Woodlots on Ontario farms

Publication 890

October, 1953

WOODLOTS

ON ONTARIO FARMS

D. J. PACKMAN

630.4
C212
P 890
1953
c. 3

FUEL PILE NEAR FARMER'S WOODLOT (ORILLIA)

DEPARTMENT OF

■ ^AGRICULTURE ^/S\
URE CANADA

tICULT

OTTAWA, PANADAg^^BuREAcREYNTRALE

{8k EDIFICE SIR JOHN CARLING BLDG. A

\gxv OTTAWA, ONTARIO ^

©V^CANADA K1 A 0C5

^»ENNE n£ \SU

&

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2012 with funding from

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada - Agriculture et Agroalimentaire Canada

http://www.archive.org/details/woodlotsonontariOOpack

Publication 890 October, 1953

WOODLOTS

ON ONTARIO FARMS

D. J. PACKMAN

Economics Division

Marketing Service

Canada Department of Agriculture

A Co-operative Study by the Farm Economics Branch

of the Ontario Department of Agriculture

and the Economics Division, Canada

Department of Agriculture

75620— li

SUMMARY

Records were obtained from 162 Ontario farms in possession of a woodlot
during the year commencing June 1, 1950. Eighty-five farms were visited in
the eastern part of the province and 77 in the western region. Woodland
accounted for 30 per cent of the total area on the farms studied in the eastern
area as compared with only 17 per cent on farms in the western district.
The farms studied were considerably larger than the average Ontario farm,
averaging 242 acres of which 90 were in crops. The average total capital invest-
ment was $22,974 per farm — $18,610 in the eastern district, and $27,741 in the
western. The average woodlot was valued at $1,437.

The main findings of the study are as follows:

1. The average woodlot provided a harvest valued at about $500 per
year. Almost 50 per cent of the forest products were sold, making up approxi-
mately four per cent of the total farm income.

2. In terms of value, lumber accounted for 40 per cent; fuelwood 38 per
cent; maple syrup, 13 per cent; posts, 2 per cent; and miscellaneous products
such as Christmas trees and telephone poles, 7 per cent of the total harvest.
Sawlogs were much more important in the east and accounted for about one-
half of the crop.

3. Labour was the largest item of cost in woodland operations. The returns
per hour of labour averaged 95 cents and varied from $1.67 for those farmers
primarily engaged in harvesting sawlogs, to 29 cents per hour on farms report-
ing fuelwood as the only tree crop harvested during the year.

4. The effect of grazing on the woodlot is indicated by the comparative
returns obtained from grazed and ungrazed lots. Returns averaged $10.21
per acre on 63 ungrazed woodlots and only $5.62 on those grazed by livestock.
Of the 162 farms, 99 woodlots were pastured, 34 of them on only part of the
wooded area. The most significant difference between the two groups of wood-
lots was in the kind of forest products harvested. The ungrazed woodlots pro-
duced a large proportion of high quality sawlogs and poles, whereas fuelwood,
a less valuable product, was the chief tree crop harvested from the grazed
woodlots.

5. Farm woodlots were larger in eastern than in western Ontario but were
given greater care in the western area where reforestation was more prevalent
and the annual harvest per acre about 50 per cent greater.

6. Farm operators gave the following reasons for maintaining their bush:
to serve as a cover for submarginal land; to supply a cash income and wood
products for farm use; to conserve soil and water; to provide shade and wind
protection; additional crop land not required; and the high cost of clearing.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgment 6

Introduction 7

Farm Forestry in Ontario 9

Description of the Forests 9

Farm Income from Forest Products 9

Land Use 12

Price of Wood Products 13

The Production of Wood Products on 162 Selected Farms 15

Method of Study 15

Farm Organization 16

Size of Woodlot 17

Production

1946-50 18

Annual Cut per Acre 19

Woodlot Production — 1950-51 19

Sale of Wood Products 21

Wood Products Used on the Farm, 1950-51 22

Reforestation 23

Why Keep a Farm Woodlot? 23

Pasturing Farm Woodlots , 24

Labour on the Farm Woodlot 26

Labour Requirements 26

Financial Returns From Forestry Operations 28

Returns per Hour of Labour 28

Other Values of the Woodlot 29

Marketing 29

Prices 30

Problems 31

The Production of Maple Syrup 33

Returns from the Maple Syrup Enterprise 34

Relation of Returns to Size of Enterprise 37

Labour Requirements 38

Bibliography 39

'5620— 2

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This study was conducted jointly by the Farm Economics Branch of the
Ontario Department of Agriculture and the Economics Division of the Canada
Department of Agriculture. Special assistance and advice was provided by
Mr. C. P. Howard and several District and Zone Foresters of the Ontario
Department of Lands and Forests, as well as by members of the Forestry
Branch, Canada Department of Resources and Development; Dr. H. L. Patterson,
Mr. J. B. Nelson and Mr. H. Noble of the Ontario Department of Agriculture;
Dr. S. C. Hudson of the Economics Division, Canada Department of Agriculture.

The photographs were supplied through the courtesy of the Ontario
Department of Lands and Forests.

INTRODUCTION

Most of the literature on farm forestry in Ontario deals with the physical
improvement of the farm woods and the measurement of farm timber. Relatively
little study has been made of the economic problems of farm forestry as a
continuing source of farm income.

The value of farm woods has been generally recognized as a source of
wood products to meet farm needs, as a source of cash income, as a preventive
of excessive soil erosion and water runoff, as a cover for game birds, as a pro-
tection to crops and farmsteads against wind and finally as an aesthetic and
recreational asset. In spite of the recognition of the value of the farm woodlot,
until recently, little consideration has been given to the economic problems.
Even now the farm woods continue to be a neglected natural resource, under-
going gradual deterioration through excessive cutting and grazing. In war-
time especially the woods were combed over for their supplies of strategic
materials.

The strong demand for wood both during and after the war is making an
impact on farm woodlands. If the cutting is done destructively, it will cause
serious damage to the woodlands of Ontario.

Demonstration of woodlot of mixed wood.
Gait, Waterloo County, Ontario.

The forests which originally covered most of southern Ontario constituted
a hindrance to agricultural progress. Settlers slashed and burned the forest to
clear the land for crops. Little revenue was realized from the process and
only a small fraction of the timber cut was used. Later the manufacture of

75620—2*

8

lumber and other forest products became an important source of farm activity.
With exploitation of the available resource rather than harvest of a crop as the
prime objective, the virgin lumber rapidly disappeared.

Now the forest resources in southern Ontario have been reduced to a minor
part of the rural economy. Forest industries have declined rapidly as forest
depletion became more acute. In many sections processing facilities are no
longer available to provide satisfactory outlets for farm woodland products.

Farmers have long utilized their woodlots as a source of firewood and
occasional income in time of need without considering forestry as part of the
farm business. Many have striven to achieve and maintain high production
per acre or per animal in agricultural enterprises; few have extended com-
parable attention to the productivity of their woodland.

Many farm woodlot owners manage their forests very well. However, as
stated by the Ontario Royal Commission on Forestry "There is urgent need for
the inauguration of immediate restorative measures, as well as for the control
of the exceedingly destructive methods practised by so many operators who
purchase and remove timber from Ontario's woodlots. In general, all species
and all sizes are included in the purchase of such stands. The material suit-
able for sawing is usually removed first and the remainder is sold to a firewood
dealer. If, as is usually the case, the lot is then used for pasture, the cycle of
devastation is complete and instead of a forest which, wisely utilized, could
continue to pay good dividends to its owner in perpetuity, there remain a few
acres of indifferent pasture which will rarely yield a noticeable return".1

The lack of economic data relating to the value of farm woodlots has been
a serious handicap to farmers and extension workers in promoting better wood-
lot management. There is, of course, no practical way of rating statistically the
importance of farm woodlands as shelter and source of food for wildlife, as a
holder of soil against the erosive forces of the weather, as a conserver of water,
and as a source of aesthetic gratification to the community. But the value of
products yielded for home use and for sale can be calculated.

Forest trees possess certain characteristics, some of them not too well
understood, which distinguish them as a crop from other agricultural pro-
duction. Most important is the fact that a tree does not grow into a marketable
crop in a single growing season. It may take 50 to 75 years to produce a tree
of sawlog size and this fact has undoubtedly discouraged many landowners
who might otherwise be interested in growing trees. Although a long time is
required to grow a sawlog from seed, less time is required in existing wood-
lands because some of the trees may already be large enough to produce logs.
Furthermore, other products such as fence posts and pulpwood can be grown
in much shorter periods. Therefore, the majority of existing woodlands already
contain some trees ready to be harvested. Consequently, light annual cuts
covering all or part of the farm forest can often be undertaken immediately.
It is important in thinking of tree crops to realize that the period between seed
and sawlog harvest is not the important time element but rather the time to
the first harvest of any product.

Bare land on which a forest is to be established requires the longest time
before harvest, but with such short rotation crops as Christmas trees, the
working time will generally be less than 15 years. Other products such as
pulpwood require a minimum of 40 years, cedar posts 35 years, and merchant-
able timber about 75 years from the date of planting to harvest.

