Historic, archived document

Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

bor Recovery From Douglas-fir Thinnings ataBandmilland ... *

or bECHON ORD UR Ane RENT proc ae SER ; CURRE ge

4 2507 THOMAS D. FAHEY and DOUGLAS ke HUNT,

PACIFIC NORTHWEST FOREST AND RANGE EXPERIMENT TATION. US. DEPARTMENT OF i

GRICULTURE~ _— FOREST SERVICE

AZO

AUTHORS Thomas D. Fahey is a Forester with the Quality of Western Softwoods

Project at the Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.

4) Douglas L. Hunt is a Forest Products Technologist in the Timber

Management Division of Region 6 of the National Forest System.

sfeate ste she stente ste afe she ate ote ofe ofr nfs afe she afer ofe abe she afer nfe abe she nh fe abe ef afr ofr nf afr afro

ABSTRACT

Trees cut in thinning of Douglas-fir stands were processed into

lumber at a profiled cant chipper, a Square cant chipper with resaw, and a bandmill.

Results are reported in terms of both cubic feet and Scribner

long log scale. Included are tables by log input by diameter class for three studies, recovery by lumber grade and dimension item for three studies, and value and recovery by diameter class for the square and profiling canters. Recovery totals for all three studies in both lumber and chips are also reported.

Keywords: Lumber, recovery ratios, thinning (trees), sawmill equipment.

INTRODUCTION

Commercial thinning of young Douglas-fir stands is a rapidly increas- ing portion of the total timber harvested in the Pacific Northwest. New logging and sawmilling equipment and increasing demand for forest products have combined to make operations in younger and smaller stands commercially feasible. Very little information is available on lumber grade recovery, overrun, or chip recovery from this portion of the resource.

In 1968 Region 6 of the National Forest System in cooperation with the Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Exper- iment Station, the Bureau of Land Manage- ment, and three mills initiated a series of lumber recovery studies on thinning materials from Douglas-fir stands. The material was processed between January and April 1970 through a conventional bandmill, a 10-inch-maximum cant-size Square-canting chipper (Beaver) with resaw, and a 12-inch-center-cant profiling chipper with double arbor circular saws for cant breakdown (Chip-N-Saw Model 1242-60).

The information on lumber and chip recovery will be useful to mill oper- ators and timber managers in predicting product yields of logs from similar stands and in evaluating different production methods as logs of this type are used more.

il ies 5 Mentton of compantes or products does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

STUDY PROCEDURES

TIMBER SAMPLING AREAS

The samples were taken from well-stocked Douglas-fir stands less than 100 years old (table 1) located on the Mount Hood National Forest in Oregon.

The sample trees were selected to improve growing conditions for the thriftier trees, to salvage incipient or existing mortality, or to improve stand spacing. The material processed at the Chip-N-Saw and at the bandmill was from the same stand, with only a road separating the two areas. The material processed at the Beaver was from two widely separated stands.

Because the bandmill had no effective diameter limit, some larger trees were included in the sample (tables 1 and 2).

LOG SCALING AND GRADING

The woods-length logs were scaled and graded in the mill yard by a U.S. Forest Service check scaler. Scaling was according to uniform scaling bureau rules for west side,—’ with logs up to 40 feet in length being scaled as one piece. Logs were graded according to rules for Douglas-fir logs in the standing tree.2 Defects not visible on the log surface were not considered in grading.

g Offtetal log sealing and grading rules. Revised as needed.

g Log grade descriptions for Douglas-fir. Form R6-2440-19D (March 1965). Unpublished material on file at U.S. Forest Serv., Regton 6, Portland, Oreg.

Table 1.--Stand characteristics of sampling areas

Characteristic

Stand age (years) Site class Basal area/acre (square feet) Basal area cut/acre (square feet) Average d.b.h. (inches) D.b.h. range (inches) Log scaling defect (percent)

Table 2.--Log input by diameter class as a percent of net Scribner scale and gross cubic volumes

flunber|Seribner| Cubic _|HMunber|Scribner Cubic

F Beaver Diameter

(inches)

4 46 2.35 5 285 14.28 6 199 19.55 7 161 20.88 8 137 Alods 9 62 12.4] 10 32 7.82 11 4 .96 12 0 -- 13 0 -- Total 926 100.0

Beaver

II]

100.0

565

Clackamas County

Beaver

Pereent

] 20. We iss “As ee

8.

Se

100.

