p-a : ~a *.‘ “I; I u ‘.I‘ r ‘ . . ._._.‘ ‘ .’;~.- . "u.- afc. Posy-fl"- - .._, . ~A. ' t " e b C'ka. & " v1... .‘ a. a a, n ‘- -\ f N s 2" . v 1h 1 , r. I. .11. ., in New Hampshire. . "After giving each owner the _ 1131:3198" of his property, the discussion of the alternatives f mmwu the objectives of the owner." Adequately . 4 .gid informed" . . . the owner is the person best able to flick! OIthe various alternatives will develop and utilize fiimt resources in a way most likely to maximize all of the . m and non-monetary returns."9 I to, :.- imager raised the question of differing objectives and W cabinations of them for different owners, when he asked, :Min'herests the landowner in growing trees? Game, water, .m recreation, income? One or a. combination? These are not ' .mm for; all people."10 in. addition to recognizing the fact that differing objectives ' 'Wth.m Saunders observed that even for a single family V ..thoware conflicting with one another and changing over Vfit‘fimlz‘b 1.1 goal-s and preferences of farm families differ and are ‘ L‘ASWJW over a period of years."11 “The task of evaluation r’i ‘ 1 . .3. Barraclough, "The pilot woodland management program in - i . » ".Pr Societ of American Foresters meet '13, 1957, Syracuse, N. Y. Washington, D. C.: Soc. of Amer. « )1 pp. 175, 176 13%; L Quilter et ___a_l., I'Panel discussion: the small forest ~ke‘ystone and_ enigma in forestry," Proceedings, Society of 111th: meet ,.Oct 15-17, 1956,14emphis, Tenn. Soc of Amer. Foresters, 1957), p. 161. ,w-Wh and Fred B. Saunders, Evaluat1_ng inane 1 w ('12:: J. .m'r: a, tame, Series I, Develggment of « ~ .. reial and: -time f .. a; and ag-lication to .' gia Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin . j'th 1956), p. 7. . 4 ‘ . . - ..~.- rv‘ “‘§" ‘. l a ...‘ . ......1-n ‘- ~ ...‘o- o ~v- " . "...‘1 I: " ‘ ' '. il‘ J. .n ...-o.ae .- 5.. .. uc‘ 9' " . . -L...~J> A. fiaé...» vv ~- , . a... . .... .-.- 0‘ . q 1 — - ‘ u -u..-.| ’. - —- a o a< a ‘- x . ' ‘ ‘t 1. ..., - .. . ,. ~|. ... a. -. . ~- .... I s .‘0 p . 'n. \'. "'v .- 5“- .... a; . ‘D i. "no. ... ‘ . , ~. ~--:. '- -I-‘ .... - ... A .. .. ‘Cdf. - - u. -9 . -. ~.~-‘..’~ "r - v s - fl . .. 'v-1-..'_ H . 'Q.. I "\\ “ ‘ .. . a “‘A«‘a J \- I l 1 I F‘-o ‘_ h V. 2. ~‘,' lb. ,b ‘ ‘ c-._. - a ' 4", ‘ . e . u. ‘1‘. 'w‘. _ :1 «a ‘ a . , . b. “an: . .N ‘Ha.’ N., ”9. I. s.‘_“; > \ 2 a- ' ‘o - 15 ”alternatives is. a function of management. It can- {xvii}; bafielegated to others since intricate systems of and changing goals and. objectives are involved. A high W beam Mediate objective, but the sacrifice which a family 1114.". ‘ .J‘bo undergo to Obtain this income depends on many complex, ,1. yetrmore fundamental goals."l2 SW xhfljpln example of conflicting goals where dominance changes due f ‘mtmes changing over time has been described by Larson: 3* mg: W Ell-ll owners often are willing to forego the sustained “to be obtained through woodland management, and to sell their m, inclusive of growing stock, whenever the need for income .1 ’;“‘4\9).)¥ ”68811181 "13 (111 Brief report was made by Hall on the 1958 regional confer- Diwored by the U. 8. Forest Service to learn more about the 1 501’ will woodland owners. Although his comments included "1' ginonmny of the conferees' motives and the value of their 1, Hall noted a commonly voiced difference between the v -> &‘ the private owner and the public in regard to forest ' . f cthe possibility of satisfactory solutions. 8? the time at the conferences was spent by federal, , WM: and. consulting foresters, each telling of 1. 3d of their respective programs and proposing that v (- .-...r-.:..- I--- -- - . - a o .- ‘...., ‘p. .‘- r c ‘ I 0 r F . . , . , ~ I--... -.. -v- .. O'o;‘ : v-o .. -..... ”,3 a .. 54-.-1 ...-A. ~ n”.- . . . ‘ O ‘ O ..- n o k- r.:-‘ r. s . p. O . . ...-a. . .l a ~.~. . . .‘-C a..\..g.| ‘I! n a '_ \ .; e .o . . , ._ . O4- .0 g. . “ . IA...".“ 7 :\, (..., ~ - . "‘ fi.‘ «.... ;‘g .- ‘- -0 “‘4 ‘4 4"“ . __ ..- Lin. ‘ L‘-- ‘: 5'. ~ “‘s. F, “a.” Q‘ . . ~ , . “ ' . >‘Ia‘ 7‘. ." ‘~‘ 0.“ = Lfl‘a -\ ‘ 5w. a r. ~ a .. \ " ..-; ‘N‘ "a a I O \ -‘ “.1 k \ ..F‘. “v. n 1 . ‘ -*.‘a— ;' " ‘_ ‘ .‘1‘1-- .\ -‘ '5- 16 These jurisdictional conflicts, within government and between government and private interests, contributed little, however, to the definition of the problem, and what, if any- thing should be done about it. The conferences were called to explore what to do, not who should do it. It was repeatedly brought out that except for the hobbyist, landowners will not invest in forestry unless there are monetary gains in the foreseeable future. While the future timber supply may be a "national problem," the landowner's problem.is purely a personal one. It was this emphasis on the future national need for timber that prompted at some of the meetings the suggestion of direct subsidies in the national interest. The U. S. Forest Service . . . has assigned a small staff to analyze the miscellany of information, advice and criticism. . . It should be obvious, however, that no one solution is possible. Land ownership problems, like the people who have them--and like the land and trees themselves--vary with locality, with owner objectives, with markets, with land values, etc. To attempt a national solution to local problems which are not made of the same weighting of component aspects will be most difficult and probably woefully inefficient.lu Management Problems Problems of management of farm and forest resources on small Cmnerships have been studied and discussed by many individuals and {ypups. Key aspects of management problems, being of both private and social importance, are highlighted in quotations from recent references. Deficiencies in the various resource factors have been mnessed in a report by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. "There aue nearly a thousand counties in the United States where more than Imlf of the farmers are mainly dependent on the income from small, R luAlbert G, Hall, "The small woodland conferences: what they have accomplished," Southern Lumberman, CXCVII, No. 2H65 (Dec. 15, 1958), 150-152. . . w" r'F' ’g—: ".3. a”; . ‘I._"' ...-a. figue’ av-W‘F -"" "“' I , “an! ...-n we run- fo- t~-\‘ '3 p" '3'” W": J " ....“ nus you-“ a" VG " . ‘ v..- I '1'. «3‘ NQV,‘ '0 o- - I 5..- .Jv‘ .‘b- ybU'u-a v- A... 0 C O O Tova. g‘...‘\.‘ 4‘ .‘ : ‘ . 'L—a—J qo—v ...-.5 5“ s an o-‘.- 'a 'C x. - ., but: T??-D.'....; ‘ I a -. . . . 73"5 "'4'- ‘czw- '. .....- . .... '5'-.-“ C 'I '- " . -..‘,“ a _ ' amg...‘ C a“! °,‘;\I-v- ‘2 u 5‘" ‘a‘ ' . . ‘f'n ,. 11... an” a...“ .. "“ V».~..._i t D u f . . ‘N‘lq .-V ““0 v .. . . ‘ , . Q... E‘Wn M. ' ~~w -T‘m~ ‘ mu- ~9‘ ‘ u ‘5‘-“ U.p‘\5q ‘n ‘A . ""--\, ~A ‘sa 5 (I ' a. ' g C I. . .7... ‘ I - ‘II E h u o ”.35. 2..." -"_‘ ¢.._‘ . . \. ' :q . 5“:e 95““ 9 5113‘ “a . ‘. _ ‘Iv ‘5 -‘. - \ , p. g n», I. s v, I u. 17 poorly paying farms. ‘What they are up against, in innumerable cases, is lack of enough.good land, lack of equipment, lack of credit facil- ities, and often lack of the management information and skill which nfight open wider opportunity to them” . . . With better information, training, sometimes credit . . ., they can achieve a reasonably good living."15 One recommendation particularly emphasized in this pub- lication is the possibility tha ". . . loans, supported by manage- nent guidance and technical services, would assist low-income fhrmers to become soundly established in a successful system.of fanmug."i6 Likewise, with specific reference to management of forest lands, Barraclough pointed out that ". . . one major impediment to tme'widespread practice of more productive forestry on small Imfldings is the prOblem.of getting labor, capital, and managerial cmpacity properly combined on forest lands over a period of time. .ku.of these factors are necessary for purposeful forest manage- ment."17 A.similar statement, but of general application to farms, ifim made by Lanham and Butler. "Human and physical resources need 'U>be utilized more profitably on many farms in order to produce —5 V—v 15U.S. Department of Agriculture, Development of agriculture's .ngn,resources; a report on problems of low-income farmers, Ohshington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1955), p.2. 16Ibid., p. 5. 17K. E. Barraclough, p. 175. u-- _ ’ g: ..._I '. ._‘, “-- 0'. ..‘-.. - ""f ,:.._ ...... o U l C u . DQ . ~.- ..o w- "-"_— . I. ' ‘ d .- ‘ v . o :0 u 9. .. ...‘:3 .. .3 .Tu' A‘ ‘ . > ‘ ‘ .nov .a~,l. ‘ ‘3 ‘r I' - HQ. u»~-v-.j--b- \- . £~;‘S §-'- ‘ u... - .. _- ‘. . i n .l' f~.-.-\a§ "‘. ~“ "~‘~‘.»sb \ 5.- ‘ Q 1" ‘ 2 . ‘ ‘ ' A ‘ o“.- -.n. :.~ - -0 'r.. ‘ - f h ' a“, ‘_ . . 6‘. ‘1‘... :‘o 18 higher farm incomes. These needed adjustments require careful plan- ning and programing by individual farmers so that they may avoid financial difficulties in the years ahead."18 Taylor and Burch have directed attention to inadequate educa- tion as a cause of inefficient management and of underemployment of available labor. "Inadequate education and training often restricts managerial capacity which is reflected in pessimism and conservatism toward technological change in agriculture. It also retards and restrains farmers from developing alternative uses for surplus agri- cultural resources, particularly labor."l9 This point was carried further by Johnson and Haver in con- sidering farm management decisions. "With change and imperfect knowledge obviously so important, farmers must continually learn and adjust. As a consequence, they must spend time learning and making decisions on the basis of what they learn. The essence of manage- ment is the process of learning and adjusting."20 Recognizing dimin- ishing returns even in this area, they emphasized that "First among the principles for handling change and acquiring knowledge is not to 18W. J. Lanham and C. P. Butler, Economic analysis of annual adjustments in developing a beef cattle-grain farm in the Piedmont Area of South Carolinaifisrouth Carolina Agricultural Experiment s't'at'i'cn Bulletin 159 (Clemson, S.C.: 1958), p. 3. 19Calvin C. Taylor and Thomas A. Burch, Personal and environ- mental obstacles to production adjustments on South Carolina Piedmont Area farms ,_§outh Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 1:56 {Clemson, 8.0.; 1958), p. 33. 20Glenn L. Johnson and Cecil B. Haver, Decision-making prin- ciples in farm management, Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 593 (Lexington, Ky.: 1953), p. 7. \VJ J’wv‘ :u .~—.'..~ E. ... d-“-~ I..- """t 4" n . Qt! ‘ ‘ . -n‘9' - > La-'.: "2‘ :‘ ‘ g .. o.“ In... 0.5.. “‘O . . g I _ ,._-.~ ...suob-M- *1 . ~ 9 . p‘»!“‘“ ' a .‘. . ¢ u E‘ " ,. . . - ' . ‘ w --w:"‘ a! ~1"1-- 5:. Lacuna-v“ A‘ W'- ~ . - . '0 r-‘c"*~v-c.' "C' Snub-...uue‘ onu- a O O O ...: . ., ‘ " 1 . 1“! 9‘:u-'v-:_,-"-~I -~~-‘..v' it A......._. -' I "~""' ‘~I"~~- .‘O‘.—:v~ . . vac... ~ " o-A—u‘fiyc v. ..Q5 *.4 y lrw . --o.. ..r" ' n - c u.._‘_'| ‘ a. fin“: In “' d“..~. ... ~~I 5,. . F“ 9‘ .' ‘ ‘ u C. P“. I. .. N “.‘_ ... s a ‘h‘ 7. -- ,._ .- . . .....1 ~ e P“ ‘ 5"“. ~..-_; m" ~ . I ”A ..-. . FOI- ‘ .... I- 9' . “a: , Q ‘u""‘ -‘ . .0» p‘ .- ‘S‘~ ‘ ‘ ‘h‘.‘ Jy.‘a‘ be “as; 0 Mat.‘ ."“ ’ 3~ "Q‘~' V. '--' '5'. ‘v--. ‘ ‘ v 'V‘ '- I a \fi ‘~~u'-f‘ .‘ . :--‘. .. . ‘ “ ‘h ‘.. I" ‘Vv- “‘ . x u ' “‘r A“ F‘ ' ‘- I;“n1~ V‘."'C 1'. ‘ - :‘e-ts m“ ‘ C- a _v« .-.~ wo. ‘ Thu:.‘~‘ .‘ “9-t.. - ‘h.‘.‘ “O c‘.“".'_ u ‘3' ‘ “'f‘&. ‘ I."1h a o" " ~y‘i BCh.-Q‘C: r“ \.~-"“ 6 . '9 a. v: - « ""»: mu “ “ c I" ‘ g. r. J" Lax...‘ N ‘§-‘.‘. - \ ’ {.4 a. ~.,. '1‘ C' . v Au; V l9 afiend more, in time, foregone alternative opportunities, money, and efiTbrt, in performing additional amounts of any of the managerial finmtions than such additional performance is worth."21 Classified asnmmagerial fUnctions are ". . . those of observing, analyzing, (kmiding, taking action, and bearing resPonsibility."22 Johnson and Haver stressed the importance of labor integrity tum.mentioned that a ". . . technique widely used in handling un- reliability and dishonesty [of farm workers] involves their elimi- rmtion through training and development of pride in moral and pro- ductivity standards. Religious thought and school and family training are thus valuable from.a business standpoint as well as from religious, ethical and moral standpoints. . ."23 'W. B. Back and his colleagues have considered factors bearing on farm-and-forest management decisions in Kentucky. A.farmer has the prOblem.of deciding whether the land would better be used for timber or for other farm.crops. . . . Level- to-rolling upland in the Eastern Pennyroyal Area can be used for either timber or other crops, and the best use of this land depends upon the future income from.woodland, the cost of con- version to cropland, the potentigk future farm.income with and without conversion to cropland. 211mm, p. 33. 22Ibid., p. 38. 23Ibid., p. 28. 21FWilliamB. Back et al., Economics of the farm woodland in the Eastern Pennyroyal Area of Kentucky, Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 650 (Lexington, Ky.: 1956), p. 28. . I ‘ - ... .1...“ p n c..-"' . y 0 5" ‘I.“ ‘ -.. .4-.. “15;" .—‘u-ov L firs -zter‘r' E's-3i 1;“5». 3:; :y- n0-"‘ ""no-Ou. ms: nu... .2 ...: 1:229 1 ask 3;: '1 if: 3:: V" " ‘W.’ O..- .. , s. ‘ . -h no \a d'hwg . 1. $.p‘ ‘n , ‘ .. O ‘s. c '\.,\ ‘2 ‘ 1. V“; a‘ W _. ~_ 9.. ~59- “»\.‘ n I a -. aAV -' .. in. - "‘w..‘. "' ‘K‘a ‘ \ v“ ...:s‘ S": ‘ has.“ a- - h ¢v§ .: “Dis 5:." ‘ vvk. nu‘ '. A‘A " ~- 7“ .~ a. “*2“: ’5 .9...‘_.’ ‘0 5 20 When it is uncertain whether best use of land calls for clearing or leaving the land in timber, a guiding rule is to leave it in timber until a‘wellebased decision can be made, and meanwhile to manage the woodland as if timber were the best alternative use of the land. ‘Woodland resources in the Eastern Pennyroyal Area have been depleted because clear-cutting was anticipated and the woodland was placed in a temporary lang-use category, and then the land was not clear-cut as planned. 5 Some ambiguity exists as to the precise meaning of this last maflence; its general intent, however, is obvious. Uninformed management was also reported by Britt and Martin from their recent survey of woodland owners in Tennessee. ". . . of all owners interviewed, less than 10 percent had ever received pro- fessional aid in marketing their forest products. The landowner's reluctance to ask for professional aid or their lack of knowledge that such aid was available greatly weakens their bargaining power."26 Inadequacy of management knowledge is not limited to the wood- land owner, however. In discussing the need for forest research, Iarson stated that "One of the major obstacles to the promotion of forestry on these small areas is the lack of accurate information upon which foresters can base their recommendations relating to management practices.27 251bid., p.30. 26Ray T. Britt and Joe A, Martin, Marketing sawtimber and Imlpwood, University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 295 (Knoxville, Tenn.: 1959) p. 10. 27Larson, p. A93. . - ...... n .\:‘O§ ...... Odour- . . o ”0' 5;: Org ‘ ...-Owl ~“U..-~ ...‘V r --' -"~ L be). ‘4‘... ‘- ‘5 v. J .. . m... .ud“. ‘. . 0p~cn ~p. PA "-“’:Fv g... g .. ~ ' p..- ’I-IAI-b‘ h. .4... v . c;": R: ""9"; ‘ v v. .0.. ‘-M:-.:'.I "'~‘-Vu~‘_‘- ”TV"... Ir t..,' . ‘3 ‘ =:'-’fi‘~0 o: --.‘ I n ..Q‘c::a .'O a no. .‘_' . 'v- a. .x ‘. ,. "I ‘0... Univ 1...” F A. b ' F, ‘ .... -._, .5 ’ ’ a vb .~ v-~ O J |;t ‘:~‘-H . V.‘ I 7!. c...‘ h- u 5- 1‘ . ‘ g a. ...; ‘.'~v H. r3.e a...“ . ‘ . "~A‘.A : b..v~'¢“!_ “U F‘mf. “ht“. u' u . 0Q. ‘ '19 3a.”! ,- ...!- ‘ h-._ "d: .- ~ ‘\ “- h“... .9 ‘z . ' v ~‘O w- I ~‘V ‘ ., ‘ Q \'-\q u -9 fi'h‘. H ‘0 ’ .u~ y. _‘.‘.'. ‘ ‘ ‘0‘. " "-3 - 21 Redman has theorized as to how the farmer's fOrest operations ewe determined by his response to uncertainty and the market rate of interest on loanable funds. Uncertainties of yield and price predictions encourage practices that result in preferences for a more certain present income although long-run income may be larger. This rate of discount is the farmer‘s own estimate of what constitutes a reasonable return on woodland investment. His idea of reason- able return is affected by nonmonetary values, relative capital position and needs for capital, or additional cropland and degree of uncertainty envisioned. The need for capital or awareness of a high rate of return from alternative uses tends to increase the farmer's discount rate. The degree of uncer- tainty is enhanced because of the difficulty of using the con- cept of flexibility to adjust resources to keep the prOper relationship with other farm enterprises. When the farmer’s discount rate is higher than the market rate of interest, clear-cutting and selling timber is encouraged, and conversely, if his discount rate is lower than the market rate, he is encouragedto invest in woodland. In the area under study, the past cutting practices indicate that the prevalent dis aunt rates have been higher than the market interest rates. From this reasoning Redman has drawn the conclusion that, "For nmst farmers, there appears to be no economic incentive to invest in Imoduction of hardwood lumber." 'While many farmers may actually con- sider what a "reasonable return" may be, it is quite likely that nmny'base decisions for a single cutting simply on liquidation values without consideration of such factors as possible long-run income or nmrket interest rates. _— 28John C. Redman, "Economic aspects of the farm woodland muerprise," Journal of Farm Economics, XXXVIII, bk» h (Nov. 1956), 901‘910 o '-.c ’9" ‘4‘.) _. _ _ . .-. :. U '+,,o :e- g ‘ " ‘ :41 1., I... 0". "‘ “‘ ' . . ' ‘ . ~ ~ "a ”'3' .... o‘- I u ‘Ck‘. ' a: p o I o "S. ‘. _ b5.-.’--v I I ,._,:.._ -.. ’ ..— . ~Vu».~‘~ v.0 Q . "V-a .-.. . 3“- o . ‘~.- f. g. u ,, c- . ‘u ...-..9_ ‘ ‘v. V“ 1‘ ;—9. . "‘ w. -" u.- "Vu ‘ ..i s; - . .‘ ‘5 ‘Ra a ~ 'I‘t fl“ .\ . ~ . . l“ ._ . " ‘s. ‘ "“2. a a» ‘c g.“ . ‘ 22 Budgeting The process of budgeting in developing the farm plan is very important for achieving, on paper, a satisfactory productive organ- ization. The farmer can choose to implement whatever plan appears the most desirable to him. .A concise outline of the over-all procedure has been pro- vided by Woodworth and Saunders as part of a detailed exposition <fi?planning for increased farm family satisfactions. "An evaluation cfi'income opportunities involves planning to allocate resources emwng alternative uses. . . . Specifically, we are concerned with (l) evaluating the resources available, (2) listing the alternatives 'flnch.are most appropriate, (3) estimating the resources required fln-each alternative, (h) developing several alternative farm organ- izations which would result in increased farm.income . . . ."29 Attention has been given to the importance of including wood- land in the farm plan. "Timber stands are important resources on nmny Georgia farms. . . . Regardless of how the woodland fits into the farmis organization it is desirable to inventory this resource periodically as a basis for planning."30 The woodland resource, being productive capital, needs to be given adequate consideration in planning, due to the interrelation- ships of the timber volume, growth rate, and harvest outputs, as Y I I Albir“ 29Wood‘worth and Saunders, p. 8. 30Ibid., p. 16-17. \ i'I a . o.- -- O-' ’ .v '1: :.g.:-. 0“: . I _,_I M - O ... ‘ .; V.- b.'-l~.o-~v -" 1 - - -‘ - . c ; - 3'. ' .- 0-0 V -p 99"“ .. . ‘ 1‘" ... ...-......t a o ...-o- v“ . . c......o.'-. -5. Ho- ' ‘ .. _N .D‘ h - :5... -v~:u-vu v. - . - =- '5‘ up 0.; 9'. --.-'1.. - .0"... on» 5..-». u... .. . . . .~.=:_-_-o -;o ..-'. I- . , .2. - .n..-vu- ..be v. u... v.0». ' c . O . v. - gpr : ‘4 v‘dh‘I h ‘- Vagafi‘ ' O O ...a. . ... '9' ‘\"" ‘fignsa. 0.. ,l A. . ... I‘v “" “'"O o...- - .. _ . '2‘ :v~<,‘ ....-i" O. ‘b Um. I. . - “a ‘ nfi._‘. w‘ M... g. 3 . "- a - ‘ ‘.;.._ . _ :- P 4-,, - ‘- , 'u- _ c.v‘ .‘ 3‘...“ ‘L- -..; f ‘—’U- '~ . ‘ "in. 1‘; cu": ....“ a. . "- u b ‘ p0. _ -I’ ‘ ~‘n-.. ..-; .. ‘5- ..’2. “ . be... as Xv. _ . . o -...“ - ‘ V, . ‘ — ‘fi ' .U h..- “on > r .O~ V. ‘I;: ~_“-' . ‘q. a: \a ‘ - 0‘, .- ‘1 .‘~.' g -‘ . t ‘-.’- N:“-‘“ “02‘ “-9 ‘O~y .u. y . . A. 4 q J‘ \ .12» H- ' 3“,), D .. - . I ‘I‘ VI 3 \ I}. QV‘N ‘0 . \ , :4. :- 'Q V‘. . ‘. yJ‘v v “*3?" ., ~‘z _‘ "‘ b- ... . . 23 (hegory has stated. "Outputs cannot be treated as independent through time. 'we must recognize the interdependence Of.§ii outputs through- mn;the entire planning interval."31 This is important for planning ‘dth the assumption of profit maximization as the sole objective. 'TWen though the enterpreneurial intent is represented by maximization cfl'present net worth, there remains the possibility of widely dif- flning output patterns through time. In this, two factors are of Imime significance: the choice of the interest rate, and the choice of the planning interval."32 Furthermore, pursuit of the maximized profit objective is com- ;flicated to such a degree, as Ciriacy4Wantrup has mentioned, that r'Afarmer’s uncertainties about future costs and prices are usually so great that he cannot hope to hit exactly the peak of profits. All he can do is to try to move in the right direction; the only course that makes sense is to take one step at a time, try one change after another, improve net returns by trial and error. Most of his trials and errors will be made on paper, by budgeting. In this way a farmer may choose among alternative conservation practices without actually putting them.into effect."33 Budgeting requires reasonably well estimated input-output data to fulfill its purposes for the farmer, as indicated by Johnson and Haver. "The keeping of financial and other records in farm operation 31Gregory, p. 36. 321bid. , p. 131. 33CiriacyAWantrup, p. l9. . : Anv- ...-0‘ q ""> v .-.- . . . .... l .,...o‘ v . . . ,,— a. hug ‘pfi “ a ; ‘_ ._. ..-... c - o o g‘ r p u I» .. . sac -- ‘ . a n r” an r, .. I ..‘.. .....- u a I t ~v-~-- -'-0A Dv- ~q ‘ - ' ‘Fh v- .. CI- .-g :\ n.‘ I'- . ... 5 1'-“\..‘ ‘R “ Lita-..., . """L I" I 'b . a 3.4,. '- : "afi'a. ‘ .. b. u- “I .-'_. ‘ k.“ ‘H ‘ 0‘ “It; ‘ ..-", “Q" ' “‘ V" l1. '\ \‘N ’u u - .‘ ‘ K ‘1‘ 'I’,__ . ‘u N‘ l 1' ..- "'~.S ~N. ~0l~r 4- " -.,.‘ . l. nu ' A. L_’>~l . ~ h a“ :7 A.‘ .- 1! a)“. .’ :~- ‘--~ in. o 1 § ', ‘ of ‘ 4’ v'» I E Q is C 0 :2»... 2A and specific enterprises and trials provide him.with basic data for Iflanning future operations. Budgeting is a deductive process that finnmdizes plans, crystalizes [sic] analysis, and thereby reduces the Imssibility of errors."3h Gregory has added the caution that ". . . the process of es- timating involves expense, and a balance must be struck between the advantages of obtaining more accurate (and more costly) estimates and those of using less exact estimates but revising plans more fre- quently."35 In the pilot woodland management program for New Hampshire already referred to, several budgets were devised and a correspond- ing "set of alternative management plans was prepared for each pro- lerty." As Barraclough briefly described the procedure, "Each alternative plan of management includes an estimate of the amount of labor necessary to carry it out, the amount of income that might be realized from.the plan, and the value of the residual trees at the end of a decade. These figures summarized and evaluated the inputs and outputs likely to result from.each plan of action. Once these alternatives were presented the owner it was up to him to decide which plan or combination of plans he wished to follow." However, ". . . the owner does not commit himself to a single plan, but . . . the plan is flexible and is a general guide to action."36 3"Johnson and Haver, p. 27. 35Gregory, p. 1&8. 36K. E. Barraclough, pp. 175, 176. iv . ' . — ~ A prfikfl a... Ongb . Y .... Mu- ~:- V‘I h D A-» 1 o n ...-1' -,.;n--‘.. v- . . _ . ...-...... Gaz-.-b‘.-~¢. 0 "I" ...-u :9”... q“ -..1. 42b....-: Db v: y.v .... . _ - --‘-"‘:-‘:.:.‘:": s a” a. - .-..“ "V ' _ . ' v . . 0.0-»5' 0‘9 “r_-r ‘*- v..- Mao-.." . 1 Q‘- no": ; I- ' fl.- 5.- .‘ u. u. a .. .1": ~ . . ‘ _ -o - a I g» -Q-‘-.' 9 . p ’0- '~""'..“.‘."'* ‘ora "" “a; C‘ F. u,- u..-- l“ . “r. W \‘ . K 'D‘a "- . . Q I P -..“. v I a” ‘- \a VI, *w. ‘~ -. \C . ‘1'. “ ‘ ...". 5" ' H “VN. D a“. " r ' I“V‘- o . “‘-:’v..‘v~~ : ‘ “’ ‘N'Ei. .U \‘N‘ ' l “A 3‘ 'V: C ”a fix- ."a \\ \ .‘ ‘ .~ q ‘ . G‘- - "‘5 9‘: u . ".“v' 1 .- O a ..9 ”I “ I LJh‘n‘ a. \ «- w ._. Q '1 o- n,‘ ...; a.“ ‘-.. .‘.. ~14": . v . N 5‘. ., v“.:r‘ ‘._v~ . 25 Flexibility Considerable attention has been given to the functions and value of flexibility in resource use. Johnson and Haver have pointed out that "Flexibility is often valuable and should be built into a farm organization to the extent that the value of additional flexibility to the organization, in the opinion of the operator, equals or exceeds its costs." "When valuable facts and data become available with the passage of time, it often pays to spend money, time, and effort postponing decisions until more such facts and data become available. The ability to postpone decisions is re- ferred to as flexibility."37 While flexibility is advantageous, its great disadvantage, as Ciriacy-Wantrup has stressed, is its deleterious effect upon con- servation investment. "A flexible plan allows a farmer to make adjust- ments from time to time as he sees more clearly what is likely to happen. On the other hand, a flexible plan will bring lower profits than a fixed plan based on the most likely guesses--if such guesses prove right." "An increase in flexibility has important effects upon conservation." "A farmer can make his plans more flexible by . . . postponing investment in improvements--in short, by reducing his sunk. costs. As we know (p. 12), a reduction in sunk costs results in depletion. "38 37Johnson and Haver, pp. 17, 33- 3801riacy4Wantrup, pp. 10, 17. . . ova“. ' 0”- Eu.- .- . A , - ..- p’v. 0" a ‘ ‘ .' O .. ‘ o ’0 ‘ .:. v:— L- - v - ""' G Mr. O ,a" k C I' ,uefl“ . . O .' ~00 \ - --A” ' ”fr-'1‘ “#\V y .b a...”- r- "h“ v c I § ' . V. .... 0. “'22-“... ‘II - . .. a..-“ ...»...- _ , , . ..r x, :3 ., ...D .. in“. ..l ch 'aAO‘U “a 'ch ...-v - v . ’Fi‘ “ :9. : '- w c _ W. ‘9 .IM' I‘M-..” ea . ... 1‘” - o. ‘ ' - .p i ' .~.~ ‘ R... 1‘- .5-= k - .....‘f_ "n ' ‘ ~- ‘ I . 'K-.: k” t 2'“' Fa- c .“hng-t .--. Lag . . ' ‘DO-u - ' 5... on “..~~ . ”‘3 MAS .. h c U - ... c 'F- . “I 9. . Is... . '“i- Ha! . " ~‘—-..o ‘ "I 5" “’9' “a 'Q. F ~ fig ‘ — «... e . u. _ '2‘19 \. “a "F .. ' "J .... ”y ”gt-«p. 0.. ... Ann... I“ . ha... "'1: 'l-- .‘ 3 :s. . h. V...‘ ‘ 5 .“‘ h " 9- u-‘ u . . \J \ it: ‘ . s ' ‘- '- og: . .dk--;'°c ‘H" . ‘A ..." .. ' y" *H‘E 26 The importance of flexibility in planning stems from its essential potentiality for accommodating future operations to cir- cumstances presently uncertain. 'With flexibility essential despite its involving some cost, Gregory has explained its practical appli- cmtion,‘with multi-stage planning. ". . . expectation of events com- Imratively nearby in time are usually held with greater certainty ‘Umm.those in the more remote future. . . . at the end of the first year he [the planning agent] would probably have additional informa- tion on which to base better plans for the coming years. He would therefore strive for f1exibility--to make even his short-term.goals amenable to re-adjustment in the light of added information." "Multistage planning allows the planning agent to incorporate flexi- bility into his growth goal at each stage."39 With.timber being both factory and product, he commented that ". . . the dual nature of standing timber permits an almost extreme flexibility in the harvesting and marketing of the product.""0 Recognizing this highly valued flexibility in timber management, Back and his colleagues have discussed how the farmer can apply it to his advantage. ". . . an individual farmer will realize the greatest income from.a woodland in the long run by harvesting and marketing timber in the periods of high prices (at peaks of [business] cycles) and during peak years within the upward part of the cycle. Light cuttings may be necessary in low price periods, when mature trees are damaging the remainder of the stand.""1 39Gregory, p. l"?- "01bid., p. 36. "lBack et a1., p. 20. , - ..‘I'A :' ’9‘. i ‘3'- - --- .0 ,- .... u .'v 9 :':':_f.:p- 0"; if:' ~ “...-..M- ~--‘ V. b a : o . . . r‘ . any-Q “" ‘5": an.“ .. .. ~ - a .... a..-” - c . .'-~-o \ ' . - an o-. T" “-0: P” 1 . .- . 4.. L"- ...05 O, - . a. ' . . . apt: ~v‘n09 FR“.~ (. ' ' no..- .-.x. ...”...5 Ann... . 1 :'-~:: “ 1'0-.. 9. ‘v.-'—.. D , . 3""\g 9,. .. -.— ."‘.‘0-*L. .».t~-, _ . n3! " ‘«:O F“"‘ _.' I ' _'~ “.\ " U ...-as. -.... - ~r‘~ ’h F u “_-‘: .:= AP“ “... ‘ ~--.-...,..' ‘I 5. .. .‘?:°;- 0" Q .C.‘ At. ‘4-.. -.fv- I ......_ . Q (... V-a..- P1" .... '.v , "“‘P‘ I .' " F' u ' a - y u its... 3. § A "a.“ 0 I». ‘ I" ‘ h "‘w "\'E :w-. ‘ I- c I \-.t t‘5 27 Their recommendation is for continual flexibility. "A.major nmans of minimizing the loss of efficiency resulting from price and technological uncertainty is the maintenance of a [flexible] position which permits 1) more rapid adjustments to be made, or 2) delay in zmjustments until adequate information is available on which to base a course of action.""2 AsSistance Technical forestry assistance has been extended for many years in most areas where small woodlands exist. However, reported experience has commonly been similar to that of Richard C. Smith, who stated in a 195% report that interviews with Missouri farm.opera- tors in 1952 showed that the service functions of the farm forester were only partially understood by the 35 percent who knew that he was available, and over the 10-year period of his employment till then only a very small percentage of them had called on him for as- sistance in either forest management or marketing."3 The farmer's need for assistance was pointed out by Preston in l9h3. "Once he has decided that he wants to grow and harvest wood as a farm.crop, he will need help in the details of practices. Selecting trees and products in reference to the best markets, as well as with regard to the growing stock to be left, are points on "QIbid., p. 25. "3Richard c. Smith, Marketing farm woodlot progpgts in Franklin, Osage,_and Gasconade Counties, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 623 (Columbia,.Mo.: University of Missouri, 195k), P- 15. ‘ ub- J' W" ’ \A. .6.- ,' .;‘.,- u. ..- o O ‘. ' . Op 9 In: em: .’ — F... .. ... ....-u " ...vo. o .. Q . Q “-..',..,._ p” \ _. II; who- v...- ., L ' ’ .u . h c . . F'3-‘:v: av 9-Har "' .- m.--‘-.- .a v¥‘.~ . .. - ...- . v 4‘- p “"L".'.V' _ a— n, 'g “- 3 . g g . '. 3'” ":“:~;-.-.-° " '. “b-‘s.... ' if ‘v- ...... .o .g Q '1'. a . ‘. ~' .u- .. .L . V. .."‘; fl ‘0'; J :. .‘u-n... . ~—~‘ " ¢M.:; v v. D . o -.l O ‘ .L.‘ g‘:~ . Ca ‘ "K“;--‘C “‘ -“ I .. v‘ . . 5..“ O i “ ~*--, g o N" x..- ‘iv-n v‘__ Kc- . U». Cov- o“ - ‘ o -.4 2:- . .'~:‘: P\ ... a".->'v «..g};~. ... -H l. 28 which farmers are not usually well informed. Forestry bulletins the available that tell how to put various forestry measures into eflfect. The Soil Conservation Service can give some field assist- ance, and the county agent or the State agricultural college will Imt farmers in touch with other agencies that may assist him.""" In 195%, however, Preston prefaced his book on farm forestry with a highly optimistic general statement on the simplicity of farm woodland management. "One purpose of this book is to take the mystery out of farm.forestry. Farmers and agricultural leaders have long shied at forestry practices as something beyond and outside the realm of agriculture. . . . Farm.management of woodland fields is no more difficult than is pasture management. Even relatively small incomes from the woods will raise the standard of living on a.mi11ion or more farms. Forestry on the farm is simple and en- tirely feasible for farmers to learn and to practice.""5 More realistically, Coulter has made clear that ". . . there is no substitute for personal contacts and on-the-ground service as- sistance to get better forestry practices by millions of small wood- land owners. Flexibility in standards or quality of forestry prac- tices are necessary. This brings up the horrid word 'compromise,‘ but compromise may be necessary and even desirable due to particular ""John F. Preston, WOodlands in the farm.plan, Farmers' Bul- letin no. l9uo (Washington,D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1993), p. ii. "SJohn F. Preston, Developing farm woodlands, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.,l95h), p. vi. I I! F .' cyst. f. ,wgtg’fi-QC a“ ' u - ‘- 'u‘.«~"' '7' ‘ O - ao~v-' .. an " .uu‘Vu"- ‘3 “...-J ‘ .- v~‘""'“~.‘ _ ...-- . n _ . ‘ {.-. ‘-:": .O «3 ’50 '! ~ -3.-_ ...-— L ‘--- .-.. ... O P ..‘to. m "'3 '9 a'."c ‘ .1... ' ....» u —-- '- I. . ‘ ' s q a ‘\r - ' f-‘ st‘.‘ -... . . . 1.. ... : apo‘cp —,. -~¢'-"-...-~ wo»..-..-‘ .a. 1,. 55‘": .o .‘..,_ 9-..- .. ~v - a ”cab to. u-.- -v'“ —-- ,‘""‘a:"" "m “-5 I - -~ "(x-s .. b“ v I Q n :I.’ .9: R ‘yncm o .' -‘ g . f .t Us-.. viva-av. "Ev-vol k'. a. on.- . ' ‘V‘fi ‘ E:L‘ :Hna -o‘ .H~ --' .....v\ y. ...” t" ' ‘ v A- -. ~' L h‘. 'Iq . . -» " I“ .5 s “vn. _ a ngo.’ - , «a. --- ,- ~.. ‘8‘, ‘ "'u . :‘a ‘2.."‘ ‘ “u." n ‘ Fr Q ~ ~ -..a , n.‘ «A - ‘ K.‘:. .“n . ~ as h‘ ‘ ~ ‘ ‘ u, _ ‘C; “:5‘ o v-‘.‘~. 7“\ - --' ‘5‘ :93- ‘V‘I‘ Yr~$ : ‘ rs. ' -. \ .q. g: ‘h. _ .r‘:\~ ..,\ ...-‘3.“ bk- 29 aheumstances.""6 In the area of marketing, Smith gave an example of rmeded compromise, noting that "Frequently, it is necessary to com- promise the most desirable forestry practice in favor of selling suf- ficient volume to attract buy,ers.""7 By a field study in a 3l-county area in northern Michigan, th0 and James Obtained data for measuring some of the impacton small forest owners of the four major public assistance programs concerned with forestry on small properties: forestry extension, service for- emtry, Soil Conservation Service cooperation, and the Agricultural Conservation Programa Most striking was the lack of knowledge as to the existence of the assistance programs. "The existence of a for- estry extension program was unknown to 82 percent of the forest land- cmners in the field. Ninety-seven percent of the owners did not know anything about the service forestry program. Ninety percent of the farmers were unaware that payments for forestry practices [were] available under the Agricultural Conservation Program.""8 The other principal summary observation was that "in view of the limited effort put into them, limited effects from the assist- ance programs would appear to be inevitable." ‘While forestry ex- tension was concluded to be the most efficient of the programs, advice having been followed and considered sound by 80 percent of "6Cou1ter et al., p. 160. "78mith, p. 16. "8James G. tho and Lee M; James, "Influence of some public assistance programs on forest landowners in northern Michigan," land Economics, XXXIV, no. A (Nov. 1958), pp. 357-359, 36l-36h. ... ..p _ "_ t' .1. “ad 1“ (f) ~..._,,,. -.- -v‘ "p i U" 1 a 30 those who had applied for it, the volume of such assistance was slight, with forestry extension specialists able to devote only mxmt 9O man-days a year to the 3l-county area. The reaction of the majority of owners assisted by the service forestry program and Soil Conservation Service farm planning indicated the positive attitudes toward woodland management had not been effec- tively developed by the methods used. This was particularly un- fortunate in the case of SCS cooperators, as they held over half the farm forest land in the area. Only about 3-1/2 percent of all farmers (half of those who had applied for ACP forestry payments) stated that the money in- centive had been necessary for them to undertake forestry practices, but practically all of those (90 percent) who had not heard previ- ously of the availability of payments for forestry practices were not interested in changing their practices. Many of these, however, were interested in obtaining payments "but indicated their practices would be unchanged." While the "need to study these programs in greater depth and over larger geographical areas" was concluded to be "of greater im- portance that the tentative conclusions" as to weak aspects of the programs, Yoho and James indicated optimism in the possibilities for developing interest in assistance programs among the many owners who had not known that such programs existed. They recognized that "slight interest may, with small stimulus, be converted to strong interest. Moreover, lack of interest is often linked to lack of . . ..-.- c I‘ "' - u‘L't ‘ 5""-.0 ;a*-. A _ olf w. Nun. ’5 ""'".' “- ,.-'v 5 wk ~C ‘v “u‘, ...-vi I C 1“ "..‘M ‘ ‘ vv‘ . ‘ fim‘ "' l: h. ' .. 4“ ’- - .. ..~ ..-v-gvv- ~n° "" “"-' ~ -6- ”. lu'u.- ‘4' " 'I . - . I u - s ‘ a": 1:": ‘v-w'r’ ’9 " __‘. .50--..»x... V. —" . (fifia “"““' ’ .. .....e u. -3“ I'M: a a ’ .3 Ut“ . . ~ . a 1'”. ‘;n '“V‘R o 9.19 ’1‘ ‘ucvd .a. u“ '0 o..‘ h- -’ a lo ...: g ' ' ' . n:- : .... a...‘~, O .. who... y. I I... Dacha." a... ; .... :-'-~- ., ' ... e _n a . ' «--.... If?" 5".“ ‘. “.‘ - I“: a“ : we N . :..|;'e C"~&V‘:;r ' w “-~b..-. E , . £8" ‘7‘“?- c -.;.~ ’3‘: W l 5 ~,. a, ~T=2;':‘~'u ‘ '¢§«&1 L"; .' ., .... V‘ In a \H I" 31 hxmledge. To stimulate interest in forestry assistance it is nec- essary first to createawareness that a need for such assistance exists." One over-all view of needed assistance is embodied in Larson's cxmclusion of his thesis that improved and coordinated administra- tdon of government programs is essential. "The great need today is fln'the development of machinery which will serve to coordinate resource programs at the local level, thereby allowing them to be carried forth to the people as an integrated whole. It is the con- clusion of this study that the local soil conservation districts established under state law can and should be developed as the (xmrdinating units for all activities, federal and state, which re- late to the conservation and development of land and timber resources h held in private ownership." 9 Marketing and Cooperation The key problems of timber marketing by the average farmer have been outlined by westveld and Peck, as follows: ". . . if he produces forest products in excess of his own needs he is fre- quently at a disadvantage in marketing them because (1) he may not understand timber and timber values, (2) he may sell at the wrong time, (3) he cannot bargain effectively because he has only a small quantity of material suitable for any one product, and (h) he may "9Larson, p. 526. \l’ -D ..O' .0, P . 3. ‘U‘ .r ' . ~ E.“ .5- wfltuu " c . . o - -v' - «:3. p_, -u- u.- .. . . - - .,— ...‘o: q- . 'fl ‘\ u...- fi s ----. —;‘ ‘ro' k-‘v ..- cs '0.— O n. so .... Vs§.c ‘\ .- .... . . '.‘ :‘f;“‘ 0o». * .-. I... ‘ t v 3.. ..:._.-, .. —. on U DI! “...-......" ___ . \n 2.. v... " A--. l. » -- c“~‘:"?~;-v ‘ -vo. knz' ' ’uo'.‘_' "¢~..‘ v - I '~_~.. a: ' .._‘ 3" o ,. u - '0... b 5. . ..- ‘~ -Vll . K. ".i ‘z' la n! ". U» a o o I m . ‘g :v-o . , V ..., .. « -,_ O‘ U. I. ;‘-‘. ..." \‘ &.. . k ‘K “C ~ ~ V . ~ ‘5 ‘. V‘ ... N I in. U -. "v;.‘ . . .. . \I‘ ‘: '3: ‘ 1 . UV a \ U" ‘lg I ‘ I h’iu ' ““32: O ‘._~ - ,_ Av. . ~. \U . a“: I 3' .A u- ‘n )4“. 5 I 'v w - c“ -. ~- ._~ ‘.I ,4. Q‘ ~ A I ‘ . \- I, Y‘_ -1 h 1*. ‘v ‘ . o“"\'- _ 32 find little market for some of the more valuable products such as saw logs, stave bolts, and poles and piling."SO These problems are partly due to the fact of the smallness of the woodland enterprise. .Minckler and Hosner have touched on this fact and suggested cooperative action as a possible help. "Small tracts do make economical harvesting and marketing more difficult, but it has been demonstrated that operable cuts can be made on wood- lands no larger than ten to fifteen acres. Larger holdings, however, would definitely encourage good forestry. The formation of co-opera— tives or seller groups would help the owners of smallwoodlands."51 An abstract of a similar statement by James W. Craig extended the recommendation to the formation of cooperative forest management units. "Voluntary associations or cooperatives of adjoining land- owners offer [the] best method of establishing a workable management unit that can be staffed by a trained forester and that can offer stumpage in quantities large enough to attract better prices."52 'WOodland owners' current management decisions will have an effect on future markets and, as Colgan has pointed out, their management in turn is affected by their prediction of what future conditions will be. "Every forest landowner, whether large or small, decides for himself what the future market for his products is likely to be. On this basis he handles his property, occasionally 50R. H. Westveld and Ralph H. Peck, Forestry in farm manage- ment, 2d ed., (New York: John Wiley 3. Sons, Inc., 1951), p. 2. SlIMinckler and Hosner, p. 51. 52Coulter et al., p. 162. . . ¢ ' .4 .3 _‘:,. 54-4.?“ " I.. n' c ‘ ...—e- c “A- . ...-D 'v . oV :‘H. a} ...—V; .— a. . .. cu- ..» v- ' ._ ‘0.“ 7‘" a: ...-a .‘-'- '-._.' a. _, .. om'b o 'r.-,..-'-a-O~ O" O - - '.Z~--J.-—~ v v . S'_';"'. : :G V .- ‘O‘ ‘ ...é' “ 5* _... o .. HI“ ‘ . .. .9. (1,..- ”a-.. I. ..‘-5 -.J '.._ - v “ "‘7‘. -.-- .-— J—i..~. -~ --: - . - -..- ~ru ‘1‘: .3 -I - q 8"""‘ do c...» F: "'W-“o-OQ - v. .~ a A - . ‘:~.u.- -. ‘;q~.‘"‘ ' h‘ " “'w-p -. -- _ ~ .§. ~ .. ' L“. ' _ I. ' .‘. a. . :- fir“-.. .‘-- ... " a- w"‘_ -; Q ~ ..- Ax- ‘ -..- ”K: A" "I 4‘ “—1., ‘O‘ .‘y '4 'K. |~:V-- A..- ._ d- ~\“‘ '_ g»- -- “ -. .‘ "-- ... a ‘ \i': -‘N ‘.fu ‘ -yk‘s a‘. -... ‘. A .- 9p- M ‘u“' or ‘ ~a| ..‘.. NT". ‘ . --., ~ . a 9 '4: ;‘~,. .‘3‘. ~~._ F..- E." 3'. .__~ I. ‘ ‘ . ... o - - ‘:"-‘A _ _ ‘. "V 'w-_' ' .‘ “ I ”...," . 3“ a "‘c. .“v\,= F..; o J V “‘ u ‘ ... ”HT- Q- ‘ h "h'._‘ a: :‘eQr-f- “—- \- ‘- “J‘Mu'. . ‘u. ~- “ “-‘I “‘ .er- "i I." __‘-‘ ~~ ‘. 't . “I“ Aw- ; Ch.. '1 ‘ ‘C; t ...-‘9‘. '~ ‘ " I‘Q .7 'fl.‘ 5 .-..- .'~::‘ ~~~ "O. h " "‘Cc" M“: 33 changing his views as new factors enter into his calculations or as he gains added knowledge of current costs and returns. These sev- eral millions of owners' opinions are directly correlated with de- nmnds of the consumer and the prices consumers will offer."53 Organization to aggregate small holdings for forestry and Iwmketing, as suggested by Larson, may have the stabilizing effect of reducing variability among individual owners” actions and produc- ing higher long-term output. "It is likely that the answer to the problems of the small private forest holding will be found in some type of corporate or cooperative organization that will furnish technical forestry services and handle the marketing and processing of timber products for the owners."5" The commonly contrasting motivational positions of large and small owners described as follows by Behre have led him to recommend assistance to aggregational arrangements for management of small holdings and loans for joint processing facilities. The very factors which have made for progress in forestry by the large owners and for the opening up of public timber not hitherto operable have intensified the small-owner problem. High prices and insistent demand open the way for intensive forest management and better utilization by large owners whose financial interests are strengthened by long-range plans for continuous operation; they tempt small owners to reap profits by premature cutting of growing stock and liquidation of forest values. V-V—V‘ —-"— 53R..A. Colgan,Jr., "Sound economics--the basis of sound forestry," Journal of Forestry, IL, no. 7 (July 1951), H83. 51+Larson, p. #90. , bun-'0; 'Av ' l .Uo u-CU‘- ' . . IV‘ 4 '. AWE": $.CJ'C... lung.‘ 5 ... w 1 V... p.33-.. .... .. e F F. ‘ . lb “Ms 54 who- ‘ " ' "i I v F“ ~~-... "a; ~.- 9 '5 W "a m~..--. ‘-. .I'.‘C A‘c a... .-'a 3" hi‘w‘. , e- 4 '“" on- '1: "1‘ ~OI3‘ u'. b‘ Viva». :I-O:o...: .“"'-vflh- 1": ‘L h .Ut "HO ‘3'?" “Mn? 1 ins. ~ Veal. . C ‘Hv‘fi ‘ Ub‘. ' :. ...“ ‘ A I' . nc_-.,..’, au-‘. ..~ . -~“U- \ - N... , 4;: ~- . . ‘ \ \J a h ‘ ' ‘u ‘a ‘ ‘-.. .:. M‘m.’ u. KC.“ . . ."-“= ’Ho.. : “A‘s. W“ ...-,- ‘Va \ he, i ! fr-. I ‘~_- 3h Cooperative or community organization of small owners to provide continuing self-sustaining service to all may be a way to transform.the economic pressure to liquidate into an economic incentive for good forest practice. The circumstances of the small owners would be made to coincide more nearly with those of the large owners.55 To achieve this end Behre has suggested the following addi- tion to the American Forestry Association’s "Proposed Program for American Forestry": "Encouragement and aid to small owners and farm organizations in the establishment and operation of forest COOpera- tives or other institutional arrangements for group management of small forest properties, including provision for low-cost federal loans for the construction and operation of cooperative processing facilities . " He predicted that "Success means a lessening of the need for public aid and service. The cooperatives or other forms of community organization will take the place of public service that would other- wise be neededa" After describing the success of a cooperative forest products market in North Carolina, Werner was confident in making the optimis- tic prediction that improved forestry on farm woodlots will result. "As general forestry knowledge increases . . . the owners of farm 55C. Edward Behre, "The problem.of smallness," Proceedings_of the fourth American Forest Congress, (Washington, D.C.: American Forestry Association, 1953), pp. 253—258. \ --4 ...! S v... "iv": .. .- 9 F - I. ' Lye-”:1 W‘“"".' . 1 . o. : I . - Q '. I - "“be .3: ‘1““" ..l V . "V r: I ...-Hi ...:‘ao-ch ‘9. In. guda‘.»-'v .v-h C v .pv:no L :2... 4.»... n {...-gt -- “V ova - .- I ‘ ‘ 6"; cm :*'*°v--. " - «.‘do— M I! H . hivncy.“ u..cl ‘ v a W. n‘, a "“ vi. AL '3. “'5 o I". N on. . #5 a ,I': "2“. \A. W t "““H I +v If“ “a”. , o . . v‘—s. _ or; . I“; a J .r" ~ . V‘ cm. F‘ " .‘ c.‘ _-‘. I. ~ ‘CI. .3 . ‘ "h... “.“w ‘ ‘ --Agd i :1; ‘.-~ Q ...- I. 3.“: A: ‘ .7. “- «- Joe'- . a a. l ' 4‘ I“ -h. ‘V-., _ g \Q v‘v" u. n P ‘3 . . ,‘_“ . I!“ ‘h '9- ~ ‘ m I‘: \. u C. ~ ~ No .5- \\I y‘: {I ‘gv- ' ‘de ER.» 3‘ “V 35 woodlots, encouraged by a steady, continuing local marketing outlet, will increase the quality, stocking, and productivity of their wood- "56 lands. Labor Returns Comparative returns to labor for various enterprises are an important element for consideration in farm planning. Favorable re- ports have been written on this aspect of farm woodlands in the northern and southern United States and in Finland. "A.Wisconsin study of farm.income turned up some interesting facts: . . . A dairy farmer, 90 per cent of whose income came from the production and sale of milk and milk products, was shocked to learn that he averaged only $1 per hour for his labour on the dairy farm, while the 10 per cent income he realized from.his farm woodland represented a net return of $1.75 per hour of labour."57 ‘With regard to labor in- come from.pine-hardwood forest land in the South, Mignery reported that ". . . work in well-stocked stands pays as well or better per man hour than.most farm.activities. The typical return from a good traCt may range from $1 to $1.50 Per hour, excluding stumpage,"58 56John R.'Warner, History and financial results of a coopera- tive fbrest products market operated through Farmers Mutual Inc. of Durhami;florth Carolina, (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Durham; Duke university School of Forestry, 1953), p. 96. STJ. F. Walker, "A pulp and paper company's approach to extension forestry;'with particular reference to tree farms and farm ‘woodlots," Pulp and gaper Magagine of Canada, LV (January l95h), 122. 58Arnold L. Mignery, Farm woodland opportunities in the South, Paper delivered'before the fBEEStry section, Association of Southern Agricultural'Workers, at Dallas, Texas, Feb. 1, 195k (New Orleans: Southern Forest Experiment Station, 195M), p. 9. ...;A-o: “-""’¢ ! ......- . uni "‘ Lit-v ' D' ‘ . F’ - --1‘::23 — . .... ,r v ..4.‘ ./V , . null-‘0 g ””IIIO-o M ‘ ' ..--p... ..-‘ Q ~ ' ~v' .0 - F s‘ c ;‘~-¢ ....“ v“. 5--——-.. f f. I! --. *‘D— 3 - g“ :~.:.. I "~-.~- . 4 I ' . PI .“‘ ‘ \. o _- ~ H... ' u '. h“ ‘ ~ ‘._~‘ F‘.“‘ ' 9 Q H . v- ~ \1.‘ ~ M H .. u.. ‘ Q a. h". ‘0 ‘I a" “ ‘ <1; .n—e- ‘V‘: ‘ 35 woodlots, encouraged by a steady, continuing local marketing outlet, will increase the quality, stocking, and productivity of their wood- 56 lands." Labor Returns Comparative returns to labor for various enterprises are an important element for consideration in farm planning. Favorable re- ports have been written on this aspect of farm woodlands in the northern and southern United States and in Finland. "A.Wisconsin study of fanm income turned up some interesting facts: . . ..A dairy farmer, 90 per cent of whose income came from.the production and sale of milk and milk products, was shocked to learn that he averaged only $1 per hour for his labour on the dairy farm, while the 10 per cent income he realized from his farm woodland represented a net return of $1.75 per hour of labour."57 'With regard to labor in- come from.pine-hardwood forest land in the South, Mignery reported that ". . . work in well-stocked stands pays as well or better per man hour than most farm.activities. The typical return from.a good tract may range from $1 to $1.50 per hour, excluding stumpage."58 56John R. warner, History and financial results of a coopera- tive forest products market operated through FarmerSflMutual Inc. of Durham, North Carolina, (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Durham: Duke university7SEhoo1 of Forestry, 1953), p. 96. 57:. F. Walker, "A.pulp and paper company's approach to extension forestry; with particular reference to tree farms and farm ‘woodlots," Pulp and Paper Magazine of Canada, LV (January l95h), 122. 58Arnold L. Mignery, Farm woodland opportunities in the South, Paper delivered before the forestry section, Association of Southern Agricultural WOrkers, at Dallas, Texas, Feb. 1, l95h (New Orleans: Southern Forest Experiment Station, 195A), p. 9. x. / . ' ’.‘. o". y v-v-scv'n‘fi , - ......o-n- \ ' .coqvqc -- 'I' ‘ v- ‘- ,,....‘.-o~ gov}- - . . 3 o .. Q. q croft ‘uQ- ‘- I oA-‘tv-t “- .5‘ .u-v b. an- n a a Q : u . I ’ W‘nfl vo— .. ‘n'-.4 .35 ' .I- U U L---«'.. "'n I A. . ‘ V i ," Ila. O;- to: “d’ “t ~~n~¢ .v w--- -o‘ . I - ~ I -’ c -0 ...... R . _ _ .... .. 8... ;.$_-‘-_£ 35... .... L' ! u- 0.. ' v I.. J..... '75 :fi.‘ v- - 5 ~... .* l." a s ‘N— ‘ ~~-:‘=" Mug“ ‘5‘ . «O -.- A "A v . . ‘ . ‘77"- n r \ udifi “3“” 0 vii \ . -~. ‘C: § - ~... 36 A Similar statement has been made by Fr. Iso-Antilla, a leading Finnish farmer concerned with forest production. He found that ". . . returns from work invested into forest are higher than from that invested into crop production."59 In giving the woodland owner some useful considerations in choosing whether to "sell forest products at the mill, at the road; side, or as standing trees . . . ," Minckler and Hosner recommended that "Other things being equal, it seems wiser to concentrate your cmn labor on the lower-valued products such as mine props, pulpwood, and sawlogs, and to sell the higher-valued cabinet veneer as stump- ’1 age. This is because, as they indicated, the labor percentage of the delivered product price is highest for the lowest-value pro- ducts and lowest for the high-value veneer logs. "Also, veneer-log specifications are more exacting and logs can be more easily damaged ' as they pointed out.60 It is hazardous to by inexperienced crews,’ make sweeping recommendations to landowners for marketing cut pro- ducts rather than stumpage. Frequency of Cut A.matter of long-standing controversy is the policy on desir- able frequency of cut for small woodlands. The principal division is as to whether the cut should be annual or periodic. Briefly, an 59M. Sipila et a1., "How much work is it profitable to invest in farm forests?" (in Finnish), Teho, II (1957), 536-516; English summary 592-593. 6OMinckler and Hosner, p. 26. g \/ o o u‘ :l 9:...- '“a V!“ ! r: N; l “'-'-‘ .... -. we‘- I " .:.': -..“... . ., ... . w‘*.;.:.‘. :x...‘. n . , . .:$.‘::po .p..-a:o v n n E b‘taiobd. UB-o-d_ ' I I - | s " "C m“, “ ‘ c '{gv‘ I . -u" ...k 5U ~‘u‘h- ‘ . .. . ,‘g‘ ‘G!4~O~~.‘c in \d-hIAV-oh . 0 UK [7‘ “‘6'..." I on .f._ ..yJ-Ju o. 'n . . t ”x y- e no as... _—._4 u‘o -¢.- .5. ~--.-."~ c v‘.'- ..‘- J .' ' Lu.‘ Y“. ‘. “ A S ‘I Q Q i v. ‘ ‘.‘l‘.' I"? :C .:.-_. 4 . ... .b ‘. at Q 5‘ ‘ ‘: $.52 I'\ '9. .I d-"-:~:.= ~39 ‘15“:‘3 ‘P n _ ~ g .r “\ F- ,. . ug‘ a H A?! ...-E 'J.-‘“', v.2." fl: ‘3. ‘- . '5- 1» s "“45 :2 ’ A v I I NA '58 ,1 ‘ u V J v‘ho AE'I‘; . IL.» 1.12). C“.: I“ 37 annual cut is favored primarily for annual income and preciseLy sus- tained yield. A.periodic cut is larger, permitting, in many cases, nwre efficient harvesting and better Silvicultural practice. Also, if the period is variable, it permits better response to favorable market conditions . In l9h3 Preston recommended cutting trees when they are ma- ture for specific products and when markets are good, thus appar- ently favoring periodic cuts. "When the trees are ready and the market is right, it is time to cut the big trees into sawlogs,poles, I! and fuel and some trees into pulpwood." . . . it will pay to investigate the market before cutting."61 In l9h5, however, he strongly stressed adherence to an annual cut as the gplyfway of making integrated farm forestry perpetual. "I believe that the only kind of farm.forestry that is going to stick is that which enables farmers to get annual incomes from.their wood- lands, and the only'worthawhile income on an annual cutting budget is where they cut and sell processed products as they do with other In this connection the farmer may be dependent on the forester, as ". . . the forester's primary job . . . is to develop markets so as to make possible the sale of wood products annually in whatever amounts the farmer has the labor to produce. 61Preston,‘W’oodlands . . . , p. 9. 62Preston, Journal of Forestry, XLIII, No. 8 (l9h5), 576. ‘._ -,,.‘ Ov- 34“" " ..e. n a .‘ ‘ c ‘90-. ‘. ‘ n“- I. . a .1. O. ’2: H .uu . ' a 'a n. «03’: .. L...- y- w n- ' '- H . rav-z N' u! ... v a... c. . t» . "‘r; f."‘: .. .9 ‘p< #2" » .... ...—"4‘. ..u. *a‘ ...o. -. . . "0‘ -- ... u. . V .‘ 1 Q I» 'L‘- I~-.h- ~on v. ‘4‘ 0 ~ 'I a. . . .- 'mx ..., .1. -v- . ... —~.. in.‘ k n,‘ - . c“ ..‘h “ 9“ u II lp4 A ... o . .‘_ ~~_’ L.‘ :I ~v-v . ’- - _~‘ . . . . I'r- may“ ““w‘.‘, ‘- ‘ U‘.‘ c z I . . ~ ‘ i . U .. "- -~ i~ voa.‘ . A ~.. v- . “I 44“. s “y- . . . no. u [‘Tll‘:.:’i‘ ‘ ‘..‘~“'~.: up b u n...” ‘ “Jd. h ‘cie Gnr~.. ‘, u ~'._ . ‘ ' f V . .E::,‘v,c g “-‘-‘ ‘4‘ _ Q,‘ 0 - ‘V 9m, . t" . ‘av " r“ ‘3: .;‘r; t V. ‘.‘| :“c ;"- v- . - a w u:.‘“~4. v n ‘ x '1 w -‘ "ekn 7.»- U! is a y «.‘fcfi, ..." - Q L. § ‘. ‘. N a. -P.. ' u: W'.h~. ~ ~— F’x -. N‘ t. F “.1 \“.“'f- ~“« . - .~ ’ -. . . ~ We» . ) )- ... r- . “ ,. ‘ 'u‘ "in ‘_ ‘ \xvfi av; K _ ‘ r- - U “M '-~. 'ge Qr~v 2 ’ ' —. ‘ h. A d“ flu-1“ A; . V. . V V (v -HLV. . . -. 1 F. “‘ J \ !r.' \ «~ ‘n (. ... ‘ \ j p. 5" 38 Obviously, unless markets can be developed to make possible the annual sale of wood products, the concept of integrated farm forestry can- 63 not be made to work." H. H. Chapman, on the other hand, has been an outspoken critic of the annual cut and has strongly urged that heavy, infrequent periodic cuts be made. Since the advocacy of annual or very frequent 'sustained yield' cutting on these small areas originated from and is based purely on the economic theory that the owner prefers or is even dependent on annual income from timber and cannot afford to practice sound forestry if he has to wait long periods for his results, this assumption constitutes the foundation for the whole superstructure both economic and Silvicultural. If defective the building may fall. The farmer already has and is operating a going concern, the farm, and except for the aforementioned source of fuel and minor products is not dependent on annual net revenue from his woodlands for his livelihood. Operations in a small woodland for the logging of merchant- able products should be concentrated at one time, with the removal of practically all the mature timber in a Single sale or logging job. The only difference between past and continuing present practice for these owners, and sound for- estry management, consists in the substitution of good silvi- culture for ruthless exploitation. Neither good silviculture nor sound economics indicate the abandonment of heavy periodic cuts and the adoption of annual whittling out of a few logs or cords. From.the economic standpoint there are two principal sets of reasons for favoring heavy cutting of small tracts at widely separated periods, as against too frequent, or annual cut— ting. These are: l. The margin for stumpage values in sales of timber increases pep unit of volume sold, directly as the total ‘volume and average stand per acre increases, for the reason that costs of operation are thereby reduced. Unless logging 63 Ibid., p. 578. . “'3 . ~0. on; c. ”v 35 . ., - o .“h .c .' “p9 ~po “a. ~'-‘... L's a—I'vszub . on... .. ‘ V. . .... g u ‘ r ...;I ...-:1... " ‘ A”... __U EXET‘jiTfi-‘V '1‘" a--. w "' on. v u . . ‘ ‘M‘ns -. u» ‘35"? van ”....p.‘ ...". .‘ ‘ax-u,‘ 3..., ,na .. "'no‘“ .‘ 6" v..- . "l- 1 \ ‘ o.o‘.‘,. 3! {-m.“ ‘5‘? t...»‘ Uy*.x‘ -J. o. , ‘ I n ’5 3‘ ..u‘. ".;.'I&fo ruby... --..-.‘u . ..., r ...-s4 ...‘3 TESS ‘ I‘ v 9 q I. .. ‘70?" ... .. J~R J..‘er 1:55“. ,._' -. -g-.~ I“..- :’ . _ ' . . g.“ .~ 9 I “'5 extisr‘.‘ :54“ a ‘C- 3- . .... Jeers :rr. V - ‘tl v . ‘ n, -"6‘Ia . k - v\.~-k’ the EW’ _ ' Q. . - ‘ \.‘ ”S: 5‘54”“, - H.J.¢,~-Y"e 5-,1. . -L..‘-' I.. ‘ s.- t- w 'I ‘ w‘.a“ "‘ -~"I he ‘ U V. ‘ “-1. 1. . ‘1‘: g I ‘. W «HIE ~“‘“‘ .- H. a. ‘~.€ 8‘ fl . . _V ‘ 'L. ‘uy':~ ha- 9. ~VG‘TLE‘ D ‘. M. 2} ~“ I ‘5 “2‘ day. ‘5‘.' V e. A- ‘ ‘ “1‘ RH" ‘ ‘a A0 ‘3 , «... . a ”A _ 6 ”LV- . 39 is done by the owner as a measure for employing labor in Slack seasons, this factor is of determining importance provided he obtains fair value in the sale. 2. The owner regards his woodlot in the nature of a reserve or investment rather than a drawing account. In nearly every instance, sales, whether made under forestry practices or not, serve the purpose of securing funds to meet emergencies. . . . When all is said and done, economic factors determine what any class of private or of public owners can and will do with their fOrest lands. The well meaning efforts so widely and extensiveLy put forth by public agencies to induce owners to abandon heavy and long periodic cutting in favor of 'annual revenue from.the woodlands, '. . . are all to the good when Jus- tified by sound economics, but not when the practice runs counter to the best interests of the owner, whigR I am convinced is usually the case for the reasons cited. In a recent article Aughanbaugh has quoted a statement by Oliver Diller describing management of one of the Small farm.wood- lands in Ohio's "experimental forest" project. "During certain years cutting exceeded growth in order to take advantage of good markets, but in general, the growing-stock has been maintained in a contin- uously productive condition."65 This seems to imply some misgivings as to the propriety of letting cuts exceed growth during the years in which they are made, if the aim is to maintain a "continuously productive" growing stock. Such an attitude may indicate too great a concern that sustained yield management achieve an annual cut and that the cut Just equal the volume of the year's growth. Taking "advantage of good markets" is good economic strategy, and adher- ents to the policy of an annual forest crop might well consider the 6"H. H. Chapman, "Should small woodlots be managed for sus- tained annual yield?" Journal of Forestry, IL, No. 5 (May 1951), 3A3-3uu. 65John Aughanbaugh, "Experimental woodlands as a means of encouraging improved management of small tracts," Journal of Forestry, LVII, No. 6 (June 1959), Rio-L11. ...v- if?“ ..- ‘a-~‘ ' a ._ a. ... m.-. ... a '0 -_I u -, " \a ..~. A .,_ . O '- . D a. \ sl ho economic advantages of cuts made at less frequent intervals, when larger volumes-made possible more efficient harvesting operations, and especially in years when timber prices are high. It is clear that these various authors have started with dif- ferent assumptions and aimed for specific conclusions. Little atten- tion has been given to what is frequently a very strong reason for annual cutting, namely that the woods work may provide an important outlet for available farm.labor. Directly tied in with the question of frequency of out are other management factors, whether sale is to be of stumpage or of cut products, whether adequate labor and equip- ment are available, and various other considerations. As with other farm-and-forest management problems, there is no universal solution. Case Study Farms The 1955 report on development of agriculture's human resources recommended research to develop more economic use of resources. "Stud- ies should be undertaken, in addition to those already made, to es- tablish the facts concerning the combinations of resources which will increase incomes and improve levels of family living." And partic- ularly, "One aspect of this work might be a number of pilot research farms. On such farms new practices and enterprises or combinations could be tested in the setting of a farm business as a whole."66 Numerous case studies of farms have been made ignoring the woodland resource or leaving it out of the budget analysis. However, a specific case study including forestry on the farm.has been ana- 66U.S. Department of Agriculture, Development . . . , p. 19. ' o ' .... 'V' - -M . .uh . . 'f ‘ - - g...' -‘" . o .31.. g . . .\~ - l t - .oo-v .1 ....._ ....- . .-.. -... .1..... -.A- n: we: 2'- H -w. ‘- l-‘n-o‘. .. s 1.. .....- .. . ~-*v— 1" ‘k-m... .... 1, t .y . 1 'I‘. ‘2 ~., . , ',.‘-. ~ . .a‘.‘ _"v-.: . .‘~_~-‘ ul lyzed by Luttrell.67 The 208-acre Covington farm, located in Tippah County in the Tallahatchie River Watershed Area of northern Missis- sippi, has a background and general situation much similar to the tenant farms on the Ames Plantation. In this case study farm where "Cotton has been the principal source of cash income," Luttrell has pointed out that "Both general farming and farm.woodlot problems in the area are fairly typical of those found in many of the hilly portions of the Eighth Federal Reserve District" (Missouri, Arkansas, northern Mississippi, western Tennessee and Kentucky, and southern Illinois and Indiana). By planning forest management of the 92 acres of woodland as an integral part of the farm.operation, Luttrell has estimated that "Net [production] gains, including inventory changes, could be quadrupled during the next three decades." Net cash income from.the woodland could almost be doubled and would re- sult in an increase of approximately 15 percent of current net farm income. Integpatipg Plans for Farm.and Forest Farm.planning for improved allocation of resources requires joint consideration of both agricultural and'woodland enterprises, present and prospective. .As Larson has clearly stated, the farmer "must learn how to integrate forestry activities with his over-all farm.enterprise. For unless woodland management can be developed 6TClifton B. Luttrell, "The Covington farm; a case study in planning and financing farm woodlot production ," Monthly Review (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis), XXXVI, No. 12 (Dec. 195h), 133-1&1. . I‘ . " _ -. ..- ' a t" in é“. ‘.- . 'A “'= 0:“. H. c .fi—c o 'I . '- 1. M I-.. ." PD. ‘1 a '5‘ us.‘ ‘ . 2: :‘ --.; ~lv n .‘u IL. vs. .. .. . ... v. .k. u l P- . _‘ C :9. ."' .5 . ‘v. -0 ~ '~ - h. . -:.‘ 2: 0’ § . . . 5‘. .- \‘ ‘ ... _ u .' -J J U. . ‘t-J‘, ‘. - E ‘. £- . ."‘;x. \ I I- ‘ .. . ’Q #2 so as to provide the most equitable use of an owner's available land, labor, and equipment, certainly there never can be much justification 68 for a farmer to practice forestry." In the experience of Richard C. Smith in Missouri, progress toward integrated farm.planning has been slow. Typically, "a vestage of the pioneering agricultural tradition remains-~farmers do not think of timber as another farm crop. . . . the woodlot is appreci- ated and used as a source of material for farm construction, fencing, and fuel; but the farmer still does not recognize his woodland fully as an integral, income-producing part of his farm."69 Emphasis is given by Preston to the general position that much of the farmer's failure to integrate forestry in his total farm plan is attributable to the educational approach taken by foresters in trying to promote forestry as an independent enterprise on the farm. "Foresters have been trying for 50 years to teach farm for- estry as forestry on farmland, seemingly failing to recognize that 'farm? in 'farm forestry“ makes the latter an entirely different brand of forestry. wood as a farm crop is something any farmer can handle aid. by himself." He has colorfully suggested that ". . . farmers need a few foundation garments of wood crop and farm economy 68Larson, p. 81. 59Snith, p. 20. .,...- r"' ...-M' ..- II. . . .._‘.:. ......“ V’so'. . 10—..‘ 'av; -..q‘. I .‘ #3 before we try to clothe them with the silks and satins of silvi- culture. They need first to accept the fundamental concept of wood as a farm.crOp."7O Hestveld and Peck have been less critical of foresters, less forceful, and more persuasive for operational integration through constructive extension of farm forestry education. "Since farm for- ests can, if properly made a part of the whole farm enterprise, help to increase and stabilize farm incomes and conserve soil and water, farmers Should have as thorough an understanding of forest—tree crops as of their other farm crops. Such an understanding on the part of persons engaged in agricultural education should be helpful to them in developing farm.programs."71 The resources to be.considered in planning operating units have been concisely discussed and related by Lanham and Butler. In order to have a balanced farm operation consideration must be given toward fitting the various enterprises together into the desired system.of farming. First, consideration must be given to the farm operator whose responsibility it will be to initiate and carry forward the proposed plan of organization and operation. . . . The degree of success in reaching the desired goals of the adjustment depends on the operator's expe- rience, training, and attitude toward his farm business. The family labor that is available to the operator and the ability and interest of the family members in farming are also closely related to the operator's ability. The number of acres of land and the physical characteristics and fertility of the land must be considered also. These factors 7OJohn F. Preston, "Preston takes issue with talks at La Plata," American Forests, LXIII, No. 1 (Jan. 1957), 6, 71. 71Westveld and Peck, p. ix. an influence the decisions relative to intensiveness of the farming system, crops adapted to the particular soil and area, and proper location on the farm for the various crops. The amount of available capital required for investment in improvements, livestock and equipment, and for operating ex- penses affects Significantly the organization of any farm.72 In their bulletin on farm planning Johnson and Parsons have recognized the interrelationships of the various enterprises which must be integrated into the over-all plan. They called attention to the complementary, supplementary, and competitive relationships between enterprises and, as a forestry example for integration, they mentioned that "An undeveloped wood lot on a farm offers the chance for a supplemental enterprise in getting out fence posts and cord— wood in the slack winter months."73 However, no part of the dis- cussion of alternative plans or enterprise selection was devoted to the consideration of woodland contributions and requirements in re- lation to the over-all farm.planning process. Budget analysis has long been used as a method in farm plan- ning, facilitating integration of whatever enterprises may be ap- propriate. Numerous studies in the literature of agricultural economics and farm.management have been based on this method and it has been highly successful in practical application on innumerable farms. An excellent example already cited was that of WOodworth 72Lanhamand Butler, p. h. 73Neil‘WL Johnson and.Merton S. Parsons, Planning the farm for profit and stability, Farmers' Bulletin No. 1965 (lst ed. rev.; Hashington, D.C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1956), p. 19. 4‘... ... __.,..-. ...... o - "'-u- - .- .." ~~s.‘. . . "“ N o‘.. I 5‘ .. "I ”.5 Yum .- .... :fl‘uo‘.-. -. .. \ ...-.. ‘4' g o: ; ‘ h 9‘ ."- ' a. vv ‘ ~. I..- u . .w‘_‘_.- I n,_ ‘_‘ . n“"‘~ ‘ . . \a“.. r- . 'n.‘ In :- - ~‘ . V».. _ . ‘K "i a. . . . \ . d‘ H~ s . '- ' .2». , h». a “ . ~u “ .. ‘ "J :‘A J. ‘ .. . . p ~ i \- K ‘ :e N... 1‘ o N 115 7b and Saunders. Woodland enterprises were absent, however, presum- ably due to the lack of forest input-output data. Such omission does not warrant criticism, however, as inclusion of a woodland enterprise is not vital to the discussion and illustration of a use- ful farm.planning method. As was pointed out earlier, budgeting requires reasonably well estimated input-output data for each enter- prise considered. Almost certainly the absence of analysis of wood- land enterprises from.the numerous farm.planning studies is primarily due to the dearth of forest input-output data. The 195% study by Luttre1175 is unique in that an agricultural economist has predominantly stressed the woodland enterprise on a farm. Rarely have even forest economists given such detailed atten- tion to the various elements of costs and returns for woodland en- terprises in conjunction with active farms. Luttrell actually pre- sented a single woodland plan and an over-all farm financial sum- mary for his case-study farm, however, rather than comparable budgets of alternative plans for analysis. His emphasis was on the need for loan capital for woodland develOpment and on the scheduling of woodland income and loan repayment. In 1955 Barraclough and Gould wrote a bulletin constituting the most comprehensive study of farmpand-forest integration using budget analysis. It has been the most thorough such study to date. First among the Objectives outlined in the foreword by Professor 7"Woodworth and Saunders. 75Luttrell. M. J. ”a... v00 '9: n- " J... I.“ 1,: .9 9";- ,J c. .J-‘2 .u - ‘ ‘ “Nu-"Q“ V‘ l ...-oi... ‘ I t’l" \gu ‘ = '4‘- r - ' I -- I l-‘.: 1 - v. i... l 1 s «5:; “‘1 ‘ ‘uufin; v - 4 1 “4 to" .‘. . V — v. ‘k‘: *‘I c p. "‘. ‘C a“. n; ‘ - h - y. J“ 3;, ,. ' w P I; q M. . " vs #6 John D. Black was the purpose of illustrating "a method of analysis that has wide application to the management opportunities and prob- lems iof forest and farm operating units." This objective was accomplished by showing in detail ". . . how alternative operating plans can.be evaluated by the budget method." Also included were the Objectives of deriving ". . . broad generalizations based on the analysis of these farms" and presenting forest planning data.76 The over-all purpose of the bulletin was stated to be ". . . to increase our understanding of forest production problems by applying available technical information in economic analyses at the forest operating unit level."77 In accomplishing their purpose Barraclough and Gould made clear that "The basic concept of budgeting the alternatives in a for- est enterprise as a part of a total operating unit is the central theme of this study. The mental attitude suggested by the theme is much more crucial to successful planning than is any set of analyti- cal techniques and data. Once the general idea is grasped, many ways can be devised to implement it."78 The development of their analyses was ". . . based on three simple facts. The first is that forest land, especially that in farm woodlots, is . . . usually only part of a larger Operating unit," and that interrelationships and external factors must be taken into _g 76Solon L. Barraclough and Ernest M, Gould, Jr., Economic analysis of farm forest operating units, Harvard Forest Bulletin No. 26"(Petersham, MaSS.: 19557, p. 8. 771bid., p. 12. 781hid., p. 13h. 1 ..-. fio'rfi-O ‘ \ nu. .. ... ‘b» ....u..—. ' n in ’I‘ ID "I I an . Ru: 3!. I #7 account. "The second fact is that practically all forest production problems have several possible solutions." "The last and perhaps most important fact is that usually the owner is the person best equipped to work out, evaluate and choose among alternative farm and forest operating plans, provided he has the right kind of tech- nical assistance."79 In emphasizing the applicability to farm woodland management of this kind of approach, Barraclough and Gould pointed out that "Foresters will see that this kind of planning is quite different from a management plan that concentrates on detailed ways of using labor and capital efficiently in carrying out a given intensity of management. In this bulletin an. array of [three] forest management intensities is analyzed, rather than just one for each farm, without any preconceived ideas about which will turn out best."80 Thus "Alternative management plans were analyzed on the basis of the physical and managerial resources of each unit, the input-output relationships that could be expected to prevail, and reasonable price and market [conditions]."81 An external limiting factor to be considered in evaluating the relative practicability of low, medium, and high intensities of forest management was the forest products market. It was noted that "Before . . . [high intensity] management is feasible there have to be markets for all sorts of forest products, including the 791bid., p. 133. 80113101., p. 23. 811hid., p. 13%. .‘. b-u‘_ & *, ...-' ‘1 ’ U ...-.4» 0"" : ":W o. o, h.” v.1 ... I I I nu-gp... _-. . .- I- u...aos.‘ J ‘1 . '5 '1 ...b - _ n f”.'" ‘u o‘ ..v '- v . ..- -, . _. «C #8 low-grade timber that often results from thinnings and improvement cuttings." An internal limiting factor may be the owner-operator himself: "The nine farm analyses Show that the owner's objectives and capabilities are often deciding factors that determine what kind of forest management is desirable."82 As is evident from the impor- tance of these two limiting factors alone, feasibility is the over- all key to the planning of woodland on farms. And feasibility can be estimated only by considering the woodland in its place in the integrated framework of the entire operating unit. The importance of farm-and-forest integration was stressed by Mignery in elaborating on the statement that the ". . . chief aim of the Southern Station’s farm forestry research program is to seek out farm woodland opportunities, and to interpret them in terms of costs and returns to the farm enterprise." In discussing the studies es- tablished to accomplish this aim, he declared that "The various studies have one thing in common: they do 223 treat the farm.woods as an isolated small forest upon which the best silviculture must be practiced and the most money made from.timber culture. Rather, the common objective of the studies is to determine what moderate ad- justment in overall farm operations will induce a marked increase in total farm.income through improved management of the farm.wood- lands. ‘we feel that if our efforts to improve farm.woodland manage- ment are to succeed, the management prescription must be simple to 821hid., p. 135. " I‘m. D's-J: '- . u 5* n ‘t. I: . ~ UP, I ‘ “W..- f. "3:: = “.1 t, . » : ”*‘P.., a. . I ‘u ._ ‘I ‘ l O I hi‘ 5"- 3“" ‘~. !"‘ 119 apply, fit into the existing pattern of farm.management, be independ- ent of costly and highly Specialized machines, and require a minimum of cash outlay."83 Whrner has commented hopefully on the bright prospects for the widespread development of woodland enterprise integration on the farm. "The era of balanced farm.management has begun in the South and shows every indication of spreading. . . . Each year an increasing number of farmers become convinced of the value of a productive farm woodlot and the part it plays in a well-rounded farm management program."8" Optimistic indications are indeed encouraging, and hope of course is needed for success; but insight and persistent efforts are the fundamental prerequisites. These are essential for the intel- ligent development of all available resources and means to achieve integration of woodland and other farm enterprises, and thus to pro- duce more economic operating units with the primary goal of improving the welfare of farm families for whom help is needed. 83111gnery, pp. 1, 3. 8"Warner, p. 96. '- q ,. .— .... 7“...- ~h..‘.‘ . o .1,- “ w - .L ~ ~- *3» ‘I by h \ ~ N .I:F ‘. _ \ y. fin. '- ‘» I. V u‘fl ... -Q ~,.‘ o ~- 7} n: .v‘ .- u “i U :- , O CHAPTER III HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEMS AND RESOURCES Problems in the Economy The key problem of west Tennessee is low income. It has numerous people whose welfare is severely restricted by limited family resources and by various aspects of the economy. Excluded from this low-income category, however, are the primarily com- mercial, industrial, and residential city of Memphis and the sub- urban remainder of Shelby County. The low-income problem is pri- marily associated with the rural economies, in which a cotton-based agriculture predominates. The three principal prOblems fundamental to this regional low-income situation are traditional agricultural land use, lack of planning for forest management, and underdevel- oped and unstable local economies. 'While all of these problems are interrelated in the over-all economy of west Tennessee, a brief description of each one separately will contribute to a general picture of the setting of this inquiry. Traditional agriculpural land use A.traditional land use developed from the methods of the p10- neer settlers of the 1770's and '80's. These hardy people ". . . poured in from the Carolinas, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and even New England. They came with Revolutionary War land grants either earned SO .. . ' -‘I‘"‘ ‘; " 1 ~ ‘1 ... e' "Yrs-9' ' ‘~? -a.-... I~" ~.~.,‘A . I ::‘ N~o a .. '- "'I~v~ F. N L' ‘9 u». . 4d . ‘. . :‘..' ‘v ‘I .I‘ ...q l I . . i ‘ 'F‘: .