Trees possess both quality and size characteristics that influence their
value. Quality is not so well understood as size, but is actually more important.
Quality is the reason that one tree may be worth more than $100 and another
tree of the same size and species may be worth only $10.

i Report of the Ontario Royal Commission on Forestry, 1947.

:

FARM FORESTRY IN ONTARIO

Description of the Forests

The species of trees found in the agricultural areas of southern Ontario
are outlined in "A Forest Classification for Canada",1 as follows: —

"The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Forest Region. — This Region, centering on the
Great Lakes system, and extending eastward down the St. Lawrence Valley, is
of an irregular character. It occupies a middle position between predominantly
coniferous forests to the north and deciduous forests to the south. Precipitation
varies from an annual average of 25 inches in the west to 45 inches in the east,
and the growing season is from 100 to 150 days. Good forest soils of sedimentary
origin are common, but southward extensions of the granitic areas of the Canadian
Shield are within the boundaries of the Region.

"The characteristic species are white pine, red pine and hemlock, associated
with the maples, yellow birch and, in some sections, beech and basswood. Aspen
cedar and jack pine are widely distributed, and spruce and balsam fir are common
in certain localities. Among the less widely distributed hardwood species are
white birch, elm, hickories, white and black ash, bur, red and white oak, iron-
wood and butternut. The pine forests of the Ottawa Valley and Algonquin Park
have been famous as one of the greatest of Canada's lumbering areas. Elsewhere
in the Region forests of mixed type predominate, with a considerable proportion
of pure hardwood stands in the more favoured locations towards the south.

"The Deciduous Forest Region. — This Region in Canada consists of a small
northerly intrusion from the great forest of the same type in the United States,
and occupies the southwestern portion of what is commonly referred to as the
Ontario Peninsula. It enjoys very favourable soil and climatic conditions that
permit of the growth of a number of tree species not found elsewhere in Canada.
The area is completely settled because of its fertile soil, and the forests are
represented now only by woodlots, parks and small wooded areas on the lighter
soils".

"The characteristic trees of the Region are beech and sugar maple, together
with basswood, red maple and several oaks. Coniferous species are represented
largely by scattered specimens of white pine, hemlock and red juniper."

"Among the less common hardwoods, which occur singly or in small groups,
are hickories, black walnut, chestnut, tulip tree, magnolia, mulberry, sycamore,
sassafras, black gum, Kentucky coffee tree and a number of other species that find
their northern limit in this region".

Farm Income from Forest Products

The cash farm income from the sale of forest products including maple
syrup in Ontario has been increasing rather steadily from an average of
$3,658,000 during the period 1935-1939 to $14,272,000 in 1950. Only 55 2 per
cent of the farms reported wood products during the year 1940 and only slightly
more than one per cent were classified in the agricultural census as deriving
their main income from forestry. In other words, the cash farm income from
woodlot products was of considerable importance on more than one-half of the
farms in Ontario but only a few farms secured the major share of their income
from forestry. Likewise, only about 7 per cent of the farms reported income
from the sale of maple products during 1940, and these sales amounted to
$660,000 or approximately 0-3 per cent of the total farm cash income.

A gross annual harvest of $7,393,816" for the 42 southern Ontario counties
during 1940 looks in the aggregate like a substantial contribution to farm
income. When it is remembered, however, that this sum is obtained from the

•W. E. D. Halliday. A Forest Classification for Canada, Canada Department of Resources and
Development, Forest Research Division, Bulletin No. 89, 1937, Reprinted 1952.
-Census cf Canada.

10

products of 2,647,828 acres of farm woodlands, the return is rather low, only
$2.79 per acre during 1940. The value of the annual harvest varied from $1.63
per acre from farms in Frontenac County to $5.44 per acre of woodlot in Dundas
County.

Hardwood fuelpile on edge of farmer's woodlot. Orillia, Ontario.

The sale of woodland products is not an annual item of farm income but
varies considerably with economic conditions. In depression years such as
1938, when prices were low, farmers offered $2,960,000 worth of wood products
for sale, whereas during 1950 woodland products valued at $12,930,000 were
sold from Ontario farms (Table 1). On the average, the sale of farm forest

Table 1.— Cash Income From the Sale of Forest Products, Ontario, 1926-1950

Source: Dominion Bureau of Statistics

Year

1926-29

1935-39

1943-45

1947

1948

1949

1950"

a Preliminary

Maple Products

Sale
Value

$000

1,117

624

746

1,882

999

1 , 043

1 , 342

Per Cent

of Total

Farm Cash

Income

per cent
•43
31
18
34
15
15
20

Forest Products

Sale
Value

$000

4,970

3,034

6,215

9,199

l(),.r>12

12,089

12,930

Per Cent

of Total

Farm Cash

Income

per cent

•91
•53
•50
•94

■90
■78
•90

Total Woodland
Products

Sale
Value

$000

6,087

3,658

6,961

11,081

11,511

13,132

14,272

Per Cent

of Total

Farm Cash

Income

per cent

•34

•84
•68
•28
■05
•93
•10

11

products constituted 1-8 per cent of the total farm cash income from the
province during the period from 1926 to 1950 inclusive, and varied from 1*3
per cent in 1942 to 1*9 per cent of the total farm income in 1947.

The total value of forest products from farms, excluding maple syrup and
sugar, increased from 11-2 million dollars in 1910 to 18-3 million in 1920,
decreased to 12-8 million in 1930 and finally to 9-4 million dollars in 1940.
(Table 2).

During the period 1920 to 1940 the greatest proportion of the farm woodlot
products, about 66 per cent in terms of value, was consumed on the farm. There
appears to be, however, a slight variation in the percentage of the total value
of production which is sold during periods of varying levels of prosperity. For
example, during the prosperous year of 1920, 36*4 per cent of the cut was sold
off the farm, 28-7 per cent in 1930 when the general price level was on the
decline and 36*6 per cent during the year 1940 when the economy was on the
upswing.

Table 2.— Forest Products of Farms, 1910-1940, Ontario

Source: Census of Canada

Item

VALUE OF ALL FOREST
PRODUCTS

Firewood

Used on the farm

Sold

Pulpwood

Other forest produetsb

Used on the farm

Sold

Unit

cord

cord

cord

cord

1910

11,205,220

2,584,298
5,654,171

109,149
436,151

5,114,898

1920

18,336,015

2,855,675
12,229,550

2,481,360
10,373,611

374,315
1,855,939

249,237

2,686,933

3,419,532
1,295,504
2,124,028

1930

12,762,589

307,018
142,355

934,105
443,386

372,913
698,969

283,533
745,853

874,381

725,047

149,334

1940

9,403,806

1,884,221
7,400,980

1,479,781
5,701,789

404,440
1,699,191

179,553

885,227

1,117,599

248,277
859,322

a Not available.

b Includes fence posts, rails, railway ties,

logs for lumber, pit props, etc.

The most important woodlot product cut on the farms during the period
under study was firewood. While the volume of fuelwood sales has remained
relatively constant during the census years beginning 1920, there has been a
decline in the amount of firewood cut, and a decline in the amount of firewood
used on the farm. Other forest products, including fence posts, rails, railway
ties, logs for lumber, pit props, etc., ranked second in terms of value during the
census years 1910 to 1940 inclusive, followed by pulpwood.

On the average 53 per cent of the farms in southern Ontario reported
woodlot products in 1940. In the eastern region all counties except Carleton,
Russell, Prescott and Dundas were above average in the percentage of the farms
reporting forest products, Renfrew being the highest with 80-6 per cent. In
western Ontario, only ten of the 24 counties were above average, with a large
concentration of the farms reporting forest products in the northern area.

12

Land Use

In 1940, 34-2 per cent of the farm land in the agricultural areas of Ontario1
was classified as unimproved with 14-0 per cent in woods, 16-0 per cent as
natural pasture and 4-2 per cent as marsh and waste land. The heavily wooded
areas lie in the central portion of the eastern region and the northern area of
western Ontario. Renfrew was the most heavily wooded county with 36-8 per
cent of its land in woods, whereas Essex County with only 4-4 per cent of its
land in woods, was the area most heavily denuded of trees.

Agriculture over the years has gone through many changes. Southern
Ontario is one of the oldest farming regions of Canada and is an area in which,
in the early days, a type of highly diversified agriculture based primarily on
production for home use was developed. As city markets have grown, the type
of farming of the region has shifted more and more to a commercial basis,
concentrating on the production of items which have the greatest advantage
when produced close to the consuming market.

Many people travelling the back roads of Ontario hill areas have seen the
abandoned farms and fields, the numerous one-time farmsteads that remain
only as overgrown cellar holes, and have concluded from this evidence that
Ontario agriculture has gone into a period of decadence. This is certainly not
a true statement of fact.

The number of persons engaged in farming and the acreage devoted to
crops have declined over the past decade, nevertheless those who remain are
producing much more agricultural produce than before. Each new develop-
ment in agriculture, such as new and improved varieties of crops, and new
implements and machinery, makes it more difficult for farmers in the "poorer"

i The agricultural areas under study are delineated in Figure 1.