-65

39 83 96 43 69 U7

0

1.75 75 29.52 214 15.11 68 12.39 66 19.79 66 11.54 31 6.74 18 3.16 10

== 13 = 6 100.0 567

Chip-N-Saw

Number |Scribner

Hood River County

Bandmi 11

100.0

Bandmi 11

100.0

CUBIC MEASUREMENTS

Cubic measurements were made on sawmill length, bucked and barked logs. The cubic volume of a wood length log was determined by adding the cubic volume of the mill length segments, with diameters recorded to the nearest inch. The cubic volume of the segments was determined by Smalian's formula. No deductions were made from gross cubic volume measurements. Cubic volumes of lumber were calculated by computer, based on sample measurements of actual rough green lumber width and thickness and on nominal lumber lengths.

PROCESSING AND INDIVIDUAL MILL SETUP

In the woods each mill length log was given a number identifying the tree and the log position in the tree. At the mill, lumber was identified with the mill length and scaling length log and tree from which it came.

The bandmill had a debarker, band headrig for primary breakdown, recipro- cating gangsaw, two edgers, a vertical band resaw, and gang trim saw. Grading and tallying of boards was done on the green chain. Due to very difficult condi- tions in the mill, several errors were made in assigning log sequential numbers to some or all of the boards from several logs. Recovery by log or by diameter class cannot be accurately given. However, total log scale in and total lumber recovery out can be compared with the other two studies.

The equipment with the Beaver included a debarker, vertical band resaw with recycling chains, an edger, and a 24-foot gang trim saw. Grading and tallying were done on the green chain.

The output from the Chip-N-Saw

was put into the production flow from a conventional mill which was sawing other lumber also. The edger and trim saw were inside the main mill. Grading and tallying were done on the chain from the canter to the main mill. Because of plant layout there was more pencil trim and rip*/ at this mill than at the other two, but because of the soundness of the material, less than 10 percent of the total pieces were either trimmed or ripped.

CHIP RECOVERY

At all three mills, an empty chip bin or car was provided. All study chips were put in one shipment. The weight and moisture content of the chips were determined in the standard manner by the chip purchaser, and the total number of ovendry tons was. determined from the shipment or car number. At the Chip-N- Saw, material pencil trimmed or ripped was excluded from the lumber tally. Since actual trimming or ripping was done at the main mill, these chips were not included in the reportedchip recovery. The actual chip recovery would be very little higher than reported here. Pencil trim and rip at the other two mills would be insignificant.

LUMBER GRADING

All lumber was graded in the rough green condition by inspectors from the West Coast Lumber Inspection Bureau or Pacific Lumber Inspection Bureau. Each piece was given its anticipated surfaced

4 Reduction in length or wtdth marked by the grader when he assumed such remanufacture would be done beyond the point at whitch he was grading.

green erade. 2/ Pencil trim and rip, or both, were also designated by the grade inspector. Pencil trim was used to up- grade a board only when it could reason- ably be assumed that the same decision would be made at the planer chain.

LUMBER TALLY

Lumber was tallied by Forest Service crews working immediately after the grader. Each board was tallied by width, thickness, length, grade, and the identification number of the log from which itcame. Pencil trim and rip were deducted from the actual length and width as the boards were tallied.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The results are listed in a series of tables (tables 3-6). Table 3 is the lumber recovery by lumber grade and dimension item for each of the study mills. Table 4 is the recovery by lumber grade for each log diameter class for the Beaver and Chip-N-Saw, and the totals for the bandmill. Table 5 is the total value and volume, recovery per unit volume, and value per unit volume by diameter class for the Beaver and Chip-N-Saw and totals for the bandmill. Table 6 summarizes information from the other tables and includes chip recovery.

The tables are set up to allow the user to supply any set of grade, item, or chip prices to recompute values. The values assigned to various grades and

° West Coast Lumber Inspectton Bureau. Number 15, Standard grading and dressing rules for Douglas fir west coast hemlock, Sttka spruce, western red cedar lumber. Rev. Feb. 15, 1968. Portland, Oreg.

items can produce wide variations in total and unit values.

Diameter limits expressed in the grading rules caused all logs at both the Beaver and the Chip-N-Saw to be graded Number 3 Sawmill. There were 19 logs at the bandmill large enough to be graded Number 2 Sawmill. Since individual log recovery was not obtained at the bandmill, there was no analysis by grade. This refinement is probably not necessary since, other than diameter, there were no external differences between grade 2 and grade 3 logs.