- ...x "A ~ c 'N. e . § " ~‘- 51 1 Intensive in service or purchased from veterans or speculators." cultivation of the soil was characteristic of pioneer agriculture, following clearing of small patches in the existing forest. As the Tennessee farmers came from the East, the first of the State's three natural divisions to be settled was east Tennessee. Rich farm.soils were rare in the eastern hilly uplands, however, and much of the soil.mantle was so thin that the farm families were barely able to eke out a subsistence. Therefore most settlers proceeded westward to the middle and western divisions of the State where soils were deeper and more fertile. A.prosperous agricultural economy de- veloped in the western section soon after the 1818 purchase from the Chickasaw Indians. It stemmed from the fertile alluvial Mississippi River bottomlands where "large plantations produce enormous yearly crops of cotton and corn with no apparent Signs of exhaustion."2 Large plantations are still prevalent today and continue as the most prosperous segment of agriculture. 'West Tennessee--the southerly section in particular-~had by 1825 ". . . become one of the cotton growing centers of the Midsouth. Cotton showed a decline in middle Tennessee during this period. Here the farmers could not compete with the vast crops produced by the slave-gang system.of the newly cleared sections within the State and in Alabama and Mississippi."3 Southwestern Tennessee's best lFederal'W'riters Project of the Works Progress Administration, Tennessee; a guide to the state, American Guide Series (New York: The Viking Press, 19397, p.VH8T 2Ibid., p. 23. 3Ibid., p. 75. 1" f...- “‘ ' a ' , or- roi . ‘ . no." ' . .u- . 1‘" ‘w‘ a “.-.“, . ‘. A. .I.: 4' ‘8“ u ‘ n a at 'F. ‘ . I, a 'c, h _ '8‘ \- ‘.5- -. ‘ .‘I ‘ I s‘ O.‘ n .\ '\~.“ . N ‘I a x' . . I — u . ..‘fi 'v. ‘ ~ 5‘ ‘ 52 soils and most accessible tillable lands have been devoted to cotton since that time. The virtual single-crop economy of west Tennessee's bottom- lands was also adopted in the hill country. The uplands of the region developed many large and productive farms, as well as numerous small ones. The light, siliceous, and fertile soils of the rolling hills have been subject to pronounced gully erosion. "As early as 185%, the State Agricultural Bureau warned that excessive 'mdning' or one-crop cultivation of the soil would finally lead to economic disaster. Farmers following this practice grew one crop year after year without letting the land lie fallow or rotating crops to build up the soil."" Gullies result from "shoestring erosion" started by little rain rills which develOp on exposed sloping soil. The rills are widened and deepened by successive rains if plant cover is not established, and the cutting process continues to gouge out the earth to such a depth that filling the gullies or leveling the land by bulldozers becomes difficult and often uneconomic. A multitude of gullies and even profound ravines have resulted from a century of such land use. ‘Lack of plannipg for forest management Land use in west Tennessee forests has brought about a rela- tively low quality timber resource. This base, however, will be called upon to develop the region's future wood production and to yield income to landowners and wood handlers. l‘I‘bid., pp. 23.211. ... 5t . all-.. 53 The density of the forests was estimated (in the forest survey made in l9h8-5O by the U. S. Forest Service) to be about 57 square feet of basal area5 per acre--greater than any other region of Ten- nessee6 and almost a fourth higher than the State average. However, almost three-eighths of this basal area was in cull trees, the re- mainder being classed as growing stock. Unfortunately, "The percent- age of low-value species is increasing, while that of the better grade species is decreasing," as reported by Cowan for the State as a whole in the section on "The Future of Tennessee's Forests" of the State of Tennessee forest resource appraisal of 19h5-h6.7 Forests exist on land where a conflicting use does not take precedence. Compatible multiple uses are, of course, possible. Until recently, however, forest use has usually not been planned. It com- monly has evolved as a residual use of land which was left over after agricultural and commercial land develOpment. AS has been pointed out by Sternitzke, "The most obvious impact of agriculture on Tennessee's [original] forests has been the clearing of land, which has meant a large reduction in forest area, especially on the better 5For definition of technical terms, see the appended glossary. 6Regional statistics are based on Forest Service reports covering the "west Tennessee region," designated to include all of the counties west of the western valley of the Tennessee River except Benton, Decatur, and Hardin. Throughout the text, references to west Tennessee will apply to this region of 18 counties. 7H. Foster Cowan, The forest resources of Tennessee, Based on the l9h5-h6 appraisal by the State Conservation Department Forestry Division and the American Forestry Association ([Nashville, Tenn.]: 19u6), p. 33. ”...-'4 ‘t.>. . -Iuihcnof ‘ o- r ‘l ’- Unui .A a .u u .- I A N A. I. .. "1":4. “:°-... V“ .‘_" ‘00:. . '5‘. . \. x . Sh soils."8 Although the better forest soils are generally the better agricultural soils also, farmers have not always been successful in assessing land quality for different uses. .A reliable system using natural indicators for grading land productivities in forests has yet to be developed. Farm.areas remaining in forest have been influenced by special uses of farm woods over successive generations. Timberland uses have typically included harvesting of products for fuel, fencing, and farm construction needs; forage and Shelter for livestock; and incidental sale of stumpage to local buyers for wood-using industries. These customary uses have had profound effects on the quality of timber remaining in the Tennessee forests, on species composition, and oc- casionally on the forest type. Likewise, part of the present forest land pattern has devel- oped from.continual farm abandonment over many decades and natural reversion to woods. "New acreage is always being cleared from the forest and old land that becomes worn out, eroded, and in other ways submarginal is being abandoned," according to Sternitzke.9 Land-use evolution has proceeded Slowly, with little marked change from.year to year; however, the net effect of farming by successive generations of families in west Tennessee, and land purchase from time to time by newcomers, has been that a substantial proportion of the forest is now on land that once had been cleared for agriculture. 8Herbert S. Sternitzke, Tennessee's timber economy, Forest Resource Report No. 9 (washington, D.C.: Forest Service, U.S. Department of.Agriculture, 1955), p. 8. 9Ibid. u. .-..d .:,. 9.. u.;t.¢‘_ "‘ - . H, 1.. £5“ l - - .“ an». . ,‘ 1., ino'-q: "...—... A... 1.. \ .:‘ “:‘s. ‘ n .— Q o u '* 'F a "v:. = I ‘ . “‘ L a q“ ...- v.- ‘7 n. ‘l‘ ‘1. . ...‘E‘ ' A." I. . . -V \ ~~.‘ o '.' x ‘n '«. t l: .A t.__ I-\‘*. 1:. ‘ l DI ‘r ... '7‘ .._ . . _. \ “-k’ x.“ K 55 Virtually no virgin forest remains in west Tennessee. The existing forest is termed "second growth," having developed from areas where trees had been cut and areas which had formerly been cleared, then abandoned. ‘With good management a second growth for- est can be developed up to a level of productivity as high as is economically feasible within the limitations of the soil potential, climate, and existing species. The present state of the majority of west Tennessee's forest areas, however, has developed from the absence of good forest management--in fact, from.negligence if not abuse. Underdeveloped and unstable local economies The 1950 population in the eighteen counties of west Tennes- see ranged from a little over 11,000 in two small, rural counties, Chester and Lake, to over #80,000 in metropolitan Shelby County, which contains the city of Memphis.10 The city of Jackson had most of the 60,000 population of Madison County, the only urban county other than Shelby. Ten of the sixteen rural counties had pOpula- tions of between 20,000 and 30,000,and only two had between 30,000 and 50,000. With regard to distribution of residents between town and country, Shelby and Madison Counties had urban percentages of 85 and 56. Three rural counties each had about one-third of their residents in urban communities, ranging from.32 to 37 percent of total popu- lOILS. Bureau of the Census, Census of population: 1950, Vol. II, Characteristics of the population: Part h2, Tennessee (Hashington, D.C.: U. S. Department of Commerce, l952). ..--.—.. w-«r “_-...v-onEnl —-.-...o Int-Ail. ...: «I - Othz 0“: Iht~z ].L.~..Mv .IIJn.vr ll!u..-u.q-uu- Ila 'dIAUNH - —G§-u‘~h Inns-ionusut 0!..z ‘11. u - ..l . I» i. n.|...|n.|l|.'.l.|::.‘1finl.nulfl.r .. . ‘u i ..XI: i. I] 4 --v Q - OVh-IIIII pt ts}... IIIIIU-b- IIIIII .I but... .uuvavua. .0- ttiluvnuinvni )Cl I‘vn.llv.\ ...-IO... wall! a It) at: r .moasmm .mm .m¢ manna .Ammma .oonoasoo mo unwavusmon .m.= ..o.n .zo»w:wnmd3v vummunmuhudmw;mm¢m «soapsasmom on» no mafipmfipouomnmno .HH .Hob .0wma ”sowpaasaoa mo mdmcoo .msocoo on» no odoham .m.bH 59 www.mna.a mos.¢e omH.mH omo.mm mma.mm sme.mmm www.mm nmm.~m emm.om som.ms msm.se~ Hence spasm m-.mem mam.oa roH.m Hme.m www.mfl coo.em one.m are.» moo.oH som.a~ osm.ss snoop .50? p.003 emo.m mas sea mom mam mem.H «me has ope omm mmn.¢ season: mem.o com nae one was moo men on no mom ooo.m screws mmH.HmH om~.m ome.~ ~mm.m mue.¢fl moo.sm moe.~ soo.m sop.o ~e>.nfl vmr.o season oee.oH son «an mom ewe omo.H son was was eam m¢o.m soaeo oom.H~ mam sen one ~mo.~ one.m smm.a mum see osm.a Heo.e screen: mea.o mom sod oma use mum ova m vow con man.» spasms: eme.~ com em ewe mNH can mm em cma mom who.¢ caressesoa men.» mm we see we mum m cm on cmH ms~.~ can; one.o own mam ems Ham mam Ham me see rem moo.~ asses Noe.m mmH om mmH see one can an HNH «on mmm.~ sonaonsom so~.o sum or msa mm sew ans as me new one.m scorers who.» new as sea nee sen n ma Hem mow oem.m assessor m¢m.~a new arm «on on» ~m0.m meH.H oHH was «no Hmo.o dosage mem.n ooN mm mHH mm one H mm as sea Ham.o opposes esm.oa men mum omn mow oem.H mm» so new man o~>.m moan omH.m era op sea or mom am so ea omm vsm.n sensuous sem.m mma or so no «He man m an saw moo.H nuances oen.m won cow ens men eoe.H mom no son sum «or.m Haoanuo Honda .bfio m00fi> museum soups» Hosanna u.oonn n.oonn noes oohoamsm now» than 600% upon Hopes oawvuoa doom poo) Icahn chopdoo henooo fierce usosom saunas Hanson unease .moz .wo: .moz .mez unsoo uaaw< HOmmH .mQSOHm hfivmfiocw mfioasQom poo: a“ .hassoo ha .ooHOH Honda :dewbflo ochoamlwll.a mqm‘_ J: c o ‘-- \ 1‘ - ‘l >.~ I , . a \ ‘4 ‘ "‘I .~‘ \ \‘ ._- " v \ 61 County's business volume in 1951+ as indicated by sales receipts was 351+ ,782 ,000 ,000 , over half of which was accounted for by wholesale trade, $2,h3l,ooo,ooo. Retail trade added $653 million, service trade $131 million, and finance $115 million. Shelby’s wholesale trade likewise constituted more than half of the State total of $h,325,000,000. Memphis receives raw and partially processed mate- rials from Arkansas and northern Mississippi, in addition to Ten- nessee, for its wood products industries, cottonseed processors, meat packers, and drug manufacturers. It is the railroad hub of the South and the largest inland cotton-handling port in the nation. Jackson also is a railroad center and, like the smaller towns of Paris, Dyersburg, and Humboldt, is a commercial center for the sur- rounding rural areas. Railroad, trucking, and other transportation services occupied 5.6 percent of west Tennessee's total employed civilian labor force in 1950. The transportation industry group ranked fourth, following agriculture, all manufacturing industries, and construction. For the State as a whole, transportation, with in? percent of total civilian employment, was outranked by the textile and apparel manu- facturing industry with 1L9 percent. (In west Tennessee only 2.7 percent of all workers were occupied in textile and apparel manu- facturing.) Most of the employment in transportation in west IIlen- nessee occurred in Shelby County, 75 percent of the regional trans- portation industry. In Shelby County it constituted 7.6 percent of all civilian employment, the activity predominantly occurring in the city 01’ Memphis, where it was second only to all manufacturing indus- try. ”v” ~r~ -v- o-‘n u '~: h ’u. u . . a 62 Educational services, both public and private, occupied 3.1 percent of west Tennessee's total employed civilian labor force in 1950. This percentage was somewhat lower than the State average of 3-9 percent. Only three west Tennessee counties exceeded the State average, Chester, Madison, and Weakley, and the percentages were scattered fairly evenly in the range from 2.1+ in Fayette and Lake Corinties to Chester's MA. Shelby County, where 55 percent of west Tennessee's labor force was employed, accounted for practically half of the region's employment in educational services, although this was only 2.7 percent of Shelby County's total employed civilian labor force. Most of the teachers in west Tennessee were in the public School system, with only a few in private schools and colleges. The Public system included Memphis State Teachers College and the Univer- sity of Tennessee medical and dental schools located in Memphis, also the University‘s Junior college at Martin in Weakley County. The west Tennessee educational level, as indicated by the Inedian number of years of schooling completed by the residents at least 25 years old in each county in 1950, was slightly lower than the State median. The median for west Tennessee (taken as the median of the 18 county medians) was 8.1, as compared to 8.1t for the State. These figures combine male and female levels. In west Tennessee c0111:1ties female schooling levels averaged 0.6 year higher than male, with the higher differences predominating in the counties of lowest Schooling level. County medians ranged from 6.3 to 9.5, for Fayette and. Shelby Counties respectively. Percentagewise, a similar range ekillsted for the Negro medians: from 3.9 in Lake County to 6.7 in 63 Shelby and Carroll Counties, with a regional median of 5.9, some- what lower than the States 6.5. The regional median for Negroes was lower than the all-population regional median by 2.2 school years, practically identical to the-average difference of 2.1 between medians on a county-to-county basis. 0f the 56,121+ farm operators reported in the 18 counties of west Tennessee by the 195h Census of Agriculture 16,239, or 29 per- cent, were Negro. Percentages of Negro operators in individual counties ran from 2 to 71 percent, with the following frequency distribution: Negro percentage of Number of all farm operators counties 0-10 11-20 21-30 3l-uo hl-so 51-60 61-70 71-80 I-‘I-‘l-‘I-JUJOUJCI) The 8 counties having the lowest percentage of Negro farm Operators (10 percent or less) included the 5 highest modal-size Easxreages, 2 in the 70-99-acre class and 3 in the 100-139; these IIlcdsl-size classes were markedly above all the other counties in Vest Tennessee, the other 13 counties having their modal-size farms in the lO-29-acre class. The 3 remaining counties in the group of 8 having Negro farm operator percentages of less than 10 percent .* ‘ r!‘ ’ p... “ 12' ab«.- c:- . n» ‘s-- [iv “ ‘\ 6. 6% had county average-size farm acreages of over 100 acres, however; and one of these three had a modal-size of farm of 30-1+9 acres as recently as the 1950 Census. At the other end of the scale, the h counties with the high- est percentages of Negro farm operators (#1 to 71 percent), in ad- dition to having modal-size farms in the lO-29-acre class, had average-size farms of less than 100 acres, and 3 of these averages teeere in the 60-70-acre class. A large "average size of farms" is noted to be less signifi- cant as a descriptive characteristic of a county than a small aver- age. This is because large average size often results from a few very large farms in a county and may be far above the typical or modal size, whereas a small average size can arise only from a preponderance of small farms. In 5 of the 7 counties where more than 35 percent of the farm operators were Negro, more than half of all farms were in the Census of Agriculture Economic Classes V and VI (having the value Of annual product sales between $250 and $2,500), and in the 2 other ctounties these classes constituted 1+3 and 1+7 percent of all farms. No other counties in west Tennessee reached 50 percent in Classes V and VI; nor did their Negro percentages of all farm operators ex- c=Eed, or even equal, 20 percent. Comparing average west Tennessee farm acreages according to OI>erator's race, the average size of farm operated by whites was 10h acres, while that of farms operated by Negroes was 39. Similarly, the average acreages of cropland harvested were 1+2 and \./ ””3; .uuf ‘u-VV‘ h 3 a: 9 If \t .‘i O .. ?“== “ ...». . z. a...“ ~ on» ‘fl‘. . n J‘- ‘t/ m- -, 3 f 3 1;; o -.. o}, . ,- 'u. 65 20 acres, respectively. Put on a percentage basis, Negro farm acreages averaged 37 percent of white, and average cropland har- vested by Negroes was l+8 percent of the white average. Dividing average cropland harvested by average size of farm, it appears that whites cropped on the average about 1&0 percent of their total land in farms, Negroes about 51 percent. In the 16 "rural" counties, where the rural population was more that 50 percent of the total, the level-of-living index in 1951+ was inversely related to the Negro percentage of all farm op- erators. In the 5 counties where the percentage of Negro operators exceeded 35 percent, the level-of-living index did not exceed 70, the United States average being 100.1h The only other county with a level-of-living index below 70 was McNairy County, whose index Vas 68, with a Negro percentage of farm operators of 5 percent. The two west Tennessee urban counties, Madison and Shelby, in- cluding the cities of Jackson and'Memphis, had level-of-living in- dexes of 75 and 70, respectively. Facilities for Economic Development Establishment of facilities for economic development of Ten- nessee was long and difficult but generally persistent and success- ful in the State's history.ls’ 16 x A it Data were taken from Earm-operator family level-of-living indexes, Statistical Bulletin No. 2ou, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S.D.A., March 1957, and adapted to a U.S. average of loo from the given 1’40. ll5Federal Writers Project. J'6George I. Whitlatch, Industrial resources of Tennessee, (Nashville, Tenn.: State Planning Commission, 1915), 209 pp. .. . E‘Lif' ‘ . "...-.. "~_. . V'- . ‘:'-~.-' ‘~ - '.| V ~‘ -. - n a- "-_ Q 'A‘ n. . ‘ ~ .'~ 1. l 7‘ I b. 5“ 66 Transportation River transport.--The lower Tennessee River, northward- flowing below Muscle Shoals in Alabama, has always been directly accessible to the west Tennessee cotton-growing region, furnishing an important freight route for the plantation system. River trans- port declined rapidly after 1900, for although long freight hauls in some cases were still cheaper by water, the railroads became the chief carriers. In the last forty years, however, waterway traffic has somewhat revived due to recent improvements in mass freight- hauling by tug and barge fleets, spurred by federal operation of the Mississippi-Warrior Service, beginning in 1918. This line rejuvenated common carrier operation, pioneering in the use of Steel-covered barges propelled by tunnel-type towboats. Freight totals on the Tennessee River increased markedly during the 1930's, the primary reason being the saving in freight costs on goods moved entirely by water or by combined river-rail and river-motor truck facilities. River Shipments move at rates generally about 80 percent of rail rates; and in Tennessee, barge lines have worked out joint rates with rail and motor carriers that give coverage to practically the entire State and permit Ship- ments to and from almost all points in the Midwest and South. Development of barge-rail rates was inaugurated in 1918 in the op- eration of the federal Mississippi-Warrior Service. The Tennessee River flows into the Ohio at Paducah, Kentucky, Vhich provides a link with the Mississippi River at Cairo, Illinois. The Tennessee is maintained to 9-foot navigation depth by a series fl-— - ..- ‘r in"; F f3 “V- I“ I ‘1 ‘- uti ‘1 I, I 67 of locks and dams, forming an important part of the most extensive interconnected inland waterway system in the United States. This system, which includes the Warrior River in Alabama, the Mississippi River and its tributaries, and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, has a total of about 10,000 miles of navigable channel. The river Ship- ping facilities not only provide an economical form of transporta- tion connecting the various inland portS, but also link these ports directly with the industrial and ocean Shipping centers of the Gulf Coast. At the coastal ports, river freight can be transferred to ocean-going vessels destined for other coastal or foreign ports. Likewise, import and coastwise freight can be shifted either di- .rectly from ship to barge or over the docks. Common carriers handle about 75 percent of the freight hauled on the Mississippi River, as measured in ton-miles. Memphis is a Port of call for 5 major common carrier barge lines and more than 15 private and contract carriers. Five major common carrier barge lines also operate on the Tennessee River. Railroads.--The wave of railroad building which surged over the country in the 1830's met with little response in west Tennes- See, as the region was well served by riverboats and barges. The first line in the State oddly was built from Memphis ten miles eastward by the short-lived LaGrange and Memphis Railroad. The c=Ompany failed soon after its exhibition run in 18h2. In 1856 the Nashville and Chattanooga Railroad-completed a line between Knoxville and Dalton, Georgia. This road later became the Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis. The East Coast and the Ihly" .. .-. \ a.-. we ‘. . :y t. -. . . x . ... . u a. . v pct u~w ... . 2‘ 5. O ' ‘ C x . a v n ~ N . .u \ ena.‘ \nr‘ .n I ll . Q. a». t \ uh c e . s» ...H |lt|.'| . 68 Mississippi River were linked by the Memphis and Charleston Rail- road in 1857. Ten years later the Louisville and Nashville Rail- road connected the State directly with the North. In east and middle Tennessee, railroad branch lines reached into mining, forest, and farming areas. Most of the State's enor- mous soft coal production has come over rail lines from the coal fields of the Cumberland Mountains. Main lines of the Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis Railroad eventually connected Chattanooga, Nashville, Memphis, and Paducah, Kentuclqr--each on a different large river and separated by hundreds of miles. These connections have required overcoming a great number of natural obstacles-- poorly drained swampland in west Tennessee and rivers and high plateaus in other sections. Railroads connect Tennessee's principal cities with St. Iuouis, Chicago, Cincinnati, Washington, Pittsburg, Philadelphia, and New York, as well as with all principal points in the South and Southwest. Transcontinental service passes westward from Memphis. Nine important railway systems serve Memphis: The Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad, and Gulf, Mobile and Ohio Railroad, the Illinois Central Railroad, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad, the Missouri Pacific Railroad, the Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis Railroad, the St. Louis and San Francisco Railway, the Southern Railway, and the St. Louis and Southwestern RBallroad. Three of these also operate through Jackson: the Gulf, Mcabile and Ohio Railroad, the Illinois Central Railroad, and the 1wasshville, Chattanooga and St. Louis Railroad. ‘- iv . i 1“ .i D. d4 “J4 ' 69 Motor transport.--A.1though the railroad system is excellent, many communities are more than 25 miles from a railroad and 11+ counties are entirely without service. For this reason the de- velopment of motor transport service has been encouraged, with the result that virtually every point in the State is now reached by Since the mid-1930's Tennessee has progressed mark- Expan- motor carrier . edly in improvement of both State and county road systems. sion of trucking, concurrent with construction of better roads, has made definite contributions to the economic development of the State's agricultural, forest, and mineral resources. Likewise benefited have been the smaller manufacturing and processing industries, many of which are located in areas where railroad facilities are not available. Usually these industries are dispersed for accessibility to raw material sources and to mar- kets for finished or semi-finished products. The bulk of Tennessee timber, for example, is moved from forest to mill by truck. In addition to milk, livestock, and poultry products, berries and c3‘13her small fruit and vegetable crops are shipped speedily by truck and with a minimum of handling. Shipments are coxmnonly J~<>aded in the field for truck transportation to market with no in- termsdiate rehandling. Major arterial routes in Tennessee form a State network of 8 3300 miles of paved roads, linked to a county and local system of 16,1t00 miles paved, 1+0,000 miles of gravel and stone roads, 2,100 Iniles of graded and drained dirt roads, and 2,600 miles of unim- Drowed dirt roads, a total of 69,l+oo miles. At the State bound- I .... .' . \““h' V‘. ca- .-., c ‘VA » 0“ m ~ ‘5 b s ‘Cr A:- \ 70 aries the principal highways connect Tennessee's road system with the road network of the eight adjoining states. In 1957, 905 truck- line companies were authorized to operate in Tennessee, 201 of which carried on their operations entirely within the State. These lines, operating the majority of the 114,800 trucks registered in the State during 1957, carry practically all classes of freight. All commercial truck lines operating in Tennesseeare certified by the Motor Carrier Division of the Tennessee Public Service Commis- Sion. Water Supplies A total of about 275 Tennessee cities and towns have munic- ipal water distribution systems. Almost two-thirds of these are mmicipany owned, with ownership of the remainder about equally divided between utility districts and private firms. Wells and SPrings are the sources of supply for about three-fourths of these mimicipal systems, and the remaining fourth depend on surface SOIJcheS, such as rivers, creeks, lakes, or impounding reservoirs. Practically all of west Tennessee's larger municipal water systems use wells as their sources of supva. A number of sizable towns are incapable of furnishing large vcDiliumes of water to new industries without construction of addi- tional pumping facilities. All of the major cities, however, are lOeated on rivers and appear to be able to accommodate considerably increased water consumption, either for direct industrial demands 01‘ for indirect ones, such as increased population needs created by industrial expansion . 4 '1'; O~1I r; "an. ...- ‘ . .... , r v Dan'- _ on .... .', V-‘._ . Ago... “Hug :._..“: ~--. -» o.» sw' ! ‘1 E 71 Industries consuming large quantities of water usually have found necessary the development of their own water supplies. This is often the most practical way of assuring adequate water for their needs. In many cases the water requirements of industry ex- ceed. the capacity of municipal systems. In other cases the se- lected industrial location provides ready access to a surface source that guarantees virtually unlimited supplies of water and facilitates waste disposal. Although there is considerable pollution of the Tennessee River in east Tennessee and in Alabama, most of it is dissipated by the time the water reenters Tennessee, and in the western val- ley Of the Tennessee River no pollution of any importance occurs. West Tennessee is drained by a number of major streams, in- Cluding the Obion, Forked Deer, Hatchie, and Wolf Rivers and num- erous small tributary creeks. As the region has relatively minor tOPOgraphic relief, the streams have very low gradients. However, due to the relatively large amounts of Silt and sand received from the adjacent loess formations, the streams are usually turbid and continually clog their channels. To relieve the problems caused by clogging, and to assist in drainage of lower areas, artificial drainage canals have been out throughout much of the region. Poor drainage is not conducive to the development of private industrial water supplies from sur- face sources, nor are sluggish streams well suited to disposal of industrial wastes. Fortunately, several widespread aquifers in in '- ‘- 72 the region exist at moderate depths and are capable of yielding large volumes of water at almost any location. Memphis, in the extreme southwest corner of west Tennessee, serves as a. good example of the geologic conditions in the region and. of theresults to be obtained in the development of ground water supplies. The city water supply and the private water Systems of industrial plants in Memphis constitute one of the largest ground water developments in the United States, according to Whitlatch.:L7 The principal water-bearing strata in the area are at maximum depths of 500 and 1,1+00 feet. To the eastward in the region, horizons Similar to those in Memphis are tapped at even shallower depths. Electricity There are 25 electric power systems in west Tennessee. Of these systems 11+ municipalities and 5 cooperatives buy Tennessee Valley Authority power for distribution. The 6 others generate t115311? own power. Three of them are municipal systems, and 3 are Private companies. One of the latter also buys TVA power for dis- tribution at TVA resale rates. The vast network of generating sys- tems and transmission lines operated by the TVA provide unlimited pover at exceptionally low rates. Residential use of electricity, as well as industrial use, is widespread in west Tennessee. Even on farms, electrification is cOmnion. Thirteen of the 18 counties in the region had elec- trici’cy on over 90 percent of their farms in 195A, and the x lTIhid., p. 123. nun—m .‘l '5' ..I l I" .- t.. "t *,.. y“ ... . 4. . ”fi ‘ 73 remaining 5 ranged from 72 to 88 percent. All 5 counties were among the 6 having Negro farm operators constituting at least 39 percent of all farm operators. The Sixth county, in which ’41 per- cent of the farm operators were Negro, had electricity on 91 per- cent of the farms. All 6 counties had progressed markedly since 1950 , having the highest county increases in number of farms with electricity; numerical increases ranging from 5&0 to 1,068 farms and percentage increases varying from 17 to 53 percent. Alto- gether 12 counties had increases over the h-year period, one had no change, and 5 had decreases. The 5 having decreased numbers of farms vith electricity nevertheless had electricity on at least 96 Parcent of the farms remaining after the general reduction in total numbers of farms. While the total number of farms in the west Tennessee region fell to 56 ,12h in 1951+, 8,635 less than in 1950, the number with electricity rose to 50,171 in 195%, 5 ,l’+3 more than in 1950. The regional number of farms with electricity thus increased from 70 to 89 percent of the total number of farms. Pfllic services The University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station has branch stations in west Tennessee located at Martin and near Jackson. The Ames Plantation has recently begun to serve some f“fictions similar to those of the older branches, as well as to pioneer in new directions. a-., 'V-s. “b No ‘v.' ‘ . q n‘ U‘ .“555 "al‘ I: 35 2 7A In cooperation with the Agricultural Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture, the University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service provides numerous services in west Tennessee. Federal agencies active in this area include the Soil Conservation Service, the Farmers Home Administration, the Farm Credit Administration, and the Agricultural Conservation and Stabilization Service. The Tennessee state government has many agencies concerned with the economy of west Tennessee. However, the principal agencies connected with agriculture are the Department of Agriculture and the Division of Forestry and the Game and Fish Commission of the Department of Conservation. These numerous agencies for public service, and other re- lated ones, are concerned in their various ways with the develop- ment and the stabilization of local economies or the alleviation of wide spread problems. Federal, state, and local officials, as well as actively interested local residents, have given much thought, to the problems of economic development and have proposed a number of possible measures and contributory partial solutions. Three of the most commonly offered proposals are listed as fol- 10‘“, affording a brief indication of principal current opinions: l. Encouraging migration of industries is the most com- monly Proposed solution to the rural counties' economic problems. This Pr0posal is easy to suggest due to publicized successes in Other Parts of the nation, and it receives popular support, as it inn-”7"“ increased local family income through employment of women 75 and. underemployed farmers. Further attraction comes with the ex- pectation of expansion in other sectors of the economy, wholesale and retail trade, construction, and services. Many towns and counties have organized local committees to survey community re- sources, to prepare attractive brochures, and to write and some- times to visit officials of distant manufacturing companies con- sidered to be potential users of community resources. The re- source surveys have included industrial sites, water and power sources, numbers and skills of available workers, transportation faciILities, and related industries and services available. In some cases community bond issues have been planned to finance con- struction of industrial buildings for rent to prospective companies; in other cases tax concessions have been offered to encourage establishment of new industries. Many difficulties commonly are involved in implementing this proposal; however, hope exists that POtential mutual benefits will bring about successful outcomes in com“unity economic development. 2. In view of the chronic problems of cotton farmers, diversification of enterprises on farms is often proposed by agri- cultural advisors. A wider variety of specialized farm types within the area might also be an alternative possibility of impor- tance . These recomendations have the advantage of spreading risk 01’ loss or reduction in income due to biological and climatic fac- tors or unfavorable markets for specific products or groups of pro- ducts. Rotation of land use may also be facilitated by diversi- fication of enterprises, thus tending to conserve the productivity - .--—— “I A 76 of the soil. However, diversification increases demands on the managerial skill and capacity of the farm manager and usually re- quires increased investment. 3. A popular recommendation for relieving the agricultural economy is the increase of cotton acreage allotments, or complete abandonment of the allotment system. This would involve elimination of federal price supports and would put cotton production back on a free-enterprise basis. This might be beneficial in improving re- source allocation in the long run by encouraging establishment of substitute enterprises to replace cotton on many farms. In the short run, however, disruption of the economy would be pronounced, and the immediate impairment of farm income might be disastrous on small family farms where cotton is the principal cash crop. The present study is oriented primarily toward investigation into Opportunities in the second category of approach to the prob- lems of farm organization but also is concerned with related areas Pertaining to rural economies. .7 N 0!! -.w‘ H \ _i CHAPTER IV FOREST RESCIJRCES: TIMBER INVENTORY AND FOREST LAND OWNERSHIP Timber Inventory A survey of Tennessee's forest resources was made in 191+8-50 by the Southern Forest Experiment Station. Important data obtained by the forest survey crews and by other research were reported by Sternitzke in Forest Resource Report Number 9, Tennessee's Timber ism-l Tennessee had 12,607,600 acres of forest land, 1+7 percent of all land in the State. West Tennessee’s forest acreage covered 1,791+ ,200 acres, or 30 percent of the total land area. Some counties were much more sparsely forested than others, however, the fOI‘ESt land percentage ranging from 16 in Crockett County to 1&3 in Hardeman, The 199 relationship of net annual growth of timber to the annual cut of timber was less favorable over Tennessee as a whole than in the west Tennessee region. As appears from Tables 2 and 3, While net annual growth of total growing stock of all timber SPECIes was greater than annual cut in all regions, averaging 113 Percent for the State, growth of sawtimber was less than the cut in all regions except west Tennessee, and averaged 87 percent for lSternitzke . 77 ||I1.ll | I ll.~.-..o-.~n|~ Iii no.1“! ~T~nsm pooh canon ho msoaaads ea pooh vague Mo meoHHHHa ea Honsapasm xOOpm wuaaono ' ’ \r > ILVL I} ’L 11‘ ’uD I r. nu ,- a . , .D } ... £fi-f -r r- it .- . ll chm mused poxrn.w mqm<fi. msma .noawmn sm>ssm season as .oonnonnoa as spa. a :.mae s.:mm . a.mHo.H m.mwa m.mw m.mmm Hope» oeupm 79 moms a.mma méom fiwm a.mm ore. some can? {mm damn me :35 eta 333m in? via names Tm: 9m me: 3380 984” NS mime och o.m mam 1359933 To? cums mama «.5 o.m «.8 poo: l nooaendm wooupuom noauomm HH< coonenum cochpnom—i uuaoumm HH< daemon hm>asm poo.“ canon no 2833s 5 poo.“ 3&6 .3 3...an 5 nonfifiom soopn 3.6.8 Ill 11;- l . II o 833 generim as mzma «noflwou ho>ksm pmmh0h an noonmusuua dd 930 honsfiv M 80 Tennessee as a whole. The ratio was most unfavorable for Tennessee softwoods, net growth being only 61+ percent of cut for sawtimber and 86 percent for all growing stock. Hardwood growth for total growing stock was 122 percent of cut, but for sawtimber was just 96 percent, nearly a balance. West Tennessee's relationships of net annual growth to an- nml cut in 1919 were much more favorable than the State's. Net growth of total timber of all species was 109 percent of cut and for sawtimber was 102. For softwoods the ratios were remarkably high: 137 percent for total timber and 120 for sawtimber. Hard- wood growth was 107 percent of cut of total timber and just bal- anced with cut at 100 percent in the case of sawtimber. These percentages, showing that west Tennessee‘s annual timber growth equals or exceeds the annual cut, are favorable in- dications only of the fact that in general a build-up of total timber volume is occurring rather than a depletion. Also the only indication as to changing quality in the over-all resource is the I"eduction in average size of timber, as evidenced by the fact that the ratios of growth to cut are less for sawtimber than they are for total timber, in the case of both hardwoods and softwoods. More important, however is the rate at which growth is oc- QIlrring, because the current rate of growth affects the length of time needed to build up the timber volume per acre. Also the fL‘I:ture growth rate will determine the rate of cutting which will be possible without depleting the forest resource. According to the 1919 data, west Tennessee's 1,701+,300 acres in hardwood types 81 averaged an annual growth of all timber of about 30 cubic feet per acre, including 100 board feet of sawtimber. Softwood types grew an average of 50 cubic feet per acre annually on 83,l+00 acres, a volume which included almost 200 board feet of sawtimber. These growth averages are below those offered as rules-of-thumb by for- esters. Commonly accepted guide rules suggest that forest manage- Inent can produce annual growth per acre of 60 cubic feet from up- land hardwoods, with 200 board feet of sawtimber included, and 100 c1.:1bic feet from loblolly pine, including LL00 board feet of saw- 1’: imber. The guide standards for these specific types are, coin- c identally, Just double the present averages for all hardwood types and softwood types, respectively. Commercial forest land comprises very nearly the total for- est land area of Tennessee; only the limited areas reserved from Cutting of timber are classed as noncommercial. The acreage of Commercial forest is listed by major forest types for the five ragions of the State in Table 1+. West Tennessee had only a small Parrt, 83,1L00 acres or less than 3 percent, of the State's total a-Qreage of the softwood type. By contrast, hardwood types were we 11 represented in west Tennessee, with 1,70h ,300 acres or 18 Percent of the State’s hardwood acreage located in this region. Tennessee's bottomland hardwoods were concentrated in west Tennes- See, where 733,1+00 acres or 80 percent of the State’s total acre- age in bottomland hardwoods were recorded. While west Tennessee had only 11+ percent of the State’s for- ested acreage, it had 17 percent of the volume of merchantable and A .‘hlr~o-A . I F.- v — (STU-- >pfl>vnun r.- 'Ulhil‘ linh>c\- )- la IV. ‘~ ..Jl. >4. ~ putt-\qunus-I\o~. iv-udt \ .0 lhrhu n I uvi 82 , m.smo.m a.mmo.m m.::m.m H.soa.m s.aws.a a.mmm.ma noose HH< s.eam.a m.wma.m m.wmm.a e.smm.a m.:o~.a a.mam.m Hosea m.msm H.wme a.mm a.msm a.mos m.mmo.m onsnweoooonon noose: o.emw m.emm.a o.amm.H m.amm.H o.emw m.:mm.m ooononoa sodas: m.mH m.sm m.He m.mm a.mms m.amm ooosonoa onoa-soppom mommy dooaendm m.m:m.a w.mmm o.msm a.mma a.mw a.mmo.m Hence a.mw. e.wm . . . . . . H.woa ooospoom posse a.mm s.sm o.m:m m.:w a.ma a.mmw snoop a.moa.a :.ews . . m.:s m.em m.mmo.m moan noaaoa anonnsom monk» uoobpmom poem ssopsam Hohpsoo Hsnpsmonpmo3 puck .oespm - one» pmohoh moped Mo munsmsonp nu don< I1nununnnnnunmmmnnuuununuuunuuuuunuuuunununuuunuuunuuu on- wemH «dofim oh ao>nsm one name pnonom an «monomeeoa nfi ease pumaok Hmfionmsscc_ho anew...e memea 1AM V: QKN to 83 potentially merchantable timber. In millions of cubic feet west Tennessee had 973.1 of the State's 5,728.5 total of all species. In their minor position, softwoods comprised only 78.3 million cubic feet or 8 percent of Tennessee’s 926.2 volume. Hardwoods in west Tennessee, however, accounted for 8911.8 of the State's 1+ ,802.3 million cubic feet, or almost 19 percent. This hardwood volume was 92 percent of the total timber volume in the region. The economic importance of west Tennessee's hardwoods is flirther indicated by the fact that they covered 28 percent of the land area of the region. Upland hardwood types grew on 57 per- cent of the hardwood area, thus constituting the principal source Of income on 16 percent of west Tennessee's total land area, while the remaining 1+3 percent of the hardwood area is in the bottomland hardwood type. However, due to the heavy average volume per acre-- 651 cubic feet--of bottomland hardwoods, the total volume in this tyjpe in west Tennessee slightly exceeded the region's total volume in the upland hardwood types (where the average volume per acre was 503 cubic feet on 867,000 acres of upland hardwoods and 261 cubic feet on 103,900 acres of upland hardwood-pine type). Basal area per acre.was also heavier in bottomland hardwoods than in the other types. West Tennessee had an average of 1+2.3 same feet per acre of merchantable (including potentially merchant- a:ble) hardwoods in the bottomlands, 31. 5 in the uplands, and 29.7 Ethane feet per acre of merchantable softwoods. Unfortunately the basal areas of cull trees in all of these types were considerable, 29.7, 15.3, and 7.6 square feet per acre, reSpectively. These cull Pl F uh. qJ d4 9.0. a 81+ basal areas occupied percentages of Al, 33, and 20, respectively, of the total basal areas of 72.0 square feet per acre in bottom- land hardwoods, h6.8 in upland hardwoods, and 37.3 in softwoods. None of these statistics of basal area by type vary appreciably from the State's averages. However, the weighted basal area aver- age for all types is almost 25 percent higher for west Tennessee than for the State as a whole, primarily due to its heavy proportion of bottomland hardwoods and the high percentage of culls in this 133716. The State averages for basal area per acre were 32.3 square feet in merchantable trees and 13.3 in culls, totaling 16.6 square West Tennessee averaged 35.8 square feet in merchantable feet. trees and 20.9 in culls, with an average total basal area per acre for the region of 56.7 square feet. These data reveal a high proportion of cull timber in west Tennessee forests and a poor stocking of merchantable timber. whi :Le these regional averages for all timber types are predomi- nantly weighted by upland hardwoods, they are somewhat influenced-- in<-‘—1~eased-c-by the weighting of bottomland hardwoods. In any case, ho"fever, in well managed stands the volume of cull timber should And for both types of hardwoods and basal area in merchant- 2 be nil. able timber (defined as sound, well formed trees 5.0 inches d.b.h. and larger3) should be at least 55 square feet per acre following \f 2Diameter breast high; stem diameter at a point h-l/e feet above average ground level. 3Present merchantability standards for most hardwood saw- t1ltlber in west Tennessee would class trees under 12 inches d.b.h. as only potentially merchantable for timber products. Throughout “1081'. of this region, markets for these [continued on page 85] . i “ ‘il v . ..| : .I ... J . ‘lv up: W‘ ‘ ... . . ... L .L . . .a..n hm W' s. \ o u . | o . . . _ In \ I . v. ... . . ... o a . . . l . . . . O . C O o o . V o . 85 a selection cutting--50 percent more than the current west Ten- nessee average . Forest Land Ownership Whereas considerable information has been made available on the timber resource in west Tennessee, there has been little factual knowledge published about timberland owners. Pertinent information was sought in order to learn (1) how owners sold timber, (2) how and why they held forest land, and (3) the relationships between how the timber market functions and how the forest is treated as a. source of timber. The search for information was pursued by means of a survey of a sample of owners of forest land in Hardeman County, a typical Vest Tennessee county with respect to its forests. A sample of 1+0 Owners was stratified according to the method described in the ap- Pendix, to insure interviews with at least 20 recent sellers. It was desired to have at least half of the sample composed of owners “ho had sold timber in the 1951-1955 period, since these recently act :Lve participants in the timber market were considered the most Sigltlzlficant segment of the owners whose forest management and tiniber marketing practices were under study. \ Smaller hardwoods have not yet developed, but insofar as such trees are sound and well formed, virtually all will grow into merchant- abi:Lity. Markets for pulpwood and other small products can also be expected to be created and to expand, thus lowering the minimum Clia-lneter of actual merchantability. ’qf 86 In respect to the proportion of total forest area in the major forest types, the area included in the sample was similar to west Tennessee as a whole. West Tennessee had 51+ percent of its forest area in upland hardwood types (including pine -hardwoods ), 1+1 percent in bottomland hardwoods, and 5 percent in pine. The forest areas in the 1+0 ownerships totaled roughly 63 percent in upland hardwoods, 32 percent in bottomland hardwoods, and 5 per- cent in pine. Sizes and types of forest land The most common size of total ownership area in the sample was less than 300 acres (Table 5). However, the mean was l+65, Since 35 percent of the ownerships were larger than 600 acres and Covered 68 percent of the area (12,700 of the 18,600 acres). The Smallest acreage in the sample was 50 acres and the largest was 13350. The most common size of forest on these ownerships was less than 150 acres (Table 6), but the mean forest acreage was 297. The range of forest area was from 15 to 983 acres. Over the 1+0 owner- ships the ratios of size of forest to size of total ownership, when eJ‘i‘Jpressed as percentages, ranged from 20 to 100 percent. The largest number of ownerships, 11+, were in the l+1-60-percent class (Table 5) and almost as many, 13, were in the 61-80-percent class. I1311118 the modal ownership had forest land occupying about 60 percent of its total area. The predominant forest type was upland hardwoods, including Pine -ha.rdwoods, which occurred on 31+ of the 1+0 properties, or 85 Percent. Nine of these had only the pine-hardwoods type (two of ‘1fl4l‘lilh‘l' I An .‘a~u.~<.fl 87 o: h ma :H m H hmnazn aspoa m o m o o o oomHuHomH H a o o o o oomanaom NH m m m a o oomuaom a. H a m m 0 08-8». ma m N m m H oomna OOH-H0 ownaw omua: oauam omua pmnfiss mound aw proa pmonom ma dons mo mmapsooamm dunno sand Hmpop Mo mmnao muam mnmnao no hmnapz as as age sag . pmmpow SH wmpd no wwwpcvohmm an and donko send H6909 Ho umdao onwm.A§ myopic ho hoaafizru.m mqmdfi ’11,!!! In... u:h~fl.dn. . .. ... -.. ...v u .c-\:Lv~.J-v- .- u 3 iv v... .u‘- >a a. - 'ilhfitlfizh ' 1.! .I Llfinh~nuz.l.l I R\ Vo-Q. \I\r\o\r 88 aooa m.m 0.0m m.wm m.mm m.ma omwpumonmm o: H NH m ma m hogan: proe a o o a o o 8348 m o o a m o oomuamh o o o o o o 02.48 m o a m H H cow-Hm: m o o a m H omzuaom m o a H a m oomuama ma a N m m o Omana pqmww mmappmswsfi woo: ma madfida>adnfi nmpmmnom «mm: oqoz mqofipomssoo mmmnamsm Hmooq pumannm>ow proa com: meadow soapmsnomnfi nexus: Amopomv swan amonom no muam mnonko ho honsbz £2 £5 baa Egan . 8.3 $38 .Ho 33 c3 .23 com.» 0938 833285 pagans \3 2330 .mo Seaman-6 mafia ..--v- K§r_ '» .. «‘ _ .5. —, VI ‘I ‘1“! . «a :-- .y “ v4‘ r»- 5" ‘1 ‘u ~t‘ I”. \‘ u 1 P J ,‘ 89 which also had pure pine stands), and two had pine-hardwoods in addition to other upland hardwoods. Twenty ownerships contained bottomland hardwoods, and all but six of these also had upland hardwood areas, typically considerably larger than the areas in the bottomland types. Twenty-four ownerships had areas in the pine type, either native shortleaf or planted loblolly pine; how- ever, 18 of these ranged from 1 acre to 30 acres; only 6 ran from 1+1 to 100 acres. Ownership types The characteristic ownership type was the resident farm ownership, comprising 36 of the 1+0 ownerships, or 90 percent. Owner's resided on 21+ of these, 2 of which were part-time farms, where the owners' principal occupations were off the farm. The other 12 ownerships had only tenant residents, although several properties were multi-farm units, occupied by at least one family for each operating farm unit. Two of the remaining four ownerships were non-resident farms, one of which was a part—time enterprise. The other two were non-farm commercial forest ownerships, one owned by a lumber company and one held by an individual "for timber- growing as an investment to develop into an educational fund to send my son to college." flail description of Hardeman County farms The preponderance of farms in the sample (is in accord with the heavily agricultural nature of Hardeman County. A few census facts about the county will give a sketchy picture of the back- ground involved. Hardeman's 2,700 farms occupied 76 percent of .‘ F ’9- 8.05 ...... ...~- g— u 90 the almost 1120,000 acres in the County, the average size of farm thus being about 117 acres} The modal size of cropland acreage was in the category of 10-20 acres per farm. The total farm woodland acreage in 1951+ was reported to be almost 1%,000 acres, and nonfarm woodland in the county brought the Hardeman forest total to over 178,000 acres. Over 53 percent of all farms reported forest areas, with the average woodland acreage on these 1AM} farms being 97 acres. Of the total farm Census acreage, over 70 percent was oper- ated by the owner, despite the fact that only 1+8 percent of the total number of farms were owner-operated. This implies also that the tenant-operated farms were smaller than the ll7-acre average, which is to be expected--especially as owners who have subdivided large acreages into a number of tenant farms commonly leave the woodland out of the rented areas and retain this forest area in their own farm or non farm operating units. Electricity was used by 81 percent of all farms reported and tractors were a source of pulling power on 28 percent, mules 01‘ horses the only source on 33 percent, and no tractors, mules or horse 3 were listed for the remaining 39 percent. It is probable that the 19 percent reporting no electricity were farms rented to tenants , and they were very likely among the 39 percent without tract; iVe power. Undoubtedly some of these farms used rented or borrowed trucks, mules, or horses to supplement human labor, but \ Vol MILS. Bureau of the Census, Census of Agriculture: 195b,, ' I: Counties and state economic areas, Part 20, Tennessee (washington, D.C . : 1956) - 91 sonmez may well have been so small that even such borrowing was un- necessary or uneconomic. Fortunately, however, over 60 percent of all. :farms had both electricity and traCtive power. In the period L95()-—l95h there was a 38-percent increase in the number of farms havinrlg electricity and a 51-percent increase in the number posses- sing a tractor. Of the 2,700 farms in 195h about #00 were classed as pri- nmriJLar residential and 230 others as part-time operations. About 1,00C) :farm operators reported working off the farm, with half of tflmsee obtaining off-farm employment for 100 days or more during the areeamu Over 500 farmers reported more family income from off- farm sources than from the sale of farm products. Over 5 million dollars' worth of farm products were sold frmn IIardeman County's farms in 195%, with only about $72,000 or 1.1} percent obtained from forest products. This forest income was a marked decrease from the $100,000 worth sold in 19u9, which V95 Umaeudy 2.5 percent of the total value of farm products har- vested in that year. The 195% aggregate of farm forest sales of sawtimber for veneer and sawlogs was 1,350 MBF (thousand board feet), taken from 87 flEL‘lt'lms’ua farm average of not quite 16 M. If the total value recejLWredf’rom all timber products had been equally divided among thesEE 87 farms, the receipts to each farm.would have been $820, and 1311e average price slightly over $50 per MBF. A fuelwood vol- me Of almost 13,000 cords was cut on 1,501+ farms, and nearly ..-—q. 92 173 ,000 fenceposts came from 622 farms. For the 1,501+ farms the melt—food average was 8.5 cords and the 622 post-producers averaged 278 Posts . Owner ship objectives Major ownership objectives as indicated by the 1&0 owners in the SL956 survey fell into five categories, designated as farming, residence, timber-growing, rental of farm land, and timber-removal. These categories are listed in order of decreasing over-all fre- quency of occurrence, which is also the order of frequency of the primary objectives of the 1+0 owners (Table 7). Secondary objectives are noted for all but two of the owners, those two being the non- farm commercial forest owners, whose only objective was timber- growing. Third place objectives were cited by only eight owners. Farming or rental of farm land were among the objectives of the 38 farm owners, although in only 25 cases were they primary ob- Jectives. Two of these farm owners indicated both farming and rental of farm land as ownership objectives. Residence was notable as the secondary objective on half of all 0""Itlerships surveyed and was the primary objective on seven. One feurmer residing on his farm considered farming and timber- growing to be his only objectives, residence being so incidental as to be not worthy of even third place. The 12 other ownerships had he ither been used nor planned for owner residence. Currently, however, there were 16 properties on which owners did not reside. It. tlb 3.110 uN.u -.-~\V-ZI#'I IK. .‘:‘~u~ a\.~. -i 93 mm : ma ma hm mm H6909 w o H. z o m m mm m m m om m m o: m m m e. mm H Hwbosmn Gama sham wnakonm Amps; mo 22% £3.59 0883mm we “Ems monophomafl Hmpoe mo nacho mm>Hpoonno mfinmhonko wmma o €080on «monophomfla ho H388 a.“ mgfivoonno magmhogo ha 938.6 M0 Hmnfiafilfi EB; «mamadm hpnso 9h Timber-growing was cited as a major ownership objective by 15 owners, although only 6 rated it as the primary objective. Nevertheless, timber-growing was the third most important objective, following farming and residence. Timber-removal, without intention to perpetuate a productive forest, was a major ownership objective of four owners. Two held it as the primary objective and the other two as secondary. The method. of initial land acquisition of 21!- ownerships, or 60 percent of the sample, was purchase (Table 8). Thirteen owner- ships , or about a third, had been obtained by inheritance; and three had resulted from a transfer within a family, not due to the owner ’6 death. While the initial acquisition of one ownership dated. from as early as 8 decades before the survey, no other tract had been held over 5 decades. Most holdings(over 60 percent) had been acquired in the last 2 decades. The median length of owner- ship was slightly less than 20 years. This distribution of dura- tion of ownership reflects the combined action of two factors: the limitation of the length of adult life of the owner and the normal purchase turnover rate. (11 16 ownerships two or more acquisitions had been made. The 16 second acquisitions had all been purchases, made up to 20 years following the initial acquisition and averaging 7 years, with the median at h-S years. Three purchases had followed ini- tial inheritance, at intervals of 8,19, and 20 years. One pur- Ch&8e had come promptly after an initial transfer within the I II‘IIIIIZI II. ...s‘ ~ .5 F\. \. .podnp oso swap whoa no confisvoo mm: mfinmhosko MH muse pmuHHHdma 95 or m mH am Hseoa dophomoh H o o H pom open mH m m w mmmH-mamH NH o m m mamH-mmmH m o m m mmmHummmH a H m H mmmH-mHmH m o H m , mHmHumomH o o o o momH-mme o o o o mme-mme H o H o mme-mewH aHHssa sHspHa Mohandas ooqdvanmnsH cannonsm Hogans HsoHpHdevow Hspoa no open soHeHaasoos no soaps: mmmH aoamsum hvnsoo anaconda anoHpHmHfiHood M0 936 an odd Honda Ho floavamgdod M0 #9308 an unease mo 90955316 Enema 96 family: a young man had extended his property two years after a. gift of land from his father. Twelve of the second purchases had been made by initial purchasers. Thus half of the 21+ who had made an initial purchase had wanted to increase their holdings, and typically after only a short period of years. In contrast to the purchaser repeat rate of 50 percent, the heirs’ purchase rate was less than 25 percent, and then after a much longer interval on the average. Sales and harvests and owner's age The connection between the present age of woodland owners and whether they have sold timber recently or at all is not proof of a relation between owner's age and the farsightedness of his forest management. However, certainly the refraining from un- planned or ill—considered sales of growing timber implies a con- servat ive attitude. The inference is probably not incorrectly drawn that the owner advisedly is holding off from an early sale 50 as to obtain much more profitable future returns from his wood- land. Six of the 1+0 owners, or 15 percent, had never sold timber Since they had acquired their properties (Table 9). All six were within the age range of 1+1 to 60 years and constituted a fifth of the tO‘tal in that group. Eight others had made no sales since 1950, bringing to 1% the total who had sold no timber during the five years preceding the 1956 survey. These eight had, however, sold timber at least once between their acquisition dates and 1950. 11.1.- \A¢~‘~ stunt-n51.1v IN..- uh0a~nh~'.2! [I \ . 3&- ~ -.~ 9‘ . h. 97 .HUHBO oHom on» was psodeonm Hnsumpom omonz zswgaoo quESH dowwsdsthHSdm «downpomhoosH no qudSHqun o: m :H w NH Hdpoa m o m o H omuHe b o m m m oenHm Hm a: e a w om-Hm w m m H m omuH: H o o H o ozuHm 03H- mmmH unease mo nOHpHmHsvow monuom noHpHmHsuu< uHmmH hogan: oosHm npon kuoa moHnm oz sH moHdm Amvamm nunaHp no upon Amadohv house mo ow< uhmfikb MO #03353 wmmH «hpgoo gauchdm ..mdem Hons—Hp Ho oodmhpdooo he. was pogo mo mwd hp 93:30 mo HonuHHHZII.m page 98 Timber sales had been made between l95l and 1955 by 12 owners who had sold no timber previously. Sales in both periods, however, had. been made by 14 owners. All 10 owners over 60 had made sales at least once, 8 of then in the period of 1951-55. Recent selling by aged owners was widespread, as might have been anticipated, since a man nearing the end. of his life realizes that his last sale could well have been his final opportunity to obtain income from his timber. Also the normal income from labor requiring vigor naturally tends to dimin- iSh with age, while total need for income diminishes only slightly, if 8.1; all. Five, or 50 percent, of the 10 owners over 60 had made sales in both periods, 1951-55 and previously. By comparison, only 9, or 30 percent, of the 30 owners up to age 60 had sold timber in both Periods. At first thought the older owners' higher rate of repeat Sales does not appear unexpected, as 60 years is a long time to live and getting money from timber is attractive. In the upland ha-?E‘<3.V~roods typical of west Tennessee, however, two timber sales in a man's lifetime speak fairly well for his conservative nature. The commonly slow growth of many of these lightly stocked hardwood StaJilds seldom permits the harvesting of more than 1,500 board feet Per acre every hO-LLS years if the logger takes trees down to the commonplace, l2-inch stump diameter 12 inches above the ground. In all owner's 60's and later, a declining interest in timber might be eXpected due to the long time needed to grow a crop. Indeed, 99 such declining interest is markedly pronounced among Michigan for- est owners over 50, according to a recent study reported by Yoho, James, and Quinney.5 In the Hardeman County sample, on the other hand, it was noted that six of the ten owners over 60, despite the ir vigorous record of timber-selling, were trying to manage the ir timber to assure future returns. Of the 1+0 forest owners, 26 had made a total of 35 sales of timber products in the 1951-55 period (Table 10). Twenty-two sales were of stumpage, 6 of logs, and 7 of delivered lumber or ties. The logs and sawed products‘were sold by their board-foot volumes, as was the stumpage in 3 sales. Most (11+) of the stumpage sales, how-ever, required payment of a lump sum agreed upon before the tim- ber was cut. Five sellers preferred to release ownership of their Stlnnpage with the understanding that they would be paid for it by a. Share system. The stumpage share was usually 1/ h or 1/3 of the rIlCDIley received by the sawmill operator when he delivered the green JJulnber to a concentration yard or other dealer. Over half (19) of the sale agreements were verbal; and of the 16 written contracts, 1.0 were drawn up by the buyer or his lawyer. The share system was expecially advantageous to the small Sa‘fl‘mill operator with scant finances. It relieved him of the pro- blem of getting the loan he needs when stumpage has to be paid for in advance of cutting. The only reason some sellers preferred it \ 5James G. Yoho, Lee M. James, and Dean N. Quinney, Private l*‘Ildownership and management in the northern half of Michigan's ower peninsula, Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment tation Technical Bulletin 261 (East Lansing, Mich.: 1957), p.29. 100 mm m rH 3 Hosea e o e 0 new» n0\u:d Honing m o m o mmoq «N m m I ousaasem ooHHm «HumoHonr .ovo .ooon 02¢ AshopsHv no .5ng so A...) as $2: 28p roof. on» he moHdm Ho n\Hv mondnm dawnsonu on» an sum mesa no Hogan: , Haves vHom poncOHQ acoahwm mo ones moHdm uo Hones: fidflovhdm .vnolbam Ho . mm? .0333 .3580 :Hda no Show oaks hp «at .mmlemH .uHou poawbnn awn! ho Inch he uoHun ho Honastll.oH mqmdh 101 was that they felt adequately paid according to the actual volume of “timber out, without the necessity for a pre-sale inventory or eS-«[:.:imate of the volume of trees to be cut. Hardly any of the sales were of marked timber; thus cutting was selective only in that saw- mill operators chose the larger trees (above a l2-inch stump diam- eter for hardwoods and an 8-inch stump for pine) and left the smaller and otherwise less valuable trees in the woods. Forest products for home use had been harvested by 31 owners, Of Whom 27 had cut sawtimber and 19 had cut fenceposts. Fifteen of these owners had out both sawtimber and fenceposts. All 31 were farm Owners. No harvests had been made on the 2 non-resident farms nor on the 2 nonfarm commercial forest ownerships. .P 18.118 for future sales and harvests Few woodland owners had definite plans for future sales or ha-:I:‘8vests from their forests. Twenty-three, however, had general intentions of selling or harvesting sometime in the next decade or tWO. Twenty of these expected to regulate timber cutting on a sus- tained yield basis; three did not. Nine others intended sustained Yield, bringing the total to 29, but due to the need to build up tllez‘Lr stands, they had no intentions of Cutting for at least 20 y e firs . All 29 who aimed to achieve sustained yield had some idea of what products would be cut, and all but one of these had at least rough intentions or perhaps indefinite plans as to what wood- land work should be done. Seven not wishing for sustained yield er. 102 nevertheless had some future timber products in mind, but four others expected no future products from their woodlands. 0f the 36 expecting yields at some future time, 12 planned to sell stumpage only. Two others planned to sell stumpage but also to harvest timber, one intending it for home use, the other for roadside sale. Two more planned harvesting timber for home use and two for roadside sale. The remaining 18 expected to har- vest and deliver products to the buyers, 5 planning delivery of sawlogs and other logs, 7 pulpwood, and 6 lumber. Of the 6 plan- ning delivery of lumber, 1+ planned to saw it on their own mills and 2 would have it custom-sawed. @or and capital available for woods work Although 21 owners (or alternate family members) had done Woods work, 5 no longer considered themselves available--primarily due to age. Twenty owners, however, felt that they could do woods Work, despite the fact that 6 had no previous experience of this kind. Eleven owners counted on other males in their families to help with such work, and 2 others (who were not able to work in the woods) expected family members to execute the work for them. F0LII-teen owners had tenants or sharecroppers to help them in woods work, it had neighbors available, and 15 expected to hire others to ““3331; on their woods crews. In 9 cases where hiring tenants or 0t11ers was expected, neither the owner nor a family member would be Working with them; in 3 of these cases, though, the owner had had previous woods experience and probably would supervise oper- at ions. 1‘... .Ju A. nun 103 Equipment available for harvesting of timber included cross- cut saws and other hand tools on 13 ownerships and power saws on 7 others. Nineteen of these 20 ownerships were equipped for skidding, 8116. in most cases for hauling also, by means of tractors, trucks, or mules, with chains, tongs, or wagons. As to the question of possible need for credit, all owners' responses were negative. Probably in most cases no thought had been given to the possible desirability of credit for forest im- Proyement, such a matter being outside the realm of normal expe- rience. In many other cases credit need was probably ruled out due to general aversion to debt, expecially since risk was in- creased as a result of lack of knowledge of timber-growing. In Practically all cases the subject of credit was a touchy one, the common reaction indicating that it was a personal matter not to be discussed outside the family. Rather than considering credit as a useful tool of farm management, lack of use of credit ap- Peared to be a source of pride to most of the farmers interviewed. The common aversion to debt was illustrated by one farmer who appeared industrious, progressive, and prosperous, and who was willing to discuss the subject of credit. He reported that he had c(Blisulted a government forester regarding management of his timber- land. The forester had pointed out to him that if he were to cut, as he intended, a stand of cherrybark red oak, the trees of which were growing, on the average, one inch in diameter annually, he wQUld be losing the potential for about a lO-percent annual in- crEase in volume and value. The farmer's response was that the 10h cutting of this timber would enable him to pay off a 6-percent note, and that therefore he would be losing only M percent annu- aley and gaining peace of mind through reducing unwanted debt. In the case of a timberland owner whose occupation was op- eration of a portable sawmill, debt was common to his existence. He had a personal debt of 35 to 1+0 thousand dollars, largely in- vested in equipment. Although his business was active, he seemed to be somewhat uncomfortable with this level of debt and appeared to be close to the limit of his credit. Despite the fact that he had bought several timberland properties in the past few years, he had. no intention of using credit for growing timber; forested prop- er‘t: ies were bought for prompt harvesting of all merchantable tim- ber, then conversion to farms. @eral management programs and practices Only one owner had a formal management program; this was for a. large nonfarm commercial forest property of bottomland hardwoods. The current phase of the program called for accumulation of volume of merchantable trees, as the timber stand had recently been im- Proved by the girdling of culls. Thirteen other owners had planted loblolly pine seedlings, but this was the only active practice in- V'Olved in their informal forest management programs. Two others, however, who were growing pine timber had found that natural regen- eration of the native shortleaf pine on their tracts was adequate e‘n-d transplanting of nursery stock was unnecessary. Management by the remaining 15 owners among the 29 who in- terlded achieving sustained yield forestry did not yet include many 105 active forestry practices. Some of these 15 owners, however, as wre 11 as some of the 13 who had planted pine, had made improvement cuttings to remove low quality but merchantable trees, and many had cut cull trees for firewood and low-grade fenceposts. Basic to their general management policies were the owners' attitudes toward timber as a resource of some value. Statements they made and behavior they revealed during interviews indicated that 33 owners considered timber to be a substantial resource. Among these were the 29 who believed timber to be of sufficient val'ue to make sustained yield management profitable for them. There were four who recognized that growing timber is of value but fe it that investing in a program of sustained yield was not suit- ab le for themselves. And seven owners were quite indifferent to 1~73Lx1rfber , giving the impression that it was hardly worth consider- at ion, and certainJy worthy of no effort on thier properties. Four of these unquestionably would have regarded timber more highly had their peculiar ownership situations not precluded management effort toward development. Two others considered that management would be Iilliteconomic due to the low value of the resource on their properties. 0:113, one had a really antagonistic attitude toward both timber and People, especially timber buyers and government officials. Thus all owners but one recognized forestry as a potentially worthwhile enterprise where applicable, even though ten of them had not adopted it on their own land (for various reasons of fin- a“lees or incentives). This general acceptance of forestry in prin- Q1131e, is in striking contrast to the attitudes reported several yr- “7: 106 years earlier in Mississippi by James, Hoffman, and Payne, who learned from their interviews in the central part of the State that the owners of 17 percent of the area surveyed either had "no idea" of what forestry was or thought that it was some kind of "nonsense perpetrated .by government."6 Certainly there has b een much progress in recent years, although much more is needed. howledje of alternatives in production and marketing Information was sought about the degree of owners' knowledge 0f grades and size specifications for timber products, merchanta- bility of timber stands, and existing or prospective markets for tincriber. As no objective measures were available, a subjective evaluation was made following each interview, and the owner was I‘arted as having one of 6 degrees of knowledge, from "poor" to "excellent," in each of the 3 categories related to timber pro- d‘LIction and marketing. Over half of the owners were rated as "poor" or "fair" in each of the categories (Table 11), with an O\rer—all average of about 62 percent of the owners in these ratings. Nevertheless, a sizable proportion, 29 percent, were in the ratings of "good" or better, and 18 percent were felt to have "very good" Or "excellent" knowledge in the 3 categories. In deciding whether to make a timber sale and when, how, and to whom, 12 of the 1+0 owners had sought no market information \ 6Lee M. James, William P. Hoffman, and Monty A. Payne, £r$ate forest landownership and management in central Mississippi, Ssissippi State College Agricultural Experiment Station Technical BUlletin 33 (State College, Miss.: 1951), p. 23. 107 ooH ONH o¢ ow ov Haves NH ma c m m anoHHoowm m P o v n 600% knob Ha ma v w n @000 m S n v a. o8» has mm mm ma p Ha Hash em He ¢H ea ma noon oaaxndfl uzowvdoamuooma o>wpoomuonm hpaaapuesunonoa on“. and ouapaoonom no uswaouxfl ease» Rogues autumn vouaonm Hadnnubo Haven - pmvoahanx aowauuhomaa mo ocean . mo cannon unnsso no monly: i i .33? ea as {as see 855 . huaawndpnunohul suave .oposeonm mo cud-ahonx ho cosmou an unease ho nanssznn.~fl names I.‘ ,13‘ Nate h;- ”933;:‘ ‘ .1 us; 177‘ j e, 108 C Table 6); 9 had obtained advice from people they knew in the for- est products industries; 13 had discussed the matter with other loc all. individuals; one spoke about it to a county agricultural technician; and 5 had consulted with foresters, at no direct ex- pense to themselves in these cases since only government foresters involved-mo private consultants. The only obvious relation were betwe en size of forest area and the owner's desire for market in- form-tion was that no owners of less than 150 acres of forest availed themselves of the help of a forester. The 5 owners ad- vise <3. by government foresters held between 160 and l#80 acres of fore st land, and averaged 292. Four of these ownerships were farms , 3 full-time and one part-time, and one was nonfarm com- merc: 18.1 forest. The nonfarm owner was a lumber company which employed a. forester to manage company lands in addition to his prime ipal duty of timber buyer or procurement agent. The company called upon the government forester's services to supplement the marl‘B-gement work of its own forester. Won of ownership objectives to alternatives for management The alternatives for economic forest management on farms are numerous when a number of conditions are favorable. The greater the restrictions imposed by these conditions the more limited be- come % the range of economic alternatives. Ownership objectives are Qhe of the most determining of the limiting factors but also cough fitute a condition that is susceptible to both minor modi- fica‘fe. ion and drastic change. The objectives of each owner are U.SuE lly multiple, and ordinarily at least 2 or 3 major objectives 109 we consciously recognized, as was indicated by the Hardeman County smey. Additional objectives, however, are likely to be present in the "bundle" of total reasons for ownership; some of these may be c onscious and other unconscious. But regardless of whether they are defined clearly or hardly at all in the mind of the owner, Objectives directly limit his alternatives for forest manage- his ment by eliminating possible choices which are inconsistent with his objectives. They also tend to rule out any management practice which is difficult to accomplish as an addition to time-consuming priLmsry activities. Also, when the ownership objectives are of a Sher—t; -term nature, the owner is likely to ignore forest management alte rnatives requiring a longer outlook. Inasmuch as five principal categories of objectives were r eve filed by the woodland owners surveyed in Hardeman County, the alternatives for management by these owners can be expected to be restricted to those choices that are compatible with their ob- Ject ives. Other possible alternatives on each ownership are not likely to be adopted unless a change occurs in ownership, in the Omar 's objectives, or in other circumstances which have hitherto limted the owner’s aspirations toward conceivably feasible objec- ti‘r§ e. . Where farming is the major ownership objective, possible I9.113%I‘Iiatives in management of the woodland include the harvesting of Frees and the transport of round timber products by the farm ()wath during periods when his time is not fully demanded by the Sal-1% . . quled requirements of hlS agricultural enterprises. Planting i: .... “I . ‘ . x r ...u a? t. u w a «J lu~ a...“ MI» ‘CW .AH 1. u may 0 Be .A 1‘ v Ck. Pl. ~ V :4 I r N H VV’ ...1 .hx new .. k M» . a AU an! ..fia H4 ~i- .x'V . N N I. § H4! I‘I‘ ‘\ V VI I . . .' p ‘ U Al x .0 A 4...! w i ‘ RV,“ flk - 6 91V T. C; y ' U ‘ .§\ I' ‘I" . .kl L i [Mi o . l .- 2v. . v» a o . r . o 110 of nursery stock, either manually or by tractor-drawn planting machine, is likewise often compatible with normal farming schedules and labor skills. Protection of the woodland against fire, grazing, insects, and disease is possible at a high level of effectiveness due to the farmer's active presence around his property and his periodic selection of trees to be harvested for products for farm use , both of which facilitate observation of the condition of his wood..‘.‘l_a.nd. With respect to grazing, he is likely to be favorably incLined toward fencing his woodlands, as he does his fields, to keep out wandering livestock; however, he may consider that his own livestock need woodland pasture or access to a woodland stream-- in wit-1.1 ch case he will allow grazing in his woods. The ownership survey revealed that where intensive forest management had not been adopted, the reason was primarily lack of knOrl’flleélge and associated inadequate motivation. Some owners sug- gested that they had no surplus labor available for woods work nor w0u_]_a_ they hire any. More commonly the owners gave indications that intensive forest management may be compatible with over-all farming objectives and be integrated into an economic farm organi- zatic3r1 - Residence as the primary ownership objective is more likely to have fewer intensive forest management alternatives associated with it than is farming__exce‘pt if timber-grating is the secondary Objee t ive. If the resident owner is employed away from the prop- ert y- th in some occupation not related to the land, his back- grout-1 Q and experience are likely to be further removed from woods lll ‘arczrk.than are the farmer's. He is likely not to have appreciable home use for rough wood products nor to have other occasion to go into the woods except for recreational use--which may also be ssjl_:1.£flNn. Ftrthermore, ownership of equipment, especially power erngtnzgipment, for woods work cannot be expected to be economic unless int; :is put to adequate use over time. Where rental of farm land is either the primary or the se (2: ondary ownership objective in conjunction with farming, resi- dence, or timber-growing, it offers good possibilities for inten- sive forest management alternatives. Associated with farming, it 31rII:[;>Ilies cultivation of a considerable area of open fields by oper- Ert:;<::xzrs other than the owner, with the forested portion of the land 3?€E=13E1£1ining under the control of the owner. The woodland thus be- Comes a larger percentage of the owner's operating unit and can bid for more of his attention than if he were responsible for the management of all of his ownership area. Ftrthermore, rental of farm land has the advantage that, ‘r13LIne which contributes its product, or part of it, to another enter- :IPJrise. As Heady points out, "Technical complementarity may arise jt><3cause of any 1 of 3 reasons: (1) One enterprise may contribute SELII element of production, a joint product of the first, required 1t>27 the second enterprise. (2) One enterprise may divert surplus ut’Gassources from a second product. (3) The products may intersect with each other as the proportions of non-usable joint products <:=]b1£ange'with varying levels of output from.a fixed technical \j 1‘}! 136 unit. . . . Perhaps the first is the most important in agriculture. In production economics it is the problems of crop rotations econ- 'omics or land use."1 Moderate grazing of fairly mature woods not yet scheduled for natural regeneration is a complementary use in- asmuch as both the forest and the livestock provide nutriment to each other. Also the forest is a complementary farm enterprise in- sofar as it provides materials for construction and repair of buildings, fences, and other structures. Supplementary relationships.«Supplementary enterprises are ones which permit by coordination a fuller use of a given element of production. To the extent that tractors, teams, and trucks acquired for agricultural enterprises can serve forestry purposes during slack seasons on the farm, farming and forestry are supple- Inentary. Land that cannot be used efficiently for agriculture CDZf‘ten can be put to supplementary use in forestry. Farm roads Passing through or near woodlands may be used supplementarily for hauling forest products, provided such use does not cause exces- s ive deterioration and reduce their efficiency for use in other farm enterprises. As mentioned in connection with production ob- 3 ectives, forestry activities for underemployed farm labor during S lack seasons provides supplementary use of time, provided both labor skills and managerial skills are available or can be developed. \Eol‘est administration and tenure The size of the working circle will vary from small to large \ : lEarl 0. Heady, Economics of agricultural production and \esource use, (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1952), p. 222. .137 and the number of producing subunits or farms, from one to many. Each combination will offer different possibilities for organi- zation of administrative resources. A working circle, as Chapman defines it, ". . . is an area for which a separate management plan :is required, and from which a sustained yield is sought as the object of management."2 Generally it is preferable to have a working circle of sufficient size to spread the costs of equipment and administration to an efficient level. Equipment use should be scheduled to avoid unnecessary idleness. Yet all administrative resources should permit normal operations in each part of the work- ing circle at intervals of not over about ten years. For conti- nuity of management, tenure shofld be fairly stable. The impor- ‘tance of this factor, though, will tend to diminish as farmers increasingly adopt forest management as a normal farm enterprise. It will markedly decrease as the real estate market comes to rec- ognize the values of managed woodland investments when total farm Values are to be appraised for purposes of purchase, sale, or loan collateral . Operations may be carried on under c00perative agreement eJncng several owners. These would ideally be neighboring owners in a cooperative working circle, each cooperator having responsi- bilities established so that operations are scheduled and executed by the members using cooperatively owned equipment. Or operations a Qheduled by the working circle members may be contracted to out- \ 2Herman H. Chapman, Forest management (Bristol, Conn.: Hildreth Press, 1950), p. 306. 138 side operators or may be performed independently by individual owners using jointly owned equipment but hiring labor as needed. The organization of the marketing units of a well coordinated ‘working circle will be as the independent subunits (or farm owner- ships) or as a marketing cooperative. The market power of a co- operative is likely to be substantially greater than that of a smaller seller. (This is in contrast to the situation in woods operations, where independent subunits may be able to achieve op- erational efficiency of the same order as that of a larger organ- ization.) In the case of timber marketing the bargaining position of a cooperative or association of sellers probably will be enough greater in profit potential so that higher sales prices would more than compensate individual woodland owners for their loss of in- dependence of action. Just how important the difference is, will depend of course on current market conditions in an area and the I‘Elative powers of buyers and sellers. Processing of forest products and integration of operations Several alternatives are available to the forest landowner as to the form in which he sells timber. The principal categories are these: 1. W. There is no processing before sale, as this product is standing timber. This form is advantageous to the owner lacking the time, labor, equipment, or managerial skill necessary for his own harvesting of timber. 2. Round products at roadside. The simplest degree of E rocessing is merely the felling of merchantable trees, limbing 139 the holes and bucking them into suitable lengths for highest com- bined sale value, and skidding these products to a convenient road- side yard where they can be loaded onto a buyer's truck. (Some- ‘times skidding of limbed tree lengths or other long lengths may :precede bucking of logs or bolts.) An active owner can make prof- itable use of his time and equipment if he can run a small oper- ation well. He should be sure, however, of having at least one good outlet before he begins harvesting, or he may find himself in a disadvantageous bargaining position with cut products on hand subject to deterioration. Round products hauled to buyer’s location. The relative- 3. ly routine step of hauling can be added to harvesting if the owner has facilities and equipment for loading and hauling round products “to a bwer’s mill, 8 railhead, or a woodyard. This operation, in addition to increasing total income, may make possible the exten- sion of an owner’s market to include buyers who buy neither stump- age nor round products at roadside. 1+. Round products treated for preservation. Treatment of posts and poles by applying preservative chemicals will extend the uSef‘ul life of these products and thus increase their value. This is especially profitable if they are destined for use in the common lecations where they are subject to decay-producing factors. 8(baking in preservative solutions is usually much more effective on green PI'OdUCtS than on dry; so this process should be well co- Q:li‘clinated with the harvesting, hauling, and storage phases. Prior familiarity with available outlets is also a prerequisite, as well no . as knowledge of approximate prices for grades of products, so that profit margins can be estimated from costs of handling and of chem- icals consumed by penetration and lost by evaporation. 5. Lumber or other processed or seasoned products. Some timber owners may be able to increase their net returns by proces- sing round products into lumber and construction timbers, chips, charcoal, or other marketable products. Where the process involves a fairly large capital investment, such as a sawmill, the operation "vill be profitable only if production is substantial. The supply base for such an enterprise would have to cover a large acreage, but it would not necessarily belong to only one owner. Two or more owners of nearby timberland could cooperate in the supply and operation of a sawmill, although it might be most practicable :E‘or mill operations to be carried on by one owner and his crew. The supplying of logs from different ownerships in the working Circle would have to be scheduled by the cooperators for good for- est management and efficient woods operations. The degree of integration of harvesting and processing oper- ations will depend upon the available yields of various products and grades. This and the demand of existing market outlets for ~these products will affect the total returns to the forestry enter- Prise. Efficient integration of manpower and equipment for various Products will increase returns above income yielded by a single- IDI‘oduct use of resources. ihi Knowledge of markets and methods of making sales The range of completeness of woodland owners‘ knowledge of available markets and of methods of making sales runs from negli- gible to very complete for each of these two variables. Owners ‘who are seldom concerned with forest products markets may know nothing about outlets to which they could. sell timber. A rare few may have made the effort to learn of all prospective buyers within economic transport range. Similarly, some owners may be entirely “Lanaware of the methods of making sales; others may have a partial knowledge 3 and a few may be thoroughly informed. Experience in selling timber is a valuable means of learning; however, the individual owner's experience with sales may commonly be one-sided, thus depriving the owner of a rounded knowledge of alternative methods of making sales. Often sales are made simply by private negotiation with firms considered reputable, with arrange- ments for payment according to merchantable timber (either including all merchantable timber or limited to certain species or minimum diameters) within a certain boundary. Sometimes, however, sales axe negotiated for marked timber in an ownership, for scaled vol- Ilime of logs removed, for a fractional share of the sale value of rough green lumber sawed from stumpage, or from some other measure. However, where several potential buyers are interested, a more :Dl‘ofitable alternative is often the sale of marked timber to the highest bidder, by closed bid or by open auction bid. it’! lh2 Examples of Alternative Combinations of Production and Marketing Variables Possibly Desirable for Owners There are a tremendous number of alternative combinations of production and marketing variables that owners of forest land in west Tennessee might find satisfactory in fulfilling their ownership objectives. For illustrative purposes here, only four possibly practicable modal types involving intensive forest manage- ment are briefly outlined, as the intention is simply to indicate something of the substantial. range of types that might be con- sidered. The measures constituting intensive management would be only those now economically practicable in the region. An owner would protect woodland from fire and grazing, girdle cull trees, jplant pines on open land, and convert to pine plantations all areas occupied by hardwood stands of low productivity. And trees marked for harvesting would be selected with the intention of leaving a profitable growing stock to be maintained. 1. large forest operating unit with technical knowledge and facilities for intensive management. Consisting solely of forest land (of well over 1,000 acres in most cases), it would be operated as an independent unit. In west Tennessee it might well be inter- SCpersed with separately operated farming units on the tracts of better agricultural soils scattered throughout the region. Fully Occupying an operating crew year 'round, it would involve any of 6. number of types and degrees of owner- operator processing of trees into merchantable products. Facilities would consist of equipment fer cutting, loading, and hauling logs and might also include a lh3 small sawmill for making lumber and construction timbers, with a stacking yard for air-drying sawed products. 2. Large unit as in l. except with, a. sale of logs only, or perhaps b. sale of stumpage only. 3. Combination of several fairly small (100- to hoo—acre) farm-forest operating units owned separately but acting coopera- ‘tively for intensive forest management on a large working circle. {The coordinated group would avail itself of technical knowledge aand facilities to achieve efficient integration of agricultural 23nd forest enterprises. The group’s large acreage and volume of ‘jgntflnction‘would enable it to gain economies of scale in opera- ‘tzions and increased market power through centralized marketing. h. Individual small farm-forestry operating units as in .23., but acting independently, thus lacking the use of specialized 1:1arvesting equipment and other beneficial opportunities of larger 8 cale operations . CHAPTER VII THE AMES PLANTATION: AN IDEAL AREA FOR CASE-STUDY ANALYSIS OF FORESTRY ALTERNATIVES IN THE REGION Description In Chapter I the Ames Plantation was referred to as the set- 'ting for the study of the relationship of forestry to problems of uover-all farm.management and family income goals. Its suitability :for case-study research into economic farm operating units for the :region it serves has in a relatively short time become well estab- Zlished. Its physical resources and the development of stable man- zagement policies and operational arrangements are conducive to (:ontinuity in land-use research. History Development of the Ames Plantation, formed by consolidation <:>f many separate farms into a single ownership for sporting purposes éannd gentleman farming, evolving subsequently into an institution ded- :i_cated to perpetual encouragement of agricultural research and edu- <::ation, has occupied half a century. In 1903 Hobart Ames, a wealthy Ircuanufacturer from.North Easton, Massachusetts, having discovered the 3E>Zleasure of quail-hunting in west Tennessee, began to purchase tracts CDZE farmland in Fayette and Hardeman Counties between Somerville and 1141+ 1&5 Grand Junction in order to develop a hunting preserve.l These were about fifty miles east of Memphis, in the Brown Loam Area of the state, and a half dozen miles north of Mississippi. Mr. Ames's last acquisition was made in 1937, bringing the owned acreage to 18,5h0, but he also bought hunting rights on many thousands of acres of neighboring land when the owners were unwilling to sell the land outright, at least at a price Mr. Ames was willing to pay. Al- though the irregularly shaped block of owned land covers just twen- ty-nine square miles, its longest dimension is ten miles (east- west) and its greatest width is seven miles (north-south). Despite the fact that Mr. Ames was not concerned with the farm properties as sources of income, he was willing to let the ex- isting agricultural use of each tract continue more or less unchang- ed and to accept the existing residents as his tenants. Being pri- marily concerned with the establishment and maintenance of favor- able conditions for the reproduction of quail, he took steps to improve bird cover in addition to maintaining existing borders be- tween fields and woods by keeping the tenant farms in use. Al- though continued farming would keep the open fields from evolving into brushland and then forest, Mr. Ames had hedgerows or thickets created in many of the fields to increase the border effect. He wwas very reluctant to have any fences on the Plantation, however, zas they would constitute barriers to cross-country hunting on Inorseback. _ lJohn A. Ewing, Planning the Ames Plantation, (Unpublished ID-PJL. Dissertation, Harvard University, 1955), 330 pp. Many of the 1Basic facts in this section on history were Obtained from the Ewing thesis. Others were acquired by personal contact on the Plantation. 116 Mr. Ames was fortunate in finding available for acquisition, about in the middle of his purchase area, a small cotton plantation having a fine ante-bellum mansion large enough to accommodate his numerous hunting companions and other guests. As his personal use of the Plantation was almost entirely limited to only a few weeks in late winter and early spring, Mr. Ames insured continuous man- agement of the Plantation under the system typical of the area by employing a manager to deal with the tenants and to handle all matters concerning the rest of the Plantation. As the acquisition of the central plantation tract included livestock as well as fields of cotton and corn, a highly recom- mended Scot was hired as herdsman. His experience with Black Angus cattle-~and especially his enthusiasm for them--eventually per- suaded.Mr. Ames that a Purebred Aberdeen Angus show herd would be a satisfying addition to his plantation. Therefore, by purchasing animals from.aome of the best blood lines of the breed, Mr. Ames proceeded to acquire such a herd as a hobby incidental to his own- ership of a hunting preserve. He pursued it vigorously, however, and took pleasure in exhibiting his best specimens in the impor- tant Angus shows, oftentimes winning. His crowning glory came from.ance winning the International Grand Championship. Although a generous proportion of the cattle feed was grain purchased for the purpose of developing specimens of superior size and form, all the open land needed for pasture and for the raising of corn and sorghum for feed and silage was allocated in support of the Angus herd, this use of the land taking precedence over cotton produc- 1147 tion since the income to be obtained from the cotton crop was of little moment to Mr. Ames in comparison to his Angus hobby. While the Ames Plantation achieved nationwide fame from its successful showing of Aberdeen Angus cattle, this recognition came primarily from the limited number of Angus owners and others par- ticularly concerned with the breed. The Plantation became far better known, however, though not from coast to coast but predom- inantly throughout the South and Midwest, to the numerous bird-dog owners who followed the annual local, state, and national field trials for bird dogs. For many years the National Field Trials have been held annually on the Ames Plantation, using the two high- ly reputed hunting courses each of several miles in length. This event became an institution on the Plantation as a result of an invitation by'Mr. Ames and the enthusiastic response of the Nation- al Field Trial Association in accepting the opportunity. Of course, Mr..Ames's offer stemmed originally from his passion for quail-hunting and then from the consequent actions he took to em- bellish this sport to the fullest extent possible on his property. Needing pedigreed bird dogs for hunting, he took an avid interest in them.and spared no expense in the construction of kennels near the mansion, purchase of dogs, and employment of a "keeper of the hounds" to raise and train them. Likewise, the need for well trained mounts led to a large investment in fine horses, construc- tion of a large brick stable and coach house (the finest building on the Plantation), and the employment of a horse master and as- sisting grooms. The central plantation tract, together with some of the ad- lh8 jacent farm and woodland tracts, came to be referred to as the Central Unit. Agricultural work on this Central Unit was done by crews of hired field hands supervised by strawbosses or foreman under the direction of the Plantation manager. On this 8,000-acre unit were located, as has been mentioned, the mansion, kennels, stable, and extensive acreages of pasture and field crops, with slightly over half of the area in woodland. Also centrally sit- uated were the cattle barn, cotton gin, equipment sheds, and re- pair shops, as well as residences for the manager, foreman, keepers of the hounds and horses, and some of the wage hands. Surrounding the Central Unit some fifty farm units of var- ious types and sizes have been operated by tenants and share- croppers under a variety of initial tenure agreements. For ease of administration, with little or no need for attention to each tenant's productivity, sharecropping gave way, wherever feasible, to a standing rent of two bales of cotton annually. Despite the large income from the annual sale of baled lint cotton and from occasional sales of cattle, Mr. Ames virtually had to "pour" great sums of money into the Plantation to make up the deficit caused by the large recreational expenses incurred (for maintenance of the mansion and other buildings and grounds and for replacement and care of horses and dogs) and the tremendous costs involved in producing and showing the prime Angus specimens. This he did willingly, simply because it was the price to be paid for his personal enjoyment and the satisfaction of pleasing his family and friends. 119 As a result of their interest in raising superior Angus cattle, the Ames family sought and obtained much information and advice from officials of the College of Agriculture of the Univer- sity of Tennessee. In a cordially helpful manner both the late Dr. M. Jacobs, formerly Head of the Animal Husbandry Department and later Dean of the College of Agriculture, and Dr. C. E. Brehm, re- cent University President and former Dean of Agriculture, coopera- ted very closely with Mr. and Mrs. Ames in developing the purebred herd on the Plantation. The friendly and interested assistance of these officials and others was undoubtedly of great effect in bringing about in the Ameses a sincere concern for the cause of re- search and education in agriculture in general. In l9h5 Mr. Ames died, leaving the Plantation to Mrs. Ames. She wanted its activities carried on by the manager according to the customs Mr. Ames had established. With hardly any changes (except for the cutting of vast quantities of prime timber to pay the enormous inheritance taxes), this traditional use of the Plan- tation continued until her death in 1950. Then, through her will, Mrs. Ames made the "facilities of said Plantation available to the College of Agriculture of the University of Tennessee for such scientific and educational purposes as said College of Agriculture is or may be lawfully authorized to pursue, including the carry- ing on of experiments and investigations in or relating to any such purposes."2 Mrs. Ames's will put the complete control of the Plantation 2Will of Mrs. Julia C. Ames, Section 7, appendix II, Boston, l9h9, as quoted by Ewing. 150 into the hands of two trustees, William.A. Parker of Easton, Mas- sachusetts, and the Old Colony Trust Company of Boston, whom she considered able and willing to see that the Plantation would be maintained as a memorial to her husband and operated in a manner satisfying what he might have wished his estate to do for posteri- ty. For this memorial she left the Plantation land, buildings, livestock, and equipment listed as worth $600,000 by conservative valuation, also an endowment fund of negotiable securities valued at $1,008,713 on December 10, 1952. She specified that "the in- come from said fund may be mingled with the income from said Plan- tation and the Trustees at any time from time to time may use any funds in their hands for the purposes of . . . carrying on the business and activities of said Plantation, and said trusts. ... She stipulated that "The trust herein created . . . shall be a permanent foundation . . . held and operated exclusively for sci- entific and educational purposes in the manner herein set out and shall be known as the Hobart Ames Foundation." It was her desire that "The use of such facilities [as may exist on the Plantation] shall be extended to students . . . and . . . other young men . as a practical training ground in the educational training of boys in farmdng and in furnishing them with practical experience in the cultivation and conservation of the soil, the raising of crops, the management of large estates, the handling of pure herd cattle and other livestock and in any other branches of Agriculture and farming which may be approved from time to time by the Trustees and said College . 151 Mrs. Ames also provided that the National Field Trial Asso- ciation be welcomed to continue to use the Plantation hunting courses for the annual National Field Trials for as many years as they may wish to do so. This provision has given rise to unfore- seen conflicts between maintenance of the lengthy and circuitous original field trial courses and Plantation agricultural opera- tions "exclusively for scientific and educational purposes." For portions of the established field trial courses where these pur- poses have been mutually exclusive, the trustees have necessarily had to use their discretion and judgment in determining which of the two conflicting uses should be given priority--a serious prob- lem inasmuch as several farm "economic operating unit" research projects of a long-range nature have been involved. In 1953 the University of Tennessee undertook to design and to begin to implement, with the approval of the Ames Trustees, a research and education program on the Ames Plantation. A planning committee was organized to initiate this program and to cooperate in facilitating the satisfactory execution of the various projects involved in it, as well as to help in solving technical problems arising in the production enterprises on the Plantation. The com- mittee consisted of the Ames Plantation manager and assistant man- ager and several staff members of the University of Tennessee agri- cultural divisions: the College of Agriculture, the Agricultural Experiment Station, and the Agricultural Extension Service. The committee chairman was the program director of the University's program on the Plantation, a member of the Department of Agricul- “-... 152 tural Economics. Other committee members were the associate direc- tor of the Agricultural Experiment Station, the head of the Depart- ment of Animal Husbandry, the University's forester on the Planta- tion, and the superintendent of the West Tennessee Experiment Sta- tion, and, as project leader for the Ames Plantation project, the director of the Agricultural Experiment Station. Other agencies cooperating with the planning committee, especially in the estab- lishment phase of the program were the Soil Conservation Service, the Tennessee Forestry Division, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, and the Federal Land Bank. The committee members continually review cur- rent activities and annually make work plans to be approved by the University and the Ames Trustees for each successive year's opera- tions. Actually supervising the daily operations are the Univer- sity's forester, animal husbandman, and agricultural economist, all of whom live on the Plantation, the first having been assigned a. functional project in 19514, the second in 1955, and the third in 1956. Resources gage-The total area of the Ames ownership is recorded as 18,5A0 acres, a little more than half being wooded. The wooded tracts, ranging in size from a few acres to several hundred, are intermingled with farm lands. About 2,500 acres of the woodlands are on bottomland areas Which are subject to occasional stream overflow. The bottomland Soils are mostly Ina and Beechy. They are medium-textured, im- ”w“: p ‘ u:- ( I 153 perfectly- to poorly-drained soils that were formed of Coastal Plains alluvium and loessial material. The available moisture capacity is high, but soil air is limited at times in these bottom- land soils . The remaining 7,500 acres of woodlands are rolling uplands. They have Red-Yellow Podzolic soils formed of silty loess from a few feet to a few inches deep overlying Coastal Plains material of sandy texture. This overlying loess was deposited in a strip up to about 80 miles wide running along the east bank of the Missis- sippi River from Louisiana to southern Illinois. Predominant among these soils are Lexington silt loam, Loring silt loam, and Ruston fine sandy loam, with smaller inclusions of Grenada silt loam. Being well-drained soils, these are limited in moisture-supplying c: apacity. Frequently these soils have become deeply gullied where th ey have been cultivated. Erosion of the loess is rapid, quickly eaqposing the sandy material. Without plant cover the silt and Sand are soon washed down into the beds of the intermittent streams (which commonly begin in the lower portions of all gullies). The resultant deposition produces clogging at multiple places of low gradient throughout the drainage system. This not only reduces the Potential productivity of the uplands by subtracting from its soil has e, but also seriously damages many bottomland acres by covering the topsoil and by inhibiting the draining and aeration necessary for plant growth. Only one permanent stream, the north fork of the W011? River, flows through the Plantation. Labor.--The Ames Plantation's principal source of labor for 151+ farm work and, since l95h, for forestry work has been the scattered population living within its boundaries. The labor force included a high proportion of men of late middle age and boys in their teens. Farming on the small and usually outlying farm units was done by the resident tenant farmers. The employees of the Central Unit were primarily a core of wage hands living in the Plantation's var- ious log cabins located on the many originally independent farms and tenant farm units of several decades ago, also in wooden shacks typically of similar decrepitude though usually of lesser age. Some of the wage hands were members of the tenant farmers' families, and several of the tenant farmers themselves seasonally joined the ranks of the Central Unit workers. A few of the wage hands, espe- cially ones having special skills needed for an increasingly mech- anized agricultural Operation, were hired from nearby towns or rural communities. The Ames Plantation Forestry Department also employed resi- dent wage hands and a minority of skilled workers from outside. Most of the resident workers were experienced in farming but had done relatively little woods work prior to employment by the Depart- ment. What little they had done was logging of small timber or cutting of fenceposts and firewood but did not include any forest management activities other than harvesting. WOrkers in the-For- estry Department were paid according to length of time worked. Some forestry work was done by tenant farmers working on their own, most- ly harvesting products. These tenants, lacking immediate super- vision, were paid at piece rates. 155 Forestry operations expanded during the slack farming seasons. Only about half of the l2—man forestry crew were steady employees. There was a high rate of turnover even among these six. Due to differences in equipment, age, and skill from tenant to tenant and between the tenants and the forestry crew, labor pro- ductivity varied greatly on the different operations. Capital.--Most of the Ames Plantation capital resources were owned by the Ames Foundation. The trustees managed the principal financial fund as investment capital, the annual income from which they could invest either in more securities or in capital resources for the Ames Plantation. The Plantation manager held a smaller fund of operating capital and controlled the use of Ames buildings, livestock, and equipment on the Plantation. Jurisdiction over the forestry buildings and equipment was delegated to the forester, who was responsible to the trustees for the management of the Forestry Department. A small quantity of capital goods was owned by the tenants. Their capital resources consisted primarily of a few head of live- stock (cows, pigs, chickens, and mules or horses) and a little basic farm.machinery and wagons. A few tenants owned pick-up trucks or rarely a flat-bed truck. Management.--All activities on the Ames Plantation were under the jurisdiction of the manager, who frequently inspected many of the principal operations. Over-all supervision of the farming oper- ations (construction and maintenance of buildings, fences, and roads; and repair and maintenance of equipment) was delegated to 156 the assistant manager. Foremen exercised direct supervision over most of these Operations and the various enterprises on the Central Unit. Management of the Ames Plantation forest and forestry opera- tions was the responsibility of the forester. The Tennessee Agri- cultural Extension Service forester for the western division of the state assisted in planning management, in marking timber for harvesting, and occasionally in over-all supervision of operations. The crew was directly supervised by the forestry foreman and when it was divided into two crews for separate operations, one of the two was supervised by a woods crew leader. People and land tenure The principal inhabitants of the Ames Plantation were the tenants of small farm operating units and their families. A sec- ond major group consisted of wage hands and their families. The Ames management staff and the research staff from the University of Tennessee were the remaining residents but constituted a rather heterogeneous group. The research people were provided Ames hous- ing during their periods of service on the Plantation. Periods varied in length from a year to several years, but since the re- searchers had previous ties in Knoxville or elsewhere, they did not become an integral part of the Plantation's pOpulation. The Ames management staff were expected to reside on the Plantation indefinitely. Most of them.had already been established there for at least several years. The manager, assistant manager, and two foreman all lived within half a mile of the headquarters. 157 The other foremen lived in the central houses of large outlying farm tracts. This distribution made them available at strategic locations in case of emergency during non-work hours and placed them conveniently near their crew-organizing points at the begin- ning of the work day. The wage hands who had been assigned Plantation housing (other than the tenant farmhouses) were farm workers who had been selected from.outside the Plantation and had been offered jobs by the management due to their reputations for skill or capability. Several of them had worked on the Central Unit operations for many years. The majority ranged in length of employment from several to a couple of years, and a few had been there only a season or two. All these workers and their families could look forward to remain- ing for an indefinite period provided they kept up the standard of their work and did nothing to offend the assistant manager or man- ager. Most of the wage hands were moderately content to remain on the Plantation as long as their wages and paternalistic fringe ben- efits (such as the management's provision of two fattened pigs a year for each family) were not reduced and as long as the condi- tions of their houses did not deteriorate excessively. Occupants usually improvised for minor house repairs to suit their personal convenience, but major repairs were seldom.authorized by the man- agement due to reluctance to invest in restoration of buildings al- ready several decades old. Where living conditions became a prob- lem for workers whom.the management was particularly desirous to retain, approval was given either for repairs or for assignment to 158 more satisfactory quarters. Persistent inaction following repeated complaints by a wage hand, made apparent the fact that the manage- ment was indifferent to his retention, and eventually resulted in his departure when he could find work elsewhere. The abandoned house was then usually repaired sufficiently to become acceptable to a new candidate whom the management might locate. The tenants of small farm units have enjoyed a great securi- ty of tenure under the policy of fixed rent and minimum supervision established by Mr. Ames. Tenants could live an entire lifetime on one farm.and ”inherit" tenancy of the unit from.parents who farmed it as either tenants or owners when Mr. Ames bought it. Most of the heads of tenant families in 1956 were youths or young adults when.Mr. Ames began to aggregate the numerous inde- pendent farm.properties to form the Plantation. The majority of the children of these now elderly tenants have left the Plantation and sought work elsewhere, many in the North and some in Memphis. Many of the emigrants settled in the cities where they found work, married, and bore children. These young couples, unable to take care of children while both parents worked, commonly gave their offspring into the custody of the "old folks" on the Ames Planta- tion, who would readily accommodate one more baby. The typical tenant farmhouse of two to four rooms was occupied by grandparents and a dozen or so children of ages ranging up to 20 or 25. Another child could always be squeezed in, as an extra mouth to feed made only a slight percentage increase in the family. One family had accumulated twenty-seven members; so one child more or less was almost negligible. ~-a—-v 159 Since establishment in 1953 of the University's program for research and improved farm.management, the perpetual fixed rent agreements acceptable to Mr. Ames have been giving way to contracts providing incentives for increased production using conservation methods and specifying arrangements for sharing investments and in- come. These contracts can be carried out only by fairly industri- ous and ambitious farmers capable of applying modern systems of farming to planned Operating units. The spreading of such contracts throughout the Plantation will eventually require removal of un- qualified farmers. Of course, complete coverage will take some years due to the immensity of the task of management planning. Also the University staff members have humanitarian aims and are reluctant to force displacement of aged tenants unless an alter- nate unimproved farm unit is vacant. Natural attrition of the ten- ant population helps to relieve the pressure, but this is roughly offset by the frequent enlargement of operating units in the proc- ess of converting farming systems for more efficient production. Enlargement of units is achieved by combination of adjacent farms or parts of farms and thus eliminates some former tenant units. Economic and social conditions Ames Plantation farm tenants, living under conditions fairly similar to the average inhabitants of Fayette County, probably had a median annual family income close to the Fayette County median of $705 in 1950. This included income from seasonal off-farm employ- ment. Full-time wage hands earned about $900 annually. The typi- 160 cal family had a car or pick-up truck, electricity, radio, and television, but no running water or good sanitary facilities. Few had telephones. Tenant family capital resources for farming averaged less than $1,000 including livestock, vehicles, machinery, and other equipment. Food for consumption by both tenant and wage-hand fam- ilies came largely from.home-raised garden vegetables and live— stock such as cows, pigs, rabbits, and poultry. Beverages made from.corn included wine, beer, and whiskey. Purchases of staple foods, tobacco, hardware, and clothing were made at either of two villages within a radius of S-lO miles or occasionally at one of the two county seats 15-20 miles distant. Fuel for cooking and heating was available, by exertion of a modicum of effort, from the ubiquitous low-grade hardwoods and from slabs produced by the Ames sawmill. During Mr. Ames' lifetime, however, permission was given to fell only dead trees, although in fact some valuable live trees were out between inspections-~commonly at or below ground level. Since establishment of the University’s program, the for- ester has been marking trees which may be cut for fuelwood by each inhabitant. Both tenants and wage hands were strongly dependent on the landlord and, for certain services, on the county. House repair, as already mentioned, depended on the wishes of the landlord. Like- wise for road maintenance; although upkeep of the principal roads, gravel and dirt, through the Plantation was a county road department responsibility, a long mileage of additional dirt roads had to be 161 maintained by the landlord. Schooling and bus transportation to school were provided by the county school departments. All white children went to the Grand Junction School. Negro children attend- ed elementary school on the Plantation, junior high school in Grand Junction, and high school in Somerville. Further dependence on the landlord applied primarily in the case of tenants, most of whom were unable to accumulate sufficient capital to Operate from year to year. Operating capital or "fur- nish," in the form of seed and fertilizer, usually had to be borrowed from.the landlord before the planting season. This was to be repaid, plus ten percent, at harvest time. Similar advances, but smaller, were made in cash to wage hands who had unusually .large bills for items such as medical expenses. No charge was made for this credit, paternally extended. Most Ames Plantation tenants and wage hands are Negro, some are white. Racial discrimination is less observed on the Planta- tion than off. Houses once occupied by Negroes are now used by whites, and vice versa. Occasionally protests have been raised, however. Negro families refused to accept promotion to a house in good condition on a good farm unit because the house had been the recent scene of a white "family matter" murder; one family re- luctantly agreed to move in. One white tenant on a farm unit ad- jacent to a vacant house formerly long occupied by whites so strongly protested the manager's announced intention to move a INegmo family into the house-~in fact he threatened to kill any Ne- ggro tenant moving in--that the manager agreed to leave the house Vtucant. Jobs have been assigned to wage hands mainly on the basis 162 of ability, race being a secondary consideration. MOst of the better jobs are held by whites, but usually due to more schooling, skill, training, and experience. Members of both races work fairly harmoniously together and often either cover up for or defend the shortcomings of each other. Off the Plantation racial discrimination is much more pro- nounced, except of course on the highway-~where one car is as dead- ly as any other. Facilities available for Negroes are far inferior in hotels, restaurants, transportation terminals, and other public buildings. The situation is especially deplorable in the school system, where buildings are crowded, poorly lighted and heated, and few teaching aids are provided. Despite the higher average educa- tional level of teachers in the schools for Negroes, student morale and level of ambition are low under such circumstances. Slovenli- ness tolerated or abetted under educational conditions certainly tends to be perpetuated outside of school hours and to become a lifetime habit. Educational Opportunities for inhabitants of the Ames Planta- tion and vicinity are somewhat limited. The county school systems 'begin the academic year early in August in order to be able to schedule a cotton harvest recess of several weeks in the fall. Due to the economic importance of speed in harvesting the cotton crop, and to keep low the piece rate for picking, child labor is needed regionally to supplement adult field workers. The superintendent of schools is kept informed on the average ripening conditions in ‘his county, and as soon as a considerable fraction of the county 163 crop reaches ripeness, the schools are closed for the "cotton- picking" season. During the oppressive heat of August and Septemp ber, classroom instruction is much less effective than usual; so the split school schedule is actually equivalent to a shortening of the academic year. The scholastic levels of the schools and of the majority of pupils suffer as a consequence. High school graduates are not well prepared, on the average, for competitive work in trades or industry other than farming. Few college aspirants from these schools are able to fulfill entrance require- ments. Statutory requirements on school attendance are not seriously enforced, partly due to the expense of enforcement and partly due to informal acceptance of expedients to relieve family poverty. The median number of years of schooling completed by all residents at least 25 years old in 1950 was 6.3 for Fayette County and 7.5 for Hardeman.3 Comparable figures for Negroes in these two counties were 5.0 and 4.8 years, respectively. Unfortunately the pupils withdrawn from.school before graduation due to their recognized competence to do required jobs are frequently those whose growth potential for increased capability through further schooling is above average. It is not clear, however, whether the long-run fam- ily welfare is better served by adoption of one alternative course of action or the other. Membership in local churches is high, for both religious and 3U.S. Bureau Of the Census, Census of population: 1950, Vol. II, Part h2, . . . Table 12, pp. 32-33. 161+ social reasons. By religious belief and conviction, people can ob- tain positive relief throughout trials and difficult circumstances which continually beset them. The healing value of faith is eSpe- cially evident to those in miserable conditions, but it is also in- valuable in imparting special strength to all who exercise it vigor- ously. Social and civic organizations stem primarily from affili- ation with church and school. Church groups predominate, with Sunday School groups, Bible study groups, rehearsing choirs, and various young people's groups occupying much leisure time. Boy Scout troops and h—H clubs also operate on a local basis. All of these are beneficial in providing interesting activities for social intercourse and release from.the tedium of daily routine. They give the individual member a feeling of approval deriving from iden- tification with an accepted group having social goals and policies. Specific projects of these groups are organized for cooperative ex- ecution, giving each participating individual a responsibility and a desire for success. Pride in accomplishment may carry over into personal affairs and foster ambition and industry in family enter- prises. The sense of belonging encourages security in other aSpects Of life and thus also promotes individual and family welfare. Social habits geared more plainly to pure enjoyment and fel- lowship include the weekly trip to town on Saturday afternoon or evening for shopping and chatting. Little knots of people gather along the sidewalk to gossip between errands and afterwards. The barber shop and drug store hum, as do restaurants, cafes, and other 165 places Of refreshmentl People manage to bring themselves up to date on the affairs of others and to unburden their own problems as well as to report events in which they take pride. Other occasions which are sources of pleasure and invigor- ation are school athletic events and hunting or fishing expeditions with the conviviality of local clubs or small groups. Leisure is highly valued by most of the people, who rate it above income- earning and investment activity, once a modest annual income can be counted on. While various levels of living are considered sat- isfactory by different members of local society, no one appears so ambitious for improvement of financial status that he does not allocate a fairly substantial share of his time for recreational pursuits--subjectively appearing to be a larger share than the av- erage urban resident allots. Similarities to and difference from typical conditions in west Ten- nessee. A few principal differences between the Ames Plantation and west Tennessee in general can be noted, although similarities are preponderant in an over-all comparison. While 59 percent of west Tennessee's forest is of upland types and Ml percent bottomland, the Ames forests are 75 percent upland and 25 percent bottomland. Forests cover only 30 percent of the total area of west Tennessee, ‘but M3 percent of Hardeman County and 5h percent of the Ames Planta- tion. On the Plantation, the manager acts for the landlord (the Hobart Ames Foundation) in matters concerning the tenants, whereas 166 the most common relationship in west Tennessee is a direct contact between owner and tenant. Ames tenants have enjoyed considerably longer tenure than most others in west Tennessee. Both tenants and wage hands have had somewhat poorer housing, however, less school- ing, and substantially lower income than the average in west Ten- nessee. The heavy concentration of Negroes on the Plantation re- sembled the situation in the rest of Fayette County, where the percentage of Negroes in the population was more than double the west Tennessee average and several times the percentage in counties outside the southwest corner of the region. Shmilarity is apparent, however, with respect to social con- ditions and accumulation of capital. Likewise the evident condition of land and the general land use patterns on the Ames Plantation have been comparable to the rest of west Tennessee. Close resem- blance of external appearances of the rural way of life has also been notable. CHAPTER‘VIII FACTORS IN ANALYSIS OF PRINCIPAL ALTERNATIVES To provide actual examples of farm-and-forest operating unit planning, using the budget method, eight planned farms on the Ames Plantation are illustrated verbally and statistically in Chapter IX. Analysis of the principal feasible alternatives for each of these units will be abbreviated insofar as possible so that an over-all view of a range of common types of resource situations will be readily grasped. For that reason, several of the most important factors needed for evaluation of an owner-operator's resource al- location are discussed in advance, in general terms. The rele- vant facts and assumptions for each operating unit can conse- quently be stated briefly in the illustrative chapter following this explanatory one. The major factors to be discussed and their principal subcategories are outlined as follows: 1. Physical management intensity a. Extensive management b. Intensive management 2. Farm timber products Cut or processed products 3. Management and marketing institutions a. Organization of units (1) Independent farm unit 167 I68 (2) Forestry service company (a) Integration with agriculture (b) Non-integration with agriculture (3) Farmer cooperative b. Methods of making sales (I) Noncompetitive sales (2) Competitive sales Method of analysis Budgetary comparison Of alternatives Data for budgeting alternatives a. Agricultural budget data b. Forestry input—output data (I) Work-performance data (2) Management-yield data (3) Timber price data c. Considerations relating to management-yield data (1) Development of management program (2) Rate of return on investment (3) Rate of wood yield (h) The development period (5) Collection of management-yield data d. Use of management yield data (1) Scheduling of management needs and wood yields (2) Scheduling of management work and timber harvests (3) Examples of schedules 169 Physical_Management Intensity Extensive management .A farmer who has adopted extensive management of his wood- land as appropriate to satisfactory over-all management of his farmsand-forest operating unit either has no wood production ob- jective or intends primarily to hold his timber as an asset for emergency use. He has no intentional silviculture and does not invest in any stand treatment or planting of understocked areas. ‘The extensive manager occasionally extracts posts, fuelwood, and possibly sawlogs for farm construction. Such harvesting of wood products is not considered in the farm.plan, however, nor is it related to farm operations except that woods operations do not compete for time with agricultural enterprises. Likewise, occa- sional stumpage sales are unplanned, but whenever his woods con- tain enough to attract a stumpage buyer--usually about 1,500 board feet per acre--the farmer as a reasonably prudent man will try to sell his timber advantageously. Although the farmer managing his woodland extensively will take no measures to improve yields, and will build neither fences nor fire lanes, he will let his neighbors know that he objects to fire and trespass. In case of wildfire on his property or near enough to threaten it, he will aid suppression crews sent by the state fire organization. 170 Intensive management Intensive management includes only measures now economically practicable in the region. The farmer will protect his woodland from.fire and grazing, girdle cull trees, plant pines on open land and on areas occupied by hardwood stands of low productivity, and harvest timber selectively to maintain a profitable growing stock. Intermediate cuts will include thinnings or improvement cuts. If natural regeneration appears insufficient following appropriate harvest cutting, planting will be used to supplement it or to sub- stitute for it. More intensive practices than these are not con- sidered to be reasonable alternatives for present management plan- ning. The intensive manager’s production objective is to obtain as much income from his woodland as is consistent with his over- all Objective Of maximum.net income for the entire farm, This includes satisfying needs for products for farm and home use. .All round products needed for farm use, fenceposts, structural members for sheds, loading or storage areas, and so forth, will be cut and put in place by the farmer, using farm equipment, or may be custom- cut along with needed farm lumber made by a stumpage buyer whenever such coordination is feasible. Farm.Timber Products Merchantable timber in Operable quantities in excess of farm consumption needs is sold as stumpage, or standing timber, under extensive management and also, in cases of inadequate labor supply \(|- \T Inn-II! 171 or equipment availability, where management is intensive. The ex- tensive manager will sell all merchantable timber, while the inten- sive manager, will sell only mature trees and undesirable merchant- able trees. Cut or processed ppoducts A.number of products will be sold on intensive management units where the manager has sufficient labor and equipment avail- able to cut, haul, and in some cases to process even further the stumpage ready for harvesting. Cut and processed products will include Christmas trees and charcoal as well as bolts, logs, posts, poles, piling, lumber, crossties, crossarms, and various timbers sold greemair-dried, or treated, and available at roadside, pro- cessing yard, or delivered to the buyer's place of business or some designated intermediate point suitable for change of mode of transport. Management and Marketing Institutions Certain institutions involved in forest ownerS' management and marketing affect the economic factors influencing incentives for management. These institutions include the internal organiza- tion of the management and marketing units and the established methods by which timber is bought and sold in the local market area. Organization of units The units controlling and selling timber may be organized in any Of three ways, functioning differently but being related directly to the size of forest ownership and the characteristics 172 of the selected working circle. The organization may be an inde- pendent farm, a forestry service company organized for a year 'round working circle which includes several farm forests, or a farmer COOperative developed into a working circle. Independent farm.units.--Products sold by the independent farm unit will usually be limited to logs, bolts, and posts. Ex- ceptions will exist when farmers have special interests, skills, and markets--also in the case of farms having exceptionally large forest acreages which can profitably occupy labor for most of the year and yield enough timber to permit efficient operation of equipment for processing rough products. Regardless of size, the independent farm.will have to integrate forest and agricultural enterprises into the annual operating schedule if intensive for- estry is to include harvesting of products. Probably most inde- pendent farmers, having their primary concerns and skills in enter- prises other than forestry, will tend toward the sale of stumpage. They will adopt intensive forestry cultural measures and harvesting only if time spent in farming does not appear to be more immedi- ately remunerative. Harvesting products for sale will be even more demanding of time than cultural measures and hours will have to be available in larger blocks, although long-term investment of labor value will not be so great. Forestry service company.--For a working circle to be opera- ted year‘round by a forestry service company working for the owners of several farm forests, a large enough acreage must be encompassed 173 to make economic the acquisition of sufficient equipment and suit- able workers for the organization of an efficient crew. Although this crew will continually do work related to forestry, it will have to be well trained in several skills in order to accomplish a rounded forestry program. It will be under the supervision of a crew leader and the general administration and guidance of a for- ester, whose planning, timber marking, and marketing functions will occupy most of his time. A.substantia1 degree of coordination be- tween operations in the woods and in sheltered processing facilities will be necessary to insure consistently productive crew function- ing during inclement weather and periods of too soft ground condi- tions. .A forestry service company will be economic only if it can achieve economies of scale and maintain harmony among landowners through equitable forest management agreements and satisfactory performance in forest improvement and marketing. Inasmuch as fin- ancial results from forest improvement are not so quickly obtained, nor even so quickly indicated, as are the results of most agri- cultural and industrial investments, the development period pos- sibly necessary to assure the owner of the profitability of the service company's program.may be reasonably set at ten years. A shorter period fOr evaluation of forest management might not allow enough time for primary changes in the forest's growth rate and in establishment or rehabilitation of potentially merchantable trees. There must be a fair opportunity for probation of the newly estab- 17h lishedkforestry program tentatively accepted by the landowners who have not previously been convinced of the wisdom of forestry prac- tices. Financing of the probationary period may be arranged by a sharing system, whereby the service company is paid for its ex- penditures Of time, equipment, and materials by income received from sale of products from improvement cuts and type conversions, with the balance of the out-Of-pocket costs being paid for by the landowners. The service company's temporary share of total costs of development may consist of deferred receipt of the balance of management fees, secured by interest in cutting rights for an equal value of timber. (a) Integration with agriculture.--For farms employing the services of a forestry service company, an ancillary element of or- ganization within the farm.may make possible the integration of certain forestry activities with the agricultural Operations of the farm.units involved. Integration of these separate enterprises re- quires the application of farm labor and equipment, where suitable, to the execution of forestry functions at certain times throughout the year. The appropriate times will be those periods during which forestry work can be scheduled for the farm.hands while other farm activities cannot efficiently use available labor and equipment. The basic forestry crew of the service company will be sched- uled to function all year long. Logging operations can be carried on in all seasons except during inclement weather or, for skidding and hauling, over ground too soft for effective movement. Likewise, 175 barring weather interference, planting can be done by hand through— out the dormant season, and by machine, over firm, fairly even, and unobstructed ground. Tree deadening operations are limited only by weather. Sheltered processing has no scheduling restrictions and lumber stacking is prevented only by inclement weather and soft ground. Most agricultural enterprises are more severely restricted in period of Operation than these common forestry activities. In addition to immediate working weather conditions and soil con- ditions, farm Operations are restricted also by the growth pattern and cultural needs of various crops, the life cycles of all live- stock, and climatic variation from normal during the current growth cycle. This means that during all seasons of the year there are certain periods, ranging in length from one day to a few weeks, during which farm labor can be more productively employed in the forest enterprise than in farm.work if the individual farm workers are willing and adequately equipped. 'Wage savings should be pos- sible due to the handy and perpetual availability of part-time employment. Such intermittent forestry employment, however, requires expert advance planning by the service company, with enough flexi- ‘bility to provide short-notice scheduling of alternative actions. ‘Various choices may be desirable, depending on season, weather, crew size and individual skills, total current forestry needs (in order of priority), and the existing schedule of operations planned for the basic forestry crew. The key demand on the forester will 176 be the ability to plan and execute efficient forest management with a crew of variable size and differing combinations of individual skills. Successful administration, however, will enable him to ‘produce a large output of forestry work at a moderate cost. The advantages to the farmer-landowner of this integration are two, in addition to the possibly increased efficiency of the service company's work output, for part of which he pays. The principal advantage is the more rapid improvement of his forest land, which can therefore benefit sooner and achieve better wood ‘production from the passage of time (hence growth) after improve- ment, instead of an extended period before improvement. Another advantage is the reduction of out-of—pocket investment costs due 'to his own participation--or this may'be regarded, as it will actually be in later years--as additional farmefamily income from jpart-time employment and possible equipment rental. (b) Non-integration with agriculture.--The forestry service company may be operated completely independently of the agricul- 'tural enterprises of the farms. This non-integrated organization .keeps both farmer and forester sovereign in their own specialties and lets each one schedule his own activities for most efficient ‘use of labor and equipment. While this is of no particular advant- age to the farmer, as he plans his agricultural work independently anyhow, it relieves him.of having to decide just when he reaches ‘the margin at which his labor becomes less efficient in pursuing an agricudtural enterprise than it would be in forestry work. At \‘j/ 177 the same time, however, it also denies him the possibility of for- estry labor income or equipment rental. As for the advantage of independence to the forester, the ‘planning load is much lighter than is the case under integration, 'which severely taxes his managerial capacity for scheduling and rescheduling efficient operations, allowing for various combinations of labor skills and quantities and types of equipment. Also he can be relieved of worry about execution of operations during any time he must be unexpectedly absent, for his crew leader can follow the simplified yet flexible schedule, including alternative plans in case of sudden occurrence of unfavorable weather or ground con- ditions or equipment breakdown. The crew size is stable and crew capabilities are well known to the forester and the crew leader, due to their familiarity with the skills of each individual. While the crew is likely to be highly mechanized for most operations, and consequently efficient in executing them, the fact 'that a variety of operations are necessary at different times during the year means that there will always be some idleness of equipment. In the case of integration with agriculture, idleness is reduced due to the greater application of labor to the forest ;management programt ‘Wear and tear as a result of less careful 'handling may be somewhat greater, but this will be offset by the advantage of more complete equipment use. The non-integration of forestry and agriculture results in greater annual idleness and ‘therefore, despite skilled use of equipment, total work output during equipment life will be less. ...... 178 Farmer cooperative.--The organization of farmer cooperatives can be varied, within limits of effectiveness, to suit the members. To get satisfactory value from a forest farmer cooperative, the organization will be based largely on collaboration of nearby farmers to integrate forestry with agriculture. Through a moderate amount of study to supplement and reinforce the advice and guidance of a consulting forester, public or private, interested farmers can become as proficient in management of their forestry enterprises as they have already become in the management of their more tradi- tional agricultural enterprises. The benefits of the cooperative will be primarily its functions in harvesting, processing, and marketing of products. The cooperative members who organize and execute the harvesting and processing operations will have an important effect on the success of the cooperative; but even greater responsibility will lie with those planning and carrying out the marketing. Economies of scale must be obtained in both phases. Cooperative marketing by shrewd members appointed to this ‘task will benefit from increased bargaining power relative to wood jproducts buyers, as larger volumes can be sold in one transaction 'than is the case on individual ownerships. Also timber can be with- iheld from the market if buyers' prices are not acceptable. This is a distinct advantage if a member is suddenly financially pressed and.would.otherwise sell timber on the open market; the cooperative can make him an advance payment on a future sale and receive cut- -t1ng rights on a volume of timber to cover the payment. 179 Also, by handling larger volumes of timber of various cate- gories, the cooperative can operate a concentration yard and can sort each type of product, accumulating small volumes from differ- ent ownerships until a satisfactorily merchantable quantity can be sold at an advantageous price. Thus integrated marketing will be coordinated with harvesting and processing schedules designed to obtain the most profitable combination of timber products by ef- ficient use of timber, crews, and equipment. Harvesting and processing are not quite so well assured of economies of scale as is marketing. Problems Of integration of labor and equipment normally used in agricultural enterprises re- quire skillful planning and coordination, as indicated in the dis- cussion of a service company's integration and non-integration with agriculture. These problems demand the true cooperation Of all members of the cooperative. The background of a versatile and experienced operating manager is invaluable to the efficient harvesting and primary processing of all merchantable products. Usually the cooperative will have to settle for lesser qualifi- cations. In some circumstances it may be preferable to limit op- erations to production of only one or two products--or perhaps even to sell stumpage only. One of the forest products most valuable for general farm use is lumber. If a cooperative can efficiently operate a small sawmill for a large enough portion of the year to avoid excessive overhead costs (especially interest on the investment and costs of depreciation) in relation to its annual output, great economy can 180 be achieved in lumber procurement for each member farm. However, if a sawmill operation is not expected to be economic, as will likely be the case for most small cooperatives, the organization will serve its members best by not making lumber. If farm plans call for considerable consumption of lumber, the cooperative can be effective in coordinating the scheduling of consumption plans so that it can total all needs for a planning period, purchase lumber wholesale, and then pass the savings on to its members. Financing arrangements can be made with the assistance Of an agent of the Farmer Cooperative Service of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. Shares will be the principal financing instrument, not yielding income until profits have been Obtained following pay- ment of timber owners for stumpage cut and payment of wages to creW‘workers. A farmer joining the cooperative may decide either to col- laborate in the physical work of forestry operations on the various tracts owned by cooperative members, on his land only, or not at all. Farmers are likely to reject the alternative of personal work in forestry only if their time is fully occupied by other farm work or if they are physically unable to do it. The fact that there are such farmers as members of a cooperative simply means that there must be enough other farmers and their helpers available to carry on the Operations necessary for forest develop- ment at a reasonable rate and for keeping up with the management schedule thereafter. The farmers who do not contribute labor equivalent to the amount invested in their own lands will have to 1:“ I - 181 contribute a payment to compensate a substitute worker. This will no doubt mean that practically all cooperative members will be eager to insure efficient work by the working crew, readily pro- viding various elements of assistance to facilitate operations. Methods of making sales Noncompetitive sales.--Selling timber at a fair price is difficult if only one buyer is in the market. Required conditions for equitable noncompetitive sales are (1) that the seller know the quantities of the various specific qualities of product that he offers for sale, (2) that he be familiar with the current range of fair market values finrhis quantities and qualities of product and be willing to sell for prices in that range, (3) that he be under no coercion to sell and be able to withhold the timber from sale if fair conditions are not agreed in contract, and (A) that he be familiar with and able to arrange reasonable terms for pay- ment and for, in the case of stumpage sales, maximum.duration of operation, proper woods conditions, and appropriate penalties for contract violations. Competitive sales.--Timber-selling is much more certain of success if bids are obtained from potential buyers each of whom is aware that his securing of the transaction depends on competitive effort against the others. The Obtaining of competitive bids re- quires considerable effort by the seller, who must (1) locate a number of possible buyers and invite them.to bid, (2) arouse in them sufficient interest in his timber to induce them to acquaint \III’I 182 themselves thoroughly with it and to determine its worth to them, (3) convince them of the profitability of bidding as high a price as they can with the expectation of reasonable profit following payment for timber and costs of their particular operations, and (h) collect bids either sealed or unsealed depending on an esti- mate of the buyers' psychology. Item h of the noncompetitive sales procedure is also necessary. The total effort involved in the competitive sales is not negligible but is likely to require less capacity and responsi- bility of the seller than is the case with noncompetitive sales because with competition the first three items under noncompeti- tive sales, though helpful, can be fairly safely dispensed with due to the safeguards inherent in the competitive process. To win the transaction, competing buyers will 2213 to make bids well within the range Of current market values and concur with fair conditions of the seller’s stipulated contract. Method of Analysis Budgetary comparison of alternatives The principal method of analysis used in this study is budg- etary comparison of alternatives over time for the entire farm-and- forest operating units selected. For each unit, given are (l) a certain Operator with an existing combination of skills, procliv- ities, and material resources, (2) a fixed total area composed of a certain mix of land qualities in open land and forest, (3) a land- lord of definite characteristics (if the Operator is not also the owner), and (h) capital resources of limited extent. 183 The number of alternatives discussed is greatly reduced from the total number which have been considered, because many are obvi- ously incompatible with one or more of the characteristics listed above. Long-run changes are of course possible with respect to all of these, but for the short run, changes may be restricted to the first and fourth items, the ones most likely to be responsive to development. Farm.operators may be able to develop skills and acquire knowledge required for enterprises different from those presently engaged in. For example, farmers habituated to cotton and corn production may become skilled in any of several livestock enter- prises, feed or truck crops, and may also learn how to handle a forested acreage of considerable extent. To bring about this personal development will require mo- tivation as well as education. The person most likely to be effec- tive in these processes is the county agent of the cooperative agricultural extension service or the local work unit conserva- tionist of the Soil Conservation Service. The agent working with the farmer will first have to attract the interest Of the farmer if he is to be able to accomplish the process Of motivation. The technique of budgeting will be intro- duced as soon as interest is aroused. MOtivation and education will occur concurrently. All the reasonably appropriate budgets will be worked out by the agent in collaboration with the farmer, who will presumably be motivated by the more attractive possibil- ities for improving his farm business. The agent will learn the farmer’s characteristics that will restrict the range of possible 181+ alternatives. The farmer will learn something of the reorganiz- ation techniques for more profitable operation with his total re- sources. Where necessary, he will also be helped to understand unfamiliar aspects of new enterprises compatible with those to be retained, and perhaps modified, from the existing farm organiza- ‘ tion. Decision on a new farm plan may be provisional, depending on an increase in capital for develOpment of an adequate total sup- ply of resources to implement the plan. The farmer may become able to relieve the limitation of capital resources by convincing a local bank or Other source of credit that a loan to finance farm reorganization for Specific purposes would be well placed. The loan may even permit rental of additional land if area is a lim- it ing factor . The conclusion of the initial process of budgeting comes with the decision as to which alternative farm plan to put into Operation. Still, after the choice has been made and implemented, continualxewevaluation will be advisable so that if operations do not work out as planned, due to either endogenous or exogenous factors, prompt adjustment can be made if necessary. Data for Budgeting Alternatives The sources of data used in preparing the alternative budgets are indicated together with the methods of data collection used on the Ames Plantation for each of the principal categories of data. Details are relegated to the appendix. 185 Agricultural budget data Data for budgets involving modal combinations of agricultural enterprises have been computed from.basic data for individual oper- ating units prepared by experienced farm management specialists of the Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology of the University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station. The spec- ialists used land capability classifications and soil tests as aids in planning efficient use of the farm.resources of land and labor on each of the operating units. Principal categories of modal-type farm units are included among the cases cited. Forestry input-output data 'Work-performance data.-~Each type of forestry operation in- cluded in the functioning of the Ames Plantation Forestry Depart- ment has been Observed and pertinent data have been recorded. WOrk-performance data involve the time required by men and equip- ment to accomplish an amount of work actually done. A.summary of forestry work-performance data for each type of operation is listed in the appendix. Effective use of work-performance rates requires estimating how nearly conditions of each planned operation will resemble those under which the data were obtained. Average rates vary considerably from operation to operation due to the combined influences of many factors which range up and down at different times and places. Factors responsible for the ranges in rates are of considerable importance in making estimates for farm planning under different 186 circumstances. Both the method of data collection and aspects important to data interpretation and use are therefore described in the appendix. Development of new labor-saving methods and machinery for performing forestry jobs can be expected to continue in the future. For this reason long-term projections based on current inputs will be likely to overestimate labor requirements and to underestimate machine use. The projections for the short run, though, will be fairly accurate even though they may have to be adjusted to accom- - modate technological changes. Management—yield data.--All major varieties of Ames Plant- ation forest conditions have been sampled in a survey of the ex- isting woodland. From data recorded in the survey, management- yield data have been computed: levels of growing stock (forest capital) and their associated wood yields (returns) related to forest management policies. The choice of a growing-stock level and its value cannot in practice be separated from the election of a specific management program. Ordinarily a development period of a number of years will be needed to change the characteristics of the existing forest to those desired. Once the desired stocking is attained, it can be relied upon to produce a fairly stable peri- odic yield of merchantable timber. When a landowner is induced to appraise his forest resource, he usually finds it desirable to invest more capital and labor in his woodlands. In many cases the investment will be made in the 187 existing forest acreage, but it could also lead to expansion of the acreage allocated to timber production. The change in investment per acre will be toward more growing stock of higher unit value. Thus the development period is pri- marily one of accumulation of forest capital. Nevertheless, there will be timber harvesting during this period. The forest products harvested over the :first. few decades, however, will typically be of lower qualities and smaller volumes per acre than those avail- able when the effects Of the management program are fully realized. For this reason the average annual yield per acre during the period of capital accumulation will be less, and usually considerably less, than the average annual yield from.the desired level of stocking, In many cases, it will be even less than the current one. The expectation of a higher future rate of income than the present rate will have to be great enough to induce this foregoing of consumption. The pattern of returns over time depends on the length of the development period, which in turn is influenced by the landowner's demand for income. .A farmer will be more interested in yields and inputs for alternative forestry programs during the next ten years than for the more distant future. While the long-run returns might persuade him of the desirability of forestry, the yields and inputs during the first five or ten years will very likely determine whether he begins intensive management atcmme or postpones or rejects it. Both short-term (first decade) and long-term.management-yield data 188 are scheduled in appendix tables to illustrate typical patterns of timber yield and labor inputs for a variety of initial stand con- ditions, forest types, and Sites. Timber price data.-—The price estimates used in budgeting farm forest management on the Ames Plantation are based on 1955-56 experience in the timber market on the Plantation and in its vicin- ity. Average prices which are expected to approximate, conserva- tively, the actual situation over the next fifty years are tabu- lated in the appendix, along with the assumptions on which they are based. Categories include pine and mixed hardwoods, pulpwood and sawtimber, stumpage and roadside products, extensive and intensive management. The difference between sawtimber stumpage and roadside prices is assumed to be ( as it typically has been) $15 a thousand board feet (Doyle log scale), but would vary for sales of timber of different qualities and different per-acre vol- umes and total volumes. As intensive management improves stand quality, the average price is expected to increase concurrently. Considerations relating to managementeyield data Development of management program.-«A forest management pro- ggram.is comprised of a set of practices. These practices are the <>perations applied either to the forest stand as a whole or to :individual classes Of trees. The practices may include such cul- irural treatments as site preparation, seeding, planting, weeding, tuninning, culling, and harvesting. General practices are not ‘likely to change appreciably inasmuch as they are Silvicultural ,l 189 applications of general biological and economic principles relating individual trees to communities of trees and to other aspects of forest environments. Operating methods, however, will change with technological improvements. At any given time techniques will vary among Operating units due to differences in acreage, equipment and labor available, land characteristics, and the forest. Forests will differ in species composition, tree size, and spatial distribution of the stems. The forestry alternatives must be integrated with other enterprise alternatives available to the landowner in deter- mining the practices to be applied to his woodland. In the decision-making process the landowner will strive to achieve the most advantageous combination Of uses of land and fam- ily resources. Land use alternatives might include forestry, row crops, grazing, water, and recreation. In general the financial merits of an over-all farm plan can be evaluated by anyone through comparison of expected costs and returns. The decisive element in a plan, however, is its acceptability in the minds of the users. This crucial element can be determined only by the owner and his family on a subjective basis: (1) how attractive the prospective plan is with respect to the kind of work to be done; (2) the daily, weekly, and seasonal distribution of the work load; (3) the total capital investment requirements (regardless of rate of return and degree of risk, although these will usually be considered) and possible necessity \b/ 190 for use of credit (to which at least some degree of aversion exists in everyone); (A) the extent to which managerial activities are required continuously throughout the year, thus "tying down" the owner and prohibiting appreciable travel away from home; (5) the availability Of leisure time, its scheduling, and the opportunity for recreational use of Operating-unit resources; (6) the future pattern of ownership and managerial capacity as it may affect continuity of objectives; and (7) the ease with which proposed capital investments can be shifted with revisions of the plan. Through provision fln'revision of the farm.plan as circum- stances warrant, there will be a considerable flexibility of policy practicable in response to exogenous factors such as market demand, climatic shifts, relative prices of land, labor, and capital, and in response to endogenous factors such as owner-Operator objectives and capacity of management. In determining a forest management program, another consid- eration is the amount of capital and labor to apply to a given inoodland. The degree of forest management intensity will vary with idle potentialities of a tract and the owner's ability to realize tfliem. Programs which require only minor investments in a given acreage may be characterized as "extensive management" programs, as 2a unit of investment is spread extensively (over many acres). Where \n/ ‘1 u “‘1 ~ ,ss 191 investments of considerable value are used on the same size of area, "intensive management" is involved, because a unit of invest- ment in these cases is applied intensively to the land. Programs involving intensive management require waiting for income during the commonly necessary development period discussed earlier. Then, when the stable period has been reached, periodic yields flow regularly. Extensive management programs, on the con- trary, do not initially involve a long waiting period (if any at all) before income is obtained, but then in the stable period much less income is yielded than under intensive management and the intervals between yields are much longer. In cases of extensive management in which owners exert no forest management effort what- ever-amerely allowing timber to grow, as it may, until a minimum merchantable volume develops, whereupon it is sold--this is the result of extremely high time-preference for income. In such cases it is convenient to assume as acceptable only a very high rate of interest. Rate of return on investment.--Alternative annual farm crops can be evaluated without comparing their rates of return. By con- 'trast, when forest crops are to be included in budgetary compar- ijxans, the concept of an alternative rate of return becomes essen- ‘tiaLl. The need arises due to the length of time required to realize a return from an investment in woodland. Moreover, during the: development period both the returns from.timber sales and in- 'vesfl;ments in management practices will likely vary over the years. \ .-~ be v T \u .‘ oi as 192 Under these conditions, computations using the owner's required rate of return can be made to carry the alternatives to a common point in time, at which a valid comparison can be made. Rates of return will naturally vary from owner to owner de- pending on their financial situations.. Even an individual owner may assign higher rates to some alternatives, thus recognizing the degree of risk he associates with the various enterprises. Every venture involves risks, and farm-forest management is no exception. Yet farmers may assign a higher risk rating to forestry than is warranted. Of course, forests are subject to losses from wildfire, trespass, wind, insects, mammals, and disease, but the effect of a forest management program.is to moderate these influences. Resident owners can act to control wildfire and trespass. Also losses to wind, insects, and disease can be held to a minimum by timely salvage of dead and dying timber. The landowner's investment in forestry is in growing stock. The more timber he carries on the land the greater will be his 'total returns up to a point. It is the specific rate of wood yield in relation to a given level of timber volumes per acre that.largely determines his rate of return. Rate of wood yield.--The rate at which a forest yields wood can be varied over a wide range. Based on the usual volume of tim- 'beI' to be found on farm woodlands, annual growth per acre will be .low; The development process operates according to the law of climdlnishing returns. This can be illustrated by the assumption of? increasing the timber stocking on a typical tract by additions 193 of 1,000 board feet per acre at a time. The first few additions increase per-acre yields tremendously--proportionately even greater than the increase in stocking. Each further addition to the growing stock continues to increase total yields but only by a smaller increase than the one preceding it. Finally a point is reached where any additional increase in stocking reduces the total yield. The relevant range of choices for a level of growing stock lies somewhere between this point and the timber currently avail- able in the woodlands. By a level of growing stock is meant a quantity of desirable timber-~a quantity that can be maintained while its growth over a period is harvested. For convenience both wood yield and growing stock are ex- pressed in terms of board feet of sawtimber and cords of pulpwood per acre. These two categories account for most of the total for- est products marketed. Additional products, such as veneer logs, poles, and the like, can be adapted to this classification. Sum- marizing growing stock and growth in these units makes possible a ready conversion to dollars of investment and yield. Though it is casually implied that the yield is an annual one, the quantity referred to will actually be an average. Prac- tical considerations require a forest to be operated on a cutting- cycle basis, that is, timber may be harvested each year or at some interval of years depending upon the management program. Also weather variations from.year to year will affect the yield. Con- sequently the stated yield should be an average annual growth figure. 191+ A.yield factor applies to a particular quality of land, recognizing the variation in woodland productivity. In general the most productive soils occur in the bottomlands along streams and on the lower slopes, with the growth potential declining to— ward the ridge top. The effects are twofold: first, the more valuable species tend in nature to limit themselves to the best soils. This is particularly true in the hardwood country in which the Ames Plantation is located. Second, the grade of any species is usually higher on the better soil. The combined effect is thus that not only will the growth rate of a certain level of growing stock of a given species or a mix of species be higher on the better soils but the sale value per unit of volume will be greater also. One of the reasons for emphasizing rate of wood yield is that planning must consider alternatives other than forest pro- duction. These yield factors provide a basis for deciding whether to grow timber or grass, or to use a particular parcel of land for some other purpose. The development period.--For a particular level of growing stock the length of the development period is primarily determined by the nature of the existing timber and how much of its growth will be reinvested and how much will be used for income. The most important of the alternative period lengths which should be con- sidered is the shortest practicable one. (Practicability depends to a considerable degree on the scale of cultural operations-- some treatments may be so thinly dispersed over the tract as to be Prohibitively costly.) The shortest period will usually require 195 a heavy investment program and a willingness to accept only modest cash returns. Any other program will spread investing over a longer period of years, being designed either to yield more income from the intermediate cuts of timber or to hold down by some other means the costs of accumulating a large growing stock volume, The owner can attain the high future yield only at the expense of de- velopment period income. The flexibility inherent in the development period stems from.the various alternatives available to the forest manager. He can adopt any of a series of practices that will not only improve stocking and growth but will generate income at the same time. For instance, he can alter the mixture of species by simply marketing the undesirable but merchantable species. Thinning which contrib- utes to stand growth and development also creates income. Because trees differ in individual vigor, taking out the slow growers in the form of forest products also stimulates stand growth and pro- vides income. Trees may be below par in terms of merchantable length, grade of their logs, and freedom from damage by insects, mammals, disease, and fire and still permit ready sale. As long as the volume of this improvement type of cutting is less, over any period, than the current growth of the tract, stocking in- creases as does growth. Other practices that speed up the development period ordi- narily involve waiting for income. One profitable operation is deadening unmerchantable stems that interfere with the growth or establishment of better trees. Income attributable to this 196 Operation.may take ten years or more to develop. Similarly, openings in the forest may be seeded or planted. Also, in the general area being considered, ridgetop hardwoods of low produc- tivity may be deadened in the process of converting this type to pine. Collection of management-yield data.--Most of the yield data for the analyses were obtained directly from the Ames Plantation woodlands. Pine plantation yield data alone were derived from secondary sources. Methods of data collection on the Ames Planta- tion were much more detailed than usual types of farm planning will demand. This was because the University's forest research program required data in far greater detail than what will be needed on most farm woodlands. For completeness, however, the particular procedures are described in the appendix. Commonly the data collection method can be fairly simple. It should be commensurate with the types of management programs being considered. Bearing on the Justifiable cost of data col- lection are the value and heterogeneity of the forest resource, the people and facilities available, the urgency of the management planning time schedule and, over all, the degree of difficulty of the decisionemaking problem». In many cases the first step toward planned forest manage- ment can be made from a relatively small number of practicable alternatives on the basis of very rough information as to re- sources, procedures, and potential markets. After the initial 197 step has been taken, a more refined appraisal is likely to be needed for making decisions on the more intensive management prac- tices. ‘With the help of a forester the decision-maker can choose an appropriate means of data collection. Two inexpensive methods briefly outlined in the appendix are an extensive forest sampling procedure and application of published U. S. Forest Service Survey data. Use of management-yield data Scheduling of management needs and wood yields.--Ordinarily the development period is characterized by variability in volumes of timber to be harvested and in the time between harvests. A schedule of cuts and the years in which they may be made can be calculated for any set of forest conditions. These schedules are essential to valid cost-and-returns comparisons. The yield of the desired stable growing stock presents no special problem because it will consequently be fairly stable, too. The schedule of necessary management operations which in- volve an investment in cultural practices can also be prepared. These two schedules, listing the sequences of work to be done and wood to be harvested, can be calculated on a yearly basis, but for practical purposes decadal summaries are sufficient. Scheduling of management work and timber harvests.--The oper- ational schedule of work to satisfy management needs and of harvests ‘to obtain wood yields should match the need for labor with the labor available . 198 The first step in making an operational schedule is to con- sider the sources of labor available to the farm. The primary source is the farm family. The secondary source is the local sup- ply of labor available for hire. The seasonal pattern of agriculture fairly well fixes rou- tine farm labor needs. Forest operations are seasonal, too, but more flexible than other farm work. For the most part, they can be done when other farm needs are slack. The second step, filling scheduled needs with labor to be actually used, starts with underemployed labor on the farm and may be finished by assignment of additional labor to be hired (from off the farm) for woods work.managed by the farmer. Such work will be done, however, only if thought more profitable than some other use of an equal amount of money and family time. If discrepancies between labor needs and available supply are too great, a major adjustment may be called for. If certain practices are not feasible as farm operations, it may be possible to sat- isfy the need by contracting an outside operator. Over widespread areas commercial management firms provide contract services for 'most management practices. Also many wood-buying industrial cor- porations mark stumpage for cutting according to forestry prin- ciples and then bid for the marked timber. Examples of schedules.--Eight examples of farm-and-forest operating units on the Ames Plantation are briefly described in Chapter IX. 199 For each of the units a summary of management work and tim- ber harvests for an intensive forest management program.is given, also one for an extensive program. The forestry portions of each operating unit budget are based on schedules of management needs and anticipated wood yields summarized in the appendix. These examples are based on actual conditions observed during the forest survey of 1956. Most of the forested areas are suited to growing hardwoods either intensively or extensively. Each of the various stand types occurs on one of the three topo- graphic slope positions: upper slope, lower slope, and bottom. Another category of forest area includes hardwood stands of such low productivity that intensive management of them would be un- profitable. Extensively managed, however, they might continue indefinitely. To be converted to profitable areas for intensive management, they would have to be clear-cut and planted to pine. The comparison of intensive versus extensive management is made by evaluating the costs and returns for each program. The long-term schedules project the stand forward in time far enough to reach stability of production and of length of cutting cycle. In addition to the comparisons of costs and returns for each inten- sity of management during the development period, similar compar- isons are made for the cutting cycles under the stability of the final goal of intensive management and under the semi-stable final conditions under the extensive program. CHAPTER IX PLANS FOR FARM OPERATING UNITS General Information The eight farm Operating units referred to in Chapter I are located at the eastern, southern, and western extremities of the Ames Plantation. All of these units have streams running through them or along a border. The acreages of these units range from 230 to 2,601 acres, and their woodland areas from 92 to 2,022. With family size varying considerably, the different units have "man—equivalents" (corresponding to man-years of labor availa- ble annually) as low as 1.8 and as high as 3. 5, totaling suo to 1,050 man-days of labor available annually (a West Tennessee farm- er's normal work year consisting of about 300 work days). With the labor requirements for agriculture ranging from.h6 percent to 88 percent of the total available annual labor time on each farm, the number of man-days remaining for forestry work by the farm family was from 290 to 75. .3X subtracting stumpage value from the sale value of cut products at roadside, the return to labor and equipment used in the harvesting process is determined. Similarly, the quantity of labor for harvesting is obtained by subtracting the man-days needed for management alone from the total labor requiredfor the production of cut products. IThen the total value added by harvesting can be 200 201 divided by the labor quantity and the quotient will be the return for a man-day of harvesting. The harvesting service will include the equipment needed to cut the products and transport them to the roadside. For this reason the labor time might be referred to briefly as an "equipped" man-day. The value.of these range from _§l§.§3wtai$l6.90, with an averagemofh$l5.7l. The average value .9f annual-wood growth on all eight units is $8.58 per acre but on the individual units runs from a low of $6.08 to $10.89. Unit 6 has this lowest average value because 75 percent of its acreage is a fairly poor site for hardwoods, growing each decade only 2.1 MBF of sawlogs and 3.0 cords of pulpwood (with no market value assumed) per acre after the stand has been built up to the stock- ing level from which the decadal cut will leave a basal area of 60 square feet. All the farm operating units are described verbally in con- siderable detail as separate entities in the remainder of this chapter. Major emphasis is given in each case to the proposed plan assumed to have been selected by the individual farm operator and his family as being the most desirable and workable alterna- tive to the present farm operation. For the benefit of readers who are interested only in a certain type of unit, each unit's discus- sion stands independently and any reference to another unit is made only for specific clarification; an understanding of the discussion of each unit does not require the reading of the discussion of any other unit. Similar portions of separate units are discussed sim- ilarly, and parts of the rationale that are common to all units appear in all the discussions. The reader of more than one unit 202 will find the skimming of such portions desirable once he has assimilated the important similar elements of the verbal discussion technique. Detailed data used in the budgeting of the alternatives discussed are provided in the appendix and furnish a good numeri- cal description of the units. Unit l--A Cotton—Hog-Beef-Forestry Farm This 3lO-acre farm currently has 51 acres in agricultural uses (32 in cotton, and 19 in corn), 173 acres in woodland and brush, and 86 acres idle or in miscellaneous uses such as roads, buildings, and farmyards. Only 51 acres are in row crops despite the fact that the soils on over half of the total acreage are good for agriculture, a fourth being suitable for permanent pasture and 30 percent for crops. Thus current agricultural operations use less than a third of the acreage suitable for farming and a sixth of the total property. Alternative plans for fuller use of the land best suited to farming will redistribute the acreage with a 30-percent decrease in woodland area and more than a tripling of land in cultivation. The largest shift in acreage will be the es- tablishment of 83 acres in permanent pasture in place of the cur- rent grazing on land in the miscellaneous and idle category and on the cropland after harvest. Ten acres are to be allocated for si- lage production and 1h to grow hay. Corn production will be allo— cated #5 acres, an increase of 26, and the cotton acreage will be reduced from 32 to 25. Livestock production will be increased as permitted by the {larger pasture acreage, to over nine times the present total, 5 203 times as many head of beef cattle being planned and 15 times as many swine as at present. The numbers of each kind of livestock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Beef cows lul 36 22 Dairy cows 0 2 2 Calves raised 0 3h 3h Sows l 10 9 Hogs raised _8_' EEO £32 Total 23 222 199 This proposed budgeting of agricultural resources will pro- duce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to the individual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased net income is supposedly valued highly enough by him to be worth the added responsibility and work required for carrying out the new plan. Improved land use on this farm calls for the woodland to occupy about forty percent (133 acres) of the total area. At pres- ent over half the acreage is in woodland, and idle land comprises another quarter, inasmuch as a bare sixth is used for agriculture. Five-sixths of this woodland is upland hardwoods and one-sixth is lower-slope hardwoods. In the upland hardwoods about one-fifth of the area produces such slow-growing trees that conversion of the stand to a loblolly pine plantation is indicated. The present stumpage value of the entire l73-acre woodland lAmixed group of cows, heifers, steers, and calves. 201+ is about $3,100 for a stand of 330 MBF of mostly large sawtimber. Expansion of the agricultural land to 9A acres for crops and 83 acres for permanent pasture will use all the land suitable for these purposes and will leave only 133 acres for timber, with a residual stand of 2A6 MBF. The total value of the present 173 acres of forest (bare land real estate value plus stumpage value) is approximately $5,900 and the 137 acres of agricultural land are worth about $6,800. The combined value of buildings, live- stock, feed, machinery, and other equipment is $h,000. Thus the total investment in the farm is $16,700. The present farm operation has required an average annual outlay of labor of 260 man-days from the farm family. The work load on a cotton farm is heaviest in the Spring and early summer and again in the fall. Between these periods there is time for other work, if it is available. The opportunities for improved living on this farm lie in fuller use of the resources of land and labor. The prime essential is to obtain the money and advice to get started on a better farm- ing system. Credit is commonly available from local banks or pro- duction credit associations. Advice is available from a number of government agencies for any of the various possible plans for oper- ating the farm. After the farmer has talked with agricultural spe- cialists and foresters and considered his own capabilities and resources, he narrows the alternatives down to a few, in this case, four. Plan I calls for continuation of all aspects of the present 205 Operation. The three other alternatives all include the agricul- tural changes described at the beginning of the discussion of this unit. In addition, Plan II requires intensive forest management 'with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. Plan III also requires intensive forest management but calls for sale of stumpage only, thus involving no labor for harvesting. Plan IV specifies merely extensive forestry and occasional unplanned sales of stumpage, with no labor allocated for any aSpect of forest man- agement. Next, the farm owner compares these plans with regard to ex- pected net income, capital and labor requirements, seasonality and type of enterprise, and other considerations of importance to him, and then selects the one most desirable in relation to his own per- sonal scale of combined criteria. If the owner continues with his present farm operation, Plan I, he proposes to sell the farm as soon as he can get $26,000. By investing this amount elsewhere at four percent he can equal his present income of $1,0h5 from the farm and save property taxes besides. By adopting and implementing the plan (Plan II) indicated here to be his selection, however, within ten years the farmer will be able to increase his net farm income nearly six times and to a- chieve a much fuller use of his various resources. He will be able especially to use his time and land more completely and to spread overhead and certain Special costs (such as depreciation) over a 'broader base. Over the development period this plan results in a considerably increased total investment: from $16,700 to $65,h00. 206 Of this greater amount, however, $20,300 is the stumpage value of the residual timber after six decades of management. The stumpage value increase of almost $17,200 is not directly an out-of-pocket cost-~nor is it primarily an expense at all, but a result of re- fraining from.consumption. Similarly, $13,275 is the value of the farm's 177 acres of agricultural land after improved land manage- ment has raised the real estate value from.$50 to $75 an acre (See Table 12). (These 177 acres include no acres of original forest land valued at $16 an acre initially and $75 after clearing and im- provement.) This increased investment will take place over several years. Table l2.--Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of operation for Unit 1 Present operation Alternative plans Investment Plan Ia Plans 11b and IIIC Plan IVd category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 137 $6,850 177 $13,275 177 $13,275 Forest landf 173 2,768 133 2,128 133 2,128 Buildings, live- stock, and other8 . . h,000 . . 29,7u0 . . 29,7h0 Stumpage . . 3,100 . . 20,300 . . 1,100 Total 310 $16,718 310 $65,hh3 310 $h6,2h3 aPlan I—-no timber sales. Plan II-«intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III-~intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. fIncluding brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. 207 Thus almost half ($23,000) of the increase in total farm value is due to the fuller timber stand and the appreciation of the agricultural land. The only major area of investment requir- ing direct expenditures is that of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment. Although not all of these must be paid for immediately, most of the increase from.$h,000 to almost $30,000 will have to be covered in the first couple of years of the new program. Some of this can be paid for by cash on hand but most of it will require a number of years for repayment, by such devices as short-term credit, real estate mortgages (for second mortgages), and preferably intermediate-term credit for construction of buildings. Assuming that the net farm income under the chosen plan will be at least $5,000 for the first two years and at least $6,000 thereafter, the farmer will be able to pay interest and principal on his debt at the rate of $h,000 at first and then $5,000 and still have a disposable income equal to his present one. Therefore even if the entire $25,7h0 for direct expenditures is borrowed immediately, it can be paid off (with 6Apercent interest compounded annually) within 7 years. Under the new plan the farm family will have available 2.0 man-equivalents of labor. This would be about 600 man-days if spread fairly evenly throughout the year. Most of this labor will be needed for the agricultural enterprises: #80 man—days. The re- maining 160 man-days could be used for forest work if needed. During the first decade of intensive forest management, however, only 187 man-days of labor will be needed--about 19 a year--to 208 include harvesting of timber products for sale at roadside. The expected sale value of these products totals $2,h56, of which $921 would be stumpage value if the trees were sold on the stump (See Appendix, Table 1-1). Although the remaining $1,535 could be at- tributed to labor used in harvesting (at $13.70 a man-day for the necessary 112 days), ho percent of the total labor would have been in forest management and improvement work: 75 man-days. If the returns of this labor were paid at the same rate as the harvesting labor, the stumpage value would be swallowed up. The farmer might consider it quite fair to allocate a zero return to stumpage re- moved during the first decade inasmuch as the improvement work probably will increase the potential value of the residual stand more than the removal of the harvested products decreases it. The $2,h56 income from timber products harvested during the decade would allow a $13.13 daily wage for the 187 man-days of labor if no returns to other factors were considered. In the long run if prices and volumes do not depart seri- ously from the estimates for the stable period, the average decadal income from roadside sales will be about $2h,h90 and labor require- ments for all forest work will average 603 man-days. The average decadal value of stumpage to be cut will be $15,800. If a minimum.h-percent rate of return is required on the average investment of $20,300 in stumpage and $2,128 in forest land, $897 would have to be subtracted from the annual stumpage value of $1,580 of the harvested products, leaving $683 as an additional re- turn to land, timber, and labor. As an average of only 16 man-days of labor is needed each decade for management purposes, less than 209 2 days a year, practically all of the stumpage returns should be attributed to the timber and 1and--equal to almost exactly 7 per- cent Of the investment. The difference of $8,687 between roadside and stumpage sale value would require 587 man-days of labor. These man-days would therefore be worth $1h.80 each to the owner who would supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and skidding. This would provide a 15-percent increase over the comparable aver- age harvesting man-day return of $12.8h during the development peri- 0d. The rise of the stumpage return to 7 percent from the h.h Of the development period is a far more pronounced increase: 60 percent. Subtraction Of equipment cost Of about $2 a man-day would make an adequate allowance for Operation and depreciation of a power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share Of the cost of the several pieces of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone (separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $10.80 during the development period and $12.80 during the stable period. In the case of this farm, where more man-days are available than are needed for forest management and harvesting either in the first decade or in succeeding decades, intensive forestry with har- vesting tO roadside is clearly the best alternative. This is the important feature of Plan II that differentiates it from Plans III and IV. The following condensed annual financial summaries for the first and second decades show the comparative net farm incomes for these decades (Table 13). In the first decade the annual net farm 210 TABLE 13.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 1 -W Income and Alternative plans EXpense items Plan Ia Plan 11" Plan 111C Plan Ivd First decade Receipts Crops $h,0h0 $5,h68 $5,h68 $5,u68 Livestock 0 10,832 10,832 10,832 Livestock products MOO 0 O 0 Forest products 0 2M6 92 313 Total receipts h,hu0 16,5u6 16,392 16,613 Cash operating expenses 2,595 8,h2h 8,h0h 8,h0h Net cash farm income 1,8h5 8,122 7,988 8,209 Depreciation 800 1,9h5 1,927 1,927 Net farm income 1,0u5 6,177 6,061 6,282 Second decade Receipts Crops h,0h0 5,h68 5,h68 5,h68 Livestock 0 10,832 10,832 10,832 Livestock products AOO O 0 0 Forest products 0 616 162 0 Total receipts u,hh0' 16,916 l6,h62 16,300 Cash Operating expenses 2,595 8,h50 8,h0h 8,h0h Net cash farm income 1,8h5 8,h66 8,058 7,896 Depreciation 800 1,973 1,927 1,927 Net farm.income 1,0u5 6,h93 6,131 5,969 aPlan Ie-present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. .~ .., "’ - ... 1»a - ' ' "V‘ c \ 211 income under Plan IV is $105 and $221 higher than for Plans 11 and III, respectively, because under extensive forestry all merchant- able sawtimber (313 MBF) is to be cut, whereas only 81 M are to be cut under intensive forestry. 'While Plan II benefits from the higher price for a volume Of cut products over a similar volume of stumpage and also includes an average annual gross income of almost $hh from 5-1/2 cords of hardwood pulpwood not merchantable as stumpage, the cost of harvesting includes $38 annually for Opera- tion, maintenance, and depreciation Of the power saw. By the second decade, however, the sort Of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm incomes that is repeated in succeeding decades. The highest net farm.income is achieved under Plan II--about $500 more than under Plan IV, and Plan III is $160 above Plan IV. These annual differ- entials are increased in the stable period to approximately $2,300 and $1,500 respectively (See Table 1h). Alternative Plans with purchase Of additional acreage If the farmer sells stumpage only (Plan III), he will need not more than 8 man-days a year on his planned acreage. Thus to use an extra 152 Of the 160 man-days available for forestry, he could expand his acreage 19-fOld by purchase Of woodland and idle land similar to what he owns now. If funds could be obtained for 'this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 2,660 and the annual net stumpage income $1,8h0 for the first ten years. The increased investment of $83,980 in 2,527 acres of woodland would lflnis add $1,7h8 annually to net farm income during the first decade, 212 a return Of 2.1 percent. During the second decade it would add $3,078 annually, a return Of 3.7 percent on the additional in- vestment in woodland. The rate would be 6.2 percent during the third decade and would be over 18 percent in all succeeding decades, leveling Off to an average Of 36 percent in the stable period. Table lh.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 1 Income and Alternative plans expense items Plan Ia Plan 11b Plan 111° Plan Ivd Receipts Crops $h,0h0 $ 5,h68 $ 5,h68 $ 5,h68 Livestock 0 10,832 10,832 10,832 Livestock products #00 0 0 0 Forest products 0 2,hh9 1,580 SH Total receipts h,hu0 18,7h9 17,880 16,35u Cash operating expenses 2,595 8,h6h 8,h0h 8,h0h Net cash farm income 1,8h5 10,285 9,h76 7,950 Depreciation 800 1,987 1,927 1,927 Net farm income 1,0h5 8,298 7,5h9 6,023 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III-~improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. If forest products are sold at roadside (Plan II), the annual number of man-days needed for forest management and har- vesting will not exceed 63 except in the fourth and seventh decades, Which.call for 97 and 8h, respectively. After that, the average IKKNied will not exceed 60. ‘With 160 man-days available annually, 213 at least 97 Of these would be in excess during all but the fourth and seventh decades. If the farmer wished to make fuller use of these 97 man-days annually, he could buy an additional 205 acres of wooded and idle land similar to what he Owns now. For the fourth and seventh decades this would mean hiring annually 3A and 21 man-days, re- spectively. The enlarged total acreage would be 338, from which the contribution to annual net income would be only $529 during the first decade but considerably more in the second and later decades. The second decade would yield over $1,300 annually toward the farm's net annual income, and the stable decades, over $5,900. These in- creased annual net incomes would be $321 more in the first decade than Plan II without the additional 205 acres, $808 in the second decade, and $3,590 in the stable decades. The rates of marginal annual returns during these decades on the $8,108 investment would therefore be approximately h percent, 10 percent, and Rh percent, respectively. Neither of these last two modifications Of the intensive forestry alternatives are likely to be implemented for at least several years, because the owner can be expected to have some diffi- culty in Obtaining additional credit until considerable portions Of 'the loans for agricultural improvement have been repaid. If he is eager tO finance forest area expansion under either of these pro- POSals, however, and can do so, his long-run profit position will be greatly enhanced . f‘ 21h Unit 2.--A.Cotton-Hog-Sheep-Forestry Farm This 33l-acre farm currently has 50 acres in agricultural uses (10 in cotton, 15 in corn, and 25 in permanent pasture and hay), 178 acres in woodland and brush, and 103 acres idle or in miscellaneous uses such as roads, buildings, and farmyards. The small acreage in agricultural uses is regrettably low inasmuch as the soils on almost a third Of the total acreage are good for agri- culture, 10 percent being suitable for permanent pasture, 9 per- cent for temporary pasture, and 13 percent for crops. Thus current agricultural Operations use about half of the acreage suitable for farming and a sixth of the total property. Alternative plans for fuller use of the land will redistribute the acreage with almost a 25-percent increase in woodland area and a doubling of Open agri- cultural land, but 5 acres will continue in miscellaneous uses. The largest shift in acreage will be an increase Of #3 acres in pasture-~the proposed total being 63, instead of 20 as at present. Thirty acres of this increase will be in pasture only temporarily, however, with a possible shift later to cropland or permanent pasture. Hay acreage is to be increased to 10 from the present 5. Corn production will be allocated 22 acres, an increase of 7, and the cotton acreage will remain unchanged from the present 10, in compliance with the federal program designed to control cotton pro- duction by acreage limitation. Livestock production will be expanded, as permitted by the larger pasture acreage to over 9 times the present total. Most im- Ixnrtant, a sheep enterprise will be added, but also hog production / will bi tractor stock h T duce the individu; 11100319 1: added 1‘8: Operatic; I: 215 will be quadrupled, and draw-bar power will be Obtained from a tractor replacing the mule team. The numbers of each kind Of live- stock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Dairy cows 2 1 -1 Ewes O 50 5O Lambs raised 0 55 55 Sows 1 A 3 Hogs raised 13 56 M3 Mules ___2_ __0_ __-_-_2_ Total 18 166 1A8 This prOposed budgeting of agricultural resources will pro- duce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to the individual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased net income is assumed to be valued highly enough by him to be worth the added responsibility and work required for carrying out the future Operations. Improved land use on this farm calls for the woodland to occupy two-thirds (221 acres) of the total area. At present over half the acreage is in woodland (178 acres), and idle land com- prises almost another third, with less than a sixth in agriculture. Practically all Of the existing woodland is in upland hardwoods, with only eight acres in lower slope hardwoods and five in bottom- land hardwoods. The bottomland hardwood area and three-fifths of the upland area are so poorly stocked that they should be converted to loblolly pine plantations. 216 The present stumpage value of the entire 178-acre woodland is about $1,500 for a stand Of 117 MBF primarily of poletimber. Expansion of the agricultural land to #2 acres for crOps, 30 for temporary pasture and 33 for permanent pasture will use all the land suitable for these purposes and will still leave 221 acres for timber. The total value Of the present 178 acres of forest (market value of bare land plus stumpage value) is approximately $h,h00 and the 153 acres of agricultural land are worth about $7,600. The combined value of buildings, livestock, feed, machin- ery, and other equipment is $3,100. Thus the total investment in the farm is $15,100. The present farm operation has required an average annual outlay Of labor of 180 man-days from.the farm family. The work load on a cotton farm is heaviest in the spring and early summer and again in the fall. Between these periods there is time for other work, if it is available. The Opportunities for improved living on this farm lie in fuller use of the resources of land and labor. The prime essential is to Obtain the money and advice to get started on a better farming system. Credit is commonly available from local banks or production credit associations. Advice is available from a number Of government agencies for any of the various possible plans for Operating the farm. After the farmer has talked with agricultural specialists and foresters and considered his own capabilities and resources, he narrows the alternatives down to a few, in this case, four. 217 Plan I calls for continuation of all aspects of the present Operation. The three other alternatives all include the agricul- tural changes described at the beginning of the discussion Of this unit. In addition, Plan II requires intensive forest management with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. Plan III also requires intensive forest management but calls for sale of stumpage only, thus involving no labor for harvesting. Plan IV specifies merely extensive forestry and occasional unplanned sales of stumpage, with no labor allocated for any aspect of forest man- agement. Next, the farm owner compares these plans with regard to expected net income, capital and labor requirements, seasonality and type of enterprise, and other considerations of importance to him, and then selects the one most desirable in relation to his own personal scale Of combined criteria. If the owner continues with his present farm operation, Plan I, he proposes to sell the farm as soon as he can get $20,600. By investing this amount elsewhere at four percent he can equal his present income Of $823 from.the farm.and save prOperty taxes be- sides. By adopting and implementing the plan (Plan II) indicated here to be his selection, however, within ten years the farmer will be able to increase his net farm income to over three times its present value and to achieve a much fuller use of his various re- sources. He will be able especially to use his time and land more completely and to spread overhead and certain special costs (such the Vt when 2 value TABLE marke' Inves1 Qatar» \6\ kric‘ 218 as depreciation) over a broader base. Over the development period this plan results in a considerably increased total investment: from almost $15,200 to $62,300. Of this greater amount, however, $38,500 is the stumpage value Of the residual timber after six decades of management, a $37,000 increase but not directly an out- Of-pocket cost. Similarly, though to a much smaller degree, $8,250 will be the value of the farm's improved 110 acres of agricultural land when modern methods of land treatment have raised the real estate value from.$50 to $75 an acre (See Table 15). TABLE 15.--Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans Of Operation for Unit 2 Present Operation Alternative plans a b c d Investment Plan I Plans II and III Plan IV category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 153 $ 7, 650 110 $ 8,250 110 $ 8,250 Forest landf 178 2 ,8 8 221 3,536 221 3,536 Buildings, live- stock,and otherg . . 3,125 . . 11,950h . . 11,950h Stumpage . . 1,582 . . 38, 567h . . 1 W800 Total 331 $15,165 331 $62,303 331 $25,536 aPlan I--no timber sales. bPlan II--intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale Of forest products. cPlan III-~intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. Including brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. hAverage in the long run. value value 219 The original agricultural land total of 153 acres valued at $7,650 will be increased in value by $2,750 for this reason, as the preceding table shows, but l3 acres of it will drop in value $l,u62 when it is shifted from miscellaneous agricultural use or idleness into forest use--from.a real estate market value of $50 an acre, cleared, to $16 an acre, forested. Thus the net increase in land value of the entire farm.will be only $1,288. The productivity value increase will be many times greater, however, even over only the first decade, both on the agricultural land and on the forest land. Over three-fourths of the increase in total farm value during the 60-year development period is due to the fuller timber stand. The only major area Of investment requiring direct expenditures is that of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment. Although not all of these must be paid for immediately, most of the increase from $3,100 to almost $12,000 will have to be provided for in the first couple of years of the new program. Some of this can be paid for by cash on hand, but most Of it will require a number Of years for repayment, using such devices as short-term credit, real estate mortgages (or second mortgages), and preferably inter- mediate-term credit for construction of buildings. Assuming that the net farm income under the chosen plan will be at least $1,800 for the first two;years and at least $2,500 thereafter, the farmer will be able to pay interest and principal on his debt at the rate Of $1,000 at first and then $1,700 and still have a disposable income equal to his present one. Therefore even if the entire '8 H- 0. years man-e 220 $8,800 for direct expenditures is borrowed immediately, it can be paid Off (with 6-percent interest compounded annually) within 8 years. Under the new plan the farm family will have available 1.8 man-equivalents Of labor. This will be about 5#0 man-days if spread fairly evenly throughout the year. Less than half Of this labor will be needed for the agricultural enterprises: 250 man- days. The remaining 290 man-days could be used for forest work if needed. During the first decade of intensive forest manage- ment, however, only #68 man-days Of labor will be needed--about #7 a year--to include harvesting of timber products for sale at roadside. The expected sale of these products for the decade totals $#,338, Of which $858 would be stumpage value if the trees were sold on the stump (See Appendix, Table 2-1). Although the re- maining $3,#80 could be attributed to labor used in harvesting (at $15.20 a man-day for the necessary 229 days), 51 percent of the total labor over the decade would have been in forest man- agement and improvement work: 239 man-days. If the returns to this labor were to be paid at the same rate as the harvesting labor, the stumpage return as a source Of funds would be woefully inadequate. In view Of the fact that the management and improvement work can be expected to increase the potential value of the resid- ual stand more than the removal of the harvested products will have decreased it, the farmer might well consider the management labor later move; ment ‘ ‘-; pa 6"? 221 labor as an investment for which he should expect no return until later in the development period. He may prefer, though, to allocate the roadside products' income by equal division among the total number of man—days for harvesting and management labor required over the decade (including the stumpage value of the harvested trees, on the ground that re- moval of these merchantable trees is part Of the over-all improve- ment Operation prescribed for the woodland area and needs no financial return to the land factor to justify the cutting). This would result in a wage of $9.#8 a man-day for the #68 man-days of labor if no returns to other factors were considered. In the long run if prices and volumes do not depart serious- ly from the estimates for the stable period, the average decadal income from roadside sales will be about $#5,500 and labor require- ments for all fOrest work will average 903 man-days. The average decadal value of stumpage to be cut will be over $29,000. If a minimum #-percent rate of return is required on the average investment of almost $38,600 in stumpage and $3,500 in for- est land, $1,68# would have to be subtracted from the annual stumpage value of $2,933 Of the harvested products, leaving $1,2#9 as an additional return to land, timber, and labor. As an average Of only 37 man-days of labor is needed each decade for management purposes, less than # days a year, practically all of the stumpage returns should be attributed to the timber and land--equa1 to al- most exactly 7 percent of the investment. The difference of almost $16,200 between roadside and stump- age sale value would require 866 man-days of labor. These man-days woul. the I: This 222 would therefore be worth $18.68 each to the owner who would supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and skidding. This would provide a 13—percent increase over the comparable aver- age harvesting man-day return of $16.#6 during the development period. The rise Of the stumpage return to 6.9 percent from the 5.1 Of the development period is an even more pronounced increase: 35 percent. Subtraction of equipment cost of about $2 a man-day would make an adequate allowance for Operation and depreciation Of a power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share of the cost Of the several pieces of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone (separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $1#.5O during the development period and $16.70 during the stable period. In the case of this farm, where more man-days are available than are needed for forest management and harvesting either in the first decade or in succeeding decades, intensive forestry with har- vesting tO roadside is clearly the best alternative. This is the important feature of Plan II that differentiates it from.Plans III and IV. The following condensed annual financial summaries for the first and second decades Show the comparative net farm incomes for these decades (Table 16). In the first decade the annual net farm income under Plan II is $25# more than under Plan III because the income from roadside sales is increased by the higher price for a volume Of cut products TAB; Incc expe Recs Cr Li Li F0 225 TABLE 16.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 2 Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan 1‘3L Plan 11b Plan 111° Plan 1vd First decade Receipts Crops 31,550 82,150 82,150 82,150 Livestock 429 2,728 2,728 2,728 Livestock products 0 150 150 150 Forest products 0 454 86 154 Total receipts 1,979 5,462 5,114 5,182 Cash operating expenses 970 2,206 2,156 2,156 Net cash farm income 1,009 5,256 2,958 2,872 Depreciation 186 659 615 615 Net farm income 825 2,597 2.345 2,411 Second decade Receipts ‘Crops 1,550 2,150 2,150 2,150 Livestock 429 2,728 2,728 2,728 Livestock products 0 150 150 150 Forest products 0 1,148 591 17 Total receipts 1,979 6,176 5,419 5,045 Cash operating expenses 970 2,226 2,156 2,156 Net cash farm income 1,009 5,950 5,265 2,889 Depreciation 186 685 615 615 Net farm income 825 5,265 2,648 2,274 aPlan I--present farm operation.with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. °P1an III--improved agricultural organization and intensive ‘forestp'with sale of stumpage only. dP1an.IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. OVEI‘ 8.3111: 181. i( inc 0: A.“ 22h over a similar volume of stumpage, and also includes an average annual gross income of $1h6 from 18 cords of hardwood pulpwood not merchantable as stumpage. The cost of harvesting, however, includes $9h annually for operation, maintenance, and depreciation of the power saw. The annual net farm income under Plan II is only $186 higher than for Plan IV, however, because under extensive forestry all merchantable sawtimber (llT'MBF) is to be cut whereas only 684M are to be cut under intensive forestry. By the second decade, however, the sort of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm incomes that is repeated in succeeding decades. The highest net farm.income is achieved under Plan II--on the order of $1,000 more than under Plan IV, and Plan III is a few hundred dollars above Plan IV. These annual differentials are increased in the stable period to approximately $h,3OO and $2,800, respectively (See Table 17). Alternative plans with purchase of additional acreage With intensive forest management, if the farmer sells stump- age only (Plan III), he will need not more than 2% man-days a year on his planned acreage. Thus to use an extra 266 of the 290 man- days available for forestry, he could expand his acreage ll-fold by purchase of woodland and idle land similar to what he owns now. If funds could be obtained for this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 2,652 and the annual net stumpage income $1,032 for the first ten years. The increased investment of $55,858 in 2,h31 acres of wood- Table 225 land would thus add $9h6 annually to net farm income during the first decade, a return of 1.7 percent. During the second decade, however, it would add $h,3OO annually, a return of 7.7 percent on the additional investment in woodland. The rate would be 5.3 per- cent during the third decade, 8 percent during the fourth, and would be over #0 percent in all succeeding decades, leveling off to an average of 60 percent in the stable period. Table 17.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 2 .Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan 13 Plan 11b Plan 111c Plan Ivd Receipts Crops $1,550 $2,150 $2,150 $2,150 Livestock M29 2,728 2,728 2,728 Livestock products 0 150 150 150 Forest products 0 h,55O 2,933 89 Total receipts 1,979 9,578 7,961 5,117 Cash operating expenses 970 2,2u6 2,156 2,156 Net cash farm income 1,009 7,332 5,805 2,961 Depreciation 186 705 615 615 Net farm income 823 6,627 5,190 2,3h6 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II-improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. If forest products are sold at roadside (Plan II), the annual number of man-days needed for forest management and har- vesting during the development period will not exceed 90 except 226 in the seventh decade, which calls for 221. .Also in the stable period the average needed will not exceed 90. With 290 man-days available annually, at least 200 of these would be in excess during all but the seventh decade. If the farmer wished to make fuller use of these 200 man- days annually, he could buy an additional h9O acres of wooded and idle land similar to what he owns now. For the seventh decade this would mean hiring annually 131 man-days. The enlarged total acre- age would be 711, from which the contribution to annual net income would be $1,09h during the first decade and considerably more in the second and later decades. The second decade would yield over $3,200 toward the farm's net annual income, and the stable decades, over $13,800. These increased annual net incomes would be $75k more in the first decade than Plan II without the additional h9O acres, $2,235 in the second decade, and $9,h96 in the stable decades. The rates of marginal annual returns during these decades on the $11,259 investment would therefore be approximately 6.7 per- cent, 20 percent, and 8% percent, respectively. Neither of these last two modifications of the intensive forestry alternatives are likely to be implemented for at least several years, because the owner can be eXpected to have some difficulty in obtaining additional credit until considerable por- tions of the loans for agricultural improvement have been repaid. ZIf he is eager to finance forest area expansion under either of tflnese proposals, however, and can do so, his long-run profit posi- txion.will be greatly enhanced. 227 Unit 3--A.Cotton-Hog-Beef-Forestry Farm This 398-acre farm currently has 63 acres in agricultural uses (16 in cotton, 22 in corn, and 25 in permanent pasture and hay), 218 acres in woodland and brush, and 117 acres idle or in miscellaneous uses (such as roads, buildings, and farmyards). The small acreage in agricultural uses is regrettably low inasmuch as the soils on almost half the total acreage are good for agriculture, a fourth being suitable for permanent pasture and almost a fifth for crOps. Thus current agricultural Operations use about a third of the acreage suitable for farming and a sixth of the total prop- erty. Alternative plans for fuller use of the land best suited to farming will redistribute the acreage with no change in woodland (except for conversion of brush to pine plantation), but all 175 acres usable for agriculture will be prepared for field uses, and 5 acres will continue in miscellaneous uses. The largest shift in acreage will be an increase of 80 acres in pasture--the proposed total being 100, instead of 20 as at present. Ten acres are to grow silage, and the hay acreage is to be increased to 2h from.the present five. Corn production will be allocated 25 acres, an in- crease of 3, and the cotton acreage of 16 will remain unchanged, in compliance with the federal program designed to control cotton production by acreage limitation. Livestock production will be eXpanded as permitted by the larger pasture acreage, to over three times the present total, the largest percentages of increase being in calves and beef cows, but the greatest absolute increase will be in hogs. The numbers of eat? ual i is SI I‘ES I (j n 228 each kind of livestock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Beef cows 8 3O 22 Calves raised 5 27 22 Sows 3 h l Hogs raised. _E§1 _£¥é _£¥§ Total 36 117 81 This proposed budgeting of farm resources will produce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to the individ- ual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased net income is supposedly valued highly enough by him to be worth the added reSponsibility and work required for carrying out the new plan. Improved land use on this farm calls for the woodland to occupy over half (218 acres) of the total area. At present this acreage includes both woodland and brush, idle open land comprises almost another third of the farm total, and less than a sixth is in agriculture. Brush occupies 83 acres and woodland 135, all of which acreage is upland except for 10 acres on a lower slope hard- wood site. .All the existing woodland is either mixed hardwoods or hardwoods in combination with pine or cedar or with pine and cedar. In view of the poor stocking of 50 acres of pine hardwoods and cedar hardwoods, intensive forest management of these areas as well as of the land in brush (all totaling 133 acres) will re- quire conversion to loblolly pine plantations. Well-stocked up- land areas of 25 acres in young pine-cedar hardwoods and 50 acres in hardwood poletimber, also a 10-acre tract of moderately well stocked lower slope hardwoods, will need only thinning in the first 0T3 is {11 timb~ and 2 al 14 lives 229 or second decade. The present stumpage value of the entire 135-acre woodland is about $1,000 for a 60-acre stand of 103 MBF primarily of pole- timber. The total bare land value of the 218 acres of woodland and brush is approximately $3,500 and the 180 acres of agricultur- al land are worth about $9,000. The combined value of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment is $3,000. Thus the total investment in the farm is $16,500. The present farm operation has required an average annual outlay of labor of 269 man-days from the farm family. The work load on a cotton farm is heaviest in the spring and early summer and again in the fall. Between these periods there is time for other work, if it is available. The opportunities for improved living on this farm lie in fuller use of the resources of land and labor. The prime essen- tial is to obtain the money and advice to get started on a better farming system, Credit is commonly available from local banks or production credit associations. Advice is available from a number of government agencies for any of the various possible plans for operating the farm. After the farmer has talked with agricultural Specialists and foresters and considered his own ca- pabilities and resources, he narrows the alternatives down to a few, in this case, four. Plan I calls for continuation of all aspects of the present (:peration. The three other alternatives all include the agricul- tniral changes described at the beginning of the discussion of this 'unit. In addition, Plan II requires intensive forest management own ‘ 18.1 ‘3 his y. his to 8.11( 230 with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. Plan III also requires intensive forest management but calls for sale of stumpage only, thus involving no labor for harvesting. Plan IV specifies merely extensive forestry and occasional unplanned sales of stumpage, with no labor allocated for any aspect of forest man- agement. Next, the farm owner compares these plans with regard to expected net income, capital and labor requirements, seasonality and type of enterprise, and other considerations of importance to him, and then selects the one most desirable in relation to his own personal scale of combined criteria. If the owner continues with his present farm Operation, Plan I, he proposes to sell the farm as soon as he can get $25,200. By investing this amount elsewhere at four percent he can equal his present net farm income of $1,009 from the farm and save prop- erty taxes besides. By adopting and implementing the plan indicated here to be his selection, however, within ten years the farmer will be able to increase his net farm income to three times its present value and to achieve a much fuller use of his various resources. He will be able eSpecially to use his time and land more completely and to spread overhead and certain special costs (such as depre- ciation) over a broader base. Over the development period this plan results in a considerably increased total investment: from $16,500 to $70,300. Of this greater amount, however, $38,h00 is the stumpage value of the residual timber after six decades of man- agement, a $37,h00 increase but not a direct out-of-pocket cost. be ‘. mod: I! m (D P10 cf“? (7") FL f; 231 Similarly, though to a much smaller degree, $13,500 will be the value of the farm's 180 acres Of agricultural land when modern methods of land treatment have raised the real estate value from $50 to $75 an acre (See Table 18). Table l8.--Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of Operation for Unit 3 Present Operation Adternative plans Investment Plan la Plans 11b and 111c Plan 1vd category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 180 $9,000 180 $13,500 180 $13,500 Forest landf 218 3,u88 218 3,h88 218 3,u88 Buildings , live- stock, and otherg . . 3,000 . . lu,900 . . 1h,900 Stumpage . . 1,030 . . 38,1+25h . . 1,750 Total 398 $16,518 398 $70,313 398 $33,638 aPlan I--no timber sales. bPlan II--intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--intensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. fIncluding brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. Average in the long run. Most of the $h,500 value increase will be required during the first decade Of improved farming practices--the major investment being in developing 112 acres Of miscellaneous and idle land into cropland and permanent pasture. Almost three-fourths Of the increase in total farm value during the 60-year development period is due to the fuller timber may“e Sprea labor _ p. — 232 stand. The only major area of investment requiring direct expend- itures is that of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment. Although not all of these must be paid for immediately, most of the increase from.$3,000 to almost $15,000 will have to be provided for in the first couple of years of the new program. Some of this can be paid for by cash on hand, but most of it will require a number of years for repayment, using such devices as short-term credit, real estate mortgages (or second mortgages), and preferably intermediate-term credit for construction Of buildings. Assuming that the net farm income under the chosen plan will be at least $2,100 for the first two years and at least $3,000 thereafter, the farmer will be able to pay interest and principal on his debt at the rate of $1,000 at first and then $2,000 and still have a disposable income equal to his present one. Therefore even if the entire $11,900 for direct expenditures is borrowed im- mediately, it can be paid Off (with 6-percent interest compounded annually) within 9 years. Under the new plan the farm family will have available 2.0 mansequivalents of labor. This will be about 600 man-days if spread fairly evenly throughout the year. About two-thirds of the labor will be needed for the agricultural enterprises: 388 man-days. The remaining 212 man-days can be used for forest work if needed. During the first decade of intensive forest management, however, only 353 man-days of labor will be needed--about 35 a year--to in- clude harvesting Of timber products for sale at roadside. The expected sale of these products for the decade totals $968, Of which $75 will be stumpage value if the trees are sold on mark an i trib: days: days retur vestii woefu7 work 0 ual st haVe d. 233 the stump (See Appendix, Table 3-1). NO pulpwood stumpage value is included, as only sawtimber is merchantable. Inasmuch as the market value of pulpwood stumpage is eXpected to remain zero for an indefinite period in the future, the remaining $893 can be at- tributed to harvesting (at $8.70 a man-day for the necessary 103 days). Of the total labor requiredfkm'the decade, however, 250 days will be in forest management and improvement work. If the returns to this labor were to be paid at the same rate as the har- vesting labor, the stumpage return as a source Of funds would be woefully inadequate. In view of the fact that the management and improvement work can be expected to increase the potential value of the resid- ual stand more than the removal Of the harvested products will have decreased it, the farmer might well consider the management labor as an investment for which he should expect no return until later in the development period. He may prefer to allocate the roadside products' income by equal division among the total number of man-days for harvesting and management labor required over the decade (including the stumpage value of the harvested trees, on the ground that removal of these merchantable trees is part Of the over-all improvement Op- eration prescribed for the woodland area and needs no financial return to the land factor to Justify the cutting). This would re- sult in a wage Of $2.7h a man-day for the 353 man-days Of labor if no returns to other factors were considered. Any additional wage for labor performed in the first decade would have to be either 231+ foregone, postponed until the next decade, or financed out of ag- ricultural income. In the long run if prices and volumes do not depart serious- ly from the estimates for the stable period, the average decadal income from roadside sales will be about $115,900 and labor require- ments for all forest work will average 1,083 man-days. The average decadal value of stumpage to be cut will be about $28,600. If a minimum.h-percent rate of return is required on the average investment of $38,h00 in stumpage and $3,500 in forest land, $1,676 would have to be subtracted from the annual stumpage value of $2,860 of the harvested products, leaving $1,18h as an additional return to land, timber, and labor. As an average of only 35 man-days of labor is needed each decade for management purposes, less than M days a year, practically all of the stumpage returns should be attributed to the timber and land--equa1 to al- most 7 percent of the investment. The difference of over $17,300 between roadside and stumpage sale value would require 1,0h8 man-days Of labor. These man-days would therefore be worth.$l6.53 each to the owner who would supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and skidding. This would provide a 2-percent increase over the comparable aver— age harvesting man-day return of $16.1h during the development period. The rise of the stumpage return to 6.8 percent from the 5.1 Of the development period is a far more pronounced increase: 33 percent. Subtraction of equipment cost of about $2 a man-day would make an adequate allowance for operation and depreciation Of a IV ber. O. o. a .1. mm in. m: ‘1‘ 235 power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share Of the cost of the several pieces Of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone (separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $lh.00 during the development period and $lh.50 during the stable period. In the case Of this farm, where more man-days are available than are needed for forest management and harvesting either in the first decade or in succeeding decades, intensive forestry with harvesting to roadside is clearly the best alternative. This is the important feature Of Plan II that differentiates it from Plans III and IV. The following condensed annual financial summaries for the first and second decades show the comparative net farm incomes for these decades (Table 19). In the first decade the annual net farm income under Plan IV is $76 and $95 higher than for Plans II and III, respectively, because under extensive forestry all merchantable sawtimber (103 MBF) is to be cut, whereas only 7.5 M are to be out under intensive forestry. ‘While Plan 11 benefits from the higher price for a vol- ume of cut products over a similar volume of stumpage, and also includes an average annual gross income of $78 from.almost 10 cords of hardwood pulpwood not merchantable as stumpage, the cost of har- vesting includes $70 annually for operation, maintenance, and de- preciation Of the power saw. By the second decade, however, the sort Of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm 256 TABLE 19.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 5 Alternative plans Income and expen3° items Plan 18 Plan 11b Plan 111° Plan 1vd First decade Receipts Crops $2,540 85,020 85,020 83,020 Livestock 900 5,223 5,223 5,223 Livestock products 0 O 0 0 Forest products 0 97 8 105 Total receipts 5,240 8,540 8,251 8,546 Cash operating expenses 1,457 4,197 4,162 4,162 Net cash farm income 1,785 4,145 4,089 4,184 Depreciation 674 1,055 1,020 1,020 Net farm income 1,009 5,088 5,069 5,164 Second decade Receipts Crops 2,340 3,020 3,020 3,020 Livestock 900 5,223 5,223 5,223 Livestock products 0 O O 0 Forest products 0 1,272 584 50 Total receipts 3,240 9,515 8,627 8,293 Cash operating expenses 1,457 4,245 4,162 4,162 Net cash farm income 1,785 5,270 4,465 4,151 Depreciation 674 1,105 1,020 1,020 Net farm income 1,009 4,167 5,445 5,111 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan IIv-improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. °P1an III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. t‘r P1 CBIB incomes that is repeated in succeeding decades. farm income is achieved under Plan II--On the order Of $1,000 more 237 The highest net than under Plan IV, and Plan III is a few hundred dollars above Plan IV. These annual differentials are increased in the stable period to approximately $h,300 and $2,800, respectively (See Table 20). TABLE 20.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 3 Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan I8 Plan IIb Plan IIIc Plan IVd Receipts Crops $2,3u0 $3,020 $3,020 $3,020 Livestock 900 5,223 5,223 5,223 Livestock products 0 0 O 0 Forest products 0 h,592 2,860 88 Total receipts 3,2h0 12,835 11,103 8,331 Cash Operating expensesl,h57 h,270 h,l62 h,162 Net cash farm income 1,783 8,565 6,9h1 h,l69 Depreciation 67h 1,128 1,020 1,020 Net farm.income 1,009 7,h37 5,921 3,1h9 a'Plan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale Of forest products. cPlan III-~improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. Alternative plans with purchase Of additional acreage With intensive forest management, if the farmer sells stumpage only (Plan III), he will need not more than 25 man-days a year on his present acreage. Thus to use an extra 187 Of the «to /O Y x. a, ‘ . V 1‘ ‘<. He: at 8:1 ' 238 212 man-days available for forestry, he could expand his acreage 7-fold by purchase Of woodland and idle land similar to what he owns now. If funds could be Obtained for this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 1,7hh and the annual net stumpage income $6h for the first ten years. The increased investment Of $2h,h16 in 1,526 acres of wood- land would thus add only $56 annually to net farm income during the first decade, a return of a bare 1/6 of one percent. During the second decade, however, it would add $2,691 annually, a return Of 8.5 percent on the additional investment in woodland. The rate would be 7.7 percent during the third decade and would be over 16 percent in all succeeding decades, leveling Off to an average Of 63 percent in the stable period. If forest products are sold at roadside (Plan 11), the annual number of man-days needed for forest management and har- vesting will not exceed 83 except in the sixth and seventh decades, which call for 95 and 217, respectively. After that, the average needed will not exceed 108. With 212 man-days available annually, at least 129 Of these would be in excess during all but the sixth and seventh decades. If the farmer wished to make fuller use Of these 129 man- days annually, he could buy an additional 339 acres Of wooded and idle land similar to what he owns now. For the sixth and seventh decades this would mean hiring annually 12 and 13h man-days, re- spectively. The enlarged new total acreage would be 557, from which the 239 contribution to annual net income would be only $69 during the first decade but considerably more in the second and later decades. The second decade would yield annually over $2,800 toward the farmis net annual income, and the stable decades, over $11,000. These increased annual net incomes would be $h2 more in the first decade than Plan 11 without the additional 339 acres, $1,720 in the second decade, and $6,805 in the stable decades. The rates of marginal annual returns during these decades on the $7,026 invest- ment would therefore be approximately 0.6 percent, 2h percent, and 97 percent, respectively. Neither Of these last two modifications of the intensive for- estry alternatives are likely to be implemented for at least sever- al years, because the owner can be expected to have some difficulty in Obtaining additional credit until considerable portions of the loans for agricultural improvement have been repaid. If he is eager to finance forest area expansion under either of these pro- posals, however, and can do so, his long-run profit position will be greatly enhanced. Unit h-eA Cotton-Dairy-Forestry Farm This 362-acre farm currently has hh acres in agricultural uses (1% in cotton, 10 each in corn, lespedeza and permanent pasture), 17h acres in woodland and brush, and 1AM acres idle or in miscellaneous uses such as roads, buildings, and farmyards. Only Rh acres are in cultivation despite the fact that the soils on nearly half of the total acreage are good for agriculture, over a fifth being suitable for permanent pasture and a fourth for w l a flu 1i 21+O crops. Thus current agricultural Operations use less than a fourth of the acreage suitable for farming and an eighth Of the total prop- erty. Alternative plans for fuller use of the land best suited to farming will almost quadruple the acreage in cultivation and will establish a lO-acre woodland pasture. The largest shift in acre- age will be the expansion Of the lO-acre permanent pasture to a total of 77 acres, instead Of the current grazing on land in the miscellaneous and idle category and on the cropland after harvest. Twenty acres are to be allocated for silage production, 25 for oats and lespedeza, and 9 to grow alfalfa. Corn production will be reduced from 10 to 8 acres, and the cotton acreage will be in- creased from_1h to 30. Livestock production will be increased as permitted by the larger pasture acreage, to eight times the present total. The major category, the dairy enterprise will actually become almost 20 times its present size, but all the mules will be eliminated when a tractor is obtained. The numbers Of each kind of livestock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Mules h 0 -h Dairy cows 2 110 38 Heifers __1___ __1_6_ _1_5_ Total 7 56 1+9 This proposed budgeting of agricultural resources will pro- duce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to the individual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased net 2&1 income is supposedly valued highly enough by him to be worth the added responsibility and work required for carrying out the new plan. Improved land use on this farm calls for hardly any change in the woodland acreage, slightly less than half (175 acres) of the total area. At present brush occupies some of this area, and idle land comprises another ho percent of the total, inasmuch as a bare eighth is used for agriculture. Somewhat over half (93 acres) of the woodland is in upland hardwoods, almost a fifth is in lower slope hardwoods, and nearly 30 percent is well stocked with natural stands of shortleaf pine Of various diameter classes up to 30 inches. All of the upland hardwood area produces such slow-growing trees that conversion Of the stand to a loblolly pine plantation is indicated. The present stumpage value of the entire 175-acre woodland is about $5,h00 for 300 MBF of small and large sawtimber, $h,800 for 2h0 M.of shortleaf pine and $600 for 60 M.of hardwood. Ex- pansion of the agricultural land to 92 acres for crops, 77 acres for permanent pasture and 10 acres for woodland pasture will use all the land suitable for these purposes but will still leave 175 acres for timber. The total value of the present 175 acres Of forest (market value of bare land plus stumpage value) is approx- imately $8,200 and the 187 acres of agricultural land are worth about $9,350. The combined value Of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment is $2,300. Thus the total invest- ment in the farm is $19,850. 01 2h2 The present farm Operation has required an average annual outlay of labor of 170 man-days from the farm family, The work load on a cotton farm is heaviest in the spring and early summer and again in the fall. Between these periods there is time for other work, if it is available. The opportunities for improved living on this farm.lie in fuller use of the resources of land and labor. The prime essen- tial is to obtain the money and advice to get started on a better farming system. Credit is commonly available from local banks or production credit associations. Advice is available from a number of government agencies for any of the various possible plans for operating the farm. After the farmer has talked with agricultural specialists and foresters and considered his own capabilities and resources, he narrows the alternatives down to a few, in this case, four. Plan I calls for continuation Of all aspects Of the present operation. The three other alternatives all include the agricul- tural changes described at the beginning of the discussion of this unit. In addition, Plan II requires intensive forest management with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. Plan III also requires intensive forest management but calls for sale of stumpage only, thus involving no labor for harvesting. Plan IV specifies merely extensive forestry and occasional unplanned sales of stumpage, with no labor allocated for any aspect of forest man- agement. Next, the farm owner compares these plans with regard to 2I+3 expected net income, capital and labor requirements, seasonality and type of enterprise, and other considerations of importance to him, and then selects the one most desirable in relation to his own personal scale of combined criteria. If the owner continues with his present farm Operation, Plan I, he proposes to sell the farm.as soon as he can get nearly the value Of his investment of almost $19,900. By investing this amount elsewhere at four percent he can receive $796 interest, almost $300 more than his present net farm income of $h98 from the farm.and save property taxes besides. By adopting and implementing the plan (Plan 11) indicated here to be his selection, however, within ten years the farmer will be able to increase his net farm income to over fifteen times its present value and to achieve a much fuller use of his various resources. He will be able especially to use his time and land more completely and to spread overhead and certain special costs (such as depreciation) over a broader base. Over the development period this plan results in a considerable increase in total in- vestment: from almost $19,900 to almost $70,l+00. Of this greater amount, however, $33,900 is the stumpage value of the residual timber after six decades of management, a $28,h00 increase but not directly an out-Of-pocket cost. Similarly, though to a much smaller degree, $111,025 will be the value of the farm's improved 187 acres of agricultural land when modern methods of land treatment have raised the real estate value from.$50 to $75 an acre (See Table 21). Most of the almost Bl 2AM $h,700 value increase will be required during the first decade of improved farming practices--the major investment being in devel- oping l35 acres of miscellaneous and idle land into cropland and permanent pasture. TABLE 2l.--Acreage Of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of operation for Unit h Present Operation Alternative plans Investment Plan 18. Plans 11b and 111C Plan 1vd category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 187 $ 9,350 187 $11,025 187 $1h,025 Forest landf 175 2,800 175 2,800 175 2,800 Buildings , live- stock, and otherg . . 2,300 . . 19,675 . . 19,675 Stumpage . . 5,h28 . . 33,87hh . . 2,550h Total 362 $19,878 362 $70,37h 362 $39,050 aPlan I--no timber sales. bPlan II--intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III-~intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. fIncluding brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. hAverage in the long run. Over half ($28,h00) Of the increase in total farm value during the 60-year development period is due to the fuller timber stand. The only major area of investment requiring direct expend- itures is that Of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment. Although not all of these must be paid for immediately, most Of the increase from.$2,3OO to almost $19,700 will have to be CC 2115 provided for in the first couple of years of the new program. Some of this can be paid for by cash on hand, but most of it will require a number of years for repayment, using such devices as short-term credit, real estate mortgages (or second mortgages), and preferably intermediate-term credit for construction of buildings. Assuming that the net farm income under the chosen plan will be at least $5,000 for the first two years and at least $7,000 thereafter, the farmer will be able to pay interest and principal on his debt at the rate Of $h,000 at first and then $6,000 and still have a disposable income over twice his present one. There- fore even if the entire $17,h00 for direct expenditures is borrowed immediately, it can be paid Off (with 6-percent interest compounded annually) within 5 years. Under the new plan the farm family will have available 3.5 man-equivalents of labor. This will be about 1,050 man-days if spread fairly evenly throughout the year. Most of this labor will be needed for the agricultural enterprises: 880 man-days. The remaining 170 man-days could be used for forest work if needed. During the first decade of intensive forest management, however, only'h89 man-days Of labor will be needed--about #9 a year--to in- clude harvesting of timber products for sale at roadside. The expected sale of these products for the decade totals $6,992 of which $2,633 would be stumpage value if the trees were sold on the stump (See Appendix, Table h-l). Although the remaining $h,359 could be attributed to labor used in harvesting (at $12.13 a man-day for the necessary 359 216 days), one-fourth Of the total labor over the decade would have been in forest management and improvement work: 130 man-days. If the returns to this labor were to be paid at the same rate as the harvesting labor, the total management wage Of $1,57h might be subtracted from the stumpage value, leaving only $1,059 as a stumpage return for the decade. If the farmer wishes to keep the stumpage return intact, however, and charge both management and harvesting labor to the $h,359 harvesting return, the daily wage for the A89 man-days would average $8.91. In the long run if prices and volumes do not depart serious- ly from the estimates for the stable period, the average decadal income from roadside sales will be about $37,900 and labor require- ments for all forest work will average 830 man-days. The average decadal value of stumpage to be cut will be over $2h,h00. If a minimum h-percent rate of return is required on the average investment of almost $33,900 in stumpage and $2,800 in for- est land, $l,h67 would have to be subtracted from the annual stumpage value of $2,hh5 of the harvested products, leaving $978 as an additional return to land, timber, and labor. As an average of only 32 man-days of labor it: needed each decade for management purposes, about 3 days a year, practically all Of the stumpage re- turns should be attributed to the timber and land--equal to 6.7 percent of the investment. The difference of almost $13,500 between roadside and stump- age sale value would require 798 man-days of labor. These man- days would therefore be worth $16.91 each to the owner who would supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and 2H7 skidding. This value is almost the same as the comparable average harvesting man-day return of $16.89 during the development period. The rise of the stumpage return to 6.7 percent from the 5.h of the development period is a substantial increase, however: 2% percent. Subtraction of equipment cost of about $2 a man-day would make an adequate allowance for operation and depreciation Of a power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share of the cost Of the several pieces of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone (separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $lh.90 during both the development period and the stable period. In the case Of this farm, where more man-days are available than are needed for forest management and harvesting either in the first decade or in succeeding decades, intensive forestry with har- vesting to roadside is clearly the best alternative. This is the important feature of Plan II that differentiates it from Plans III and IV. The following condensed annual financial summaries for the first and second decades show the comparative net farm incomes for these decades (Table 22). In the first decade the annual net farm.income under Plan II is $338 more than under Plan III because the income from road- sales is increased by the higher price for a volume of cut products over a similar volume of stumpage, and also includes an average annual gross income of $22M from pulpwood not merchantable as stumpage, 25 cords of hardwood and 2.6 cords of pine. The cost of 248 TABLE 22.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 4 Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan 1a Plan 115 Plan 1115—» Plan 1vd First decade Receipts Crops 81,480 $6,505 86,505 86,505 Livestock 0 1,168 1,168 1,168 Livestock products 0 6,950 6,950 6,950 Forest products 0 699 265 545 Total receipts 1,480 15,500 14,864 15,144 Cash operating expenses 857 5,950 5,882 5,882 Net cash farm income 625 9,570 8,982 9,262 Depreciation 125 1,760 1,710 1,710 Net farm income 498 7,610 7,272 7,552 Second decade Receipts crops 1.480 6,503 69503 6,503 Livestock 0 1,168 1,168 1,168 Livestock products 0 6,950 6,950 6,950 Forest products 0 867 577 158 Total receipts 1,480 15,468 14,978 14,759 Cash operating expenses 857 5,927 5,882 5,882 Net cash farm income 625 9,541 9,096 8,877 Depreciation 125 1,755 1,710 1,710 Net farm income 498 7,786 7,586 7,167 a b Plan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. Plan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. 2119 harvesting, however, includes $98 annually for Operation, mainte- nance, and depreciation of the power saw. The annual net farm income under Plan II is only $58 higher than for Plan IV, however, because under extensive forestry all merchantable sawtimber (382 IMBF) is to be cut whereas only lh6 M are to be cut under intensive forestry. By the second decade, however, the sort of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm incomes that is repeated in succeeding decadeS. The highest net farm.income is achieved under Plan II--Over $600 more than under lPlan IV, and Plan III is $200 above Plan IV. These annual differ- entials are increased in the stable period to approximately $3,500 and $2,300, respectively (See Table 23). .Alternative plans with purchase of additional acreage In the long run with intensive forest management, if the farmer sells stumpage only (Plan III), he will need on the average not more than 3.2 man-days a year on his planned acreage. During the first decade he will need a total Of 130 days, an average of 13 days a year, primarily for timber stand.improvement, but there- after not over 3.2 a year except in the seventh decade which will require 10 days annually. Thus after the first decade, to use an extra 167 of the 170 man-days available for forestry, he could ex- pand.his acreage 52-fold by purchase of woodland and idle land similar to what he owns now. If funds could be obtained for this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 9,275. If this land is bought and improvement work and planting 250 done in the first decade, he will need to hire an extra 520 man- days during that decade. If he pays a wage of $10 to $15 a man- day, or an average annual labor cost ranging between $520 and $780; and if he charges it against the average annual stumpage income of $13,939, the average annual net stumpage income will be between $13,159 and $13,419 for the first ten years. TABLE 23.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit h Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan 18 Plan 11b Plan 111c Plan 1Vd Receipts Crops $l,l+80 $ 6,503 $ 6,503 $ 6,503 Livestock 0 1,168 1,168 1,168 Livestock products 0 6,930 6,930 6,930 Forest products 0 3,79h 2,hh5 108 Total receipts l,h80 18,395 17,0h6 1h,709 Cash Operating expenses 857 5,965 5,882 5,882 Net cash farm income 623 l2,h30 11,16h 8,827 Depreciation 125 1,793 1,710 1,710 Net farm income A98 10,637 9,h5h 7,117 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. The increased investment of $h27,856 in 9,100 acres of wood- land would thus add about $13,000 annually to net farm income during the first decade, a return Of 3 percent. During the second decade it would add almost $19,600 annually, a return Of 11.6 251 percent on the additional investment in woodland. The rate would be 6 percent during the third decade, 8.h percent during the fourth J and would be 22 percent or more in all succeeding decades, level- ing Off to an average of almost 30 percent in the stable period. If forest products are sold at roadside (Plan II), the annual number of man-days needed for forest management and har- vesting during the development period will not exceed 75 except in the seventh decade, which calls for 189. Also in the stable peri- od the average needed will not exceed 83. 'With 170 man-days available annually, at least 87 of these would be in excess during all but the seventh decade. If the farmer wished to make fuller use of these 87 man-days annually, he could buy an additional 183 acres of wooded and idle ZLand similar to what he owns now. For the seventh decade this prould mean hiring annually 217 man-days. The enlarged total acre- sage would be 358, from which the contribution to annual net income would be $1,229 during the first decade and considerably more in 'tihe second and later decades. The second decade would yield annu- ally almost $1,600 toward the farm’s net annual income, and the firtable decades, over $7,800. These increased annual net incomes would be $628 more in the first decade than Plan 11 without the Eldditional 183 acres, $813 in the second decade, and $h,203 in the Eitable decades. The rates of marginal annual returns during these (decades on the $8,60h investment would therefore be approximately '7 percent, 9 percent, and #9 percent, respectively. Neither of these last two modifications Of the intensive 252 forestry alternatives are likely to be implemented for at least several years, because the owner can be expected to have some difficulty in Obtaining additional credit until considerable portions of the loans for agricultural improvement have been re- paid. If he is eager to finance forest area expansion under either Of these proposals, however, and can do so, his long-run profit position will be greatly enhanced. Unit 5-aA Cotton-Grade A Dairy-Forestry Farm This 230-acre farm currently has 6h acres in agricultural uses (9 in cotton, 20 in corn, 15 in lespedeza, and 20 in pasture), 92 acres in woodland and brush, and 7h acres idle or in miscella- Iieous uses such as roads, buildings, and farmyards. The small sicreage in agricultural uses is regrettably low inasmuch as the ssoils on nearly 60 percent of the total acreage are good for agri- <2111ture, over 28 percent being suitable for pasture and 80 percent :fkor crops. Thus current agricultural Operations use less than Ilealf the acreage suitable for farming and less than three-tenths (Djf'the total property. Alternative plans for fuller use Of the :Leind best suited to farming will increase the acreage in culti- ‘fertion by over 50 percent and will more than triple the acreage IiIl pasture. The largest shift in acreage will be the expansion Of 1ihe 20-acre pasture to a total of 65 acres, instead of the cur- 1?ent grazing on land in the miscellaneous and idle category, and Vfill be supplemented by grazing on the cropland after harvest. ESixteen acres are to be allocated for silage production, 25 for 253 oats and lespedeza, and 8 to grow millet. Corn production will be reduced from.20 to 13 acres, and the cotton acreage will be in- creased from 9 to 12. Dairy livestock production will be increased to almost three times its present size, as permitted by the larger pasture acreage and the elimination of the hog enterprise. Both mules will be eliminated when a tractor is Obtained. The numbers of each kind of livestock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Dairy cows 8 30 22 Calves raised 6 10 h Sows 3 O -3 Hogs raised 30 0 ~30 .Mules _£1_ __£1_ _;fi_ Total 1+9 1+0 -9 This proposed budgeting of agricultural resources will pro- éluce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to izhe individual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased Iiet income is assumed to be valued highly enough by him.to be ‘Vrorth the added responsibility and work required for carrying out the future operations. Improved land use on this farm calls for the woodland to occupy two-fifths (92 acres) Of the total area. At present idle land comprises almost one-third of the total, inasmuch as just over a fourth is used for agriculture. Over four-fifths (75 acres) 1? only 14 man-days of labor its needed each decade for management IPIIrposes, less than 2 days a year, practically all of the stumpage returns should be attributed to the timber and land--equal to 6.7 Percent of the investment. The difference of almost $6,500 between roadside and stump- ‘1€§€3 sale value would require 397 man-days of labor. These man- days would therefore be worth $16.24 each to the owner who would We} 26o supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and skidding- This value is almost the same as the comparable aver- age harvesting man-day return of $16.59 during the development period. The rise of the stumpage return to 6.7 percent from.the 5.0 Of the development period is a substantial increase, however: 34 percent. Subtraction Of equipment cost of about $2 a man-day would make an adequate allowance for Operation and depreciation of a power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share Of the cost Of the several pieces of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone,(separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $14.60 during the development period, and $14.25 during the stable period. In the case Of this farm, where more man-days are available than are needed for forest management and harvesting either in the first decade or in succeeding decades, intensive forestry with harvesting to roadside is clearly the best alternative. This is the important feature of Plan 11 that differentiates it from Plans III and IV. The following condensed annual financial summaries for the first and second decades show the comparative net farm in- comes for these decades (Table 25). In the first decade the annual net farm income under Plan II is $75 more than under Plan III because the income from road- side sales is increased by the higher price for a volume of cut products over a similar volume of stumpage, and also includes an 261 TABLE 25.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 5 Income and ‘1 ‘ L A—l_ Alternative plans ’t expense 1 ems Plan 1a Plan 11b Plan 111c Plan Ivd First decade Receipts Crops 31,375 $2,262 82,262 82,262 Livestock 1,050 100 100 100 Livestock products 0 12,000 12,000 12,000 Forest products 0 158 59 72 Total receipts 2,405 14,520 14,401 14,454 Cash operating expenses 1,200 7,157 7,155 7,155 Net cash farm income 1,205 7,565 7,266 7,299 Depreciation 514 1,057 1,015 1,015 Net farm income 891 6,526 6,251 6,284 Second decade Receipts Crops 1,375 2,262 2,262 2,262 Livestock 1,050 100 100 100 Livestock products 0 12,000 12,000 12,000 Forest products 0 597 142 25 Total receipts 2,405 14,759 14,504 14,587 Cash operating expenses 1,200 7,158 7,155 7,155 Net cash farm income 1,205 7,601 7.369 7,252 Depreciation 514 1,058 1,015 1,015 Net farm income 891 6,565 6,354 6,257 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive ‘forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. 262 average annual gross income of $58 from 7.2 cords Of hardwood pulpwood not merchantable as stumpage. The cost of harvesting, however, includes $44 annually for operation, maintenance, and depreciation of the power saw. The annual net farm income under Plan II is only $42 higher than for Plan IV, however, because under extensive forestry all merchantable sawtimber (72 MBF) is to be cut during the decade whereas only 13 M are to be cut under intensive forestry. By the second decade, however, the sort of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm incomes that is repeated in succeeding decades. The highest net farm income is achieved under Plan II--Over $300 more than under Plan IV, and Plan III is over $100 above Plan IV. These annual differentials are increased in the stable period to approximately $1,600 and $1,050 respectively (See Table 26). Alternative_plans with purchase of additional acreage In the long run with intensive forest management, if the farmer sells stumpage only (Plan III), he will need on the average not more than 1.4 man-days a year on his planned acreage. During the first decade he will need a total of 120 days, an average of 12 days a year, primarily for timber stand improvement, but there- after not over 0.9 a year except in the seventh decade which will require 3.6 days annually. Thus after the first decade, to use an extra 73 of the 75 man-days available for forestry, he could expand his acreage 52-fold by purchase Of woodland and idle land 263 similar to what he owns now. If funds could be Obtained for this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 4,876. TABLE 26.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 5 m J Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan 18 Plan 11b Plan 111° Plan 1vd Receipts Crops $1,375 $2,262 $2,262 $2,262 Livestock 1,035 100 100 100 Livestock products 0 12,000 12,000 12,000 Forest products 0 1,738 1,093 37 Total receipts $2,405 $16,100 $15,455 $14,399 Cash operating expensesl,2OO 7,176 7,135 7,135 Net cash farm.income 1,205 8,924 8,320 7,264 Depreciation 314 1,056 1,015 1,015 Net farm income 891 7,868 7,305 6,249 a‘Plan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. Plan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III-~improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. If this land is bought and improvement work and planting done in the first decade, he will need to hire an extra 564 man- days during that decade. If he pays a wage of $10 to $15 a man- day, or an average annual labor cost ranging between $564 and $846; and if he charges it against the average annual stumpage in- come Of $2,072, the average annual net stumpage income will be between $1,226 and $1,508 for the first ten years. The increased investment Of over $76,500 in 4,784 acres Of 264 woodland would thus add somewhat less than $1,500 annually, say $1,400, to net farm income during the first decade, a return of 1.2 percent. During the second decade it would add almost $7,400 annually, a return of 6.5 percent on the additional investment in woodland. The rate would be 5.1 percent during the third decade, 19 percent during the fourth, and would be over 38 percent in all succeeding decades, leveling off to an average Of 50 percent in the stable period. If forest products are sold at roadside (Plan 11), the annual number of man-days needed for forest management and har- vesting during the development period will not exceed 37 except in the seventh decade, which calls for 78. Also in the stable period the average needed will not exceed 41. With 75 man-days available annually, at least 34 of these would be in excess during all but the seventh decade. If the farmer wished to make fuller use of these 34 man- days annually, he could buy an additional 76 acres of wooded and idle land similar to what he owns now. For the seventh decade this would mean hiring annually 65 man-days. The enlarged total acreage would be 168, from.which the contribution to annual net income would be $208 during the first decade and considerably more in the second and later decades. The second decade would yield annually $640 toward the farm's net annual income, and the stable decades, over $3,000. These increased annual net incomes would be $94 more in the first decade than Plan II without the additional 76 acres, $289 in the second decade, and 265 $1,368 in the stable decades. The rates of marginal annual returns during these decades on the $1,812 investment would there- fore be approximately 5 percent, 16 percent, and 75 percent, re- spectively. The 52-fOld woodland acreage increaSe for intensive forest management with sale of stumpage only (Plan III expanded) is not likely to be implemented for at least several years, because the owner can be expected to have some difficulty in Obtaining addi- tional credit until considerable portions Of the loans for agri- cultural improvement have been repaid. Credit for the $1,800 investment needed for the 76-acre expansion under Plan 11, however, should not be difficult to secure in view of the particularly favorable profit outlook for this modification. Unit 6-eA Cotton-Beef-Sheep-Forestry Farm This 318-acre farm currently has 46 acres in agricultural uses (almost 10 in cotton, 10 in corn, 20 in lespedeza pasture, 5 in hay, and l in truck crops), 156 acres in woodland and brush, and 116 acres idle or in miscellaneous uses such as roads, build- ings, and farmyards. The small acreage in agricultural uses is regrettably low inasmuch as the soils on almost half the total acreage are good for agriculture, 16 percent being suitable for permanent pasture, 13 percent for temporary pasture, and 15 percent for crops. Thus current agricultural Operations use about a third Of the acreage suitable for farming and a seventh Of the total property. Alternative plans for fuller use of the land will re- distribute the acreage with a l2-percent increase in woodland area 266 and a tripling Of Open agricultural land, but 5 acres will con- tinue in miscellaneous uses. The largest shift in acreage will be an increase of 70 acres in pasture--the proposed total being 90, instead of 20 as at present. Twenty acres Of this increase will be in pasture only temporarily, however, with a possible shift later to cropland or permanent pasture. Hay acreage is to be in- creased to 23 from.the present 5. Corn production will be allo- cated 15 acres, an increase of 5, and the cotton acreage will remain unchanged from.the present almost 10, in compliance with the federal program designed to control cotton production by acre- age limitation. LOblolly pine will be planted on 18 acres Of idle land ill-suited to agriculture. Livestock production will be expanded, as permitted by the larger pasture acreage, to over 77 times the present total. Most important, a sheep enterprise will be added, but also a herd of beef cattle will be obtained and the small present dairy produc- tion will be continued. The numbers of each kind Of livestock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Dairy cows 2 2 0 Beef cows 0 l5 15 Bull 0 l l Yearling calves l ll 10 sold Ewes 0 100 100 Rams 0 3 3 Lambs 0 100 100 Total "3" 2 32 “"229 This proposed budgeting of agricultural resources will pro- duce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to the 267 individual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased net income is assumed to be valued highly enough by him to be worth the added responsibility and work required for carrying out the future Operations. Improved land use on this farm calls for the woodland to occupy over half (174 acres) of the total area. At present brush occupies some of this area, and idle land comprises another third of the total, inasmuch as a bare seventh is used for agriculture. All of the woodland is in poorly stocked upland hardwoods, and one-sixth of the woodland area produces such slow-growing trees that conversion of the stand to a loblolly pine plantation is in- dicated, in addition to the l8-acre plantation on idle Open land. The present stumpage value of the entire 156-acre woodland is about $900 for 91 MBF of small and large sawtimber. Expansion of the agricultural land to 49 acres for crops, 50 acres for per- manent pasture and 40 acres for temporary pasture will use all the land suitable for these purposes but will still leave 174 acres fOr timber. The total value of the present 156 acres of forest (market value Of bare land plus stumpage value) is approx- imately $3,400 and the 162 acres of agricultural land are worth about $8,100. The combined value of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment is $1,700. Thus the total invest- ment in the farm is $13,200. The present farm.operation has required an average annual outlay of labor of 172 man-days from the farm family. The work load on a cotton farm is heaviest in the spring and early summer 268 and again in the fall. Between these periods there is time for other work, if it is available. The Opportunities for improved living on this farm lie in fuller use Of the resources of land and labor. The prime essen- tial is to obtain the money and advice to get started on a better farming system. Credit is commonly available from local banks or production credit associations. Advice is available from a number of government agencies for any of the various possible plans for Operating the farm. The farmer narrows the alternatives down to a few, in this case, four, after talking with agricultural special- ists and fOresters and considering his own capabilities and re- sources. Plan I calls for continuation of all aspects of the present Operation. The three other alternatives all include the agricul- tural changes described at the beginning of the discussion of this unit. In addition, Plan II requires intensive forest management with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. Plan 111 also requires intensive forest management but calls for sale of stumpage only, thus involving no labor for harvesting. Plan IV specifies merely extensive forestry and occasional unplanned sales of stumpage, with no labor allocated for any aspect of forest man- agement. Next, the farm owner compares the most attractive alterna- tives with regard to expected net income, capital and labor re- quirements, seasonality and type of enterprise, and other consid- erations of importance to him, and then selects the one most de- sirable in relation to his own personal scale of combined criteria. 269 If the owner continues with his present farm Operation, Plan I, he proposes to sell the farm as soon as he can get $16,375. By investing this amount elsewhere at four percent he can equal his present net farm income Of $655 from the farm and save prOp- erty taxes besides. By adopting and implementing the plan (Plan II) indicated here to be his selection, however, within ten years the farmer will be able tO increase his net farm income to over three times its present value and to achieve a much fuller use Of his various resources. He will be able especially to use his time and land more completely and to spread overhead and certain special costs (such as depreciation) over a broader base. Over the development period this plan results in a considerable increase in total in- vestment: from $13,200 to almost $47,700. Of this greater amount, however, almost $24,100 is the stumpage value of the residual timber after six decades of management, a $23,200 increase but not directly an out-Of-pocket cost. Similarly, though to a much smaller degree, $10,800 will be the value of the farmjs improved 144 acres of agricultural land when modern methods of land treatment have raised the real estate value from $50 to $75 an acre (See Table 27). The original agri- cultural land total of 162 acres valued at $8,100 will be in- creased in value by $3,600 for this reason, but 18 acres of it will drop in value $600 when it is shifted from miscellaneous agricultural use or idleness into forest use--from a real estate market value of $50 an acre, cleared, to $16 an acre, forested. 270 Thus the net increase in land value Of the entire farm will be Only $3,000. The productivity value increase will be many times greater, however, even over only the first decade, both on the agricultural land and on the forest land. TABLE 27.--Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans Of Operation for Unit 6 Present operation Alternative plans Investment Plan I8 Plans IIb and 111° Plan Ivd category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 162 $ 8,100 144 $10,800 144 $10,800 Forest landf 156 2,496 174 2,784 174 2,784 Buildings, live- stock, and otherg . . 1,700 . 10,000 - . . 10,000 24 8 h 40 h Stumpage . . 910 . . ,0 5 . . l, O Total 318 $13,026 318 $47,669 318 $24,984 aPlan I--no timber sales. bPlan II--intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. fIncluding brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. Average in the long run. Approximately three-fourths ($25,875) of the increase in total farm value during the 60-year development period is due to the fuller timber stand and appreciation of 144 acres of agricul- tural land. The only major area of investment requiring direct expenditures is that of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment. Although not all of these must be paid for im- 271 mediately, most Of the increase from $1,700 to $10,000 will have to be provided for in the first couple of years of the new pro- gramt Some Of this can be paid for by cash on hand, but most of it will require a number of years for repayment, using such de- vices as short-term credit, real estate mortgages (or second mortgages), and preferably intermediate-term credit for construc- tion of buildings. Assuming that the net farm income under the chosen plan will be at least $1,450 for the first two years and at least $2,100 thereafter, the farmer will be able to pay interest and principal on his debt at the rate of $800 at first and then $1,400 and still have a disposable income equal to his present one. Therefore even if the entire $8,300 for direct expenditures is borrowed immedi- ately, it can be paid off (with 6~percent interest compounded annually) within 9 years. Under the new plan the farm family will have available 2.0 man-equivalents Of labor. This will be about 600 man-days if spread fairly evenly throughout the year. Somewhat over half of this labor will be needed for the agricultural enterprises: 334 man-days. The remaining 266 man-days could be used for forest work if needed. During the first decade of intensive forest man- agement, however, only 248 man-days of labor will be needed-~about 25 a year-~to include harvesting of timber products for sale at roadside. The expected sale of these products for the decade totals $2,795, of Which.$910 would be stumpage value if the trees were 272 sold on the stump (See Appendix, Table 6-1). NO pulpwood stumpage value is included, as only sawtimber is merchantable. Inasmuch as the market value of hardwood pulpwood stumpage is expected to re— main zero for an indefinite period in the future, the remaining $1,885 can be attributed to harvesting (at $14.50 a man-day for the necessary 130 days). Of the total labor required over the decade, however, 118 days will be in forest management and im- provement work. If the returns to this labor were to be paid at the same rate as the harvesting labor, the stumpage return as a source of funds would be woefully inadequate. In view Of the fact that the management and improvement work can be expected to increase the potential value Of the resid- ual stand more than the removal Of the harvested products will have decreased it, the farmer might well consider the management labor as an investment for which he should expect no return until later in the development period. He may prefer to allocate the roadside products' income by equal division among the total number of man-days for harvesting and management labor required over the decade (including the stumpage value of the harvested trees, on the ground that removal Of these merchantable trees is part of the over-all improvement Operation prescribed for the woodland area and needs no financial return to the land factor to justify the cutting). This would re- sult in a wage of $11,27 a man-day for the 248 man-days of labor if no returns to other factors were considered. Any additional wage for labor performed in the first decade would have to be 273 either foregone, postponed until the next decade, or financed out of agricultural income. In the long run if prices and volumes do not depart serious- ly from the estimates for the stable period, the average decadal income from roadside sales will be about $28,400 and labor require- ments for all forest work will average 814 man-days. The average decadal value Of stumpage to be cut will be about $17,500. If a minimum 4-percent rate Of return is required on the average investment Of $24,100 in stumpage and $2,800 in forest land, $996 would have to be subtracted from the annual stumpage value of $1,752 of the harvested products, leaving $756 as an additional return to land, timber, and labor. As an average of only 31 man-days of labor is needed each decade for management purposes, less than 4 days a year, practically all of the stump- age returns should be attributed to the timber and land--equal to over 6 percent of the investment. The difference of over $10,872 between roadside and stumpage sale value would require 783 man-days of labor. These man-days ‘would therefore be worth $13.88 each to the owner who would supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and skidding. ThIS'would provide a 2.8 percent increase over the comparable average harvesting man-day return of $13.50 during the development period. The rise Of the stumpage return to 6.5 percent from the 4.1 of the development period is a far more pronounced increase; 58 percent. Subtraction Of equipment cost Of about $2 a man-day would .I" 274 make an adequate allowance for operation and depreciation Of a power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share of the cost Of the several pieces Of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone (separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $11.50 during the development period and $12.00 during the stable period. In the case Of this farm, where more man-days are available than are needed for forest management and harvesting either in the first decade or in succeeding decades, intensive forestry with harvesting to roadside is clearly the best alternative. This is the important feature of Plan II that differentiates it from Plans III and IV. The following condensed annual financial sum- maries for the first and second decades show the comparative net farm incomes for these decades (Table 28). In the first decade the annual net farm income under Plan II is $139 and $230 higher than for Plans 111 and IV, respectively. In the second decade the cutting under Plan IV of a large volume of stumpage (which by then becomes heavy enough per acre to be merchantable) results in an average annual net farm income higher than Plans II and III. At that time under extensive for- estry all merchantable sawtimber (273 MBF) is to be cut, whereas no sawtimber is to be out under intensive forestry. Plan II's second decade forest products' income comes solely from pulpwood Obtained by the first thinning of the young 26-acre loblolly pine 275 TABLE 28.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 6 Income and Alternative plans “Pen” items Plan 1‘5L Plan 11b Plan 111° Plan 18 First decade Iieceipts Crops $1,520 $2,051 82,051 82,051 Livestock 20 2,860 2,860 2,860 Livestock products 0 512 512 512 Forest products 0 280 91 0 Total receipts 1,340 5,503 5,314 5,223 Cash operating expenses 570 2,658 2,615 2,615 JNet cash farm income 770 2,865 2,701 2,610 IDepreciation 115 705 680 680 liet farm income 655 2,160 2,021 1,950 Second decade Receipts Crops 1,320 2,051 2,051 2,051 Livestock 20 2,860 2,860 2,860 Livestock products 0 512 512 512 Forest products 0 242 75 275 Total receipts 1,540 5,465 5,296 5,496 Cash operating expenses 570 2,651 2,615 2,615 iNet cash farm income 770 2,854 2,685 2,885 JDepreciation 115 698 680 680 ]Net farm income 655 2,156 2,005 2,205 aPlan I-opresent farm operation with no timber sales. Plan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. 276 plantation, and is reduced by the cost Of harvesting which includes $36 annually for Operation, maintenance, and depreciation of the power saw. By the third decade, however, the sort Of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm in- comes that is repeated in succeeding decades. The highest net farm income is achieved under Plan II--Over $400 more than under Plan IV, and Plan III is $66 above Plan IV. These annual differ- entials are increased in the stable period to approximately $2,600 and $1,700, respectively (See Table 29). TABLE 29.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 6 4 w Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan 18 Plan IIb Plan 111° Plan Ivd Receipts Crops $1,320 $2,051 $2,051 $2,051 Livestock 20 2,860 2,860 2,860 Livestock products 0 312 312 312 Forest products 0 2,839 1,752 80 Total receipts 1,340 8,062 6,975 5,303 Cash operating expenses 570 2,694 2,613 2,613 Net cash farm income 770 5,368 4,362 2,690 Depreciation 115 761 680 680 Net farm income 655 4,607 3,682 2,010 aPlan I--present farm Operation with no timber sales. bPlan II-—improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. 277 .Alternative plans with purchase Of additional acreage In the long run with intensive forest management, if the farmer sells stumpage only (Plan III), he will need on the average not more than 3.1 man-days a year on his present acreage. During the first decade he will need a total of 118 days, an average of 12 days a year, primarily for timber stand improvement, but there- after not over 3.1 a year except in the seventh decade, which will require 5.7 days annually. Thus after the first decade to use an extra 263 Of the 266 man-days available for forestry, he could ex- pand his acreage 85-fold by purchase of woodland and idle land similar to what he owns now. If funds could be Obtained for this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 14,964. If this land is bought and improvement work and planting done in the first decade, he will need to hire an extra 749 man- days during that decade. If he pays a wage of $10 to $15 a man- day, or an average annual labor cost ranging between $750 and $1,125; and if he charges it against the average annual stumpage income of $7,826, the average annual net stumpage income will be between $6,700 and $7,075 for the first ten years. The increased investment of $313,990 in 14,790 acres of woodland would thus add about $6,800 annually to net farm income during the first decade, a return of 2.2 percent. During the second and third decades the return would be somewhat less. The rate of return on the additional investment in woodland would be almost 21 percent during the fourth decade, and would be over 37 percent in all succeeding decades, leveling Off to an average of 47 percent in the stable period. 278 If forest products are sold at roadside (Plan II), the annual number of man-days needed for forest management and har- vesting during the development period will not exceed 73 except in the seventh decade, which calls for 117. Also in the stable period the average needed will not exceed 82. With 266 man-days available annually, at least 184 of these would be in excess during all but the seventh decade. If the farmer wished to make fuller use Of these 184 man- days annually, he could buy an additional 390 acres Of wooded and idle land similar to what he owns now. For the seventh decade this would mean hiring annually 113 man-days. The enlarged total acreage would be 564, from which the contribution to annual net income would be $746 during the first decade and considerably more in the third and later decades. The third decade would yield annually nearly $1,400 toward the farm's net annual income, and the stable decades, almost $8,700. These increased annual net incomes would be $516 more in the first decade than Plan 11 without the additional 390 acres, $966 in the third decade, and $6,000 in the stable decades. The rates of marginal annual returns during these decades on the $8,280 investment would therefore be approximately 6 percent, 12 percent, and 72 percent, respectively. Neither of these last two modifications Of the intensive forestry alternatives are likely to be implemented for at least several years, because the owner can be expected to have some difficulty in Obtaining additional credit until considerable por- tions of the loans for agricultural improvement have been repaid. 279 If he is eager to finance forest area expansion under either of these proposals, however, and can do so, his long-run profit position will be greatly enhanced. Unit 7--A.Cotton-Hog-Forestry Farm This 2,601-acre operating unit currently has 191 acres in agricultural uses divided among four small farming units. There are totals of hS acres in cotton, #0 in corn, 25 in 1eSpedeza hay, 80 in lespedeza pasture, and 1 acre in truck crops. The rest of the area consists of 2,022 acres in woodland and brush, and 388 acres idle or in miscellaneous uses such as roads, buildings and farmyards. The soils on this unit are inadequate to support in- definitely such a degree of agricultural activity as at present; in fact only half (96 acres) of the area in agricultural uses should continue to be farmed, and 96 percent of the total acreage should be forested. In addition to Specifying removal of three of the four fam- ilies sharing the area, alternative plans for better land use call for a 2h-percent increase in forest acreage. This will be the largest shift in land use, achieved by converting 388 acres of idle land and 95 acres of agricultural land into loblolly pine plantations. The only farmed acreages to remain unchanged will be those in corn and truck crops. The allocation for cotton will be reduced to 10 acres, likewise for lespedeza hay and lespedeza pasture. Twenty acres, however, will be devoted to permanent pas- ture and five acres will be planted to oats. Livestock production will be expanded, as permitted by the 280 pasture improvement and reduction of the dairy herd, to almost three times the total under the present farm operation, Plan I. The swine enterprise will be more than quadrupled, but only two milk cows will be left from the 16 existing dairy cattle. The numbers of each kind of livestock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Dairy cows 9 2 -7 Bulls 2 0 -2 Calves raised 5 0 -S Sows 2 12 10 Boars l l 0 Hogs raised _18_ __8_1_+_ _6_6_ Total 37 99 62 This proposed budgeting of agricultural resources will produce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to the individual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased I net income is assumed to be valued highly enough by him to be worth the added responsibility and work required for carrying out the future Operations. Improved land use on this farm calls for the woodland to occupy over 2,500 acres, 96 percent of the total area instead of the present 78 percent. Currently idle land comprises one-seventh of the total, inasmuch as Just over seven percent is used for agriculture. Over two-thirds (lh08 acres) of the present woodland is in upland hardwoods, a twelfth (160 acres) is in lower slope hardwoods, and over a fifth (REM acres) is in bottomland hardwoods. 281 Forty-five percent of the upland hardwood area (640 acres) and six percent (27 acres) of the bottomland area produce such slow— growing trees that conversion of the stands to loblolly pine plan- tations is indicated, in addition to the #83 acres of plantation on open agricultural land. The present stumpage value of the entire 2,022-acre wood- land is $29,800 for almost 3,000 MBF of small and large hardwood sawtimber. Reduction of the agricultural land to 66 acres for crops, and 30 acres for pasture will increase by h83 acres the area available for forest use. The total value of the present 2,022 acres of forest (market value of bare land plus stumpage value) is almost $62,300 and the current 579 acres of agricultural land are worth almost $29,000. The combined value of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment is over $7,200. Thus the total investment in the farm is almost $98,h00. The present farm Operations have required an average annual outlay of labor of 868 man-days from the four farm families, too small an average amount coming from each of the eight man-equiva- lents to constitute an efficient use of the human resource or to return an adequate income to more than one family. Economic use of the natural resources (land and timber), in conjunction with the adequate amount of capital that could be obtained, calls for removal of three families and more work per man-equivalent from the family remaining to manage and operate the reorganized unit. The work load on a cotton enterprise is heaviest in the spring and early summer and again in the fall. Between these periods 282 there is labor available for other work, if labor-using operations can be effectively scheduled. The Opportunities for improved living on this farm lie in better use of the resources of land and labor. The prime essen- tial is to Obtain the money and advice to get started on a better farming system. Credit is commonly available from local banks or production credit associations. Advice is available from a number Of government agencies for any of the various possible plans for operating the farm. The farmer narrows the alternatives down to a few, in this case, four, after talking with agricultural spe- cialists and foresters and considering his own capabilities and resources. Plan I calls for continuation of all aspects of the present Operation. The three other alternatives all include the agricul- tural changes described at the beginning of the discussion of this unit. In addition, Plan II requires intensive forest management with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. Plan III also requires intensive forest management but calls for sale Of stumpage only, thus involving no labor for harvesting. Plan IV specifies merely extensive forestry and occasional unplanned sales Of stumpage, with no labor allocated for any aspect Of forest man- agement. Next, the farm owner compares the most attractive alterna- tives with regard to expected net income, capital and labor re- quirements, seasonality and type of enterprise, and other consid- erations of importance to him, and then selects the one most 283 desirable in relation to his own personal scale of combined criteria. If the Owner continues with the present farm Operation, Plan I, he proposes tO sell the farm as soon as he can get close to $88,000. By investing this amount elsewhere at four percent he can equal the present net farm income total of $3,520 from the farm and save property taxes besides. By adopting and implementing the alternative plan indicated here to be his selection, however, within ten years the farmer will be able to increase the net farm income for his own famiLy to almost double the present total for the four families and to achieve a much fuller use of the various resources. This result is based on the assumption that he will choose Plan II, which in- cludes intensive forest management, harvesting Of sawlogs and pulpwood, and sale of these timber products at roadside. He will be able especially to use his time and land more completely and to spread overhead and certain special costs (such as depreciation) over a broader base. Over the development period this plan re- sults in a considerable increase in total investment: from almost $98,h00 to almost $h68,300. Of this greater amount, however, over $h10,100 is the stumpage value Of the residual timber after six decades of management, a $380,300 increase but not directly an out-Of-pocket cost. Similarly, though to a much smaller degree, $7,200 will be the value of the farmis improved 96 acres Of agricultural land when modern methods of land treatment have raised the real estate value 28h from.$50 to $75 an acre (See Table 30). TABLE 30.--Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans Of operation for Unit 7 Present operation Alternative plans Investment Plan I8 Plans 11b and IIIc Plan Ivd category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 579 $28,950 96 $7,200 96 $7,200 Forest landf 2,022 32,352 2,505 h0,080 2,505 uo,080 Buildings , live - stock, and otherg . . 7,250 .. . 10,850 . . 10,850 Stumpage . . 29,806 . . £110,121h . . 20,050h Total 2,601 $98,358 2,601 $h68,251 2,601 $78,180 aPlan I--no timber sales. Plan II--intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale Of forest products. cPlan III--intensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. Including brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. hAverage in the long run. The original agricultural land total of 579 acres valued at $28,950 will be increased in value $2,h00 for this reason, but #83 acres Of it will drop in value $16,h22 when it is shifted from various agricultural uses or idleness into forest use--from a real estate market value Of $50 an acre, cleared, to $16 an acre, forested. Thus the net change in land value of the entire farm will be a de- crease Of $lh,000. The productivity value increase will largely Offset this, however, even within the first decade, both on the agricultural land and on the forest land. 285 Practically the entire increase in total farm value during the 60-year development period is due to the fuller timber stand. The only major area of investment requiring direct expenditures is that Of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other equipment. Although not all of these must be paid for immediately, most Of the increase from $7,250 to $10,850 will have to be provided for in the first couple Of years of the new program. Some of this can be paid for by cash on hand, but most of it will require a number of years for repayment, using such devices as short-term credit, real estate mortgages (or second mortgages), and preferably inter- mediate-term credit for construction of buildings. Assuming that the net farm income under Plan II will be at least $h,200 for the first two years and at least $5,200 there- after, the farmer will be able to pay interest and principal on _his debt at the rate Of $1,300 at first and then $2,300 and still have a disposable income equal to the present total. Therefore even if the entire $3,600 for direct expenditures is borrowed im- mediately, it can be paid Off (with 6-percent interest compounded annually) in less than 3 years. Under the new agricultural plan the farm family will have available 3.0 man-equivalents of labor. This will be about 900 man-days if spread fairly evenly throughout the year. Less than half Of this labor will be needed for the agricultural enterprises: #29 man-days. The remaining h71 man-days could be used for for- est work if needed. During the first decade of intensive forest management h,9h0 man-days Of labor will be needed under Plan II-- about M9M a year--to include harvesting to roadside. 286 The expected sale Of these products for the decade totals $16,029, Of which $lh,550 would be stumpage value if the trees were sold on the stump (See Appendix, Table 7-1). NO hardwood pulpwood stumpage value is included, as only sawtimber stumpage and pine pulpwood stumpage are merchantable. Inasmuch as the market value of hardwood pulpwood stumpage is expected to remain zero for an indefinite period in the future, the remaining $30,h79 could be attributed to labor used in harvesting (at $12.28 a man- day for the necessary 2,h83 days). Of the total labor over the decade, however, nearly half would have been in forest management and improvement work: 2,h57 man-days. If the returns to this labor were to be paid at the same rate as the harvesting labor, the stumpage return as a source of funds would be less than half ade- quate. In view of the fact that the management and improvement work can be expected to increase the potential value of the resid- ual stand more than the removal of the harvested products will have decreased it, the farmer might well consider the management labor as an investment for which he should expect no return until later in the development period. He may prefer to allocate the roadside products' income by equal division among the total number of man-days for harvesting and management labor required over the decade (including the stumpage value Of the harvested trees, on the ground that removal of these merchantable trees is part Of the over-all improvement Operation prescribed for the woodland area and needs no financial 287 return to the land factor to justify the cutting). This would result in a wage Of‘$9.l2 a man-day for the h,9h0 man-days Of labor if no returns to other factors were considered. Any addi- tional'wage for labor performed in the first decade would have to be either foregone, postponed until the next decade, or financed out of agricultural income. In the long run if prices and volumes do not depart seri- ously from the estimates for the stable period, the average decadal income from.roadside sales will be over $h85,900 and labor require- ments for all forest work will average ll,h50 man-days. The average decadal value of stumpage to be cut will be $312,200. If a minimum.hapercent rate Of return is required on the average investment of $10,100 in stumpage and almost $10100 in forest land, $18,008 would have to be subtracted from the annual stumpage value Of $31,220 of the trees cut, leaving $13,212 as an additional return to land, timber, and labor. As an average of only 366 man-days of labor is needed each decade for manage- ment purposes, less than 37 days a year, practically all of the stumpage returns (except about $h00 for management labor) should be attributed to the timber and land--the net return would be equal to 6.8 percent of the investment. Thus under Plan III, providing for intensive forest manage- ment with sale Of stumpage only, the labor requirements are far too small tO constitute an Opportunity to use adequately the farm family'man-days available. Consequently, although Plan III in- creases net farm income considerably by returning over 6 percent 288 on the forest investment, it contributes little wage income. The problem.of finding an economic outlet for the equivalent of over one man-year of labor would remain if Plan III were to be adopted. TO Obtain the decadal difference Of over $173,700 between roadside and stumpage sale value, Plan II requires 11,08h man-days of labor. These man-days would therefore be worth $15.67 each tO the owner who would supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and skidding. This value is comparable to the aNerage harvesting man-day return of $16.22 during the development period. The rise Of the stumpage return to 6.9 percent from the 5.3 of the development period is a substantial increase, however: 30 percent. Subtraction of equipment cost of about $2 a man-day would make an adequate allowance for Operation and depreciation Of a power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share of the cost of the several pieces Of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone (separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $111.20 during the development period, and $13.65 during the stable period. In the case of this Operating unit, the number of man-days of farm family labor available fOr forestry are not quite suffi- cient for intensive management and harvesting to roadside in the first decade, and although assumed constant in succeeding decades these are far less adequate in relation to the increasing harvest- ing requirements. Nevertheless, Plan II is clearly the most 289 profitable alternative for the Operator despite the fact that he will have to hire outside labor for management work or harvesting every decade--from an average Of 23 man-days a year during the first decade to 1,617 annually in the seventh decade and averaging 67k in the stable period. The Opportunity for full use Of all the family labor availa- ble is one of the key features Of Plan II that makes it preferable to the farmer over Plans III and IV. Under Plan IV no effort is expended for forest management, but timber is sold as Often as it becomes merchantable as stumpage: whenever a portion Of the wood- land acreage accumulates enough timber tO attract a stumpage buyer--usually an average volume per acre of about 1,500 board feet. The following condensed annual financial summaries for the first and second decades show the comparative net farm incomes for these decades (Table 31). In the first decade the annual net farm income under Plan II is $1,830 more than under Plan III because the income from roadside sales is increased by the higher price for a volume Of cut products over a similar volume Of stumpage, and also includes an average annual gross income of $1,393 from 17h cords of hardwood pulpwood not merchantable as stumpage. The cost of harvesting, however, includes $230 fOr hiring woods labor at $10 a man-day and $988 annually for Operation, maintenance, and depreciation of the power saw. The annual net farm income under Plan II is only $30M higher than for Plan IV, however, because under extensive forestry all merchantable sawtimber (2,981 MBF) 290 TABLE 31.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 7 Income and Alternative plans expense items Plan Ia .Plan 11" Plan 111° Plan Ivd First decade Receipts Crops 86,228 82,163 32,163 82,163 Livestock 200 2,706 2,706 2,706 Livestock products 0 0 O 0 Forest products 0 4,503 1.455 2,981 Total receipts 6,428 9,372 6,324 7,850 Cash operating expenses 3,085 3,109 2,385 2,385 Net cash farm income 3,343 6,263 3,939 5,465 Depreciation 435 1,034 540 540 Net farm income 2,908 5,229 3,399 4,925 Second decade Receipts Crops 6,228 2,163 2,163 2,163 Livestock 200 2,706 2,706 2,706 Livestock products 0 0 0 0 Forest products 0 8,085 2,682 336 Total receipts 6,428 12,954 7,551 5,205 Cash operating expenses 3,085 3,703 2,385 2,385 Net cash farm income 3,343 9,251 5,166 2,820 Depreciation 455 1,088 540 540 Net farm income 2,908 8,163 4,626 2,280 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive d forestry with sale of stumpage only. Plan IV-oimproved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. 291 is to be cut during the decade whereas only 1,103 M are to be out under intensive forestry. By the second decade, however, the sort of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm incomes that is repeated in succeeding decades despite the multi- plied costs Of harvesting included in "cash Operating expenses" and "depreciation" for Plan II. Annual harvesting costs Of $770 for hired labor and $5h8 for power saw operation and maintenance are combined in Operating expenses, and $5h8 is budgeted for de- preciation of the power saw and the forest enterprise share Of farm equipment used partly for woods work. The highest net farm income is achieved under Plan II--a1most $5,900 more than under Plan IV, and Plan III is over $2,300 above Plan IV. These annual differentials are increased in the stable period to almost $37,200 and $30,200, respectively, despite Plan II's harvesting costs Of $8,088 for hired labor and a total Of $2,290 for Operation, main- tenance, and depreciation Of the power saw and other equipment (See Table 32) . Plan III with purchase of additional acreage In the long run with intensive forest management, if the farmer sells stumpage only (Plan III), he will need on the average not more than 37 man-days a year on his planned acreage. During the first decade he will need a total Of 2,h57 man-days, an aver- age Of 2M6 a year, in about equal numbers over the decade for planting pine and for timber stand improvement, totaling 1,265 and 1,192, respectively. For the next five decades he will need only 292 25 a year for management until the seventh decade, which will require 9% days annually. Thus after the first decade, to use an extra h3h of the A71 man-days available for forestry, he could expand his acreage 11.7 times by purchase Of woodland and idle land similar to what he owns now. If funds could be Obtained for this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 31,81h. TABLE 32.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 7 Income and Alternative plans expense items Plan I8 Plan IIb Plan 111° Plan Ivd Receipts Crops $6,228 $ 2,163 $ 2,163 $2,163 Livestock 200 2,706 2,706 2,706 Livestock products 0 0 0 0 Forest products 0 h8,593 31,220 1,0h7 Total receipts 6,u28 53,h62 36,089 5,916 Cash operating expenses 3,085 11,618 2,385 2,385 Net cash farm.income 3,3u3 hl,8uh 33,70h 3,531 Depreciation #35 1,685 5h0 5&0 Net farm income 2,908 h0,159 33,16h 2,991 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. bPlan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. CPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale Of stumpage only. If this land is bought and improvement work and planting done in the first decade, he will need to hire an extra 26,536 man-days during that decade. If he has to pay a labor wage of 293 $10 a man-day, the average annual labor cost of $26,536 will exceed the average annual stumpage income of $18,h78. If the farmer were to prefer Plan III with this expanded acreage (perhaps because the harvesting work of Plan II appears unacceptable to him) and could finance the first decade investment in land and hired labor, income thereafter would substantially exceed expenses. The next five decades would require no hiring Of outside labor and would produce many times larger stumpage returns. In each of these decades the farmer would be able to make use Of 3,181 of the family's available h,710 man-days, and in the stable decades, h,700. From these they could impute ade- quate wages from.the increasing stumpage returns Of successive decades. Only in the seventh decade would hired labor be needed-- 7,23h man-days--costing $72,3h0 at $10 a man-day. The total stumpage income for that decade, however, would be $10,129,672, thus leaving $10,057,332, or $1,005,733 annually, as the net return to the total land investment of $509,02u and the average $5,208,537 investment in the growing stock accumulated during the development period. The annual net rate Of return to land and timber in the last decade Of the development period is there- fore 17.6 percent, leveling Off in the stable period to 6.8 per- cent, as has been already stated. The main attraction of the expanded acreage is that it provides an opportunity to use productively the available family labor. The principal detraction, however, is the large cash 29h investment required initially to pay for land purchase, stand improvement, and planting of pine on large acreages. Unless the expansion is spread over several decades or limited to a consid- erably smaller total acreage, the problems of land acquisition and financing will probably be tOO large to have a practicable solution. Unit 8-eA Cotton-Beef-Forestry Farm This 2,h08-acre Operating unit currently has 120 acres in agricultural uses divided among three small farming units. There are totals of 30 acres in cotton, 25 in corn, 10 in lespedeza hay, 50 in lespedeza pasture, and 5 in truck crops. The rest of the area consists of 1,63h acres in woodland and brush, and 65h acres idle or in miscellaneous uses such as roads, buildings and farmyards. The small acreage in agricultural uses is regrettably low inasmuch as the soils on almost a fifth of the total acreage are good for agriculture, 8 percent being suitable for permanent pasture, h percent for lespedeza pasture, and 6 percent for crOps. Thus current agricultural Operations use about a fourth of the acreage suitable foribrmingland a twentieth of the total property. Alternative plans for better land use call for removal Of two Of the three families sharing the area and redistribution of the acreage with a 20-percent increase in woodland area and almost a tripling of land in agricultural use, but 10 acres will continue in miscellaneous uses. The largest shift in acreage will be establishment of 295 loblolly pine plantations on 320 acres of idle land ill-suited to agriculture. Use Of another 32# acres of idle land will permit permanent pasture to be developed On 200 acres and the lespedeza pasture to be doubled--to 100 acres. Lespedeza hay acreage will be increased to #0, and #0 acres will also be planted to Balbo rye. The allocation for cotton will be reduced to 8 acres, that for corn to 20 acres and the truck crop acreage will be cut to a one-acre garden. Thirty-five acres, however, will be devoted to corn and cane silage. Livestock production will be expanded, as permitted by the pasture enlargement and improvement, together with reduction of the dairy herd and elimination Of the swine enterprise. .A large beef cattle enterprise will be established, increasing 13- fold the number of animals kept under the present farm Operation, Plan I. The numbers Of each kind Of livestock are as follows: Present number Proposed number Increase in number Dairy cows 5 2 -3 Beef cows 0 100 100 Bulls 0 # h Heifers under 0 #5 #5 one year Steers sold 0 #5 #5 Heifers sold 0 35 35 Sows l 0 -l Hogs raised 10 0 -10 ” * _ Total 16 231 215 296 This proposed budgeting of agricultural resources will produce the most readily practicable reorganization acceptable to the individual farmer managing this farm. The expected increased net income is assumed to be valued highly enough by him to be worth the added reSponsibility and work required for carrying out the future Operations. Improved land use on this farm calls for the woodland tO occupy l,95# acres, 81 percent of the total area instead Of the present 68 percent. Currently idle land comprises slightly over one-fourth Of the total, inasmuch as 5 percent is used for agri- culture. Almost three-fourths (1,188 acres) of the present wood- land is in upland hardwoods, an eighth (20# acres) is in lower slope hardwoods, and a seventh (2#2 acres) is in bottomland hard- woods. Seventeen percent of the upland hardwood area (198 acres) produce such slow-growing trees that conversion of the stands tO loblolly pine plantations is indicated, in addition to the 320 acres Of plantation on idle Open land. The present stumpage value of the entire 1,63#-acre wood- land is almost $22,700 for 2,268 MBF of small and large hardwood sawtimber. Expansion Of the agricultural land to 1## acres for crops, and 300 acres for pasture will use all the land suitable for these purposes but will still allow for enlargement of the forest acreage to 1,95#. The total value of the present 1,63# acres of forest (market value of bare land plus stumpage value) is over $#8,800 and the current 77# acres Of agricultural land are worth $38,700. The combined value Of buildings, livestock, 297 feed, machinery, and other equipment is over $5,100. Thus the total investment in the farm is over $92,600. The present farm operations have required an average annual outlay of labor of 528 man-days from the three farm fam- ilies, too small an average amount coming from each Of the five man-equivalents to constitute an efficient use of the human re- source or to return an adequate income to more than one family. Economic use of the natural resources (land and timber), in con- junction with the adequate amount Of capital that could be Ob- tained, calls for removal of two families and more work per man- equivalent from.the family remaining to manage and operate the reorganized unit. The work load on a cotton enterprise is heav- iest in the spring and early summer and again in the fall. Between these periods there is labor available for other work, if laborausing Operations can be effectively scheduled. The Opportunities for improved living on this farm lie in better use of the resources of land and labor. The prime essen- tial is to Obtain the money and advice to get started on a better farming system. Credit is commonly available from local banks or production credit associations. Advice is available from a number of government agencies for any of the various possible plans for Operating the farm. The farmer narrows the alternatives down to a few, in this case, four, after talking with agricultural Spe- cialists and foresters and considering his own capabilities and resources. Plan I calls for continuation Of all aspects Of the present operation. The three other alternatives all include the agricul- 298 tural changes described at the beginning of the discussion of this unit. In addition, Plan II requires intensive forest man- agement with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. Plan III also requires intensive forest management but calls for sale Of stumpage only, thus involving no labor for harvesting. Plan IV Specifies merely extensive forestry and occasional un- planned sales of stumpage, with no labor allocated for any aspect Of forest management. Next, the farm owner compares the most attractive alterna- tives with regard to expected net income, capital and labor re- quirements, seasonality and type of enterprise, and other consid- erations of importance to him, and then selects the one most desirable in relation to his own personal scale of combined cri- teria. If the owner continues with the present farm Operation, Plan I, he proposes to sell the farm as soon as he can get nearly the value of his investment Of $92,600. By investing this amount elsewhere at four percent he can receive $3,70# interest, $2,220 more than the present net farm income total of $1,#6# from the farm and save property taxes besides. By adopting and implementing the alternative plan indicated here to be his selection, however, within ten years the farmer will be able to increase the net farm.income for his own family to more than quadruple the present total for the three families and to achieve a much fuller use of the various resources. This result is based on the assumption that he will choose Plan III, 299 which specifies intensive forest management, and sale of stumpage. He will be able especially to use his time and land more complete- ly and to spread overhead and certain special costs (such as depreciation) over a broader base. Over the development period this plan results in a considerable increase in total investment: from.over $92,600 to over $391,200. Of this greater amount, however, almost $288,100 is the stumpage value of the residual timber after six decades Of management, a $265,#00 increase but not directly an out-Of-pocket cost. Similarly, though tO a much smaller degree, $3#,050 will be the value Of the farm's improved #5# acres Of agricultural land when modern methods of land treatment have raised the real estate value from $50 to $75 an acre (See Table 33). The ori- ginal agricultural land total of 77# acres valued at $38,700 will be increased in value $11,350 for this reason, but 320 acres Of it will drop in value $10,880 when it is shifted from various agricultural uses or idleness into forest use--from a real estate market value of $50 an acre, cleared, to $16 an acre forested. Thus the net increase in land value of the entire farm will be only $#70. The productivity value increase will largely Offset this, however, even within the first decade, both on the agricul- tural land and on the forest land. Eighty-nine percent Of the increase in total farm value during the 60-year development period is due to the fuller timber stand. The only major area of investment requiring direct expend- itures is that of buildings, livestock, feed, machinery, and other 300 equipment. Although not all of these must be paid for immediate- ly, most of the increase from $5,125 to $37,881 will have to be provided for in the first couple Of years of the new program. Some Of this can be paid for by cash on hand, but most of it will require a number Of years for repayment, using such devices as short-term credit, real estate mortgages (or second mortgages), and preferably intermediate-term credit for construction of build- ings. TABLE 33.-~Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value Of bare land and other investments under various plans Of operation for Unit 8 Present operation Alternative plans Investment Plan Ia Plans IIb and 111° Plan Ivd category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 77h $38,700 h5u $ 3u,050 hsu $ 3u,050 Forest landf 1,63u 26,1uu 1,95h 31,26u 1,95h 31,26# Buildings, live- stock, and otherg . . 5,125 . . 37,881 . . 37,881 Stumpage . . 22,682 . . 288,073h . . 15,600h Total 2,h08 $92,651 2,h08 $391,268 2,h08 $118,795 aPlan I-—nO timber sales. bPlan II--intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale Of forest products. cPlan III--intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. fIncluding brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. Average in the long run. Assuming that the net farm income under Plan III will be at least $5,500 for the first two years and at least $6,800 thereafter, equipment. A l7, most of t provided for Some of this require a num ShCI't-tem CI“ and pre ferab 1; ”aka value c N Cate gCry \ AéTicultural 1: heat landf Baildings’ 8:0 300 equipment. .Although not all Of these must be paid for immediate- 1y, most of the increase from $5,125 to $37,881 will have to be provided for in the first couple Of years of the new program. Some Of this can be paid for by cash on hand, but most of it will require a number Of years for repayment, using such devices as Short-term credit, real estate mortgages (or second mortgages), and preferably intermediate-term credit for construction Of build- ings. TABLE 33.--Acreage of agricultural and forest land and estimated market value of bare land and other investments under various plans of Operation for Unit 8 Present Operation Alternative plans Investment Plan I8 Plans IIb and IIIc Plan Ivd category Acreage Value Acreage Value Acreage Value Agricultural lande 77h $38,700 h5u $ 3h,050 ash $ 3u,050 Forest landf 1,63u 26,1uu 1,95u 31,26u 1,95u 31,26h Buildings , live- stock, and otherg . . 5,125 . . 37,881 . . 37,881 Stumpage . . 22,682 . . 288,073h . . 15,600h Total 2,h08 $92,651 2,h08 $391,268 2,h08 $118,795 a"Plan I--nO timber sales. bPlan II--intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. eIncluding miscellaneous and idle land. fIncluding brush land. Values are bare land values. gIncluding feed, machinery, and other equipment. Ayerage in the long run. Assuming that the net farm income under Plan III will be at least $5,500 for the first two years and at least $6,800 thereafter, the farmer wi 31 the rate 0 disposable in even if the e inmediately, pounded annua ing to keep 11 heme until Pal'mnts at 1; $5,330. In t years . 301 the farmer will be able to pay interest and principal on his debt at the rate of $2,500 at first and than $3,800 and still have a disposable income equal to double the present total. Therefore even if the entire $32,756 for direct expenditures is borrowed immediately, the debt can be paid (with 6-percent interest com- pounded annually) within 1# years. And if the farmer were will- ing to keep his disposable income equal to the present net farm income until the debt is paid in full, he would be able to make payments at the rate of $#,OOO for the first two years and then $5,300. In this event a debt Of $32,756 would be paid within 9 years. Under the new agricultural plan the farm family will have available 3.0 man-equivalents of labor. This will be about 900 man-days if spread fairly evenly throughout the year. Eighty- five percent of this labor will be needed for the agricultural enterprises: 767 man-days. The remaining 133 man-days, could be used for forest work if needed. If Plan II is adopted, requiring intensive forest management, harvesting Of sawlogs and pulpwood, and sale of these timber products at roadside during the first decade #,293 man-days Of labor will be needed--about #29 a year. The expected sale of logs and bolts for the decade totals $37,227, or which $10,188 would be stumpage value if the trees were sold on the stump (See Appendix, Table 8-1). NO hardwood pulpwood stumpage value is included, as only sawtimber stumpage and pine pulpwood stumpage are merchantable. Inasmuch as the market value of hardwood pulpwood stumpage is expected to remain zero for an could be at day for the decade, howe ment and 1m} labor were i 302 zero for an indefinite period in the future, the remaining $27,039 could be attributed to labor used in harvesting (at $12.67 a man- day for the necessary 2,938 days). Of the total labor over the decade, however, nearly a third would have been in forest manage- ment and improvement work: 1,356 man-days. If the returns tO this labor were to be paid at the same rate as the harvesting labor, the stumpage return as a source Of funds would be far from adequate. In view of the fact that the management and improvement work can be expected to increase the potential value of the resid- ual stand more than the removal Of the harvested products will have decreased it, the farmer might well consider the management labor as an investment for which he should expect no return until later in the development period. Or he may prefer to allocate the roadside products' income by equal division among the total number Of man-days for harvest- ing and management labor required over the decade (including the stumpage value of the harvested trees, on the ground that removal of these merchantable trees is part of the over-all improvement Operation prescribed for the woodland area and needs no financial return to the land factor to justify the cutting). This would result in a wage of $8.67 a man-day for the #,293 man-days of labor if no returns to other factors were considered. Any addi- tional wage for labor performed in the first decade would have to be either foregone, postponed until the next decade, or financed out of agricultural income. In the long run, or stable period, if prices and volumes return is r in St‘mage to be subtrz trees cut, 1 ”3379?, and Fear, Practic 0 ”n to; managemen lacinthe net E11521; . 303 do not depart seriously from.the estimates, the average decadal income from the roadside sales of Plan II would be over $379,100 and labor requirements for all forest work would average 9,827 man-days. The average decadal value of stumpage to be cut during stable decades will be $2#0,8#O. If a minimum #-percent rate Of return is required on the average investment Of almost $288,100 in stumpage and over $31,200 in forest land, $12,773 would have to be subtracted from.the annual stumpage value Of $2#,O8# Of the trees cut, leaving $11,311 as an additional return to land, timber, and labor. As an average Of 2#7 man-days Of labor is needed each decade for management purposes, less than 25 days a year, practically all Of the stumpage returns (except about $300 for management labor) should be attributed to the timber and land-~the net return would be equal tO 7.# percent Of the invest- ment. Thus under Plan III, providing for intensive forest manage- ment with sale Of stumpage only, the labor requirements are far too small to constitute an Opportunity to use adequately the farm family man-days available. Consequently, although Plan III in- creases net farm.income considerably by returning over 7 percent on the forest investment, it contributes little wage income. The problem of finding an economic outlet for the equivalent of over a third Of a manayear of labor will remain if Plan III is adOpted. To Obtain the decadal difference of over $138,300 between roadside and stumpage sale value, Plan II requires 9,580 man-days of labor. These to the owner who labor for felli increase over th1 during the devel- 30 15 percent f more pronounced Subtract: maze an adequate WET Chain saw «a ‘9 ti tile SEVEral I “how on most 1 )a‘h 1 Se} "(,1 ~. (3le be about 5 during the Stab; In the c 0f farm fainilw of the mail 6 r n 30# of labor. These man-days would therefore be worth $1#.## each to the owner who would supply the necessary equipment as well as labor for felling and skidding. This value is only a 2-percent increase over the average harvesting man-day return Of $l#.12 during the development period. The rise Of the stumpage return to 7.5 percent from the 5.0 Of the development period is a far more pronounced increase: 50 percent. Subtraction of equipment cost of about $2 a man-day would make an adequate allowance for operation and depreciation of a power chain saw and also for a minor fractional share Of the cost of the several pieces of equipment that are likely to be present anyhow on most farms. Thus the actual returns for harvesting labor alone (separated conceptually from the equipment needed) would be about $12.10 during the development period, and $12.#5 during the stable period. In the case of this operating unit, the number Of man-days Of farm.family labor available for forestry are less than a third of the number needed for intensive management and harvesting to roadside in the first decade, and as they are assumed constant in succeeding decades, they become comparatively far less adequate in relation to the increasing harvesting requirements in each later decade until the stable period. The fact that the farmer would have to hire and supervise a substantial amount Of indispensable outside labor for management work or harvesting every decade is a serious disadvantage of Plan II. He would need to hire from an average of 296 man-days a year during the and averag 133 man-da; labor avail the trouble erations , a Villingne s s The 1 these decade Income under the fact tha+ 31:; v- e Cf 5* “Wage, of e v‘ $2’i55 fro: ”image ' The 1131110ng $3 ) p annually for O MST Saw 305 during the first decade to 12,7h5 annually in the seventh decade and averaging 850 in the stable period to supplement the family's 133 man-days. The opportunity for full use of all the family labor available is not a great enough advantage to compensate for the troubles of hiring a crew, managing the extensive woods Op- erations, and becoming dependent on the presence, ability, and willingness of the various crew members. The following condensed annual financial summaries for the first and second decades Show the comparative net farm incomes for these decades (Table 3A). In the first decade the annual net farm income under Plan II is $1,112 less than under Plan III despite the fact that the income from.roadside sales is increased by the higher price for a volume Of cut products over a similar volume of stumpage, and also includes an average annual gross income Of'$2,155 from 269 cords Of hardwood pulpwood not merchantable as stumpage. The cost of harvesting on this unit is high, of course, including $3,060 for hiring woods labor at $10 a man-day and $878 annually for Operation, maintenance, and depreciation Of the power saw. The only expense under Plan III isiflEQ for hired labor for stand improvement work. The annual net farm income under Plan II is $3,275 less then for Plan IV because under extensive forestry all merchantable sawtimber (2,268 MBF) is to be cut during the decade whereas only 366 M.are to be out under intensive forestry. Under Plan IV no effort is expended for forest management, but timber is sold as Often as it becomes merchantable as stumpage: whenever a portion eels 54.--Cond Incoue and expense items fi_J ; Receipts Crepe Livestock LIVES tOCk pr7 PoreSt PTOdut Total rece: Cash operati 9‘» cash farm 1 306 TABLE 34.--Condensed annual financial summaries for first and second decades, Unit 8 W Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan I8 Plan IIb Plan IIlc Plan IVd First decade Receipts Crops 84,152 $2,066 82,066 32,066 Livestock . 0 14,800 14,800 14,800 Livestock products 0 O O 0 Forest products 0 3,723 1,019 2,268 Total receipts 4,152 20,589 17,885 19,134 Cash operating expenses 2,360 12,557 9,180 9,058 Net cash farm income 1,792 8,032 8,705 10,076 Depreciation 308 2,333 1,894 1,894 Net farm income 1,484 5,699 6,811 8,974 Second decade Receipts Crops 4,152 2,066 2,066 2,066 Livestock 0 14,800 14,800 14,800 Livestock products 0 O O 0 Forest products 0 8,638 2,841 - 956 Total receipts 4,152 25,504 19,707 17,822 Cash operating expenses 2,360 13,657 9,058 9,058 Net cash farm income 1,792 11,847 10,649 8,764 Depreciation 308 2,433 1,894 1,894 Net farm income 1,484 9,414 8,755 6,870 aPlan I--present farm operation with no timber sales. Plan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. cPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. of the woodlaz stmaae b11391 bead feet. By the lationship dex inccms that :7 cost of harves n . cash operatir harvesting cos Operation and 307 of the woodland acreage accumulates enough timber to attract a stumpage buyer--usua11y an average volume per acre of about 1,500 board feet. By the second decade, however, the sort of comparative re- lationship develops among the three new plans' annual net farm incomes that is repeated in succeeding decades. The increased cost of harvesting increased volumes of timber are evident in "cash operating expenses" and "depreciation" for Plan II. Annual harvesting costs of $h,060 for hired labor and $539 for power saw operation and maintenance are combined in operating expenses, and $539 is budgeted for depreciation of the power saw and the forest enterprise share of farm equipment used partly for woods work. These harvesting costs continue to operate strongly against the profit advantage of Plan II, offsetting most of the $5,800 margin in forest products receipts that Plan II obtains over Plan III. The highest net farm income is achieved under Plan II, however--over $2,500 more than under Plan IV, although less than $700 above Plan III. These annual differentials are increased in the stable period to approximately $2h,900 and $1,700, reSpec- tively (See Table 35). This slight net income edge of Plan II over Plan III is all that remains of the $13,800 difference be- tween.roadside products receipts and stumpage receipts, due to Plan II's harvesting costs of $10,200 for hired labor and a total of $1,966 for operation, maintenance, and depreciation of the power saw and other equipment. Plan III benefits from having none of these operating expenses. TABLE 35. "0039 Incone and expense items ——_| Receipts Craps Livestock LLx'estock pro Forest produc Total recei Cash operating Net cash farm i Depreciation 5‘31 farm income \ Elan I--pres 3.3-II II--im1j fore c, prod Ran III — -13 d ‘ fOI‘E Plan “imI fore 308 TABLE 35.--Condensed annual financial summary for stable decades, Unit 8 Alternative plans Income and expense items Plan Ia Plan IIb Plan IIIc Plan IVd Receipts Crops $u,152 $ 2,066 $ 2,066 $ 2,066 Livestock 0 1h,800 lh,800 1h,800 Livestock products 0 0 0 0 Forest products 0 37,915 2h,08h 806 Total receipts u,152 5h,781 h0,950 17,672 Cash Operating expenses2,360 20,2h1 9,058 9,058 Net cash farm income 1,792 3u,5uo 31,892 8,6lu Depreciation 308 2,877 1,89h 1,89u Net farm.income l,u8u 31,663 29,998 6,720 aPlan I--present farm Operation with no timber sales. Plan II--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with harvesting and roadside sale of forest products. cPlan III--improved agricultural organization and intensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. dPlan IV--improved agricultural organization and extensive forestry with sale of stumpage only. Plan III with purchase of additional_acreage In the long run with intensive forest management, if the farmer sells stumpage only (Plan III), he will need on the average not more than 25 man-days a year on his planned acreage. During the first decade he will need a total of 1,h52 man-days, an aver- age of 195 a year, for planting pine and for timber stand improve- ment, totaling over the decade 570 and 882, respectively. For the next five decades he will need only 20 a year for management until the seventh decade, which will require 51 days annually. Thus after the first decade, to use an extra 108 of the 733381141838 av 11.3th by pu he ems now. I bought and imp: 53” Vill need tc If he ( has to pe labor cost of 55 me 01’ $1,019. If the 1 acreage and C01 Eid hired 18:00: expenses. The Side labOr and In each of the: 309 133 man-days available for forestry, he could expand his acreage h.3 times by purchase of woodland and idle land similar to what he owns now. If funds could be obtained for this acquisition, the total woodland acreage would be 10,356. If this land is bought and improvement work and planting done in the first decade, he will need to hire an extra 6,367 man-days during that decade. If he has to pay a labor wage of $10 a man-day, the average annual labor cost of $6,367 will exceed the average annual stumpage in- come of $1,019. If the farmer were to prefer Plan III with this expanded acreage and could finance the first decade investment in land and hired labor, income thereafter would substantially exceed expenses. The next five decades would require no hiring of out- side labor and would produce many times larger stumpage returns. In each of these decades the farmer would be able to make use of 1,036 of the family's available 1,330 man-days, and in the stable decades, 1,310. From these they could impute adequate wages from the increasing stumpage returns of successive decades. Only in the seventh decade would hired labor be needed-- 1,353 man-days—-costing $13,530 at $10 a man-day. The total stumpage income for that decade, however, would be $2,h35,286, thus leaving $2,h21,756, or $2h2,176 annually, as the net return to the total land investment of $165,696 and the average $1,526,787 investment in the growing stock accumulated during the development period. The annual net rate of return to land and timber in the last decade of the development period is therefore lh.3 percent, leveliw off alrady state The ma l-‘._.:, . II 310 leveling off in the stable period to 7.# percent, as has been already stated. The main attraction of the expanded acreage is that it pro- vides an opportunity to use productively the available family labor. The principal detraction, however, is the large cash in- vestment required initially to pay for land purchase, stand im- provement, and planting of pine on large acreages. To avoid difficult problems of land acquisition and financing, the expan- sion, if attempted, should be spread over several decades or limited to a considerably smaller total acreage. The economic rent of this study pertion of the lite Ring to their 8011 pragressing fronti the present time. We been stated, been described. CHAPTER X CONCLUSIONS The economic and social problems that led to the develop- ment of this study have been thoroughly discussed. .A large portion of the literature bearing on these problems and contrib- uting to their solution has been reviewed to delineate the progressing frontiers of knowledge and work in this field up to the present time. The three principal objectives of the project have been stated, and the scope selected and methods used have been described. Next it is necessary to analyze and evaluate the results of this study, including conclusions that can be made and in- ferences that can and should be drawn. Then it will be possible, hopefully, to decide whether the objectives of the project have been accomplished and if so, to put the results to work. The information sought in the six phases of data collection was successfully obtained in all cases. To the extents necessary for the various categories, the data were tabulated, computed, analyzed, and in formal form were incorporated into Chapters IV through IX and the appendix. One of the most extensively demonstrated results of the project is the combination of numerical tables and narrative 311 description Operating u: T36 relative briefly desc; sized three 1 unit--as alte for VOOdland ; that can be .16 MCation by an 312 description to illustrate the application to farm-and-forest operating units Of the budgeting method Of economic analysis. The relatively simple examples in Chapter IX Of eight units briefly described only two agricultural alternatives but empha- sized three types Of operation Of the forest enterprise on each unit--as alternatives to absolute ignoring of the opportunities for woodland income. This method is a very useful technique that can be learned by most farm owners of moderate intelligence. Adoption by an owner of the tool of budgeting farm.and forest resources can lead him to understand how to identify and inventory his resources of land, labor and capital and to reallocate them, on paper, to various possible farm enterprise combinations. For each alternative budget he will compute annual net farm income by subtracting expenses of production from expected receipts. Also he will need to consider for each budget the preferences of his family for the various enterprises and his Own capacity for management Of the entire coordinated operation. Then the owner will make the decision to select one budget from.among the alternatives he has prepared. This choice is ex- pected to conform to his objectives. The assumed (and widely accepted) primary owner objective of higher net income was found to be satisfactory for the purpose of accomplishing as Objective an analysis as was feasible with the data available (both numer- ical and verbal). The assumed unconscious ultimate objective of the owner to be generally satisfied with his own allocation Of resources was considered important in Owner-operator decision- 313 making. This final goal, as might be expected was not found measurable by a scale of utility (for lack of adequate data suitable for formal analysis). Owner satisfaction, or most commonly some degree Of dissatisfaction, with his operation was Observed subjectively, however, during many Of the interviews on the owner survey, to be very real. It is undoubtedly of consid- erable importance tO the making of future management decisions. How significant it is in the process is complicated by the prev- alent human traits of conservatism, or inertia, and unpredictable reasoning. Lacking a method for objectively evaluating general owner satisfaction, non-financial decisions that were assumed to be those of the farmers in Units 1 through 8 of the Ames Planta- tion were derived from value judgment estimates made by the author, who put himself temporarily--in his imagination--into the very "shoes" and environment of the farmer. Each of the three alternatives to the present Operation (which does not make profitable use Of the forest resource) shows, in the condensed annual financial summaries of Chapter IX, an increase in the total net farm income resulting from the forest products' contributions to total farm receipts. In general (with few exceptions) and always in the'long run the more labor- requiring alternatives yield the higher receipts and result in the higher net farm incomes. It is important to note, however, in the discussion of each alternative that different uses of labor yield different rates of return for a man-day. And it is interesting that among the various Operating units, and even among different 31% areas in a single unit, labor for a single use has different rates Of return-~also among different decades of time. The alternative plan selected as the most attractive and feasible for Units 1 through 7 is Plan II, intensive forest man- agement with harvesting and roadside sale Of forest products. This choice results from the fact that the process of harvesting to roadside would provide much-needed wage income for the farm family. The annual labor and income outlook for each of these units and for Unit 8 is best depicted in Table 36. In all cases a portion Of the available farm family man- days are needed, ranging in the first decade from 9 to 100 per- cent and in the stable period, from 30 to 100 percent. By allocating all of the roadside products' net income to labor, Units 1 through 7 can derive wages for each man-day that range from fair to good—-except for Unit 3, where considerable motiva- tion and forebearance are necessary (in the first decade only). In Units 7 and 8 additional man-days would have to be hired; in the first decade averaging annually 23 and 306 reSpectively, and in the stable period, 675 and 850. To pay this hired labor $10 a man-day in the first decade and $12 a man-day in the stable period, there would be no problem for Unit 7 nor, in the stable period, for Unit 8. In the first decade there would not be enough income for Unit 8, however, to pay for all the outside labor, much less to derive any wages for the 133 man-days of family labor needed. It is not likely that a farm.family would choose this situation for a duration of ten years, even though 315 .hmousms s «Ha no owe: m we Honda oofimpso when on oedema oom.oHo msfiodaocw p0Zo .hdcucds d 0H» mo own: 8 as honwa odwmpsO one: Op were me omo.mo we padmome .hoousds 8 NH» mo owe: m vs Honda ocflmvso one: op cocoon mmo.mn mowcsHoow poZo .hoolcms s OH» we own: a pm nopma ocflmpso onwn Op cocoon 0mm” wcwdsaosfi poz .poosmwsvo mo defipwwoonmoc use sowvwnomo pom arouses a No mo sowpomnppSm Hopmhdn new: psoSOMdsda phenom o>fimsopsfi new cocoon mowduobd use cansawc>d cadences Hosns4ll.mm wands 316 the financial prospects thereafter would be much brighter. For several successive decades a larger and larger crew would have to be hired and managed. Plan III, on the other hand, involving sale of stumpage only, would be immediately attractive financially and was there- fore selected for the family on Unit 8, which has a large for- est acreage but a relatively small number Of man—days available for woods work. Under this plan an average of 1&5 days would be required annually during the first decade, only 12 in excess of the number available from the family. If these were hired for $120 and if none Of the stumpage income were considered (for the first decade) as a return to the forest investment, the remaining $899 would provide a daily wage of $6.76 for the 133 man-days of family labor. After the first decade only a small fraction of the family labor would be needed under Plan III, but there would be an ever- increasing stumpage return, from which a generous labor return could be allocated for management activities. This would level Off in the stable period to just over $2h,000. If the 25 annual management man-days were compensated by a daily wage of‘$15, the return on the forest investment would still exceed $23,700. This is financially practically equal to the stable period net return under Plan II, yet avoids the hazards of a timber harvesting Operation and the problems of managing hired labor and selling cut products. ‘With the intensive forest management program under both Plans II and III, there are the generally increasing returns to 317 timber, land, and labor,decade after decade--until the fluid equilibrium Of the stable period is reached. These are tab- ulated in the appendix tables 1-1, 2-1, . . . and 8-1. In addition, by way of further contribution to the land- owner's financial status over the development period, there is a continual increase in the stumpage value Of his accumulating growing stock. The average annual increase for the eight units ranges from $2hl to $6,581 in the same order as the forest acre- ages--from the smallest, 92 acres, to the largest, 2,505 acres. Table 37 shows the difference between the stumpage value Of the residual growing stock at the end of the development period and that after the first decade's harvest (the value Of which was allocated to labor in Table 36 and the discussion Of Unit 8's Plan III). When the increase is averaged over the approximately 60- year development period, the average annual rate of capital accu- mulation is seen to be considerable, roughly in proportion to the forest acreage. The average annual increase per acre ranges from $2.26 to $2.96--not a great variation, and not related to the size of the forest area. This order of increase shows that in- tensive forest management builds up the value Of the investment in growing stock at a substantial rate. The increasing invest- ment value thus provides a further incentive for good management-- in addition to the sizable income from labor and from harvested timber each decade. 318 TABLE 37.--Stumpage value increase of residual growing stock over development period, annual average for each unit,2 and annual average per acre m w : Stumpage value Of residual growing stock Unit Forest After After Average acreage first devel- Increase Average annual decade's Opment over annual increase cut period period increase per acre 1 133 $ 2,220 $20,300 $18,080 $ 301 $2.26 2 221 68h 38,550 37,866 631 2.86 3 218 955 38,h00 37,hh5 62% 2.86 h 175 2,795 33,900 31,105 518 2.96 5 92 320 1h,800 lh,u8o 2u1 2.62 6 17% 0 2u,100 2u,1oo h02 2.31 7 2,505 15,256 h10,loo 39h,8hu 6,581 2.63 8 1,95u 12,u9u 288,100 275,606 h,593 2.35 tAfter first decade's improvement cut. 2Assuming development takes about 60 years. The two farming enterprise alternatives differ from unit to unit, depending on the soil capabilities Of each field, the existing pattern Of agriculture that has been long established, the types Of enterprises that the farmer believes he can Operate and manage and the yields and prices to be expected for each type of product. In all cases except that of Unit 7 the alternative agricultural budgets proposed for actual use on each of the units schedule higher receipts and higher net farm income than the present Operations. 319 Thus in regard to both farm and forest enterprises, the use of the budgeting method, coordinating the allocation of a unit's available resources of land, labor, capital, and managerial capacity for the achievement of farm family objectives through efficient operation of compatible agricultural and forest enter- prises, can contribute substantially to higher income on low- income farm-and-forest Operating units in the west Tennessee area. The general significance for west Tennessee of improved forestry on farm-and-forest units can be readily inferred from the problems and needs for economic progress that have been described in Chapters III through VI and VIII. Evidence has been supplied from the budgets of all eight case units that intensive forest management will increase the volume of growing stock per acre and the productivity of the residual stand following stand improvement operations--also the productivity of an area planted or converted to a pine plantation. This alone benefits the econ- omy by increasing the tax base--manyfold in the course Of several decades. But also when the fast accumulating volume growth of timber is cut and marketed, the owners derive an increasing return on their growing investment and many people in addition have an opportunity to Obtain wage income from labor devoted to woods work. Much Of their increased net income will probably be Spent locally, thus contributing to the flow of money in the community. Likewise, handling and usually some processing of the harvested timber by timber buyers within a 50-mile radius will add employ- ment and value to the economy of the west Tennessee area. And 320 of course there will be a multiplier effect, with some fraction of the money changing hands a number of times. Power chain saws and other equipment will be bought to fell and handle the timber. And numerous other transactions will take place. With reliable farm-and-forest budgets to present management intentions clearly and to help bankers judge how provident a loan for the expenses Of planting or stand improvement will be, wood- land loans On merchantable timber are likely to become more common, thus providing at reasonable rates funds needed to accelerate the intensive forest management programs--to the profit Of both owner and banker. Another result of this study is the derivation and use of data that will permit more accurate appraisals of opportunities for improved forestry on individual farm-and-forest operating units in the west Tennessee area. Management-yield data, work performance data, and timber price data have been developed and used as mentioned in Chapter VIII. InfOrmation on data collection and computation is provided in Appendix B. All three categories Of data were needed for the creation of the set of appendix tables pertaining to each unit's forested acreages (See Appendix A). The work-performance data and timber price data will be applicable under roughly similar conditions of work and markets, respectively. Locally applicable management—yield data will have to be devel- Oped for timber stands that differ substantially in any of several characteristics from those described in the respective Ames Plan- tation tables. Important characteristics in the forest survey 321 data that materially affect management-yield data through their effects on the stand projection procedure are: number of trees in the various diameter classes, form class, tree vigor class for diagnostic prescription, and growth rate for the various diameter classes. Clearly, in the west Tennessee area the application Of intensive forestry and modern farm.management methods in con— junction with the budget approach to economic allocation of available resources can help to alleviate poverty by making sub- stantial contributions to higher incomes for low-income Operating units and in some degree add to the over-all economic health Of the area. Probably the application of these principles in other low-income rural areas can have a similar effect. And certainly the techniques of data collection, devel- Opment, and use to permit more accurate appraisals Of opportu- nities for improved forest management can be of value for widespread adoption. APPENDIX A STATISTICAL APPENDIX: TABLES OF MANAGEMENT-YIELD DATA FOR OPERATING UNITS ANALYZED IN CHAPTER IX The following tables of forest management-yield data provide the statistical basis for the forestry contributions to the condensed annual financial summaries of Chapter IX and the other forest data used in analyzing the forestry alternatives for each of the units. The tables are arranged in sets in the same order as the Units 1 through 8 to which they apply. Within each set the tables are organized in a standard order; for Unit 1 the tables are num- bered l-l through l-6C, for Unit 2 they are Tables 2-1 through 2-6D. In the remainder Of these explanatory notes preceding the tables they are referred to generically as Tables x-l through x-6. Tables x—l are placed first in each set because they sum- marize the totals from Tables x-2 through x-5. Tables x-6 are placed last because they are the most basic, and will need to be referred to least Often. The letter suffixes A.through F to Tables x-3, x-h, and x-6, refer to each unit's Areas A, B, and so forth, which in total comprise the entire forest for the unit. Each Of these areas in a given unit has a different forest condition and therefore re- quires separate computation of management-yield data. A brief de- scription of each area's initial forest condition is provided in the pertinent Table x-6. 322 323 Tables x-l consist of the labor requirements and value Of yields by decade from the total area of forest land on each unit, for both intensive and extensive forest management. Under Plan II's intensive management and roadside sales, the data include the num- ber of man-days of labor input required for harvesting sawlogs and pulpwood and skidding them to roadside. The value Of these products sold at roadside represents the stumpage value of the products cut plus the value added by harvesting. Under Plan III, labor inputs are required for management work only, as no harvesting to roadside is involved. The value Of products sold is the stumpage price alone. Under the extensive management of Plan IV, no cultural work is required and only stumpage sales are made. Therefore no columns contain data except the value of products sold when possible during the period of declining yield and the average decadal value there- after. Tables x-l note the initial stumpage value Of the timber and the average value of the growing stock after 60 years of in- tensive management. They also include the average value of the growing stock following 70 years Of extensive management. The columns Of labor input under roadside sales and stumpage sales are Obtained from Tables x-2. The values of the products sold in the roadside sales of Plan II are the sums of the corresponding decades of all the Tables x-3 for each unit. The values of products sold in the stumpage sales of Plan III are the sums of the correspond- ing decades of all the Tables x-h. The values of the products sold in the stumpage sales of Plan IV are the sums of the corresponding decades of all the areas listed in Tables x-5. Tables x—2 consist of the labor requirements in man-days for 32h management work and for harvesting by decades on every area Of forest on each unit, and the unit totals. The total requirement for manage- ment and harvesting labor for each decade is given only for the en- tire unit. The labor requirements for both types of work are given on a per-acre basis for each of the areas, however. These figures are multiplied by the number Of acres on which they apply and the products are listed in the second column for each area. The man- days required on a per-acre basis on each area were Obtained from the pertinent Table x-6. Tables x-3A, B, and so forth, list for corresponding Areas .A, B, and so forth, Of each unit, the value of yields by decade from the total acreage Of each area under Plan II, with intensive forest management and roadside sales. For each decade are listed the saw- log yield per acre in thousand board feet, the price per thousand, and the product Of these two figures, the value per acre Of the saw- log yield. Likewise, for each decade are listed the pulpwood yield per acre in cords, the price per cord, and the product of these two figures, the value per acre of the pulpwood yield. The next-tO-last column in each of these tables is the total value per acre of the sawlog yield plus the pulpwood yield. When the figures in this col- umn are multiplied by the number Of acres in the area, the area total value is obtained to produce the last column. The prices in these tables and Tables x-h and x-5 are all Obtained from the average prices in Appendix B, Table B-3, which provides estimates of roadside and stumpage prices related to timber quality (dependent on stand conditions following a given length and intensity of forest management). 325 Tables x-hA, B, and so forth are organized similarly to Tables x-3 but apply to stumpage sales under Plan III. As will be noted in each of these tables, there is no price per cord of pulpwood for most Of the areas. This stems from the fact that the potential pulpwood cut for most Of the areas is hardwood, which has no stumpage value. Therefore though the potential pulpwood yield per acre is listed, the pulpwood stumpage value per acre in the case of hardwoods is listed as zero. For this reason the total value per acre is the same as the value per acre of the sawlog yield. Tables x-5 list the value of yields by decade from all the areas Of each unit under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales. As only sawtimber stumpage is sold under Plan IV, only the sawlog yields per acre, price per MBF, and their prod- uct, the value per acre of the sawlog yield, are given. For each area, the per-acre figure is multiplied by the number of acres to produce the final column, total stumpage sale value for each area. Tables x-6 provide for each area the average decadal yields and labor inputs per acre for each decade of the development period under Plans II and III and an average for the stable period--also for the period Of declining yield under Plan IV. The potential yields of both sawlogs and pulpwood are given, though no hardwood pulpwood is sold by the stumpage sales of Plans III or IV. These yields for all areas (except the loblolly pine plantations) have been computed from cut-and-leave data columns on development period stand projection sheets for each area. The cut-and-leave determi- nation for each decade was made according to the method described in Appendix B. The yield volumes were computed from the number of 326 trees cut in each diameter class and volumes per tree derived for each area from local board-foot and cubic-foot volume tables prepared for Ames Plantation major species groups. Loblolly pine plantation yields were derived by adjusting yield data from similar site-8O plantations in Louisiana according to short-term data from planta- tions in west Tennessee and northern Mississippi. Beginning with the initial stand composition of each area as modified by the first cut, the stand projection was accomplished by applying for decade after decade the projected lO-year growth rates in Appendix B, Table B-2, for crop trees and trees Of average vigor for each of the three topographic slope positions. In many areas the projected stands reached an equilibrium.condition of stand structure, growth, and cut in fewer than seven decades of develop- ment or (in the case Of extensive management) of declining yield. In such cases the stable period was scheduled to begin as soon as the equilibrium was reached. The labor inputs are the sums of the products Of the amounts of each kind Of work scheduled and the labor requirements per unit of work. The latter were taken directly from the work-performance data in Appendix B, Table B-1. The estimates for timber stand im- provement were refined, however, according to the basal area Of trees to be deadened, as follows: 0.2 man-day for 3.0 to 5.9 square feet per acre, 0.3 for 6.0—9.9, 0.u for 10.0-13.9, 0.5 for 1h.0-18.9, 0.6 for l9.0-2h.9, 0.7 for 25.0-28.9, 0.8 for 29.0-32.9, and 0.9 for 33.0-37.9. In practically all decades 0.1 man-day per acre was allocated for fire protection. 327 TABLE l-l.-LLabor requirements and value of yields by decade from 133 acres of forest land on Unit 1, with intensive and extensive management Roadside sales Stumpage sales Value of Value Of Years of Labor products Labor products management input sold input sold Man-days Dollars Man-days Dollars Intensive managementa 1-10 187 2,u56 75 921 11-20 M62 6,160 13 1,618 21-30 63h 8,982 13 2,715 31.u0 966 15,880 13 6,h0h h1-50 600 21,u28 13 13,h16 51-60 571 2u,838 13 16,256 61-70 838 h2,093 31 28,0hh Average per decade for stable period 603 2h,u90 16 15,803 Extensive managementb 1-10 NO cultural work is required 3,132 11-20 and only stumpage sales are 0 21-30 made. 560 31-h0 2,59“ h1-50 1,8hh 51-60 #30 61-70 1,010 Average per decade after 7th decade 5&5 8'The initial stumpage value of the timber is about $3,100, while after 60 years Of intensive management the average value of growing stock is about $20,300. bThe average value of growing stock following 70 years of exten- sive management is about $1,100. 328 'T‘A‘QTE 7_?.-—T,Q1‘QV‘ v-gnqniv'nmothp in man-flaw" Vor- mahpgnmpv+ afid 60% havan+iwg My flopafloa on +he 3 categories or fnrqu 0V1 Trhi f 1 ---—— .. ——_—.--. -—--—.-———. Labor requirements in man—83v. ---. --..- - _ Area A Area 8 Area C Tota1 on on on on Decades nor 29 per 76 00* 28 133 vears acre acres acre acres acre acres acres Management 1abor 1-10 1.6 A6.A 0.3 22.8 0.2 5.6 74.8 11-20 .1 2.9 .1 7.6 .1 2.8 13.3 21-30 .1 2.9 . 7.6 .1 2.8 13.3 31-40 .1 2.9 .1 7.6 .1 2.8 13.3 41-50 .1 2.9 .1 7.6 .1 2.8 13.3 51-60 .1 2.9 .1 7.6 .1 2.8 13.3 61—70 .7 20.3 .1 7.6 .1 2.8 30.7 Average For ctgqu decades 0.2 5.8 0.1 7.6 0.1 2.8 16.2 Uarvesting labor 1-10 3.0 87.0 0 O 0.9 25.2 112.2 11—20 3.8 110.2 0.7 53.2. 10.2 285.6 449.0 21-30 3.5 101.5 3.4 258.4 9.3 260.4 620.3 31-40 1.5 43.5 2.9 220.4 24.6 688.8 952.7 41-50 3.4 98.6 3.4 258.4 8.2 229.6 586.6 51-60 3.8 110.2 %.5 266.0 6.5 182.0 558.2 61-70 12.4 359.6 3.5 266.0 6.5 182.0 807.6 Average for stab1e decades 4.8 139.2 3.5 266.0 6.5 182.0 587.2 Total management and harvesting labor 1-10 187.0 11-20 462.3 21-30 633.6 31-40 966.0 41-50 599.9 51-60 571.5 61-70 838.3 Average for stable decades 603.4 329 oo.>m>.¢ oo.mmm oo.mm 00.0H oo.oom 00.0m o.v morocco ofixmem Lou ommscba 00.0mm.vm oo.O whom meow whoa atom as: meow Howe; see so: are poo see are 4 ospm> osam> ocflsm ooaw> oOwrm came» moa< fleece coozoasm Moaamm moflsmm memooc mmamm mtamddos use pcmEommomE emopoc obflmcmpcw new: .HH seam sees: H pas: no a sets no notes mm are nose messes as messes co scars--.amus mamas cm.mum.me Ow.awe Om.me oc.m m.r Om.m.m mmwmcmr operas soc dmmsoea 330 cm.mmm.oe Om.rwe om.mr oc.d q.e Om.m

.m cease om.mmm.wr 0m.~ae om.mr cc.m m.e 0m.m.m , Omire oc.mru.m oo.mre cc.me cc.d m.p oc.cce oc.om c.m 0<|~w om.o<<.r o>.rs om.cs oc.m e.a Cu.am oc.uw m.~ cases oo.cmm.m oo.cM o . . o oo.cM oc.o~ c.e amuse o o o . . c o . . c 0H1" mLmMHCn mamflflcm wtmaflce mawflecr motes mamflflor shearer no: match moflmt mice with eaoo mice meet an: atom -...w+0+ 1.0L ....QC ......Qc. 1.0.9 300. SOC. Sac. m onset, m:em:. eceim canal“ dorms. acetic nwdea mesa mm+ce coozorzm coczcrrm uofltmo worsen wrote: moamm mcmarmOL com #Cmeommcme sumac; obwmcepafl x+m3 .HH cram Lars: a pep: we m wme< co moses we oer Sosa cancer a; «crash mo c:~m>su.mmlr means 331 oo.es¢.m om.mmH oo.mn m.¢ om.mmH oo.mm m.~ cocoons oHpopn you cmdhebd oo.ese.m om.mmH oo.mn m.e om.mmH oo.mm . m.~ osuHm oo.v>w.m om.mmH oo.mn m.v cm.mmH oo.mm m.~ oouHm oo.vm>.v 0H.mwa ow.mm pom 0m.mHH oo.mm H.N Omnav om.o~H.m om.oHN ow.mma N.v~ oo.mm oo.Om m. cecam o~.mmo.~ oe.v> cv.v~ m.m o . . o omuHm om.vmm.m ow.Hm ow.Ho «.0H 0 . . o ONcHH ov.¢Hv oo.va oo.¢ v.0 oo.oH oo.mm v.0 oHnH mndaaon mndHHon mndaaon mnuaaon undafion ondaaon undo» osadb choc open ones mm: Have» you Mom Hon son a «sad» osasb osadb ocean «and Hopes coosnasm weaham cocoon head» evwmvnon use «easemenda phenom o>Hn:0pnw saw: .HH sch woes: H pass as o.sow< co cones mm or» some spaces as osHoaa as osHu>1-.om-H mamas 332 0H.~¢m.¢ om.m¢H om.m m.m oo.ovH oo.mm cocoons oHespo you omsno>< oo.omm.cH oo.~sm oo.~H o.e oo.oem oo.mm osuHm om.mmh.v om.mmH ,Om.e m.H oo.HmH oo.mm owuHm em.mmm.~ om.om Om.~ m.m oo.Hm oo.mm cmuaw om.¢mm 0m.om Om.e m.H oo.wH oo.o~ owaam oo.mm¢ oo.ma oo.ma o.m o . . OnuHN 0m.m>¢ 0m.wH 0m.wH m.m o . . omsHH oa.mom om.~m om.m n.H oo.¢~ oo.oH OHnH mndaaon undaaon onsaaon mndaaon assoc mHsHHon deHHon undo» asad> ones ones choc mm: Have» Hon non non Hon 4 cede» mafia» coax» ooanm dead Howey ooosnasm cooxnasm moasnm oedema cease owumlnun and encloudsdl Aachen chansons“ spa: .HHH swam nouns H was: we 4 send no none. mu any menu evened he avaoah no ouaubwu.<¢ta Hands . I.I 333 oo.mo~.m oo.moH o . . c.H oo.moH oo.ov s.~ mascots oHsseo you onHo>< oo.mom.m oo.moH o . . m.H oo.r0H oo.o¢ s.~ o>-Hm oo.mo~.r oo.moH o . . w.H . oo.moH oo.ov s.m omuHm 00.00~.m 00.00H 0 . . m.H 00.00H 00.0w h.m emuae 00.0mm.m 00.0w 0 . . m.a 00.o> 00.mm 0.N 0¢|Hm 00.00m.~ 00.0m 0 . . ¢.~ 00.0m 00.0w m.H onuam oo.oeH.H oo.mH o . . o oo.mH oo.mH o.H omuHH 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 Oana andaaon deHHon mnaaaon mudaaon meson mamaaon mHaHHon mm: undo» osaw> macs ones choc ones choc mm: used Have» you Mom Hon you new Mom you m uses» osamb ocean oaoflh odds» oomph vaowh dead Howey voosnasm doornasm moarum moarmm cocoon coach mudmnupm dud vsoEonsdl phenom obwwnovnw Ava) .HHH ssHm nouns H has: as m sow< so cones as as» spam canoes an ooHoas co osHs>au.meuH Manse 331+ oo.re~.m oo.rHH o . . m.e oo.mHH oo.o¢ m.~ possess oHsseo how omsHO>d 00.0¢N.m 00.0HH 0 . . m.v 00.0HH 00.0w m.~ Ohuaw 00.0vm.m 00.0HH 0 . . m.¢ 00.0HH 00.0w m.w omcam 00.Nmm.w 00.vm 0 . . >.m 00.vm 00.0w H.~ omnHv 00.0mv 0m.>H 0 . . ~.vw 0m.~a 00.nm m. ovnam 0 0 0 . . m.m 0 . . 0 Onoau 0 0 0 . . «.0H 0 . . 0 oonH 00.~HH 00.¢ 0 . . 0.0 00.¢ 00.0H v.0 oHuH undaaon deHHon deHHon mndaaon ounce undaaon deHHon mmx undo» scam» ones owed choc . once when mmz once Haves you you Mom Hog mom you Mom 0 mead» osanb ocean odor» mean» mownm daowh send Hence vooxnasm voornasm woahem moabmm cocoon coach omdmsnpn use acolowdadi phenom obwmcopnw saw: .HHH ssHm goons H sHss as o cow< as pesos mm as» none assess an neHoss as osHs>...oeaH msmqa 335 TABLE l-5.--Va1ue of yields by decade from Areas A, B, and C of Unit 1 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales w Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area A - 29 acres 1-10 2.4 10.00 24.00 696.00 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-30 0 o o 0 0 31-40 1.8 10.00 18.00 522.00 41-50 0 . . 0 0 51-60 0 . . 0 0 61-70 2.0 10.00 20.00 580.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 116.00 Area B - 76 acres 1-10 2.1 10.00 21.00 2,436.00 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-30 0 . . 0 0 31-40 2.1 10.00 21.00 1,596.00 41-50 .4 10.00 4.00 304.00 51-60 .4 10.00 4.00 304.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 304.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 304.00 Area C - 28 acres 1‘10 0 o o O 0 11‘20 0 o e O O 21’30 2.0 10.00 20.00 560.00 31-40 1.7 10.00 17.00 476.00 41-50 5.5 10.00 55.00 1,540.00 51-60 .45 10.00 4.50 126.00 61-70 .45 10.00 4.50 126.00 Average for ' stable decades 0.45 10.00 4.50 126.00 336 TABLE l-6A.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1 Area A, a 29-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked large sawtimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.4 MBF per acrea Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development period Years 1-10b 2.4 1.3 1.6° 5.0 11-20 0 5.5 .1 3.8 21-50 0 5.0 .1 5.5 31—40 .8 1.5 .1 1.5 41-50 2.6 2.5 .1 5.4 51-60 4.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61-70 16.0 4.0 .7d 12.4 Average 4.4 3.6 .5 5.2 Av. for stable period8 4.0 5.3 0.2 4.8 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of declining yield Years 1-10 2.4 ... ... ... 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-30 0 ... ... ... 31-40 1.8 ... ... ... 41-50 0 ... ... ... 51-60 0 ... ... ... 61-70 2.0 ... ... ... Average 1.0 000 000 000 Av. for stable periodf 0.4 ... ... ... aThe total basal area of this stand was 48 square feet per acre, of which 32 were in growing stock, 2 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 14 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 28 inches d.b.h.; 52 percent of the trees are below the l4-inoh d.b.h. class. inelds in this decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. c1.1 manrdays for planting pine, 0.5 for deadening unmerchantable hardwoods having a basal area of 14 square feet. d0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. f Residual growing stock nil. 337 TABLE 1-6B.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1 Area B, a 116-acre poorly stocked large sawtimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.1 MBF per acre8 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade , (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0 0 0.3 0 11-20 1.0 0 .1 0.7 21-30 1.5 2.4 .1 3.4 31-40 2.0 1.5 .1 2.9 41-50 2.7 1.5 .1 3.4 Average 1.8 1.4 .2 2.6 Av. for stable periodb 2.7 1.6 0.1 5.5 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 2.1 ... ... ... 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-30 0 ... ... ... 31-40 2.1 ... ... ... Average .7 ... ... ... AV. for Stable periOdc 004 000 000 cc. 8‘The total basal area of this stand was 57 square feet per acre, of which 35 were in growing stock, 13 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 9 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 30 inches d.b.h.; 61 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. bResidual growing stock, 5.4 MBF plus 2.5 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 338 TABLE 1-6C.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 1 Area C, a 28-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 0.6 MBF per acre8 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.9 11-20 0 10.2 .1 10.2 21-30 0 9.3 .1 9.3 31-40 .5 24.2 .1 24.6 41-50 2.1 6.7 .1 8.2 Average .8 12.8 .1 13.3 Av. for stable period‘0 2.9 4.5 0.1 6.5 Extensive management Period Of declining yield Years 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 Average Av. for stable period 0 0 0 7 5 3 .45 2 1 5 2 0 C 8‘The total basal area of this stand was 80 square feet per acre, of which 66 were in growing stock, 9 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 5 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 28 inches d.b.h.; 89 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. bResidual growing stock 5.6 MBF plus 4.6 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 339 TABLE 2-l.--Labor requirements and values of yields by decade from 221 acres of forest land on Unit 2, with intensive and extensive management Roadside sales Stumpage sales Years of Value of Value Of management Labor products Labor products input sold input sold Man-days Dollars Man-days Dollars Intensive managementa 1-10 A68 h,338 239 858 11-20 700 11,477 22 3,910 21-30 561 8,1uh 22 2,685 31-80 865 9,h02 22 h,070 h1-50 779 32,58h 22 20,752 51-60 902 h6,7u5 22 31,096 61-70 2,215 134,734 110 91,380 Average per decade for stable period 903 h5,505 37 29,331 Extensive managementb l-lO NO cultural work is required 1,582 11-20 and only stumpage sales are 168 21-30 made. 2,556 31.h0 176 11—50 1,857 51-60 505 61-70 2,597 Average per decade after 7th decade 893 3The initial stumpage value Of the timber is about $1,500, while after 60 years of intensive management the average value of growing stock is about $38,500. bThe average value Of growing stock following 70 years Of extensive management is about $1,800. 340 TABLE 2-2.--Labor requirements in man-days for management and for harvesting by decades on the 4 categories of forest in Unit 2 -...--‘--.———u-—‘~—s --.— -* ———« _,..._- c—nn a—o-fi..-_-—.-_~ --—-—-———. .-.—-- Labor requirements in man—davs - o—-——-— .— -..—....— w-—.¢_——~- _-~ '- Area A Area B Area C Area D r"otal on on on on on Decade her 142 per 5 oer 66 per 8 221 years acre acres acre acres acre acres acre acres acres Management labor 1-10 1.5 213.0 1.9 9.5 0.2 13.2 0.4 3.2 238.9 11-20 .1 14.2 .1 .5 .1 6.6 .1 .8 22.1 21-30 .1 14.2 .1 .5 .1 6.6 .1 .8 22.1 31-40 .1 14.2 .1 .5 .1 6.6 .1 .8 22.1 41-50 .1 14.2 .1 .5 .1 6.6 .1 .8 22.1 51v60 .1 14.2 .1 .5 .1 6.6 .1 .8 22.1 61-70 .7 99.4 .7 3.5 .1 6.6 .1 .8 110.3 Average for stable decades 0.2 28.4 0.2 1.0 0.1 6.6 0.1 0.8 36.8 Uarvesting labor 1—10 2.0 198.0 0.2 1.0 O O 3.8 30.4 229.4 11-20 3.8 539.6 3.8 9.0 1.8 118.8 0 0 677.4 21-30 3.5 497.0 3.5 7.5 O 0 3.1 24.8 539.3 31-40 1.5 213.0 1.5 7.5 3.0 198.0 3.0 24.0 442.5 41-50 3.4 482.8 3.4 7.0 3.6 237.6 2.4 19.2 756.6 51-60 3.8 539.6 3.8 9.0 4.3 283.8 4.7 37.6 880.0 61-70 12.4 1,760.8 12.4 2.0 3.7 244.2 4.7 37.62L104.6 Average for stable decades 4.0 568.0 3.3 16.5 3.7 244.2 4.7 37.6 866.3 Total management and harvesting labor 1-10 468.3 11-20 699.5 21-30 561.4 31-40 464.6 41-50 778-7 51-60 902.1 61-70 2,214.9 Average for stable decades 903.1 3&1 oo.mmo.mm oo.mmm oo.mm oc.o~ oo.oom Oo.om mwcmomc wHprm mom wuc¥¢>< 00.0mm.oe~ 00.08w 00.0w 00.06 0 v oo.oom 00.0m 0 owuflm O0.0©>. 00.0m 00.0m 00.0_ o m o . . o Omuam oo.o~m.> oc.mm oo.mm 00.0” m m o . . o omuhe om.m<>.m Om.>m om.mm oo.m w.~ oo.ma oo.mm w.o owna meHHOm mpwfiaoc mpmaaoc mpwaaoc mwhoo whmnaoc mewwmoc mmz mica» mseme wsoc meow choc meow «Low as: atom Hw+0p Fmo ima $¢o two ice flan twp < msmw> crew> ¢0wpm creek mfirm> women cwaeh mmp< Hmsoe coozeasm woo3cfism Meezwm womsmm accoma mwfidm mCflmocOM can pCmEmdeQS pmmhom m>wmcmpcw see: .HH ream swan: N per: 80 d were we mmsom «we on» scum mewome a; mcrmee mo m:~m>u-.4 00.00N.v 00.000 00.0v 00.0H 0.¢ 00.000 00.0w 0.0a ounflm 00.m-.H 00.mv~ 00.ma 00.0H m.H 00.0mm 00.0w 0.¢ omuam 00.m>> 00.an 00.nm 00.0H m.~ 00.0ma 00.0m 0.0 omsa¢ oo.mHN oo.mv oo.mH oo.oH m.H oo.m~ oo.mm m.o ovuan 00.0mw 00.0w 00.0w 00.0H 0.m 0 . . 0 0muam 00.m>m 00.mm 00.nm 00.0H m.m 0 . . 0 0~IHH 00.0 . 00.H 00.H 00.0 «.0 0 . . 0 0HnH undaaon mndHHon mndaaon meuaaon mcuoo mndaaon undaaon mm: made». quad» once anon anon chow chow mmzfl anon Hugo» Hog mom Hog non non Hon Hog m cyan» mafia» ooenm afloes quad» oosnm cause «and H0009 vootnaum voounanm mcaamm moaxam oudoon madam udwmudon can «noaumusua vmohom o>amnoanfi spa: .HH mafia noun: m pen: co m «and no canon m on» gone oedema up meHoss mo caeapwu.mm-~ mqm.m 00.0vH 00.0H 00.0 0.0 00.0ma 00.nm v.0 ovsam 00.000.m 00.n0a 00.00 00.0 0.0 00.HOH 00.nm 0.0 omuam 00.00¢.0 00.00H 00.0H 00.0 0.0 00.0HH 00.mm 0.0 onuav 00.00m.a 00.00 00.00 00.0 0.m 0 . . 0 ovtam 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 0mmH0 00.0mn.n 00.3 00.0 00.0 0.0 00.3 8.0m mé 00-: 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 OHIH andaaon mudaaon unuaaon mudaaon 00900 muwaaon undaaon mm: 0900» 00am» 0n00 onus 0&00 0900 0900 km: 0900 Havoa H00 non H00 non you 909 you n ouaup quad» 00000 genes oaHap 00000 canes 00nd H0009 000:0H0m 0001nasm moanum mdanum 000009 mmadm 0000000H 0nd anoa0mdqda 900900 obwuaounu :00: .HH naam 000:: n 00:0 00 0 0004 00 00000 00 on» 0000 000000 an auaoes 0° aaaa>1..om-~ mamas 00.00v.a 00.00H 00.00 00.0 0.0 00.mwa 00.mm 0.m 0000000 0Hp0v0 900 00090>< 00.000.9 o0.m09 00.00 00.0 0.0 00.m09 00.nm 0.m 09-90 00.000.H 00.n0a 00.00 00.0 0.0 00.n0a 00.mm 0.m ownam 00.0Nm.a 09.0»H 00.H 00.0 0.1 0m.0>a 00.mm H.m onuaw 00.0mv.a 09.009 00.m 00.0 h. 00.90H 00.nm m.m owlam 00.000 0n.mm 00.09 00.0 H.0 0m.00 00.00 m.H OnsHN 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 00IHH 00.00m 0m.mh 00.00 00.0 0.m 0m.mw 00.n0 H.H 0H|H 0% :0 0909900 0909900 . 090HH00 090HH00 00900 090HH09 090HH09 mm: 0900» 0590b 0900 0900 0900 0900 0900 mm: 0900 H090» 90m 900 90m 900 90m 900 900 n 0090b 00H0> 0009A 0900h 09H0> 00090 0H00h 0094 H0009 0003mH0m 000:0H00 00H30m 00H30m 000009 00H00 00000009 090 0908000009 #00900 0>0090unw £90) .99 0090 900:0 N 0900 00 0 0090 00 00900 0 000 0000 000000 90 009099 00 009001-.0m-0 90009 316 00.mmm.9m 00.009 00.0 00.m m.m 00.009 00.nn 0.0 0000000 099090 909 0009094 00.0-.90 00.~>m 00.N9 00.m 0.0 00.000 00.0m 0.09 00:90 00.900.m~ 00.009 00.0 00.m 0.9 00.909 00.00 0.0 00:90 00.000.M9 00.00 00.0 00.m 0.0 00.90 00.0w 0.0 00190 00.990.m 00.0w 00.0 00.m 0.9 00.09 00.0w 0.0 00:90 00.009.~ 00.09. 00.09 00.n 0.0 0 . . 0 0mi9~ 00.nvm.m 00.09 00.09 00.m 0.0 0 . . 0 0 00199 00.000 00.0 0 . . 0.9 00.0 00.09 0.0 09.9 0909909 0909909 0909909 0909909 00900 0909909 0909909 99: 0900» 0090» 0900 0900 0900 0900 0900 99: 0900 90909 909 909 909 909 909 .909 909 0 0090> 0090» 00999 09099 09909 00999 09099 0094 90909 00039909 00039909 009000 009:0m 000009 5 00900 00090590 090 900300000: 900909 099000909 999: .999 0099 90099 N 9999 90 4.0090 90 00900 ~09 0:9 0099 000000 99 009099 90 0990>1|.4¢|~ 99949 3&6 0m.m¢> om.m¢H om.m oo.m m.m oo.o¢H oo.mn o.¢ mmudoou oapupu How wmdnc>d oo.omo.w oo.~>m oo.~H oo.m o.v 00.0mm oo.mm a.mH owlam 0m.>mm 0m.mmH om.v oo.m m.H oo.ama oo.mm w.¢ omuam om.~m¢ om.mm cm.~ oo.m m.~ oo.Hm oo.nn m.~ omuH¢ 0m.NoH 0m.o~ Om.¢ oo.m m.H oo.mH oo.o~ 0.0 ovnam oo.m> oo.mH oo.ma oo.m o.m o . . o omuam 0m.mm 0m.mH Om.ma oo.m m.m o . . o ONIHH o .o o . . «.0 o . . o oHIH mndaaon mndaaon andaaon deHHon ounce mudaaon mndaaon undo» odaw> chow cued once when mm: Haven Hmm umn umn Hon you n 05Hd> mafia» aoflym mfiaw> mownm wand annoy doormasm mcahum ocdown moadm onmanpu and ancammdnda amonom obwunopnfi Ava: .HHH :de noun: N van: mo m wand mo waned m on» Scum oudowv hp mdamwh mo asad>11.mcnu Manda 347 oo.mmm.w oo.mm o . . o.~ oo.mm oo.ow v.~ monocod maniac you omuno>d oo.mmn.m oo.mm o . . o.~ oo.wm oo.ov ¢.~ osuam oo.oow.m oo.wm o . . m.w oo.mo oo.ov ~.~ owuam oo.om~.m oo.om o . . w.~ 00.0w 00.0¢ o.~ cmufic o o o . . o.m o . . o ovnHm o c o . . o o . . o OmIHw oo.mmv.H om.mm o . . ¢.o cm.- oo.mH m.H omuafi o o o . . o o . . o Caua undaaon undaaon andaaon ondafion nvnoo andaaon ugaaaon mm: ondc» «sad» anon anon whoa whoa chow mm: anon Have» non ncm non Hum non hon Hon 0 mafia» Quad» oownm uaowh Guam» aowym daowh dond Havoa coosnasm vootnadm MGahwm meaaum ocdoon moadm wusmasuu cud unoaonndl vaunom obwnnovna nu“) .HHH swam noun: m udnp go o coud mo mono: wm on» song «cacao hp uuaofi» mo o:~¢>--.ov-~ mqm4 00.0mm 00.0NH o m.~ 00.0NH oo.ov o.m onuam 00.0mm 00.0NH o w.~ 00.0NH oo.ov o.n owuam oo.~mm oo. msadb vawwh Guam» oownm vHOflh «and Hdpoa cochnasm cooxnasm Mcahmm moauam ovdoon mcawm mmdmadun and vcoaamdqda vmwnom obwmcuunfi saw: .HHH $8 n35 N tap go a «and mo 3.3..~ o 23 sea 38% .3 “But" no 31 2.5qu 5m: 3H9 TABLE 2-5.--Value of yields by decade from Areas A, B, C, and D of unit 2 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales Decade Savlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area A - 142 acres 1-10 0 . . 0 0 11-20 0 . . O 0 21-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 2,556.00 51-40 0 . . 0 0 41-50 0 . . 0 0 51-60 0 o c O 0 61-70 1.6 10.00 16.00 2,272.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 568.00 Area B - 5 acres 1-10 0 . . 0 0 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-50 0 . . 0 0 51-40 0 . . 0 0 51-60 .5 10.00 5.00 25.00 61-70 .5 10.00 5.00 25.00 AVerage for stable decades 0.5 10.00 5.00 25.00 Area C - 66 acres 1-10 1.5 10.00 15.00 990.00 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-30 0 . . 0 .0 31-40 0 . . 0 0 41-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 1,188.00 51-60 .4 10.00 4.00 264.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 264.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 264.00 350 TABLE 2-5 -- Continued Decade Savlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area D - 8 acres 1-10 203 30000 69000 552000 11-20 2.1 10.00 21.00 168.00 21-30 0 o o 0 0 51-40 2.2 10.00 22.00 176.00 41-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 144.00 61-70 .45 10.00 4.50 36.00 Average for stable decades 0.45 10.00 4.50 36.00 351 TABLE 2-6A.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade fa- Unit 2 Area A, a 99-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 3.5 cords per acrea --- _.___. .H _ ~--~—— e1-._. _—.——_ —. _ -...____..-1 ~¥< Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development period Years 1-10 0.6 1.6 1.50 2.0 11-20 0 5.5 .1 5.8 21-50 0 5.0 .1 3.5 51-40 ..8 1.5 .1 1.5 41-50 2.6 2.5 ..1 5.4 51-60 4.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61-70 16.0 4.0 .7d 12.4 Average 4.1 5.6 .4 5.1 Av. for stable periode 4.0 3.5 0.2 4.7 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of declining yield Years 1-10 0 co. co. 000 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-50 1.8 co. co. 000 31-40 0 co. co. 000 41-50 O .00 co. 000 51-60 0 co. one 000 61-70 1.6 ... ... ... Average .6 ... ... ... AV. for Stable periOdf 0.4 coo co. co. 8The total basal area of this stand was 36 square feet per acre, of which 11 were in growing stock, 11 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 14 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 20 inches d.b.h.; 69 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. inelds in this decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.4 for deadening unmerchantable hardwoods having a basal area of 14 square feet. d0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. 352 TABLE 2-6B.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 2 Area B, a 5-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked seedling and sapling stand of bottomland hardwoods contain- ing 0.2 cord per acrea :— Decade Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade (years Of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development period 0 Years 1-10 0 0.2 1.9 0.2 11-20 0 5.5 .1 3.8 21-30 0 5.0 .1 3.5 3140 0.8 1.5 .1 1.5 1:150 2.6 2.5 .1 3.1+ 51-60 11.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61-70 16.0 11.0 .11 12.h Average h.0 3.h .5 h.8 Av. for stable periode h.0 3.3 0.2 h.7 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of deClining yield Years 1-10 0 . . . ll-20 0 ... ... ... 21-30 0 ' 31.110 0 hl-SO 2.5 Average f .5 ... ... ... Av. for stable period 0.5 aThe total basal area of this stand was 3h square feet per acre, of which 11 were in growing stock and 23 in culls. The stand con- tains trees up to 12 inches d.b.h.; all trees over 8 inches are culls. inelds in this decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. c1.1.man-days for planting pine, 0.8 for deadening unmerchantable hardwoods having a basal area of 32 square feet. d0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. 353 TABLE 2-6C.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 2 Area C, a 66-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope.hardwoods containing.l.5 MBF per acre8 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Mansdays for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0 0 0.2 0 11-20 1.5 0.8 ..1 1.8 .21-50 0 0 .1 0 51-40 0 5.0 .l 5.0 41-50 2.0 2.2 .1 5.6 51-60 2.2 2.8 .l 4.5 Average 1.9 2.2 .1 5.2 Av. for stable periodb 2.4 2.0 0.1 3.7 Extensive management PeriOd of declining yield Years 1-10 1.5 ... ... . ... 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-50 0 ... ... ... 51-40 0 ... ... ... 41‘50 1.8 .00 co. 00. Average .8 ... ... ... Av. for stable period0 0.4 ... ... ... a"I'he total basal area of this stand was 59 square feet per acre, of which 14 were in growing stock, 22 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 5 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 20 inches d.b.h.; 47 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch class. This stand could also be classed as poorly stocked large sawtimber. bResidual growing stock 5.2 MBF plus 5.5 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 359 TABLE 2—6D.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 2 Area D, an 8-acre well stocked poletimber stand of lower- _slope hardwoods containing 2.5 MBF per acre3 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) 'MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 1.1 3.0 0.4 5.8 11-20 0 ‘ 0 .1 0 21-30 1.5 2.1 .l 3.1 31-40 3.3 .7 .1 5.0 41-50 3.1 .2 .l 2.4 Average 2.2 1.5 .2 5.0 Av. for stable periodb 3.0 2.6 .1 4.7 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1'10 2o} ooo ooo ooo 11-20 2o]. ooo ooo ooo 21‘50 0 ooo ooo ooo 31-40 2o2 ooo ooo ooo 41-50 1o8 ooo ooo ooo 51‘60 2o? ooo ooo ooo Average 2o2 ooo ooo ooo AVo for Stable PeriOdc Oo4 ooo ooo ooo 8‘The total basal area of this stand was 80 square feet per acre, of which 52 were in growing stock, 21 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 7 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 52 inches d.b.h.; 60 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as moderately stocked large saw- timber. bResidual growing stock, 5.5 MBF plus 2.7 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 355 TABLE 3-l.--Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 218 acres of forest land on Unit 3, with intensive and extensive management Roadside sales Stumpage sales Value of Value of Years of Labor products Labor products management input sold input sold Man-days Dollars Man-days Dollars Intensive managementa 1-10 353 968 250 75 11-20 83h 12,725 22 3,8hu 21-30 677 10,380 22 3,h95 31-h0 sun 1h,179 22 7,276 hl-5O 826 33,181 22 20,300 51-60 9A9 h7,197 22 30,h32 61—70 2,17u 126,65u 102 8h,736 Average per decade for stable period 1,083 h5,923 35 28,597 b Extensive management 1-10 No cultural work is required 1,030 11-20 and only stumpage sales are 500 21-30 made. 0 31.h0 2,995 h1-5o 1,012 51-60 532 61‘70 532 Average per decade after 7th decade 877 8The initial stumpage value of the timber is about $1,000, while after 60 years of intensive management the average value of growing stock is about $38,h00. bThe average value of growing stock following 50 years of exten- sive management is about $1,750. ILL) I§nb!-I-\oni -.I u u: o .IIII.acllI.I ‘ III.IIIII lla..~ .rV ~ .II. 4 .‘T . h.\.\e. —\.3 . . ILA» pso- - .... ...-.......... .,,.A ..x... . ....x.;>-x.. vp.... -...n\ o..t\:..¢-\. ....d.h.: .» 356 m.mmo.a H.meo.r o.mm m.m 0.0mm o.m o.oma m.e e.e0m e.< s.eHe e.e awesome eHsbae Lem owmk¢>< m.m>H.m m.m~o.m o.mm m.m 0.0mm o.m 0.0NH w.< N.omm.H «.mr 0.0Hm a.mH ONIHm a.mee e.eme o.em e.m o.oem o.m m.eHa e.e <.oas m.m o.mo m.» Oenem o.mmm m.um w.m o.mm <.m OmnHv a.msm o.mmm o.me m.e o.om m.» m.~m m.» OmaHm >.mmm o.Ham o.< ... m._oa o.r a. o.m H. m.m a. m.me e. m.eH a. oeuHm ... m.am o.r H. o.m H. m.m H. m.oH H. m.w H. OmIHm ... m.HN o.H H. o.m a. m.m H. m.or H. m.m r. Omun ... m.Hm o.H H. o.m a. m.m H. w.or H. m.m H. owuHm ... m.pm o.r r. o.m .H. m.m H. w.oH H. m.m H. CruHm ... m.HN o.H H. o.m H. m.m H. m.oH H. m.w H. owner ... H.0mm o.< v.0 0.0m v.0 m.> m.o m.mmH ~.H o.mm q.H OHIH scamH pceemmmcmz mewpmo>sm£ meson copes whom meson atom meson meow moses meow meson macs mamcm can mHm or be: Om Loo mm :09 moH ado mm eon mrmocm pcmsmmmcmz cc CC CC co :c to Hmpoe Hmpoe m moh< a dead u send m mead d mop< mementos CH mucoEmpHsdoh popmH m ms; so mecmomr m ewrb co pmwpou Lo mcwtcmmpmo ma mcHumw>Lms soc vcm ecmemmmcme you mamcncme cH mpcmsmewzucp postu|.mrm mgsde 357 oo.mmm.0m do.mnm 009mm co.oH Om.m oo.oom oo.Om oo.v moudooc oHpmpm you omeo>< oo.ow~.HHH oo.ovm oo.ov oo.oH oo.v oo.oom 00.0m oo.mH ornHm oo.mmm.~m oo.mem oo.me oo.oH om.e 00.0mm oo.Om ow.e ow-Hm oo.mem.o~ oo.mme oo.m~ oo.oH om.~ oo.onH oo.om om.~ cm-He oo.mH~.m oo.mv oo.mH oo.oH 0m.H oo.mm oo.mm om. ovnHm oo.omb.b oo.Om oo.om oo.oH oo.m o . . o om-H~ oo.mHm.> oo.mm oo.mm oo.oH 0m.m o . . o omuHH 00.0mm mm.w ow.m oo.m mm.o m~.m oo.mm mH.o oHnH manHon mndHHon manHon madHHon mdnoo deHHon deHHon mm: munch osHm> chow chow. whoa -onoc .onod .mmz - whom. Hobo» non Hon Hog Hog Hog you you mud msHm> osHm> mownm dHlo osHs> oOHHm vaHh amend Hmvoe voozmHsm dooranm mOHamm onrmm mucosa moHdm cdwmdmoh use equammdqma pmouow_m>flmsmasfi new: .HH_qum nous: m wasp mo m can < nomad no mouom mmH one Scam memocv hp muHmHh mo osHm> ua.m< oo. 2H4 84.3 8.3 8&3 09mm m.~ 07$ oo.oom.m oo.mMH oo.¢m co.NmH oo.mm v.m ownHm oo.mwm.~ 0m.om 00.0 Om.Nm oo.mm m.H OmIHv 00.00m oo.~H oo.NH o . . o oqum o o o o . . o omuHN oo.oow.H oo.mm oo.om oo.mm 00.0m N.H omnHH o o o o . . o oH1H deHHon uHsHHon mHuHHon deHHon meson mndHHon mndHch mm: undo» ostb ones choc choc hm: Have» you you you Hon 0 osHm> osHmb osHm> oownm mend Hence voommHsm coothsm mcHsmm oumoon moHdm ovwmucon and vsoamwdsma nuance omesopnw due: .3 sea noses m 3:6 as o 8.2 .3 sense mm :3 not 38% se. egos» as Beckie?» 3m: 359 oo.oom.m oo.oea oo.¢w oo.o oo.ema oo.mm . accuses senses you cmdnm>< oo.oom.o oo.m>H oo.vm 00.0 oo.¢mH oo.mm oesHm oo.oom.m oo.m>H oo.¢m 00.0 oo.VmH oo.mm owuHm oo.oom.m oo.oee oo.em oo.m oo.emH oo.mm omnae oo.oow.~ oo.¢mH oo.¢~ oo.m oo.OmH oo.0m oenHm oo.omm.m om.me oo.o~ oo.m om.~m oo.mn omaew oo.omH.m om.mw om.sm oo.m oo.mm 00.0m omuHH oo.ovm oo.NH om.~H oo.m o . . oHnH mudHHon mudHHon mnsHHon mudHHon meson mumHHon mauHHoQ memo» osHm> «Hos ones vuoo choc mmz Hobo» pom you you non mom a osHsb osHm> oownm osHs> moHnm «and Honey vooansm uocansm mcHrmm oedema mmHmm cchuwou and psmsmmsta vmoaom obfimsopsH nu“: .HH seam sees: m ease as a ooaa no bones on on» seam become an bases» as been --.nmum mamas 360 oo.mmm.e om.mma oe.e~ oo.m m.» om.mmH oo.mm m.~ bounces senses you owshobd oo.mmm.H om.mmH ov.w~ oo.m m.m om.mmH oo.mm m.m owuHm oo.mem.a om.HmH o~.- oo.o e.m oo.VmH oo.mm o.~ oeuem oo.¢ov.H ov.oeH oe.0m oo.o m.m oo.oHH oo.mm o.~ omuHe oo.owm oo.mm oo.mm 00.0 m.¢ o . . o oqum oo.om oo.m 00.» 00.0 o.H o . . o OMIHN oo.oow 00.0w 0 . . 0 00.0m 00.0m o.m ommHH o o o . . o o . . o oHuH deHHon mHsHHon mamHHon chHHon meson andHHon unuHHon Max“ undo» osHmb choc choc choc ones choc hm: once Hence new Ham Ham Hog pom pom mom a osHs> csHs> oOHHA cHowh ostb ooHnm vHowh mend Hopes doeansm cccsmHsm uoHsmm monmm oedema moHdm mewmdsch uss_usmadenda «woken o>HmsopsH new: .HH ssHm sees: m been as m ses< me eases oH ex» seam seesaw an ewHoHa.ue osHsau-.mmum memes oe.mnm.ma om.meH om.m oo.m m.m oo.o¢H oo.mm o.¢ absence been». new omduobd oo.mao.be oo.~em oo.m~H oo.m o.e oo.omm oo.mm o.oH oeuam om.HHo.- om.mee om.¢ co.“ m.H oo.HmH oo.mm m.v owuam om.ooa.mH om.mm om.~ oo.n m.~ oo.Hm oo.mm m.~ omuae 0m.m-.~ Om.om 0m.v oo.m m.H oo.mH oo.o~ m.o oanm oo.mmm.H oo.mH oo.mH oo.m o.m o . . o omun om.vma.~ om.mH cm.mH oo.n m.m o ..., o omuHH oo.m>H 0m.H o . . mm.o 0m.H oo.oH mH.o OHuH fl“! macHHon deHHon madHHon mndHHon mvnoo andHHon deHHon mm: undo» osHs> choc ones anon anon choc mm: choc Have» Hon Hon you Mom Hog non Hon mid ost> osHmb ooHnm dHowh osHub oownm cHowh amend Hence vooraHsm dooraHsm monmm mchmm oedema monm cwdmanpm use vacaomdqda phonon o>wmnovnH sew: .HHH.ssHm House m pas: no m and d amend Ho cones mmH on» Home ounces hp uvHowh no o§Hd>1|.m once onod choc choc choc mm: cued Hence Hon Hog use you Mom Hon Hon 0 ostb osHm> oownm uHowh osHm> cowhm cHlo «and Hayes wooansm wooxaHsm mchmm mcHhuw oedema moHdm cudaasvu dad vscloudsma «mohom obwmaopsfi Au“: .HHH :mHm Hons: m wash no 0 dead no monom mm 0:» scum ovcooc hp ovHowh mo osHubwu.ovum mqm chad once 0900 choc chow uni“ choc Have» you Mom you Mom mom non you a osHmb cstb cownm uHlo osHmb oownm vHowh .cond Hdpoa cocansm voormHsm 00H>mm 00H3mm cocoon i .mdem omsmaspm use «soSQMdQQI eunuch obwmaovsw sue: .HH 8.8 .398 m asap .3 a 3.2 .3 bases 2 as» .88 38% an agar» co assessiéeé ESE. .54.. . . . . o .. . . .. v . o. a . c . . . v . . . n . . . . b . ‘. o . h ’1 .Q A 1 s 0 v C . o I u I or v A. . . I 0 I l I ‘ J l u I . it. . .. l y . . o . . u l I u . . . . . u v u . I o I l . O o» 0 1 ’ D I C ‘ o _ on a. .. . O o .. o . D .- s . o I O o O o 0.: 365 TABLE 5-5.-- Value of yields by decade from Areas A and B, C, D and E of Unit 5 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Areas A and B - 155 acres _— 1‘10 0 o o 0 0' 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-50 0 . . 0 0 51-40 1.5 10.00 15.00 1,995.00 41-50 .4 10.00 4.00 552.00 51-60 .4 10.00 4.00 552.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 552.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 552.00 Area C - 25 acres 1-10 0 1. o 0 0 11-20 2.4 10.00 24.00 500.00 21-50 0 o o 0 0 51-40 0 . . 0 0 41-50 2.0 10.00 20.00 400.00 51-60 0 . . 0 0 61-70 0 . . 0 0 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 100.00 366 TABLE 5-5.-- continued Decade Sawlog'yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area D ~ 50 acres 1-10 1.7 10.00 17.00 850.00 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-50 0 . . 0 0 51-40 2.0 10.00 20.00 1,000.00 41-50 0 . . 0 0 51-60 0 . . 0 0 61-70 0 o o 0 0 Average for stable decades 0o4 lOoOO 4.00 ZOOoOO Area E n 10 acres 1-10 1.8 10.00 18.00 180.00 11-20 0 o o 0 0 21-50 0 . . 0 0 51-40 0 . . 0 0 41-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 180.00 51’60 0 o o 0 0 61-70 0 . . 0 0 Average for stable decades 0.45 10.00 4.50 45.00 367 TABLE 3-6A.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for unit 3 Area A, a 25-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of pine-hardwoods containing 0.7 cord per acrea w m Decade Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development period Years 1-10 0.1 0.h 1.uc 0.5 11-20 0 5.5 .1 3.8 21-30 0 5.0 1 3.5 31-h0 .8 1.5 1 1.5 hl-so 2.6 2.5 .1 3.h 51-60 h.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61—70 16.0 1.0 7d 12.u Average h.0 3.h .h h.8 Av. for stable periode u.0 3.3 0.2 h.7 Extensive management of original pine-hardwoods Period of declining yield Years 1-10 0 ... ... .. 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-30 0 ... ' ... ... 31-h0 1.5 ... ... ... Average .5 ... ... ... Av. for stable periodf 0.h ... ... ... 8‘The total basal area of this stand was 11 square feet per acre, of which 7 were in growing stock, 2 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 2 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 1h inches d.b.h.; 80 percent of the trees are below the lh-inch d.b.h. class. bYields in this decade are shortleaf pine sawlogs and hardwood pulpwood, in succeeding decades, loblolly pine. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.3 for deadening hardwoods having a basal area of 9 square feet. d0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. 368 TABLE 5-6B.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area B, a 25-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope cedar-hardwoods containing 0.8 cord per acre3 »-.~ -- .h... . _ . H... -.. -. - --—.. .- ..._..__-.....__ ......-...... Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine-stand Development period Years 1—10b 0.2 0.3 1.7° 0.4 11-20 0 5‘5 o1 308 21—50 0 5.0 .1 5.5 31-40 o8 los o1 los 41-50 2.6 2.5 .1 5.4 51-60 4o6 los o1 3.3 61-70 16.0 4.0 .7d 12.4 Average 4.0 5.4 .5 4.8 Av. for stable periode 4.0 5.5 0.2 4.7 Extensive management of original cedar-hardwoods stand Period of declining yield Years 1‘10 0 ooo ooo ooo 11-20 0 ooo ooo ooo 21'30 0 ooo ooo ooo 31-40 los ooo ooo ooo Average Cos ooo ooo ooo Av. for stable periodf 0.4 ... ... ... 8‘The total basal area of this stand was 25 square feet per acre, of which 14 were in growing stock, 9 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 2 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 16 inches d.b.h.; 91 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. inelds in the first decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.6 for deadening unmerchantable cedars having a basal area of 20 square feet. d0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration ofetnew pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. 369 TABLE 5-6C.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area C, a 25-acre well stocked seedling and sapling stand of upper-slope pine-cedar-hardwoods containing 1.5 MBF per acrea Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management DevolOpment period Years 1-10 0 0 0.3 0 11-20 1.2 2.5 .1 5.5 21-30 0 O .1 0 31-40 0 1.5 .1 1.5 41-50 1.5 1.0 .1 2.0 51-60 2.4 3.0 .1 4.7 Average 1.0 1.6 .2 2.5 Av. for stable periodb 2.6 3.0 0.1 4.8 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 0 ooo ooo ooo 11-20 204 ooo ooo ooo 21-30 0 ooo ooo ooo 51-40 0 ooo ooo ooo 41.-SO 2.0 ooo ooo ooo Average lol ooo ooo ooo AVo for stable periOdc 0o4 o o o ooo o oo 8The total basal area of this stand was 48 square feet per acre, of which 18 were in growing stock, 25 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 5 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 18 inches d.b.h.; 72 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as moderately stocked poletimber or poorly stocked large sawtimbers. bResidual growing stock 5.4 MBF plus 5.2 cords. °Residua1 growing stock nil. 370 TABLE 5-6D.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area D, a 50-acre well stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 1.7 MBF per acre“ Iields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Han-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0 1.6 0.4 1.6 11-20 1.2 5.4 .1 4.2 21-50 1.5 2.6 .1 5.6 51-40 2.6 5.0 .1 4.8 Average 1.8 5.5 .2 4.8 Av. for stable periodb 2.8 5.0 0.1 5.0 Extensive management Period of declining'yield Years 1-10 1.7 ... ... ... 11’20 0 ooo ooo ooo 21-30 0 ooo ooo ooo 31-40 2.0 ooo ooo ooo Average ' lo2 ooo ooo ooo AVo for stable periOdc Oo4 ooo ooo ooo 8The total basal area of this stand was 79 square feet per acre, of which 57 were in growing stock, 15 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 7 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 26 inches d.b.h.; 75 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as poorly stocked sawtimber. bResidual growing stock 5.2 MBF plus 5.2 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 371 TABLE 5-6E.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area E, a lO-acre moderately stocked seedling and sapling stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 1.8 MBF per acre Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (Years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0 O 0.4 ..0 11-20 2.0 0 ol 1o4 21-50 0 1.0 .1 1.0 31-40 0 4.5 .1 4.5 41-50 2.0 3.8 .1 5.2 51-60 2.8 3.4 .1 5.4 Average 1o4 2o5 o2 3o5 Av. for stable periodb 2.9 5.5 0.1 5.5 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1'10 1.8 ooo ooo ooo 11-20 0 ooo ooo ooo 21'30 0 ooo ooo ooo 31-40 0 ooo ooo ooo 41.-50 1.8 ooo ooo ooo Average o9 ooo ooo ooo AVo for Stable PeriOdc 0o4 o o o o oo o o o 8The total basal area of this stand was 50 square feet per acre, of which 50 were in growing stock, 15 in.undesirable but merchantable trees, and 7 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 54 inches d.b.h.; 59 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as poorly stocked large-sawtimber. bResidual growing stock 5.4 MBF plus 5.5 cords. °Residual growing stock nil. 372 TABLE h—l.--Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 175 acres of forest land on Unit h, with intensive and extensive management Roadside sales Stumpage sales Value of Value of Years of Labor products Labor products management input sold input sold Man-days Dollars Man-days Dollars Intensive managementa 1-10 A89 6,992 130 2,633 11-20 uu6 8,670 18 3,766 21-30 526 11,216 18 u,985 31.10 36h 12 , 321 18 6, 912 h1-50 668 28,u15 18 18,036 51-60 7h5 38,637 18 25,h7h 61-70 1,893 113,872 103 77,0h8 Average per decade for stable period 830 37,9hl 32 2h;hh9 Extensive managementb 1-10 No cultural work is required 5,h28 11-20 and only stumpage sales are 1,580 21-30 made. 3,211 3LAO 0 hl-so 2,356 51-60 0 61—70 2,088 Average per decade after 7th decade 1,080 8The initial stumpage value of the timber is about $5,h00, while after 60 years of intensive management the average value of growing stock is about $33,900. bThe average value of growing stock following 70 years of exten- sive management is about $2,500. 373 TABLE 4—2.--Labor requirements harvesting by decades on the in man-days for management and for 4 categories of forest in Unit 4 Labor requirements in man-days Area A Area 3 Area C Area D Total Decades on on on on on years per 95 per 50 per 20 per 52 175 acre acres acre acres acre acres acre acres acres Management labor 1-10 1.2 111.6 0.5 9.0 0.5 6.0 0.1 5.2 129.8 11-20 .1 9.5 .1 5.0 .1 2.0 .1 5.2 17.5 21-50 .1 9.5 .l 5.0 .1 2.0 .l 5.2 17.5 51-40 .1 9.5 .1 5.0 .l 2.0 .1 5.2 17.5 41-50 .1 9.5 .1 5.0 .1 2.0 .1 5.2 17.5 51-60 .1 9.5 .1 5.0 .1 2.0 .1 5.2 17.5 61-70 .7 65.1 .7 21.0 .7 14.0 .1 5.2 105.5 Average for stab1e decades 0.2 18.6 0.2 6.0 0.2 4.0 0.1 5.2 51.8 Harvesting labor 1-10 2.0 186.0 1.5 59.0 2.4 48.0 2.7 86.4 559.4 11-20 5.8 555.4 1.5 59.0 1.8 56.0 0 0 428.4 21-50 5.5 525.5 2.5 69.0 5.0 60.0 1.7 54.4 508.9 51-40 1.5 159.5 5.4 102.0 5.0 60.0 1.4 44.8 546.5 41-50 5.4 516.2 5.2 96.0 5.6 72.0 5.2 166.4 650.6 51-60 5.8 353.4 5.9 117.0 4.2 84.0 5.4 172.8 727.2 61-70 12.4 1,155.2 8.8 264.0 10.0 200.0 5.4 172.8 1,790.0 Average for stab1e decades 4.7 457.1 5.6 108.0 4.0 80.0 5.4 172.8 797.9 Total management and harvesting labor 1-10 489.2 11-20 445.9 21-50 426.4 31-40 565.8 41-50 668.1 51-60 744.7 61-70 .895.5 Average for stab1e decades 829.7 37h oo.mme.em oo.mmm .ooymm Geese n.m ,oo.oo~ oo.om o.e seeseee basses Hon owseob< 00.0NH.0> 00.0w0 00.0w 00.0H 0.v 00.000 00.0w 0.0H owch 00.m0~.~m .00.mvm 00.mH 00.0H m.H 00.0mm 00.0m w.v omnHm 00.mHv.eH 00.mmH 00.mm 00.0H m.m 00.0mH 00.0w m.~ 0mqu 00.mmm.m 00.m¢ 00.mH 00.0H m.H 00.0w 00.nm m. oqum 00.0mm.e oo.om oo.Om oo.oH o.m o . . o om.am 00.mHH.m 00.nm 00.mm 00.0H m.m 0 . . 0 0NIHH 00.5m0.~ 0m.H~ 0v.¢H 00.0 0.H 0m.» 00.mm m.0 oHnH mesHHon mHsHHoQ memHHon .memaHon .mdnoo manHon memHHon . an: munch osHm> ones once when ones when hm: ones Hmeou use new Hem mom son Hoe use 4 osHm> osHmb oOHHm uHowh csHm> ocenm chwh mend Hmeoa doosaHsm doormHsm wOHIsm moHrmm museum mmHme odemdmon_dsm encadesms eschew cbwmsopsw nee: .HH seam sees: a ease as 4 ease as eases mm as» ease assess an assess as eaaaeuu.emue mamas 375 00.00¢.m 00.00H 00.nu 00.0H m.~ 00.an 00.0w H.m seduced oHpsem you omseobd oo.oo~.eH oo.oem oo.oe oo.oe o.e oo.00m oo.om o.oa oe-Hm 00.00¢.m 00.00H 00.0w 00.0H 0.m 00.0mH 00.0w 0.m owuHm 00.00m.v 00.0mH 00.nm 00.0H m.~ 00.an 00.0m m.m 0mIH¢ 00.mmm.~ 0m.~m 00.mm 00.0H m.n 0m.~m 00.mm m.H oeth 00.m>H.N 0m.~> 00.0w 00.0H 0.~ 0m.mm 00.mm m.H onuHN 00.nmw 0m.m~ 00.0H 00.0H 0.H 0m.0H 00.mm m.0 omnHH oo.mmm.a om.wm oo.e oo.oH e.o om.~m oo.mm m.a oH-H medHHon unsHHon mnsHHon .medHHon mcnoo mnsHHon mnsHHon umn. memo» osHm> macs ones ance ones once mm: ones Hence non non use use you Hon Mom m osHm> osHm> eoeum uHoeh osHs> ocfinm cHoeh mend Hseoa doomaHsm doomanm moHrmm mpomm oedema monm odamwmch use ususmwmsma phenom o>Hmsevsw new: .HH seam geese m ease as m saga as abuse on one some assess he seems» as eaessvu.mm-e mamas ...... 00.0NH.v 00.00N 00.0w 00.0H 0.N 00.00H 00.0w m.m madness cHnmem new owmeo>d 00.000.NH 00.0vm 00.0w 00.0H 0.v 00.000 00.0w 0.NH opun 00.00>.m 00.m0H 00.nm 00.0H m.m 00.0mH 00.0w 0.m owIHm 00.00H.m 00.mmH 00.0m 00.0H 0.m 00.an 00.0m m.~ 0mnHv 00.00m.~ 00.m~H 00.m~ 00.0H m.~ 00.00H 00.0w 0.N ownHm 00.00m.m 00.mNH 00.m~ 00.0H m.N 00.00H 00.0m 0.~ omnHN 00.0wp.m 00.0mH 00.m 00.0H m.0 00.mMH 00.0m ~.~ 0NIHH 00.00m.~ 00.mHH 00.» 00.0H >.0 00.NHH 00.nm ~.m 0HIH /o w“ mesHHon deHHon manHon memHHon meson deHHon mesHHon mm: - memo» msHs> choc ones vuoo ones 7 once mmzn ones Have» use use Hon Hog use use see 0 base» aaae> aeeem eases sass» tease eases mead Hseca vooraHsm eocsaHsm MOHsmm mcHsmm oedema nonm ovemdmOH use vsoaommsss umcnou o>HmscusH new: .HH seam seas: e ease as o ees< as eases om sea nose assess an assess as eaasetu.om-e mamas 377 oo.~me.e oo.HH~ oo.e~ oo.o o.m oo.esfl oo.mm a.» eeeeeee senses Hon owmhm>< oo.~m~.e oo.aam oo.ee so.» o.m oo.eea oo.mm e.» canes oo.~me.m oo.HH~ oo.e~ oo.o o.m oo.ema oo.mm ¢.m seven 00.00e.0 00.00m 00.¢~ 00.0 0.m . 00.0FH 00.mm ~.m cmqu 00.000.m 00.00H 0 . . 0 00.00H 00.0w 0.0 0¢1Hm om.Hm0.H 0H.mm 00.m 00.0 v.0 0m.~m 00.mm m.H 0m4H~ 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0. 0~JHH 00.000 0m.b~ 00.00 00.0 m.~ 0m.~ 00.mm m.0 0HuH eanHon memHHon unsHHon manch sumac mHsHHon mesHHon mm: memo» csHm> ones ones 0900 once ones 00: ones Hence son use yea mom you use Hon 9 csHmb osHmb oOHHM echh osHm> 00Hnm 0H0fih send Haves vooamHsm dooansm 00Hhmm moHsmm oedema moHsm meHmdsoH and psoammdsma unseen obwmscusw new: .HH seam sees: e ease as a send as sense an use seam assess an messes as eaasswu.nmue mamas 378 0>.0vm.mH 00.0eH 00.0 00.m m.m 00.0¢H 00.mn mocsooc oHnsem Hon cmsnobd 00.00H.nm 00.~>m 00.NH 00.m 0.v 00.00m 00.nn 0>nH0 0m.Hmm.mH 0m.m0H 0m.v 00.m m.H 00.HOH 00.nm 00|Hm om.oba.e om.em on.» oo.m m.~ oo.Hm oo.mm amuse 0m.000.H 00.00 0m.¢ 00.n m.H 0020H 00.0w 0¢|Hm 00.nmm.H 00.mH 00.0H 00.m 0.m 0 . . 0nIH~ 00.¢mm.H 0m.0H 0m.0H 00.n 0.0 0 . . ONIHH 00.0»0 00.n 0 . . 0.H 00.n 00.0H 0HIH mHsHHon ensHHon uHsHHon nanHon ounce ensHHon mnsHHon memo» osHsb ones ones when ones hm: Have» pea Hon use non non 4 osHm> osHs> ocean osHmo cospm mend Hence dooaanm vcommHsm uloam oesoon monm omdmsuvm use uncrowded: «munch chansons“ new: .HHH seem sees: v ease as <.eoe< as asses mm ea» seam .eeeee a: bases» as oaeoswu.IH0 oo.o~¢.m oo.¢HH co m oo.m o.n oo.moH oo.mn o.n cthm 00.0m0.~ 00.nm 0m s 00.m m.~ 00.>0 00.nn m.~ 0m1H¢ 00.mH~.H 0m.0v 0m 0 00.m m.m 00.0w 00.0w m.H 0vam 00.000.H 00.0m 00 0 00.m 0.0 00.0w 00.0w m.H omnHN 00.ewm 00.0H 00 v 00.m 0.H 00.0 00.0w m. 0~IHH 00.0mm 0~.Hm cm H 00.m v.0 00.0w 00.00 m.H 0HIH manHon uHmHHon memHHon mHsHHon sense mesHHon eanch um: meson cstb choc ones when ones onom mm: ones . Hence use use you Mom mom use Ham 0 osHs> osHs> ooHnm uHoeh osHsb ooHnm cHlo seed Hspoe vooansm coosaHsm wcHrsm mcHsmm oedema ill I||ll moHsm mmsasbum use «sesewusms vacuum chumsovnw Ana: .HHH seam sees: e ease as m aea< as abuse on es» nose assess an eases» es easeswn.mvue mamas 380 00.000.~ 00.an 00.» 00.m 0.0 00.0NH 00.mm 0.m 0000000 0Hnmum you 000h0>4 00.000.0 00.~m¢ 00.~H 00.m 0.¢ 00.0mv 00.nm 0.NH 0NIH0 00.0Hm.~ 0m.mHH 0m.0H 00.n m.m 00.m0H 00.nm 0.m 001Hm 00.0mm.H 0m.0m 00.0 00.m 0.n 0m.>0 00.mm 0.0 0mnH¢ 00.0mm.H 0m.>e 0m.» oo.m m.~ 00.0» oo.mm o.~ oean oo.0mm.a om.ee om.e co.» m.~ oo.oe oo.mm o.~ omuem 00.0om.H 0v.mm 00.0 00.m m.0 0m.¢m 00.mm v.0 0~3HH 00.~Nm.H 0H.00 0H.N 00.m 5.0 00.V0 00.0w ~.n 0HIH manHon mamHHon medHHon mesHHon meson mesHHon eHsHHon 00:, name» cstb ones ones when chem choc mm: ones Hence 900 90a H09 H00 H09 H00 900 o osHm> H 05H0> olom dHowh osHsb eownm 0H0flh send Haves vooraHsm cooraHsm 00Hmmm mchum 000009 moHsm oumaanuo use usesommssl peonou abandons“ new: .HHH seam asses e ease as o oes< es eases om use ease eeaeee as eeeees us eseestu.oeue names 381 00.0mm.0 00.0mH 0 . . 0.H 00.0mH 00.00 0.m 0000000 0H00¢0 you 000n0>0 00.0mm.e oo.0ma o . . 0.H 00.0ma oo.oe e.m oeuem 00.~mm.¢ 00.0mH 0 . . 0.H 00.0mH 00.00 0.m 001Hm 00.0moev 00.00H 0 . . 0.m 00.00H 00.00 ~.n 0muH0 00.00~.N 00.0» 0 . . 0 00.05 00.mn 0.~ . oqum 00.000 00.0m 0 . . v.0 00.0m 00.0w m.H OmnHm 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 omaHH 00.00 00.m 0 . . 0.0 00.m 00.0H m.0 0HIH 0H0HHon 0H0HH00 0H0HH00 mesHHon 00sec eanHon 0H0HHon mm: 0H00H 00H0> ones 0H00 0uoo 0000 0H00 mm: 0e00 H000» sea H00 900 H00 H00 H00 H00 0 00H0> 00H0> ooHym 0H0Hh osHsb 000nm 0H0Hh 00nd H0009 000:0Hsm 000:0Hsm mcHsmm mcHaum 000000 00H00 000asspm 000 9000000003 amoucu 0>000090H new: .HHH seam poses a ease as a aos< as eases mm as» seam assess an bases» as eaassws.n¢-¢ mamas 382 TABLE 4-5.--Va1ue of yields by decade from Areas A, B, C and D of Unit 4 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area A - 95 acres 1-10 0 o o 0 0 11—20 0 . . 0 0 21—50 1.5 10.00 15.00 1,595.00 51-40 0 o o O 0 4.1—50 0 . . 0 0 51-60 0 o o 0 0 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 572.00 Area B - 50 acres 1-10 2.7 20.00 54.00 1,620.00 11-20 1.5 20.00 50.00 900.00 21-30 0 . . o 0 31-40 0 . . 0 0 “‘50 1.5 20.00 50.00 900.00 51-60 0 o o O 0 51-70 0 . . 0 0 A'fe:l:age for Stable decades 20.00 10.00 500.00 7 O . o U1 TABLE 4-5.-- < Decade Years 1-10 11-20 21-30 51-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 “”389 for stable decades 1-10 11-20 21-50 51-40 41.50 51.50 61~70 he ““13 d8 cade s 383 TABLE 4-5.-- continued ‘1 ‘2- Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars ‘ Area C — 20 acres 1-10 8.0 20.00 160.00 5,200.00 11-20 1.7 20.00 54.00 680.00 21-50 1.5 20.00 50.00 600.00 51-40 0 . . 0 0 41—50 2.2. 20.00 44.00 880.00 51-60 0 . . 0 0 61—70 1.5 20.00 50.00 600.00 Average for stable decades 0.7 20.00 14.00 280.00 Area D - 52 acres 1-10 1.9 10.00 19.00 608.00 11-20 0 . . o 0 21-30 5.8 10.00 58.00 1,216.00 31-40 0 . . 0 0 41-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 576.00 51-60 0 . . 0 0 61-70 0 . . 0 0 Average for stable decades 0.4 ‘ 10.00 4.00 128.00 ‘ TABLE 4-6Ao--A Unit 4, Area A stocked poleti Decade (years of magement) fl -¥ ‘d DevelOpulent pe: Years 1-10b 11-20 21-50 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 “erage "A for stable 1 Y”““ 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 381+ TABLE 4-6A.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 4, Area A, a 95-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper slope hardwoods containing 2.9 cords per acre3 ==I-I------I-E-I-----I-----------------I Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of 'MBF of Cords of Han-days for Men-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development pgriod Years 1-10 0.3 1.8 1.20 2.0 11-20 0 5.5 .1 5.8 21-50 0 5.0 .1 5.5 51-40 .8 1.5 .1 1.5 41-50 2.6 2.5 .1 5.4 51-60 4.6 1.5 .1d 5.8 61-70 16.0 4.0 .7 12.4 Average 4.0 5.6 .4 5.1 Av. for stable period9 4.0 5.5 0.2 4.7 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of declining yield Years 1’10 0 ooo ooo ooo 11020 0 ... ... ... 21-30 loS ooo ooo ooo 31-40 0 ooo ooo ooo 41-50 0 ooo ooo ooo 51-60 0 ... ... ... 61‘70 1o6 ooo ooo ooo Average .5 ooo ooo ooo Av. for stable period 0.4 ... ... ... 8The total basal area of this stand was 20 square feet per acre, of which 17 were in.growing stock, 2 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 1 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 50 inches d.b.h.; 70 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. inelds in first decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.1 for deadening unmerchantable hardwoods having a basal area of 2 square feet. d0.7 man-day schedule to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. 387.3 4-6B.--Ave hit 4 Area B, a S Bessie I {gears of magement) h; -__ 99191011116111: peri Years 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 Average .11. for Stable p, 181011 of decli ' '“83 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 385 TABLE 4-6B.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 4 Area B, a 50-acre well stocked seedling and sapling stand of shortleaf pine containing 2.7 MBF per acre“ Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years Of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management' Development period 0‘ Years 1-10 1.5 0.4 0.5 1.5 11-20 0.5 1.6 .1 1.5 21-50 1.5 2.0 .1 2.5 31-40 1.5 5.5 .1 5.4 41-50 2.5 2.5 .1 5.2 51-60 5.0 5.0 .1 5.9 61-70 10.0 4.0 .7° 8.8 Average 5.4 2.8 .2 4.0 Av. for stable periodd 5.1 2.5 0.2 5.6 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 2.7 ... ... ... 11-20 1.5 ... ... ... 21-50 0 ... ... ... 51-40 0 ... ... ... 41-50 1.5 ... ... ... Average 1.4 ... ... ... Av. for stable period9 0.5 ... ... ... 8The total basal area of this stand was 66 square feet per acre, of which 57 were in growing stock, 4 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 5 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 50 inches d.b.h.; 66 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as moderately stocked poletimber or poorly stocked large sawtimbers. inelds in the first decade are about 1/5 hardwood. The hardwood portion of the stand will be reduced rapidly to a negligible element in the course of 2 more decades. c0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. dEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. eResidual growing stock nil. 713:3 4'6Co"AV€ hit 4 Area C, s lecade {years of 33118.ng nt) —_ 39191011116“ per: lbss 1.10b 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 lVergge 11‘. for stable p \ Period 0 ‘ f dec ' Yam 1.mlln 11-20 21-30 386 TABLE 4-6C.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 4 Area C, a 20-acre well stocked large sawtimber stand of short- leaf pine containing’8.0 MBF per acre“ Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade ##— Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Han-days for Han-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10b 5.2 0.7 0.5 2.4 11-20 2.7 0.3 .1 1.8 21-30 2.0 2.5 .1 3.0 31-40 2.0 2.5 .1 5.0 41-50 2.5 3.0 .1 3.5 51-60 3.0 5.5 .1 4.2 61-70 12.0 4.0 .7° 10.0 Average d 4.6 2.8 .2 4.7 Av. for stable period 5.6 2.6 0.2 4.0 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 8.0 ooo ooo ooo 11-20 107 ooo ooo ooo 21-50 1.5 ... ... ... 31-40 0 ooo ooo ooo 41-50 2o2 ooo ooo ooo 51-60 0 ooo ooo ooo 61-70 lo5 ooo ooo ooo Average 6 205 ooo ooo ooo AVo for stable period 0o? ooo ooo ooo aThe total basal area of this stand was 98 square feet per acre, of which 51 were in growing stock, 41 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 6 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 26 inches d.b.h.: 44 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. inelds in this decade are almost entirely pine, but in the remaining decades of this first rotatiOn will include about 1/8 hardwood. c0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. dEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. eResidual growing stock nil. 31.113 4-6D.--Ave Unit 4 Area D, & slopa Decade {years of Easement) _— Mmpment per-'1 Years 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 “erage A1. for stable I 387 TABLE 4-6D.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 4 Area D, a 52-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of lower- slope hardwoods containing 1.9 MBF per acre3 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Manedays for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Deve10pment period Years 1-10 0.3 2.5 0.1 2.7 11-20 0 0 .1 0 21-30 1.5 0.7 .1 1.7 51-40 2.0 O .1 1.4 41-50 3.2 5.0 .1 5.2 Average 1.8 lo6 o1 308 Av. for stable periodb 5.4 5.0 0.1 5.4 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1'10 1o9 ooo ooo ooo 11‘20 0 ooo ooo ooo 21-30 3o8 ooo ooo ooo 31-40 0 ooo ooo ooo 41-50 1.8 ooo ooo ooo Average 109 ooo ooo ooo Av. for stable period° 0.4 ... ... ... 8The total basal area of this stand was 62 square feet per acre, of which 59 were in growing stock, 25 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and no culls. The stand contains trees up to 22 inches.d.b.h.; 59 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as poorly stocked large sawtimber. bResidual growing stock 5.6 MBF plus 5.2 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. TABLE 5-1 . - -L .0 92 acres 01 ======= Years of management \ \ 113 ll- . 23.-313 3.14:3 b-so BIA-51:) 91-70 1,- *«vErage per deriade fOr 81001: ,. 3's *8 83C 388 TABLE 5-l.--Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 92 acres of forest land on Unit 5, with intensive and extensive management m Roadside sales Stumpage sales Value of Value of Years of Labor products Labor products management input sold input sold Man-days Dollars Man-days Dollars Intensive managementa 1-10 220 1,581 120 391 11-20 228 3,969 9 1,h18 21—30 212 3,262 9 1,115 31.h0 173 6,887 9 h,136 81-50 296 13,158 9 8,39h 51-60 370 17,922 9 11,628 61-70 780 uu,697 36 29,920 Average per decade for stable period 411 17,382 1h 10,926 Extensive managementb 1-10 No cultural work is required 721 11-20 and only stumpage sales are 252 21-30 made. 765 31—h0 339 h1-50 756 51-60 328 61-70 720 Average per decade after 7th decade 368 8‘The initial stumpage value of the timber is about $720, while after 60 years of intensive management, the average value of growing stock is about $18,800. bThe average value of growing stock following 70 years of exten- sive management is about $750. “A87? 5 J harve Decade veers I I 1-10 11-20 21-50 51-40 41-RO 51-60 51-70 A'Wiv-a'gg f0? g‘a} dQCadpq 389 WARLE 5-2.--Labor requirements in.man-days For management and for harvesting by decades on the 4 categories of forest in Unit 5 }"'—' M .5- Labor requirements in man-days Area A Area B Area C Area D Total on on on on on Decade per 45 per 50 per 12 per 5 92 years acre acres acre acres acre acres acre acres acres Management labor 1-10 2.0 90.0 0.7 21.0 0.4 4.8 0.9 4.5 120.5 11-20 .1 4.5 .1 5.0 .1 1.2 .1 .5 9.2 21-50 .1 4.5 .1 5.0 .1 1.2 .1 .5 9.2 51-40 .1 4.5 .1 5.0 .1 1.2 .1 .5 9.2 41-50 .1 4.5 .1 5.0 .l 1.2 .1 .5 9.2 51-60 .1 4.5 .1 5.0 .1 1.2 .1 .5 9.2 61-70 .7 51.5 .1 5.0 .1 1.2 .l .5 56.2 Average for stable decades 0.2 9.0 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.5 15.7 Harvesting labor 1-10 1.2 54.0 0 O 5.8 45.6 0 O 99.6 11-20 5.8 171.0 1.6 48.0 0 0 O 0 219.0 21-50 5.5 157.5 0 O 5.1 57.2 1.6 8.0 202.7 51-40 1.5 67.5 2.0 60.0 5.0 56.0 2.0 10.0 165.5 41-50 5.4 155.0 2.8 84.0 2.4 28.8 4.5 21.5 287.5 51-60 5.8 171.0 5.7 111.0 4.7 56.4 4.5 21.5 559.9 61-70 12.4 558.0 5.6 108.0 4.7 56.4 4.5 21.5 745.9 Average for stable decades 4.7 211.5 5.6 108.8 4.7 56.4 4.5 21.5 597.4 Total management and harvesting labor 1-10 219.9 11-20 228.2 21-50 211.9 51-40 172.7 41-50 296.5 51-60 569.1 61-70 780.1 Average for stable decades 411.1 00H0m 00H0000H 050 00030? «00.8.0 9502023. £0 .0: HH 00$ 000:: m 085 so 1.. 00.3. co 00.80 me one son... 000000 .3 030:. so 030 1.570 weave 390 oo.mm¢.oH .oo.mmm oo.mm 00.0H n.m oo.om o.v mouaoou capapm Mom omwnobd oo.oom.>m oo.o¢m oo.o¢ 00.0H o.¢ oo.om a.mH o>-Hw oo.m~o.aH oo.m¢~ oo.mH 00.0H m.a oo.Om m.v ow-Hm oo.m~m.m oo.mmH oo.m~ oo.oH m.~ oo.om m.~ om-H¢ ooomnm.H oo.m¢ oo.mH oo.oa m.H oo.mm m. ovmam oo.0m~.m oo.om oo.0m 00.0H o.m . . o ommam oo.m>¢.m oo.mm oo.mm oo.oH m.m . . o omaaa oo.mmm o¢.H~ o¢.m oo.m m.o oo.m~ m.o ofiua mnuHHon mauHHon unuHHon maaflaoq muuHHon mmz macaw and?» . .953 one.» than .mmz H33 non Hon ham you d 25.9» 25.3 03.5 003m 3.3 33 8252 8233 madam 3325 mmadm ofiwmddoy dad pavemmdfiwa awake.“ w>wmnovdd spa: HH awflm nmuqs m ”as: mo < mou4 mo mouoa mv on“ song mcaomc hp mcflmda mo msfim>1-.¢m-m mgm oo.0m m.H ownam o o o . . o o . . o omnaw oo.vmv.a ow.m¢ om.v oo.m v.0 oo.mv 00.0n m.H ONIHH o o o . . o o . . o OHIH unuaaoa andaaon mndaaon undaaog mvnoo mudaaon mndaaon mm: madm» odad» whoa ones when when oped mm: anon annoy you Ham Ham umn Hog umn umn m used» ofiad» oownm camwh 05H») cownm uaowh «and Havoa vooxnasm voounasm moahum mdabam ovaoon uoadm mvwmudon dad pcoaowdgda «money o>wnumanfi Ana: .2 58 nova: m 35 .3 m 8.4 go 8.8a on on» sea 38% .3 3:3» .3 83>--.mnum mafia ospmnnda «munch mbfimnounfi an“) 2.: not .326 .3 .33». .3 2:» .....RA .3?“ umaun euwmdeH uni a: .HH 5:. Anus: m can: no 0 no.3 .«o no.8: NH 392 om.m-.~ om.mmH om.o~ oo.o o.m oo.mmH oo.mm o.m mmuaoov wanna» Hon ¢mdno>d ow.mum.m om.mma oo.o~ co.o w.~ oo.mmH oo.mm o.n Opuam oo.mmm.~ oo.moH oo.o~ oo.o w.m oo.mwa oo.mm o.m om-Hm om.mmo.~ 0H.~>H om.H 00.0 N. 0m.o>H oo.mm H.m Omaav o~.~¢o.~ om.o~H om.m co.» 5. oo.mmH co.0m m.n ovsam oo.amo 0m.mm oo.ma 00.0 H.N 0m.~m oo.mm m.H omuaw o o o . . o o . . o oNIHH 00.0Hw cm.am oo.v~ 00.0 o.m 0m.>N oo.mm H.H OHIH madaaon undaaon mHaHHon mudaaon deoo mnaaaon andHHon mm: chum» Quad» «nod onod whoa whoa chow mm: chow Have» umn you Mom Hon umn you Hon 0 quad» ofiad» mownm uaowh «dad» mownm canah «and adpoa coahmasm vooanasm maaxum udabum ocdoon .HH Guam umawm ovamcdon cud anoaawdqul pmohom obamnopnfi unfit Huang m vamp «a o «and mo mono: «H on» song ouooau ha acaowh mo o¢a¢>¢-.om-m wands modem oufimueoh and anon—cg «mono.» o>finnouafl .3?— .HH 38 .393 m 3:: ...S n 3.3 no nonoa m 23 Sum 3326 .3 3.11. .3 o3§naémnm Sass 393 oo.mHm oo.mma oo.om 00.0 m.~ oo.mva oo.mm m.~ noddood mapnpu you andnmbd oo.mam oo.mma oo.o~ 00.0 m.~ oo.m¢H oo.mm m.~ Opnam oo.mHo oo.an oo.o~ oo.m m.~ oo.m¢H oo.mm w.~ mam om.~m~ om.~mfl oo.o~ oo.o m.~ om.~nfl oo.mm m.~ omuac oo.mH¢ oo.mm 00.0 oo.o o.H oo.m> oo.Om m.H ovuam oo.owH oo.mm oo.m co.» o.H oo.m~ oo.mm o.o ommam o o o . . o o . . o ONIHH o o o . . o o . . o OHIH undaaon mndaaon mnuaaon undaaon woken mudaaon unuHHon mm: «high «sad» one» «nod undo cued anon mm!” chad Hdpou Ham non Hon non you you you n odaub osaub oOfinm vamwh Quad» moanm aaufih «and Haves coobmasm cooumflsm woabdm moaaum oudoon madam ovfimvdon and vnanomdqda uuouom obfiauopua an“: .HH moan noun: m pan: mo n awnq no gonad m on» gong ouaoou ha uuaoah «a .s~¢>1u.nmun mamas no In andmlaau wad aficiflfldfidfl nuoHo& obwn§09nfi £98) a IPC .302» ha 3.7:. Mo on~§uu€4um "35$ .HHH Guam Hound m «an: no d duhd Mo mono. mV 0:9 ‘‘‘‘‘ vvvvv 391+ om.m¢~.m oa.m¢H om.m oo.m m.n oo.o¢H oo.mm o.¢ nuanced .Hadpa non omino>d oo.ov>.mm oo.~>m oo.~H oo.m o.¢ oo.owm oo.mm .o.wH owuam 0m.~¢¢.> Om.mma om.¢ oo.n m.H oo.HwH oo.mn m.¢ anam 8&3; 3.3 cm; 86 m.~ 8.8 8.3 wé emu: cm.-m cm.om 0m.¢ oo.m m.H oo.wH oo.o~ 0.0 oejflm 8.2% 8.9 8.? co. m o.m o . . o RAN 0m.~v> 0m.ma 0m.wH oo.m m.m o . . o omuHH oo.o>~ oo.w o . . 0.0 oo.w 00.0H w.o oHnH andaaon unuaaon undaaon mudaaon ounce unuaaon ohuaaon mm: and.» «dad» cued cued choc one: one: mm: one: Have» 90m ham Man you you you ham 4 quad» ouanb oownm uHlo «sad» ooanm vaowh «ond Haney voornasm voobnaum maabmm mdasam ovdoon madam omdmluuu and anonnudqdl amouou obwnnopnw new: .HHH adam noun: m awn: mo 4 dead no gonad mv 0:» Iona oduooc hr mud-ah.uo Q!~d>13.<¢|m Handy lllllllwkl‘lfki _ and: gap: and «:33: :98.“ 85332: 5?. .«o n do: No no.3: on 23 39C 3303» En aumowh .wo cam—filamwuh ENS“ .HHH 5.7m H035 m #29 . .. . 4 395 oo.oov.~ 00.00 0 . . N.N 00.00 oo.ow o.~ novdoau omadpn you pudho>4 oo.oov.~ 00.00 0 . ~.m 00.00 oo.ov o.~ owuaw oo.ooc.~ 00.00 0 . n.~ 00.00 oo.ov o.~ cwuHm oo.owH.w oo.~> o . m.H oo.~> oo.ov o.H Omnav oo.m~m.a cm.~m o . o.H om.~m oo.mm m.H ovuam o o o . o o . . o OmIHN oo.m~w 0m.N~ o . m.o 0m.- oo.mH m.H ONIHH o o o . . o o . . 0 Dana undaaon undaaon andaaon undaaon mvnoo andHHon andHHon ant and.» snag» anon than when chow chow mm!“ chow Hana» Hon you Ham h¢m mom Hem nan m «nan» odadb oowpm uaowh quad» oownm vaofih «and Hench cooxnaum voornadm maflrum Madram oudoon uoada vMIAESvm and uccaomunua poouou abandopnw Ava: .HHH ndam Mada; m vamp mo m «and we named On 0:» Iona oddoou ha «cacah no quad>1|.nvom Hands «conga vacuum standout: 5w) QNUQIS I Ufifi :13 a one. Na .5 Ion.“ ems-con ha qua-w». Mo 0:19:16?“ EMS“ .HHH Scam Hound m pad: Mo 0 I081 ho a 396 mowdomc «Hanan 8.8NJ 8.8a o . . m.~ 8.8a 86¢ o.n you wuunobd oo.om~.H oo.o~H o . . m.~ oo.oma co.OV o.m owuaw oo.owN.H oo.oma o . . w.~ oo.o- oo.ov o.m ownam oo.mmv.H oo.v~H o . . m. oo.¢~H oo.ow H.m Omaav oo.mmm.H om.mHH o . . p. om.mHH oo.mm n.m owuan oo.own 00.0m 0 . . H.~ 00.0m oo.o~ m.H omuam o o o . . o o . . o omIHH oo.HmH oo.HH o . . o.m oo.HH oo.oH H.H OHIH undaaon audaaon anaaaon unuaaon mambo undaaon nudaaon max and.» ofiawb «no. shod anon chad onoa mmx oped adpo» Ham you you Mom Hon non . o onawb onaab oownm vaofih quanb ooanm vaowh wand Haves vooymasm coornanm moauum anxam oudoon aoHdm ondmlupu and acolomdnda nacho“ obfiunovcfi spa: .HHH swam nauns m vamp go o non< no «one: NH .na Iona ouaooo 5: uufioah_uo o:aa>1u.ov-m unn moanm caowh mafia» ooapm caowh dead Haves vooumasm voo:masm acauam udanam cvdoon mwadm mudmadvm and pnmammGQda vacuum o>wmdovaw nu“: .HHH 5mm 23: m 35 no a 2...: no 38... m 23 SC 3.83 an 83» .3 33>.-.nvum Em: TABLE 5-5 of Unit 5 Decade Years 398 TABLE 5-5.-éValue of yields by decade from Areas A, B, C and D of Unit 5 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales M Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area A - 45 acres 1'10 0 o o 0 0 11-20 0 o o O 0 21-30 1.7 10.00 17.00 765.00 31-40 0 . . ' 0 0 41-50 0 . . 0 0 51-60 0 . . O 0 61-70 1.6 10.00 16.00 720.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 180.00 Area B - 30 acres 1-10 1.1 10.00 11.00 330.00 11-20 0 o o O 0 21-30 0 . . 0 0 31-40 0 . . 0 0 41-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 540.00 51‘60 O o e 0 0 61-70 0 . . 0 0 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 120.00 Area C - 12 acres 1-10 2.3 10.00 23.00 276.00 11-20 2.1 10.00 21.00 252.00 21-30 0 . . O 0 41-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 216.00 51-60 2.7 10.00 27.00 324.00 61-70 0 o o 0 0 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 48.00 ‘. l o o w . TABLE 5-5 . 399 TABLE 5-5.-- continued -——fi f‘ Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area D - 5 acres 1-10 2.3 10.00 25.00 115.00 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-30 0 o o O 0 31-40 1.5 10.00 15.00 75.00 41’50 0 o o O 0 51-60 0 . . O 0 61-70 0 o o O 0 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 20.00 . . ‘7. . . ...- A . , .o .. c o » . «- o¢—.a-u . r .1 A, . . ‘ . o MOO TABLE'5-6A.--Average yields and labor inppts per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area A, a hS-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.6 cords per acrea ____ ____.___— __ ,___ _________._____. ......_*_-__- ,- _ Decade Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days fer Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development period Years 1.10b 0.6 0.8 2.00 1.2 11-20 0 5.5 .1 3.8 21-30 0 5.0 .1 3.5 31Jm .8 1u5 .1 1l5 hl-so 2.6 2.5 .1 3.h 51—60 h.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61-70 16.0 h.o .7d 12.h Average h.l 3.5 .6 h.9 Av. for stable periode h.o 3.3 0.2 1.7 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of declining yield Years l-lO O ... ... ... ll-2O 0 ... ... ... 21-30 1.7 ... ... .. 3LAO o ... H. .. h1—5o o .. .. ... 51-60 0 ... ... ... 61-70 1.6 ... ... ... Average .6 ... ... ... Av. for stable periodf 0.1+ . . . . . . . . . 8The total basal area of this stand was 53 square feet per acre, of which 20 were in growing stock, h in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 29 in culls. The stand contains trees up to ho inches d.b.h.; 56 percent of the trees are below the lh-inch d.b.h. class. inelds in the first decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.9 for deadening unmerchantable hardwoods having a basal area of 37 square feet. 0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. e Even-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. #01 TABLE 5-6B.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area B, a 30-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of upper- slope hardwoods containing 1.1 MBF per acre3 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Hanrdays for Han-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0 O 0.7 0 11-20 1.5 0.6 .1 1.6 21-30 0 0 .l 0 31-40 1.5 1.0 .l 2.0 41-50 1.8 1.5 .l 2.8 51-60 200 203 01 507 Average 1.4 1.1 .2 2.1 Av. for stable periodb 2.0 2.2 0.1 3.6 Extensive management Period of declining yield Yea-r8 1'10 lo]. 000 000 00. 11-20 0 cos co. co. 21-30 0 one co. 000 31-40 0 ooo sec 000 41‘50 1.8 co. co. coo Average .7 co. co. 000 Av. for Stable periOdc 004 c o o e o e o co 8The total basal area of this stand was 72 square feet per acre, of which 39 were in.growing stock, 9 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 24 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 46 inches d. b.h.; 63 percent of the trees are below the lA-inch d.b.h. class. bResidual growing stock 2.8 MBF plus 2.7 cords. °Residual growing stock nil. #02 TABLE 5-6C.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area C, a l2-acre well stocked poletimber stand of lower- slope hardwoods containing 2.3 MBF per acre3 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 1.1 3.0 0.4 3.8 11-20 0 O .l 0 0 21-30 1.5 2.1 .l 3.1 31-40 3.3 .7 .1 3.0 41-50 3.1 .2 .1 2.4 Average 2.2 1.5 .2 3.0 Av. for stable periodb3.0 2.6 0.1 4.7 Extensive management Period of declining yield Yea-r8 1'10 2. 3 co. co. 000 11-20 201 .00 ooo 000 21-30 O 000 .00 ooo 31-40 2.2 .00 ooo coo 41-50 1.8 sec ooo ooo 51-60 2.7 co. co. .00 Average 2.2 coo .00 cos AV. for stable periOch.4 ooo ooo ooo 8The total basal area of this stand was 80 square feet per acre, of which 52 were in growing stock, 21 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 7 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 32 inches d.b.h.; 60 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch class. This stand could also be classed as moderately stocked large sawtimber. bResidual growing stock 3.3 MBF plus 2.7 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. . . . x g . . s g . 1103 TABLE 5- 6D.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 5 Area D, a S-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 2. 5 cords per acrea Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days fa- sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0 0 0.9 0 11-20 0 0 .1 0 21-30 0.8 1.0 .1 1.6 31-40 1.5 1.0 .1 2.0 41- 50 2.5 2.5 .1 4.5 Average 1.2 1.1 .3 2.0 Av. for stable periodb 2.6° 2.5 0.1 4.} Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 203 .00 co. 000 11-20 0 see so. 000 21-50 0 co. co. ooo 31’40 1.5 co. co. ooo Average 103 000 co. co. AV. for Stable PeriOdd 005 o co ooo ooo 8The total basal area of this stand was 68 square feet per acre, of which 27 were in growing stock, 11 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 30 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 28 inches d.b.h.; 83 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as poorly stocked small sawtimber with 0.8 MBF per acre. bResidual growing stock, 3.3 MBF plus 3.2 cords. C1The relatively low yields in.the stable period result from the short-bodied form of existing trees, indicating poor site. dResidual growing stock nil. hoh TABLE 6-l.--Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 17h acres of forest land on Unit 6, with intensive and extensive management Roadside sales Stumpage sales Value of Value of Years of Labor products Labor products management input sold input sold Man—days Dollars Man-days Dollars Intensive managementa 1-10 2MB 2,795 118 910 11-20 185 2,h2o 17 726 21-30 665 5,632 17 660 31—ho 603 1h,762 17 7,727 h1_5o 570 21,666 17 13,69u 51-60 731 27,992 17 17,682 61-70 1,17% 55,095 57 36,088 Average per decade for stable period 81h 28,387 31 17,516 Extensive managementb l-lO No cultural work is required 0 11-20 and only stumpage sales are 2,730 21-30 made. 0 3LAO o h1-5o 3,651L 51-60 800 61-70 800 Average per decade after 7th decade 800 8‘The initial stumpage value of the timber is about $900, while after 60 years of intensive management the average value of growing stock is about $2h,lOO. bThe average value of growing stock following 70 years of exten- sive management is about $l,hOO. 1105 mAuLE 6-2.--Lab0r rennirpmen+g in man-davs P0? management and For harvesting bv 5903899 On the 2 categories 0? Forget 0n Wait 6 —_—.——.——-—-—— .- t _u— a .h a ..—--_o Labor requirements in man-days ...- .--“.—I.¢-‘-- .- -..-....-.- .__.— . . —-—--—-.—..o——-.¥- --.C—‘-_..—.«--vo~u - .-..“ Area A Area 8 Total Total on on on management Decades per 44 per 130 174 and year acre acres acre acres acres barvesting Management labor 1-10 1.8 66.0 0.4 82.0 118.0 ... 11-20 .1 4.4 .1 13.0 17.4 ... 21-30 .1 4.4 .1 13.0 17.4 ... 31-40 .1 4.4 .1 13.0 17.4 ... 41-80 .1 4.4 .1 13.0 17.4 ... 51-60 .1 4.4 .1 13.0 17.4 ... 61-70 .7 30 8 .2 26.0 56.8 ... Average for stable decades 0.4 17.6 0.1 13.0 30.6 ... Harvesting labor 1—10 0.8 13.0 0.9 117.0 130.0 248.0 11-20 3.8 167.2 0 0 167.2 184.6 21-30 3.5 154.0 3.8 404.0 648.0 668.4 51-40 1.5 66.0 4.0 520.0 886.0 605.4 41-80 3.4 149.6 3.1 403.0 582.6 570.0 81-60 3.8 167.2 4.2 846.0 713.2 730.6 61-70 12.4 846.6 4.4 872.0 1,117.6 1,174.4 Average for stab1e decades 4.8 211.2 4.4 872.0 783.2 813.8 #06 oo.mmm.oa oo.mmN oo.mn -.ooeod, n.m oo.oow .oo-Om o.¢ maddoow oanwvm how omdno>¢ 00.0mm.mm oo.ovm oo.ow 00.0H o.¢ oo.oom oo.om o.wH o~-Hm oo.ow>.oH oo.mvN oo.mH 00.0H m.H 00.0mm 00.0m w.v omnam oo.omo.o oo.mma oo.mm 00.0H m.~ oo.OmH oo.om m.~ cm-Hv oo.wa.H oo mv oo.mH 00.0H m.H oo.mm oo.mm 0.0 ov:Hm oo.oom.m oo.om 00.0m 00.0H o.m o . . o OmuHN oo.oNv.N oo.mm oo.mm 00.0H m.m o . . o ONJHH oo.voa oo.v oo.v 00.0 m.o o . . o oHuH mndaaon mndaaoq mndaaoa- mndaaon .mdnoo. mndaaoa mnwdaon mm: ,mnmm» mead» anew. whoa whoa whoa whoa mmz meow HmpOp umn Hog umn ume H09 H09 umn < maaw> ode> mowym vaowh oaaa> oownm dame» wand kuoa doosmadm doormasm moatwm woaumm uuwomn moawm ccwmddOH dquvnwaemmqwa ummnom o>HmamvnH new) .HH swam “was: w peep mo «mud no wagon we on» song oucowu an mufimflm mo o§am>.-.H ov.mma ov.- oo.o m.~ oo.oHH oo.mm o.~ owuam oo.mvm.¢fl o~.¢HH o~.mH oo.o m.H oo.mm oo.mm m.H CmIHV oo.o~m.NH oo.mm oo.¢~ oo.o o.n oo.mw oo.Om m.H ocnam oo.wmv.m ov.m~ ov.w~ 00.0 n.m o . . o Omnam o o o . . o o . . o owaHH oo.Hmw.w o~.om o~.m 00.0 v.0 ow.>H oo.mm >.o . oHnH undaaon uudaaon mndaaon unuHHon ucnou andHHon undaaon hm: nude» gnaw» once ohod. choc onus choc mm: whoa Have» Ham Ham Hon Hon umn Hon umn m mead» odad> ocean deHh mfiHub oownm vamfih deed Hupoa vooamasm coornasm udabam mafiuum oedema mofidm mdwmvdou cud pumaomdqua amonom obwnueunw Ave: .3 58 .898 m 35 .8 m 8.3 .3 3.8.. 02 on». not 38% .3 3:3» .3 33>...mmnw 5m; 1108 om.mmm.m om.m¢H om.m oo.m m.n oo.O¢H oo.mm o.v mmcaoou «andpm you omdhm>< oo.me.mu oo.-m oo.NH oo.m oc.w 00.0mm oo.mm o.wH Opuaw oo.mmm.> Om.mmH cm.v oo.m m.H oo.HmH oo.mm w.v omuam oo.vmm.v 0m.om om.> oo.m m.m oo.Hm oo.mm m.~ Omuav oo.~om cm.om 0m.¢ oo.m m.H oo.mH oo.o~ m.o ovnam oo.owm oo.ma oo.mH oo.m o.m o . . o emuaw oo.wm> om.ma 0m.ma oo.m m.m o . . o omcaa o o o . . m.o o . . o oHuH undaaon undaaon meaaaon deHHon mdnoo mndaaon mndaaon amt. undo» oflam> choc whoa whoa need one» mm: «you Hdeo» Hon yea yea Mom Ham hon ume d ode> mead» coaum came» m5Hm> mownm uaowh wand Haves dooanasm uoohnflsm moaxam mdaxum accomn monm mmdmaupm and anoEaUdndl «munch obwmnopzw Ava: .HHH .38 393 m 35 .3 4 3.: .3 8.33 3. 23 :93 3303 B 3.33 .3 33>...évnw Ems... ... #09 oo.o~m.oa oo.¢m o . . o.n oo.¢o oo.o¢ H.~ «oedema «Hanan you omdnobd oo.omm.oH oo.¢o o . . o.m oo.¢m oo.o¢ H.~ oeuflm oo.oo«.ofl oo.om o . . m.~ oo.om oo.ov o.~ omaam 00.0mm.m oo.~> o . . m.a oo.- oo.ov m.H OmoHv oo.mum.m om.~m o . . o.m om.~m oo.mm m.H owuam o o o . . m.n o . . o Omuaw o o o . . o o . . 0 out: oo.on oo.p o . . v.0 00.5 00.0H 5.0 oHuH undaaon meaaaon mudaaon deHHon mvnoo quHHon anaaaon mmz. undo» odaab anon anon unoo when 0900 mm: chow Hana» umn mom umn Hem non umn Hog m mead» mead» mownm came» «flaw» oownm dacwh dead Hdpoa dooxnadm cochmflsm moarwm moauwm oddomn moadm emanaupm and unmaemdQQB anonou obfimcovcfi new}. .HHH ddam Hausa w was: no m 0094 we named one on» song ovdoou hp mdaofih mo ode¢>1l.m¢:m mnm oownm osae> mafihm coed Hence ooobaasm oooaaasm Moasmm oedema modem ovwmdmon use psoaomdsda «munch obwmnopdfl new: .HH nose noun: a page no 4 need me eouon mNH.H an» acne eeeooe an neeoaa co eaaeew-.am-e memes 417 oo.Hm~.m oo.mm~ oo.mm oo.oH n.m oo.oo~ oo.om o.e noeaoee eageee you omeno>< oo.omm.- oo.oem oo.oe oo.oH o.e oo.ooo oo.om a.mH cause oo.mam.w oo.m¢~ oo.mH oo.oH m.a 66.6mm oo.om a.e omnem oo.mma.v oo.mmH oo.m~ oo.oH m.~ oo.OmH oo.om m.~ om-ee oo.HmH.H oo.mv oo.mH 00.0H m.H oo.e~ oo.mm o.o oesem oo.omm.H oo.om oo.om oo.oH o.m o . . o om-H~ oo.mme.H oo.mm oo.mm 00.0H m.m o . . o omufle cm.ooe.~ om.om oe.m co.» o.o om.~m oo.m~ m.m cane and.” H09 mHflHHOQ anHHOQ uHaHHOQ mdhoo quHHOQ deHHOQ hm: anGH OfiHg Ohod chad flhoo fined Ohod mm! 0H8 Hope» Mom Hoe sea non Hoe non non m ease» mafia» ocean wees» open» ocean eaten mon< Hence vooaaasm coounasm woaamm moanmm oedema modem adamuGOH and escapadsda amoeba obwmsounw nu“) .HH auam Henna a page co m nouq co uenou aw on» none oeeoee an uefleaa mo ou~e>1u.mm-e memqe 418 o~.HHN.on om.o¢a 10¢.aa 00.0 m.a 0m.mma oo.mm n.~ moueooe caecpu How owdhohd 0N.HHN.mOH om.ova ov.¢H 00.0 m.H 0m.mwa oo.mm o.~ ornaw ow.HHN.moH om.0¢H ov.¢a 00.0 o.a 0m.wma oo.mm m.~ omuam oo.eeH.NoH oo.mmH oo.~H co.» m.H oo.H~H oo.mm ~.~ cmuae 00.0mm.HHH oo.mva o . . o oo.mva oo.Om m.N Hanan oo.mmm.em cm.em oo.e oo.m m. om.oo oo.mn m.~ onuflm o o o . . o o . . o ownHH ov.¢am.oa on.mH om.o oo.o H.o 0m.NH oo.mm m.o oHnH mecHHon macaaon mecaaon encaaon meson mndHHon mecHHon mm: memo» mean» choc once when once once mm: once Hope» yea sea sea son Hon new mom 0 osamb mean» ocean eaowh osacb oownm dame» coed Hcpoa eooraflsm cooaaHsm moarmm woarmw oedema .HH :dam moaom ovwmucon use vaoaomdsca vmonom chansons“ up“: Home: 5 was: no 0 coed no canoe mm» on» some oedema he meaoah.uo enam>1I.oma~ wands hi9 oo.o~>.m~ om.moH om.o~ 00.0 m.~ oo.mmH oo.mm 01m «oedema cannon no.“ owanobd oo.o~e.m~ oe.mme oo.o~ oo.o m.~ oo.mae oo.mm o.» apnea oo.m-.mm om.mmH oo.o~ co.» m.~ oo.me oo.mm o.m owafim oo.mmm.>~ 0H.~>H om.H 00.0 N. 0m.o>a oo.mm H.m cmuav oo.mmm.mm 0H.>ma -ow.m oo.m h. 0m.HeH .oo.mm n.m . oeuam oo.mmm.mH cm.mm om.ma oo.o H.~ 0m.mw oo.mm m.H OthN 0 o o . . o o . . o omnHH oo.om~.HH cm.m~ oo.v~ oo.o o.m Om.mv oo.mv H.H cauH medaaon nemaaon medaaon necaaon meson meoHHon nHmHHon mm: endow mean» used once when once once amt. once Hence Hoe non Mom non non mom hem n uses» use». ooanm eaten one». ocean same» coed Hence vooaaasm vooaaHsm madman moasmm oedema mead» evacuees and ucosomdsms amonou obwmsopnw Ava: .HH cdam House h awn: no a coed we named omH on» 309% oedema 5: meaowh no meaebwn.nms> mamas I o . . . s . . a n .- g a l , . . n . ,- . I a w a w u n v c Q o . .. e . . o I c 420 o>.va.mv ofl.o>a om.H~ oo.m >.N 0m.m.N modcoou manage you omduoefl o~.wH¢.me oa.o>a ow.H~ 00.0 >.~ em.ova oo.mm >.~ ovuam o>.aaa.me oH.oeH ow.Hw oo.e e.~ om.meH oo.mm e.~ cameo o>.<¢H.He oH.¢mH ow.m oo.o p. cm.oaH oo.mm >.~ chHv ov.¢m~.om o~.an om.m oo.m v.. oo.oea 00.0m o.~ oauam oH.m~H.mm om.mmH oa.o¢ oo.o H.m om.em oo.mm e.~ omaem o o o . . o o . . o owuHH o>.meo.ma oH.oa om.ee oo.o ~.~ om.~e oo.m~ e.H oHuH meHHOQ deHHOQ deHHOQ mound—hog mvhoo deHHOQ deHHOQ .mmx mhdofi gag whom @HOd dfloo waned whoa hm“: whoa Have» Ham non Ham Ham Hoe you mom a osamb cede» oownm came» asadb oownm eaowh mend Hmpoa vooxaasm voosnasm moasmm woahmm oedema moamm oewmdcoh use usesommsca emouom obwmnoenw Ape: .HH adam nodes 5 van: no m coed no mono: pmm on» menu oedema he neaoeh no asaopwu.mmu> mum.va.mv 0H.o>a ow.H~ oo.m >.N 0m.o¢H oo.mm >.N morocco magmas new omeno>< ow.mHv.m¢ oa.o>H ow.H~ oo.m >.N 0m.ova oo.mm >.~ Oplam oe.aae.me oH.o~H om.H~ oo.o e.~ om.meH oo.mm e.~ cotem o>.¢va.ae oH.¢mH ow.m oo.o w. cm.ova oo.mm >.~ cmaaa 0¢.¢mm.mm om.mvH om.m 00.0 ¢.; oo.ovH 00.0m m.~ ovuam oa.mme.mm om.mmH om.oe oo.m H.m om.em oo.mm e.~ omaam o o o . . o o . . o owuHH oe.meo.ma oe.om ow.eH oo.o ~.~ om.~e oo.m~ >.H cane mamaaon msmaaon msaaaon manHoQ meson mamaaon mamaaon mm: memo» asamb choc choc choc once when mm: choc Hove» Hon pom pom sea you pom mom a osamb osHm> ocean vaoeh mean» oownm came» mend Hench coomaasm doornasm woasmm moasmm oedema moamm ocflmecon and ancsmwcsms pmonom obwmsovnw new: .HH scam node: N peep no u coed no mono. pmm on» scum oedema an weave» no osam>1u.Mm|> mum< oo.¢~m.en ov.mH~ oe.oH oo.mmH oo.mm m.» oo.v~w.Vm oe.mH~ ov.ma 004mma oo.mm w.m oo.¢~m.Vm ov.mam ov.wH oo.mwa oo.mm m.m oo.w>H.ov 0H.Hm~ ow.mw 0m.HmH oo.mm m.m oo.~mm.ma o~.HNH om.HH 00.0HH oo.mm o.m oo.oom.>H oo.oHH oo.ov 00.0» 00.0m v.H o o o o o o o undaaon mecaaon anHHon mecaaon meeoo mecHHon mndaaon ofiad» choc once choc mm: Have» you Mom pea you w osamb mead» mead» oownm mend Hopes vooraflsm vooaaasm woarcm .HH euam noes: e page no a non< no eeuou owe one gene eeeoee an enema» no oaeeewu.amue mamas moacm oewmchH use usaamwcada awoken obwmsovsw new) 422 o>.~mm.mma om.m¢H om.m oo.m m.m oo.0¢H oo.mm o.v nuanced cancun you omuno>< oo.mmm.wem oo.~>m oo.NH oo.m o.¢ 00.0mm oo.mm o.wH owuaw om.mmm.moH 0m.me 0m.¢ oo.m m.H oo.HmH oo.mm w.¢ ownam 0m.mHm.oHH 0m.mm cm.» oo.m m.m oo.Hm oo.mm w.m OmIHv 0m.awo.mw 0m.om 0m.¢ oo.m m.H oo.mH 00.0 9.0 oelam oo.mem.mH oo.ms oo.ms oo.m o.m o . . o om.sm 0m.mmm.mH 0m.ma cm.mH oo.m m.m o . . o ONJHH o o o . . m.o o . . o oHIH mscaaon msdaaon meeaaon oncaaon ounce enuHHon mncaaon mm: endow osacb once «you deco choc choc mm: ones Hence sea new you sea son nos has 4 osamb osamb oownm daowh osamb ocean daewh coed fleece vooxnasm coosaHsm moasmm Moasmm oedema mead» omdmssvn use psosouusdl «meson chansons“ new: .HHH nose means a page so 4 none no meson muss one zone oeoooe an eases» eo o:au>uu.m oo.~H oo.m o.¢ oo.owm oo.mm o.wH ohuam 8.834 8.3a on; 86 mA 8.1: 09% m4 8-3. Panama...“ 003 on; 83 m6 8.8 8.2 e.~ 8...: om.mmn cm.o~ cm.e co.» m.H oo.mH oo.o~ o.o ovuam oo.mov oo.mH .oo.mH oo.m o.m o . . o enlaw om.mvv 0m.ma 0m.wa oo.n m.m 0 . . o ONJHH oo.~mo oo.nm o . . 0.0 oo.nm 00.0H n.m oHuH asuaaon undaaon usdaaon endaaon meson asdaaon enoaaon mm! and.» asaeb once choc deco once mm: choc fleece Hoe Hos has sea son Hon m asaeb osHee oownm osash coanm cane» coed Hence eooraasm doomnasm moahcm moamam oedema modem omenssve use psalmwdsdl nausea chansons“ spa: .HHH scam House > pas: no m mend mo nosed pm on» long odoooc he uuHOfih we esHo>1I.nvns nanny 424 00.0m0.0~ 00.~m 0 . . 0.H 00.~m 00.0w m.~ anemone canon» you mudhobd oo.ama.oe oo.~m o . . o.s oo.~m oo.oe n.~ oe.sm 00.0m0.0> 00.~m 0 . . 0.H 00.~m 00.0w m.~ omuam 00.vmm.~w 00.00 0 . . m.H 00.00 00.0< ~.~ OmnHv 00.Nmm.>> 0m.HOH 0 . . 0 0m.HOH 00.nm m.~ ownam 00.0mm.mm 00.0w. 0 . . m. 00.0w 00.0w n.w 0mIHN 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 0~1HH oo.oem.m oo.m o . . H.o oo.m oo.oH m.o oH-H uedaaon escaaon uscHHon eedaaon meson usuaaon ehoaaon mm: ance» osae> choc once whoa choc once mm: once Hope» new you son yea sea sea sea 0 easa> ease» «cane uses» ease» ocean canes coed fleece doormasm doormasm woaaam moamwm oedema cease omensspm use vsesmwdsdl umenou obwasopsw spa) .HHH noes means a page no u uen< no nosed owe one gene oeeoee an eases» so ease».-.oese mamas 425 00.00N.mH 00.0NH 0 . . m.~ 00.0NH 00.0w 0.m moumoou mapmvu you omdno>d 00.00~.mH 00.0NH 0 . . m.~ 00.0NH 00.0u 0.m osuam 00.00~.mH 00.0mH 0 . . w.~ 00.0NH 00.0u 0.m omuam oo.oem.mH oo.e~H o . . u. oo.eus oo.oe H.m omtse oo.o~H.HN oo.~ms o . . a. , oo.NmH oo.oe m.m oeesm 00.000.m 00.00 0 . . H.~ 00.00 00.0w m.a Onlam 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 0N4HH 00.00N.m 00.nm 0 . . 0.m 00.nm 00.0m H.H ofina mndaaon msdaaon undaaon chHHon musco mnmaaon ascHHoQ mm: endow osacb once once unoo once choc mm: once Hence sea Mom Has Hon Hon Ham Mom 0 asacb csacb oownm uHouh osao> eownm uaofih dead Havoa uooraasm uoornasm woarmm woarmm oudoon madam owdmssvc use usolomdses neonom obwuscpsw new: .HHH scam Houss 5 push no a deed Ho moped 00H as» Iona oudoou he muaowh mo och>1|.n¢I> nqnub e l.. . ..- .......t ... -.. t u.. .. . . , . ..-; ....I.t . ..-.... . ... .... ..1... . ... . 11,. .. ...., 4.... . .4. v.. .. . .o-A-..l.. I. .... ...-..1., v . .... . . . . .. . . ... . ..1.... ..... ....1.....y.t. . ... . f t .. . Z ...v-...v:.!1.ao..,. .k e n 0.. . . . .n: v . nr.. ..... nu. ... . ......vt. .... . .. ....n....\.. .I.. .I ..v . . v a O a . o ..J 426 00.0m0.ow 00.00H 0 . . h.~ 00.00H 00.0u >.~ noucoou masses How O’Hobd 00.0m0.0~ 00.00H 0 . . h.~ 00.00H 00.0w h.~ opuam oo.wmm.m~ oo.oos o . . ~.~ oo.eoH oo.oe ~.~ oeuflm oo.mma.m~ oo.aos o . . a. oo.aoH oo.oe e.~ amuse oo.mas.m~ oo.mm o . . e. oo.om oo.mm m.~ oe-sm 00.0Hv.¢a 00.um 0 . . H.m 00.¢m 00.0w >.~ chlaw 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 0NJHH 00.mmm.v 00.>H 0 . . N.m 00.~H 00.0H >.H 0HJH manHon mscaaon ascaaon escaflon eunoo deHHon endHHon mm: nude» nude» once once unoo once choc mm: once Have» sea sea son sea you Mom non m esad> osHm> newnm uaowh osacb ocean uaofih send H8009 uoornasm uooraasm moaawm moaaim ouaoon cease owcassvn use usosoudsss amenom ebwmsovsfi new: finnfimtfiuefiéeemzfieo83aSufiugsefigehngzs3ofifiidfefifie 427 00.0mH.HN . 00.~mH 0 . . n.m 00.Nma 00.0w. ,m.n mousoou canopm you mwdhobu 00.0NH.H~ 00.Nma 0 . . m.m 00.~mH 00.0v m.m 0>1H0 00.0NH.HN 00.NmH 0 . . m.~ 00.NnH 00.0w m.m omuam 00.0NH.HN 00.~mH 0 . . m.~ 00.~mH 00.0u m.m OmUHv oo.o~H.HN oo.~ns o . . e.o oo.~ms oo.oe m.» cans“ 00.000.NH 00.00 0 . . u.H 00.00 00.0u 0.~ onuam oo.ovo.> oo.me o . . o.m oo.me oo.mm ¢.H owuHH 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 oficH mndaaon chHHon endaaon msdHHon munoo nsdaaon msdaaon mm: memo» osad> once once unoo choc once an: choc Have» has new you pom pom use use m -osadb och> mowhm uaowh och> ocean uaowh coed Haves uooraHsm uoornasm woasmm woaadm oueoon mead» cwdassvm use usasommsms pmohou o>ansopsw new: .HHH scam sous: h push mo m coed mo moses 00H on» Bosh ouooou hp muaofih no och>uu.muI> mqmua an. . 428 TABLE 7-5.--Value of yields by decade from Areas Aa, Ab, B, C, D, E and F of Unit 7 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area Aa - 640 acres 1-10 0 . . 0 0 11-20 0 . . O 0 21-30 0 . . 0 0 31-40 2.4 10.00 24.00 15,360.00 41-50 0 . . O 0 51-60 1.7 10.00 17.00 10,880.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 2,560.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 2,560.00 Area Ab - 483 acres 1-10 0 . . 0 0 11-20 0 . . O 0 21-30 0 . . 0 0 31-40 1.5 10.00 15.00 7,245.00 41-50 .4 10.00 4.00 1,952.00 51-60 .4 10.00 4.00 1,932.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 1,932.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 1,932.00 Area B - 27 acres 1-10 3.3 10.00 33.00 891.00 11-20 0 . . 0 0 21-30 0 ... O 0 31-40 1.7 10.00 17.00 459.00 41-50 0 . . 0 0 51-60 0 . . O 0 61-70 1.5 10.00 15.00 405.00 Average for stable decades 0.5 10.00 5.00 135.00 429 TABLE 7-5.-- Continued J Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area C - 768 acres 1-10 2.0 10.00 20.00 15,360.00 11-20 0 . . O 0 21-30 2.6 10.00 26.00 19,968.00 31-40 0 . . O 0 41-50 1.7 10.00 17.00 13,056.00 51-60 .4 10.00 4.00 3,072.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 3,072.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 3,072.00 Area D - 160 acres 1-10 2.4 10.00 24.00 3,840.00 11-20 2.1 10.00 21.00 3,360.00 21-30 0 . . O 0 31-40 2.2 10.00 22.00 3,502.00 41-50 1.8 10.00 18.00 2,880.00 51-60 2.7 10.00 27.00 4,320.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 640.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 640.00 Area E - 267 acres 1-10 2.5 10.00 25.00 6,675.00 11-20 0 o o 0 0 21-30 4.1 10.00 41.00 10,947.00 31-40 2.2 10.00 22.00 5,874.00 41-50 1.6 10.00 16.00 4,272.00 51-60 .5 10.00 5.00 1,335.00 61-70 .5 10.00 5.00 1,335.00 Average for stable decades 0.5 10.00 5.00 1,335.00 430 TABLE 7-5.-- continued Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area F - 160 acres 1-10 1.9 10.00 19.00 3,040.00 1.1-20 O o o 0 0 21-30 5.2 10.00 52.00 8,320.00 31-40 3.0 10.00 30.00 4,800.00 41-50 2.1 10.00 21.00 3,360.00 51-60 .5 10.00 5.00 800.00 61-70 .5 10.00 5.00 800.00 Average for stable decades 0.5 10.00 5.00 800.00 ._ , , _ _ , l - .2. . .. .__.__.___ - - _. . ~04-.‘_.-.*7 .- ..--._.-.____._.,.,- _.-_.» a. a ‘ . o n \ : ' l I t 1 n . . ‘ i n . v . u . . 431 TABLE 7-6A.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade fa' Unit 7 Area A, a 1,123-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 0.9 cord per acre8 and 483 acres of brush or idle land Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development period Years 1-10 0 0.9 1.70 0.9 11-20 0 5.5 .1 3.8 21'30 O 5.0 01 305 31-40 0.8 1.5 .1 1.5 41-50 2.6 2.5 .1 3.4 51-60 4.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61-70 16.0 4.0 .7d 12.4 Average 4.0 3.5 .5 4.9 Av. for stable period8 4.0 3.3 0.2 4.7 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of declining yield Years 1-10 0 ... ... ... 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-30 O 000 ooo 00. 31-40 2.4 ... ... ... 41-50 0 ... ... ... 51-60 1.7 ... ... ... Average 08 co. ooo ooo Av. for stable periodf 0.4 ... ... ... 9The total basal area of this stand was 36 square feet per acre, of which 12 were in growing stock, 5 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 19 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 26 inches d.b.h.; 66 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. inelds in first decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. In the first decade, yields and harvesting labor do not apply to the 483 acres of brush or idle land. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.6 for deadening unmerchantable hardwoods having a basal area of 19 square feet. d0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. 432 TABLE 7-6B.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 7 Area B, a 27-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a poorly stocked large sawtimber stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 3.3 MBF per acrea Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development period Years 1-10b 5.3 0.8 1.4° 5.1 11-20 0 5.5 .1 0 21-30 0 5.0 .1 7.4 31-40 .8 1.5 .1 1.5 41-50 2.6 2.5 .1 3.4 51-60 4.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61-70 16.0 4.0 .7d 12.4 Average 4.5 3.5 .4 5.3 Av . for stable period8 4.0 3.3 0.2 4.7 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of declining yield jrears 1-10 3.3 so. ooo ooo 11-20 0 . . . . . . . . . 21-30 0 cos 0.. cos 31-40 1.7 ooo ooo 000 41-50 0 . . . . . . . . . 51-60 0 co. ooo 0.. 61‘70 1.5 ooo ooo ooo Average 1.1 ... ... ... <£L‘7fi. for Stable periOdf 0.5 ooo ooo ooo ¥ 8"The total basal area of this stand was 41 square feet per acre, or which 7 were in growing stock, 25 in undesirable but merchantable bees, and 9 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 22 inches 5- o'b.h.; 33 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. inelds in first decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.3 for deadening unmerchantable 1'1&:I:'dwoods having a basal area of 9 square feet. (10.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. 'fResidual growing stock nil. 433 TABLE 7-6C.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 7 Area C, a 768-acre moderately stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.0 MBF per acrea Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/deoade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.4 11-20 0 O .l 0 21-30 2.3 .5 .l 2.1 31-40 2.0 O .1 2.0 41-50 2.2 1.5 .1 3.0 51-60 2.3 1.8 .1 3.4 Average b 2.0 .5 .2 1.9 Av. for stable period 2.3 1.8 0.1 3.4 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 2.0 ... ... ... 11‘20 0 ooo ooo ooo 21-30 2.6 ... ... ... 31-40 0 ... ... ... 41-50 1.7 ... ... ... Average c 1.6 ... ... ... Av. for stable period: 0.4 ‘ 8The total basal area of this stand was 59 square feet per acre, or which 30 were in growing stock, 17 in undesirable but merchantable recs, and 12 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 32 inches d-b.h.; 59 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. bResidual growing stock 5.0 MBF plus 3.0 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 434 TABLE 7-6D.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 7 Area D, a l60-acre moderately stocked large sawtimber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 2.4 MBF per aorea Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade I)ecade (years of unanagement) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Manrdays for sawlogs pulpwood management. harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 1.1 3.0 0.3 3.8 11-20 0 O .l 0 21-30 1.5 2.1 .l 3.1 31-40 3.3 .7 .1 ‘ 3-0 41-50 3.1 .2 .l 2.4 Average b 2.2 1.5 .2 3.1 Av. for stable period 3.0 2.6 0.1 4.7 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 2.4 ... ... ... 11-20 2.1 ... ... ... 21-30 0 . . . . . . . . . 31-40 2.2 ooo ooo ooo 41-50 108 ooo ooo ooo 51-60 207 co. co. co. Jiverage 2.2 ooo ooo ooo Av- for stable period° 0.4 ... . _ . ..-.- . . .. 8"The total basal area of this stand was 80 square feet per acre, 01‘ which 52 were in growing stock, 21 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 7 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 32 inches deb.h.; 60 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch d.b.h. class. bResidual growing stock 3.3 MBF plus 2.7 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 1135 TABLE 7-6E.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 7 Area E, a 267-acre poorly stocked large sawtimber stand of bottomland hardwoods containing 2.5 MBF per acrea Yields/ acre / decade Labor inputs/ acre/ decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawl ogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 1.7 2.2 0.4 3.4 11-20 0 0 .1 0 21-30 2.7 5.1 .1 7.0 31-40 2.8 .4 .1 2.4 41-50 2.7 .7 .l 2.6 Average 2.5 2.1 .2 3.8 Av. for stable periodb 2.7 2.7 .1 4.6 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 205 ooo ooo ooo 11-20 0 ooo ooo ooo 21-30 4.1 ooo ooo ooo 51-40 2.2 ooo ooo ooo 41-50 1.6 ... ... ... Average 2.6 ... ... ... li‘r. for Stable periOdc 0.5 ooo ooo ooo 8The total basal area of this stand was 74 square feet per acre, of which 49 were in growing stock, 13 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 12 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 30 inches d-b.h.; 58 percent of the trees are below the lS-inch d.b.h. class. bResidual growing stock 3.6 MBF plus 3.4 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 436 TABLE 7-6F.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 7 Area F, a 160-acre well stocked poletimber stand of bottom- land hardwoods containing 1.9 MBF per acrea Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade ,_ 1_ (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management iDevelopment period Years 1-10 0 O 0.3 0 11-20 1.4 5.0 ..l 6.0 21-30 2.0 1.4 .l 2.7 31-40 3.3 8.7 .1 11.0 Average 2.2 5.0 .2 6.6 .Av. for stable periodb 5.6 2.5 0.1 4.8 Extensive management ]?eriod of declining yield Years 1-10 1.9 ... ... ... 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-30 5.2 ... ... ... 31-40 300 ooo ooo ooo 41-50 2.1 ... ... ... Average 3.0 so. ooo ooo £L1v. for stable period0 0.5 ... ... . ... _.._— aThe total basal area of this stand was 99 square feet per acre, 015'which 72 were in growing stock, 18 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 9 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 24 inches fiefb.h.; 76 percent of the trees are below the 14-inch d.b.h. class. 'bResidual growing stock 5.6 MBF plus 3.0 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 1‘37 TABLE 8-l.-—Labor requirements and value of yields by decade from 1,954 acres of forest land on Unit 8, with intensive and extensive management Roadside sales Stumpage sales Value of Value of ‘Years of Labor products Labor products :management input sold input sold Man-days Dollars Man-days Dollars Intensive managementa 1-10 4,390 37,227 1,452 10,188 :11-20 5,391 86,380 195 28,413 21-30 4,671 98,781 195 46,770 ,31440 6,228 193,555 195 112,546 41-50 8.907 333.658 195 211.071 51,60 9,493 383,431 195 248,105 61-70 14.074 1,693,579 506 459,488 .ANerage per decade for stable period 9,827 379,153 247' 240,840 Extensive managementb 1-10 No cultural work is required 22,682 211-20 and only stumpage sales are 9,556 21-30 made . 16, 148 .31440 22,714 l11-50 25,590 51,60 1,280 61-70 4,448 .Awerage per decade after 7th.decade 8,058 ~ the initial stumpage value of the timber is about $22,700, while after 60 years of intensive management the average value of growing stock is about $288,000. bThe average value of growing stock following 70 years of exten- sive management is about $15,600. fi 438 TABLE 8-2.--Labcr recuirements in man-days for management and for harvesting by decades on the 4 categories of forest in Unit 8 r 1 Labor reouirements in man-days Area A Area 8 Area C Area D Total on on on on on Decade per 518 per 990 per 204 per 242 1,954 y9arg acre acres acre acres acre acres acre acres acres Management labor 1-10 1.5 777.0 0.5 445 0.3 133.5 0.4 96.8 1,452.3 11-20 .1 51.8 .1 99 .1 20.4 .1 24.2 195.4 21-30 .1 51.8 .1 99 .1 20.4 .1 24.2 195.4 31-40 .1 51.8 .1 99 .1 20.4 .1 24.2 195.4 41-50 .1 51.8 .1 99 .1 20.4 .1 24.2 195.4 51-60 .1 51.8 .1 99 .1 20.4 .1 24.2 195.4 61-70 .7 362.6 .1 99 .1 20.4 .1 24.2 506.2 Average far stable decades 0.2 103.6 0.1 99 0.1 20.4 0.1 24.2 247.2 Harvesting 1ab0r 1-10 1.6 316.8 0 O 4.9 999.6 6.7 1,621.4 2.937.8 11-20 3.8 1.968.4 2.1 2.079 1.0 204.0 3.9 943.8 5,195.2 21-30 3.5 1,813.0 1.0 990 3.1 632.4 4.3 1,040.6 4,476.0 31-40 1.5 777.0 3.5 3,465 3.5 714.0 4.7 1,137.4 6.093.4 41-50 3.4 1,761.2 4.8 4.752. 5.2 1.060.8 4.7 1.137.4 8,711.4 51-60 3.8 1,968.4 5.1 5,049 5.6 1,142.4 4.7 1.137.4 9,297.2 61-70 12.4 6.423.2 5.1 5.049 4.7 958.8 4.7 1,137.4 13,568.4 Average for stab1e decades 4.7 2,434.6 5.1 5.049 4.7 958.8 4.7 1,137.4 9,579.8 Total management and harvesting labor 1-10 4,390.1 11-20 5,390.6 21-30 4,671.4 31-40 6,288.8 41—50 8,906.8 51-60 9,492.6 61-70 14,074.6 Average for stab1e decades 9,827.0 00.umm.0~a 00.nmm 00.nm 00.0H n.m 00.00N 00.0m 0.u moucoou canoes you andho>< 00.0waemmv 00.0v0 00.0w 00.0H 0.¢ 00.000 00.0w 0.0a ornam 00.0Hm.0ma 00.mv~ 00.na 00.0H m.H 00.0mm 00.0w 0.u owlam 00.ommeom 00.nma 00.m~ 00.0H m.~ 00.0mH 00.0w m.~ Ontau 00.u>~.- 00.nu 00.mH 00.0H m.H 00.0w 00.mn 0. oulam oo.oom.m~ oo.om oo.om oo.os o.m o . . o amuse 00.0mv.0~ 00.nm 00.nm 00.0H m.m 0 . . 0 0~|HH oo.abm.m oo.es oo.~e oo.m m.H oo.m oo.mm ~.o osus w h. memHHoa «madden uneaaon asmaaon nusoo esmaaon msmHHon mm: memo» osamb choc once usoo seem once mm: once Have» Hos sea mom sea son Hem sea 4 osHmb seam» ocean uaouh osace ocean uaowh menu Hausa uoomaHsm uoomaflsm moasmm uoHsmm ounces nunnnuunll means ouueumOH use vsosmwdsma eschew chansons“ new: .HH scam sous: 0 push me 4 menu mo moses can on» loan oumoou he auaowh no osam>1|.4muo Hanan 440 oo.mmn.~es oa.ees oa.m~ oo.r u.» m.oeH oo.mm e.~ uoeaoee cabs». you ouch-nu oo.mmm.-H oH.¢~H ow.m~ 00.0 ~.m m.oea oo.mm p.“ oeaflw co.mmn.~es os.¢sa ow.m~ oo.o ~.m m.rvH oo.mm e.~ owusm 00.0mm.m0a 00.~0H 00.v~ 00.0 0.n 00.nua 00.nm 0.~ Omnau 00.0m0.vm 00.mm 00.0w 00.0 m.~ 00.m> 00.0w m.H ouuam 00.0mm.p 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.H 0 . . 0 Ontaw 00.0vm.mm 00.0m 00.~H 00.0 m.H 00.um 00.0w 0.0 onuHH o ,o o . . o o . . o cans msdaaon useaaon mecaaon unmaaon wusoo uncaaon unaaaon max“ endow asam> used once unoo once choc hm: once Have» nos use new sea son mom has n esasb mead» ooeam uHouh usHme ocean uHowh coed Haves uoosnflsm uooanasm woammm Moasmw ouooon moamm ouwmueon use asesommsml eschew chansons“ new: .HH 88 noses a use 3 m 8.2 3 noses 8m one. 8.8 388 an 833 .3 osseeaudnnm use: s 1: . - .. . r . ... . . .. . . . .. . . . . ... . ... ; . . . . ., -.v, . .. \ y . .. .. . . . .. .. ..... .. ~,.p. .... .i!. . ., 1 .. l ,. .. . .. . ... . , a . . . ..1 . . . . I, .I . O a o .. . . a I I c a . O J I J a y 0 0 4 a O 441 00.m00.0m 0m.0ma 00.0w 00.0 m.w. 0m.0~H 00.nm H.m eeueoeu oHeeue Hon omehe>< 00.~00.0m 0m.0mH 00.0w 00.0 m.~ 0m.0>H 00.nm H.m chuam oo.ewm.mm oo.HoH oo.ms oo.r o.~ oo.mas oo.mm o.m oa-sm oo.oom.oe oo.oo~ oo.e~ oo.o o.m oo.mes oo.mm ~.m om1Hw 00.u00.mm 00.00H 00.NH 00.0 m.H 00.umH 00.mm 0.~ ovnam 00.Nmm.mm 00.npa 00.0 00.0 0.H 00.n0a 00.nm 0.m OMIHN 00.~m0.a 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.H 0 . . 0 ONIHH 00.000.0N 0v.NOH 0v.0m 00.0 0.m 00.~h 00.m¢ m.H. 0HnH mneaaon eHeHHon neeaaon eseHHon eueou useaaon useaaon mm: when» esHe> once once usoo once once mm: once Hence sea you see sea son yea sea 0 esaeb esaeb ocean uHeuh esHeb eownm uHowh eenu Hence uoomaasm uoosaHsm moamem moamem eueoen modem euwmueos use usesemeses veesom obsesepse new: .HH seam nouss 0 nus: mo 0 eoe< no canoe vow es» seem eueoeu he euaewh no esaebtn.om10 Hanan 442 0v.om~.~¢ 0~.mma 0~.mH 00.0 ¢.~ 00.0FH 00.nm ~.n neueoeu cases» you amassed 0¢.0m~.~u 0~.mmH 0~.ma 00.0 ¢.~ 00.0»H 00.nm ~.m opuam oe.om~.~v o~.mmH o~.me oo.m e.~ oo.meH oo.mm N.m omiem oa.mm~.>v o~.mmH o~.mH 00.0 v.~ 00.0FH oo.mm ~.m emuaw 0v.0wm.m¢ 0~.m>H 0N.mH 00.0 v.~ 00.00H 00.0m N.m ounam o~.mam.mm or.-H om.es 00.0 ~.~ oo.mos oo.mm o.m onaem 0v.0H0.0m 0m.mm 0N.mH 00.0 v.~ 00.00 00.0m ~.m ONIHH o~.Hem.~H ow.mm om.mm oo.m a.m o . . 6 cans mseaaon mneaaon useHHon uneaaon eunoo eseaaon eneHHon hm: whee» esae> «Hoe once unoo once once mm: once Hence sea sea son has Hes sea sea a seam» cede» eownm uaeuh cede» eownm uaeuh umenu Hence uoomaHsm uoomaasm weasem moamem eueocn eoHee ouwnueos use «seleuesel peouom chansons“ new: .HH seem sees: a pass so a menu so renew New on» some nessee an assess so ossspwu.nn-o manna 443 o~.eea.s> om.meH om.m oo.m n.m oo.oes oo.mm o.¢ because repose Hem eweuebu 00.0mw.0m~ 00.N>m 00.NH 00.m 0.¢ 00.00m 00.nm 0.0a ohuaw 00.mN>.m0 0m.m0a 0m.¢ 00.m m.H 00.HOH 00.mm 0.u omuam 00.mN0.Hm 0m.0m 0m.» 00.m m.~ 00.Hm 00.nm 0.N 0mIHv 00.0H0.0H 0m.0~ 0m.u 00.m m.H 00.0H 00.0w 0.0 cutam 00.0>>.> 00.na 00.na 00.m 0.m 0 . . 0 emuam 00.>um.0 0m.mH 0m.wH 00.m m.m 0 . . 0 ONIHH 00.0mm 00.N 0 . . m.H 00.N 00.0H «.0 OHIH eneaaon eseaaon eHeHHon eseaaon eunoo eseHHon eHeHHon mm: meme» esHe> once once usoe esee esoe mm: esee Hence sea Men men men yea yea sea 4 esaeb esae> ocean uaewh esaeb eownm uaefih eesd Hence uoomaasm uoosaasm wearem moamem eueoen eeHee ewemlsue use «sesemeses geese“ e>weseusfi sue) .HHH seem noes: e pass so 4 on< co noses can as» some ceases an assess no esssswu.u 00.0mm.00s 00.00H 0 . . ~.m 00.00H 00.0e e.~ cause 00.0mm.00a 00.00H 0 . . N.m 00.00H 00.0w e.« oeism 00.00m.~0H 00.00H 0 . . 0.m 00.00H 00.00 0.~ 0m.se 00.nem.sm 0m.~m 0 . . m.~ 0m.~m 00.mn m.s oeusm 0 0 0 . . 0.H 0 . . 0 cause 00.000.HH 00.~H 0 . . m.s 00.~H 00.ns 0.0 cause 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 cans unasson recedes anssson enussoe eenoo unassoe esnsson an: ruse» 0.9—”db 083 Once 6800 Chad OHOG hm: Chow Hence sea yea yea new sea son sea m 03.0» 25.: eefinm uaewh esaee eeaam gosh menu Hence uoosnnsm uoomnasm uonem Moamem eueoen .HHH seam eeHee emessspe use psesemeses neenom erwesevsw spur noses 0 pass as m nou< so noses 0am was none eeaeee an asses» so answew..me.0 mamas ‘ . t n ‘ ; v . . , . 4 ~ ,9 g ) o _ v u o . u . > . . o . ’ . I ~ I , n , . . .. . \ ‘ z . u . , v ‘ I A . ‘ a . ‘ . . v ‘ O C I i , . . . A v ‘ ' . I . . . ' v u v . . I o r . I u . u , . . . ‘ a P ' c . . n . . > . . » . u ' O ‘ I I . u n ‘ c ‘ , I . a a ‘ . . c y . . < | v 1 ' ‘ 9 ~ . . , . Q . v ‘ O . ‘ . . o ‘ I ' . I a . . ' a ‘ . a I ‘ . 7 g . i ‘ ‘ nus 00.000.00 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 0.0 0000000 000000 you omauobd 00.0m~.m~ 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 0.0 00-00 00.000.00 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 0.0 00-00 00.000.00 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 «.0 00-00 00.000.00 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 0.0 00-00 00.000.00 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 0.0 00-00 0 0 0 . . 0.0 0 . . 0 00-00 00.~mp.m 00.00 0 . . 0.0 00.00 00.00 0.0 00.0 0000000 0000000 0000000 0000000 00000 0000000 0000000 mm: 0000» 05Hd> OHOd whom @800 oHOd Chou hm: 9.2.6 0090» Hum 0mm Mom 009 Ham Ham 00m 0 05Hm> mafia» oownm uaowh 05Hn> moaym uaoflh 0004 H0009 wootnfism voosnasm woaxmm moH:Um addoon noadm awdmasuu and psaa¢Mdcda pmohom obwmuovnw saw: .000 0000 00000 0 0000 00 o 0000 00 00000 000 000 0000 000000 0n 000000 00 000001u.00.0 00000 1. 446 oo.m~m.0m oo.m~0 o . . ¢.N 00.0N0 00.00 ~.m 0000000 009000 you ominobd oo.m>m.0m oo.mN0 o . . ¢.N oo.m~9 00.00 ~.n ONIHm 00.000.00 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 0.0 00-00 oo.m~m.0m oo.mm0 o . . v.~ oo.mN0 oo.ov N.m Omnav 00.000.00 00.000 0 . . 0.0 00.000 00.00 0.0 00-00 00.000.00 00.00 0 . . 0.0 00.00 00.00 0.0 00-00 oo.mmm.> oo.mm o . . ¢.N oo.mm oo.m9 ~.N 0N|90 o o o . . >.m o . . 0 00:9 0009909 0009009 0000009 0009009 00000 0009009 0000009 99: 0000» 0:00» 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 99: 0000 0000» 009 009 009 009 009 009 009 9 ofiawb cdadb 00009 0900» 0590» 00009 00009 0004 90009 00039009 00039959 $0030m moaxdm 000009 00900 owd9a500 and unmammdcdl #00009 o>Hmcovnfi nth .000 0000 00000 0 0000 00 0 0000 00 00000 000 000 0000 000000 00 00000.0 00 00000.-.00-0 00000 .aJu ._ 107 TABLE 8-5.--Value of yields by decade from Areas Aa, Ab, B, C and D of Unit 8 under Plan IV, with extensive forest management and stumpage sales Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area Aa - 198 acres \ 1-10 0 . . o 0 11-20 0 . . o 0 21-30 1.8 10.00 18.00 $564.00 31-40 0 . . o 0 41-50 0 . . o 0 51-60 0 . . o 0 61-70 1.6 10.00 16.00 3,168.00 Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 792.00 Area Ab - 520 acres 1-10 0 . . o 0 11-20 0 . . o 0 21-30 0 o c 0 0 31-40 1.6 10.00 16.00 5,120.00 41-50 .4 10.00 4.00 1,280.00 51-60 .4 10.00 4.00 1,280.00 61-70 .4 10.00 4.00 1,280.00 AVerage for Stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 1,280.00 Area B - 990 acres 1-10 1.0 10.00 10.00 9,900.00 11-20 o . . o o 2l—3o o . . o o 31-40 o . . o o 41-50 1.6 10.00 16.00 15,840.00 1-60 o . . o o 61--70 o . . o o AV'erage for Stame decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 3,960.00 TABLE 8-5.--continued 11.118 “. _—.— Decade Sawlog yield Price Sawlog value Total per acre per MBF per acre value Years MBF Dollars Dollars Dollars Area C - 204 acres 1-10 3.3 10.00 33.00 6,732.00 11-20 1.6 10.00 16.00 3,264.00 21-30 0 . . 0 0 31-40 2.1 10.00 21.00 4,284.00 41-50 0 . . 0 0 51-60 0 . . 0 0 61—70 0 . . 0 0 .Average for stable decades 0.4 10.00 4.00 816.00 Area D - 242 acres 1-10 2.5 10.00 25.00 6,050.00 1.1-20 2.6 10.00 26.00 6,292.00 221-30 5.2 10.00 52.00 12,584.00 31-40 ,_ 5.5 10.00 55.00 13,310.00 411r50 3.5 10.00 35.00 8,470.00 51-60 0 o c 0 0 61-70 0 . . 0 0 Average for EB‘table decades 0.5 10.00 5.00 1,210.00 _— u u n ‘ . u > , . n v ‘ 11119 TABLE 8-6A.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade for Unit 8 Area A, a 518-acre loblolly pine plantation replacing a 198-acre poorly stocked poletimber stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 2.3 cords per acre8 and 320 acres of brush or idle land. Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management of pine stand Development pgriod Years 1-10 0.2 1.5 1.50 1.6 11—20 0 5.5 .1 3.8 21-30 0 5.0 .1 3.5 31-40 .8 1.5 .1 1.5 41-50 . 2.6 2.5 .1 3.4 51-60 4.6 1.5 .1 3.8 61-70 16.0 4.0 .7d 12.4 Average 4.0 3.6 .4 5.0 Av. for stable period6 4.0 3.3 0.2 4.7 Extensive management of original hardwood stand Period of declining yield Years 1-10 0 ... ... ... 11-20 0 ... ... ... 21-30 1.8 ... ... ... 31-40 0 ... ... ... 41-50 0 ... ... ... 51-60 0 ... ... ... 61-70 1.6 ... ... ... Average .6 ... ... ... AV. for Stable PeriOdf 0.4 o o e o o e o c o 8The total basal area of this stand was 25 square feet per acre, of which 14 were in growing stock, 7 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 4 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 18 inches d.b.h.; 64 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch d.b.h. class. bYields in first decade are hardwood, in succeeding decades, pine. In the first decade, yields and harvesting labor do not apply to the 320 acres of brush or idle land. c1.1 man-days for planting pine, 0.4 for deadening unmerchantable hardwoods having a basal area of 11 square feet. ‘ d0.7 man-day scheduled to assure regeneration of a new pine stand. eEven-aged pine on 60-year rotation. fResidual growing stock nil. 450 TABLE 8-6B.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade fa- Unit 8 Area B, a 990-acre moderately stocked seedling and sapling stand of upper-slope hardwoods containing 1.0 MBF per acre“ Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Man-days for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years 1-10 0 O 0.5 0 11-20 0.8 1.5 .1 2.1 21-30 0 1.0 .1 1.0 31-40 1.5 2.5 .l 3.5 41-50 2.6 3.0 .1 4.8 Average 1.2 2.0 .2 2.8 Av. for stable periodb 2.7 3.2 0.1 5.1 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 1.0 ... ... ... 11-20 O 000 000 000 21-30 0 ... ... ... 31-40 0 ooo 000 000 41-50 106 000 .00 000 Average .6 ... ... ... AV. for Stable periOdc 0.4 o oo o oo o co 8The total basal area of this stand was 56 square feet per acre, of which 34 were in growing stock, 11 in undesirable but merchantable trees, and 11 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 26 inches d.b.h.; 71 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch d.b.h. class. This stand could also be classed as poorly stocked poletimber with 5.9 cords per acre. bResidual growing stock 3.0 MBF plus 3.4 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. 1151 TABLE 8-6C.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade fa- Unit 8 Area C, a 204-acre well stocked large sawtimber stand of lower-slope hardwoods containing 3.3 MBF per acre8 Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of management) MBF of Cords of Man-days for Manpdays for sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management IDevelopment period Years 1-10 1.6 3.8 0.3 4.9 11-20 0 1.0 .1 1.0 21-30 3.0 1.0 .1 3.1 31-40 2.8 1.5 .1 5.5 41-50 3.2 3.0 .1 5.2 51-60 3.0 2.0 .1 5.6 Average 2.7 2.5 .l 4.4 .Av. for stable periodb3.l 2.5 0.1 4.7 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1‘10 303 co. 000 000 11-20 1.6 ... ... ... 21-30 0 ooo .0. 000 51-40 2.1 ooo .00 .00 Average 2.5 000 000 000 AV. for Stable period°0.4 co. co. co. _ 3The total basal area of this stand was 87 square feet per acre, (bf which 61 were in growing stock, 21 in undesirable but merchantable ‘trees, and 5 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 24 inches Ci.b.h.; 42 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch d.b.h. class. bResidual growing stock 3.6 MBF plus 2.6 cords. cResidual growing stock nil. TABLE B‘6Do' Unit 8 Area Decade (years of mageme nt ) L152 TABLE 8-6D.--Average yields and labor inputs per acre by decade fa- Unit 8 Area D, a 242-acre well stocked poletimber stand of bottom- land hardwoods containing 2.5 MBF per acre Yields/acre/decade Labor inputs/acre/decade Decade (years of MBF of Cords of Man-days for Manpdays for management) sawlogs pulpwood management harvesting Intensive management Development period Years l-10 0 6.7 0.4 6.7 11-20 2.2 2.4 .1 3.9 .21-30 3.0 2.2 .1 4.3 Average 2.6 5.6 .3 7.4 Av. for stable periodb 3.2 2.4 0.1 4.1 Extensive management Period of declining yield Years 1-10 2.5 ... ... ... 11-20 2.6 ... ... ... 21-30 5.2 ... ... ... 31-40 5.5 one 0.0 000 41-50 3.5 ... ... ... Average 4.8 000 .00 000 Av. for Stable periOdc 0.5 .00 co. co. 8“The total basal area of this stand was 112 square feet per acre, of which 95 were in growing stock, 10 in undesirable but merchantable trees and 7 in culls. The stand contains trees up to 20 inches d.b.h.; 72 percent of the trees are below the l4-inch class. This stand could also be classed as moderately stocked small sawtimber. bResidual growing stock 3.5 MBF puls 2.9 cords. °Residua1 growing stock nil. APPENDIX B METHODS, PROCEDURES, RELATED INFORMATION, AND GLOSSARY Section 1. Survey of Forest Land Owners 2. Survey of Timber Markets . . . . . . . . . . 3. Work-Performance Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Timber stand improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . Harvesting pulpwood . . . . . . . . Harvesting sawlogs . . . . . . . . . . . . Timber marking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fencing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Protection from fire 4. Management-Yield Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ames Plantation procedures: intensive survey. Extensive forest survey. . . . . . . . . Application of U.S. Forest Service Survey data . Computation of decadal yields related to manage— ment intensity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intensive forest management. Extensive forest management. Estimation of Potential Yields Using Resource Bulletins . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Timber Prices 6. Glossary . . . . . . . . . 1#53 Page 454 456 457 460 461 464 465 468 468 469 470 470 473 474 474 478 #79 The; Hardeman C; ticnnaire s +~€I'In:'Lning '4. method was For the real at least 2;; “38 considg Sample wit1~_ By Covering a1, I a lOO‘bloclv EVE]: lab 16 1‘ network 1 n I On 111 Appendi} PI‘Q‘ 11 me“ Of 4 ident‘i fi C a: SECTION 1 SURVEY OF FOREST LAND OWNERS The information in Chapter IV on forest land ownership in Hardeman County was obtained by means of a personal interview ques- tionnaire survey of a sample of 40 owners of forest land. In de- termining which ownerships to survey, a random block selection method was used to avoid undue bias in selection of the sample. For the reason stated in Chapter IV, the objective of interviewing at least 20 owners who had sold timber in the preceding five years was considered important enough to warrant stratification of the sample within each block by the procedure described below. By reference to a table of random.numbers, 10 blocks (each covering about one percent of the county area) were selected from a lOO-block grid system with 10 north-south divisions and 10 east- west divisions. The grid had been drawn on the most recent available Hardeman County map showing existing houses and the road network in detail, the "General Highway and Transportation Map" prepared by the Tennessee State Highway Department in 1938. On the ownership questionnaire form.(a c0py of which appears in Appendix C), entitled "Marketing of Forest Products: Data from Producers," pertinent data were collected by interview with the owners of the first four properties identified in each block. The identification was made by the interviewer after he entered the 454 block by a1. ownership c The effected byl block were preceding : tain data c It VHS aCCO ships in ea least 2 of cessive pro Sale" inter 455 block by any road crossing the block boundary-~providing that each ownership contained at least 15 acres of woodland. The stratification of the h ownerships in each block was effected by the stipulation that not more than 2 ownerships in a block were included if the owners had not sold any timber in the preceding five years. This stipulation was made in order to ob- tain data on recent sales from at least half of the ownerships. It was accomplished with a continued mechanical selection of owner- ships in each block in case a recent sale had not been made by at least 2 of the first 4 woodland owners contacted. Owners of suc- cessive properties within the block were approached until 2 "recent sale" interviews were obtained in addition to the first 2 "no recent sale" interviews. (The only exception to this procedure occurred in one block where so few ownerships existed that only one owner could be found who had made a recent sale.) The and round t by means of using induS significant As '. the county " the county ' to include timber: l hardwood fl The cluded all all of the 1 serrmpermané sawmills th: 011 t in Appendix . e.- :- nst Buyers. weer or ot“ 1 SECTION 2 SURVEY OF TIMBER MARKETS The information in Chapter V on the markets for stumpage and round timber products from Hardeman County forests was obtained by means of a personal interview questionnaire.survey of 20 wood- using industries diligently determined to be or to represent a significant portion of the buyers of Hardeman County timber. As part of the cross-section of the timber markets facing the county's forest land owners the 9 large firms located outside the county (but within a SO-mile transport radius) were selected to include all the most active outside buyers of Hardeman County timber: large sawmills and veneer mills and plants manufacturing hardwood flooring, dimension, handles, and other specialty products. The other ll firms were chosen within the county and in- cluded all of the specialty products firms and concentration yards, all of the known active small sawmills operating at permanent (or semi-permanent) locations, and a couple of the dozen small portable sawmills that are operating in any one year. On the marketing questionnaire form (a copy of which appears in Appendix C), entitled "Marketing of Forest Products: Data from First Buyers," pertinent data were collected by interview with an owner or other responsible officer of each firm. 456 SECTION 3 WORK-PERFORMANCE DATA As described in Chapters I and VIII, pages 5-7, 185, and 186, Ames Plantation work-performance data were obtained from record card forms completed daily by forestry crew supervisors during the years 1955-57. (A copy of the work-performance data record card appears in Appendix C.) Each crew supervisor carried with him on the job several of the 3- by 5-inch card forms so that he could complete one each time a change occurred in the type of Job, the equipment used on a single job, or the conditions of work (such as weather or ground conditions). The card record system facilitated the sorting of the data by type of operation, size of crew, kind of equipment, area in which the work was done, and season and weather. The total labor inputs in man-hours on each card were divided by the number of hours in the work day (usually about 9 hours, but ranging up to 10 hours in 1957) to derive the number of man-days required to produce the work output listed under "Total production" on the card. Division of the labor input in man-days by the number of units of output yielded for each record card a quotient of labor requirement in man-days per unit. Man- days are used as the unit of input in work-performance data be- cause they are more convenient and practical units than man-hours, 1+5? hence more Plantation about the because ti: workers a}: day's work T}. listed in tion, size. in the int. ious Opera been used . Eli-Ents unde; days Per 0; in Appendip inputs fOr 0f haI‘Vest: ations War; pO’HEr 9118.1; In labor requ: attentiOn L apple c iab 13;" Expected in 458 hence more meaningful though less precise; experience on the Ames Plantation showed that a man's total output for a day's work was about the same whether the work day was 8, 9, or 10 hours long because the weekly wage total did not vary appreciably. The workers apparently had a standard of what constitutes a reasonable day's work for their rate of pay. The range of labor requirements on the Ames Plantation is listed in the following Table B-1 for each of the types of opera- tion, sizes of crew, and kinds of equipment that might be involved in the intensive forest management work under Plan II for the var- ious operating units. Within each range, careful judgment has been used to make an estimate of future work-performance require- ments under the most typical situation. The estimates (of man- days per output unit) listed in Table B-1 were used as mentioned in Appendix A in the computation of the Tables x-6 total labor inputs for management operations and for harvesting. In all cases of harvesting pulpwood and sawlogs the most typical future situ- ations were judged to include well-equipped crews working with power chain saws and, for skidding or yarding sawlogs, with tractors. In considering the adaptation of these work-performance labor requirements to other and different situations, thorough attention must be given to the effects of each factor that varies appreciably from the following typical Ames Plantation situationsl expected in the planning of Units 1 through 8. The more common rea- sons for variation in work-performance rates are briefly discussed. lBarraclough and Pleasonton, pp. ll-29. I I Ix ft... ..r a ..ru. firxrk (......r» were» pomemaovo one keno Hpficb soHpmkaO mhmenmme me pzmsohfizwoh honed @U~3uEL3:H.HDnm 89343? ,5va nuvdafizfidimv No.3» \Ffimfilfiflmfl :fi QOZDEUQSSUOK eHO CM-~H~L A ~.:..«# .«dfiJfi-dufinfi oureta< ...-E. .... a any: a n J dhLUflmau \nouu J :.&.~a:a.u :1! tnu-d§=p~a ..a v~ rvan v75...) .6. ..h a; .a.h-~..e.h h 1.~J.U.N .%.J.-\N.I I c .N |.N RN.NF\.—\.N. h59 .oeflmdmoa op woweamz ho mofiecfixm mudaoofi macapwnmmo mewpmo>anm N .mamx zoowu:\a “odds Hmooapmohoqu 59 was 908% dadop Ham nondesmpm mam mdaoo HHHesH 01010100 010101 haawdsom oao4 mHflE hmz OOH hm: hm: mm: mm: Uhoo UHOO Uhoo opo< opo< oao< H0.0 ricdgé r-{r—l r-1r—1 Ln oopom \OOOO H.H Ho.u:oo.o oofipowpoaa mafia Amsappooupmom moedaooav ow-o: mouse was: eesspmnm mqfieaasm m.m-H.H meaasea pagans m.aum. waoasmm mafia moapmm>Adm N.Hum. waoast moan mofipmo>nom o.m::.a mmwoaamm pooaendn woapmo>pom :.Huw. mmwoasmm dooapaws wsfipmo>som M.aum. moooanasm mafia smock onpmobnmm m.aum. meoosaaom moan nwdoa msfipmm>nsm N.Hum. meoosmaom dooaeadn swoon mdapmo>amm Amaado moanodmoev w. 1:. pcoam>ongaa women dookfinmm H.Hum. Amoooadasn wsfioodmodv ommoaon mofim m.mao.H mwdHHUmom mafia woavodamuusmm pooamfidwo was Soho Huge: assesses [1| manage pom smmaummma pom mwcmm soapsaoao mhmescms ow panamaadvoa ponmq mocdanomaom weapon pom moansHpmo was .bmmaummma ca mpooaosaovos mo omens acofipwpomam moa< one so msoapmnoao hapmmuom ca ooomahomaom Mao: now mesmamhfiodos Monmqnu.anm mqm<9 a planting Tne seedlix the plants: equipped a: average for be expected of 1.1 man- of 6 by 8 j The Plantin ence with t shortleaf p On Popped, re Vhen there ‘ of Vage ban, Yes Paid for inCentivE t A? < V ihen plante: 4.2: {3 ( 8’ . J? ’1? 460 Planting of pine seedlings most commonly involved using a planting bar or dibble to open and close a deep, vertical slit. The seedlings were carried in a canvas planting bag hanging at the planter's left hip from a strap over the right shoulder. Thus equipped and working alone, but with a supervisor in the area, an average forest worker with a few days'experience in planting can be expected to achieve the Plantation's typical performance rate of 1.1 man-days per acre of (about 900) trees planted at a spacing of 6 by 8 feet--or about 1.25 man-days to plant 1,000 seedlings. The planting work-performance data are based on records of experi- ence with the planting of a total of one million loblolly and shortleaf pine seedlings at the standard spacing. On the Ames Plantation the planting performance rate dropped, requiring more man-days per acre or per thousand trees, when there was no crew foreman in the field to supervise the work of wage hands. The rate was maintained, however, when planting was paid for on a piece-work basis, so that the worker had a greater incentive to work fast. A 30-percent lower rate of output per man-day resulted when planters worked in pairs, with one carrying the trees and placing a seedling in each slit which the other made and then closed. The use of mattocks instead of dibbles reduced the rate by nearly 25 percent except where the ground was extraordinarily hard, such as the baked clay bottoms of eroded gullies. Before the canvas planting bags had been obtained, a much lower rate of performance had resulted from the use of buckets to carry seed- lings. Gn performance broomsedge planting 5 large cull lings made gullies. Ab easiest p1 as on the 821d briars eX'tI‘eInely influence able fOr p Ve Storage ofj SEedling b saved ab Ou heeling in up the 1111;: T :Z \ Fromm nt hardVOOds merChantall inch to C‘ Vere hiCIr 461 Ground cover, topography, and soil condition affected performance rates. Gently rolling abandoned fields covered with broomsedge and light brush constituted about 40 percent of the planting sites. Cutover ridges with a scattered overstory of large cull trees and a ground cover of brush, sprouts, and seed- lings made up another 40 percent; and about 20 percent were eroded gullies. About twice as many trees were planted per man-day on the easiest planting sites--areas of sandy soil and light ground cover-- as on the hardest--badly gullied areas or those with heavy brush and briars. Moist soil permitted faster planting than dry or extremely muddy ground. Weather during planting did not seem to influence performance much, provided conditions were at all suit- able for planting. Very small and very large seedlings slowed planting. Storage of seedlings from the nursery was most efficient when the seedling bales were put on racks and watered daily. This procedure saved about one man-day per thousand trees over the method of heeling in trees as they arrived from the nursery and later digging up the number for each day's planting. Timber stand improvement included both hardwood stand im- provement (deadening all culls) and pine release (deadening cull hardwoods following harvesting of merchantable trees). The pine release operation involved deadening on the average about 160 un- merchantable hardwoods per acre. These ranged in diameter from 1 inch to over 2 feet but were predominantly small. About 17 percent were hickories and most of the rest were post oaks, red oaks, elms, and gums. 34 square i at breast h All and the one poisonous 81 were spraye the men use tree-girdle hard, gritt 462 and gums. The sums of the basal areas of the tree stems averaged 34 square feet per acre, and the average sum of their circumferences at breast height was approximately 193 (lineal) feet per acre. All hardwoods 3 inches or larger in d.b.h. were girdled, and the ones under 3 inches were deadened by a basal spray of poisonous auxins. In addition, trees under 12 inches in diameter were sprayed around the girdle to prevent sprouting. For girdling, the men used a Little Beaver gasoline-powered back—pack mechanical tree-girdler and axes. All hickories were axe-girdled because their hard, gritty bark quickly clogged and dulled the blades of the "Little Beaver's" fast-rotating cutting head. The spray consisted of one part of auxin concentrate (composed of 2 pounds of 2,4-D and 2 pounds of 2,4,5-T acid equivalent per gallon) dissolved in 20 parts of diesel oil. It was applied by a long spray nozzle attached to the rubber hose of a 5-gallon pressure spray can sus- pended by a shoulder sling. Basal spraying of the small trees and brush involved soaking with solution a band of bark several inches wide above the root collar. The timber stand improvement (TSI) crew usually was a h-man team, but at times the numbers varied from 3 to 6. The foreman laid out the work, cleared away brush and vines ahead of the mechanical girdler, and axe-girdled as time permitted. Axemen girdled hickories and as many other trees as they could, while keeping pace with the Little Beaver. One man operated the machine; another carried the sprayer. The weight and vibration of the machine made mechanical girdling much more tiring than the other tasks; so the men traded ”bout every hour. Lat The Little gallons of rough terra affected by Har in 63 acres composition which desir sawlog hart bottoms, In crew and w: bottomland; but the pC Th Same as f0 Vere defide eliminatic re quiremen Ellen thOlk DHSal arEEI statistic] diffel‘enc; Vines and 101' the c: 463 Labor requirements averaged about 0.56 man-day per acre. The Little Beaver was operated about 1.1 hours per acre, and 1.25 gallons of spray solution were used per acre. Work was slowed by rough terrain and heavy ground cover, but it was not appreciably affected by tree size. Hardwood stand improvement involved girdling of culls in 60 acres of bottomland hardwoods and 66 acres of an upland stand. Deadening of the undesirable trees was done to improve the composition of the growing stock and to create openings into which desirable hardwoods could seed. The operations followed a sawlog harvest in the upland stand and a pulpwood cut in the bottoms. In the uplands, culls were deadened by the same h-man crew and with the same equipment as for pine release. In the bottomlands a 3-man crew girdled the trees by axe and by machine, but the poisonous spray was not used. The labor requirements in the upland stand were about the same as for pine release where similar numbers and sizes of trees were deadened. In the bottomland stand, however, despite the elimination of the sprayer and of one man from the crew, labor requirements per acre were over 50 percent higher. This occurred even though the number of girdled trees, their circumferences, and basal areas were a fourth lower at least than the corresponding statistics for the upland stand. The chief reason for this difference in labor requirement is that the dense ground cover of vines and brush made moving about through the stand very difficult for the crew. Har # produced a; bolts pilec' by 11 by 8 i being conve cottonwood, in 125 acre The and yarding it was 8115 Stands was fire-damage about 1.6 s 11* inches 1; bolts apiem HODEIite 5_- 3. gallon of VOI‘e 01.113 1110‘ Species: Wh , The 311d thifln 11’: cut alire rage {Dime Vas -. 464 Harvesting pulpwood from 310 acres of hardwood stands produced approximately 550 units (8-foot long ricks of 5-foot bolts piled 4 feet high), equal to about 700 standard cords (4 by 4 by 8 feet). Of this wood, 55 percent was oak from 185 acres being converted to pine. The remainder was sweetgum, river birch, cottonwood, blackgum, boxelder, and elm from improvement cuttings in 125 acres of bottomland stands. The total labor requirement for cutting, limbing, bucking, and yarding pulpwood averaged approximately 1.0 man-day per cord. It was slightly higher for the oak because the pulpwood in the oak stands was scattered, the terrain rough, and most of the trees were fire-damaged and of poor form. The cut averaged 1.3 units (or about 1.6 standard cords) per acre. The trees ranged from 7 to 14 inches in d.b.h. but seldom contained more than two 5-foot bolts apiece. Bucking of the stems into bolts was done with a Homelite 5-30 chain saw, which consumed about three-fourths of a gallon of gasoline per unit (or 0.6 gallon per cord). Chains wore out more rapidly in the oak than in the mixed bottomland species, which were softer-textured. The mixedawood operation was a combined improvement cut and thinning in a good bottomland stand about 40 years old. The cut averaged 2 units (or 2.5 cords) per acre. One third of the volume was in sweetgum, and another third in river birch. As might be expected, small bolts required more labor per unit than did large bolts. Volume of cut per acre, tree size, and amount of ground cover appeared to be the chief factors influencing felling, limbing, and bucking time. Production was most efficient with large 200 feet t: bottoms ant could yard Pi: on a 15 -ye: per acre a foot bolts when cut b; labor requ a farm tra Ha. N D3318 10g . kept for 1.; OPGratiOn : Table B‘l ‘ 465 with large trees and heavy cuts per acre. Bolts were yarded about 200 feet to a roadside; a mule and logging tongs were used in the bottoms and a mule and slide in the upland oak. A man and mule could yard about 3 units or 4 cords a day. Pine pulpwood bolts were cut in a small thinning operation on a l5-year-old shortleaf pine plantation. The volume harvested per acre averaged 2 cords, requiring 1.0 man-day per cord of 5- foot bolts when out by one man with a bow saw, and 0.7 man-day when out by a 2-man crew with an axe and a power chain saw. This labor requirement included 0.2 man-day per cord for yarding with a farm tractor and trailer and for ricking at roadside. Harvesting sawlogs produced over a million board feet, Doyle log scale, from.the Ames Plantation. Separate records were kept for log-making (felling, limbing, and bucking), and for skidding to a roadside yard; but because both major phases of the operation are necessary for roadside sales of timber products, Table B-1 on page 459 summarizes the ranges of labor requirements for the total harvesting operation. A range of requirements for actual operations and an estimate for future operations are listed for each of the two species categories, hardwoods and pine, and for each of the principal combinations of equipment: power chain saw, axe, and tractor; and cross-cut saw, axe, and mules. For log-making alone, labor requirements varied primarily according to the species category and the kinds of equipment used, but they were also affected by tree size, volume cut per acre, ground cover, terrain, and the organization, skill, and initiative of the workers. The performance of the Ames Plantation forestry crew in up with trave The averag feet and t formance r T}; Who also w heavy cutt ”5‘33" one each consu T2; wage hand: day Vas 15 tions Of 7. lengthEHed was extern- "Ea-€68 of E Same cI‘ew with the k CirOpped s C «1.031 5.6 3 and lower l 466 crew in upland hardwoods ranged from 0.6 to 1.2 man-days per MBF with travel time, lost time, and equipment maintenance included. The average was 0.85 man-day. Where trees averaged over 100 board feet and the volume cut per acre was over 1,500 board feet, per- formance rates of nearly 0.6 man-day per MBF were common. The crew was composed of 3 or 4 men: a chain-saw operator who also was foreman and log sealer, and 2 or 3 axemen. For the heavy cutting a Mercury 2-man chain saw was used, but a Homelite "5-30" one-man saw served well for the smaller timber. These saws each consumed about 0.7 gallon of fuel per MBF. To establish a uniform labor policy for all Ames Plantation wage hands, the forestry crew's wages were lowered and their work day was lengthened in April 1957 to conform to the working condi- tions of the Plantation's field hands. The daily hours were lengthened from 9 to 10, as already mentioned, and the work week was extended from 5% to 6 days. Pay rates were reduced from hourly wages of about 45 cents to monthly salaries of about $85. The same crew continued logging in similar areas after these changes, with the same equipment and supervision. Output per man-day dropped somewhat and production per man-hour declined sharply; formerly the number of man-hours required to make logs ranged from 5.6 to 9.1 per MBF and averaged 6.6, but with the longer hours and lower pay the range was from 6.3 to 11.8 and the average was 9.6, or almost a full man-day to cut a thousand board feet. Al- though morale and fatigue are difficult to measure, it is clear that they affect performance at least as much as tree size and other variables that can be easily measured. given V< power 52 man -day from O .7 tractors rable sk 50 board alike--w' Internet With mod: rule) , at from 1 tC to 0~45 u only when (75 board demOHStra this rate 467 As in the pulpwood harvesting, power saws produced a given volume of output faster than did handsaws. After buying a power saw, a 2-man tenant crew almost doubled the log output per man-day they had achieved in the same stand with a cross-cut saw: from 0.74 man-day per MBF to 1.44. Skidding to a roadside yard was more commonly done by tractors than by a mule team. In similar operations with compa- rable skidding distances and volumes of modal log (not over about 50 board feet), the man-day requirements for labor were remarkably alike--whether the logs were pulled by a wheeled farm tractor, an International Harvester TD-6 crawler tractor, or a mule team. With modal log volumes ranging from 45 to 50 board feet (Doyle rule), average skidding distances from 75 to 100 yards, and crews from 1 to 3 men, the range of labor requirement varied from 0.24 to 0.45 man-day per MBF for a variety of hardwood operations. Only when hardwood operations involved a larger modal size of log (75 board feet) over a lOO-yard distance, did the crawler tractor demonstrate superior efficiency: 0.20 man—day per MBF--and even this rate was surpassed by a wheeled farm tractor in a shortleaf pine sawlog operation with the same modal 10g volume and the same average skidding distance: 0.14 man-day per MBF. Labor requirements for skidding were highest where dis- tances were long and logs were small. Using both a crawler tractor and a wheeled tractor, an upland hardwood operation with a 2- to 3-man crew required 0.38 man-day per MBF for skidding logs with a modal volume of 50 board feet over an average distance of 150 yards. A similar operation used 0.85 man-day per M where the modal log averaged 1 factors m '_I'_ tation by the 2 mar: nan-days of from 31 hoses att. were need» at ab out . 468 modal log contained only 35 board feet and the distance skidded averaged 200 yards. Mud and steep, broken ground were additional factors noted to slow performance greatly. Timber marking of 3 million board feet on the Ames Plan- tation by a 2-man crew (and sometimes a third man to tally for the 2 markers) has required under most conditions from 1.1 to 3.3 man-days to mark 100 MBF for cutting. This range is the equivalent of from 30 to about 90 M marked per man-day. Using paint guns on hoses attached to pump pressure spray cans, 4 gallons of paint were needed on the average to mark 100 MBF of trees with a spot at about eye level and a spot at the base (the volume needed ranged from as little as 2 gallons up to 6). The labor require- ment varied primarily according to the size of the trees and the average volume to be cut per acre. The typical conditions in- volved an average tree volume of 200 board feet and an average cut per acre of l MBF. Fencing for protection of woodlands in danger of damage from grazing cattle required from 40 to 60 man-days per mile, and averaged 48 (or about 1.5 man-hours a rod). .A 3-strand barbed wire fence along 2 miles of forest boundaries with posts erected at l2-foot intervals was built over rough terrain and through some brush along the forest border. A 4-man crew using hand tools and a power saw needed 12 eighty-rod rolls of wire and 440 posts per mile. The work included cutting, trimming, hauling, and setting cedar posts and stapling the wire. The approximate total cost for labor, posts, barbed wire, and staples was $1 a rod or $320 a mile. El ... measure . services parative 1;, tation, p1 and disc Siemens. ECtIVIty E remote are and Other State FOI‘E re quired ; 469 Protection from fire has a value that is not easy to measure. The cost, though, of activities to supplement the State's services in fire prevention, detection, and suppression is com- paratively low and is an advisable investment. On the Ames Plan- tation, preventive protection was increased by using a tractor and disc to clear fire lanes around young pine stands and by developing good relations with neighboring farmers. The latter activity also added to local detection measures, especially on remote areas of the Plantation. Prompt fire suppression was achieved and areas burned were therefore kept small by equipping the forestry crew with pump spray cans, fire rakes, flappers, and other tools such as shovels and axes. Cooperation with the State Forestry Division was good. These various activities have required annually about 0.01 man-day per acre. SECTION 4 MANAGEMENT-YIELD DATA Ames Plantation Procedures: Intensive Survey As is mentioned in Chapter VIII, the forest research pro- gram on the Ames Plantation required data in far greater detail than will be needed on most farm woodlands. To obtain the desired data a forest survey was made in which all land that had been determined to be not economically suitable for agriculture was classed as woodland. Maps of "compartments" of the entire Plantation were made at a scale of eight inches to the mile on letter-size paper for convenient handling and reproduction. These maps were made by tracing from large government aerial photographs available at this scale (1:7,920). Compartment boundaries were determined by selecting features such as drainage lines, roads, and wire fence lines easily recognizable both on photographs and on the ground. To fit on the 8.35.- by ll-inch map sheets, the ground. area of the compartments averaged 272 acres; few compartments were over one- half square mile in area. 'Within each compartment were mapped the boundaries of the agricultural land, the open land intended for forest use, and the land already covered with trees or brush. To secure a representative sample of the forest growth a 3- by 3-inch grid of east-west, north-south lines was drawn on an 470 acetate 5 I were trao: ferred by aerial phi onto stem. of 1:20 ,3. T: pattern on conditions adequate p the Plants by halving Wing of A eration of the lOCati locating a ground and to the Poi M71 acetate sheet, and over a light table the points of intersection were traced onto each compartment map. These points were trans- ferred by pin-pricking through each compartment map onto the large aerial photographs, and then they were reproduced by inspection onto standard 9- by 9-inch contact prints (with the larger scale of l:20,000) for convenient handling in the field. The master grid consisting of a 30- by 30-chain square pattern on the ground, was established to obtain an estimate of conditions prevailing on the Plantation as a whole. To obtain adequate planning data for the individual operating units within the Plantation the number of inventory locations was quadrupled by halving the grid interval. This smaller grid assured the sur- veying of at least 6 locations on each unit. A.two-man team collected the information needed for prep- aration of management-yield data. These men made their survey at the locations indicated on the aerial photographs. This required locating a feature visible on the photograph as well as on the ground and then following a measured compass bearing and distance to the point. The survey system used was that of point-sampling for forest management by diagnosis of condition classes and treatment prescriptionl. At each location the trees on which information was recorded were indicated by a 3-diopter prism. The prism re- quires sampling of a higher percentage of the larger, hence more valuable trees, than is the case with plot- or strip-sampling lLewis R. Grosenbaugh, Better diagnosis and prescription in Southern forest management, Southern Forest Experiment Station Occasional Paper lMS (New Orleans: 1955), 27 pp. methods w}: of occurrel point 8am}: good estizr. area per al central or the center A: a field re Species, (1‘ class, pas m. >, haight in bark) of t Brook and 8:0 OVe the by species this Purpo anion cla tally Shee Appendix C Th ‘~Uded, in We methods which include trees according to their actual frequency of occurrence in the forest. Also, the number of trees in each point sample, when multiplied by a factor of ten, gives a fairly good estimate of stand density as expressed in square feet of basal area per acre. Four points were surveyed at each location; the central or photograph point and 3 satellite points 80 feet from the center and separated from each other by l2OO angles. At the central point detailed information was entered on a field record sheet listing for each tree in the sample its Species, d.b.h. to the nearest tenth of an inch, tree condition class, past lO-year radial growth(of trees 3 inches or more in d.b.h.), merchantable height in 5-foot bolts of pulpwood trees, height in l6-foot sawlogs (up to an 8-inch top diameter inside bark) of trees merchantable for sawlogs, tree cull factors for crook and for rot, butt log grade, and number of pulpwood bolts above the top of the sawlog portion. The three supplementary points were used to increase the accuracy of the volume estimated by species and tree condition class. The only data needed for this purpose were tree species, d.b.h. by 2-inch class, tree con- dition class, and merchantable height. (A copy of the field tally sheet for the Ames Plantation forest survey is included in Appendix C.) The total information recorded at the central point in- cluded, in addition to the data on individual trees, noteworthy topographic and cultural features within about 50 feet of the center. Other data listed fOr the location as a whole were the forest type, maximum stocking percentage (stand density) class, stand SlZ§ recent fir graphic 5. A mine the _ ted the p a tally C An estima In additi Banner of J J. basis f0} in the r: hOWeVer) . Forest me and bett6 r ted from ClaSses %hmh 01‘ each Cultura- (0r has,3 Case the 1+73 stand size class appropriate to the stocking class, evidence of recent fire, slope aspect, class of principal ground cover, topo- graphic slope position, and average slope percentage class. A gauge with a basal area factor of 50 was used to deter- mine the need for thinning and planting. When this gauge indica- ted the possible need for planting, confirmation was obtained by a tally of seedlings, by quality class, on a l/ZSO-acre plot. An estimate of the need for deadening cull trees was also obtained. F In addition, an estimate of the presence or absence of an adequate number of seed trees in poorly stocked areas was recorded. The plots were permanently established. This provided a basis for obtaining managed-growth data by resurveys called for in the research program. The plots were inconspicuously marked, however, so that management practices would not be influenced. Forest managers in the area can look to the Plantation for more and better data with the passing years. Extensive Forest Survey A few broad categories of field information may be collec- ted from locations representative of typical forest condition classes the approximate acreages of which can be estimated. Prob- ably minimum tree data to be collected should include assignment of each tree to a broad grouping of species (according to silvi- cultural or market use characteristics), a 2-inch d.b.h. class (or basal area class), and a vigor-value potential class. In this case the volume computation must be made by use of a general factor rel for the lo Me conditions locations the in for... U.S. Fore: its major These rcpt resource data on 3 average b types, a:: SPECles g a Simple aVErage .h able to L partiClllE Com . & mu factor relating d.b.h. (or basal area) and height and form class for the local conditions. Meaningful forest classes must recognize the major typical conditions. Point-sampling of trees at two or more representative locations in each broad condition class could provide estimates of the information desired. Application of U.S. Forest Service Survey Data The Forest Survey data collected and summarized by the U.S. Forest Service for major forest conditions in each state and its major physiographic subdivisions (Survey regions) are available. These reports can be used to get a broad picture of the forest resource in the area around any particular county. Included are data on acreage by forest types, volumes by major species groups, average basal areas of growing stock and of cull trees by forest types, and sawtimber volume by log class and stand quality and by species group. From this information it is reasonable to recommend a simple series of practices widely applicable to the area's average woodlands. Beyond this usage, however, it should be desir— able to check the applicability of broad survey averages to particular tracts. Computation of Decadal Yields Related to Management Intensity Adter completion of the forest survey on the Ames Plantation, average tree volumes and past lO-year growth rates were computed from the field data. Local board-foot and cubic-foot volume tables were prepared according to 2-inch d.b.h. class, form class, and merchantable height in l6-foot logs (to the nearest half log) for sawtimber pines, ot soft-text textured was 11 in hardwoods log trees table was Species. local V011 i’Or'm class in the foi pines , ot} SOft-text other fir: Bl Vere Comp methods a, tWe cond El‘ade’ an: asmct 0f tabulat io rates had 4. UOpOC‘I‘aph tree c0nd on the S: 475 sawtimber in the various major species groups: Southern yellow pines, other softwoods, sweet gum, black and tupelo gums, other soft-textured hardwoods, red oaks, white oaks, and other firm- textured hardwoods. The smallest sawlog considered merchantable was ll inches in diameter (inside bark at the small end) for hardwoods and 8 inches for pine. A single volume table for half- log trees served for all species--likewise a cubic-foot volume table was made for pulpwood in the top stem of sawtimber of all species. For the cubic-foot volume of pulpwood-size trees, however, local volume tables were prepared according to 2-inch d.b.h. class, form class, and merchantable height in S-foot sticks for pulpwood in the following groupings of major species groups: Southern yellow pines, other softwoods and sweet gum, black and tupelo gums, other soft-textured hardwoods, and red oaks combined with white oaks and other firm-textured hardwoods. Both tree volumes and past lO-year radial growth rates were computed and tabulated by International Business Machines methods according to major species group, 2-inch d.b.h. class, tree condition class, merchantable product class, and butt log grade, and according to the slope position, slope percentage, and aspect of the survey location where each tree was tallied. These tabulations revealed that observable differences in past growth rates had occurred for softwoods and hardwoods, on each of the 3 topographic slope positions, by 2-inch d.b.h. class, and by grouped tree condition class. This last variable is, of course, determined on the spot in the field for each tallied tree on the basis of its observable vigor, form,merchantability, and desirability as growing stock. On to smari classes of merchants: then espec TABLE B-2. ll D.b.h. class in inches 10 11+ 16 18 ! 20 22 2t h76 stock. On the basis of these tabulations, Table B-2 was computed to summarize lO-year growth in inches projected for two major classes of trees: the average of those merchantable or potentially merchantable, and ones whose form and other characteristics made them especially suitable for crop trees. TABLE B-2.--Projected lO-year d.b.h. growth for hardwoods on the Ames Plantation lO-year d.b.h. growth in inches D.b.h. class in Upper slope Lower slope Bottomland inches Crop Average Crop Average Crop Average trees trees trees trees trees trees 2 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 h 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 2.1 2.1 6 1.9 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.h 2.3 8 2.1 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.6 2.u lO 2.l 1.9 2.2 2.1 2.6 2.5 12 2.2 2.0 2.h 2.2 2.6 2.6 lh 2.u 2.3 2.h 2.h 2.6 2.6 16 2.7 2.h 2.8 2.u 2.8 2.6 18 3.1 2.h 3.1 2.5 3.3 2.8 20 3.3 2.2 3.3 2.5 3.h 2.5 22 3.h 2 o 3.h 2.u 3.5 2.h 2A 3.6 2.0 3.6 2.h 3.6 2.u 26 3.6 2.0 6 2.u 3.7 2.u 28 3.6 2.0 3.6 2.h 3.7 2.u This proj growth of will be a the past growing 5 each surv forest ty HEEd (or 1’15 fores Position CI‘Op tree 1+7? This projection of growth rates was made on the assumption that growth of trees selected to remain in the stands in future decades will be at least as rapid as the growth of similar trees over the past 10 years. In order to project the volumes of yields and residual growing stock of the stands on each of the 8 operating units, each survey location was classed with respect to its existing forest type group, slope position, crop tree density, and the need (or lack of it) for conversion to a pine plantation. Exist- ing forest type groups were simply softwoods or hardwoods; slope position classes were upper slope, lower slope, and bottom; and crop tree density was classed as either adequate--if the basal area in desirable trees was 60 square feet or more per acre—- or inadequate. In each unit the survey locations that were alike in all h classifications were grouped as a stand. The stand structure applicable to the total area of each stand (represented by the survey samples for each group of similar locations) was tabulated. These tabulations listed on a per-acre basis the number of trees-- and their volumes, if any, in board feet and in cubic feet--in each 2-inch diameter class within each tree condition class. The tree condition classes were listed in descending order of quality, as defined in Grosenbaugh's diagnostic tree classes,2 so that when these tabulations were transferred to multi-column tabulating sheets for stand projection over the several decades of the de- velopment period, the cut-and-leave prescription for intensive 2Grosenbaugh, p. 8. magene nt merchant ab 1 Intensive f The to achieve gr 'n'th char woods, the forest lam decade i 1" ~ (unless 0v residual t The distri PTOportioI; that of 02‘ ideals You diameter Cl h78 management would result in the elimination of the lower quality merchantable timber from the lower part of the sheets. Intensive forest management The intensive forest management goal that was adopted was to achieve close to a maximum average annual yield per acre of high quality timber. On the basis of current knowledge of the growth characteristics of all-aged stands of west Tennessee hard- woods, the following cut-and-leave prescription was used. The forest land owner will harvest amounts of timber scheduled each decade if possible but will never remove desirable immature trees (unless overly crowded) and seldom will cut the stand back to a residual total of less than 60 square feet of basal area per acre. The distribution of diameters cut will be planned so that the proportion of trees left in each diameter class will approach that of crop trees in an ideally managed stand. Although different ideals would be appropriate to different sites, a single ideal diameter distribution has been assumed for expediency. This ideal postulates a basal area of 60 square feet per acre in re- sidual growing-stock trees between 2 inches and 26 inches in d.b.h.; further, each 2-inch diameter class contains #0 percent more trees than the next larger class. For each area, or stand, of Units 1 through 8 (including the first rotation of the small old-field stands of shortleaf pine), the stand structure tabulations just described were pro- jected decade after decade--after deleting (as of the beginning of each decade) all trees scheduled to be cut during the decade-- using st the lO-ye; able cut savt imbel agement, decade, 1 sirable 1 during ti mature l‘ ones, T to hBJ‘Ve may alSc trees fC that all that PO< tations h79 using standard stand projection by 2—inch diameter classes and the lO-year d.b.h. growth rates of Table B-2. The minimum oper- able cut is assumed to be normally 1,500 board feet per acre for sawtimber, 80 cubic feet (about 1 cord) per acre for pulpwood. Under the cut-and-leave prescription for intensive man- agement, if an improvement out can be scheduled for the first decade, the harvest will remove the trees that are the least de- sirable as growing stock. Hence the trees cut initially and during the early decades will usually be poor quality trees or mature individuals and those interfering with the growth of better ones. The owner who cuts timber himself may find it worthwhile to harvest as little as 500 board feet per acre at a time. It may also be desirable for him to remove some small, low quality trees for pulpwood. Intensive management further prescribes that all existing culls be deadened during the first decade and that poorly stocked stands be clearcut and converted to pine plan- tations. As a result of all forms of improvement operations under intensive management, the proportion of good growing stock continually increases throughout the development period until the "equilibrium stand" of the stable period is reached. The over- all growth rate of the residual stand after each operation there- fore rises concurrently. Differences in initial species composi- tion and tree form among the various original stands are reflected in future yields and in the volume of the stablized growing stock. Extensive forest management For extensive management it was assumed that a stumpage i { sale will feet per decade, 1 the exist the totaf more). case was additions exceed 1: 98 square average 8 decades merchantg ] flight EV: able, hO‘ 131118 se yolune t Past 10 533111311 3 bott 011115 State-Vic data hax SErieS C u80 sale will be made as soon as a merchantable volume of l,SOO board feet per acre accumulates. For stand projection over the first decade, the average growth rates in Table B-2 were applied to the existing stand (minus the trees large enough to harvest if the total merchantable volume per acre was 1,500 board feet or more). For the rest of the period of declining yield, this pro- cess was repeated on the residual stand for each decade, but the additional assumption was made that basal area per acre would not exceed ll6 square feet on bottomlands, 107 on lower slopes, and 98 square feet on uplands. These basal areas were the highest averages that had developed on these sites on the Plantation over decades of extensive management with virtually no harvesting of merchantable timber. Because extensive management removes no culls, such trees might eventually take over the entire stand. It seems more prob- able, however, that mortality of culls and regeneration of prom- ising seedlings will always provide about the amount of usable volume that grew on the various sites on the Plantation over the past 10 years. This growth was about no board feet per acre annually in the uplands, AS on the lower slopes, and SO in the bottomlands. Estimation of Potential Yields Using Resource Bulletins Estimates of potential yields can be deduced from standard statewide data tables prepared by the U.S. Forest Service. These data have started to become available for state after state in a series of Research Bulletins to be published following the completion the Servic Tc ownership as site c; cellaneous ages of la (*9— O ‘13 Q4 0 'd ('1‘ ., h81 completion of the next scheduled Forest Survey of each state by the Service's forest experiment stations. Tables of "Area of commercial forest land by site and ownership classes" (in which all forest types in a state are grouped) list A ranges of potential annual volume growth per acre as site classes. Using the area data in the "Farmer and mis- cellaneous private" ownership class, average statewide percent- ages of land in each class of potential growth can be computed for this private individuals' ownership class. Then the help of a forester familiar with the forest types and sites in the state is almost essential; but with his knowledge and judgment, related data in other tables (on area—condition classes, mortality rates, and so forth) can be used to adjust the statewide percent- ages to approximate those for a given owner's forest land. The forester's judgment will be needed to select the appropriate point in each range of potential annual volume growth per acre to adopt as a reasonable level to expect from intensive management by the owner. Based on these points, useful estimates can be made of the annual or decadal yields the owner can expect from each of his principal categories of forest. a of timber erating i; TABLE E Producr Pulpwo; Pine Hart S 3% iml. Unm: Well Sawtiml EXtc Int Flmflthrri Y. SECTION 5 TIMBER PRICES The estimated average prices used in calculating the value of timber yields and growing stock on the Ames Plantation farm op- erating units are summarized in Table B-3. TABLE B-3.--Average prices for pine and hardwood logs and pulpwood in west Tennessee expected during the next 50 years Stump e Roadside Product and stand price price2 Pulpwood (rough) Pine 3‘; 3 $10 Hardwood . . 8 Sawtimber, pine Unmanaged and young stands 20 35 ‘Well managed older stands 35 5O Sawtimber, hardwood Extensively managed stands Poor stands 10 25 Good old-growth stands (first cut) 30 AS Subsequent cuts 10 25 Intensively managed stands Poor stands 10 25 After 10 years 15 30 After 20 years 20 35 After 30 years 35 50 After #0 years MO 55 Good old-growth stands 30 A5 .After 10 years 35 50 After 20 years #0 55 lSolon L. Barraclough and Alfred Pleasonton, Data for planning woodland opportunities on west Tennessee farms, University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 276 (Knox- ville, Tenn.: 1957), p. 5%. Estimates assume continuation of the 1957 price level. 2Pulpwood prices are for cords, sawtimber prices for MBF, Inter- national rule. A82 The diffe is assunn actually ential b ddlms The tab 1 qualityr crease 0 quality Static, table w' that fu Price 1 the Sam Continue t0 inert turns i baSed C Ceeded the fOr land, 6. #83 The difference between roadside and stumpage prices of sawtimber is assumed to be $l5 for all Species and qualities of timber; it actually is an estimated average, however, as the price differ- ential between logs at roadside and standing timber varies several dollars according to volumes and qualities of individual stands. The table shows not only that higher prices are paid for better quality timber but also that the average price is expected to in- crease over time, as intensive management improves the average F quality of each stand. The price estimates for any specified quality of timber are static, however. In the long run, therefore, the prices in the table will be conservative because they are based on the assumption that future timber values will not rise in relation to the general price level and furthermore that the general price level will be the same as at present. Actually the general level is expected to continue its historic trend upward with lumber prices continuing to increase more rapidly than average prices. If this expectation turns into fact in the indefinite future, the prices in Table B-3 based on the conservative assumptions just mentioned will be ex- ceeded by the actual future prices, which will then serve to direct the forest manager toward even more intensive forest management. If a forest investment (such as purchase of additional land, establishment of tree plantations, or hiring labor to improve existing stands) is so large that an intermediate- to long-term loan to finance it must be borrowed in the first decade--the debt per §e_will be advantageous to the forest owner. The dollars borrowed will be worth more in exchange than the dollars used for llmber pr level--wi forest m“ of his ti financial p08 itiOn Er volUm beQauSe inCrEaSe h81+ repayment after prices have risen. Therefore a debt will be re- paid with a smaller portion of the volume--and value--of his timber than would have been the case if prices had not risen. Even without a loan to finance investment, the fact that lumber prices are expected to rise relative to the general price level-~with only temporary drops--is a cause for Optimism of the forest manager. Not only will he benefit from the volume growth of his timber over the years but also will receive an additional financial profit from the preferred price position of his products. Most west Tennessee timber is harvested as sawlogs, and the markets (and therefore prices) for sawtimber are of course responsive to current timber prices. A similar relative price prospect is expected for veneer logs and other high-quality round products for demanding uses. As the national economy expands along with the number of its citi- zens, demand increases for high quality timber that is becoming more and more difficult to Obtain. Pulpwood prices are not likely to rise more rapidly than the general price level. The potential supply of pulpwood is large and is not likely to become the cause of widespread price competition among pulp companies. This is the most probable expectation for at least the next few decades despite the high current predictions of United States population growth. Intensive forest management holds a preferred financial position over extensive management not only because it yields larg- er volumes of timber (at least after the first decade) but also because the average quality of each intensively managed stand will increase over a period of development, as mentioned earlier. Under extensive enough t! sive occ. manageme merchant ades. F merchant Most of from 18.1 diameter harvest P€rcent from tr l#85 extensive management the sawlogs removed as soon as they are large enough to be merchantable will inevitably be small at each succes- sive occasional sale and will mostly be low in quality. Intensive management will remove practically all of the poorer quality yet merchantable trees (as well as all culls) during the first two dec- ades. From the third decade on, most of the trees allowed to reach merchantable size will be well formed and free of serious defects. Most of the volume harvested during the development period will be from large undesirable trees and from those less than 20 inches in diameter. But when stable yields are achieved, 30 percent of the harvest will come from trees larger than 26 inches in diameter, MS percent from trees 18 to 26 inches in diameter, and only 25 percent from trees less than l8 inches. POTt "Ball k CF03 tree Othe COVE SECTION 6 GLOSSARY Acid equivalent. The weight that the active ingredient of a chlorophenoxy-acid auxin herbicide would have if it were stripped of the carrier groups of the molecule and converted to the pure acid. The concentrations are conventionally expressed in terms , of pounds of acid equivalent per gallon or hundred gallons of the spray mixture. All-aged. Refers to a stand in which theoretically trees of all ages (or at least, sizes) are found, up to and including mature ~ individuals. Auxin. Any of a group of plant growth-regulators that have pro- found effects on the elongation of plant cells and other im- portant growth phenomena. Basal area. The area, usually expressed in square feet, of the cross section at breast height of a single tree or of all the trees in a stand. Usually the area inside bark, unless stated otherwise. Batten. .A narrow strip of lumber that is used on buildings to cover cracks in siding or roofing. Board foot. A unit of measurement represented by a board 1 foot long, 1 foot wide, and 1 inch thick. In practice the working unit is l,OOO board feet (1 MBF). h86 Bottomla a stre Breast t level, Clearcut 923d. ! pile c mmic The vc rangin bolt d desira harmfu Ball- A mercha defect the me Incas #87 Bottomland(s). Low-lying land, usually the flood plain area of a stream. Breast height. The standard height, h% feet above average ground level, at which the diameter of a standing tree is measured. Clearcut. Cut all the merchantable timber in a stand. Cord. A measure of wood volume. A standard cord is equal to a pile or rick of stacked wood h by h by 8 feet, containing 128 cubic feet of wood, bark, and air within its outside surfaces. The volume of solid wood is approximately 75 cubic feet but ranging from 67 to 95, depending on bark thickness, average bolt diameter, and amount of irregularity of shape. Crop tree. A merchantable or potentially merchantable tree of desirable species, vigor, and form, and essentially free of harmful insects and disease. Cull. A tree or log of merchantable size that is considered un- merchantable because of poor form, limbyness, rot, or other defect. Cutover. Refers to an area of forest from which all or part of the merchantable timber has been cut. d.b.h., diameter, breast high. The diameter of a standing tree measured at h.5 feet above average ground level. Doyle rule. A simple formula log rule commonly used for meas- uring board-foot volume of logs in the eastern and southern U.S.; it underestimates the volume in small logs and over- estimates large logs. Doyle log scale. A scale marked on a measuring stick in board feet as computed by the Doyle rule. A88 Doyle-Scribner rule. A combination rule derived by using Doyle rule values for measuring board-foot volume of logs up to 28 inches in diameter and using Scribner rule values for logs larger than 28 inches. Even-aged. Refers to a stand in which relatively small age differences exist between individual trees. Growing stock. All live, potentially merchantable trees in a stand regardless of size, but often used to connote collectiveLy all crop trees, or "desirable trees", that forest managers aim to leave to grow to maturity-~in contrast to trees that are expected to be removed in future Silvicultural cutting before reaching maturity. Hardwood. Generally, one of the botanical group of dicotyledonous trees, usually broad-leaved and deciduous, in contrast to the conifers; also wood produced by such trees regardless of texture. Heeling in. A.method for storage of young trees prior to planting, by placing them in a trench and covering the roots or rooting portions with soil. MBF. . Thousand board feet. MMBF. Million board feet. Mature. Refers to a given tree or stand that has reached the approximate age or size beyond which the growth rate diminishes or decay begins to increase at a rate likeLy to assume economic importance. Merchantable timber. As a class, often set arbitrarily as timber 12 inches or larger in d.b.h., but actual merchantable sizes for many purposes include all sizes of poles as well. In the area of the Ames Plantation, the smallest hardwood sawlog considered mercha the SI area 1 1,500 sale Modal. size the h int in of aHC 1+89 merchantable had to be ll.O inches in diameter inside bark at the small end (d.i.b.) and pine, 8.0 inches in d.i.b. For this area a merchantable stand normally had to contain at least 1,500 board feet (International l/h-inch rule) of sawtimber for sale or one cord of pulpwood (in pine stands). Modal. Refers to the mode or value of the most common class (of size or other characteristic); belonging to the class having the highest frequency in a given statistical distribution. Poles, poletimber trees. Trees of commercial species, 5.0 to 9.0 inches in d.b.h. for softwoods and 5.0 to 11.0 inches for hard- woods. More generally, a young tree h inches in d.b.h. up to some diameter between 8 and 12 inches, depending on local merchantability standards. Poletimber stand. A stand at least 10 percent stocked with pole- and sawtimber trees, containing less than 1,500 board feet per acre in sawtimber, but at least 5 percent stocked with pole- timber trees. Pulpwood. ‘Wood prepared for use in the manufacture of wood pulp, which in turn is processed into paper, paperboard, and other cellulose products. Pulpwood, in the commonly accepted use of the term, refers to a round product that has been limbed and cut into bolts ranging from.h to 8 feet long and from_h to 10 inches in diameter inside bark at the small end (d.i.b.). In the area of the Ames Plantation, pulpwood bolts were nominally 5 feet long and at least 5.0 inches in d.i.b. sing, and‘bu conven d.b.h. Sawlog. produ< vary \ tatio chant actua monly more 13! 0- able Surv kerf Cent inc} thar incl __—_'— SCI-1bI mac? #90 Round product. A.product of the simplest degree of timber proces- sing, a log or bolt cut from a tree that has been felled, limbed, and bucked into lengths suitable for sale after skidding to a convenient roadside yard. Saplings. Trees of commercial species, 0.5 inch to h.9 inches in d.b.h.,(Dmmonly of desirable form and vigor. Sawlog. .A round product large enough to produce lumber or other products that can be sawed. Its size and quality requirements vary with utilization practices. For the area of the Ames Plan- tation, see merchantable timber. As a unit of measure of mer- chantable height, a "log" is 16 feet 3 inches long, although in actual sales l2-foot logs and 8-foot long "half-logs" are com- monly'merchantable. Sawtimber. Timber, or trees, large enough to yield one sawlog or more (or at least a "half-log") from each tree. Sawtimber stand. A stand in which the sawtimber trees collective- ly contain enough sawlogs to equal the commonly minimum.merchant- able volume of 1,500 board feet per acre (estimated for Forest Survey standards according to the International rule for l/h-inch- kerf sawing). Large sawtimber refers to stands in which 50 per- cent or more of the board-foot volume is in trees at least 15.0 inches in d.b.h. Small sawtimber refers to stands in which more than 50 percent of the board-foot volume is in trees under 15 inches in d.b.h. Scribner rule. One of the oldest diagram rules commonly used in nmwh.of the U.S.; it assumes sawing of l-inch boards only, with #91 a l/h-inch kerf; it disregards taper and makes a liberal allow- ance for slabs. Seedling. Basically a tree grown from seed, but generally used for a desirable young tree under minimum sapling d.b.h. of 0.5 inch. Seedling and sapling stand. Stands not qualifying as sawtimber or poletimber, but at least 10 percent stocked with growing-stock trees, and with saplings and seedlings composing a plurality of the stocking. (‘ Softwood. Generally, one of the botanical group of coniferous trees, usualLy evergreen, having needles or scale-like leaves--primarily the conifers; also the wood produced by such trees. ' , Stand, A.portion of a forest constituting the smallest convenient t natural unit or subdivision of that forest or forest type based on measurable characteristics. .A stand is an aggregation of trees occupying a Specific area and being sufficiently uniform in Species composition, age arrangement, and condition, to be distinguishable from the forest on adjoining areas. Stand structure. The constitution of a stand with reSpect to age, crown characteristics, diameter, and tree classes. Stocking. A comparison or measure of the collective population of various numbers and Sizes of growing-stock trees occupying a given stand, related to a desired density of trees for that stand; it is described in comparative words or percentages. Stumpage. Standing timber, used with the connotation of merchant- ability. Sustained yield. The managed production of volumes of merchantable timber on a sustained renewal basis, with the expectation of yields of a: of t Unit. outs cut Workin of:m mans the effi 1y 5 defl L92 of approximately equivalent volume or value over successive units of time in the long run. 2232: A long cord of wood containing 160 cubic feet within its outside surfaces, or 1.25 (standard) cords. Bolts are usually cut 5 feet long, as compared to h-foot bolts in a standard cord. Working circle. An area having sustained yield as a prime objective of management and a large enough forest to require an individual management plan; preferably of a size to permit the spreading of the costs of equipment, labor, and forest administration to an efficient level; and commonly connoting capability of indefinite- ly supplying enough round products for economic operation of definite harvesting and manufacturing facilities. lection (at. Burv Stmr 3° Work (COP Ames Ames (a f data APPENDIX C FORMS USED IN DATA.COLLECTION The following four forms were used in the field col- lection of data for this project: Page Marketing of Forest Products: Data from.Producers . . hgh (a 3-page questionnaire used in the personal interview survey of MO Hardeman County forest land owners) Marketing of Forest Products: Data from First Buyers . A97 (a h-page questionnaire used in the personal interview survey of 20 firms that are buyers of Hardeman County stumpage or timber products) Work-Performance Data Record Card . . . . . . . . . . . 501 (copy of a 3- by 5-inch card for field recording of Ames Plantation work-performance data) Ames Plantation Forest Survey Field Record Sheet. . . 502 (afield record "tally" sheet used for listing forest data at each survey location) #93 Essearch Pro '.. County— Omer Address Operato Total 0 (incl Forest Fore st Area University of Tennessee Research Project ..... Marketing of Forest Products .......... 1955-56 AP Data from PRODUCERS 1. County Community Date ,l95_ Owner Occupation Age Type: Address Farm resident ) Farm Non-resident ) Nonfarm, commercial ( ) Nonfarm, Non-comm. , resident ( ) Operator(s) Nonfarm, non-comm, non-resident ( ) Total Ownership Area (acres) (including land located elsewhere but Operated jointly with headquarters land) 2. Forest Area (acres) (percent of total) Forest Types and Other Land Uses: Area Type or Use Volume and Condition, Tree Height and DiamgL Age Letc . (if forest: 3. Acquisition: Date Method 1t . Ownership Objectives 5. Past Sales (dates and products) ffiv—rv 6. Past Harvesting for Own Use: Date Product Quantity Uses ugh ? Recent St _I misting Prc County___ a. Date I Bwer (Name ,Ad. b.Return nate by__ C. Reaso 5. Agree e. Basis f. Marks So Methc (2) T 11. Dist; 1' Othe] &.Dat \E_ \ BWe TIE-m ) \- mfite b1 c' Rea: d' Agr. e, Bag 3, Mar 8. Met (2; 1" Dis Page 2. .Marketing Project -— PRODUCERS -— 1955—56 County Owner Recent Sales (l95h-56) If none, record the last sale made, if possible. Price + Method a. Date Product Location Quantity,Grade, and Species Scale of Determin Buyer (Name,Address) b.Returns expected based on: (1) Price & volume (with or w/o grade, species)esti- mate by ( ), (2) Price & volume (w/o estimate) ( ), (3) Lump sum.offer ( ). c. Reasons for sale: d. Agreement: Verbal ( ), Seller's written contract ( ), Buyer's writ. cont. ( ). e. Basis of payment: Seller's/Buyer's log scale at ( ), Mill tally ( ). f..Marketing services used: g. Method of selecting (1) Buyer: No. contacted ( ) (2) Trees: Marked by: h. Distances: 1. Other details: IPrice + Method a.Date Product Location Quantity, Grade, and Species Scale of Determ'n Buyer (Name,Address) b.Returns expected based on: (1) Price & volume (with or w/o grade,species) esti- mate by ( ), (2) Price & volume (w/o estimate) ( ), (3) Lump sum offer ( ). c. Reasons for sale: d. Agreement: Verbal ( ), Seller's written contract ( ), Buyer's writ. contract ( ). e. Basis of payment: Seller's/Buyer’s log scale at ( ), Mill tally ( ). f. Marketing services used: 3. Method Of selecting (1) Buyer: No. contacted ( ). (2) Trees: marked by: h95 h. Distances: 1. Other details:#__ Lei-sting Prq Plazmed S . fixture Sa County__j ‘ I or Harves Date Buyer Form ‘_— Porest Pl weeding ( b.8kills 0m “- Marketing Project —- PRODUCERS -.. 1955—56 page 3. 80 9. IO. County Owner Planned Sales Date Products & Quantities or Harvesting Buyer Date Products & Quantities Buyer Future Sale Products: Form. Location Form. Location Forest Plans a.Woods work (other than harvesting a final crop): Planting ( ), weeding ( ),thinning ( ),improvement cutting ( ),girdling+poisoning ( ),pruning( ) b.Skills and experience of labor,equipment for harvesting+handling, time available: Own Family Neighbors Tenants & Sharecroppers Other Hired c. Species in prospect (reasons+uses): d. Sustained yield planned ( ) or not ( ): e. Knowledge of grades (logs, lumber, etc.) and size Specifications: r. Knowledge of merchantability of stands (type, tree size, age, accessibility, vol./a and #'0f trees/acre required for harvesting, etc.): 8. Sources of market information: extension forester ( ), state service forester ( ), county agric. agent ( ), SCS agent ( ), other ( ) h. Knowledge of existing or prospective markets: i. Price expectations, tax and credit problems, income possibilities under various A96 alternatives: Research Prod . Caimty lam of Firm Ease of Offi location of Type of Firm Estimated P] 1 Pro-ducts B01 Pa .“ . Hi MES 4. University of Tennessee Research Project - - - Marketing of Forest Products -------- 1955-56 AP Data from.FIRST BUYERS County Community Date ,l9i__ Name of Firm Name of Official Position Location of Plant(s) or (Yards) Type of Firm Estimated Plant Capacity for 8-hour Day Products Bought and/or Harvested by Plant in l95h-SS: a. Quantities: Form Species and Grade Prices Paid Volume gin;year lgsh) Cu. ft. b. Quality Requirements c. Measurement Practices Owner Purchase Ocular Cruise Tree Log Piece Mill Class Point Estimate S £2 Scale Scale Tally Tally Other Under Stump__ 500 acres Other 500 acres Stump and over Other *##w—fl Products Sold in l95h-55: P_roduct Species Where Sold Volume (in year 195%) Cu.ft. ‘ VOL'ume Custom-sawed in l95h 1‘97 mating Pro: County___ 7'. Purchase 1 Procureme Product B \ TTMSport 0) sures of Mershil Class O hmts Page 2. QMerketing Project -- FIRST BUYERS -- 1955-56 County Firm Plant 5. Purchase Area: Max. Hauling Product Bought Distance Outlying Points in l95h—55 6. Procurement Methods: Product Bought Range of Prices Paid in l95h Method of Determination Transportation by 'Woods Operation 7. Source of Raw Materials by Forest Ownership and Type of Purchase Agreement: Verbal Buyer's Written Seller's Written Ownership Percentage Agreement Contract Contract Class of Volume Stump Other Stump Other Stump Other Firmis Own Land Private under 500A. Private 500A.+over Public land Tetal 100% Forest Land Owned by First Buyer: Area (acres) Duration of Ownership 8. Procurement Policies in Relation to Forest Management Practices & Future Raw Material Production: h98 Page 3. Marketing Project -- FIRST BUYERS -- 1955—56 County Firm Plant 6At Procurement Methods (continued): Range of prices paid for raw material products bought in l95h: Point of Procurement Product Species Grade -—Stump Roadside Mill Yard Other Price/Unit Price[Unit Price/Unit Price/Unit h99 Marketing County____ 3. Stability Number of Ember of Chief reas a. Last 1: '3. Planne Yearly dm 1"9511' arou Winter Simmer Intel'mitp Only when Orders maker 01 Fina“Ciai \ 0r ,, . re610: fol‘ester go own a CWentS \ \ N 10. Marketing Project -- FIRST BUYERS —— 1955—56 County Firm Page A. Stability of First Buyer: Chief reason for: a. Last move b. Planned move Plant Number of years in present business Number of years in present location Yearly duration of Operation for product: PRODUCTS Season of Operation Year around Winter Summer Intermittent Only when filling orders NUmber of days Financial arrangements -- Uses of capital and credit. Marketing Services -- How buyer finds producers. a. market bulletins, state or regional ( ), b. other published sources ( ), c. radio ( ), d. extension forester ( ), e. consulting forester ( ), f. other individuals or agencies ( ), g. own advertising (in newspapers, journals, etc., or by posters) ( ). Comments: 500 WORK-PERFORMANCE DATA RECORD CARD Job Location Date .195 ( ) No remarks ( ) Remarks on reverse Equipment Materials: gas, oil, other Men & Hours ; 4 Men E HOUIS ‘TOtal crewfifiours: Total production: Supervisor: Hours: 501 ..l¢.d I III... u ”J deg F ..Unv ..MV . u ml. 14» u n «A ..IJ..~.. N :7. .«ad has: A; HIEQL 3 Load >~ .5. _J LL .4...» . or: 21v 4 .~.<‘.WLC<1 ~ . ~ _ .4qu IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL_i 309 AMES PLANTATION FOREST SURVEY Grand Junction Tennessee t . BA.50 Tally BA 50 Eval. TSI needed Seed source l/250 Tally Cub, Pine Cub, Other size . . Damage. . Location Notes: i Cruised by: Date: Cover . Position Percent. [‘11 LITERATURE CITED Aughanbaugh, John. "Experimental woodlands as a means of encoura- ging improved management of small tracts." Journal of Forestry, LVII, No. 6 (June 1959), hO9-h12. Back, William B., et al. Economics of the farm woodland in the Eastern Pennyroyal Area of Kentucky. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 650. Lexington, Ky.: 1956. 32 PP- Barraclough, Kenneth E. "The pilot woodland management program in New Hampshire." Proceedings, Society of American Foresters meeting, Nov. lO-l3, 1957, Syracuse, N.Y. Washington, D.C.: Soc. of Amer. Foresters, 1958, lTh-176. Barraclough, Solon L., and Gould, Ernest M,, Jr. Economic analysis of farm forest operating units. Harvard Forest Bulletin No. 26. Petersham, Mass.: 1955. 1&5 pp. , and Pleasonton, Alfred. Data for planning woodland opportunities on west Tennessee farms. University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 276. Knoxville, Tenn.: 1957. 6A pp. Behre, C. Edward. "The problem of smallness." Proceedings of the American Forest Congress. 'Washington, D.C.: American Forestry Association, 1953, 253-25h. The Blue book of Southern progress. 1955 ed. Baltimore, Md.: Con- way Publications, Inc., Manufacturer's Record, 1955. 16h pp. Britt, Ray T., and Martin, Joe A. Marketing sawtimber and pulpwood. University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 295. Knoxville, Tenn.: 1959. 28 pp. Chapman, Herman H. "Should small woodlots be managed for sustained annual yield?" Journal of Forestry, IL, No. 5 (May 1951), 3h3-3uh. . Forest management. Bristol, Conn.: Hildreth Press, 1950. xix + 582 pp. Ciriacy4Wantrup, S. W. Dollars and sense in conservation. Califor- nia Agricultural Experiment Station Circular #02. Berkeley, Calif.: 1951. #0 pp. Colgan, R. A", Jr. "Sound economics--the basis of sound forestry." Journal of Forestry, IL, No. 7 (July 1951), #83-u8u. 503 50h Coulter, C. H., et al. "Panel discussion: the small forest landowner--keystone and enigma in forestry." Proceedings, Society of American Foresters meeting, Oct. 15-17, 1956, Memphis, Tenn. ‘Washington,DTCT?‘ Soc. of Amer. Foresters, 1957, 159-162. Cowan, W. Foster. The forest resources of Tennessee, Based on the l9h5-h6 appraisal by the State Conservation Department, Forestry Division and the American Forestry Association. [Nashville, Tenn.]: 19A6. 3h pp. (mimeographed) Craig, James W. p. 162. In C. H. Coulter et a1. "Panel discussion: the small forest Tandowner--keystone and enigma in forestry." Proceedings, Society of American Foresters meeting, Oct. 15-17, 1956, Memphis, Tenn. Washington, D.C.: Soc. of Amer. Foresters, 1957, 159-162. Ewing, John A. Planning the Ames Plantation. Unpublished D.P.A, thesis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1956. 330 PP- Federal Writers Project of the WOrks Progress Administration. Tennessee; a guide to the state. American Guide Series. New York: the Viking Press, 1939. xxiv + 558 pp. Gregory, Gustav Robinson. Developing economic growth goals for forest production. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California, 1953. 253 pp. Grosenbaugh, Lewis R. Better diagnosis agd prescription in South- ern forest management. Southern Forest Experiment Station Occasional Paper 1&5. New Orleans: 1955. 27 pp. Hall, Albert G. "The small woodland conferences: what they have accomplished." Southern Lumberman, CXCVII, No. 2A65 (Dec. 15, 1958), 150—152. Heady, Earl 0. Economics of agricultural production and resource use. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1952. viii + 850 pp. James, Lee M. , Hoffman, William P., and Payne, Monty A. Private forest landownership and management in centra1.Mississippi. Mississippi State College Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 33. State College, Miss.: 1951. 38 pp. Johnson, Glenn L., and Haver, Cecil B. Decision-making principles in farm management. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 593. Lexington, Ky.: 1953. #2 pp. Johnson, Neil W., and Parsons, Merton S. Planning the farm for profit and stability. Farmers' Bulletin No. 1965. lst ed. rev. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1956. 32 pp. Lut Ma Iv 505 Lanham,'W. J., and Butler, C. P. Economic analysis of annual adjustments in developing a beef cattle-grain farm in the Piedmont Area of South Carolina. South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin H59. Clemson, S.C.: 1958. 3 PP- Larson, Charles. Government and the small forest holding; a study of the administration of governmental programs for farm and other small private woodland owners. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Syracuse, N.Y.: College of Forestry of the State University of New York, 1952. xix + 5A2 + 12 pp. Luttrell, Clifton B. "The Covington farm: a case study in planning and financing farm woodlot production." Monthly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, XXXVI, No. 12 (Dec. 195A), 133-1&1. .Malsberger, H. J. p. 161. In C. H. Coulter et a1. "Panel discussion: the smaTI forest 1andowner--keystone and enigma in forestry." Proceedings, Society of American Foresters meeting, Oct. 15¥I?:’l956, Memphis, Tenn. ‘Washington, D.CTT' Soc. of Amer. Foresters, 1957, 159—162. Mignery, Arnold L. Farm‘woodland opportunities in the South. (Paper delivered before the Forestry Section, Association of Southern Agricultural Workers, at Dallas, Texas, Feb. 1, 195A.) New Orleans: Southern Forest EXperiment Station, 195A. 10 pp. (mimeographed) Minckler, Leon S., and Hosner, John F. How to farm your forest. Central States Forest Experiment Station, Miscellaneous Release No. 11. Columbus, Ohio: 1956. 68 pp. Murphey, Frank T. , and Simonds, Walter W. Managing the farm woodland. Circular 207. State Colkege,Pa.: Pennsylvania State University College of Agriculture, Agricultural Extension Service, 195A. 22 pp. Preston, John F. Develpping farm woodlands. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Co., Inc., 195A. xiii + 386 pp. . "Integrated farm forestry." Journal of Forestry, XLIII. No- 8 (Ana. 19h5), 575-579. . "Preston takes issue with talks at La Plata." American Forests, LXIII, No. 1 (Jan. 1957), 6, 68, 71. . 'Woodlands in the farm plan. Farmers' Bulletin No. 19AO. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 191+3. ii + 22 pp. [Q 506 Redman, John C. "Economic aspects of the farm woodland enter- prise." Journal of Farm Economics, XXXVIII,No. A (Nov. 1956), 901-910. Sipila, M., et al. How much work is it profitable to invest in farm forests?" (In Finnish). Teho, 1957, No. 11, 536- 5h3; English summary, 592-593. Smith, Richard C. Marketing farm.woodlot products in Franklin, Osage,_and Gasconade Counties. Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 623. Columbia, Mo.: University of Missouri College of Agriculture, 195h. 27 pp. Sternitzke, Herbert S. Tennessee's timber economy. Forest Resource Report No. 9. Washington, D.C.: Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1955. 56 pp. Taylor, Calvin C., and Burch, Thomas A, Personal and environmental obstacles to production adjustments on South Carolina Piedmont Area farms. South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin E66. Clemson, S.C.: 1958. 36 pp. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Census of Agriculture: 195A. Vol. I, Counties and state economic areas; Part 20, Tennessee. Washington, DuC.: U.S. Department of_COmmerce, 1956. 286 pp. . Census of population: 1950. Vol. II, Characteristics of the population; Part #2, Tennessee. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of CEmmerce, 1952. 328 pp. . 195A census of business. Wholesale trade: Tennessee. Area Bulletin W-leh2. Washington, D.C.: 1956. x + 13 pp. . 195A census of manufactures. Gums and wood chemicals; fertilizers. Industry Bulletin MC¥28F. Washington, D.C.: 1957. viii + 18 pp. . l95h census of manufactures. Tennessee. State Bulletin MC-lhl. 'Washington, D.C.: 1957. viii + 16 pp. . 195A census of manufactures. Wooden containers. Industry Bulletin.MC-2hC. ‘Washington, D.C.: 1957. viii + 15 PP- U.S. Department of Agriculture. Development of agriculture's human resources; a report on problems of low-income farmers. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1955. iv + an pp. 507 Agricultural Marketing Service. Farm-operator family level-of-living indexes. Statistical Bulletin No. 20H. Washington, D.C.: March 1957. U.S. Forest Service. Small forest landownerships, Oregon and Washington. Portland, Oregon: Division of State and Private Forestry, 1956. 22 pp. (multilith) U.S. Office of Business Economics. Survey of current business. Washington, D. C. U. S. Department of Commerce, XXXVII, No.8 (August 1957), 19. Walker, J. F. "A pulp and paper company's approach to extension forestry; with particular reference to tree farms and farm woodlots." Pulp and Paper Magazine of Canada, LV (Jan. 1951+), 120, 122, 121+, 126. Warner, John R. History and financial results of a cooperative forest products market operated through Farmers Mutual Inc. of Durham, North Carolina. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Durham,NTC.: Duke University, School of Forestry, 1953. vii + 198 pp. Westveld, R. H., and Peck, Ralph H. Forestry in farm.management. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley &.Sons, Inc.,1951. xi + 3RD pp. Whitlatch, George I. Industrial resources of Tennessee. Nashville, Tenn.: State Planning Commission, 19h5. 209 pp. Woodworth, Roger C., and Saunders, Fred B. Evaluating income opportunities on north Georgia farms: Series I. Devel- opment of procedures for commercial and part-time farming and application to a case-study farm, Georgia Agricul- tural Eiperiment Station Bulletin N.S. 3h. Athens, Ga.: 1956. 59 PP- Yoho, James G., and James, Lee M; "Influence of some public assistance programs on forest landowners in Northern Michigan." Land Economics, XXXIV, No. A (Nov. 1958), 357-36“. , and Quinney, Dean N. Private forest land- ownership and management in the northern half of.Michigan' 8 lower peninsula. Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 261. East Lansing, Mich.:. 1957. 56 PP-