13

lands to remain in agriculture. Thus it is safe to assume that while these
improvements continue, much of the land presently devoted to agriculture will
revert to other uses such as forestry.

During the period from 1920 to 1940 the acreage in farms in southern
Ontario declined from 19,146,389 acres to 18,895,195 acres, a reduction of
251,194 acres or 0-1 per cent of the total acres in farms over this period. In
1940, there were 1,898 idle or abandoned farms and 159,424 acres of idle land
in the agricultural areas of Ontario. In other words, about 92,000 acres ceased
to be worked as farm land or held as farm units. Much of this land was pur-
chased by county and provincial authorities for forestry purposes.

The decline in the acreage in woods over this period has not been uniform
throughout the area (Figure 1). Frontenac County has increased the pro-
portion of farm land in woods by 4 • 4 per cent, Bruce by 3 • 0 per cent while
Carleton, Grenville, Leeds, Renfrew, Hastings, Northumberland, Durham,
Ontario, York, Peel, Dufferin, Huron, Brant and Lincoln have increased to a
lesser degree. Russell County showed the sharpest decline with 6 • 3 per cent
while Prescott, Glengarry, Dundas, Lennox and Addington, Prince Edward,
Peterborough, Victoria, Simcoe, Wellington, Halton, Waterloo, Lambton,
Middlesex, Essex, Kent, Elgin, Norfolk, Haldimand, Welland and Wentworth,
declined by a smaller proportion.

Demonstration woodlot of mixed wood.
Gait, Waterloo County, Ontario.

Price of Wood Products

The price of wood products, like the price of farm products generally, has
followed the general price level rather closely (Figure 2). However, for the
period from 1925 to 1949, wood products in general have been more favourably
priced than farm products in 15 of the 25 years from 1926 to 1950 inclusive,
and have been considerably higher than the general level of wholesale prices
for most of this period.
75620—3

14

The price of wood products, especially lumber, is largely dependent upon
building activity, the investment in which has increased rapidly from 323
million dollars in 1939 to a record high of 1,921 million dollars in 1951. The
long-time trend in the price of wood has been rather steadily upward. The
average wholesale price of eastern white pine, for example, has advanced from
$21 in 1908 to $68 per thousand feet, board measure, in 1948. Other wood
products, including fuelwood, have followed this general pattern.

During the spring of 1952, good quality veneer logs in 9- to 16-foot lengths,
with a minimum diameter of 12 inches, were selling on cars, in carload lots, for
the following prices per thousand feet, board measure, in the Ottawa Valley:
birch $80, basswood $70, ash, oak, elm and maple $65, poplar $60, butternut
$70 and beech $65.

During the same period, pulpwood was selling for the following prices:
rough poplar $13, peeled poplar $19, rough spruce or balsam $18, and peeled
spruce or balsam $25 per cord, f.o.b. mill. Softwood peeled slabs were selling
for $11 per cord f.o.b. mill.

"]ndex

250 -

230

210

190

170

150

130

110

90

70

50

Index - 1935-39 = 100

Wood Products
Farm Products
General Wholesale Index

0

t — r

t — r

1946

1951

1926 1931 1936 1941

Figure 2 — Average wholesale price indexes of wood products, farm products and the
general level of wholesale prices. Canada — 1926:1950. Source: "Wholesale Price

Indexes" — Dominion Bureau of Statistics.

THE PRODUCTION OF WOOD PRODUCTS ON 162 SELECTED FARMS

Method of Study

Information was obtained on 162 farms throughout Ontario during June
and July, 1951, by the field survey method. One visit was made to each
farm and information obtained on the organization of the farm with specific
reference to the farm woodlot.

The field work was conducted by the Economics Division, Canada Depart-
ment of Agriculture, with the assistance of the Farm Economics Branch of
the Ontario Department of Agriculture and the Ontario Department of Lands
and Forests. For the purposes of this study, the farming areas of southern
Ontario were divided into two rather distinct areas by a line running north
of the western boundary of Durham and Victoria counties (Figure 3). These
areas are designated eastern and western regions.

With the assistance of the Ontario Department of Lands and Forests, four
representative townships were selected in each of the regions namely: Rox-
borough, Lanark, Hungerford and Hope townships in the eastern region and
Tecumseh, Arran, North Dumfries, and Lobo townships in the western region.
Within each township approximately twenty full-time commercial farms were
visited and enumerated.

The full-time commercial farm was defined as a farm whose operator
spent most of his time on the farm, received more than one-half of his income
from the sale of farm products, excluding forest products, and owned a farm

FIGURE 3
LOCATION OF TOWNSHIPS STUDIED. 1950-51

fe TOWNSHIPS STUDIED

75620 ---3*

15

16

woodlot in the year 1950. In this way, it was possible to study farm forestry
from the point of view of farmers who are primarily engaged in producing
farm products and to obtain information on the production and management
practices followed on their farm woodlot.

Farm Organization

The commercial farms enumerated were considerably larger in area than
the average for Ontario as a whole, having 242 acres of which 90 were in crops
(Table 3). Farms in the eastern region averaged 273 acres as compared
with 208 acres in the western region. The greatest difference in the land-use
patterns between the regions was in the amount of non-tillable land. Whereas
the farms in the eastern region had an average of 161 non- tillable acres, the
western farms devoted only 61 acres to this use.

Table 3.— Summary of Land Use by Region, 162 Farms, Ontario, 1959-51

Eastern Region

Western Region

Total

85 Farms

77 Farms

162 Farms

— acres —

Cropland

79

103

90

Pasture — tillable

33

44

39

non-tillable

64

16

41

Woods — pastured

53

10

33

not pastured

28

25

26

Other

16

10

13

Total

273

208

242

The larger woodlots were found in the eastern region, averaging 81 acres,
of which about 53 acres were pastured. Farms in the western region had an
average of 35 acres with only 10 acres pastured by livestock. On the basis of
townships, the farms visited in Lobo, with an average of 25 acres, had the
smallest wooded area per farm; the largest woodlots were in Lanark and
averaged 133 acres per woodlot.

On the whole, the livestock program on the two groups of farms did not
differ very much. The typical commercial farm studied in both regions main-
tained about 11 cows, and 13 head of heifers and steers along with 7 calves,
about 2 brood sows, and a flock of approximately 95 hens.

The total capital investment averaged $22,974 for the 162 farms. It
averaged $18,610 for the eastern Ontario group and $27,741 for the western

Table 4.— Farm Investment, 162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Item

Eastern Ontario

Western Ontario

All Farms

Cleared land

3,374
1 , 359
5,279

— dollars —

7,272
1,522
6,832

5,225

Woodlot

Buildings

1,437
6,017

Total real estate

10,012

2,984
5,614

15,626

5,034
7,081

12,679

Machinery and equipment

3,985

Livestock

6,310

Total Farm Investment

18,610

27,741

22,974

17

Ontario farms. (Table 4). On the average, real estate amounted to 55 per
cent of the total investment for all farms, with relatively little variation
between groups. The eastern region had 54 per cent, and the western region
56 per cent of the total capital invested in real estate.

The average farm woodlot was valued at $1,437 or 11-3 per cent of the
total real estate value on the 162 farms studied. It constituted, in terms of
value, 13-6 and 9-7 per cent of the total real estate on farms in the eastern
and western areas respectively. Real estate values were considerably higher
in the western than in the eastern area because of the larger cropland acreage,
more favourable location with respect to markets and a more intensive type
of agriculture. The average woodlot in the western region was valued at
$43 per acre as compared with $17 in the eastern region and $24 for all farms.

The average gross income per farm from the sale of farm products,
including forest products, was estimated to be about $7,020 for the eastern
region and $15,578 for the farms in the western region. The largest source
of income in both regions was from the sale of livestock, eggs, and wool which
was 54 per cent of the total cash farm income for the eastern and 55 per
cent for the farms studied in the western group (Table 5). The sale of woodlot
products including maple syrup averaged 4 • 6 and 2 • 5 per cent of the total
farm income in the eastern and western areas respectively.

Table 5. — Percentage Distribution of Income from the Sale of Farm Products,

182 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Item

Average per Farm

Eastern Region

Western Region

All Regions

Crops

Milk and cream

Livestock, eggs, and wool

Woodlot products

8-5
33-2
53-7

4-6

— per cent —

14-6

28-0

54-9

2-5

11-6

30-5
54-3

3-6

Total

100 0

100 0

100 0

Size of Woodlot

Whereas the average farm woodlot on the 162 farms studied was 59 acres,
there was considerable variation in the number of acres in woods within and
between the two regions. The typical farm enumerated in the eastern region
had more than 44 acres in woods and the typical western woodlot had from
20 to 44 acres, with 33 of the 77 farms visited falling within this group
(Table 6). Of the woodlots on eastern Ontario farms, 56 per cent were larger
than 44 acres, whereas only 23 per cent of the farms in the western region
fell within this category.

Table 6.— Frequency Distribution of Woodlots by Size and Region,
162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Size of Woodlot

Total,
Eastern Region

Total,
Western Region

Total.

All Farms

Less than 20 acres

19

18
48

-number of farms —

26
33

18

45

20 to 44 acres

51

45 or more

66

Total

85

77

162

18

Production 1946-50

The average southern Ontario farm studied harvested an average annual
cut of 2,150 board feet of sawlogs during the five-year period from 1946 to
1950 from an average of 59 acres; the eastern farms harvested an average of
2,820 board feet from 81 acres, and the western farms averaged 1,411 board
feet of sawlogs from 35 acres of woods during this period (Table 7).

During the 1950-51 crop year, there was an extra heavy cut of sawlogs
in southern Ontario. This is attributed in part to higher prices and partly
to the heavy windthrow caused by a northeasterly gale in November, 1950. A
great many mature trees were uprooted or broken and it appears that the
majority of them were salvaged during the winter.

Other woodland products such as fuelwood, fence posts, pulpwood, and
maple syrup were harvested in greater quantities on the larger woodlots of
eastern Ontario. Only during the 1950-51 crop year did the production of
poles, principally hydro and telephone, in western Ontario exceed the average
for southern Ontario.

Despite the fact that there has been a tendency for farmers to use more
coal and oil during recent years, the production of fuelwood on most farms
has increased slightly since 1946. The situation may be explained by the fact
that fuelwood is a by-product of sawlogs, the production of which has
increased since 1946.

Table 1.— Annual Wood lot Production ' Per Farm, 162 Farms, Ontario, by Region, 1946-50

Crop Year

Eastern Ontario — 85 Farms

1946-47 .
1947-48 .
1948-49 .
1949-50 .
1950-51 .
Average
1946-50 .

1946-47 .
1947-48 .
1948-49 .
1949-50 .
1950-51 .
Average
1946-50

1946-47 .
1947-48 .
1948-49 .
1949-50 .
1950-51
Average
1946-50 .

Lumber

f.b.m.

2,485
1,782
2,174
2,160
5,497

2,820

2,130
1,005
1,012
1,191
1,719

1,411

Fuelwood

•ord

151

12-5
120
120
13-5
13-6

12-7

Fence Posts

number

37

41
44
33

:'.4

Poles

number
■4

2
38-3
Western Ontario — 77 Farms

Pulpwood

27-1
16-5
15-9
200

25-8

211

b

b

b

•1

8-4
1-7

cord

•5
•5
•4
•4
•2

Maple Syrup

gallon

24-9

17-7
170
15-5
13-6
12-5

15-3

Southern Ontario — 162 Farms

2,316

13-5

32-6

•2

•2

21-7

1,413

13-5

29-6

•4

•2

23-0

1,622

14-4

30-9

•2

•2

21-8

1,699

13-8

27-2

•3

•2

18-6

3,702

14-6

30-2

4-8

•1

16-0

2,150

14-0

30- 1

11

•2

20-2

a Not including Christmas trees, nursery stock and the like.
b Less than 0-1.

The production of fence posts and poles has remained relatively constant,
while the harvest of pulpwood and maple syrup declined during this period.
The heavy demand for lumber coupled with favourable prices during the
period, has permitted farmers to sell such species as spruce, balsam and poplar

19

for use as lumber rather than to the pulp and paper industry. Many farmers
used these species for normal farm construction and repairs. The production
of maple syrup declined during this period not only because of the unfavour-
able weather conditions but also because of the increased price of hired labour.

Annual Cut Per Acre

During the year commencing June 1, 1950, the average farm harvested 34
cubic feet of wood products per acre of bush.1 The farms in western Ontario
obtained a considerably higher cut per acre, or 45 cubic feet as compared with
30 for the eastern region during the year. As previously stated, there was
an extra heavy cut of woodlot products during the winter of 1950-51. For
the five-year period from 1946-50 the average woodlot on the 162 farms
studied cut 27 cubic feet of wood products annually per acre of woods. The
77 farms in the western region harvested 38 cubic feet of wood products per
acre compared with an average annual harvest of only 22 cubic feet per acre
for the 85 farms located in the eastern area.

The present production of the average Ontario farm woodlot has been
estimated at 25 cubic feet per acre per year and it is suggested that if sound
silvicultural methods are developed and implemented, in thirty years' time the
annual growth will equal 36 cubic feet and 48 cubic feet at the end of about
75 years."

Woodlot Production — 1950-51

The average woodlot on the farms studied produced wood products valued
at $446, and $70 worth of maple syrup making the total value of woodland
production $516 (Table 8). In terms of value, the cut of logs for lumber
was about equal to that of fuelwood or an average of about $200 per farm.
Veneer logs, pulpwood, posts, and miscellaneous wood products were of lesser
importance on the average, although of considerable value on several farms.
The production of maple syrup which averaged $70 per farm will be dealt
with later in this report.

Table 8.— Average Woodlot Production per Farm, 162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Eastern Region
85 Farms

Western Region
77 Farms

Total
162 Farms

Units

Value

Units

Value

Units

Value

Lumber (f.b.m.)

Pulpwood (cord)

Fuelwood (cord)

Miscellaneous

5,497
•2
15-5
34-2

$

284
3

198
10
25

1,719

13-6

25-8

$

120

199
11
37

3,702
•1
14-6
30-2

$

206
1

198
11
30

Total wood products . .

Maple Syrup (gals.)

19-8

520

79

12

367

57

16

446

70

Total Value

599

424

516

The eastern region, with its larger woodlots, harvested the greatest
quantity of woodlot products averaging $599 per farm compared with $424 for
the western region. The average value of fuel wood production was about

•Conversion Factors obtained from Operations in the Woods, Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 1949.
2Report of the Ontario Royal Commission on Forestry, 1947.

20

$198 per farm in both regions. However, the value of logs cut for lumber
averaged $284 per farm in the eastern region compared with $120 for the
western group. Only four of the farms sold veneer logs and three cut pulp-
wood; all of these were located in the eastern region. Eight farms reported
no activity in their woodlots during the 1950-51 crop year and three reported
no woodlot production except from the maple syrup enterprise. In other
words, eleven farm woodlots reported no wood cut during the year.

In terms of value, lumber was the most important woodlot product on the
eastern Ontario farms amounting to 54-6 per cent of the total value of wood
products harvested. On the western region farms, lumber accounted for 32-7
per cent of the value of wood products and was second only to fuelwood.
About 49 per cent of the farms in both regions cut logs suitable for sawing into
lumber. The vast majority of the logs sold for this purpose were elm, spruce,
white, red and Scots pine, hemlock, beech, ash, oak and maple with a few farms
reporting the sale of hickory, tamarack and other species of trees less common
in Ontario.

Demonstration woodlot — Trees marked for cutting.
Gait, Waterloo County, Ontario.

Pulpwood was not produced on the majority of farms studied. During the
1950-51 crop year, three farms cut an average of about six cords; however,
with the increased prices paid to farmers for pulpwood during the summer of
1951, several farmers expressed an intention to cut more pulpwood in the
winter of 1952.

Fuelwood was cut on 91 per cent of the farms in the 1950-51 crop year.
On the majority of these farms, fuelwood was the most important forest prod-
uct in terms of value. An average of 14-6 cords of fuelwood was cut, valued

21

at $198 or $13.65 per cord. About one-third of the farms maintained two or
more houses, thus the cut of fuelwood per farm is higher than might be
expected on many Ontario farms. A considerable number of farms visited
burned coal or oil but nevertheless cut some wood for home use.

The production of posts was confined to the 52 farms having a cedar bush.
The average production was 30 posts per farm and these were valued at 37
cents each, at the farm. As might be expected, the larger farms in the eastern
region utilized more posts than those in the western area.

Other farms produced a considerable quantity of hydro poles, telephone
poles, beams and Christmas trees, which averaged $30 per farm and $448 per
farm reporting.

Sale of Wood Products

The average farm enumerated received $212 from the sale of wood prod-
ucts, $52 from maple syrup sales and a total of $264 from the sale of woodland
products (Table 9). On the average, $145 or 69 per cent of the total income
from the sale of woodland products was derived from the sale of lumber.
Fuelwood sales amounted to an average of $31, posts $4, pulpwood $1, and
miscellaneous products $30 per farm.

Table 9.— Summary of Woodlot Product Sales per Farm, 162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Eastern Region
85 Farms

Western Region
77 Farms

Total
162 Farms

Units

Value

Units

Value

Units

Value

Lumber (f.b.m.)

Pulpwood (cord)

Fuelwood (cord)

Posts (no.)

Miscellaneous

Maple syrup (gals.)

4,133
•2
2-2
13.8

15-1

$

207.48

2.71

27.03

4.24

24.39

59.35

1,092

2-0

8.4

9-2

$

77.25

35.86

3.44

36.08

43 . 19

2,688
•1
2-1
11.2

12-3

$

145.58

1.42

31.23

3.86

29.94

51.67

Total Value

325 20

195 82

263 70

Sawlogs for lumber were by far the most important forest products sold
in both the eastern and western areas on the average farm recorded. In the
eastern section, 33 farms or 39 per cent reported sales of sawlogs for lumber
amounting to an average of $534 for the equivalent of 10,008 board feet of
lumber per farm reporting sales. Likewise, the average for the 19 farms
reporting the sale of sawlogs in the western region was $313 covering 4,425
board feet equivalent of lumber.

Whereas fuelwood was cut on 148 farms, only 27 reported having sold it,
at an average of $187.37 for the 12-7 cords sold per farm. Only four of the
farms in the eastern region reported the sale of veneer logs and three the sale
of an average of 6-3 cords of pulpwood, whereas no farm enumerated in the
western region sold these products. Two farms sold an average of 1,641
Christmas trees.

The total gross cash income received from the sale of forest products,
including maple products, by the 162 farms during the period June 1, 1950 to
May 31, 1951 was $42,720 (Table 10). Nine per cent of the farms received
52-7 per cent of this total. Fifty-one per cent of the farms made no sales of
forest products.

22

Table 10.— Distribution of Farms According to the Sale of Forsst Product.

162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

>>

Farms Reporting

Forest Product Sales

Sale of Forest Products

Number

Per Cent

Total

Per Cent

Average
per P'arm

dollars
Nil

83
37
14
9
6
7
6

51
23
8
5
4
4
5

dollars

4^489
5,369
5,263
5,082
8,730
13,787

10-5
12-6
12-3
11 -9
20-1
32-3

dollars

1— 250

251— 500

501— 750

751—1000

1001—1500

Over 1500

121
384
585
847
1,247
2,298

Total

162

100

42,720

109 0

264

The group with individual income from the sale of forest products amount-
ing to more than $1,500 was composed of operators of large farms. The
smallest income reported by any of the six operators was $1,584 while the
largest income reported from the sale of forest products was $3,500.

There are several reasons for the unequal distribution of income. Possibly
the most important is the length of period for which data were collected.
Cuttings of any one farm are usually periodic and several years apart. Had it
been possible to get information covering a longer time, the distribution might
have been different. There would still be a number with very small incomes
from this source, however, because of the lack of woodland, poor conditions of
growing stock, unwillingness to sell at existing prices, and alternative employ-
ment opportunities during 1950-51.

Wood Products Used on the Farm, 1950-51

The majority of the wood products used on the farm had their origin in
the farm woodlot on the 162 farms studied. The average value of wood
products consumed on the farm was $231 of which only $20 or 8-6 per cent
was purchased (Table 11).

On the average, 12-2 cords of fuel wood were used on the farm, valued at
$165 or 71 per cent of the total value of wood used. Only one farm reported
the use of coal and fuel oil exclusively, although many of the farmers, partic-
ularly in the western region, burned some coal or fuel oil in the farm home.

Table 11.— Average Annual Farm Use of Forest Products on 162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

—

Eastern Region
85 Farms

Western Region
77 Farms

Total
162 Farms

Units

Value

Units

Value

Units

Value

Lumber (f.b.m.)

Fuelwood (cord)

Posts (no.)

Miscellaneous

1,044
13-3
23-9

$

64
171

8
1

482
9-7
28-9

$

42

159

16

1

777
12 2
26-3

$

53

165

12

1

Total wood products . .

Maple syrup (gals.)

2-7

244

11

2-7

218

13

'2-7

231

12

Total value

255

231

243

23

Excluding used lumber, the average farm utilized 777 board feet valued
at $53, of which 170 board feet were purchased for an average of $15. The
typical farm used 26 wooden fence posts of which 3-4 were purchased. Iron
fence posts appear to be gradually replacing the wooden type especially in
western Ontario where 12 farmers reported purchasing them during the
1950-51 crop year.

Reforestation

There are many thousands of acres once farmed in Ontario that in recent
years have dropped out of farming. Many of these acres did very well in the
days of subsistence farming, but under ordinary management they cannot
meet the challenge of today's high investment. Successful use of high quality
seed and fertilizer is difficult on low quality land which returns only a fraction
of the yield potential in the seed. While agricultural science is improving,
farm abandonment will continue. Much of this abandoned farm land is
admirably suited for the production of forest crops.

The free distribution of trees for planting in Ontario began in 1905, and
the following year a statute was passed which enabled a township council to
exempt a part of the woodland of the farms from taxation. This provided that
exemption be extended to:

"Any part of a farm used for forestry purposes or being 'Woodlands';
provided that such exemption shall not be greater than one acre in ten acres
of such farms and not more than twenty acres held under a single ownership".1

" 'Woodlands' for the purpose of this paragraph shall mean lands having
not less than 400 trees per acre of all sizes, or 300 trees measuring over two
inches in diameter; or 200 measuring over five inches in diameter (all such
measurements to be taken at 4^ feet from the ground) of one or more of the
following kinds: white or Norway pine, white or Norway spruce, hemlock,
tamarack, oak, ash, elm, hickory, basswood, tulip (white wood), black cherry,
walnut, butternut, chestnut, hard maple, soft maple, cedar, sycamore, birch,
black locust, or catalpa or any other variety that may be designated by Order
in Council, and which lands have been set apart by the owner with the object
solely of fostering the growth of the trees thereon and which are not used
for grazing livestock".

The program which began in 1905 has expanded until in 1946, eight million
trees were distributed and some 350 million trees were planted in southern
Ontario up to and including 1946. In 1949, 9-8 million trees were shipped
to private land owners and a total of 373 million trees planted to the end of
the 1949 fiscal year.

Fifty-one farms or 31 per cent of the farms enumerated planted an
average of 6,027 trees supplied by the Department of Lands and Forests during
the period 1930 to 1950, and the average farmer interviewed planted 1,897
trees during the period. About one-half of the farms visited in the western
region planted trees whereas only 14 per cent of the farms in the eastern area
reported this activity.

Why Keep a Farm Woodlot?

When the 162 farmers were asked the question: "What is the main
purpose of keeping your woodlot?", about 93 per cent of the answers implied
that the land was more suitable for the production of tree crops than for any
other use. Thirty-eight per cent of them claimed that because of stoniness,
slope, or drainage problems, the land had no agricultural value. Twenty-eight
per cent of the replies were directly related to cash income from forestry.

TR.S.O., 1927, S 4, Para. 25; 1934, C 1, 54 (3).

24

The most important reason given was to supply wood products for the farm.
Others considered the woodlot a good investment for future generations and
a readily available cash asset. Fourteen per cent of the replies were directly
related to conservation of water, soil and wildlife, and six per cent considered
protection from the wind and sun to be the most important reason for keeping
their woodlot. Seven per cent replied that under existing economic conditions
it would be too costly to clear the woodland.

Six per cent claimed that they had sufficient land under cultivation and
although their woodlot soil was suitable for agriculture they did not plan to
utilize it for that purpose. The remaining one per cent of the answers were
rather general in nature.

Poplar plantation holding back blowsand. Durham county, Ontario.

Pasturing Farm Woodlots

Grazing is harmful to the farm woodlot. The average return per acre
of woods was much higher on the 63 ungrazed woodlots. Farmers harvested
an average of $10.21 per acre of woods from the 63 ungrazed woodlots com-
pared with only $5.62 per acre for the 65 farm forests grazed during the year.
Ninety-nine of the farm woodlots were pastured by livestock and 65 of these
were grazed in their entirety, while the remaining 34 lots were partly pastured
and partly kept free of stock. Only 63 farms studied kept livestock out of
the woods.

Probably there is no more obvious difference between grazed and ungrazed
woodlots than the almost complete absence of reproduction in the forests.
The cover of grass in a woodlot of medium stocking is at best scanty and the
animals quickly turn to the young broad-leaved trees for food. Livestock

25

compact the soil and seriously disturb its physical structure. A forest soil
should be permeable to moisture and air, and when it is continuously packed
into a solid condition the natural state of cultivation is completely lost.

Perhaps the most significant difference between the two groups of wood-
lots was in the quality of the products harvested. The ungrazed woodlots
produced a large proportion of high-quality sawlogs and poles whereas fuel-
wood, a low-grade product, was the predominant tree crop harvested from the
grazed woodlots.

Why do you continue to graze your woodlot? This was a question asked
of farmers who followed the practice. Forty per cent of the replies obtained
suggested that the livestock did little harm whereas about two per cent claimed
that livestock were good for the woodlot and four per cent stated that the
woods acted as a protection for livestock.

The high price of fence wire and labour was claimed by 25 per cent of the
farmers to be the main reason for allowing cattle in the woodlot. About 16
per cent of the farmers suggested that in order to keep the woodlot free of
cattle, additional pasture land must be found. The vast majority of the farmers
who replied in this manner were located in Lanark and Hungerford townships.
Three per cent of the replies came from farmers who planned to fence their
woods in the near future and the remaining ten per cent gave miscellaneous
reasons for following this practice.

LABOUR IN THE FARM WOODLOT

From a labour standpoint, the farm woodlands play an important role.
Considering farming as a business, the farmer has labour and equipment which
is used on the land. It is good business to use that labour and equipment where
it will bring him the greatest returns per hour. But in the farm woodland
areas of Ontario there are months when it is impossible to work on the land.
In this respect, farmers with woodlots are fortunate in being in a position to
employ labour, either their own or hired, between chores.

Labour is the largest single item of expense in woodland operations. If
the cost of farm labour is estimated at 60 cents per hour then labour accounted
for about 70 per cent of the total cost of harvesting wood products and 47 per
cent of the total cost of making maple syrup on the farms enumerated.

The comment is often heard: "It doesn't pay to work in the woods. All
I get out of it is my fuelwood". But this ignores the fact that woods work, as
here conceived, is not competing with agricultural work; it simply utilizes
slack time whenever available. It is not a question of woods work or barn
work, woods work or field work — it is often a question of woods work or no
work. In fact the farmer without a woodlot in which to carry on winter work is
often operating under a distinct handicap.

The average farmer interviewed who worked in the woods during the
crop year of 1950-51 utilized 342 hours of productive labour in the woods, of
which 48 hours were used for the production of maple syrup and 294 hours on
wood products. Included in the total of 294 hours was the time required to go
to and from the woodlot. The typical farmer began his woodland operation
after the morning chores, returned home for lunch, and again in time for the
evening chores. For this reason, it is not possible to compare the labour
requirements for the farm woodlot with those of the lumbering industry.

Labour Requirements.

Since most of the products of the woodlots are harvested jointly, such as
sawlogs and fuelwood, information relating to the labour requirements for
harvesting each type of woodland product could not be obtained. It was pos-
sible, however, to obtain the labour requirements for the following; farms
harvesting only fuelwood, predominantly fuelwood, and predominantly sawlogs.
(Table 12).

Table 12.— Per Cent Distribution of Labour, by Main Type of Product Harvested,

140 Farms, Ontario, 1959-51*

Type of Product Harvested

Operation

Fuelwood
only

Predominantly
Fuelwood

Predominantly
Sawlogs

Average
All Farms

Cutting

45

— per
44

cent —

34

48

8

10

41

Skidding and hauling

Sawing

23
16
16

26
12

18

32

12

Other

15

Total

100

100

100

100

11 Includes the time getting to and from the woods.

26

27

The 140 farms for which useful labour information was available made
use of an average of 294 hours of labour in woods operations, excluding maple
syrup. About 41 per cent of the labour was utilized in felling and cutting the
trees, 32 per cent in skidding and hauling, 12 per cent for sawing and 15 per
cent for miscellaneous labour such as splitting wood and preparing machines
for use. Chain saws were used on only 21 farms while the remainder felled
their timber by other methods.

Forty-five of the 140 farmers harvested an average of 12-4 cords of fuel-
wood during the year and utilized 193 hours of labour in the process. In other

Erosion on the top of a hillside. Bolton, Lake Simcoe district, Ontario.

words, 15*6 hours of labour were used in harvesting one cord of fuelwood1
while the requirements ranged from 6 to 31 hours per cord. The greatest
portion or 45 per cent was utilized for felling the trees, trimming the branches
and cutting into lengths suitable for skidding and hauling.

The 67 farms which harvested principally fuelwood, as well as a few saw-
logs, posts and poles, utilized an average of 299 hours of labour, the distribution
of which did not differ greatly from those farms which harvested only fuel-
wood. Only 28 of the 140 farms were primarily occupied with harvesting
sawlogs and some fuelwood, posts and poles, and employed an average of 441
hours of labour for this work. The task of skidding and hauling was the most
time-consuming job and required an average of 48 per cent of the labour, while
cutting required only 34 per cent of the total labour used on these woodlots

1 Includes the time getting to and from the wood lot.

FINANCIAL RETURNS FROM FORESTRY OPERATIONS

Information relating to the expenses involved in forestry operations was
obtained on all farms enumerated. Useful data were available for 140 of the
162 farms, while the remaining farms were eliminated either because they did
not work in the woods, or because maple syrup was the only woodlot product
harvested during the 1950-51 crop year. The data contained in this section
are not presented necessarily as being typical of all commercial farms, but
rather to describe the woodland operations on the farms studied during the
1950-51 crop year.

The items of expense listed in Table 13 were calculated in the following
manner. The charge for custom work which averaged $27 per farm was made
on the basis of the actual cash outlay involved. The greatest portion of this
cost was for hiring chain and circular saws. The hourly rates for machinery
and horse use were based upon the total hours of use during the year ended
May 31, 1951 and included charges for depreciation, fuel, repairs, interest on
investment and housing. Hourly rates were applied to all machinery and
horses used in forestry operations. The average charge for this purpose on the
140 farms was $35 per farm.

The cost items grouped as miscellaneous include a nominal charge for
depreciation, repairs and interest on investment in axes, saws, chains and other
items not included in the machinery charge. It also includes the cost of a few
meals supplied to labour hired on a custom basis. The charge for this purpose
averaged $15 per farm. The total operating cost of woodland operations,
excluding labour, amounted to $171 per farm, on the average.

Returns per Hour of Labour

On the average, the 140 farms enumerated harvested woodland products,
excluding maple syrup, valued at $450 during the year and produced an average
of 4,432 board feet equivalent of sawlogs, 15-7 cords of fuelwood, 35 posts, as
well as $33 worth of miscellaneous products.

Table 13. — Summary of Operating Returns per Hour of Labour from Established Woodlots,
by Type of Product Harvested, 140 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Item

Kind of Woodland Product Harvested

All
Types

Fuelwood
only

Predominantly
Fuelwood

Predominantly
Sawlogs

Number1 of farms

no

262
188
450

27

35

15

37

57
171
279
0-95

45

— d

91

84
175

15

18

13

27

45
118

57
0-29

67

ollars — ■

167

243

410

29

33

14

37

61

174

236

0-79

28

Sales. . . .

763

Home use

Value of harvest

227
990

Custom work

Machinery and horse

43
66

Miscellaneous. .

21

Taxes

Interest on investment at 4%

57
67

Total operating costs8

Net returns from forestry a

Returns per hour of labourb

254
736
1-67

a Excluding labour and change in inventory.
b Excluding change in inventory.

28

29

Operating costs, other than labour and change in inventory, amounted to
$171 per farm, leaving a net return of $279 per farm from forest activities
(Table 13). The average woodlot employed 294 hours of labour and supplied a
net return of 95 cents per hour of labour.

The most common woodlot activity for 91 per cent of the farmers was the
harvest of an annual crop of stove-wood. On 45 of the farms, fuelwood was
the only wood product cut during the year. The average value of production
on these farms was $175 for 12-4 cords of wood, or an average of $14.11 per
cord, at the farm, during the 1950-51 crop year. Operating costs averaged
$118 per farm leaving a net operating return, excluding labour, of $57 from
the year's forestry operations. An average of 193 hours of labour were
employed giving a return of 29 cents per hour of labour.

Sixty-seven of the 140 farms reported the main woodland product har-
vested to be fuelwood, although some sawlogs, posts, etc., were cut. In other
words, fuelwood was partly a by-product of the trees cut for sawlogs and
poles. Eighteen cords of fuelwood and 1,850 board feet equivalent of sawlogs,
43 posts, and miscellaneous products valued at $28 were harvested and valued
at an average of $410 per farm. The average hourly return to labour was
estimated to be 79 cents for an average of 299 hours of labour employed for
woodlot work.

Only 28 of the 140 farms were primarily engaged in harvesting sawlogs
during the 1950-51 crop year. These farms produced an average of 12,690
board feet equivalent of sawlogs, 15-7 cords of fuelwood, 71 posts, and $86
worth of miscellaneous products, the total value of which averaged $990
per farm. Operating returns were considerably higher than on farms engaged
in any other type of woodland activity and averaged $1.67 per hour for the
441 hours of labour employed on the average farm.

Other Values of the Woodlot

In addition to their value as revenue producers from the sale of forest
products and lumber for domestic consumption, the farm woodlot has many
values that cannot be accurately measured in dollars and cents.

Where woodlands exist, the problems of soil erosion are greatly minimized.
Loss of soil does not occur in areas covered with a thrifty tree growth. On
hilltops and steep slopes, woodlands hold back the flow of surface water to
the lower lying lands and by slowing up the force of these waters greatly
reduce their eroding power when they finally reach the cultivated farmlands.

As a protective influence, forest growth affords shelter from the wind
and sun. Not only are homes benefited, but great protection is given to farm
animals that spend most of their time outdoors. The woods also serve as a
home for wildlife, and keep streams clear and cool for fish.

Although it is neither possible nor necessary to attempt an economic
appraisal of these values, it is recognized that they greatly enhance the beauty
of the countryside and make attractive the conditions of living in rural areas.

MARKETING

Woodland products, and the process by which they are distributed and
manufactured, possess a number of characteristics distinguishing them from
many agricultural products. There are said to be over 4,000 commercial and
industrial uses for lumber and wood products, and the number is constantly
increasing. Just as there is a variety of timber products, so there is a variety
of markets for each product. However, all producers cannot avail themselves
of all types of markets. The location of sawmills and manufacturers of wood
products are widely scattered and it is not economically feasible for farmers
to sell all woodlot products in all types of markets.

30

The majority of the woodland products were purchased on an "at the
farm" basis. In other words, farmers were paid for their products on the
skidway and their responsibility ended at that point. Fifty-seven per cent
of the sawlogs, 59 per cent of the fuelwood, 61 per cent of the fence posts, and
all the Christmas trees and pulpwood were sold in this manner (Table 14).

Other farmers sold their products on a "delivered" basis at the mill.
Thirty-two per cent of the sawlogs, 41 per cent of the fuelwood and 96 per cent
of the poles were sold on this basis. One farmer who supplied 33 per cent of
the posts sold on a "delivered" basis at the railway, and still another sold
11 per cent of the total lumber "on the stump" basis.

Table 14.— Methods of Selling Wood Products, 162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Item

Unit

of
Sale

No. of

Farms

Reporting

Basis of Sale

At Farm

Delivered

On Stump

Delivered

to Railway

Car

Lumber and sawlogs

Fuelwood

Posts

Christinas trees

f.b.m.

cord

no.

no.

cord

no.

gal.

51

27
9
3
3
5

27

57

59

61

100

100

4

59

— per cent of total —

32 11
41
6

96 '.'.
39

33

Pulpwood

Poles

Maple syrup

2

There was considerable variation in the distance of haul for farmers who
transported their products to the mill. The average distance to the sawmill
was 11-4 miles, for farmers who transported their logs, but the distance ranged
from one-half mile to 90 miles. The farmer who transported his logs 90 miles
sold high-quality veneer logs. Fuelwood, a low-quality product, was shipped
an average of only 5 • 7 miles.

Logs are bulky and expensive to haul long distances. Whenever a
commodity like forest products has both bulk and low value, transportation
charges become important. When value is low, transportation charges on a
relatively short haul may offset the price paid at the mill for the product.
Thus, for economical transportation, low-value logs can be shipped only short
distances — the lower the value of logs the shorter the haul. Transportation
charges for sawlogs do not vary appreciably with the value of the product,
but depend largely upon volume and weight. Therefore, it becomes economi-
cally possible to transport high-quality, high-value logs much greater distances
than low-value logs.

Prices

The complexity of the markets for farm wood products and the numerous
species and grades of timber sold make it extremely difficult to present price
information of much significance. The typical farmer enumerated sold his
winter cutting of various species and grades of sawlogs to a local buyer for
a lump sum. The best timber was generally sold, and small quantities of the
lower grades of logs were used on the farm after being sawn into rough lumber.

The average price received by farmers per 1,000 board feet, log scale, was
$54 while the prices ranged from $30 to $100 and the typical or most common
price received was about $45. (Table 15). A considerable number of the
sawlogs sold were good quality hardwood such as maple, ash, elm, basswood
and walnut, going to industries engaged in the manufacture of furniture,

31

cabinets, plywood, flooring and the like, for prices considerably above the
average. Others sold such species as spruce, white, red and Scots pine,
tamarack, cedar and hemlock for prices ranging from about $30 to $65 per
1,000 board feet, log scale, at the farm.

Table 15.— Price of Wood Products, 162 Farms, Ontario, 1950-51

Item

Average Price

Range

Highest

Lowest

Sawlogs (log scale) (f.b.m.)

Pulpwood (rough) (cord)

Fuel wood (cord)

Posts (no.)

Poles (no.)

Christmas trees (no.)

$54.16

12.11

14.87

.34

4.08

.58

$100.00

20.00

.50

16.00

$30.00

a

8.00

.20

3.00

a Less than five farms reporting.

There was a wide variation in the prices received per cord of fuelwood, or
from $8 to $20 priced at the farm, in lengths of from 12 to 18 inches. The
average price received per cord was considerably higher in the western region
or about $18 as compared with $12 in the eastern area and about $15 for the
farms studied. On the average, cedar posts sold for 34 cents at the farm. The
majority of the posts sold were eight feet in length with a top diameter of six
inches or more, for which farmers were paid 30 cents. Cedar posts ten feet in
length sold for about 50 cents while 12-foot posts averaged 60 cents at the
farm.

Telephone and hydro poles were reported to be in good demand and sold
for an average of about $4.08 at the farm. A few very large poles were sold to
the building trade for an average of $16. Rough or unpealed pulpwood sold for
an average price of $12.11 per cord, on the skidway at the farm. Christmas
trees, largely Scots pine, sold for an average of 58 cents on the stump.

Problems

Since the production of timber is carried on by many farmers, the sellers in
the lumber market are therefore numerous and their offerings small. This
situation is similar to that of other farm products except that selling on a group
basis is less common in the case of wood products. This creates a char-
acteristic situation with respect to sellers' bargaining position in the market.
United action on the part of farmers in pooling their woodlot products and
selling them on a group basis to buyers of lumber is suggested as a possible
method of improving their bargaining power and, at the same time, increasing
their net income. No investment in equipment would be involved.

The general situation with regard to the marketing of farm woodlot
products has been described by the Woodlot Management Committee of the
Canadian Institute of Forestry as follows:

"Too often woodlot owners suffer from, and are discouraged by poor marketing.
Some buyers tend to take advantage of woodlot owners' frequent ignorance of
markets and sound marketing practices for various woodlot products. Bad
bargains through lump sum purchase, followed by destructive cutting, are fairly
frequent in some regions. The problem needs to be dealt with from both ends —
selling as well as buying — to promote fair and reasonably stable arrangements
that would favour sustained yield operating. Improvement of marketing pros-
pects with regard to prices, however desirable in itself, is apt to lead in many
cases to even greater abuse of woodlots, unless preceded by, or carried on jointly
with, an effective educational campaign on sound forestry".1

]A. Koroleff, Chairman, Woodlot Management Committee, Canadian Institute of Forestry.
Action Needed for Woodlot Management Promotion, Processed Bulletin.

32

Published current price information relating to various kinds and grades
of lumber is virtually non-existent. Current prices are available only by direct
application to buyers of such wood products as pulpwood, poles, posts, veneer
logs and fuelwood. It is necessary for sellers to check several markets before
making a sale in order to obtain the best price for their products. If the
quantity the farmer has to offer is small, the process of checking current market
prices is costly. It would seem desirable, therefore, to have current price
information relating to lumber prices at selected points in southern Ontario
made available to farmers to strengthen their position as sellers in the market.

Whereas the Ontario Department of Lands and Forests uses one log rule
in scaling timber, there is no one official rule used by the many buyers of timber.
This is confusing to farmers who, as a group, are not trained forestry men.
One log rule may have an over-run of up to 100 per cent, and instead of being
credited with 2,000 board feet, a farmer might possibly be paid for 1,000 board
feet. The use of one official log rule in scaling farm timber would permit
farmers to sell their products with a greater degree of confidence.

THE PRODUCTION OF MAPLE SYRUP

Most of the sugar bushes of Ontario are remnants of the old hardwood
forests which have been reserved for maple syrup production, because of the
predominance of maples in the stand. The intermingled trees of other species
have been gradually cut out or have died.

The maple crop is produced in a limited area although a few sugar maples
may be found on almost all Ontario farms. The production of maple products
is concentrated in eastern Ontario and the areas of western Ontario adjacent to
Georgian Bay and Lake Huron, where large concentrations of sugar maple may
be found (Figure 4). In terms of number of trees tapped and value of produc-
tion during 1940, Leeds County was the most important followed by Lanark,
Glengarry, Hastings, Frontenac and Simcoe counties.

The farm production of maple products declined rather steadily over the
years (Figure 5). Perhaps the most important limiting factor in the production
of maple products is the weather. The production of sap depends upon the
weather at sap time. A long period of relatively warm days and cool nights
from early March into mid-April gives the maximum yield. The interruption
of such a period by either long cold spells or early warm spells reduces the
output. Once the buds are opened, the harvest is over. The low production
during the years 1946, 1948, 1949 and 1951 may be largely attributed to
unfavourable weather conditions during harvest.

It will be noted in Figure 5 that the year to year price changes for maple
syrup followed the general level at wholesale prices and not the year to year
fluctuations in production. The price of maple syrup in Ontario declined fairly
steadily from 1925 to 1938 and has been increasing since that time with the
exception of the war years when price controls were placed upon the product.

FIGURE 4 MAPLE TREES TAPPED. BY COUNTIES,
SOUTHERN ONTARIO. 1940

SOURCE! CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE 1941
NUMBER OF TREES TAPPED

1

LESS THAN 50.000

2

50.000 TO 100,000

3

100,000 OR MORE

33

34

Of the 162 farms enumerated, only 38 produced maple syrup during the
crop year ended May 31, 1951. These farmers hung an average of 449 buckets
and produced 67-7 gallons of maple syrup valued at $289.16. The largest con-
centration of maple syrup producers enumerated was in Lanark Township, in
the northern part of Lanark County, with 15 farms and in Lobo Township, in
the western region, where eight farms reported its production. In the remain-
ing townships, the number of farms reporting production of maple products
ranged from one to four.

Returns from the Maple Syrup Enterprise

Information relating to production requirements such as equipment, labour,
fuel and containers was obtained from 30 farmers producing maple products.
Eight farms were excluded because of incomplete information or because the
enterprise was so small that the manufacture of maple syrup was almost
entirely a hand operation.

Index

260

220

180

140

100

60

20

(Index 1935-39 = 100)

V

Price of Maple Syrup

— — Production

General Wholesale Prices

•

T — I i l — | — I — r— i 1 — j 1 — i r— i — i 1 — i — i — i — i — i — i — i — i — i

1929 1934 1939 1944 1949

J — i — r

1924 1929 1934 1939 1944 1949 1954

Figure 5 — Relationship of the price of maple syrup to production and to the general
level of wholesale prices. Ontario, 1921-1951.

35

The largest single expense item was a $50 allowance for maple syrup
equipment, depreciation and repairs (Table 16). The average investment in
maple syrup equipment on farms producing maple syrup was $402 on June 1,
1950. The evaporator accounted for $180, an average of 449 buckets on hand
made up $140, and miscellaneous items, including a maple syrup house $82.
An allowance for interest on investment in equipment amounted to $20. This,
together with depreciation, gave an average charge of $70 for the use of maple
syrup equipment for the 1951 maple syrup crop year.

Maple syrup evaporating house. Maple, Ontario.

Fuel was an important item of expense on most of the farms studied and
averaged $38 per farm. Two farms reported the use of coal but most of the
remaining farms made use of low-quality non-saleable wood which would
otherwise be wasted. A charge was made for the use of machinery, including
tractors, sleighs, stone-boats, and power saws, together with horse labour,
amounting to about $27 per farm. Since much of the maple syrup was sold
to neighbours and friends in adjacent towns who supplied their own containers,
the average cost of this item was not large. The average farm utilized about
45 one-gallon containers valued at 35 cents each.

Excluding labour, taxes, and interest on the investment in the maple bush,
the total cost involved in the production of maple syrup, averaged $150.28
per farm. The value of the 78-4 gallons of syrup produced per farm was
$335.37, leaving a net income of $185.09. An average of 221-6 hours of labour
per farm was required in the production of maple syrup. The net returns
to labour from the maple syrup enterprise, therefore, averaged 84 cents per
hour.

36
Table 16.— Summary of Maple Syrup Costs and Returns, 39 Farms, Ontario, 1959-51

Item

Average

Per Farm

Pei' 100 Buckets

Costs a

Equipment, depreciation and repairs.
Interest on investment in equipment .

Fuel

Machinery and horse labour

Containers

Total

Returns

Value of production

Returns per hour of labour.
Returns per 100 buckets . .

Hours of labour

50.03

11.14

20.09

4.47

37.79

8.42

26.54

5.91

15.83

3.53

159.28

33 47

335.37

74.69

.84

41.22

221.6

49.4

a Excluding taxes, labour and interest on investment in the maple bush.

Based on an average of 449 buckets hung per farm, the production of
syrup in 1951 amounted to 17-4 gallons per hundred buckets. The average
expenses of production were $33.47 per hundred buckets hung, while the net
return for the use of labour and maple bush averaged $41.22.

Collecting maple sap in a sugar bush. Maple, Ontario.

On the basis of 1 • 2 buckets per tree, the average tree tapped produced
about 0-21 gallons of syrup or a net return of about 49 cents per tree.

37
Relation of Returns to Size of Enterprise

In order to determine the relationship of size of enterprise to returns, the
farms were divided into three groups of ten on the basis of volume of produc-
tion, and the costs and returns per hour of labour calculated (Table 17). The
group producing more than 90 gallons of maple syrup had a return of $1.04
per hour of labour as compared with 65 cents for the group producing 41 to 90
gallons and 53 cents for the farms producing from 12 to 40 gallons.

The average enterprise studied utilized 449 buckets, but the number of
buckets ranged from 50 to 2,200 per enterprise. Farms producing from 12
to 40 gallons of syrup used 139 buckets, those producing 41 to 90 gallons used
365 and farms producing 91 gallons or more made use of an average of 842
buckets per farm.

The greatest savings in large-scale production may be attributed to the
more efficient use of labour. Only 2 • 3 hours of labour were required per gallon
of syrup on farms making more than 91 gallons. Farms producing between 41
and 90 gallons of syrup required 3-2 hours while those producing less than 40
gallons required 5 • 1 hours. This phenomenon may be explained by the fact
that the farms which produced small quantities of syrup tended to utilize more
old-fashioned equipment and conducted their operations in a more leisurely
manner than did the larger producers. It is important to appreciate that the
typical maple syrup producer is the small-scale operator. These farmers
generally have a certain amount of leisure time during this period, and their
efficiency in the use of labour and equipment is not necessarily the most
important consideration which they must make in planning their operations.

Some savings, however, do come about through more efficient use of
machinery and equipment. Investment in machinery and equipment amounted
to $6.38 per gallon of syrup produced on farms making from 12 to 40 gallons
as compared with only $4.22 per gallon on farms producing more than 91 gallons.

Table 17.— Relation of Size of Enterprise to Costs and Returns per Farm from Maple Syrup

Operations, 30 Farms, Ontario, 1951

Item

Average Production of Maple Syrup
per Farm — gallons

12—40

41—90

91 or more

Number of buckets hung

Investment in maple syrup equipment.
Hours of labour

Costsa

Equipment: Depreciation and repairs
Interest on investment in equipment.

Fuel..

Machinery and horse labour

Containers

Total

Returns

Value of product

Returns per hour of labour

139

$166

133

21-61
8-31

19-20
9-17
1-44

59-73

122-00
•53

365

$405

195

-dollars — '

49-13
20-27
32-14
26-09
11-31

138-94

274-00
•65

842
634
336

79-36
31-67
62-03
44-35
34-76

252- 17

61000
104

aExcluding labour, taxes and interest on investment in the maple bush.

38

Labour Requirements

There were wide variations in the labour requirements in maple syrup
production. The average farm for which information on costs was available
produced 78-4 gallons of syrup requiring 222 hours of labour, or 2-8 hours per
gallon of syrup. The task of evaporating the sap into maple syrup took the
largest amount of labour or 89 hours per farm. This job included the cleaning
of the evaporator, starting and stoking the fire, and attending to the task of
evaporating the sap. The second most time-consuming job was the gathering of
sap which required 83 hours. Other labour requirements were as follows: 20
hours for tapping, 25 hours for cleaning up and putting away the equipment
and 5 hours for miscellaneous work.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1 . Burns, Paul Y., Value of Woodlot Management in Missouri, University of
Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station, Circular 349, July 1950.

2. Carter, R. M., Woodlot Economics on Vermont Dairy Farms, Vermont Agricul-
tural Experiment Station, Bulletin 554, January 1950.

3. Chandler, John M., The Place of Woodland in the Farm Organization in Coos
County, New Hampshire. New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station,
Bulletin 337, June 1942.

4. Duerr, William A., The Economic Problems of Forestry in the Appalachian
Region, Harvard University Press, 1949.

5. Guise, Cedric H., The Management of Farm Woodlands, 1st Edition 1939.
McGraw-Hill Co. Inc., New York.

6. Halliday, W. E. D., A Forest Classification for Canada, Canada Department of
Resources and Development, Forest Research, Bulletin No. 89, 1937, reprinted
1952.

7. Johnson, Hugh A., Irving Fellows, and Donald Rush, Bureau of Agricultural
Economics, and C. R. Lockard and C. E. Behre, Forest Service, United States
Department of Agriculture. Woodland Opportunities on Dairy Farms in New
York, published by the United States Department of Agriculture and the Charles
Lathrop Pack Forestry Foundation, Washington, D.C., 1944.

8. Koroleff A., Practical Woodlot Management, 3rd Edition, Canadian Forestry
Association, 679 Belmont Street, Montreal, 1948.

9. Lattimer, J. E., The Farm Woodlot in Nova Scotia. Mimeographed Bulletin,
Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Marketing, 1949.

10. MacLeod, Allan, and John Chandler, The Marketing of Farm Woodland Prod-
ucts in Carroll County, New Hampshire. New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment
Station, Bulletin 318, December 1939.

11. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests, Toronto, Report of the Ontario Royal
Commission on Forestry 1947.

12. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests, 1947, Forest Tree Planting.

13. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests Bulletin, 1947, The Farm Woodlot.

14. Richards, E. S., Farm Woodlots in Eastern Canada. Prepared under the direction
of the Associate Committee on Forestry of the National Research Council of
Canada, Ottawa, 1939.

15. United States Department of Agriculture, 1949 Yearbook, Trees.

16. Westveld, R. H., and the late Ralph H. Peck, Forestry in Farm Management,
2nd Edition 1951. John Wiley and Sons Inc.

17. West Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Circular 82, Christmas Trees —
Their Profitable Production in West Virginia.

39

CAL/BCA OTTAWA K1A 0C5

3 9073 0020861 5 7

EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G., O.A., D.S.P.

QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY

OTTAWA, 1953