Among the three mills, there were some obvious differences in the volume and grade of lumber items produced, as well as in the volume of chips per unit of log input.

These differences bear out the common assumption that a bandmill will produce more overrun and less chips than a chipping type headrig. It is also commonly held that most of the increase in overrun at a bandmill will be in the form of 1-inch lumber. The bandmill overrun was 168 percent compared with 138 percent for the Beaver. Of this difference only 16 percent could be attributed to differences in 1-inch lumber production. Of the bandmill's 29-percent difference from the Chip-N-Saw, only 6 percent was attributable to 1-inch boards. Evidently the versatility of the bandmill increases recovery of more than just 1-inch boards.

The ability to vary production by lumber size was very limited on the Chip-N-Saw. The bandmill was virtually unlimited but heavily weighted toward 2-inch dimension by the gang saw. The Beaver, except for the initial 10- by 10-inch cant size, was limited only by resaw capacity. A large majority of the

Table 3.--Percent of total production by grade, dimension, and mill

Dimension Select . a Gnenes) Secor al Construction Standard Utility Economy Total ----------------- Pereent - - ---------------- Beaver: 1x4 as V/9.54 0.04 9.05 0.02 0.65 1x 6 Se 2/ (33 .03 2/ 05 04 45 EXE -- LEO .38 .16 .04 1.68 2 Se uh 5.16 17.58 4.65 1.85 sore} 29.62 CaxXeo 4.32 7.92 2.84 12 .46 16.26 2x8 Hols 1.38 .70 .03 -- 3.24 2x 10 -- .05 -- -- -- .05 4x 4 3.09 4] .50 2.97 -49 -- 48.05 Total 13.70 70.40 61 3.35 .94 100.00 Chip-N-Saw: 1x4 BEDS 3.07 0.56 0.47 0.21 7.84 1 36 .02 3/ .20 oh 12 3/ 28 74 2 xe el Ws 20.28 Soe 3.55 1.65 43.97 26 11.47 15.19 2.49 1.80 .82 Sow Be 3} 5.59 6.63 .48 28 24 13.22 2x 10 .83 Lola -42 07 -- 2.46 Total 34.61 46.51 9.39 6.29 S50) 100.00 Bandmil1: lx 3 0.01 0.47 OsT2 0.05 0.01 0.66 Ix @ oor 6.22 1.56 .79 29 9.23 I x-6 .01 37 .09 05 -- 52 1x8 ES 4/ 05 02 es a3 4/ 07 2x 3 03 37 608} 02 -- 45 2x4 2.82 20.35 4.27 1.67 .62 29.73 2x 6 1.86 19.78 7 otl® Cen . 26 Ss7/l 2x8 9] 11.50 is//S) 1.05 -- 19.21 2x 10 ~45 3.90 2.31 .54 -- 1 (0) 2% 2 BOW 51538} sl -- -- Ie: 3" & thicker, 4" & wider .04 .30 sl -- .01 50 Total 6.57 63.84 CONE 6.28 1.19 100.00

J/ Includes 0.01 percent 1 x 3. 2/ Includes 0.05 percent 1 x 8. 3/ Includes 0.01 percent 1 x 8. 4/ Includes 0.02 percent 1 x 10.

Table 4.--Lumber grade recovery as a percent of lumber tally volume

by diameter class and mill

Diameter Number Select + F nay Ginches) af lows | Stauciural Construction | Standard | Utility | Economy ------------ Pereent - - - ----=----- -

Beaver: 4 46 [6 IBC Wes 4.6 3h3 5 285 10.0 56 10.7 Be 25 6 199 8.1] 78.0 8.8 3.4 1.7 7 161 Wo 6ORS Wed Jol 8 8 137 16.1 66.7 12.4 328 V0 9 62 (22 If 63.7 WO 1.69 a] 10 32 16.1 65.0 14.5 4.2 52 1] 4 21.8 525 AS 18.2 --

Total 926 1Ws7/ 70.4 11.6 Soll! 9

Chip-N-Saw: 4 28 sd S05 7/ 23) (2 23.8 OF 5 244 27.8 50.6 SZ 6.8 3.6 6 10] Sita] 47.5 9.6 5.9 229 7 63 34.0 47.8 8.4 es 20, 8 74 44.6 43.7 So // 3.9 Oni 9 32 36.5 46.8 8 a// SZ 10 17 38.7 43.4 9.4 3o// 4.8 11 6 38h) 3552 W253 9.3 4.5

Total 565 34.6 46.5 9.4 6.3 See

Bandmill,

Total 567 6.6 63.8 (Les 6.3 Nez

"quedo yoUuL-Q| Aq youL-oQ{ AiLoedes wnuixey =

"G9" ge$ “Awouorg $29°G9$ *AIL1L3N $68°ZOL$ ‘49779q B PAepueIsS :aJe pasn sadlud 4aquny]

L0°¥89 92° L9L LL 66 €6°S9e Sb 98°9 LS Gales maymleee9 89L vSL°€p o0S0°92 028‘92 [210]

“| LLwpueg

69°8SS yL°9EL Gt 86 OL'SPL‘€ 19°S On L°8ZS°2 7629S 6€L 9V6°LE OOO‘EZ Oz6‘Ez [e101 89°09 Le*22l €5°96 €9°ZOL 12°9 LS 1°06 fe Riel l2L GLL‘L 088 026 LL 00° 28S €ySLL er 86 G9" zzz 96°S 8t O'r8L €°6LE OzL z92°2 = O88 L 006‘L OL 76°2L9 Ov 9EL LL°86 62° 86€ L2°9 0S Sie 8° 619 < sil SE0‘p 0z6°Z oe0‘€ 6 62° 69S Ge"82l 60° O0L 10° v9 09°S 9n L°S1s Seeliel 8zL See‘9 OF‘ 090‘ 8 L9° L6v LL°8OL 02°86 €0°Lve 70'S 9¢ 0° 182 7 169 OLL 9LS*€ Olz‘e ocece M 62° 66h 29° €0L 82°86 $8" v2p G0'S Lt 6 bre 6068 SOL log‘y = OOL Sv Ozb't 9 70° 69S 79° LOZ 70°86 69°St6 08° Ly ene 6° 199‘ L 902 979°6 069° 068‘ t G 96° SEL LL°OLL L1°88 68°19 97° Z 09 0°65 9°86 r6L 9€L O8e Olv y

:MeS-N-dLU9

9g" 7eS L0°6E€L 20° LOL 0€° 606‘ P 62'S Sp 6°SELl‘h 8° E8L‘6 8EL 665°8h O0€'SE OLL‘SE Leq0] 22° S8b z2€°20L LL°96 6L' ve G0°S ep ole WUE 90L Z9€ Ove Ove /zll 82° L6S 70° LZL 02° LOL 90° ree G8" 0S 2° 182 G* 19S OZL loste Oke? OLL‘2 OL BLESS 96°2r1L eZ" LOL S1°929 a On S125 Gullelitel Lvl GSL°9 —O8E ‘F OLb‘t 6 69° LzS L6°2vL €8°O0L €5° 260‘ L LLG vY 5° 926 8°€0L ‘2 raul 688‘OlL 0892 OLL‘L 8 €0°Z1S 09°/ZL 22° LOL bb" 0v6 90°S er L162 L9€85L 921 l6z‘6 = OLE 00S‘Z Ll 68°9LS LE9LL €5°O0L £6°208 vL'S by 6289 py €SS‘L 9LL L86‘L 0069 OLO‘L 9 8L° £95 EL“ Z8L 8€° LOL vl" £6 95° Lt £062 6°29‘ | S8L €0€°6 Or0'S 080°S G ve E25 76°9S1 90°66 92°0€L 82°S St 8°OLL 6 8hz 8S | Gleb 068 ogg t

:uaneag

awnLoA Bol aLeos AL Ley awn,OA Bo, dLqnd|uaqun, se} uvaqun| sho, apeos yae4 ssoub *44°n9 Bo, zau 4waquin | 03 AL Lez uaquin, |pauarodau 40 SUN LOA you Jo pueog (sayout) W/S4eLLoq 49gW/S4eLlLod | 4qw/sueL log 004-purog qyuadded aun LOA SSOUQ |jUadUad sy} [e JO] daqaue iq

$0 O170Y

awn oA 9Lqng A, (ey uaqunq AauglLuos

S[ LW dau4y} UOJ SSeLD UaqaweLp Ho, Aq awnj,OA ALUN wad anjeA pue AUXBaAODOU Uaquin]--"G aLqel

Table 6.--Summary of three processing alternatives

Characteristic Chip-N-Saw Bandmi11

Average weighted scaling diameter 6.6 6.4 6.6 Percent defect ] = 3 Percent Select Structural!/ 3e/7/ 34.6 6.6 Percent Construction!/ 70.4 46.5 63.8 Percent Standardl/ 11.6 9.4 2A Percent Utilityl/ 3.4 6.3 6.3 Percent Economy!/ 9 352 12 Overrun percent 38 39 68 Percent cubic recovered as lumber 45 46 5] $/MBF lumber tally2/ 101.02 98.45 99.77 $/MBF net log scale3/ 139.07 136.74 167.76 $/M cubic feet 534.56 558.69 684 .07 Chip recovery, dry tons4/ 77.63 5/35.80 25.48 Dry tons/M net log scale 2.20 1.56 -98 Dry tons/M cubic feet of logs 8.453 6.360 33993

a West Coast Lumber Inspection Bureau. No. 15, Standard grading and

dressing rules for Douglas fir, west coast hemlock, Sitka spruce, western red cedar lumber. Rev. Feb. 15, 1968. Portland, Oreg.

2/ Lumber prices used are: Standard & Better, $102.89; Utility, $65.62; Economy, $38.65.

3/ Official log scaling and grading rules. Revised as needed. ay dry ton equals 2,000 pounds of ovendry chips.

5/ Does not include chips from trimming or edging done in the main sawmill (estimated maximum 0.30 dry ton).

4x4's produced at the Beaver were produced by resawing larger cants.

Although the variation in lumber grades is partly a function of the items produced, it seems to be largely due to variations in sawing and trimming decisions. There was little variation in knot size among trees from the different samples. The difference in the percent of utility was largely due to mismanufacture and defects not trimmed; economy lumber was apparently related to the difference in percent of scaling defect among the mills.

< GPO—795-892

This relationship occurs in most lumber recovery studies.

One reason for the high percentage of Select Structural lumber from the Chip-N-Saw was the production of lumber with very little wane. Under the provisions of standard grading and dressing rules for Douglas-fir® and given a limited variation in knot size, wane would be the most important single factor in degrading lumber from Select Structural to Construction or Standard grade.

6 See footnote 5.

, O00000 0 000D0 0-0-0 0 016-0 070-6200" O90t0-0=0 LG 0-0, OOO ON Oy G20: 0 0-020 B2070 OS DD Oe O DOO Oe

*yuourdtInbos [[IMMeES

‘(so0a}) Sutuuty) ‘sorter ATOAODeI S1equIN]T :sp1oMAoy

*AIOAODVI Ayo [e101 pus

‘QUINJOA dIqnd pUe TOUGILOG BO] SUOT 1OJ S1OJOVJ ATOAODOI

‘UOISUOUIIp pue opeas Aq ATOAODIAI TOquUIN] epnjoUT pey1oder

sjnsey “[[fupueq e pue ‘zoddryo yueo peptjoad ve ‘1eddiyo

yueo orenbs e& :SspoyjJeU oATJVUIER[e 9O1Y) Aq TEquIN] OVUT pessoooid 910M pues I1J-se[snog & SUIUUTY} UT ynd See.

"30190 ‘Spueytodg ‘uolei1g JUSUTIIOEdXY osuBY PUB {SATO JSOMYIION ortoed “d6 ‘TSI-MNd “ded ‘soy *Atag 1S9104 YASN ‘*Sazoequeo Surddryo om) pue [[Twpuegq B 18 SSUIUUTYY IljJ-se[snoq wourj A19AODeA TEquINT °ZL6T juny] “IT sejsnog pue ‘°q sewmoyy SAoyey

6 0006 0 6 2 6 O20 801 O20 50 Oo Se Oe Oe On a OO. OO: DSO OOO tO OO ie Ci OS ae ooh

*yuoudinbe [[IUIMeS ‘(soor}) Suruuty) ‘somer ATOAODOA SAOquINT :spr1oMAdy{

*ALOAODVI AYO [e}0} pue

‘QUINOA OIqnNd pue IOUqTLOG BOT SUC] OJ S10jOvJ ATOAODOI

‘uOIsUeUIp pue aper3 Aq ATOAODOI IOquIN] OpnpoUT poey1ode.t

s}[nsey *[[Twpueg e pue ‘zoddtyo yueo pojijoad e ‘aoddtyo

queo orenbs & :spoyjow oATJeUIO}[e 9014} Aq AOqUIN] OUT possedoid 010M puejs I1J-Selsnog & SUIUUTY} UI jno S901],

‘3010 ‘pue]j1od ‘uoT1e1S JUOUTIIEdXY osuLY pue }SOTOT JSOMYIION orroeqd °d6 ‘TEIT-MNd “ded “sey “Areg ysoI0q VGSN °*Ssazequeo Surddiyo om} pue [[Tupueq B 18 SSUIUUIY) ITjJ-sejsnoq worzj ATOAODET TequUINT “ZLET yun, “JT sejsnog pue ‘°q sewoyy SAoyey

el ielie! die lela) eke ie) ole) eo) (ae; 0! /e@) \¢)\e) 16), 18) ee) 16°18 0) 8 eo. /8,

eee ee

cece eee

cece ee @

*-yuourdinbe |jTWMeS ‘(so0a}) SutuuTyy ‘soryer ATeAODSI S1aquINn'T :sSpromAoy

*AIOAODVL ATyoO [e40} pue

‘QUIN[OA OIqNd pUv IOUGIIOg SO] SUOT 1OF S1OJORJ ATAAODOA

‘uoIsuoUIIp pue opers Aq ATOAODEI JEqUIN] epnjoUT pey10de1

sjnsoy *[[fupueq e pue ‘zeddryo yueo pettyjord e ‘aeddryo

yueo orenbs e& :spoyjour oATeUIE}e 9e1Y} Aq TOqUIN] OJUT pesseooid o10M pueys ITJ-se[snog & SUTUUTY} UT yno Soot],

‘S010 ‘pue]j1od ‘uoleig JUOTIIIOdxXY osuey pue 4S910,J JSOMYIION coytoed = °d 6 ‘TSI-MNd ‘ded ‘sey ‘Ares 10104 VYaGSN ‘*Satoejueo Sutddryo omy pue [[Tupueg e 78 SSUTUUTY} ITJ-selsnoqg worj ATOAOOOA AequiNyT “ZL6T juny “7 sejsnog pue ‘*q sewoyy ‘Aoyey

*yuouTdInbe {[[TUIMeS ‘(g901}) Suruury) ‘somes AToAooeI Stoquin'y :SpLlOMAdy]

*ALOAOOOI AYO [ej0} pue

‘QUINJOA OIqnd pUe TOUGILOg GO] SUO] 1OJ S10}0BJ ALIOAODOI

‘uorsueulIp pue opers Aq ATOAODeA JequIN] spn[our poyzoder

sj[nsoy *][rurpueq e pue ‘zeddryo yueo petjord v ‘redd1yo

queo orenbs & :spoyjoU oATJVUIE;[e 9e1Y} AQ TEqUIN] O}UT pesseooid o10M pues IIJ-SBpsnog & SUTUUTY} UL yNd SoOLL

"8010 ‘pue]y1od ‘uoT}eIG JUOUIIOUXY osuULY PUB {SOTO JSOMYIION oroeg + ‘d6 ‘TSI-MNd “dtd “sey *Ateg jse10q VASO ‘Siejueo sutddtyo omy pue [[fupueq B 18 SSuruury} ITJ-sep~snog woszj AteAODeI TEquINT “ZL6T juny] “I sejsnog pue ‘°q sewoyy ‘Aoyey

The mission of the PACIFIC NORTHWEST FOREST AND RANGE EXPERIMENT STATION is to provide the knowledge, technology, and alternatives for present and future protection, management, and use of forest, range, and related environments.

Within this overall mission, the Station conducts and stimulates research to facilitate and to accelerate progress toward the following goals:

1. Providing safe and efficient technology for inventory, protection, and use of resources.

2. Development and evaluation of alternative methods and levels of resource management.

3. Achievement of optimum sustained resource produc- tivity consistent with maintaining a high quality forest environment.

The area of research encompasses Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and, in some cases, California, Hawaii, the Western States, and the Nation. Results of the research will be made available promptly. Project headquarters are at:

Fairbanks, Alaska Portland, Oregon Juneau, Alaska Olympia, Washington Bend, Oregon Seattle, Washington Corvallis, Oregon Wenatchee, Washington

La Grande, Oregon

The FOREST SERVICE of the U.S>Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation's forest resources for sustained* yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation, Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National Grasslands, it strives — as directed»by Congréss.— to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation.