Historic, archived document
Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.
p4A/
a Virginia
FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
; i : ’ : J
FOREST SERVICE Ss - United States Department of Agriculture a _ Miscellaneous Publication No. 681
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Many individuals assisted in assembling material for this report. Special acknowledgments are due to Ralph M. Nelson who gathered much of the basic information for the first draft. Much credit is also due E. V. Roberts, Regional Survey Director at the time of the field survey (1940). Field inventory was under the direction of John Carow. Data on inventory, growth, and drain were compiled under the direction of G. E. Morrill, T. C. Evans, A. D. Toler, A. S. Todd, Jr., and J. F. McCormack. Unit reports were prepared by J. W. Cruikshank, W. A. Duerr, T. C. Evans, G. E. Morrill, and Thomas Lotti. J. W Girard had principal responsibility for the prep- aration of volume tables. The statistical check of this report was made by Mary L. Denoyer and Agnes Creasman.
IUNITED SAGE SDB ek AeR EE NMeEeN Or AG REC ULE URE
MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION NO. 681 WASHINGTON, D. C., APRIL 1949
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
23 OK
RONALD B. CRAIG, forest economist
SOUTHEASTERN FOREST EXPERIMENT STATION FOREST SERVICE
juNiTeD STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE ¢ WASHINGTON © 1949 | 4 f
ike
= 13 4 OR sare BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, WASHINGTON 25, D.C. - - - = - PRICE 50 CENTS a
The Forest Survey
United States. Postwar demands for housing, paper, and other forest products}7 both at home and abroad have further emphasized the need for abundant timber] resources and for dependable information concerning them.
One-third of the Nation’s productive land is available for and suited to the growing off! timber. Maintenance of ample timber supplies on this vast area is both a public and private responsibility. ‘This involves long-time planning and a reliable knowledge of forest conditions} , and forest-products requirements. Authentic facts must be gathered concerning the location} and condition of existing and prospective forests and forest lands, depletion and growth, and present and probable future requirements for forest products. To obtain such facts, Congress by the McSweeney-McNary Forest Research Act of May 22, 1928, authorized the} Nation-wide Forest Survey. |
The fivefold purpose of the survey is: (1) To determine the extent, location, and condition of forest lands, and species, quantity, and quality of timber on these lands; (2) to ascertain
\ ), 7 ORLD WAR II proved that timber is one of the indispensable resources of the
of timber cut for industrial and domestic uses, and the losses from fire, insects, disease, sup-} pression, and other causes; (4) to ascertain the present and probable future trend in require- ments for forest products by all classes of consumers; and (5) to interpret these findings and | correlate them with other economic factors as a basis for formulating public and private policies for effective and rational use and management of land suitable for forest production.
Results of the Forest Survey are published in a series of reports that aim to supply general information for a long-time program of planning for timber production and some detailed information of use in guiding forest-industry development. In this appraisal no attempt is made to evaluate the use of forests for watershed protection, wildlife, recreation, or grazing) ~ even though such services of the forest are often of paramount importance.
The information presented here is applicable to Virginia and to major physiographic provinces within the State; it furnishes the background for intensive studies of critical situa- tions, but it is not designed to reflect conditions by counties.
RAYMOND D. GARVER, Director, Forest Survey. Th
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
Contents
Page Page Summary of survey findings................ 1 The forest-products industries—Continued ) ) P /The State: its environment and resources... . 4 UIE TE WO OG yes He NT Sayer en ae 38 elnystOeraplniGspLOVIDCESS ens h ee. 4 Miinestimlbers'< i sateen ene eo ee 38 NiaitunalecesOuUnCeSte ss es eee 5 Fence posts and hewn ties: <2... 39 Social and industrial conditions......... 6 Miscellaneous industries: 222% 53, es 39 Population and employment......... 7 Summary of county production......... 40 PNOTTCUIGUIRC es aa aisgs penne toe i Employment: sone eer ee ear 40 INA Keven DUENCLAO) cuakerse ss inate ie aig eerein 9 Uae 7 Logging and milling waste.............. 41 Transportation. ...--.-....-..-.-.. 8 Forest increment and commodity drain...... 42 Land use......-.-- +--+. +2222 ects ee 9 Horest 1nCrement eerie os ete 42 Forest-land use.........-......---- 9 Mortality. 3. ee eee ae 42 Forest-land ownership.............. 11 Net board-foot increment........... 45 | The forest, resource. ...... +2. --2.-- 20-0 2e- 12 Net increment of entire stand........ 45 | Early history.....-.-.......-..-.-.... 12 Netincrement:peracres 1 45 Present Seo tae SEE SCE eR ii aaee ya sas Ne 13 Commodity draimn yes es oer: 46 Forest description Sp Oa Uae one eae 15 Saw-timber drain te oo orc ss 46 SIUC ee nae Hen eae Cay ae 13 DramyinecordSi a mee er 46 . ee ae eo es ee - Comparison of forest increment and drain, Sere ee eee 1940-45. ee 47 INC CEOLStamMGSi ey oe eae Coes ce 20 ee aT 48 eee 50 Saw-timber balance.css 2s eit Sa S . BE ae a 71 Balancesinicords 2s 2 ate 49 Bie col ae oe : e Ba ere see a Trends in composition of growing ES eee ees ee ae StOCK (x5 nee eee ee eae 49 Sawai Der voles ce. ceie te 22 ee : ; is : Molumesby species! <1 e. 70 Opportunities for increasing the utility of the Volume by diameter classes......... 23 timiber nesournces.| eee eer ey ee ee S Woltunesser acre! 24 INSETS - oe r . Tiabilities sche eee Menten 51 Mrolumamenime ORGS: eet eee 25 ; S Volume by class of material......... 26 Plansel acon ee Woltime peracre. 2 ic 28 Iimerease-voltimen ess ease re rate 51 , ity 2 Bo he forest-products industries... .......... 29 Improve quali, SE Ata an ae eae ces es eeheylimalbe gM GUSth yy. 2 Se eee eta 29 Better ee Nes Ne cee ee = Waosine 30 Improve timber utilization.......... 52 Soe 2 Standardized log sradés. 32 3 53 Eumbemmanufacture. 0)... 31 eae) : Wanner 33 Ways to accomplish needed improvements 53 Wroodepulaer 0 a he BAe oalbema trex CULC Career cet nets eS oe 55 I@DOpERACe ter a tn ey ee BIS, sao) DISIOUG UO Gena y Ee Rog REIS G 5 2 OR Ie ORR OSE 56 3 PpERGEISI OMe nati eG Ny eh a, 37 Sueyevammebhnods: ave. sr cree Ae mits eee 56 8 Bimmer eM ThAGL: sens nee aie i ate 37 ieldsinventorys-<es2ch Se. ct eee 56 Bolesrancdyitlese a wea eee ewan nigra ey Increment seek ac ac SS 56
Appendix—Continued Page § Appendix—-Continued Page Survey methods—Continued Definitions of terms used—Continued Ai Vera G aba Siena eae ee eat oe SNE eae 51 SETCE Classes so ee eee ee 57 : @lomiputarioms ones i ee etre coe ci 57 Forest: conditions: 9 ergo tee 57 | Definitions+of temms-used se et, Dy Volume -estimatesss ns oti nee ene 58 andsusexclassese= iret 57 Growthrandedraine.. eae een ee 58 Boreststypes 4 hacer ee ee 57 SPECleS ie Se. Es Cer par et ae 58 Diameter classification.............. 5 Data by physiographic provinces. “...... 60 |
|
37>
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
Summary of Survey F indings
ORESTS rank high among Virginia’s rich and
varied natural resources. ‘They have a significant influence on the welfare of agriculture, industry, employment, water supplies, game and fish, and recre- ation. But their contribution to the people of the State is only a fraction of what it could be under bet-
‘ter forestry and closer timber utilization.
VIRGINIA’S FORESTS
| SUPPORT A LARGE FOREST-PRODUCTS INDUSTRY. Some of Virginia’s largest industrial plants use wood as raw material, and small wood- using industries are scattered throughout every county. In 1939 the products of these 2,700 plants were valued at about $123,000,000, of which about $54,000,000 Wood prod- ucts ranked third in value among all manufactures.
was the value added by manufacture.
The wood-products industries rank next to textiles as a source of industrial employment, accounting for 22
| percent of all employees in manufacturing. Com-
mercial forest industries provided nearly 40,000 man- years of employment in 1944.
In 1942 the lumber cut was 1.2 billion board feet, placing Virginia eighth in the South and eleventh in the Nation in lumber production. In 1945 the cut was 995 million board feet. Nearly one-half the lumber was produced by small, generally portable mills cutting less than 1 million feet a year, two-fifths by mills cutting from 1 to 5 million feet and a little more
| than one-tenth by the nine larger mills.
Veneer production required 29.3 million board feet
| of logs in 1945 of which 10.7 million feet was brought
|
in from adjoining States. Exports to neighboring States totaled 1.3 million feet.
The State’s nine pulp mills have a daily capacity of over 1,770 tons of pulp and in 1945 purchased 823,- 500 standard cords of wood of which nearly three- fourths was pine, and the remainder gum, yellow- poplar, chestnut, and oak. In 1945 these and out-of- State mills obtained 798,900 cords of pulpwood from Virginia.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
ra keke
Cooperage plants totaling 63 produced principally nail-keg staves; but potato-barrel, tobacco-barrel, and whiskey-barrel staves were also manufactured. Total wood used for cooperage in 1945 was 76,900 cords. More than one-third of the Nation’s excelsior plants are located in Virginia, where 30,000 cords of pine were consumed for this product in 1945. Miscellane- ous manufactured products accounted for an addi- tional 30,900 cords of various species. In 1945, 3.3 million cords of wood were used for fuel, one-fourth of it cut from sound living trees.
In 1945 saw-timber drain was 1,223 million board feet, of which 719 million feet was softwood, and 504 million feet was hardwood. Nearly one-half the saw- timber drain came from loblolly and shortleaf pine. Of saw-timber drain, lumber accounted for 75 per- cent, pulpwood more than 11 percent, fuelwood 6 per- cent, and all other products 8 percent.
Total drain from the growing stock was 4.7 million cords, of which 2.6 million cords was softwood. Of total drain, 57 percent was used for lumber, 18 percent for fuelwood, 15 percent for pulpwood, and 10 per- cent for other products.
OCCUPY 58 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL AREA OF THE STATE. Forests cover 14.8 million acres, of which 14.4 million are commercial timberland.
More than one-half of this commercial forest land is on farms; nearly nine-tenths is in private owner- ship. In 1940, 46 percent of the forest area was oc- cupied by the upland hardwood type, while the bot- tom-land and cove hardwood types together covered an additional 11 percent. The loblolly pine, shortleaf pine, and Virginia pine types each occupied about 2 million acres, or 14 percent each, of the forest area. The white pine type was limited to little more than 200,000 acres.
CONTAIN 7 PERCENT OF THE SOUTH’S SAW TIMBER (fig. 1). In 1940 the live saw-timber volume was 24.3 billion board feet, or 1.5 percent of that in the Nation. softwood. Loblolly pine made up 29 percent of the total, with 7 billion board feet. There was then
One-half of the live volume was
1
standing 758 million feet of dead chestnut. The av- erage volume per acre of all saw-timber stands was 3,250 board feet, and for all forest land was only 1,690 board feet. Nearly one-half of the saw-timber area bore stands averaging less than 1,200 board feet per acre.
VIRGINIA
$ d Ys #4 “jf, KG SOUTHEASTERN STATES Aree - |
Ficure 1.—Location of Virginia in relation to the “South,” as used in this report.
In 1940 the total volume of all sound material in trees 5 inches in diameter breast high and larger was 205 million cords. More than two-thirds of that vol- ume was hardwoods. Loblolly pine, white oak, short- leaf pine, chestnut oak, and yellow-poplar were the most abundant species. Fifteen percent (29 million cords) of the total sound volume was in cull trees, 90 percent of it hardwood species in light demand.
ARE INCREASING IN VOLUME. The total volume of saw timber increased 7 percent between 1940 and 1946, while the volume of all timber in- Hardwoods increased about 15 percent both in saw timber and in all timber. Soft- wood saw timber showed little change but there was a 5-percent increase in all softwoods when the smaller
creased 11 percent.
trees were included. Among the softwoods, the short- leaf saw timber decreased, while Virginia pine, a less valuable species, increased. In the Piedmont short- leaf pine decreased by 450 million feet but a 327-mil- lion-foot increase in Virginia pine partially compen- sated for this loss, so that the net reduction was only 4 percent. In the Coastal Plain and mountains there was little change. Among the hardwoods, about one- half the saw-timber increase was made up of the gums and yellow-poplar. The gums are generally of good yuality in the Coastal Plain, but are not particularly
desirable for lumber on the uplands. Measured in cords, total softwoods, all sound trees 5 inches d. b. h.
and larger, increased for this period 3,292,000 cords. } ;
Hardwoods increased 12,984,000 cords.
In 1945 net saw-timber increment was 1,744 million board feet, of which 923 million board feet was soft- | woods and 821 million feet was hardwoods. The saw- timber growing stock increased at the rate of 7 per-} cent. Total net increment in 1945 was 8.4 million | cords, or 3.8 million cords of softwoods and 4.6 million cords of hardwoods. Average net increment per acre
was 121 board feet of saw timber, or 0.6 cord of all },,,
growing stock. . Mortality from all causes was equal to 5 percent |
of gross growth. The principal causes are insects, },;
disease, and fire.
ARE VERY POORLY STOCKED. On almost one-half of the forest land classed as saw timber, the | board-foot volume per acre averages about 1,200 feet. In one-fourth of the counties the average stand per | acre is only 830 board feet. {
One-half of the State’s forest land in 1940 bore saw- timber stands, 45 percent bore cordwood stands, and the remaining 5 percent, including approximately |
19,000 acres not restocking, was classed as reproduc- | tion. Pine stands in the Coastal Plain were only one- half stocked, and in the Piedmont they were slightly less stocked. Hardwood stands in the mountains | averaged only one-third stocked.
HAVE 15 PERCENT OF THEIR VOLUME IN
CULL TREES. Too much forest land is occupied |
by poorly formed trees of limited merchantability. | Aggregating 29 million cords in total volume they take the place of more productive trees on the equivalent of at least 2 million acres of commercial forest land. |
ARE GRADUALLY BEING CONVERTED TO }
HARDWOODS. In the past 6 years hardwood saw
timber has increased 15 percent while the pine saw
timber has remained practically constant. serious because good-quality hardwoods are generally cut too heavily, with the result that most of the hard- wood increase is in poor-quality trees and the less wanted species. in stand quality.
This is |
The effect is a gradual deterioration |
CONTAIN SPECIES WHICH ARE OVERCUT, | The most noticeable case of overcutting occurred in | the shortleaf pine of the Piedmont, which was reduced |
in volume by 450 millon board feet in 6 years, a de- crease of 23 percent. Ss
ARE UTILIZED WASTEFULLY. In 1944 the net waste resulting from logging and milling in the primary forest industries was 134 million cubic feet. |
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture |
|
This is equivalent to nearly one-fourth of the net ) annual growth.
NEED BETTER PROTECTION. Although all ) of Virginia’s forest land is now under organized pro-
tection, the loss of usable timber due to fire, insects, disease, and other causes is still large. Annual losses
exceed one-half million cords—a volume about three- fifths as large as the requirements of the pulp industry.
CAN PRODUCE LARGER YIELDS OF TIM- )BER. The average net annual increment for all com- } mercial forest land was only 121 board feet per acre. ) This is largely a result of poor stocking and rather ex- } tensive areas of low-quality sites in the Piedmont and
mountains. With intensive management on the fair I sites and only simple protection on the poorest sites, it is estimated that net annual growth could be in- creased in three to four decades by at least 25 percent. This would increase the net annual growth from 1.7
| Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
billion board feet to 2.2 billion board feet.
HAVE UNREALIZED POTENTIALITIES. There is enough commercial forest land in the State to produce more than adequate timber supplies for its wood-using industries, provided the land is well man- aged. A united effort of all organizations and indi- viduals—local, State, Federal, and private—will be required to improve the forest situation substantially. Best oportunities for doing this seem to lie in building up the forest-land volume and quality by constructive forestry practices, better protection against fire, in- sects, and disease, and improved utilization. Aids and services to private owners, public purchase of lands not suited to private holding, adequate research to find methods of improving the growing, harvesting, and marketing of the forest crop, and possibly some measure of control of cutting on private lands are ways of utilizing these opportunities.
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
The State: Its Environment and Resources.
Fr?
TRETCHING westward 432 miles from the Atlantic Ocean to the famous Cumberland Gap on the Kentucky State line, the southern bound-
ary of Virginia separates the Old Dominion from North Carolina and Tennessee. From that boundary the State extends a maximum of 200 miles northward to Maryland. The total area of Virginia is 40, 815 square miles, of which 916 square miles is water. The land area is 25,535,360 acres.
Phystographic Provinces
Three major physiographic provinces characterize the State (fig. 2). The Coastal province, one-fourth of the land area of the State, contains 6,362,900 acres. It extends inland approximately 125 miles from the coast and about the same distance from the Potomac to the southern boundary. Elevations range from sea level up to 300 feet on the western boundary. The area lying between the coast line and the range of high tide in the major watercourses is known as the Tide-
water, where elevations seldom exceed 50 feet. Four
LEGEND
N N NATIONAL FORESTS
== BOUNDARY OF PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCE
50. 80 MILES —
FRONKUIN
WASHINGTON
~e Fe --
‘at some time during its more than 300 years of occu- |
BEDFORD fh ae NALS
/
feet wake 4 PITTSYLVANIA / A yreerformwme FY ONS tea |
tm ee ee - ~~ -
PIEDMONT
Ficure 2.—Physiographic provinces, counties, principal rivers, and national forests and parks in Virginia.
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture |
Ke
major rivers break the northern and central part of the region into three long peninsulas, and a fourth peninsula, the Eastern Shore, is separated from the | rest by the broad waters of Chesapeake Bay. This combination of tidal rivers and the Bay has provided | excellent harbors which contribute to the prosperity | of the region. While most of this area has been farmed }
pancy, cultivated fields are now generally restricted to the more productive sandy loam and light sandy soils }
which can be farmed indefinitely with proper fer- | ' tilizing and soil-conserving measures (fig. 3). In 1940 | only 29 percent of the area was in use for crops and | improved pasture, 62 percent was forested, and the §;, rest was in towns and other miscellaneous uses.
West of the Coastal Plain lies the Piedmont pro- | vince, containing about two-fifths of Virginia’s land, or a little more than 10 million acres. It extends 250 §,, miles from northeast to southwest across the State and J,
varies in width from 50 miles on the Maryland line to about 150 miles at the North Carolina border. The
oe SP
6 LPEPER SG
P ~eawc EOwaRD CAMPBELL ave (a i == may
—-- al teicsiorael/ Secor ee
F-441754 Figure 3.—Crops and pastures are confined to the better soils of the Coastal Plain and occupy less than one-third of its area.
topography is gently rolling adjacent to the Coastal } Plain but becomes progressively more rugged as the mountains are approached (fig. 4). Elevations range ‘from 300 feet on the east to between 500 and 1,000 feet at the base of the Blue Ridge. The soils, orig- inally fertile, have lost much of their productive ca- pacity through severe erosion and heavy cropping, and large areas are now clearly submarginal for farm- ing. In 1940, 37 percent of the land was in use for crops and pasture, 59 percent was forested, and the remainder was in other uses.
Three well-defined formations comprise the Moun- tain province: the Blue Ridge Mountains, the Ap- palachian Valley and Ridges, and the Appalachian Plateau. The Blue Ridge, forming the eastern bound- tary, is a narrow ridge at the north but widens into
}
i
a high rugged plateau toward the south, where Mount
F—441836 FicuRE 4.—The rolling Piedmont is characterized by inter- spersed blocks of forest, pasture, and cropland. Tobacco is an important crop.
| Virginia Forest Resources and Industries ~$25098°—49-__
2
Rogers, 5,719 feet above sea level, constitutes the highest point in the State. The upper slopes and ridges of the Blue Ridge are forested; the lower slopes and valleys are devoted to pastures, orchards, and crops. West of the Blue Ridge lie alternating broad valleys and narrow ridges of the Valley and Ridges formation—chief of which is the Great Valley of Vir- ginia, extending sothwesterly from Winchester to Bristol. Here the ridge tops and steeper slopes are forested (fig. 5), but most of the land is used for pas- ture and orchards. The soils are chiefly of limestone origin, and very fertile. Along the western bound- aries of the State is the Appalachian Plateau, consist- ing of the eastern escarpment of the Cumberland and Alleghany Mountains, a region of. rugged, broken topography, narrow valleys, and sharp ridges. It is 70 to 80 percent forested. The Mountain province as a whole contains 9,106,000 acres, of which 54 percent is forested, 24 percent is pasture, 18 percent is crop- land, and the rest is in miscellaneous uses.
F—441860
Ficure 5.—In the mountains the upper slopes and ridges are forested; the lower slopes and valleys are devoted to pastures and crops.
Natural Resources
The principal natural resources, other than forests, are the soils, minerals, and water. Game and fish, especially commercial fisheries, are also important.
The soils (6, pp. 125-129)* vary widely over the State, from highly fertile clay loams to nearly sterile sands. In the Coastal Plain, the Norfolk, Ruston, and closely associated soils predominate. ‘These soils have loam or sandy loam surface soils and subsoils varying from sandy clay loams to heavy clays. While possess- ing little natural fertility, these soils respond readily to application of commercial fertilizers. Agricultural
*Ttalic numbers in parentheses refer to Literature Cited, Das
oH
crops grown are peanuts, cotton, tobacco, and corn. Over considerable areas near the coast, drainage is too poor for agricultural production, and these areas will probably remain in forest. Forests also occur in exten- sive blocks on the higher soils throughout the province.
Piedmont soils are chiefly of the Cecil-Appling group, with associated Durham, Appalachian, and Louisa soils. Originally fertile, they have been deteri- orated by severe sheet and occasional gully erosion and by poor cropping practices. Over large areas they are now more valuable for timber than for crops. To- bacco, corn, wheat, oats, vegetables, and fruit are the principal agricultural products. The typical land use pattern is an intermingling of crop, pasture, and forest land—all in relatively small blocks. Extensive areas of forest are much less common than in either the Coastal Plain or the mountains.
The soils of the Blue Ridge portion of the Moun- tain province are chiefly the Porter-Ashe and asso- ciates. They are friable and inherently fertile but climate and topography restrict crop production. A self-sufficing farming system characterizes the area. Corn, wheat, burley tobacco, and fruit are principal crops. Livestock are an important source of farm income. In the Great Valley, the principal soils are the Hagerstown, Frederick, and associates, chiefly of limestone origin. These soils are dominantly silt loams and clay loams and are highly suitable for pasturage and fruit. Apples in the north and live- stock in the south are the principal farm products. The soils of the Appalachian Plateau are mostly the De Kalb, Leetonia, and Claymen. All of these soils, and especially the predominant De Kalb, are stony, frequently intermingled with rough, broken bedrock. Farming is of the dairy or general-farm type but most of the area is forested.
Virginia’s chief mineral resource is coal, mostly bi- tuminous, but with smaller amounts of semibituminous and semianthracite. Original deposits are estimated at 32.5 billion tons. Production in 1941 was 18.4 million tons of coal and 325,000 tons of coke, valued at $44,840,000. Coal and coke provided 63 percent of the value of all minerals produced in the State in that year, products such as stone, sand and gravel, clay, clay products, and zinc accounting for the re- mainder. ‘The total value of all mineral production in 1941 was $71,341,000 (6, pp. 152-156). Coal production is localized in three areas: In the Piedmont near Richmond; in the southwestern Valley near Marion and Pulaski; and, the principal area, in the Appalachian Plateau in extreme southwestern Vir-
oinla.
yi
Water, both surface and ground supply, is one of | the most important resources of the State, and has_ contributed markedly to its development. The upper reaches of the major streams and their headwater tributaries provide water power and their tidal por- tions afford a major artery of transportation. Pre- cipitation retained in the soil and rocks as ground water provides for maintenance of stream flow and for well supplies. ‘“Virginia’s feasible, undeveloped water power is estimated to be sufficient for an output of 4.5 billion kilowatt-hours annually” (9, p. 2). In 1944, the total hydroelectric output of the State was 579.5 million kilowatt-hours, or less than 13 percent of potential capacity. The 1944 output, however, rep- resented an increase of 18 percent since 1937. In 1944, hydroelectric plants provided 16 percent of the total production of electrical power in the State (3.6 billion kilowatt-hour) (7, p. 65; 9).
Use of water for domestic and industrial purposes in the State is dependent on impounded surface waters, base stream flow, natural springs, and both deep and shallow wells. In the Mountain province most towns depend on small reservoirs or natural springs; in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain the larger cities depend on reservoirs or direct river intakes, while the smaller communities in general use deep wells. Since water shortages exist in the southern Piedmont and Tide- water communities dependent on wells, more im- pounding reservoirs are needed. Quality of the sur- face and spring waters in the mountains is generally high, that of the Piedmont and Coastal Plain surface waters is low, requiring extensive treatment for both domestic and industrial use. Full use of the poten- tial water resources of the State is dependent on wise land use on all the major watersheds in order to mini- mize soil erosion and excessive runoff, the forerunners of silting and floods. Wise land use obviously implies conservation management on both forest and farm properties.
Social and Industrial Conditions
Virginia’s economy is well balanced between agri- culture and industry. For the State as a whole, farm production is well diversified. Industrially the State ranks third in value of manufactured products among the 12 States of the South,’ being exceeded only by Texas and North Carolina. In 1939, Virginia pro- duced 13 percent of the value of all manufactured goods in the South, her products being valued at 989
* Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Missis- sippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
“million dollars. Transportation is generally ade- quate; power development is expanding. Population } growth has averaged 10 percent per decade since 1890.
Forest resources are reasonably abundant and diversi- fied, and their utilization is an important segment of
} Virginia’s economy.
| Population and Employment
In 1940 Virginia’s population numbered 2.7 million people, roughly two-thirds of whom were classified as rural and one-third as urban. this total lived on farms. Urban-population increase has averaged 18 percent per decade since 1920, but rural population increased at a rate of only 3 percent
Nearly 37 percent of
H per decade in the same period. Undoubtedly this
‘trend toward increased urbanization was even more
'}) accentuated after 1940, as a result of war industrializa-
‘tion. Postwar trends have not yet been reported. In March 1940 about 933,000 Virginians were em-
‘} ployed in normal activities not classified as public
emergency work. By occupation they were distrib- uted as follows: Agriculture 25 percent, manufactur- ing 20 percent, wholesale and retail trade 12 percent,
} professional services 6 percent, transport and utilities
7 percent, and miscellaneous occupation 30 percent. One-fourth of those engaged in manufacturing were employed in the forest-products industries.
Agriculture
In 1940 Virginia’s 174,885 farms contained 16,- 445,000 acres, an average of 94 acres perfarm. There were only 688 farms of 1,000 acres or more, but 22,291 were of less than 10 acres each. The 94-acre average farm had 39 acres in woodland, 27 acres in crops, 18 acres in plowable pasture, and 10 acres in other uses.
The total value of farm products sold, traded, or used in 1940 was about 151 million dollars. percent of this income came from the sale or trade of livestock and livestock products, including poultry, Most of the rest of the value represented products used on
Seventy
and from farm crops, chiefly tobacco and fruit.
the farm. The value of farm woodland products
.} sold and used cannot be accurately determined from
recent statistics. On the basis of a questionnaire sur- vey made jointly by the Forest Service and the Bu- reau of Agricultural Economics in 1937, it is estimated that their value was about 15.5 million dollars. Con- sidering that at that time there were about 6 million acres of farm woodland, the average return per acre ‘was very low, only $2.60: ever, that many acres were not operated at all and that
the realization of the income on the woodlands which
It must be recalled, how-
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries -
were operated required little expense other than the value of the owner’s own labor or that of his hired farm hands. Even this low income, however, repre- sented more than 10 percent of the value of all farm products in 1940. Comparing the 15.5 million dol- lars of forest products in 1937 with 1940 farm-prod- uct values, only livestock, livestock products, corn, tobacco, hay and forage, and vegetables sold and used on farm had a higher value.
An arresting fact about Virginia’s agriculture is that a large proportion of the farms yield incomes that permit the operators and their families only the barest necessities. [he 1939 census reports that the value of all farm products sold, traded, or used was less than $400 for 44 percent of the farms, and less than $600 for 61 percent of the farms. These meager incomes are, of course, supplemented by off-farm labor income. Thirty-five percent of all farm operators reported that they worked off their farms for an average of 170 days each during 1939. Assuming a daily wage of $4, this would gross only $680 per year.
Since half of the State’s forest area is on farms, im- provements in managing and harvesting the farm woodlands can play a vital part in the welfare of the forest industries and of the State as a whole.
Manufacturing
Pronounced industrial development has taken place in Virginia since the turn of the century. During this period (1899-1939) value of manufactured prod- ucts has increased to nine times the former value, and value added by manufacture to seven times the former value. The number of wage earners has increased from 66,000 to 134,000 and wages from 20 There have also been some striking shifts in type of industry. Those pro- ducing capital goods have been replaced to a con- siderable extent by those producing consumer goods, chiefly textiles and food products. cigarettes and of smoking and plug tobacco has long
million to 116 million dollars.
Manufacture of
been a major industry.
In 1939 the 2,579 manufacturing establishments reported by the United States census employed 134,000 wage earners and produced goods valued at nearly 989 million dollars. The textile and apparel industry had the most employees, followed by wood products (fig. 6), and food products (fig. 7, A). In value of products, however, the tobacco industry was far in the lead, providing 36 percent of the value of all goods produced. ‘Textiles, and chemical products each provided about 13 percent of total product value (fig. 7, B).
wood products,
ania
F-441819 Figure 6.—In 1939 Virginia’s forest industries provided em- ployment for 30,000 persons. This is one of the State’s many small sawmills.
Value added by manufacture is in many respects the most satisfactory index of relative importance of industries. In 1939, value added in the State was 379.5 million dollars. Textiles and textile products comprised about 25 percent of this amount. To- bacco products ranked second, and wood products third (fig. 8). The tremendous industrial expansion during the war years had perhaps a greater influence on Vir-
INDUSTRY EMPLOYEES
TEXTILES
wOOD PRODUCTS CHEMICALS
FOOD PRODUCTS TOBACCO TRANSPORTATION EQUIP, LEATHER
ALL OTHER
TEXTILES
WOOD PRODUCTS
CHEMICALS
FOOD PRODUCTS TOBACCO TRANSPORTATION EQUIP. METAL PRODUCTS LEATHER
ALL OTHER
200 B MILLION DOLLARS
Ficure 7.—A, Proportionate number of employees in manu- facturing industries, and B, value of products manufactured in Virginia, 1939.
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
¥
|
ginia’s manufacturing than anything occurring dur- ing the preceding two decades. Detailed data are not! available, but by 1943 the number of wage earners had increased to 216,000 and wages had more than tripled, totaling 383 million dollars. Some of this increase has’ already been lost since the end of the war, but, barring) major deflation in the economy, many of the gains, | particularly in higher wages, will be retained.
In 1939 the average annual wage in all manufac- turing industries in Virginia was $867. Among the: major industries, the chemical industry paid the high- est average wage, followed closely by the paper and | pulp industry, both paying in excess of $1,000 per) year. Lowest average annual wage, less than $700, | was paid in the lumber and timber industry, and in’ furniture factories. Needless to say, all wage levels | are much higher today. In 1943 the average annual | wage in all industries was $1,492, excluding over- | time pay, an increase of 72 percent over 1939. Wages } in wood-product industries increased to slightly over | $1,000, a raise of about 50 percent (3).
1
F—441858 Ficure 8.—In 1939 the value added by manufacture to the State’s forest products totaled about 54 million dollars.
Three industries in the State that depend primarily | on wood or wood cellulose as basic materials have had exceptionally rapid growth during recent years. Be- tween 1919 and 1939, the furniture industry increased the value of its products from 5 to 31 million dollars. In the 1930’s, pulp and paper products increased from 21 to nearly 51 million dollars, and rayon and allied | products from 28 to 60 million dollars.
Transportation
While a good transportation system is requisite to | the adequate functioning of all segments of a region’s economy, it is particularly necessary for the utilization ~
of a forest resource that is spread thinly over many acres, and whose products are heavy and bulky, are often handled many times between stump and the final product, and may be consumed hundreds of miles from their origin. In the early days of lumbering in Virginia, the waterways and rough “tote” roads were the principal arteries of transport for both logs and lumber. Later improved roads and railroads sup- plemented the interior waterways. Today trucks are increasingly important in moving logs, lumber, pulp- wood, and the host of finished wood products, but they have not replaced railroads or water shipment. Vir- ginia has a good transportation system which utilizes highways, railroads, and waterways.
Land Use
When the first colonists stepped ashore at James- town in 1607, all of Virginia save the tidal marshes, the rock outcrops on the higher mountains, and the scattered Indian clearings was forested. In the more than three centuries which have since elapsed, the utilization of timber and the clearings for agriculture and towns have greatly reduced the forested area, but 58 percent of the State, 14,832,300 acres, is still forest land (fig. 9), of which all but 420,300 acres is com- mercial (table 1) .*
* Since 1940, the commercial forest area has been decreased ) by 35,000 acres withdrawn on national forests for recreational use. (See table 2.) :
Ficure 9.—WNearly three-fifths of the State’s area ts still forest land.
' Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
Forest-Land Use
In 1940, commercial forests were growing on 14,412,000 acres, or 56.5 percent of the land area of the State—an area exceeding by more than 5 million acres the total acreage in cropland and pasture. Less than 19,000 acres was not restocking. The relative extent of this and other classes of timberland was as follows:
Percent
Saw-timber Stand s=-ss oct. ules ban uge es 50 Cordwood stands 24 sa Bese ae see 45 Youn; reproductiones saa ie ees 5 Glear-cut Vareasi= ecm ibm sie Negligible AO tall thsi Hatha lige ie none 100
Tasie 1.—Land area classified according to use, 1940}
Teanaese Distribution of total area Forest: Acres Percent Commercial Bases Gee ie ee ean Shes 14,412,000 56.5 Bublic: reserved 2 sates oasis apie a mee 235,900 Be) Noncommercial e222 2 eS es ence 184,400 sd Totals ee Noe Re NS eRe PSE Ee 14,832,300 58.1 Nonforest: Cropland )s¥ 22 sass hes Se ee ie OS aa) 5,954,700 23.3 Abandonedicropland]ss2@eaccee = Seen eae 380,100 eS IPAStUTe sae Sits Be eet SELES ST acest ae en 3,424,300 13.4 1 Eber) Veneer ce Bh Re Years one tt ee Cte Pe 272,500 asi (OY sich case ee me Ne a ON ~ 671,500 2.6 Otay ha 2 HEROS EROS ee is en aie ty reaver fee 10,703,100 41.9 AISUSests oO SR SR Fee ENE Rah aA 28,535,400 100.0
1 Data obrained by Forest Survey.
F-441753
Forests are generally considered as chiefly valuable for timber production; yet they provide other services which in total may oftentimes equal or exceed their value for timber products. Among these are recrea-
- tional use, watershed production, game and fish pro-
duction, and grazing use. It is perhaps a unique at- tribute of forests that in many cases several or all of these services can be combined successfully with com- mercial timber production without seriously depleting the growing stock or the soil.
Virginia’s tourist trade is “big business.” In 1941,
income from tourist and vacation trade exceeded 100
million dollars. Just how much was spent by visitors —
to the State’s forests and forest parks is unknown, but the Shenandoah National Park attracted, in pre- war years, an average of 1 million visitors annually. The recreational facilities established by the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests were visited in 1941 by 336,000 people. Use decreased during the war, but even in 1945 these 2 national forests had 93,000 visitors. The 6 State parks and 4 State recreation areas attracted another 100,000 or more people in the last prewar year. Postwar use is rapidly increasing. Hence, the forests are an impor- tant attraction for recreation seekers and tourists and
aid materially in augmenting the income from these sources (fig. 10).
F-441896 Ficure 10.—Forest land and waters are an important asset to Virginia’s 100-million-dollar tourist business.
Watershed protection is a valuable function of forest land, particularly in the mountains and also on the more rolling land of the Piedmont. The two national forests were established under the terms of the Weeks law of 1911, authorizing the purchase of forest land on the headwaters of navigable streams. Forest land on their steep slopes and those -of the Shenandoah
NT
National Park helps to reduce erosion, decreases rate
of storm runoff and resulting flood crests, equalizes
the flow of streams, and maintains a higher level of |
ground water for wells and springs.
forests provide domestic and industrial water for nu-—
plants (fig. 11). Several municipalities in both the
&-441843
Figure 11.—WNational forests protect the headwaters of streams providing hydroelectric power and municipal water
supplies. TABLE 2.—Ownership of forest land, 19451
. Commer- Total Ownership Area cial forest forest Commercial areas:
Public: 1,000 acres\| Percent Percent National forestsi22 22a ee 1,266 8.8 8.5 Statesforests so saes Ge eres aimee 60 4 4 Orhempublicesewiiee oe ena 234 1.6 1.6
RO ta leaps Sea ares eine 1,560 10.8 10.5 Private: Farm: woodlands= 222 {22-25 2s 7,621 53.0 51.4 Nonfarm: Under 5,000 acres___-______= 4,248 29.6 28.6 Over 5,000 aéres____-________ 2948 6.6 6.4 PD Ota ee nies Seen ree RFE 12,817 89.2 86.4 ‘Allecommiercial ao ee re ae ies 314,377 100.0 96.9 Noncommercial areas:
Public reserved:
Nationalsforestss-2e = Se ae oes gj ASIN Weeeaehe a ot Se) Wationaljparks2e ae sens ee D4) | SRS See 1.4 ESTATE Tp ai kes gee pt nares 26S|ste Re Les 2
A Wo fer jes Seb asin e e 3695 | =e 2.5 Other noncommercial 4____ -_--__--__ B6n/Ee ores -6 All noncommercial ________-_---__- ASS ac See tiee st oleene 3.1 All ownerships_____ Sheps sid AI 14,832 pre siren tee 100.0
1 Based, unless otherwise noted, on 1945-46 Reappraisal by U. S. Forest Service.
2 Estimated by State forester, 1944.
3 Commercial forest area decreased between 1940 and 1945 because 35,000 acres on national forests were withdrawn for recreational use.
4 Land too poor to support commercial timber stands.
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
Both national |
i
merous communities and for many hydroelectric |
-mountains and the Piedmont maintain forested water-
sheds. In view of the serious water shortages now prevalent in the Piedmont and, to a lesser extent, in the Coastal Plain, it seems apparent that watershed “management on forest lands has not been sufficiently widespread or thorough, particularly in the headwater portions of the State’s drainage basins.
The sharp increase in numbers of beef cattle since 1940 has been accompanied in parts of the State by “greater use of forest land for grazing. This move- | ment has been greatest in the Coastal Plain, where it is ‘combined with commercial timber production. ~The bulk of the cattle production in Virginia, however, is ‘on improved pasture in the Upper Piedmont and ‘mountains, particularly in the Great Valley, where | woods grazing is at a minimum.
Forest-Land Ownership
Exact data on forest-land ownership are not avail- able, but the latest estimates indicate that about 89 percent of the total commercial forest area is in pri- vate hands. Farm woodlands make up 353 percent, and other small nonfarm holdings (less than 5,000 acres each) comprise 30 percent. Larger private
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
holdings, chiefly corporate, total about | million acres,
or 6.6 percent (table 2). Of the public commercial
forests, the largest part is in national forests. The noncommercial forest area is largely in public owner- ship also, much of it belonging to the United States in the Shenandoah National Park, in smaller historical parks, and in the national forests. “The noncommer- cial area shown in table 2 as “other noncommercial” (86,000 acres) is that reported by the Forest Survey as being too poor, because of soil or other site con- ditions, to support commercial stands of timber. Much of it is rock outcrop_.and severely burned areas in the spruce type on high ridges in the Alleghany and Blue Ridge Mountains, some of it within national- forest boundaries, the rest in private hands.
Of the 950,000 acres of large nonfarm private hold- ings, a considerable part is in the Coastal Plain, owned by lumber and pulp companies. Another part is in the hands of insurance companies, banks, and estates. The latter group of owners also control a considerable proportion of the tenant-operated farms, with their woodlands, throughout both the Coastal Plain and Piedmont.
11
ee ea
VIRGINIA FOREST
RESOURGES AND INDUSTRIES
The Forest Resource
77>
Early Aitstory
HE first permanent settlement of colonists in ae Virginia, at Jamestown in 1607, was founded in part because of England’s desperate need for masts, ship timbers, and naval stores. ent upon a precarious supply of these products from the Baltic countries, she found it imperative to discover
Long depend-
new sources or suffer loss in naval strength, and hence in world power, among the nations. Consequently she welcomed the opportunity in the New World to “ ... help ourselves out of Virginia ... ,” and to relieve “. . . the great and pitiful waste of our English woods...” (J).
fore, that in 1608 a ship is reported to have returned
It is not surprising, there-
to England bearing “pitch, tarre, clapboard, and waynscot,’ (2) and that in 1609 a cargo of “fower score” masts was exported to the mother country. Although large quantities of timber were used by the colonists or exported during the next several decades, these uses had little effect upon the forests in comparison with the wasteful process of tobacco culture that developed shortly after the colony was founded. Faced with producing an export commod- ity that would yield the highest profits to the English proprietors and provide for themselves necessities that a primitive country could not offer, the colo- nists quickly turned to tobacco culture. This crop soon came to dominate colonial agriculture because it best could stand the long journey and high trans- It continued to dominate for more than a century despite the fact that planters could count on only 3 or 4 seasons’ yield from land before
portation costs.
the soil became excessively depleted. ‘Thus was set in motion a cycle of land clearing, cropping for a few years, abandonment, and reversion to pine forests, that was extremely wasteful. George Washington re- marked that “We ruin the lands that are already cleared and either cut down more wood if we have it, a half, a third, or even a fourth of what land we mangle, well wrought and properly dressed, would produce more than the whole under our system of management; yet
or emigrate into the western country .
KE
such is the force of habit, that we cannot depart from it.” Thus, until the middle of the nineteenth century, agricultural development rather than industrial or local use was the principal cause of forest exploitation.
Nevertheless, use of the forests for timber was not entirely neglected. It is probable, though not proved, that the first sawmill in America was operated at Jamestown in 1608. Captain John Smith in his His- ‘tory of Virginia, advising the colonists to “remove this usurping growth,” nevertheless noted that it “might itself be converted into a source of wealth.” For the first 150 to 200 years almost all lumber mills were small sash-saw affairs powered by waterwheels and were perforce located near sources of water power. The output of a mill of this type probably did not exceed 2 to 3 thousand feet a day, and they operated only infrequently. It was not until the introduction of steam-powered circular-saw mills about 1820 that any considerable exploitation of the forest began, and not until after the Civil War, with the extension of steam railroads over the State, that the real harvest of the State’s virgin timber took place. Large band mills then replaced many of the small circular mills.
Lumber output reached its peak in 1909, when Vir- ginia produced 2.1 billion board feet, a figure never approached again. By the time of the outbreak of World War I most of the virgin pine and better hard- woods had passed through the mills, forcing the indus- try to depend on the periodic yield of second-growth timber, for which the large band mills were not suited. These mills have largely been replaced by a host of small circular-saw, gasoline- or steam-powered, port- able mills, from which the bulk of production now comes. Because of the State’s suitability for timber growth, second-growth stands have restocked almost all of the cut-over lands, although the quality of the growth is frequently inferior to that of the original forest.
As has been noted, “pitch and tarre” were among the earliest exports of Virginia. In colonial times such exports for the use of “His Majesty’s Royal Navy” were an important forest product. Virginia, however, lacked the stands of longleaf and slash pine from
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
| |LOBLOLLY PINE
| |SHORTLEAF PINE
OTHER SOFTWOODS TOTAL VALUE $128 898,000
| |REO @ WHITE OAKS
| JOTHER HARDWOODS
which modern naval stores are extracted, so the naval stores industry never assumed the importance it did farther south.
| Present Importance
Her present forest resource is one of Virginia’s most
| valuable assets. The 1940 stumpage value‘ of the | saw timber was about 129 million dollars, of. which _ 72 million dollars was in softwoods and 57 million dol- lars in hardwoods (fig. 12). Loblolly pine provided 35 percent of the total and the oaks 21 percent. The current value is probably almost double that of 1940, because of marked increases in stumpage prices, and '} the slight increase in total saw-timber volume. As |} indicated previously, the value of farm-forest products sold and used on farms is about 15 million dollars | per year.
SPECIES GROUP
SWEETGUM & TUPELO
YELLOW-POPLAR
20 30 MILLION DOLLARS
FIGURE 12 Phevstumpage value of saw timber, 1940.
In 1942, about 2,750 primary wood-using plants obtained their raw material from the forests. In 1944 the primary forest industries employed 21,000 wage earners, and an additional 18,500 workers in the woods getting out the raw material for these plants.
Virginia’s forests are also a valuable part of the re- gional and national economy. ‘The State has 8 per- cent of the commercial forest area and 8 percent of the total volume of wood in the South. Virginia has 3 percent of the Nation’s commercial forest area, and produces 5 percent of the total net annual growth of saw timber in the Nation. In 1944 the State ranked sixth in the South and eighth in the Nation in lumber production, and was exceeded only by North Carolina in the number of operating sawmills.
Forest Description
Except for a few small tracts in the Coastal Plain (fig. 13, A) and mountains (fig. 13, B), largely in
* Based on stumpage value per thousand board feet and volume of species composing total saw-timber volume, both as
of 1940.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries 825098°—49 3
Ce
private estates or public preserves, this State’s forests are now second-growth timber. As is to be expected in a State covering 25.5 million acres, ranging in elevation from sea level to 6,000 feet, her forests con- tain a wide variety of species, some extending from the ocean to the mountains, others confined to limited areas peculiarly adapted to that one species. Each physiographic province has a definite pattern of forest cover, each differing distinctly and characteristically with respect to predominant forest types, age, volume per acre, and cutting history.
Species °
Loblolly pine makes up 18 percent of the total cubic- foot volume, followed by shortleaf pine, white oak, “other red oaks,” Virginia pine, and yellow-poplar.
In the Coastal Plain loblolly pine is the most preva- lent species, growing both in pure stands and in mix- ture with other pines and hardwoods. In total cubic- foot volume, it is four times greater than sweetgum, the next commonest species. Sweetgum grows best in the river bottoms but also grows, though to smaller size, on some of the better sandy loams of the flatwoods and middle Coastal Plain. Blackgum, third most impor- tant single species, occurs in both swamps and bottom lands throughout the province. The red oaks as a group are more prevalent than blackgum, as is the white oak group. Both are widespread. throughout all parts of the Coastal Plain, growing with pines or with other hardwoods.
Originally the oaks and hickories were the domi- nant species in the Piedmont. Over the years prob- ably three-fifths of the Piedmont was farmed and eventually abandoned. Scattered shortleaf and Vir- ginia pines reseeded these abandoned fields more quickly and completely than the hardwoods, and the Piedmont forest was gradually transformed from hardwoods to pine, chiefly shortleaf and Virginia. In recent years, the increased demand for pine pulpwood, saw timber, stave bolts, and excelsior bolts has halted the transformation. The cutting out of the pine from old-field and natural stands has led to a hard- wood invasion which may in time, if present cutting practices continue, again make the Piedmont a pre- dominantly hardwood area. ‘The red and white oaks are the most prevalent hardwood species. ‘They make up a third of the total cubic-foot volume in the prov- ince, slightly exceeding the volume of shortleaf and Virginia pines combined. Yellow-poplar, gums, and
°For a list of species with their common and scientific names, see Appendix, p. 58.
13
bn gre a nee ater
F—441806. 382631
Figure 13.—Virgin timber stands are few, but occur sparingly, A, in the Coastal Plain loblolly type; and B, in the mountain hardwoods.
hickory are the other important hardwood species. Commonly the natural forest stands of the Piedmont are mixed pine and hardwood; old-field stands are either pure pine or pine-hardwood, the latter generally inferior in both composition and quality.
The mountain forests are predominantly hardwood, four-fifths of the total cubic-foot volume being in this species group. Chestnut oak is the predominant species, followed by “other red oaks” (scarlet, southern red, black, and pin oak), and white oak. The oaks as a group contain about one-half of the total cubic-foot
FOREST TYPES
UPLAND HARDWOODS
AREA OF TYPE
LOBLOLLY PINE VIRGINIA PINE SHORTLEAF PINE
BOTTOM-LAND HARDWOODS
COVE HARDWOODS
WHITE PINE
MILLION ACRES
Figure 14.—Area of forest types, 1940.
volume. Yellow-poplar and hickory are the other principal hardwood species, although a great many Of the softwoods, pitch and shortleaf pines are the most prevalent, followed by Virginia pine and white pine. Other less abundant softwoods are hemlock, redcedar, and a small amount of red spruce on the highest peaks.
species are present.
Forest Types
Forest types were classified by the Forest Survey on the basis of species composition and the proportion of commercially important dominant trees.
The upland hardwood type occupies nearly one-half of the forest land of Virginia (fig. 14). It is the principal forest cover of the Mountain province, but it occurs also in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain (fig. 15). Of the total area in this type, 48 percent is in the mountains, 39 percent in the Piedmont, and only 13 percent in the Coastal Plain. This type is com- — posed of a variety of species (table 3). The compo- sition varies widely with the physiographic province, and within each province with soil type, elevation, and
-moisture conditions. In the Coastal Plain the princi-
pal species are white oak, southern red oak, black oak,
14 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
_ yellow-poplar, sweetgum, and beech, with some loblolly _and other pines. In the Piedmont white oak is even } more prevalent, comprising one-fourth of the total } cubic-foot volume, followed by southern red oak, black oak, yellow-poplar, chestnut oak, and hickory. Pine is very limited: In the Mountain province, chestnut _ oak is the most prevalent species of this type, followed _ by scarlet, pin, and black oaks, post oak, northern red _ oak, hickory, and yellow-poplar. The pine component is very minor.
TABLE 3.—Species composition of forest types ADTs in percent of net cubic-foot volume, 1940}
Forest type | | - | Boe Species Lob- | Short-} Vir- 7.:,,,| tom- | Cove | Up- | All lolly | leaf | ginia| “Bite! tand |hard-| land |types pine | pine | pine Pine | hard-| wood hard wood wood Soft woods: Pctasliwlctee| eb ctsi|-dectoalisbact| elect |Pecten| eck. Pond pines -=_=- =.= OF Sa al SSS | RRS (2) sa Rakes eee She (2) Loblolly pine___--_-- TDN ete DAO | eer. | ota 4.4) 0 1.5) 17.9 Shortleaf pine__-_--- BI 62.6) 7.9. 3.0 S/AenOR2 | eeseOhel Ons Virginia pine___--__- 1.6} 6.0) 56.3 1:8 4 5 167.8 Wehitespines 2 = sees | poe as <4 -7\ 31.8} () 6 ACSI fa sed (0) iplemloGkss ses see een ee (2) (2) 21.8) (2 1.6 D, 6 Redcedaress2 Saar 1 9 3 2 aul 1 ey) ES White-cedar_--_____- (Che ee ele Ea Ses 1s 7) eee: (2) ai Gypressssek2 tae A so) UK Mee al Ra ne be Se S| ean (2) a Hardwoods:
Iho Red maples222 5. == Geet eer le ert |e 8aGla 9 ie2| 03 e983 Blackowm soso sa 1.8 Xo) 8 38) 1929) eles 5 ee 2R6leSayl Sweetgum______--_-- 6.1 3.2) 2.0) ©) LEY: PAYS) Keeps} Yellow-poplar______- 2.5| 4.7| -6.2| 1 3'.2| 8.5| 34.5) 9.5|~ 7.8 Northern red oak____ 5 29 Sth 276) 1-9) 1026) =676)> 3.5 Ocher red oaks_____- 3.6, 6.5) 7.3| 7.7) 4.2] 2.9) 16.8] 9.5 White oak. 22 _==2_ 3.5 4.8) 6.3 8.0} 3.4) 4.3] 19.8] 10.3 Chestnut oak______-_ (2) 15) 8 4.7) (2) AAS D656 Other. white oaks_____ 6 is | sel} 4 -5} () 1.2 9 BB iirc eee eae ens a | (2) (2) 1.4| (2) 2.8 22 aD, Beech == ee es 4 DMs eel ee SEs S| ee Sealife ale csikag lala ern ae eee 7. TSE SG PASiSs1S0|Sa429 heifer 358 Cherry} walnuto— == |=- == (2) (e Ai PLES] 4 22 Sugar maple esse lt 2) (2) 1.7} @) 4.2 4 53 UNG) pnp ones Bad ASE Ht 2) 2 S360 adage el 120 Dogwood. -_-_-2_-__ ‘ 4 8 ait SB lle ened, ah Blackslocus tees sats | eee 1 apt -7| (2) LPO ral=) 6 Other hardwoods_____ 35 =o) aff a) 5 E10) 5 USSEY ipa) as fees) Scrub hardweods_____ 3 lege cee lel festeal ean ede Stel esate
All species= __\_ -___ 100.0} 100.0]100.0] 160.0}100.0/100.0/100.0|100.0 if
1 Based on net cubic volume of sound trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger; tops and limbs of saw-timber-size hardwoods omitted. 2 Less than 0.05 percent.
The loblolly pine type (fig. 16) ranks second in -area, occupying 14 percent of the State’s forest land, _almost entirely in the Coastal Plain. The principal hardwood associates are sweetgum, southern red and
} black oaks, white oak, and yellow poplar. In terms ‘| of value, the loblolly pine type is the most valuable
in the State, since it contains by far the largest saw- timber volume of any type, and its chief species is in
| wide demand for both lumber and pulpwood.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
The Virginia pine type is almost equal in area to the loblolly pine type. Of the total type area, 69 per- cent is in the Piedmont, 17 percent is in the Coastal Plain, chiefly on the Northern Neck and Middle Pen- insula, and the remainder is in the mountains. Prin- cipal associates in the Coastal Plain are loblolly pine, southern red and black oaks, white oak, yellow-pop- lar, and sweetgum. In the Piedmont, principal as- sociates are shortleaf pine, yellow-poplar, “other red oaks,” and white oak, although there are extensive areas of pure old-field stands (fig. 17). In the moun- tain unit, Virginia pine makes up 55 percent of the volume in the Virginia pine type, and shortleaf and white pines together, 11 percent. Black, southern red, post, and chestnut oaks are the common associated hardwoods.
The shortleaf pine type (fig. 18) is only slightly less extensive than the loblolly and Virginia pine types, and occurs on about 14 percent of the forest area. Of the total area of this type, 63 percent is in the Piedmont, 29 percent in the mountains, and only 8 percent in the Coastal Plain. In the Coastal Plain, shortleaf pine forms 53 percent of the volume in the type, and loblolly 17 percent. Principal hardwood associates are the “other red oaks,” white oak, and sweetgum. In the Piedmont, shortleaf pine makes up 64 percent of the cubic-foot volume in the type, and loblolly and Virginia pines, 8 percent. “Other red oaks,” yellow-poplar, white oak, and sweetgum are the prevalent hardwoods. From the standpoint of values, this is the most important type in the Pied- mont. In the mountains, the shortleaf pine type— designated on the type map as the “‘shortleaf-pitch pine type”’—occurs as narrow bands on the east slopes of the successive ridges of the province. In this type the volume of pitch pine exceeds that of shortleaf, and the two together form two-thirds of the total volume in the type. Scarlet, black, and pin oaks, chestnut oak, and white oak are the prevalent hardwood associates.
The bottom-land hardwoods type (fig. 19) is found on about 7 percent of the forest area. Of the total type area, 63 percent is in the Coastal Plain where it occurs in the Great Dismal Swamp and along the major rivers and their tributaries above tidewater. Here blackgum and tupelo (fig. 20) provide more than one-fourth of the total cubic-foot volume, and sweet- gum nearly one-fifth. Red maple and yellow-poplar are other important hardwood species in this type. Cypress provides a little over 6 percent, and loblolly pine a little less than 6 percent, of total cubic-foot vol- ume. This type is one of the most valuable in the Coastal province, containing the second largest saw-
15
e k
(ete sO
3 Sas a = OS 2 3 7 ; = LS rm
3 2 38 ~ a4 2 & 2 See aS) as) es s © Sars eetad Re aay Sas on Sas o = ene ~ 8 : aS & < Q SS as) xs [) iS 9°
RE 18.—Shortleaf pine comprises three-fifths of the vol-
= S is} ES S Ny 5 & 2 Qa nN i} — . = SiS) :S 5 QQ aS OY S) SS Ss OCs) SS) sop SS 2 8 i) “Ss < ic} Seo Ww _ Vv ~ : js Sas -- S See see aa On, oe oe SiG 7 : = Soe Fe AY =) 5 6 1o) to) S g x by By o 3 < iS} ss ss) Sa) 2 Ses SEOn eS) >) 2 3 = 5 = § bsp) S a as 7S 8 o) SS) as S Sra = 3 8 = v e Sas SES es Oa ae Sips “2 <8 NS & SS Ny 8 28 Ses Ea aS SS) ~~ eS S 8 = om oS ~ ~ Ss ne eS 5 S 3 Ss es ney SRS 3 PS) ASS Rae Qs e~ ~ aA Ss 8 os 38 ~~ S aa Sie os S88 ez) 3 8 l= 5 | Ss . ha) v aS a s8s Os 8° On eS AS 8 y 3 Mw ww p83 pe 5 ORS os © fy fy a
E|
i 6
| Ficure 19.—Bottom-land hardwoods occupy nearly one mil- lion acres. This stand of yellow-poplar and gum is on the lower James River.
F—441767
Ficure 20.—Tupelos flourish in the swamps of the Coastal Plain, where they comprise one-fourth of the volume in the bottom-land hardwood type.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
F-441883
Figure 21.—Yellow-poplar is the chief species in the cove
hardwood type in the Blue Ridge.
Figure 22.—The white pine type occurs chiefly in the Blue Ridge and Shenondoah Mountains, but it is of relatively
minor importance.
17
Rae
is 8
ene Poe
timber. volume per acre of the several types, and some of the most valuable species. In the Piedmont, it is confined to the river bottoms and, in general, is not important.
The cove hardwood type (fig. 21) is distinctly a mountain type, although 27 percent of the total type area is reported by the Forest Survey as in the Pied- mont, owing to the inclusion in the Piedmont survey unit of the whole east slope of the Blue Ridge Moun- tains. Yellow-poplar is the most prevalent species, making up over one-half the volume in this type in the Piedmont and nearly one-fourth of the volume in the mountains. Principal associates are northern red, scarlet, black, and white oaks, sugar maple, and bass- wood. The cove hardwood is the most valuable moun- tain type, having the second highest saw-timber vol- ume per acre and the highest-priced species. As its name implies, it is confined to the north- and west- facing coves of the mountains and to the lower slopes, on deep, moist soils.
The white pine type (fig. 22) is also confined to the White pine and hemlock make up over half the total type volume. White, scarlet, black, and northern red oaks, basswood, and yellow-poplar are the This type also includes
mountains.
principal hardwood associates. the very limited amount of red spruce found in the State. slope of the Blue Ridge in southern Virginia and in the
The white pine type occurs chiefly on the west
Shenandoah Mountains in the west-central part of the State, but smaller areas are well scattered throughout the whole Mountain province.
The type map at the back of this report delineates the broad areas of the State within which the indicated forest type predominates. No attempt has been made
to delineate minor types or to show agricultural land.
Forest Condition
Forest condition © is classified, on the basis of the
size of dominant trees, eee stand volume, and
cutting history, into three classes: Saw timber, cord-
° For definitions of condition classes and tree-size classes, see Appendix, p. 57.
wood, and reproduction stands. Saw timber may be
either old growth or second growth.
nearly twice that in cordwood (table 4, fig. 23) , in the Piedmont the proportion was nearly equal, while in the mountains there was considerably more cordwood than saw-timber acreage.
Nearly three-fifths of all
In the Coastal Plain the area in saw timber was | the reproduction stands were in the Piedmont. i
FOREST CONDITION
SAW TIMBER ry
CORDWOOD
REPRODUCTION
ALL CONDITIONS
20 40 PERCENT
Ficure 23.—Distribution of forest area by forest condition | and physiographic province, 1940.
In the State as a whole, nearly one-half the forest area was in the saw-timber condition. Almost as large an area was in cordwood stands, while the re- maining 5 percent was classed as reproduction. Only 18,600 acres was classified as not restocking (fig. 7D) 5 duction.
Of the State’s saw-timber area of 7,155,000 acres, 45 percent was in softwood types, 55 percent in hardwood types.. Broken down by individual forest types, 42 percent was upland hardwoods, loblolly and the remaining one-fourth mainly Virginia pine and bottom-land hardwoods (table 25, Appendix). That so large an area of forest land could still be classed but it must be remembered that the minimum yvolume- As- suming minimum diameters and heights, only 15 to 20
and this area is included hereafter with repro-
19 percent was
pine, 14 percent was shortleaf pine,
as saw timber is in some respect reassuring, per-acre requirements for saw timber are low. trees per acre are needed to classify a stand as operable saw timber.
Of the 6,553,000 acres in the cordwood condition, only 39 percent was in softwood types, 61 percent in
Taste 4.—Dzrstribution of forest area by physiographie province and forest condition, 1940
Physiographic province Saw timber Cordwood Reproduction All conditions | E | Acres | Percent Acres Percent Acres | Percent Acres Percent Spastal blaine iets anaes e ee | 2, 477, 100 | 63.2 1, 276, 300 | 32.6 165, 800 4.2 3, 919, 200 100.0 Predmiont tare a pian laos ie teen Na aa SN tN 2, 710, 700 | 46.5 2, 708, 000 | 46.5 409, 200 7.0 5, 827, 900 100.0 Moparain= certian het | 1,967,000} 42.2] 2, 569, 000 55.1] 128,900 2.7) — 4,664, 900 100.0 | ager cack Coes hs pn Asan See GN aS | 7, 154, 800 | 49.6 6, 553, 300 | 45.5 1703, 900 4.9 14, 412, 000 | 100.0 | | | | |
1 Includes 18,600 acres (0.1 percent of total forest area) in nonrestocking condition.
18
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U.S. Department of Agriculture
19
AS) 2.8 LES 8 S is is ~ aS S) Roars Sie ae Ss eas Ses 2a 3 8 = i~ om ys 4 S$ eas Shee S Lm S Sy wo Sis 8 Se SESS SEES Soe Le SEs S Sas aN Cyne RS ‘38 ye es Qe SS Vs As wes 28 =S ioe 5 2 5 aS ers S : [s ES 5 .- & oO ~ <° N (aN fat 4 a) S z 5 i) g fy ey i ms) e > BR SN, 3 3 ues Tae u 8 eos 5 S > S 2 S) 8 N 8s x SES zoos S io} ~ Bo Saas} ~S 8 8 gs 8 oOo 4 3.8 = ae Sh © 9 Oss & ss ES = 2 — as) gus gk ies ‘Soo ash tg 8 Qs S 8 nH 38 Sy oS ne Sees ® Ae 65 5m So es S AS} RES ai oS ss & Gn 8 2s 3 5 5 % Ww S) & | | © ) Sc ; Ry iVoo) a a 8 3 g SS 5 5 2p =) x Q Ss i iS) iS a open
i
hardwood. By individual types, 3.4 million acres was upland hardwoods (fig. 25), 1 million acres was Virginia pine, 870,000 acres was shortleaf pine (fig. 26) , 580,000 acres was loblolly pine (fig. 27), and the balance was in three less extensive types. In the up- land hardwood type, the cordwood area exceeded the saw-timber area by nearly one-half million acres. Virginia pine was the only other type in which the cordwood area exceeded the saw-timber area, in this case by 323,000 acres. One reason for this is the naturally short life and small size of the species. An- other is the intense demand for pine saw timber in the Piedmont, where Virginia pine is most abundant.
Only 5 percent of the forest area, or 704,000 acres, was Classed as reproduction. Such a small area speaks well for the recuperative powers of the forests of Virginia.
In interpreting these data on acreage of forest con- ditions, a word of caution is in order. It can be said with certainty that there is a vast acreage of land in Virginia now producing or capable of producing tim- ber, and that there is very little of the area which does not have a nucleus of growing stock sufficient to yield a satisfactory volume of wood if given adequate pro- tection and time to grow. It is also true, on the other hand, that much land supports inferior species, that most areas have only one-third to one-half full stock- ing, and that not all the saw-timber area is commer- cially operable because of small volumes per acre in poor-quality trees.
Age of Stands
Old-field stands are generally even-aged. Forest- grown stands commonly contain several age classes, except where the stand has come in after heavy cut- ting. The old-growth stands in the pine types are more than 100 years old, whereas second-growth saw timber is 40 to 45 years old, and cordwood stands are chiefly 20 to 30 years. These ages are the average for all sites; on good sites, pine will attain sawlog size at an earlier age.
Hardwood forests usually contain a mixture of re- production, saplings, and sawlog-size trees, the pro- portion of each varying with the forest condition, Old-field sweetgum or yellow-poplar stands, however, are commonly even-aged. Other even-aged hardwood stands are occasionally found as_a result of prompt restocking after heavy cutting, or more rarely as old- growth timber without an understory of younger trees. Old-growth hardwood stands exceed 100 years of age, some individual trees being several hundred years old.
y
Second-growth saw timber averages 50 to 70 years — old, and cordwood stands are 25 to 30 years of age. To produce an annual sustained yield of wood, a forest should consist of a series of timbered areas ap- proximately equal in potential productivity, and vary- ing in age by roughly even intervals from the youngest to the oldest age class. The proportionate area re- quired in each age class will vary with the length of rotation which, in turn, will vary with financial con- siderations, products being grown, site quality, and other factors. In general, pine sawlogs can be grown in Virginia in 25 to 40 years, depending on the site, but it takes 60 years or more to grow high-quality saw timber. With hardwood saw timber, the minimum rotation is about 60 years, but 80 to 100 years is usu-
ally needed to obtain high-quality timber. Yellow- poplar and sweetgum will produce small saw timber
in 50 to 60 years.
The distribution of age classes in the hardwood types favors continuous production of saw timber (fig. 28) because it approaches the ideal forest just described. The bottom-land hardwoods type has the best distri- bution. The loblolly and shortleaf pine stands have about the right area in stands less than 25 years old, somewhat too much in the 26- to 55-year age group, and a shortage in the two oldest age groups, if an ample supply of high-quality saw timber is the objective. Virginia pine is a short-lived species, not too desirable for lumber, and its age-class distribution favors con- tinuous yields of pulpwood.
FOREST AGE CLASS (YEARS) IRE l=25 56-85 | 86+ {sen [ra] jeu]
Ea! LOBLOLLY PINE SHORTLEAF PINE
VIRGINIA PINE
BOTTOM-LAND HDWDS.
COVE HDWDS. UPLAND HDWDS. ALL TYPES
O 10 20 30 40 50 600 10 20 30 40 50 600 {10 201300 10 20 AREA (PERCENT)
Ficure 28.—Proportionate distribution of area of each forest type by age class.
Site Quality
It is a common but false belief that any land too poor for agricultural crops or improved pasture will, if devoted to “forestry,” grow successive crops of good timber. Actually some land is too poor to do even that; it may grow trees, but not commercial timber. Such land has been classed herein as “noncommer- cial.” Other land, in the commercial class, may grow
20 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
only limited quantities of timber of low quality because forest soils, like all others, vary in productive capacity. The combined effect of soil, climate, slope, exposure, and other factors is measured by site quality.
The site quality of forest land was measured in two ways; for the pine lands of the Coastal Plain and Pied- mont it was based on the height of average dominant pine trees at 50 years of age (site index) ; for all hard- woods in the State and pines in the mountains it was based on merchantable height, tree form, and soil and moisture conditions. Pine sites were considered good if the site index was 80 feet or above, fair if 60 to 79 feet, and poor if less than 60 feet. Hardwood sites were considered good if the merchantable trees, exclu- sive of yellow-poplar, averaged three or more 16-foot logs, fair if they averaged 1.5 to 3 logs, and poor if they averaged less than 1.5 logs. Longer merchantable lengths were required in yellow-poplar, pine, spruce, and hemlock in the mountains.
In the Coastal Plain 22 percent of the forest land _ was rated as of good site and 68 percent as of fair site, _a total of 90 percent that was of satisfactory produc- tivity (table 5). This is a much higher proportion than in the rest of the State. The deep soils, abundant moisture, and lack of erosion in the Coastal Plain ac- count for the better growing conditions. In the Pied- mont, on the other hand, only 8 percent of forest area was of good site, and 69 percent was of fair, a total of 77 percent of satisfactory productivity. Rapid and severe deterioration of soil following land abuse is the _ major cause of lower site values in the latter province.
Taste 5.—Distribution of forest area by physiographic province and site class, 1940
Physiographic province Good Fair Poor Percent Percent Percent Goustal bl arm iace tage eee ie ey tee ee 22 68 10 Piedmon tease ete ace eee eth ees ES cis 8 69 23 PTO yin cali ee veer peice ae ee se 3 74 23 Al iiprovincesm es seep ee eee 10 71 19
In the mountains only 3 percent of the area was of _ good site, but 74 percent was of fair. Good sites are rare because of the effects of topography and thin soils. In general they are confined to the lower north slopes, coves, and narrow valley floors. Except for the upper coves, these locations are commonly put in cultivation or grass pasture, reducing still further the forest area in the good-site class.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries 825098°—49 4
Stocking
The relation of the density of the average stand in terms of volume in cords per acre to the density of the best 10 percent of stands is referred to, in this report, as stocking density. Data are available only for the Coastal Plain and Piedmont. In the former, the average pine stand was only half stocked (fig. 29), containing 18 cords per acre as contrasted with 36 cords for the best 10 percent of the stands. Degree of stocking varied only slightly from age class to age class, ranging from 41 percent in the 11- to 20-year age class to 55 percent in the 51- to 60- and 61- to 70-year classes, then declining in the older age classes.
F-A41779
Figure 29.—This loblolly pine stand is about 60 percent stocked, or 10 percent better than the average pine stand in the Coastal Plain.
In the northern Piedmont, average stocking in the upland hardwood type was only 49 percent, while in the shortleaf pine-hardwood type of the southern Pied- mont it was 61 percent. For the Piedmont as a whole in all cordwood and saw-timber stands, pine types averaged 47 percent stocking, hardwood types 51 percent.
21
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
The Volume of Timber
AN va
HE estimates of standing timber in the State
refer to the volume in all trees 5 inches d. b. h.
and larger, including dead chestnut, and are ex- pressed in three units of measure: board feet, cords, and cubic feet.‘
Saw- Timber Volume
In 1940, Virginia’s forests contained 25 billion board feet of saw timber, when scaled by the International “%-inch log rule. tained by this rule are considered the equivalent of
In this report, the volumes ob-
actual yield of unseasoned lumber under prevailing sawmill practice. In 1945, Virginia ranked ninth among the 12 States of the South in total board-foot
* Definitions of the three kinds of volume, and of other terms, are given in the Appendix, p. 58.
fizasneaen|
LOBLOLLY PINE SHORTLEAF PINE WHITE OAK YELLOW -POPLAR
|RED OAKS
=} VIRGINIA PINE CHESTNUT OAK NORTHERN RED OAK
SWEETGUM
kS
volume of timber, with 7 percent of the total volume of saw timber in this region. Forty-seven percent of the State’s saw timber as of 1940 was in the Coastal — Plain, 30 percent in the Piedmont, and 23 percent in
the mountains.
Volume by Species
The total board-foot volume of live timber was almost exactly half softwood and half hardwood, the © softwood volume exceeding the hardwood by only 242 million board feet (table 6). however, made up 29 percent of the volume, with its more than 7 billion board feet (fig. 30). It was fol- lowed in importance by shortleaf pine, white oak, yellow-poplar, “other red oaks” (black, pin, scarlet, and southern red oaks), Virginia pine, and chestnut
Loblolly pine alone,
oak. The remaining 26 percent was made up by other species, each providing less than 5 percent of total volume, although all the “gums” (sweetgum, black and water tupelos) together made up nearly 8 percent. There were 758 million board feet of dead chestnut still standing and usable in 1940; a considerable vol- ume has since been cut in filling the increased demands for extract wood occasioned by war needs.
Most of the loblolly pine, sweetgum, and blackgum saw timber is in the Coastal Plain, a large part of the shortleaf and Virginia pines and yellow-poplar is in the Piedmont, and all of the dead chestnut is in the
Aeneccute mountains. Table 26 gives details on the volume by | TOTAL LIVE VOLUME species and forest condition. HeKORY 24.3 BILLION BOARD FEET WHITE PINE DEAD CHESTNUT TABLE 6.—Net saw-timber volume (International %4-inch rule) by Ree 0.8 BILLION BOARD FEET species and forest condition, 1940 : TOTAL VOLUME BEECH 25.1 BILLION BOARD FEET | Forest condition HEMLOCK Species | Total Saw | Cord- CYPRESS timber wood! | ASH Softwoods: | Mid. ft. | Mobd. fr. | Mbd. ft. | Percent Loblolly pine 2__-_-__==__ 6,913,500 | 145,900 | 7,059,400 29.0 OTHER NATE OAKS Sortleaf pines ee aetna | 2,492,800 | 220,700 | 2,713,500} 11.2 SUGAR MAPLE Virginiaspine see ae | 1,404,500 | 137,000 | 1,541,500 6.3 ; White pine---.----------| 383,900 | 30,000 | 413,900 | 1.7 OTHER HARDWOODS Hlemlocla9seae set eee | 240,100 11,600 251,700 1.0 Redcedar2peee ee eee 31,500 | 9,700 41,200 52 MER sor neeee White cedaroe sees ae | 64,000} 900 | 64,900 | 3 Gypress# et eee | ~ 201,100 | 800 201,900 8 BILLIONS OF BOARD FEET Toralap soon sare 11,731,400 | 556,6C0 |12,288,000 50.5 Ficure .30.—The volume of saw timber by species, 1940. 22 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U.S. Department of Agriculture
TasLe 6.—WNet saw-timber value, etc-—Continued
Forest condition Species | Total Saw Cord- timber wood !
Hardwoods: M bd. ft. M bd. ft. M bd. ft. | Percent Redemiap]e we sesea niet te oe 373 ,0V0 19,800 392,800 | 1.6 iBlackeum te easnein sae 823 ,400 24,200 847 ,600 3.5 Sweetgumuastesaee nes 989,500 31,700 | 1,021,200 4.2 Yellow-poplar___--------- 1,810,000 69,900 | 1,879,900 7.7 Northern red oak____----- 1,030,400 33,700 | 1,064,100 4.4 Other red oaks__-_----_-- 1,581,800 93,000 | 1,674,800 6.9 Wihitetoales shee aa 1,827,600 75,000 | 1,902,600 738 @hestnur.oak! Sars sie es 1,109,500 64,100 | 1,173,600 4.8 Other white oaks_________ 101,200 6,800 108 ,000 4 IBinGh essen Geen eS tia ei Se 34,500 2,800 37,300 2 Beecher ty sae sera en iets 276,900 8,800 285 ,700 1.2 TAC KOT yess i ere 598 ,800 37,100 635 ,900 2.6 Cherry, walnut__---=----- 42,400 7,800 50,200 ay} Sugar maple__-_2=2--4--+2 | 92.400 4,100 96,500 4 NSH a siz aie Bee Scere 171,300 | 4,900 176,200 a7 Other hardwoods 4_______- 670,600 29,200 699,800 239
aT stale Ren 11,533,300 | 512,900 |12,046, 200 49.5 All live species_-______- 23,264,700 1,069,500 124,334,200 100.0 Deadichescnut.2 se 444,400 314,000 | 758,400 | aera (Allespecies asian 23,709,100 1,383,500 \25,092,600 |________
1 Includes the saw-timber volume, 5,100 M board feet, in the reproduction areas.
2 Includes pond pine, 3,500 M board feet.
3 Includes red spruce, 2,700 M board feet.
4Includes basswood, sycamore, bay, magnolia, willow, and other minor species. :
Volume by Diameter Classes
A better picture of the current availability of the saw-timber volume for conversion to sawlogs is pro- vided by an analysis of volume distribution by diam- eter classes. The 25 billion board feet cannot all be counted as a current source of quality lumber because in 1940 nearly one-fourth of it was in trees less than 13 inches d. b. h. These small trees are suitable for pulpwood or generally low-grade lumber. One-half of the total volume was in trees from 13.0 to 18.9 inches in diameter, while only one-fourth was in trees now 19 inches or more in diameter, which usually yield the most high-grade lumber (table 7). Nearly half of the softwood volume was in the 10- to 12-inch class, and only one-eighth of it in the 20-inches-and- over class. The hardwood volume was distributed | more evenly (minimum saw-timber diameter for hard- i} woods is 13.0 inches) , 57 percent in the 14- to 18-inch class, 43 percent in the 20-inches-and-over class.
Three of the hardwood species and one softwood had a larger percent of volume in the 20-inches-and- over class than in the 14- to 18-inch class. ‘These were northern red oak, chestnut oak, sugar maple, and } hemlock. All are predominantly mountain species,
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
and the reason for this uncommon volume distribu- tion is in part their location in more inaccessible log- ging chances. Also, hemlock was not in great demand for lumber until World War II. Chestnut oak is a ridge-top and upper-slope type, but the species is not in- high demand for lumber, and has a relatively low The hard- wood species with the lowest percentage of volume in the largest diameter class were ash and sweetgum, other white oaks, and hickory.
stumpage value and high logging cost.
These are predomi- nantly Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont species, and in general are heavily cut.
TaBLe 7.—Distributors of the saw-timber volume, by species group and tree-diameter class, 1940
oe | 2 2 Species group Helen | aches | tech Softwoods: Percent Percent Percent Mob lol yapime seers ea ceentn em tesees teal erecta 40.5 45.6 13.9 Shortleaftpine S225. ee ee 60.6 33" 6.3 Mingimiaspine= =e) a eee 71.0 27.8 1:32 Wihite pine Saar saben ens era pe 28.5 39.1 32.4 IMemlocks#ise a neces ates RRC ees 14.0 32.2 53.8 Redcedarsce en aeets iia Soy ae 78.2 1989 129 Wihite=-ced an essa c 7 in EAMES Lateran: 10.9 45.5 43.6 Gy presse ane Osh cura we es cyne een SAE 43.7 28.6 All¥softwood sox 3 ets) Aes aes | 47.6 40.0 12.4 Hardwoods: | We elim apo ee sO Seat Se aa tie ER eternity 65.1 34.9 Blacker seaplane rece By ae eee eats aa 595 40.5 Sivecteumies satura Ranta Savile era 71.3 28.7 Niellow=poplarsee eso ae tnk Bow en [bseannlepte 61.2 38.8 Northern red\oak- 2-222 5202.) 1221] j aateiie ei 39.3 60.7 @thenredtoa ks te Saas is aera ae [egies xn See 60.2 39.8 Wihtteroaloe sists ie eres epee ous Biro |B Sly LR 50.9 49.1 Ghestnutioaksatan eae ieee ooo eee tees 49.1 50.9 Other white oaks:_-2._-2__L-22 22. feces 68.5 31.5 Bite tart caret nGer So Sep rss a shee Ne tants Jenene ore: 61.1 38.9 Beechiem hts eon ete cp etn Big em ste jee eee ee 56.7 43.3 PRICK Ory aM Raat Se ee RON ass | 66.8 33.2 (Greer y-servvra ra ra ae a SP a seat 62.2 37.8 Sugarpmia ple me cet ee pe See | Un ee 40.6 59.4 UNS Vig ae en Ne aS EAS FE ge ta ee | PENA eee 71.4 28.6 Othemhardwoods2st aie Sos eee al ee ee 59.9 » 40.1 Ali hardwood se saau ma sau sere a tra | beer ee os | 57.4 42.6 | | Allllivespecies.-"s.2se 525-29 ees | 24.0 48.6 | 27.4 Dear ichies teu tie teste os Bi pa Sel eats | apa aS 49.7 50.3 | Aliispectes! eon ae VE eee aoa | 23.3 | 48.6 28.1
There was considerable variation among the three physiographic provinces in board-foot-volume distri- The Piedmont particu- larly was noticeable for the large softwood volume
bution by diameter classes.
in the lowest diameter class, while the mountains had both the lowest proportion in the 10- to 12-inch class and the highest proportion in the largest size. In the Coastal Plain, 42 percent of the softwood volume was in the 10- to 12-inch class, 44 percent in the 14-
23
to 18-inch class, and 14 percent in the 20-inch-plus class (fig. 31, table 27).
In respect to hardwood board-foot volume, the dis- tribution in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont was al- most identical—about 60 percent in the 14- to 18-inch class and 40 percent in the 20-inch-plus class. The mountains had only 52 percent of hardwood volume in the 14- to 18-inch class, and 48 percent in the larger class.
DIAMETER CLASS (Inches)
) ar
ISPECIES GROUP! AND PROVINCE
SOFTWOODS: | COASTAL PLAIN 5
PIEDMONT
MOUNTAIN HARDWOODS: COASTAL PLAIN
PIEDMONT
MOUNTAIN
20 40 PERCENT
Ficure 31.—Distribution of board-foot volume by diameter class and province, 1940.
In interpreting these data, it must be recognized that the volume in the trees 13 inches and larger in diameter is not all immediately available for productive saw- milling or other conversion. scattered trees in younger stands, some of it is in
Some of this volume is in
“wolf” trees—large, limby trees often left in pre- vious cuttings—some of it is in areas of poor accessi- bility where only high lumber prices can insure a profitable operation because of high logging costs, and some of it is in species which are not in general demand. On the other hand, the larger portion of this volume is operable. Some further light on degree of operability is given by the volume per acre in the various types of forest in the State.
Volume Per Acre
While other factors such as size, quality, location, and other items must be recognized in judging the operability of a logging chance, it is the volume per There must be enough The minimum varies, of course, with the type of operation, the kind and quality of the timber, and the terrain. In the days of railroad logging to a stationary mill, heavy stands on large areas were required to offset the high costs invested in railroads and logging equipment. Except for a few areas, Virginia’s forests will no longer support this type of operation. Truck logging to a small stationary mill (small in comparison with the
acre which weighs heaviest. saw timber per acre to support the operation.
“big” mills of railroad logging history) can be sup- — ported by a stand of 1,500 to 2,000 feet per acre, or — less, of course, for specialty woods bringing high prices, or where all other factors are especially favorable. Portable mills which go to the timber, instead of hav- ing it brought to them, operate on as small a volume — as 300 to 500 board feet per acre, though with the lower limit the operation may be marginal financially.
Almost one-half (3.4 million acres) of the saw- timber area in 1940 bore stands averaging less than 2,000 board feet per acre. In the softwood types, 40 percent, and in the hardwood types, 52 percent of the area was in this low stocking class (table 28, fig. 32). This poorly stocked land bore 17 percent of the total board-foot volume in saw-timber stands, or an average This means that on nearly one-half of Virginia’s saw-timber area the forest was best adapted to operation by small portable mills. This partially explains the predominance of the small mill in Virginia’s lumber industry.
of only 1,178 board feet per acre.
VOLUME PER ACRE (Boord feet)
VOLUME
| SOFTWOOD TYPES
LESS THAN 2,000
2,000 — 3,999
4,000 - 5,999 6,000 - 7,999
econ ZMH UWA
8,000 — 9,999
10,000 AND OVER
LESS THAN 2,000
Yj MA UMMM
2,000 = 3,999
4,000 - 5,999
6,008 - 7,999
8,000 — 9,999
10,000 AND OVER
20 PERCENT
Figure 32.—Distribution of saw-timber area and board-foot volume by volume-per-acre classes and type groups, 1940.
An additional 40 percent of the saw-timber area bore stands of 2,000 to 6,000 board feet per acre, which contained 42 percent of the total volume on saw- timber areas. ‘These areas are suitable for larger sta- tionary mills supported by truck logging, but even in these it is usually cheaper to take the mill to the woods and haul lumber rather than logs. On only 314,000 acres (4.4 percent of area) did the stands average 10,000 or more board feet per acre, but these areas had 19 percent of the total volume, averaging 14,300 board feet per acre. Most of it was in limited areas of the coastal bottom-land hardwoods, in a few large holdings in the loblolly pine type, and in the less accessible deep coves of the mountains. Softwood stands in this class averaged better than 14,600 feet
per acre, and hardwood stands 13,500 feet.
24 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
The Mountain province had 60 percent of its saw- timber area in the “less than 2,000” board-feet-per- acre class, followed by the Piedmont with 51 percent. The Coastal Plain had only 32 percent in the lowest class (table 28). The mountains and Piedmont like- wise had less than 2 percent of the area in the “10,000 and over” class, whereas the Coastal Plain had 10 percent. This resulted in the Coastal Plain having 32 percent of its volume in the 10,000-feet-or-more-per- acre class, whereas the Piedmont and mountains had only 8 and 6 percent, respectively.
In the Coastal Plain no county had less than 1,000 board feet per average forest acre in 1940, and only 3 counties had less than 2,000 feet. One county (Northampton) averaged better than 6,000 feet per acre, and 7 others (Accomac, Isle of Wight, James City, Mathews, Southampton, Warwick, York) aver- aged 4,000-6,000 feet. The other 23 Coastal Plain counties averaged 2,000-4,000 feet per acre. In the Piedmont no county had over 2,100 feet per acre, and in only 2 (Loudoun and Mecklenburg) the average exceeded 2,000 feet. Eight counties had less than 1,000 board feet per acre. In the Mountain province, no county averaged as much as 2,000 feet, while 16 counties averaged less than 1,000 feet per acre.
The heaviest saw-timber stands were in the loblolly pine type, followed by the bottom-land and hardwood type, and the white pine type (table 8). Lowest vol- umes per acre were in the upland hardwood and shortleaf pine types. The average saw-timber stand had 3,250 feet per acre.
In North Carolina (3) saw-timber stands averaged 4,280 feet per acre, or more than 1,000 board feet per
acre higher than in Virginia. In South Carolina (4)
TasLe 8.—Board-foot volume (International %4-inch rule) per average acre in saw-timber stands by types, 1940
Forest type
Species group Peeters ee eee icone UP: oe inia| White! jand | hard-| land
Loblolly and shortleaf pine_|4,830] 1,890} 460 110; 420 10} 160)1,310
Virginia pine---+---_-_-- 60 150}1,430 50 20 10 40} 200 Other softwoods_~------- 10 30} 30} 2,610; 430) 110) 40) 130 COR) gags ite Ree ee ee 190} 220) 380] 610) 420) 900/1,420) 790 Gums and yellow-poplar__| 310 190} 240 110}1,980/1,120} 420) 510 Other hardwoods__-_----- 70 40 70 290}1,050| 970} 360) 310
All live species _-___- 5,470) 2,520/2,610| 3,780/4,320)3,120/2,440)3 ,250
Dead chestnut_____-_----|----- 10} (@) 120\ees2= 210} 120} - 60
1 Less than 5.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
the average stand per acre on all forest land was 2,600 board feet for the pine types and 3,500 feet for the hardwood types, contrasted with 2,100 and 1,500, re- spectively, in Virginia. These and preceding facts indicate how severely Virginia has cut into her capital of forest resources. The general understocking of all forest types in all parts of the State is one of the most disturbing aspects of the forest situation. While un- derstocking is common to all Southern States, it has reached rather alarming proportions in Virginia, where nearly half of the saw-timber area bears stands averaging less than 1,200 board feet per acre.
Volume in Cords
The total volume of sound wood and bark measured in cords, including all trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger, was more than three times the volume in saw- logs alone—a total of 204.5 million cords (table 9). The 66.8 million cords of sawlog material includes the saw-timber volume previously discussed... The volume in upper stems of sawlog-size trees includes the large limbs of hardwoods to a minimum diameter of 4.0 inches inside bark. That in cull trees is the sound material in the stems of cull softwoods and in the stems and limbs of cull hardwoods. The volume in under- sawlog-size trees is that in softwoods from 5.0 to 8.9 inches d. b. h. and in hardwoods from 5.0 to 12.9 inches d. b. h.
species and class of material,
7940 1 Saw-timber trees Wades | ss Se Sawlogs ipper trees : oe Softwoods: M cords | M cords | M cords| M cords| M cords Loblolly pine_-_________ 17,317.1) 3,657.0} 7,322.8) 650.0) 28,946.9 Shortleaf pine 2,208.8} 7,439.1 691.0} 18,111.8 Virginia’ pine=—- 22 22-2_- 3% -4| 1,307.5} 6,069.3} 1,388.4} 12,735.6 White-pine22- 22.2 - == i 207.2 304.9 133.4) 1,564.6 Hemlock 109.4 105.8 87.9 873.2 Redcedarss cscs ese O12 2 a ee 262.2 4.4 367.8 White-cedar____-----__- ‘ 13-7 By Ae 170.1 Gypress2= noses se ene : 146.7 100.2 84.8 812.7 Motals2ess we a 31,282.8] 7,650.3|21,609.7| 3,039.9) 63,582.7 | | Hardwoods:
Redimaplesss2225cs reas 6 2,139.6) 2,671.9) 6,512.1 Blackgum .8| 2,693.0] 2,483.7! 8,885.7 Sweetgumese= eae a ee .6| 5,066.4) 1,163.0} 10,174.3 Yellow-poplar__________ 5) 6,145.7} 1,279.0) 15,037.7 Northern red oak -8| 1,825.9} 1,216.4) 7,276.8 Other red oaks_________ .1) 9,187.2) 2,494.8) 19,086.5 Wihitetoalksvs= se ier eas 25.1) 9,575.9) 2,428.2] 20,133.1 Chestnut oak_-______- | 3 .4| 4,812.0) 5,180.8] 15,437.3
1 Volumes shown represent State average for year. In Coastal Plain and southern Piedmont they are as of Jan. 1; in northern Piedmont and mountains they are as of Dec. 31.
25
TABLE 9.—Volume of timber in cords by species and class of material, 33), while in the Piedmont, the hardwood volume ine ego cnunucd this class was 69 percent of the total (table 29). In
sc RS
ine
We
Ren the mountains, of course, it was almost entirely hard- | aw-timber trees Under- ¢ Soe } sawlog- | Cull All ma- wood. af pecies | U size trees terial 5 . = A Sawlogs| UPP&F | trees Two courses of action, neither mutually exclusive, x : . 3 Se oneen n geen iS N e | | appear to face pine-timber operators in Virginia. One — Hardwoods—Continued — | M cords | M cords | M cords| M cords| M cords is to adopt at once conscious steps of forest manage- — Other white oaks_______ | 337.3] 174.4] 1,232.9] 447.9] 2,192.5 sees : ; Birch te cakes aan eer | 100.6 59.5 218.6 291.1 669.8 ment to favor pine in the succession on their own Beech ese wee ene 761.7) 461.8] 614.2) 565.3) 2,403.0 lands; as a supplement to this, operators will need Hickory= o's ene 1,962.6] 1,069.4} 3,687.7] 981.2] 7,700.9 : : ‘| Gees: Bee pa 129-51. 66.2|. 177.01" 83.11. 455.8 to undertake the difficult and not always feasible task | Sugar maple_--________ 259.2) 158.5] 159.5} 315.2} 892.4 of favoring similar succession on the lands of others Ash.--_-----------..-_| 461-2] 247.6] 1,065.0] 633.0) 2,406.8 Dogwood__-._-2-_-__-- cst ledeee ee 1,160.0| 288.6) - 1,448.6 Bla ckslOocus tiecttee tees mesa pekinese | oie aa 1,096.0 185.0} 1,281.0 Other merchantable hardwoods___ =-_____- 1,873.6] 1,059.2) 2,701.4) 2,330.4) 7,964.6 SGHUDshand woods = sss: val ewan | Sees ian ee eee eS 1,355.8) 1,355.8 SEF (Ss | otaleeeeae = lcs ane 32,998. 8/18, 363 .5/53,558.0:26,394.4/131, 314.7 All live species_______ 64 281 .6|26,013 .8|75,167.7/29,434.3|194,897.4 Dead chestnut_____________- 2,552.5] 1,083.0] 2,891.0] 3,086.3] 9,612.8 All species-___-______| 66,834. 1|27,096.8|78,058.7/32,520.6]204,510.2
Volume of Class of Material
More than two-thirds of the total live volume in cords was in hardwoods (table 9), a total of 131.3 million cords out of 194.9 million cords. An additional 9.6 million cords was in dead chestnut. The sawlog equivalent of the board-foot volume (66.8 million cords) comprised one-third of the total volume, and upper stems of these same trees contributed another 13 percent. Under-sawlog-size trees made up 38 per- cent, and sound wood in cull trees the remaining 16 percent. Of the live volume in cull trees, 90 percent was in hardwoods—an indication of the damage to hardwoods caused by fire, ice, and other factors, and of the effect of poor site on tree form. Softwoods
Z at AOS, : 2 Maer and hardwoods contributed about equal proportions Fo4a1765 of the sawlog volume, but in under-sawlog trees there Ficure 33.—Hardwoods predominate in the understory, even
in the pine forests of the Coastal Plain, and compete
was about 2.5 times as much volume in hardwoods seen 2 : strongly with pine seedlings for space and nutrients.
as in softwoods. This apparent excess is due in part to the higher diameter limit set for under-sawlog-size
Soins hardwoods, 12.9 inches d. b. h. in contrast to 8.9 for softwoods. However, a comparison of the cord volume in all sound trees up to 12.9 inches d. b. h. showed that the hardwood volume exceeded the soft- wood by nearly 25 percent.
from whom they get their timber. The second course is for operators to recognize that their product in the next or succeeding rotations will be cut increas- ingly from hardwood species and to adapt their opera- tions to the use of more hardwood. Both courses—
increase of softwood supplies and utilization of hard- That so large a proportion of the cord volume, espe-
woods—will presumably be followed, depending on cially in the smaller trees, was in hardwoods is cause
circumstances in individual cases. Needless to say, there will still be a lot of softwoods produced in Vir- ginia in future years, but the present ratio between
the two species groups will probably be materially sawlog-size trees was in hardwood species in 1940 (fig. altered. i
for thought. These young trees are the forest of to- morrow. Even in the Coastal Plain, which is forested largely with pine, 64 percent of the volume in under-
26 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
In the case of the volume in upper stems (and in limbs of hardwoods), there was also a heavy predomi- nance of hardwoods. Hardwood tops and limbs are rarely utilized, whereas pine tops can be readily used for pulp and fuel wood and a longer portion of the main stem is used for lumber. Utilization of hard- wood tops and limbs is one of the yet unsolved prob- lems in decreasing woods waste, but recent pulping and chemical developments may open the way to utilize profitably a much larger portion of this material than at present. A somewhat similar problem is raised by the sound-wood volume in cull hardwoods. As noted previously, 90 percent, 26 million cords, of the total live volume in cull trees was hardwood. ‘The bulk of the hardwood volume in culls, moreover, was in the oaks, hickories, and scrub hardwoods, which have been little used for pulpwood. Here is a major problem in utili- zation and stand improvement, the solution of which __ is difficult to envisage. Greater use of sound wood in
cull hardwoods for fuel wood, tobacco wood, mine props, pulpwood, and any other use for which a market is available is silviculturally desirable.
Comparison of the cord volumes by diameter classes for the four most abundant species reveals the great predominance of volume in small trees (fig. 34, table 10). Only 38 percent of the volume in loblolly pine, 18 percent of that in shortleaf pine, 35 percent of the white oak volume, and 45 percent of that in yellow- poplar was in trees more than 13 inches d.b.h. These four species were not particularly selected to illustrate a bad situation. For all species, the distribution showed only 34 percent of the volume to be in trees more than 13 inches d.b.h. If this distribution of vol- ume remains substantially unchanged in the future, high-quality lumber cannot be produced in anything like the amount which has flowed from Virginia’s forests in the past. Continued overcutting of large trees and the practice of “high-grading” will further
TaBLe 10.—WNet volume in cords by species and diameter class, 1940}
es aE ek Ny
Diameter class Species Total 6-8 inches | 10-12 inches | 14-18 inches | 20+ inches Softwoods: M cords M cords M cords M cords M cords Percent TEGBlollya pine aaa eat aene so as Sauces Ue Ute eu Renee Cat 7, 322.8 10, 193.4 8,558.4 | 2,222.3 | 28, 296.9 19. 3 Short learte pine seecses ses ae tee a cae oat a Pee Ee 7, 439.1 6, 908. 3 2, 654.1 | 419.3 17, 420.8 11.9 Whig iver ite eke SS a ee eee Se ee 6, 069. 3 4,018.5 1, 214. 4 45.0 11, 347.2 77, Wihit cup me se sean spec en ap ae mile eaten ne oye OMe en 304.9 392.6 428.5 305.2 1, 431.2 1.0 fern) oc kee eee eet ee EL Go ee em ee 105.8 134.8 224.8 319.9 785.3 OG) Ted Ged arate teenies en si Meneame ie ramen ee ue om hon eas 262.2 80.5 18.9 1.8 363.4 | 59) WWihite-ced arses aan wena aneh ae tty be ee Te ese e ona 5.4 22.2 77.0 65.5 170.1 mal: (Chon a a a a ee ee 100.2 155.3 207.3 118.4 581.2 <4 OT ay Sa EI CE ed im Neg a ee a 21, 609.7 21, 905.6 13, 383.4 3, 497.4 60, 396. 1 41.1 Hardwoods: Teneletariey ae st Cae ee SS oe ee eee ea eee 1,065.8 1,073.8 727.2 348.8 3,215.6 DEF Blackguma= sss se saa eee I SE oe a 1, 043.2 1, 649.8 1535292. 895.0 5,117.2 3.5 Sweets rm haere eres nye er Sere aes Bee ee na Se Slalom a 2, 310.0 2, 756.4 1,817.7 652.6 7, 536.7 5.1 Wale aeloy epee eae Se ee a ee ee 21953 3, 350.4 3, 167.2 1, 766. 3 11, 079.2 75 INorthernzre dso ake meee sees trips Ny es Se ee ee ne ee ee 754.1 1,071.8 1, 165.0 1,493.7 4,484.6 3.1 @ tre race deca icc eens ee est ep a SS ee eee ee 4, 252.6 4, 934.6 3, 078.0 1,721.4 13, 986.6 9.5 \ynieas Gplen Sa AE Se a 4, 201.5 5, 374.4 2, 860.5 2, 343.4 14, 779.8 10.1 @hrestmu Vio a ener aera Se ene Sea eee yee ee pis Ss a, 2, 142.7 2, 669. 3 1, 845.7 1, 701.4 8,359.1 5.7 @then-wihiteroa ksemeeswate ote eee ae SAE See ee oe 541.0 691.9 244.2 93.1 1, 570.2 1.1 Br, cease eo ey ee Se ae a ee ean ae VSS) 123.1 65.9 34.7 319.2 .2 ? TESS OY ee ye 223.0 392; 460.2 301.5 1, 375.9 9 sf Hickory Sis: seer one nese en ee ao ne eee 4, S7ON 1 |. 2511756 1, 389.1 573.5 5, 650.3 3.8 : Cherny sewal nut eee een on ae ee eee eee woes esa 72.0 105.0 84.8 44.7 306.5 aD Suiparsniaplesenen ders ps series bY oe ee Ne eee eae 80.6 78.9 112.2 147.0 418.7 a3 LNG sg BSN a eS ee 545.1 519.9 341.3 119.9 1, 526.2 1.0 zs ID Yop terol eB ae a ee 723.7 329.2 99.0 8.1 1, 160.0 18 TEM she yeti SR a a I ee 515.5 366.5 166.7 47.3 1, 096.0 8 Other merchantable hardwoods -~---------------------------------------- uf 159.6 1 541.8 1, 190. 5 683.1 4, 575.0 3.1 Bay Fe | eee a a glen eet | SIRI Sok i SA a re ce ee eee es ae 24, 091. 3 29, 145.6 20, 344.4 12,975.5 86, 556.8 58.9 IIIc yates a Rees Ge eee 45,701.0| 51,051.2 | 33,727.8| 16,472.9| 146, 952.9\| 100. 0 Dea dachestn nies eee en wnt st et RoE Rie Sena aa ee a eae 1, 043.7 1, 847.3 2, 496. 1 3, 142-7 BriS7 OO matic ere i All species_____----_-------_---------------------------------------- 46, 744.7 52, 898.5 36, 223.9 19, 615.6 | 15S S48 2702) ee Ss eas Bs $
1 This table differs from table 9 in that the volume contained in cull trees and upper stems and limbs of hardwood and cypress saw timber is not included. As in
table 9, however, volume is State average for year. See footnote to table 9.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries 97
aggravate this undesirable balance in the growing stock, and reduce future production of high-quality products.
SPECIES AND R M DIAMETER CLASS CORDW OCR NOEUME LOBLOLLY PINE ‘| 6 — 8IN.
shocatysce
14-18 «
20+ « SHORTLEAF PINE 6 - BIN.
lOKS2ra¢ 14-18 ««
20+ « WHITE OAK 6 - BIN.
10: =12 «« 14-18 <<
20+ “ YELLOW-POPLAR 6 - BIN.
LOLS 12C6 14 - 18 <‘
20+ ALL SPECIES 6 — BIN.
lOps eres
14-18**
20+ “
0 30 PERCENT
FicurE 34.—Distribution of net cord volume by diameter class, four important species, and all species.
Volume Per Acre
Average volume per acre by forest types ranged from a low of 7.8 cords in the Virginia pine type to a high of 17.1 in the loblolly pine type (table 11). The strictly hardwood types ran from 8.2 cords in the upland hardwoods to 14.5 cords in the bottom-land hardwoods. All forest land averaged 10.2 cords, not including a little over one-half cord per acre of dead
chestnut. As would be expected, the Mountain prov- ince had the lowest average volume per acre (6.3 cords), the Coastal Plain the highest (15.3 cords),
while the Piedmont averaged 9.9 cords.
Taste 11.—WNet volume per acre in cords by forest condition and type,
7940 1 Forest type Forest condition and | Bot- pe All species group Lob- | Short-| Vir- White| to™- Cove 1 Fi | types lolly | leaf | ginia| ©") land | hard- hand pine | pine | pine Pine | hard-| wood] 24TC> eed wood
Saw timber: Loblolly and short- |Cords| Cords | Cords| Cords | Cords|Cords|Cords| Cords
leafipiness:ssaemnee 18. 34) 10.68) 2.31) 0.43) 1. 23) 0.04} 0.59} 5.51 Virginia pine____-____ 37 - 81) 8.24 P26|cenO Gin 05 iene 20 leuental Other softwoods- --_- - 03 ~15)*.15} 8.15] 1.20) .38} .13) .40 Oaks # ee hah abate 1.86] 2.17} 2:70} 3.33) 2.01) 3.23) 7.13) 4.31 Gums. and_ yellow-
poplars ae 2.33) 1.28) 1.49 - 60) 9.79) 5.22) 2.18] 2.76 Other hardwoods_-____ -65 .53) ©. 74) 1.76] 6.23) 5.39) 2.45] 2.11
All live species_____ 23.58) 15.62}15. 63 14. 53)20. 53/14. 31/12. 68/16. 20
Dead\ichestnut2 se seene [aes SUS) SOF TS1S) S04) 15731) 12532), 69:
Cordwood and reproduc- |
tion: Loblolly and short- leafspinesS= oss 32 35| ee 2557| aot .26| ~20) 02) .26) = 87 Virginia pine____---- . 09 .27| 2.16 -10)} .04) .05} .08) .47 Other softwoods---__ 02 - 10} .03} 1.62} .05) .06 04) +.06 Oaksstehs See 54 74 52) 1.32 48 76| 2.78) 1.70
Gums and yellow-
Poplar setae ees 4 29) .27 20| 1.54) 2.31 53 55 Other hardwoods__-_-- 13 17 17 80} 1.81) 2.09 78 63
All live species_____ 4.60) 4.14] 3.52) 4.30) 4.12| 5.29) 4.47) 4.28 Dead*chestnutsssssos== = [22 = LO iee-s12 13 eee §97| 183] 50,
All conditions: Loblolly and _ short-
leaf pines___---_.- 13.23} 6.73] 1.06) .38) .85} .03) .41) 3.17 Virginia pine___-___- 28 -55| 4.34; .21] .06) .05| .13) .79 Other softwoods- -___- 03 . 13) .08} 6.21| .78) .25) -08} .23 Oaks 322 Sastre ee 1.41) 1.48) 1.30) 2.73) 1.44) 2.16) 4.75] 3.00 Gums and_ yellow-
poplars==se es 1.69 79| .70 -48) 6.74] 3.96) 1.27) 1.65 Other hardwoods_____ | .47). 35| .37| 1.48] 4.60] 3.96] 1.54 36
| | | All live species____-_ 17.11) 10.03) 7.85) 11.49/14. 47/10. 41) 8. 18}10. 20 Dead chestnut___-------- | Een ap) -12). .10} 1.02} .03) 1.40) 1.06 9
1 Volume contained in cull trees and upper stems and limbs of hardwood and cypress saw timber is not included.
28 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
— o>
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
The Forest-Products Industries
57?
HE forest resources of Virginia which have been
described in preceding pages provide the raw
material for numerous forest-products industries. For more than 300 years these forests have provided the people of Virginia with shelter, fuel, implements, and the means of livelihood. They still do so today— and not only Virginians but also the people of the Nation and, in some measure, the world. The pur- pose of this section of the report is to describe in some detail the variety and magnitude of these forest values in terms of commercial and domestic products and
employment. TaBLe 12.—Production or receipts of forest products, 1940, 1942, 1945 * | 1940 1942 | 1945 Product | ; |
Active} Units? |Active| Units? |Active| Units
plants} produced | plants) produced | plants) produced | B
No. | M bd. ft.| No. | M bd. ft.| No. | M bd. ft. Timbers aeeuee see 2, 004/1, 049, 800} 2, 618}1, 213, 900|______ 994. 700 Veneer logs--—- - == == 15 37, 100 16 25, 900 18 29, 300
; Cords | Cords Cords Cooperage bolts________ 69} 107, 200 70} 109, 400 63 76, 900 Pulpwood___--__---_-- 9| 834, 300 9| 876, 800 9} 823, 500 Excelsior bolts_______-- 20 42, 700 20 55, 900 17 30, 000 Tanning extract 3_______ 921061300} 22 No data 9 64, 600 Mine timbers= == 2282-2 |- 25-22 LOI 700 soe 133 100/22 <2" 128, 200 Huelswood sss werceenesn | Seas 3, 897, 100|----_- 3, 610, 000)______ 3, 261, 500 ence*posts=0) se [ene TA3H3 00 |S 133300 |e 99, 600 Miscellaneous 4__-__-__- 34 34, 300 26 32, 400 23 30, 900 | M pieces | M pieces M pieces Polesvand:piles==. S255 tenes 128 |eesse= 160|22223 157 lewnntiestsias saps st) m/e SOG ae 100 (zeae 274 phota lees ees e 223160 |e se ee Ce) bees a Be
|
1 Data on lumber production obtained in cooperation with Bureau of the Census; data on other products obtained by Forest Survey.
2 Production is reported for lumber, mine timbers, fuel wood, fence posts, poles and piles, and hewn ties. Receipts at plants are reported for veneer logs, cooperage bolts, pulpwood, excelsior bolts, extract wood and bark, and miscel- laneous products. Receipts include wood imported from other States.
3 Includes chestnut wood and chestnut oak bark used for manufacture of tanning extracts.
4Includes plants making handles, turned wood products, insulator pins, shingles, dimension stock, boxes, picker sticks, wooden utensils, mine wedges, shuttle blocks, and cedar chests.
Important primary forest products processed in Virginia are lumber (which provides the major por- tion of value), veneer, pulpwood, extract wood, fuel
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries 825098°—49__5
KS
wood, cooperage, excelsior, poles and piles, fence posts, cross ties, and mine timbers. The number of plants and volumes produced or received in 1940, 1942, and 1945 are shown in table 12. As has been noted previ- ously, the forest-products industries as a group rank second among the State’s manufacturing industries in number of employees and third in value of products.
Among the secondary forest-products industries the most important is the furniture industry, centered largely in Henry, Franklin, and Campbell Counties: and the paper industry (excluding pulp mills) , making principally kraft paper, fiberboard, linerboard, and various types of paper containers. This report is chiefly concerned with the primary forest industries.
The Lumber Industry
From 1608 to the present day, lumber has been Virginia’s most important forest product. The indus- try has progressed from the Tidewater to the farthest corners of the State—from the days of sash gang-saw mills, through the period of relatively few large band mills, to the present era of a host of small portable mills, many of which cut less than 10,000 feet a day and operate only a few months per year. Lumber production has averaged almost 1 billion board feet
a year for the past 40 years. The first decade of
BILLION BOARD FEET
ee
4
1 n ibaa el fie 1925 1930 1935 1940
Figure 35.—Lumber production in Virginia, 1905-45 (1905-39, Bureau of the Census; 1940-45, Forest Service in cooperation with Bureau of the Census).
29
this period was marked by high production, culminat- ing in 1909 in a cut of 2.1 billion feet. The second and third decades were characterized by a gradual decline to the low of 450 million feet in 1932. Since then the trend has been generally upward, fluctuating during the war years between 1.0 and 1.2 billion feet (fig. 35). The total lumber cut in the 41-year period, 1905-45, was 42.7 billion board feet, or 16 billion feet more than the total stand of saw timber in the State in 1940.
Logging
Cutting practices vary widely among the lumbering operations over the State, as is to be expected with such a variety of forest types, conditions, and terrain. Except on the larger operations in the Coastal Plain, and on most of the operations in the Mountain prov- ince, it is common practice to harvest most of the trees 10 inches and larger in diameter. In the moun- tains, over four-fifths of the softwood is cut from trees over 13 inches d. b. h., and over one-half of the hard- wood from trees over 19 inches d. b. h. The three large mills in the Coastal Plain, cutting chiefly loblolly pine, cypress, tupelo, and white-cedar, also obtain most of their logs from pine trees above 13 inches d. b. h. and from cypress and tupelos above 16 inches d. b. h. White-cedar is commonly cut to a lower diameter limit.
Logging practice also varies, of course, with terrain, stand per acre, and size of mill. In all provinces, the small mills depend heavily on animals (fig. 36) for bunching logs in the woods and for skidding to the mill. Where the mill is too far from the timber for direct skidding, logs are often hauled by horses or mules, with the aid of “high wheels” or wagons, or by motortruck. The medium-sized mills, many of which are semipermanent, use animals for bunching in most
F—44;794 Ficure 36.—Horses or mules are commonly used throughout the State to bunch logs.
cases, but depend more on trucks to haul logs to the
mill. The few mills cutting over 5 million feet per year depend on more mechanical aids in logging, in- cluding steam skidders in the Dismal Swamp, and tractors (fig. 37) on drier ground. Mules or horses are also used for bunching in some locations. Truck
(fig. 38) or railroad haul is the usual method of getting logs to the mill.
e F-441796 Ficure 37.—Tractors are used by larger mills to skid logs to road or railroad.
The source of sawlogs varies considerably among the provinces and by size of mill. In 1940, for the State as a whole, 54 percent of the logs were from purchased stumpage, and 17 percent were cut under contract at a fixed rate per thousand board feet. Only 15 percent came from mill-owned land, 9 percent were purchased on a “delivered-at-mill” basis, while the remaining 5 percent were custom-sawn (table 13). These ratios are believed to be approximately the same now. Only in the mountains is custom sawing an important source of logs, while contract sawing is most important
in the Piedmont. In all units, purchased stumpage
F—441805 Ficure 38.—Trucks are being used increasingly to get logs to
the mill. Note metal airfiled landing mats on roadway.
30 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
provides about half the logs. The data on source of logs by size of mill reveal that only the largest mills obtain any appreciable volume of logs from their own land.
TABLE 13.—Source of sawlogs by physiographic province, 19401
Source of sawlogs coastal Piedmont Moun State Percent Percent Percent Percent Mull-owned land2=2_ #22. 18 9 16 15 Purchased stumpage__________ 56 56 44 54 Ritrchasedilogs = seen eer ses 12 6 8 9 Gontractisawings = ===) = sass 13 24 15 17 Gustomiusawinge esos eee 1 5 7 5
1 These percentages are believed to be approximately correct for 1945 also.
Lumber Manufacture
Accurate information on lumber production was obtained for 1942 through a complete canvass of all sawmills by the United States Forest Service in coop- eration with the Bureau of the Census, the War Pro- duction Board, and other public agencies. The survey showed that 2,618 sawmills produced 1.2 billion board feet of lumber. Of these, only 9, producing more than 5 million board feet per year, could be classed as large
LEGEND
Annual production in thousand boord feet 2 IDOLE ela On9.99) * 1,000 TO 4,999 = 5,000 TO 9,999
tu 10,000 & OVER
mills. The remainder, mostly small mills, (fig. 39) producing an average of 8,000 board feet or less daily, produced 89 percent of the lumber (table 14). Every county in the State had at least 4 active sawmills; some counties had over 80 (fig. 40).
The 1.2 billion board feet produced in 1942 is no index of the potential capacity of the State’s saw- mill industry. By activating the more than 650 idle
zy : i \
5 F—441763 Ficure 39.—A typical medium-size stationary sawmill, capacity 15,000 board feet per day.
Ficure 40.—Location of sawmills in Virginia, 1942.
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
mills, by operating full time with a full crew of labor not available in 1942, and with adequate logging and milling equipment likewise not available during the war, production could probably be tripled or quad- rupled—if a sufficient supply of timber were available.
TABLE 14.—Number of sawmills and lumber production by mill class, 1942
Sawmills Total lumber production
Range of annual |
production Average |Average (M bd. ft.) Num-j}~ daily | opera-| Soft- Hard- | 3 | : i Total ber | produc- ing | woods | woods | tion
time |
M bd. ft. | Days | M bd. ft.| M bd. fi M bd. ft. | Percent
Ties ss asciut 65/735 tence eres | eee le toro pene een ee ca [ee Oe IB 2 1 | 5,226 | 8,073.) 13,299} 1.1 50190 eee 1, 219 3 56 |115, 443 117, $30 | 233,273 | 19.2 500-999_______| 460 5 132 |228,035 | 98,498 | 326,533 | 26.9 1,000-4,999__-_| 317 8 | 189 |382,177 |122,736 | 504,913 | 41.6 5,000-9,999____ 6 28 258 | 27,606 | 16,117 | 43,723 | 3.6 TOO00S Senet 3 114.| 269 | 54,669 | 37,487 | 92, 156 7.6
Total___|3, 275 | 6 | 76 |813, 156 |400, 741 |1, 213, 897] 100.0
| |
Although there is ample unused capacity, the great majority of Virginia’s small sawmills are not equipped or operated efficiently enough to produce high-grade lumber. Neither do they efficiently utilize the logs they saw. Thus, the production of rough-sawn, un- graded, and green lumber is accompanied by large losses in slabs, edgings, and sawdust. Unfortunately, nearly one-half of Virginia’s saw-timber acreage is so poorly stocked as to be considered inoperable ex- cept by small mills. The result is economic waste of an
already depleted resource. But this does not mean
LEGEND THOUSANDS OF BOARD FEET
RS. RY 0 -2,499 RSS 10,000 - 19,999 ’ BS OSS
Xs
| 20,000 OR MORE
Y 5,000 - 9,999
TOTAL PRODUCTION 994,664 M BOARD FEET
MOUNTAIN
J PIEDMONT
that a small mill must be inefficient. _ It is logical to as- sume that a small mill can be efficient and operate in such stands.
Concentration yards are an essential adjunct to the small-mill industry. A majority of the smaller mills sell their lumber—generally rough, green, and none-too-well manufactured—to these yards, where it is assembled, dried, graded, and dressed for the market. In some instances the concentration yard buys rough lumber directly from the sawmills; in others the yard owns mills outright or finances them in whole or in part, the mill cutting on contract for the financing yard. There is no fixed pattern of relationship for In 1946 there were about 100 concentration yards in Virginia, 85 of them in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain, and about 15 in the mountains.
either the yards or mills.
These yards perform a highly useful service in preparing lumber in the form desired by the consumer, and in providing a central market for the Ver it is also true that their presence provides an incentive for overcutting and for wasteful mill practice. When yards are concentrated, competition for timber is in-
output of many small scattered producers.
creased as the demand for stumpage is localized. Since the common yard practice is to buy mill-run lumber, the mill owner has little incentive to grade-saw his product or otherwise improve its quality by better manufacturing processes.
In 1945 about two-fifths of the year’s output of lumber came from the mills of the Coastal Plain. The Piedmont’s mills produced almost the same volume; the mills in the mountains contributed less than one-
COASTAL PLAIN
Ficure 41.—A pproximate lumber production by county, 1945.
32 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
EXTRACT
VENEER
Ficure 42.—Location of active and idle forest-products plants other than sawmills, 1945.
fourth of the cut. Approximate lumber production by counties is shown in figure 41.
Loblolly, shortleaf, and Virginia pines made up 49 percent of the total lumber production in Virginia in 1945, other softwoods (white pine, cedars, hemlock), 6 percent. Oaks comprised 27 percent, gums and _ yellow-poplar 12 percent, and other hardwoods 6 percent.
Veneer
The veneer industry was represented in Virginia in 1945 by 18 operating plants: 8 in the Coastal Plain, 5 in the Piedmont, and 5 in the mountains (fig. 42). It consumed 29.3 million board feet of veneer logs, of which 10.7 million board feet came from outside Vir-
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
ginia. ‘These imports were partially offset by exports of 1.3 million feet to North Carolina. The Coastal Plain plants consumed 56 percent of the total, Pied- mont plants 18 percent, and those in the mountains 26 percent.
The principal product was commercial veneer for furniture (fig. 43), with smaller amounts of container veneer for fruit and vegetable baskets, shipping-box veneer, and plywood. Practically all of the commer- cial veneer and most of the other types were sold to the local market, in which the State’s extensive furni-
. ture industry was the largest buyer.
Of the total consumption of 29.3 million board feet, three-fourths was gum and yellow-poplar, about one- tenth was other hardwood, and 6 percent was oak.
33
Seger see
Ree oa
Bs ra ton tere ahi hey Sent ears meee Aas eM rama aT RON AN ARR Rs AT Tre pe a NER aS Ne Stade Si Siig’ La ee era ear ee he ye
CUS te ew allele Was
ee eee ae Sapa ls tReet | ae et a rae
oy iit ts 5 as Peg Sa Ra onreay a oc Bis Sant MAR Bat Aaa airgae ie ce he ote irl Tuk a bee Settee Rees
Ficure 43.—Rotary-cut veneer for furniture is the principal product of the State’s veneer industry. Softwoods provided the remainder. The largest cen- ter of production was in the southeastern part of the
State (fig. 44).
Veneer plants have a more difficult log-procure- ment problem than sawmills. Veneer bolts, because of the higher quality and the larger diameter trees required to produce such quality, bring higher prices than sawlogs. They are bought delivered at the plant or on cars for shipment; few plants own their own timber or buy stumpage. Because the proportion of woods-run logs suitable for veneer is low, except for yellow-poplar, most plants draw material from a wide territory. About 75 percent of the log volume is hauled an average of 46 miles by truck to the plants, the re- mainder an average of 15 miles by truck to a railroad.
LEGEND THOUSANDS OF BOARD FEET
es) NEGLIGIBLE 500 - 999 ae 1,000 OR MORE
V/A \00 - 499
TOTAL PRODUCTION 20,000 M BOARD FEET
MAM
MOUNTAIN
Wood Pulp
In 1946 Virginia’s-nine wood-pulp mills (fig. 42) had the plant capacity to produce over 1,770 tons of pulp every 24 hours. Several pulping processes are used, but the sulfate process accounts for 78 percent of the pulp produced. Four of the mills use this process. Two mills use the soda process to make hardwood pulp for book, writing, and other white papers; one mill makes insulating board from pine groundwood, one uses the semichemical process for converting chestnut into linerboard; while one groundwood and semichemical mill produces corru- gating board (fig. 45).
In 1945 these nine mills purchased 823,500 standard cords * of pulpwood, of which 73 percent was yellow pine and 27 percent was hardwoods, principally gum, yellow-poplar, chestnut, and oak, fig. 46). Pine will undoubtedly continue to be the principal source of Virginia’s pulp for a long time to come.
While some of the mills own fairly large tracts of timber, more than three-fourths of their pulpwood is obtained from other lands, almost all of it under the contract system. Under this system, the pulp com- pany enters into contracts with a number of individ- uals who agree to supply the mill with a stated amount of pulpwood.each month or week. The system is extremely variable—some contractors buy boundaries of timber and furnish the labor and equipment to harvest it; others subcontract with truck operators or
° The standard cord contains 128 cubic feet; the more com- monly used “unit” contains 160 cubic feet.
COASTAL PLAIN
Ficure 44.—Veneer log production by county, 1945.
4 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
with individual timber owners to deliver pulpwood to the mill, and others buy it at the roadside or loaded on cars. By whatever means the wood is procured, the contractor gets a fixed fee per unit delivered at the mill for wood from his district. The price of pine pulpwood, f. 0. b. mill, was $9 to $10 per cord in late 1946. In the same period pulpwood stumpage was valued at $2 to $2.50 per cord, or even higher in some locations.
Transportation costs have always been an important factor in pulpwood costs. They set the limits to pro- curement areas. About 30 miles is the economical : , limit for truck haul, but railroad hauls of 200 or more F-481868 miles, and barge hauls of 50 or more miles, are not
FicurE 45.—One of the ee of Virginia’s nine wood-pulp uncommon. Differentials in rail-freight costs have mills.
created strange procurement patterns. For example, a pulp mill 200 miles from a source of wood may com- pete successfully with a mill only 40 miles from the same source, because the first mill has a one-line haul whereas the second mill has a two-line haul. A mill may pay less in transportation cost for a unit rail- hauled 150 miles than for a unit truck-hauled only 25 miles. In general, however, pulpwood produc- tion is greatest relatively close to operating plants
(fig. 47).
Cooperage Measured by number of plants, cooperage produc- tion is Virginia’s leading nonlumber forest industry,
nee but it ranks far below the pulp industry in volume of
| Ficure 46.—E£ven a small pulp mill requires a large amount r . 4 | of wood annually. In 1946 the State’s nine plants pur- wood used. In 1945, the 63 aCuve plants (fig. 42) chased more than 1 million cords. obtained 76.900 cords of wood, chiefly loblolly pine.
LEGEND STANDARD CORDS
. ea Ge ros W 10,000 - 19,999
1,000 — 4,999 ae 20,000 OR MORE
Wi 5,000 - 9,999
TOTAL PRODUCTION 798,900 CORDS -
MOUNTAIN : PIEDMONT _COASTAL PLAIN
§ Ficure 47.—Pulpwood production by county, 1945. Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
35
F —4417! Ficure 48.—WNail-keg staves are the principal product of the cooperage industry.
About 8 percent was hardwoods. Of the total con- sumption, 74,300 cords was produced in Virginia, the rest being imported from North Carolina. At the same time 500 cords was exported to North Carolina.
LEGEND STANDARD CORDS
2,000 - 4,999 ee 5,000 OR MORE
[| none
WZ 500 - 1,999
TOTAL PRODUCTION
74,800 CORDS
MOUNTAIN
Nail-keg slack staves (fig. 48) are the principal product, but small amounts of slack staves for potato barrels and tobacco barrels, and tight staves for whisky barrels are also produced. The industry is
centered in Southampton, Sussex, and Greenville Counties of the Coastal Plain (fig. 49). Here 70 per- cent of the plants (fig. 50) consume 81 percent of the wood used by the industry in Virginia.
F-441775 Figure 50.—Cooperage plants are small, but in 1945 they used 76,900 cords of wood.
Although a few companies own sizable tracts of timber, almost all the wood used is purchased as stumpage, usually on a lump-sum basis. While trees from as small as 6 inches d. b. h. up to 20 inches are used, most of the wood for nail-keg staves comes from trees 8 to 12 inches in diameter,
COASTAL PLAIN
Ficure 49.—Cooperage-bolt production by county, 1945.
36 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
Excelsior
More than a third of all the excelsior plants in the United States are located in Virginia, all but one in the Coastal Plain, with 14 of the 17 operating plants in Caroline and Hanover Counties. In 1945, these 17 plants (fig. 51) used 30,000 cords of wood, al-
F-441748 | Ficure 51.—Excelsior plants are concentrated in Hanover and
Caroline Counties. This plant uses a maximum of 10 cords
of wood a day.
most entirely loblolly pine. Wood is purchased in 180-cubic-foot units of peeled wood 5.25 feet long. The bolts are required to be straight-grained and rea- sonably clear; pieces 4 to 6 inches in diameter from fast-growing trees are preferred.
Tanning Extract
Nine plants in Virginia manufacture tanning extract from chestnut wood and chestnut oak bark (fig. 42). Five of these plants use oak bark only (fig. 52) , two use chestnut wood only, and two use both raw materials. In 1945 they purchased 64,600 cords of wood and bark, of which 5,700 cords (9 percent) was oak bark and the rest chestnut wood. None of this use, of course, con- stitutes a drain on the growing stock. Total produc- tion of extract wood in Virginia was 51,850 cords, the balance being brought in from surrounding States. Wood is purchased in 160-cubic-foot units, while bark is usually purchased by weight. chestnut are entirely dependent on dead trees, since the chestnut blight has killed all but a few scattered small trees.
However, a considerable volume of usable dead chestnut remains. A special survey made in 1942 in the whole southern Appalachian region showed that about 2.7 million units of accessible dead chestnut were available to plants in Virginia, equivalent to 15 years’
The plants using
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
supply at full capacity. By 1960 it is probable these plants will have ceased operations, leaving oak bark
as the chief local source of tannin. The industry is
confined to the Mountain province, where the two species are most common.
= Feait 870 Ficure 52.—Chestnut oak bark is one of the sources of material for the tanning-extract industry.
Poles and Piles
In 1945 pole and pile production amounted to about 157,000 pieces, of which 144,000 were pine, chiefly loblolly. Two thousand pieces of oak, 7,000 of yellow- poplar and gum, and 4,000 of other species comprised the remainder. The Coastal Plain supplied 83 per- cent of all poles and piles and the Piedmont the rest. In 1940 it was estimated that Virginia had about 40 million trees (half of them in the Coastal Plain) that would meet specifications of the American Standards Association for poles and piles. Although the Norfolk area and the Eastern Shore are noted for their produc- tion of long poles and piling, only 9 percent of the trees in this area would make sticks over 35 feet long.
Even at prewar prices the net return from the sale of one pole greatly exceeds that from the same volume of pulpwood. The landowner in the Coastal Plain and southern Piedmont generally would be ahead by disposing of his tall, straight, and cylindrical trees for poles or piles rather than for pulpwood or even sawlogs.
37
Fuel Wood
Between 3 and 4 million cords of fuel wood are used annually in Virginia for heating, cooking, and curing tobacce (fig. 53). This is the largest single use of
wood, exceeding even lumber, but only a portion of the consumption represents drain on the growing stock. The exact volume for any one year cannot be accu- rately determined because of difficulty in obtaining an
F—441835 Figure 53.—Curing tobacco required 154,000 cords of wood from living trees in 1945. adequate sample and because fuel cut varies with the severity of the winter. Most fuel wood is cut by users from their farm woodlands (fig. 54), but use of mill waste has increased sharply since 1940. On the basis of 1945 estimates, about three-fifths of the fuel wood cut from living trees came from hardwood species. 40 percent came from tops and limbs, dead and cull
By source of wood, 35 percent was mill waste,
trees, and the remaining 25 percent from sound grow- ing trees. Farm families consumed an average of 11.7 cords per family, rural nonfarm families 6.7 cords, small-town families 4.4 cords, and urban families 0.1 cord per year.
Fuel wood ranks third as a source of drain on the In 1945, 329,000
cords of pine fuel wood was cut from sound, growing
pine growing stock of the State.
Q
and cap boards are included under “mine timbers.”
38 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture 4
trees. The total pine pulpwood drain from Virginia’s — forests in the same year was 590,500 cords, while the lumber industry used the equivalent of 1,305,500 cords ofpine. _ :
F-382654 Figure 34.—More than 800,000 cords of fuel wood was cut from sound, live trees in 1945.
Mine Timbers
Virginia’s extensive coal-mining industry, which produces from 15 to 20 million tons of coal annually, requires a wide variety of wood products, both rough and dressed. ‘These include rough mine props, cap boards, brattice lumber, wedges, mine ties, and other miscellaneous products. ties are included under the lumber industry, mine
Brattice lumber and sawn
wedges, hewn ties, and other miscellaneous mine prod- ucts under “miscellaneous industries.” Mine props In 1945 more than 128,000 cords of wood were used for mine timbers. Almost any species is acceptable, but props must be sound, at least 5 inches in diameter at the small end, and from 3 to 16 or more feet long. Pieces larger than 8 inches in diameter are generally
split in half, and those over 14 inches are quartered. In 1945, 78 percent of mine timbers were hardwood and 22 percent softwood. Oaks, hickory, chestnut, maple, yellow-poplar, and locust were the chief hard- wood species used.
Because of labor shortages during the war and the
\
increasing scarcity of desirable stumpage in the coal region, imports of mine timbers into the principal coal- producing region (southwestern Virginia) from the Piedmont increased sharply. import most of their timbers from the Piedmont, prin- cipally from Buckingham, Appomatox, and adjacent counties—a rail-haul of about 200 miles. Others con- tract for the production of timbers from their own land, while still others contract for timbers delivered at the mine by truck or rail.
Some companies now
Fence Posts and Hewn Ties
Production of fence posts in 1945 totaled 99,600 cords, chiefly cedar and cypress among the softwoods, and locust, oak, and mulberry among the hardwoods. Hewn ties produced numbered 274,000 pieces, all but 1 percent of which were oak.
Miscellaneous Industries
Included in this category are industries producing handles (fig. 55), insulator pins, dimension stock, boxes, picker sticks, wooden utensils, shuttle blocks, and cedar chests. The 23 plants so engaged in 1945 used 30,900 cords of wood. Total production in Virginia of material for miscellaneous products was 16,200 cords. An equal amount was imported from other States, while 1,500 cords was exported.
A wide variety of species is used. Handles are made chiefly from hickory, ash, maple, and oak; boxes from pine and yellow-poplar; chests from redcedar; shuttle blocks from dogwood; picker sticks from
LEGEND STANDARD CORDS
ZZ ee ee 5,000 OR MORE
TOTAL PRODUCTION 46,200 CORDS
Includes moterial for excelsior, handles, picker sticks,
9100: 25999)
1,000 - 4,999
insulator pins, chests, mauls, and other minor products.
ix MER — \ Ee A WN
-7X
MOUNTAIN
| Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
F-441888 Figure 55.—Handle blanks are an important item among the miscellaneous-products industries. These are hickory blanks for hatchet handles.
hickory; insulator pins from locust; and utensils from redgum. The production in cords for these miscella- neous industries and the excelsior industry is shown by counties in fig. 56.
state tahe secre SERS
COASTAL PLAIN
i PIEDMONT
Ficure 56.—Production of material for excelsior and miscellaneous products by county, 1945.
39
LEGEND STANDARD CORDS
SS) 40,000 - 59,999
2] 10000 - 13,999 +. 60000 - 79,999 V/, 20,000 ~ 39,999 aed 80,000 - 99,999
TOTAL PRODUCTION 3,794,900 CORDS
Includes lumber, veneer, pulpwood, cooperage, excelsior, and other miscellaneous manufactured products.
SX
a
MOUNTAIN
PIEDMONT
SS IX.
COASTAL PLAIN
Ficure 57.—Total production for lumber, veneer logs, pulpwood, cooperage bolts, excelsior, and miscellaneous manufactured products by county, 1945.
Summary of County Production
Figure 57 shows the total 1945 production in stand- ard cords for all the listed products (lumber, pulp- wood, veneer logs, cooperage bolts, excelsior, and other miscellaneous manufactured products) in each county of the State. wood, fence posts, poles and piles, and other hewn
County data are not available for fuel
products.
It is evident that production is concentrated (1) in the southeastern part of the State in a broad belt along the fall line which separates the Coastal Plain from the Piedmont, and (2) along and immediately With two exceptions (Tazewell and Accomac Counties), all
adjacent to the southern part of the Blue Ridge.
of the counties producing more than 60,000 cords of material lie in one or the other of these two areas. The Coastal Plain produced two-fifths of the total pro- duction of 3.8 million cords, the Piedmont an equal amount, and the Mountain province the other one- fifth.
Employment
Accurate information on the number of workers em- ployed in the forest-products industries is almost im- possible to obtain because of the small size and widely scattered distribution of many of the plants, and be- cause so much of the labor is on a part-time basis. . Much of the part-time labor force consists of farmers who work intermittently in woods or plants during slack periods on the farm.
A special study made by the Forest Service in co- operation with the War Production Board (8) indi- cated that as of July 1, 1944, slightly more than 39,200 workers were engaged in producing primary forest products, excluding fuel wood, as follows:
Woods workers: Number Sawlogs, veneer logs and bolts______________ 6, 950 Pulpwood ____ eae ne SAN Bee 5, 780 ATO ther 2 22282 ee Ss iis CEs neers 5, 730
Fo tales ss 2s Se sD eee ee ORO)
Plant workers: Sawmills and concentration yards____________ 12, 390
Pulp and related processing__+--____________ 5, 020 Plywoodsand: veneer! 22a ee ee 1, 270 @ooperace stock] =" as Bre as Se 960 Dewabab beter «Copan aXe mics ene EUS a 780° Shingless Saisaeieees es Ss ieee 10 band Tem lama gi eae 130 Exe] Sire ew Soa oie Sse We een etna ee 140 Shuttle blocks = Bok ae ans Seen 20 Miscellaneous ______ Ba Ron deena eee SS 40
otaleteas sere Baer 20, 760
Of the total number, 47 percent were employed in the woods and 53 percent in the plants. These figures do not include workers in secondary forest industries such as furniture, paper making, and box plants. The average annual wage in forest-products industries in 1943 was $1,015 (5) and, based on that rate, the total forest industry pay roll for 1944 may be estimated at $39,800,000.
40 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
Logging and Mi lling Waste the next largest contributors, these with lumber ac- counting for 94 percent of all net waste (table 16).
The ratio of total net waste (134.3 million cubic feet) to total drain (350.6 million cubic feet) was 1 to 2.61; that is, for every 261 cubic feet of finished product there was 100 feet of completely unutilized waste. Quite obviously, the forest industries, dealing with a scattered resource like timber, subject to wide vari- ations in quality and adaptability for specific products, cannot be expected under present supply and demand relationships and values to achieve 100-percent utili- zation of their raw material. Nevertheless, only 73- percent utilization of a critical resource like timber is too wasteful. Continuing research to point out the way to reduce this waste is needed. The degree of
Reference has already been made to the excessive waste occurring in both woods and manufacturing plants. It is a problem of forest management and utilization, the solution of which would provide raw materials for new industries and reduce the drain upon the present timber stands. A special study reveals the extent of logging and milling waste in the primary forest industries of Virginia in 1944. Gross waste, that is, the total volume of material not utilized for the finished product of a given industry, is distin- guished from net waste, which is defined as the volume of material which is not used for any purpose.
The net waste consists of 86 million cubic feet of logging waste and 48.3 million cubic feet of milling waste (table 16). The largest single source of waste is the portion of the tree left in the woods, in stump, tops, cull or broken logs, or in incomplete utilization of the stem. ~ This waste amounted to nearly 61 mil- lion cubic feet, nearly one-half of the total net waste, and nearly three-fourths of all logging waste. The second largest source of waste is in sawdust and shav-
utilization could be increased by more complete use of the tree in the woods—lower stump, use of a longer portion of main stem, more careful bucking for cull, and use of more of the tops for pulpwood, fuel wood, and small-dimension stock. Since the unused portions of trees left in the woods account for nearly half the net waste, the greatest savings would be made here by
: s ' ne : improved management and logging practices. Only ings in the processing plants, 31.4 million cubic feet,
nearly a fourth of all waste, and 65 percent of all milling waste. Sixteen percent of all waste came from trees destroyed in logging, and 13 percent from slabs, edgings, trimming, and similar waste in the processing plants. An additional 2 percent was in uncut inferior trees which could have been utilized, but which would die soon after the logging.
Because the lumber industry is by far the largest
if, by such practices, the operators can reduce costs, or obtain a higher yield of salable product at the same cost, will such improved practices be adopted. Use of sawdust and shavings, the second largest source of waste, is more difficult at present but far from hope- less. This waste product, except for cost of trans- portation, is cheap and in a form that can readily be cooked, digested, or otherwise converted. As such it
forest industry, it accounted for 78 percent of total can be used for producing alcohol, wallboard, and net waste. Fuel wood, pulpwood, hewn cross ties, other converted products. The same is true of most and cooperage-stock production, in that order, were of the other milling wastes.
TasL_e 16.—Net logging -and milling waste in primary forest industries, 1944
(Thousand cubic feet; i. e., 000 omitted]
Logging waste Milling waste Total waste Sound in- - P fe |eolu de- s Slabs, Sawdust,
Kind of product ear eee sieved ferior trees Total trimmings,| shavings, ote Vol Percent of left in in log- uncut which | logging edging, | other fine ey eS eee total woods ging will soon waste etc. materials Me gSte
die
Lumber____- Bee OE 43, 662 14, 714 2, 308 60, 684 15, 883 27, 888 43,771 104, 455. 77.8 le lkwoodese sete rne ieee rary oN eC 4,915 2, 854 291 SSOP) eek Ge ae ee eae [es et 8, 060 6.0
; Pulpwood (loggineton ly, Seer ee a Ses SS 4, 349 2, 099 584 T3032 Eee | Se Se 7, 032 L677 K@ross}tiess (hewn) mse wee ee a eS a ae 2,431 507 73 3,011 ISOS Si /ESES wanes 1, 038 4, 049 3.0 Mlolestandepilessesce sens eerste ee OT KS Soa 488 166 28 CSB | ESS 1 RUA a ENG | a Aaa 682 a5 Op peraseistac a= weet ren ete Se Wee Sy 147 37 11 LOS pase P eee 2, 620 2, 620 2, 815 2.1 sanninkandichemicalawoodssasn- = ENS ee 184 BOSS pester es G92 zee se ee Saat Ppa area 492 .4 TPO SERS a SE Ee Se Ne a a cae rene 1,051 281 19 eS Sie Pesan e 493 493 1, 844 1.4 Wieniee neces man aay cee ti 8 Prt ae ts aes 1, 096 242 34 V3 /2)3| See 51 51 1, 423 al Ronndmimestimibers sae ev eee enue yw VEE EU 1, 827 387 13 DD Di Fi epee ats WERE | fe A Jae eg s-pa---2-- 2, 227 1.6 theresa Be ae Rta ee eb wad sae eR ier 2 686 131 47 8647 || eee 358 358 1, 222 9 es PAT ieproductstses see ie ee ee ee en 60, 836 21, 726 3, 408 85, 970 16, 921 31, 410 483311 U 134.301 | ean emo
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent 45.3 16.2 2.5 64.0 12.6 | 23.4 36501 aes 100.0 41
irginia Forest Resources and Industries
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
Forest Increment and Commodity Drain |
>
and kinds of timber in the State and the industries and enterprises dependent on this raw material. These facts by themselves, however, do not reveal
Pirates sections have reported the volumes
whether the forest capital (growing stock) is being expended at an excessive rate or whether growth is sufficiently in excess of drain to increase the capital. This section of the report sets up a balance sheet of growth and drain and evaluates some of the conflict- ing trends that make an appraisal of the forest situ- ation extremely difficult.
Forest Increment
In all calculations of forest increment, three elements are factors—gross increment, mortality, and net in- crement. Gross increment is the increase in volume of the growing stock in saw-timber or cordwood trees uncorrected for losses by mortality or deterioration, plus the volume in smaller trees reaching the minimum diameters for these classes during the year. Mortality is the loss due to such causes as fire, wind, insects, disease, and suppression, but not from cutting. Net
increment is the difference between gross increment
and mortality.’
Mortality
In 1940 the net volume of trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger that died during the year amounted to 579,000 cords. Of this total, 331,000 cords were softwoods and 248,000 cords were hardwoods. The softwood mortality amounted to 8 percent of gross growth and the hardwood to nearly 6 percent. Losses of over one- half million cords per year are serious enough in them- selves but equally disturbing is the great but unmeas- ured mortality of the seedlings and saplings less than 5 inches in diameter brought about chiefly by forest fires.
In terms of saw timber, mortality amounted to 85 million board feet, 53 million of softwoods and 32
million of hardwoods. This was 6 percent of the gross
“For more detailed definitions of increment and drain, see Definitions of Terms Used, in the Appendix, p. 57.
42 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture j
RS
growth of softwoods and 4 percent of that of the hard- woods.
It is almost impossible to obtain a quantitative meas- ure of mortality by causes because of the difficulty in assigning reason for death to individual trees. In ad- dition, the number of seedlings and small saplings completely destroyed by fire, for example, cannot be measured accurately on a State-wide basis without a prohibitive amount of field work extending over sev- eral years. However, careful observation-of each dead tree tallied on the survey plots, distributed throughout the State, led to the conclusion that fire, insects, dis- ease, and wind, including sleet damage, were the major causes of tree mortality in Virginia. Logging, natural
suppression, and lightning appeared to be less im- portant causes.
Wild fire may not be the leading cause of death of trees larger than 5.0 inches d. b. h., but certainly it is one of the most important. Not only does it kill out-
F—441810 Ficure 58.—Eight-year-old loblolly pine totally destroyed by spring fire, 1946. ;
"i raRe,
Ae
= right many young trees (fig. 58) , and in severe fires ma-
ture trees also (fig. 59), but it damages in a greater or
_ less degree many more than it kills. Thereby the diffi-
culties of management are increased, since volume pro- duction of good timber is reduced, cull volume requires
‘removal, often at a loss, and in many cases the produc-
F-441813 Ficure 59.—Shortleaf pine saw timber totally destroyed by : crown fire, April 1942.
tivity of the site is reduced. Fire also exposes the
mineral soil by destroying litter and humus, thereby
causing increased erosion and storm runoff—fore- runners of silting and floods. Recreational values may be reduced, and in severe fires, game and fish are killed and their habitat ruined.
Most Virginia fires are surface fires, burning along the ground. Crown fires are rare, but do occur in severe fire seasons in all parts of the State. In the
coastal swamps, peat and muck fires occur, often re-
_ quiring dug trenches to suppress them. ‘The spring
fire season extends from February Ist in the Coastal
_ Plain to May 15th in the mountains, culminating in
April for the State as a whole. During this period most of the year’s fires occur. The fall fire season is shorter, culminating in November. Effective in 1946, all of Virginia’s 14.8 million acres of forest land was under organized protection by Fed-
eral or State agencies, cooperating on private land
with the county governments and individual landown-
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
ers. Prior to this year, the 5-year (1940-44) average of area protected was 13,419,000 acres. In this 5-year period, on State and private land under protection, there was an average of 2,597 fires per year, or 220 fires per 1 million acres protected. These fires burned an average of 105,700 acres annually, or only 0.9 percent of the area protected. This is a good protection record.
Great variation exists between various parts of the State, and from year to year. In seven counties in the extreme southern Piedmont, for example, only 0.6 percent of area protected burned over during this period, while in four counties in extreme southwest Virginia in the mountains, 1.5 percent burned over. In 1942 in the State as a whole, 2.1 percent burned over, a total of 237,400 acres, whereas in 1944 only 0.2 percent (28,800 acres) burned.
Among insect enemies of living trees the most de- structive in Virginia is the southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis). ‘During the past 55 years, at least seven notable:and costly outbreaks of the south- ern pine beetle have caused a marked drain on the forest resources of the State. An exact estimate of From the records avail- able, it appears that the quantity of timber killed ranged from 1 to 9 million board feet per outbreak. During the period 1930-33 in Fairfax County alone 5 In South- ampton County an additional 3 million board feet of merchantable timber was killed, and in King and Queen County 1 million feet was killed in the same period. During the 1936-38 outbreak, extensive dam- age also occurred in the southern counties (fig. 60). The beetle is again active in these counties.” 1° Ex- tensive damage is also done by bark beetles of the genus Ips, which generally attack cut or down timber,
such cannot be given.
million board feet of pine was destroyed.
but in summer frequently attack living trees on logging operations or following fire damage.
Forest diseases *t in Virginia take a heavy annual The un-
precedented destruction of billions of feet of chestnut
toll through mortality, cull, and degrade.
by the blight fungus provides a striking example of
what a forest tree disease can do. In the aggregate
the losses caused by our native diseases and decays that whittle continously on our timber capital are ulti-
St. George, R. A., Entomologist, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, United States Department of Agricul- ture, in statement prepared for this report, January 1946.
"This statement on tree diseases in Virginia was prepared by George H. Hepting, pathologist, Bureau of Plant Industry, Soils, and Agricultural Engineering, United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, and cooperator, Southeastern Forest Ex- periment Station.
43
eBook.
F—4,1788
Ficure 60.—This opening in the overstory resulted from
killing of mature trees by the southern pine beetle. Note reproduction seeded in from surrounding trees.
Ficure 61.—The littleleaf disease of pine, chiefly affecting shortleaf pine, is prevalent in the southern Piedmont.
mately greater than those resulting from the spectac- ular epidemics.
Losses from the white pine blister rust, which oc- curs generally over the western part of the State, have been small, due in part to the natural lack of con- currence of ribes and white pine over most of the area, and to the timely eradication of currant and gooseberry bushes where they occurred on important white pine areas. Another white pine disease, called needle blight, the cause of which is unknown, has been causing extensive browning of foliage and some mortality in Virginia. Research has just been started to determine the nature and potentialities of this disease. Strumella and Polyporus hispidus cankers, by weakening the-stem, result in breakage of thousands of oaks annually in the mountain region. The fusi- form rust (Cronartium fusiforme) also causes break- age of loblolly pine in the coastal area.
The littleleaf disease, primarily affecting short- leaf pine, and to a lesser extent loblolly, occurs in 13 Virginia Piedmont counties and is causing serious mortality and substantial reductions in growth in many areas (fig. 61). Stands affected by littleleaf disease under annual observation in Cumberland and Buckingham Counties have steadily deteriorated over the past several years. Where this disease occurs, it must be reckoned with in management plans, and dis- eased trees must be removed periodically to salvage. them before they die. The cause of littleleaf is still unknown, and no measures other than through sal- vage have yet been found to reduce its losses.
Winds of hurricane force which blow down timber stands over wide areas are seldom experienced in Vir-
A
) y
& F3441755
FicurE 62.—Glaze damage to pine in the Coastal Plain is severe at intervals of several years.
FE ‘ ey
Ae Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
ginia, but there is a steady, and, in the aggregate, a large loss of volume from local windstorms that blow down scattered individual trees. This loss occurs in all parts of the State. Although not strictly wind damage, additional losses are caused by glaze storms which seem to occur on the average about once a de- cade. Damage is particularly severe on the southern yellow pines (fig. 62), and trees 6 to 10 inches in diameter suffer especially from bole and top breakage and are frequently uprooted. When strong winds oc- cur while the trees are still weighted with ice, damage is even more severe.
Net Board-Foot Increment
In 1945, the net increment of the saw timber in Virginia’s forests was 1,744 million board feet (Inter- national %-inch rule). Slightly more than half was softwood, or 923 million feet (table 17). Nearly two- fifths of the total was in loblolly and shortleaf pines alone. Oaks contributed one-fifth, gums and yellow- _ poplar nearly one-fifth, and all other species the
remainder.
Tasie 17.—WNet increment of saw timber by species group and province,
1945 Gone Coastal Pied , | pecies group Pin iedmont | Mountain | State Million Million Million | Million Softwoods: bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. Warginiaepi neste eet es 37 164 18 219 _ Other yellow pines__-_____-- 490 157 21 668 Other softwoods______--___- 6 7 23 36 otal eas wees 533 328 62 923 Hardwoods: Oaksas eso SS 82 168 102 352 Gums and yellow-poplar____-_ 134 147 37 318 Other hardwoods-_---------- 45 58 48 151 Total eee Skee atk 261 373 187 821
All’species#=27 2 S222 ee 794 701 | 249 | 1,744
The Piedmont forests were growing at the fastest rate, chiefly because of the high growth rate of the Virginia pine type in this province. The Coastal Plain forests were second, and those of the mountains a poor third. For the State as a whole, net annual increment was nearly 7 percent of the saw-timber
growing stock. -
Net Increment of Entire Stand
The 1945 net increment on all sound trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger, including the saw timber previously considered, was 8,399,000 cords. Fifty-five percent of the increment was hardwood, but growth of the loblolly and shortleaf pines made up 30 percent of the total increase (table 18).
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
TasLe 18.—WNet increment of all sound trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger, by species group and province, 1945
Species group Coastal Piedmont } Mountain | State Softwoods: M cords M cords M cords | M cords Winginiay pies ssa ese sae 203 859 104 1,166 Other yellow pines____._____ 1,647 757 88 2,492 Other softwoods____-_--__-- 19 49 83 151 Motal sss eee eee 1,869 1,665 275 3,809 Hardwoods
Qa ks eeeeaiaes i cS are ad 472 873 594 1,939 Gums and yellow-poplar____- 631 670 157 1,458 Other-hardwoods___________ 262 483 448 1,193 Totales2- ee Moe avs 1,365 2,026 1,199 | 4,590
| ——} - All species-__---------__- 3,234 | 3,691] 1,474 |. 8,399
|
Net Increment per Acre
In saw-timber stands, increment per acre in the loblolly pine type in the Coastal Plain (321 board feet) exceeds that in any other type or province (table 19). Its nearest competitor is the cypress-cedar type in the same province, with 272 board feet, fol- lowed by the loblolly pine type in the Piedmont (262 board feet). individual types is invariably greater in the Coastal Plain than in the Piedmont, and greater in the Pied- mont than in the mountains. For all types averaged, the ratio is very nearly 3: 2: 1. The average incre- ment per acre for all commercial forest lands in the State was 121 board feet.
It will be noted that increment in
TasiLe 19.—Current annual net increment per acre by forest type. condition, and province, 1940 +
Coastal Plain Piedmont Mountain
—y | Lorest type | A x
\ Seats Saw- | Cord- | Saw- | Cord- | Saw- | Cord-
timber | wood | timber | wood } timber | wood
stands |stands 2| stands |stands 2} stands |stands ?
|
Bd. ft. | Cords | Bd. ft. | Cords | Bd. ft. | Cords
Loblolly pine_-_----.--__- BOTs si ON64 ele 262.l| Ons BP le eee se eee Shortleaf pine_-_-_--_--_-__ 197 . 80 176 . 60 53] 0.17 Virginia pine-._-------__- 190 73 182 56 108 .29 Gypress-cedar- === 2s iL DTD eyes ike | Setar weaa| Wey atta | Dye cen Sie | owen Upland hardwoods-_-____-_- 166 . 64 145 44 78 26 Bottom-land hardwoods____| 251 38 183 bie ese [Easel Coveshard woods as ee | ees |e 240 | . 80 120 | 50 TAT cess ihe ease ol een oe | ee [EO eal Ge oes leeet ate les e40 | | All types.--=---_--- 2633|k 25625 |f 2 168) |S lily 284s eee 28
1 Increment in cords includes wood and bark. 2 Includes stands classed as reproduction.
Under-sawlog-size stands are also reasonably pro- ductive. In the Coastal Plain, net increment per acre ranged from 0.8 cord of wood and bark in the short-
45
leaf pine type to a little less than 0.4 cord in the bottom-land hardwood type, averaging 0.6 cord for all types. Increment rates in the Piedmont had the same gross range but averaged only 0.5 cord. In the Mountain unit growth was much slower, ranging from only 0.17 cord in the shortleaf pine type to 0.5 cord in the cove hardwoods. For all types it was 0.28 cord per acre.
Because the average forest acre is adding 121 board feet of net growth per year, it does not mean that this volume is at once available for conversion into lumber or other products. It must be remembered that this increment includes the recruited volume, i. e., the vol- ume of all trees that each year grew to saw-timber size. For the State as a whole, more than one-half of the net board-foot increment of saw timber comes from re- In the Piedmont 62 percent of the saw-timber increment is from recruited volume, in the mountains 56 percent, and in the Coastal Plain 45 per- cent. Thus a very considerable portion of the total volume of wood added each year is on the very small- est trees. These trees must be protected against fire, insects, disease, and other causes of mortality, and against premature cutting, in order to augment the al- ready depleted growing stock. If this is not done, increment will steadily decline, and so will the future growing stock and the future output of forest products. On the other hand, if the stands were well stocked and had a reasonably good distribution of volume among age classes, most of the annual increment in saw-tim- ber volume would be on the larger trees where it could be utilized more effectively.
cruited volume.
Commodity Drain
Saw-Timber Drain
Drain upon saw-timber trees in 1945 totaled 1,223 million board feet, of which 719 million feet was soft- woods and 504 million feet was hardwoods (table 20). Loblolly and shortleaf pines together provided nearly one-half of the total cut. Oaks were the principal hardwoods cut, followed by gums and yellow-poplar. Forty-three percent of the drain came from the Coastal Plain, 37 percent from the Piedmont, and 20 percent from the mountains. Of the total saw-timber drain, lumber comprised 75 percent, pulpwood 11 percent, fuel wood 6 percent, and other products the remain- ing 8 percent.
Drain in Cords
The drain from all trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger in 1945 amounted to 4,724,200 cords. Soft- woods made up 2,567,300 cords, with loblolly and shortleaf pines comprising two-fifths of the total drain. Oaks provided a little more than one-fourth, and gums and yellow-poplar one-tenth of the total cut (table 2)
Lumber was, of course, the principal use, com-
prising nearly 57 percent of all drain, fuel wood 18 -
percent, and pulpwood 15 percent. Although soft- wood growing’ stock in cords, as of January 1, 1945, comprised only 39 percent of the total volume, it was the source of more than half the cord drain. The pines, chiefly, loblolly and shortleaf, are under heavy cutting pressure since they provide about one-half of the material used for lumber, and four-fifths of the
TaBLeE 20.—Commodity drain on saw timber, by product and species group, 1945
Species group |
rroduct | ee | | Gums and so | Virginia | Other yellow| Other soft- | E ? oh Other hard- | pine | pines 1 woods? | Oaks yellowsPOr, woods 3 | M bd. ft. M od. ft. M bd. ft. M bd. ft. M bd. ft. M bd. ft. M bd. ft. Percent sTehiin ber See eet se ES OS RS 65, 300 378, 200 55, 900 263, 900 105,700 48, 600 917, 600 75.0 Vie TN GG Tree eee op AMIR Ti SRI paca Note oe ie ete epee 900 100 1, 400 16, 700 2, 600 21, 700 128 Cooper Be se ee ARTIS SL Aenea earn 1, 000 L752 OO ly | DES Seaeaae 900 600 100 19, 800 1-6 Pulp wyood ses eesteess elit sonny Oe eee Re | 29, 100 OA OO se eesseeee ees 5, 600 6, 800 4, 400 137, 000 11.2 Ce] SIO Teen poe em Peg a tee Lane ncaa 400. ABO ee se ES EN IS Se SE | Re eee 5, 200 4 @thersmianufacrines sae ape me ie NN cs Sa | See ceer Nope aaa 100 300 [OO | Se sagbeee ies 2, 700 3, 800 38} Mitre stam De rs ee ea tap fa ee rd oe open yee | 200 3, 700 100 2, 400 500 2, 900 9, 800 ~8 Tew ngcrossatieswem bes soa be ena ne ee { RUARL CIC am LOO eee See ee 12 = S00 KNEES NES | Sent Teas 12, 600 1.0 Rolesyandéaprlessces ea hee abies He ie Ee SN 100 165-3 00s eos Se eee 200 600 300 17, 500 iS) iti e awa dase eee sare eae Sh an eer eh a i4, 500 3652002 | Jace eee See 15, 200 3, 000 2, 700 71, 600 5.9 PENCE IPOs t says aa sere eg = Me eee ee | eee eae eects A 100 3, 300 PIO O10) Pe ee 900, 6, 300 sa Eiigtalee eis GE Steet eS | 110,600} 548,700} 59,700 | 304, 800} 133,900} 65, 200 | 1, 222, 900 | 5 Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent | = 9.0 44.9 4.9 24.9 11.0 SE BIN eet eee 100.0 | |
1 Loblolly and shortleaf pines chiefly. 2 White pine, hemlock, redcedar, white-cedar chiefly. 3 Chestnut is not included.
46 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
einai Nas
laneous” items—exert a heavier drain on hardwoods than on softwoods. Except for fuel wood, all these products together account for only 7 percent of total cord drain. Fuel wood is about 60 percent from hard- wood species. An opportunity exists for increasing the pine growing stock by still greater use of hard- woods for fuel wood, especially where there is an abundance of poor-quality trees.
The distribution of total commodity drain by tree- diameter classes and species groups reveals that 55 percent of the softwood drain comes from trees less than 13 inches, but less than 14 percent comes from trees over 19 inches in diameter (table 22). This distribution of drain is another indication of the extent to which today’s softwood drain is coming out of to-
morrow’s growing stock.
Comparison of Forest Increment and Drain,
1940-45
The relation between net increment and commodity drain cannot be regarded as a reliable index of the
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
Tasre 21.—Commodity drain on all sound trees 5.0 in ches d. b. h. and larger, by product and species group, 1945} ———— Cherri | Species group a sa ancanlt sce a eas Procuct | TS Wireinia Other Other : Gums and Other oral pine yellow softwoods Oaks yellow- hendecods pines softwoods paplad ardwoods Cords Cords Cords Cords Cords Cords Cords | Percent Drier be ese tues eel Oe heen sai aA ER itn Seo 216, 000 1, 089, 500 140, 900 794, 600 298, 000 141,900 | 2, 680, 900 | 56.8 ViGneeied 255 Ae eae Aaa app Se 2, 300 200 3, 800 42. 800 7, 300 | 56, 400 51g REGO PETA 8 Oo ete ete ep ly eet ins doe ends 3, 800 GES OOR | Rraee teee 2, 400 4, 200 300 75, 200 1.6 BEAT yy OO Cs ee a a ee eee eS 158, 000 A395 OO ih] ret ae 38, 600 62, 300 31, 900 723, 300 | 15.3 Excelsior_____------ SUNS Sigh eae ae 2, 500 Liisa COs | esteem ss er nr | ad cea Saussure 30, 000 | a6 MpheraManuraccuresss= sy camer een en ewe 100 200 1, 000 2, 500 100 13, 100 17, 000 | 4 Vian entinn bers see reek pre pe neers Se ee ee A 1, 200 25, 700 300 37, 000 16, 300 43, 500 124, 000 | 2.6 ETewilkGlOss stles ces eo ey ees hen | ee a 400 100 48, 300 LOO 8] Eteacseer se 48, 900 | 1.0 Rolespamd spies iiss sone sve ten mrtg Sen eae PS 400 48, 100 100 900 1, 500 900 51, 900 ital Hire nvoo diseases een Dome ye ane Ge 128, 100 2002600} |2s 5222 as 333, 500 80, 400 84, 900 827, 500 17.5 len cesposts 4s =n ie een eR See 400 700 22, 200 14, 200 200 51, 400 89, 100 | 1.9 Cagis winery ie ON ip ete Ce | 510,500 | 1, $92, 000 164, 800 | 1,275,800 | 505, 900 375-200, :42724, 200 |= ue | a oot = = = = Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent 10.8 40.1 | Bo 5a) 27.0 | -10.7 AS SoJe eae Les eee 100.0 | 1 Chestnut is not included.
pulpwood. Only a few products—fuel wood, veneer, more, increased fire protection, better management mine timbers, hewn cross ties, fence posts, and “miscel- practices, better and more mechanized manufacture
of products, epidemics of insects or diseases, and hard- wood invasion are some of the current or prospective changes that may materially affect growing stock, growth rates, and commodity drain.
Several other points must be kept in mind in this connection. A few years in which drain exceeds growth, even to a considerable degree, can be counter- balanced by a period in which there is a surplus of growth. For example, annual lumber production in Virginia has averaged 1 billion board feet for the past 40 years. The production level of the first 10 years could not have been maintained indefinitely and only because of a decided decline in lumber output during the second and third decades did the growing stock become sufficiently augmented so that a gradually in- creasing production during the fourth decade has been possible. growth deficit does not necessarily mean irreparable damage to the forest stands.
This emphasizes that a few years of high
TaBLe 22.—Distribution of commodity drain in cords by tree diameter and species group, average year
: eet, : | ood Hardwood Total forest situation in a region or State unless data are sae ee encanta arcwood ote . . . . 7 h | | available for a considerable period of time, and unless See | Mcords | Percent | M cords | Percent | M cords} Percent the operation of economic factors in the future can | | | be predicted with accuracy. This is particularly true — 6-8___-----______- Pee eA Tele 15.3 |), 81350 y | 172321, 827 | aeeloul sO . - O21? seen arts 1,228 | 39.5 548 | 27.1] 1,776| 34.6, of a State such as Virginia where forest industries are j,,, ga9| 38| 637) 31.5 L626] 31.7 geared to the utilization of small as well as large tim- ——-20+-_____________- 416| 13.4| 486] 241] 902] 17-6 ber, and where a great variety of species are used for a ae | 3,110 | 100.0 2,021| 100.0| 5,131| 100.0 an increasingly large number of purposes. Further- 47
A second point to consider is that the Survey data are for provinces of several million acres and there- fore may not reflect accurately conditions in smaller specific areas. When data are grouped into State tables, the figures may be even more misleading be- — cause gross deficits in one section may be masked by surpluses in another. Nevertheless, the data here pre- sented do indicate the trends in the relation of growth to drain during the 6-year period since the original survey for both the State and its provinces.
Saw-Timber Balance
The net change in growing stock over the 6-year period (January 1, 1940, to January 1, 1946) is sum- marized in table 23. In using these data the reader is cautioned against considering the values as precise measurements of change. The original 1940 inventory was considered accurate, but annual changes since then have been based upon the difference between This pro- vides only a reasonably reliable indication of trends in the volume of growing stock.
computed growth and measured drain.
The over-all figures for the State are encouraging and point up the high productive powers of Virginia’s forests, for, in spite of heavy cutting to meet war de-
mands, 1,738 million board feet of saw timber were added to the growing stock. This is a net “earning” of 7 percent on the 1940 “capital” of growing stock (fig. 63).
Less reassuring are some of the details of this in- crease. Although the softwoods showed little change
in total volume, there was a serious reduction in short-
leaf saw timber in the Piedmont.
SPECIES GROUP DECREASE
Cypress and white-
sede ee
SOFTWOODS: VIRGINIA PINE
OTHER YELLOW PINES
OTHER SOFTWOODS
TOTAL
HARDWOODS: OAKS
GUMS & YELLOW-POPLAR
OTHER HARDWOODS
TOTAL
ALL SPECIES
PERCENT
Ficure 63.—Net change in saw-timber growing stock, 1940 to 1946.
TABLE 23.—WNet change in saw-timber growing stock, Fan. 1, 1940, to Fan. 1, 1946
Softwoods Hardwoods Item All species Virginia Orie Other soft-| Total soft- Oaks Gumsang Other |Total hard- pine mines woods woods aplae hardwoods} woods : = | Million Million Million Million Million Million Million Million Million Growing stock, Jan. 1, 1940: bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. bd. ft. ‘@oastiall eb amie ese Si see Nee a aa a nate een | 352 7, 289 278 7, 919 1, 013 1, 956 860 3, 829 11, 748 Pied On tara ee een ee San aren dee nig ee) MED 1, 034 1, 984 116 3, 134 2, 341 1, 289 735 4, 365 7, 499 INTO win tales see eae S Ween rei nie Pe eee | 123 504 586 1, 213 2, 529. 458 749 3, 736 4, 949 “TWO ease ee SE Se SE a ee me as ie ce na ea 1, 509 9,777 980 12, 266 5, 883 3, 703 2, 344 11, 930 24, 196 Growing stock, Jan. 1, 1946: | GoastaliPlain ss toa ee ss teen Sees eer Speer ee | 347 7, 462 219 8, 028 1, 136 2, 362 1,059 4,557 12, 585 Pied mo ntatestas eye an ees Na Ni inte he Os iesere te | 1, 361 1, 534 111 3, 006 2, 645 1, 725 977 5, 347 8, 353 NWO u nt aime aie Ses ee O e Se e e | 163 522 38 1, 223 2, 410 524 839 3, 773 4, 996 Mo tale eeerens Se a ea ane ea ae na Ra eee 1, 871 9, 518 868 12, 257 6, 191 4,611 2, 875 13, 677 25, 934 Net change, Jan. 1, 1940, to Jan. 1, 1946: Coastal SPlain nee see ees See ee —5 +173 —59) +109 +123 +406 +199 +728 +837 Piedmont 2322 2 pS Saag tor iS eea pee es +327 —450 =5 —128 +304 +436 +242 +982 +854 Moun tains ee eS ee a ee +40 +18 —48 +10 —119 +66 +90 +37 +47 sic tall eee tae eo ek pa Penne aR eee tal an ean re ee +362 —259 —112 —9 +308 +908 +531 +1, 747 +1, 738 Percentage change, Jan. 1, 1940, to Jan. 1, 1946: Percent Percent Percent | Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent GCoastalebl alin = eee a eee ney i ee —1.4 +2.4 —21.2 +1.4 +12.1 +20. 8 +23.1 | +19.0 +7.1 Pied into tess eee a ere ona Ne un ee eee +31.6 =—22.7 —4.3 | —4.1 +13.0 +33.8 Se A en a ed) +11.4 Mountai nessa et Seen uaen sate nie Len eee +3225 3.16 =8:2 +. 8 4.7 14.4 +12.0 | +1.9 +.9 PAVED rOWiTl Ces Sess ea re gos a te +24.0 | —2.6 | —11.4 —.1 +5.2 +24.5 | 422.7 AES a EES +7.2
48
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture ~
cedar in the Coastal Plain, redcedar in the Piedmont, and white pine and hemlock in the mountains were also cut too heavily. An increase in loblolly pine in the Coastal Plain partially compensated for these losses, but the bulk of the deficit was made up by the substantial increase in Virginia pine saw timber in the Piedmont. Virginia pine is much lower quality saw timber than shortleaf pine. The effect has been to lower the aver- age quality of the softwood saw timber, particularly in the Piedmont, and to make no gain in the total amount
This is far from a fair exchange as
of saw timber.
Hardwood saw timber appeared to increase marked- ly during the 6-year period, particularly in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont. The only indicated decrease was in the “oaks” in the mountains, where over one-half of the lumber is cut from these species. Here, a rather large sawmill population has difficulty finding suitable operable timber. Many observations of sawmill oper-
ations, supplemented by monthly records of lumber production, indicate that yellow-poplar in the Pied- mont was also subject to heavy cutting during the war years. The magnitude of this cut cannot be obtained from table 23, but it is safe to say that the hardwood stands of the Piedmont now contain relatively less
‘
good-quality yellow-poplar and more poor-quality gum and oak than before the war.
Balance in Cords
The growing stock of all sound trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger, measured in cords, increased about 11 percent during the 6-year period (table 24). More favorable growth-drain ratios in the under-sawlog-size softwoods resulted in a small increase in the total vol- ume of softwood. Loblolly and Virginia pines in- creased in the Coastal Plain, but shortleaf pine in the Piedmont suffered an indicated loss of nearly one mil- lion cords. The greatest apparent increase in the softwoods was in the Virginia pine of the Piedmont.
The increase of hardwoods was nearly four times that of the softwoods, partly because of a larger volume of growing stock but also because of the limited amount of cutting in hardwoods of less than saw-timber size. The net increase was about 15 percent, with all three species groups showing an appreciable increase
(fig. 64). Trends in Composition of Growing Stock
During the war years the proportion of softwood in total commodity drain decreased from its peak in 1941.
TaBLe 24.—WNet change in total growing stock,! Fan. 1, 1940, to Fan. 1, 1946
Softwoods | Hardwoods Item 3 All species Virginia Other Other soft-| Total soft- iS Gums and Other |Total hard- a yellow cans ea kae Oaks yellow- heed ae Soa pine Pines wv poplar ardwoods woods Growing stock, Jan. 1, 1940: M cords M cords M cords M cords M cords M cords M cords M cords M cords (Coastal) ait mesa seen eae ee we en 2, 340 29, 846 823 33, 009 OFF153 12,012 5, 848 27, 013 60, 022 7, 725 13, 209 577 21, 511 19, 631 9, 118 7, 196 35, 345 56, 856 1, 030 2, 661 1,915 5, 606 14, 620 2, 397 6, 261 23, 278 28, 884 Hot al esses cee tree SS S SE S 11, 095 45, 716 3, 315 60, 126 42, 804 23, 527 19, 305 85, 636 145, 762 Growing stock, Jan. 1, 1946: (Coastalublainesoesnristn ee ena Poa Ce Ne 2, 506 31, 252 676 34, 434 10, 128 14, 423 6, 972 31, 523 65, 957 (Pied mon tees sep ea esse ak oe AS eS 10, 105 12, 285 664 23, 054 20, 885 11, 463 9, 144 41, 492 64, 546 Mountaineers hee tag, HT eee Nee oe 13, 2, 656 1, 932 5, 930 15, 257 2, 654 7, 694 25, 605 31, 535 OG ay ee SS gee ee 13, 953 46, 193 3, 272 63, 418 46, 270 28, 540 23, 810 98, 620 162, 038 Net change, Jan. 1, 1940, to Jan. 1, 1946: (Coastalgblainwe tec ee ea Cian EA ea ee +166 +1, 406 —147 +1, 425 +975 +2, 411 +1, 124 +4, 510 +5, 935 Pred mon tae ee ees papa rn re a SE eS +2, 380 —924 +87 +1, 543 +1, 854 +2, 345 +1, 948 +6, 147 +7, 690 Vo tari Cal seem ee i as eee ene: AEROS DEE IE +312 =5 +17 +324 +637 +257 +1, 433 +2, 327 +2, 651 ehotal pen neemmen ree RD aS Ce NE Se a +2, 858 +477 —43 +3, 292 +3, 466 +5, 013 +4, 505 | +12, 984 +16, 276 Percentage change, Jan. 1, 1940, to Jan. 1, 1946: Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent (C@oastale bla tris ee eee pth pW es SE SO +7.1 +4.7 —17.9 +4.3 +10.7 +20.1 +19.2 +16.7 +9.9 Teed rio ri epee ete oarsmen ee Res SEs +30. 8 —=7...0 +15.1 +7.2 +9.7 +25.7 +27.1 +17.4 +13.5 Momn taint pene ncmens ya kena eo nee eee tee +30. 3 —.2 +.9 +5.8 +4.4 +10.7 +22.9} -+410.0 +9.2 oe re | | : PAIISproNinces tesa keen ote ia ean Vee SS +25.8 +1.0 ~ =1.3 +5.5 +8.1 “F21232);- 23.3 +15.2 +11. 2 | | | 1 All sound trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger. 49
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
SOFTWOODS: Sees
VIRGINIA PINE
OTHER YELLOW PINES OTHER SOFTWOODS TOTAL
HARDWOODS: OAKS
GUMS & YELLOW-POPLAR
OTHER HARDWOODS
TOTAL
ALL SPECIES
10 ihe} PERCENT
Figure 64.—WNet change in total growing stock, measured in cords, 1940 to 1946.
In that year, 70 percent of the saw-timber drain, and 63 percent of the drain of all material, was softwood. By 1945 the proportion of softwood in the drain had declined to 59 percent of saw timber and 54 percent of all material (fig. 65). The principal reason for this decline lay in the greatly increased demand for hard- wood for war needs subsequent to the outbreak of hos- tilities. Some of it may well have been the result of diminishing supplies of operable softwood timber. Whatever the causes, this proportional decline in softwood drain relieved for a few years some of the pressure on the softwood growing stock. As has been noted, however, the softwood growing stock continued to decline in relation to the total stand (fig. 65), and there is every reason to expect that the proportion of In 1946, hard- wood demand slackened as war contracts were can- celed.
softwood in the drain will rise again.
At the same time, the pent-up demand for construction lumber and increased consumption of pulpwood accelerated softwood drain. While soft- woods may not again reach the 1941 peak of 70 percent of all saw-timber drain, there is little question but that they will rise above the 1945 level over the next decade,
and that a very large proportion of softwood drain will be loblolly and shortleaf pines. Saw-timber growth of these species now barely exceeds drain in the Coastal Plain. In the Piedmont additional drain would further accentuate the decline in shortleaf saw timber, which appears to have decreased nearly one- fourth in 6 years.
PERCENT
I-SAW TIMBER
IT-ALL SOUND TREES 5.0" 0.B.H. & LARGER 4
Ficure 65.—A, Proportion of growing stock which was soft- wood, as of January I each year; and B, proportion of commodity drain which was softwood in each vear (plotted over mid point of year).
‘44° (45° «(46 YEARS
To be sure, better protection of forests from fire, in- sects, and disease, better utilization practices in both woods and mill, changed demands arising through technological advances—all of these can change the picture quite radically, and undoubtedly will do so in time. Nevertheless, in certain parts of the State, notably the Piedmont, the industries now cutting pine may be forced in a relatively short time to adapt their output increasingly toward a hardwood market. In view of the currently readier markets for pine, its quicker growth, higher yield, and lower cost of har- vesting, such a transition to a predominately hardwood
operation may well require a major adjustment in the
industrial economy of the Piedmont.
50 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
IRGINIA’S opportunity for permanently main-
taining a valuable forest industry, and even ex-
panding it, lies in extensive forest lands whose | potentialities are at present unrealized. These po- _tentialities can be realized by growing more of the ma- | terial industry needs instead of cutting that material | so heavily that less good-quality timber remains each | year to reproduce itself.
| Assets
The great and essential asset is 14.4 million acres of | commercial forest land. With such land, the State 'can produce adequate timber supplies for its wood- | using industries, provided the land is managed well. | The forest has high productive powers, as evidenced by the excess of growth over drain during the heavy cutting of the war years, even though much of that | excess growth was in less valuable species. The State | has an enviable fire control record, and all forest land | is now under organized protection. The Federal- | State program of assistance to timber owners in esti- mating and marking timber for cutting, and in sound | management, utilization, and marketing, has recently | been materially expanded. Among other important assets the State has extensive and diversified forest in- _dustries which furnish the demand for timber prod- ucts. As these industries feel the pinch of saw-timber shortage, they are backing forestry programs more and -more actively each year.
Liabilitees
On the 14.4-million-acre forest area the stands are | so depleted and understocked they grow only one- third to one-half what they could. On 3,400,000 acres, nearly one-half of the State’s saw-timber area, the stands average less than 1,200 board feet per acre,
and hence can be logged only by small “ground” mills turning out rough, green, and often poorly sawed lum-
, fp
| |
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIES
Opportunities for Increasing the Utility of the Timber Resources
KS
ber. These mills commonly cut and saw too many small trees. In one-fourth of the counties in the State, the average stand per acre of commercial forest land is only 830 board feet. One-half of the forest area of Virginia does not have enough timber to meet even the low minimum requirements for saw timber.
Also, 15 percent (29 million cords) of the total sound wood volume is in cull trees. Ninety percent of that volume is hardwood, chiefly oaks, hickories, and scrub species. On the basis of area required for an equal volume of sound trees, these culls occupy 2 million acres of productive forest land. ‘That area represents 14 percent of Virginia’s commercial forest land.
In addition, too large a part of the total wood volume is in the smaller trees. From 55 to 82 percent of the sound volume in cords of the four most valuable and abundant species, and two-thirds of the volume of all species, is in trees less than 13 inches d. b. h. Such trees do not yield high-quality saw timber, but it is common practice to saw them into lumber.
Plan of Action
There are a number of ways of decreasing liabilities and increasing assets. It is a matter of changing a steadily deteriorating situation to a steadily improving one.
Increase Volume
The most certain method of building up stand vol- ume is to reduce the cut below the net growth of the forest under sound practices of forest manage- ment. This practice works well on managed forests under stable ownership, but in a State with nearly 13 million acres of private forest land held by thousands of owners, such a prescription is difficult to follow. In spite of this, there are certain parts of the State, in certain forest types, where the cut will have to be
51
¥ x 4 = : :
reduced, either deliberately or through force of cir- cumstances. Such areas include particularly the short- leaf pine type in the Piedmont and the white pine If the cut in these stands is not held below growth, the industries dependent on saw timber from such areas eventually will face
type in the mountains.
an acute shortage of raw material.
Fortunately, a more positive approach is justified for the rest of the types, which include those most Instead of trying to reduce the cut, emphasis should be placed on increasing the
important commercially.
growing stock while keeping the cut at present levels Basic in the approach to this task are adequate fire control,
until additional yields warrant increasing it.
protection of reproduction and young saplings from logging damage, and-an expanded planting program on abandoned fields, on clear-cut areas where follow- up release is planned, and in poorly stocked old-field pine stands. A greater percentage of merchantable
but immature trees must be reserved from cutting.
Improve Quality
Improvement cuttings to eliminate low-value trees and to improve the composition of the stand are par- ticularly necessary where undesirable hardwoods are encroaching on pine lands. be profitable if markets are available for the material
Improvement cuts can
removed, or if, as on farms, the material can be used by the owner. Mine timbers in the mountains, pulp- wood and low-grade lumber in the Coastal Plain and the Piedmont, and fuel wood in all provinces are If there are no markets, the cuts involve a financial outlay, to be regarded in the same light as the cost of fire protection, planting, or other maintenance costs.
salable products from improvement cuts.
Thinning, which is another important method of improving timber quality, can often be made to pay for itself, too. In fact, thinnings sold as pulpwood or fuel wood frequently bring higher returns than the sale of improvement cuttings. Frequent thinning of stands being managed for saw timber or other high- quality products is beneficial but tends to encourage the encroachment and development of brushy hard- woods. Thinning of pine stands being managed pri- marily for pulpwood is less profitable where it ag- gravates the-hardwood-control problem. Sometimes old-field stands of Virginia, shortleaf, or loblolly pine are so densely stocked that they tend to stagnate When the stands are thinned,
however, the trees respond vigorously.
unless thinned early. Pruning of pine will probably be done mostly in farm or other
52
small woodlands, but industrial timberland owners may also find it profitable in producing higher grade logs.
These practices, plus harvest cutting designed to improve stand quality, have been advocated by forest- ers for the past decade or more. Yet a field survey made in 1945 showed that forest practices on half the smaller holdings and on two-fifths of the larger holdings are still not up to a standard sufficient to
» maintain forest productivity and that the stands on
such holdings are deteriorating.
Better Protection
Good as the fire control record is, it can be material- ly improved—at a price. Virginia has no alternative but to pay the price if she wants to keep her forests green. The total cost, from Federal, State, county, and private sources, for full protection of State and private forest lands adequate to hold annual fire loss to less than 0.4 percent of area protected is estimated to be $715,000 per year, more than three times the 1945 budget.
While losses from insects and disease are not as spec- tacular and visible as losses from fire, in the long run they are frequently more costly. Witness the chestnut blight, and the ravages of the southern pine beetle. It has not been possible to control some diseases, such as the chestnut blight, with any means now available to science. However, the losses from many other dis- eases, such as fusiform rust of southern pines and the heart rots, can be greatly reduced through practical measures already developed.
Improve Timber Utilization
Efficient use of what already grows can make the forest considerably more valuable. Pines are overcut, which leaves openings that are all too often filled by hardwoods. Thus, many pure pine stands are con- verted into mixed pine-hardwood or pure hardwood stands, generally of low quality. Profitable uses are being found for the low-grade hardwoods, but many more wood-products plants are needed to cut and use this plentiful material. The abundant supply of low- grade hardwoods presents a rather favorable oppor- In 1945 there were but
23 plants in Virginia turning out handle blanks, picker
tunity for such operations.
sticks, insulator pins, mine wedges, shuttle blocks, wooden utensils, small-dimension stock, and similar minor products. In all they utilized only 30,900 cords of wood. This is a small fraction of the volume that could be removed with benefit to the forest—provided
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U.S. Department of Agriculture
4 Ea 2 > eo
| new plants utilize low-grade hardwoods and do not specialize in the high-grade hardwoods, which are ) being cut almost as heavily as the pines. Among the _ products which could be increasingly produced are furniture, sports equipment, toys, woodenware, spools, toothpicks, buttons, dowels, shade and map rollers, boot and shoe findings, mine wedges, and novelties.
That a concentrated cut is at present depleting the best grades and sizes in the more desirable species of hardwoods points to the necessity of greater use of poor-quality material. One-fifth (26 million cords) of the total hardwood volume in trees 5 inches d. b. h. and over is cull, and an additional large volume is in such species of limited merchantability as scarlet, post, and water oaks, elms, sycamore, and hickory. Failure to use a greater proportion of this large volume of wood is not only a waste of raw material but also poor forest management. Timber operators cannot be expected to cut and process species or grades which they cannot sell, or can sell only at a loss. Greater utilization, therefore, depends on finding profitable markets for this material.
For example, there is an opportunity for using a much larger volume of cull material and hardwood tops and limbs for fuel wood throughout the State, thereby reducing the volume of sound saw timber used for this purpose. In the period 1940-45 the average annual hardwood saw-timber drain going into fuel wood was 25.9 million board feet. None of this volume came from cull trees or from top wood of sound trees; all of it was from sound saw-timber grow- ing stock, mostly oak. Some of it, no doubt, came from oaks and other species not presentiy in heavy de- mand, but most of it was material readily merchant- able as sawlogs. There are better uses for this 26 million feet of hardwood saw timber than using it for fuel wood, so long as overabundant quantities of suit- able material are available from cull trees, top wood, and mill waste.
Most of the 2.5 million cords of cull blackgum and tupelo is suitable for pulp and is entering increasingly into this product. With the increased pulping of hardwoods now under way, this industry can mate- rially aid in utilizing previously unmerchantable species and grades, at least of gums, soft maple, yellow- poplar, some of the oaks, and other pulping species.
The people in the mountains commonly use poor- quality oaks and other hardwoods for rough construc- tion lumber for houses and farm buildings. The build- ings so constructed are satisfactory, indicating the de- sirability of a greater use of similar material in the - Piedmont and Coastal Plain to help reduce the present
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
heavy cut of pine and the surplus of poor-quality hard- woods. Other possibilities in this field include the popularizing of now unwanted but satisfactory species by the manufacturers of furniture, novelties, and other minor products.
Standardized Log Grades
The current practices of buying stumpage on a lump-sum basis, i. e., so much for the tract, and of buy- ing logs at the mill on a log-run basis are a deterrent to good forest management. Even where logs are sold on grade, the grades commonly differ at each mill. Consequently, logs are rarely sold at a price based on grade yields of lumber. Both timber owners and timber operators suffer from these practices, since the owner almost inevitably gets a lower price for his stumpage and the operator cannot specify the logs suitable to his particular products or type of operation. The development and use of standard log grades for pine and for hardwoods would solve both difficulties and would be an incentive toward better cutting practices.
Ways to Accomplish Needed Improvements
To meet the needs of the forest, simultaneous efforts by all organizations and individuals—local, State, Federal, and private—offer the best chance for funda- mental improvement. Among the large number of possible actions are numerous aids and services to pri- vate Owners, expansion and intensified management of public forests, and public control of cutting and other forest practices on private land.
One essential to getting good forest practices in effect is a full-scale, State-wide education program in the woods, with on-the-ground technical assistance to timber owners. People must be told and shown again and again that timber stand improvement, thin- ning, and sustained-yield cutting pay short-term and long-term dividends. They have to learn that, with present-day heavy use, the days when the forest took care of itself are over. They must be taught common- sense methods of timber stand improvement, thinning, and harvest cutting so that how to do it and when to do it are common knowledge. To be effective, this educational campaign has to be aimed directly at the 174,000 small forest owners who control approxi- mately 80 percent of Virginia’s woodlands. Personal contacts with so large a number of individuals are dif- ficult and costly, but these are the key people. Two- thirds of their land is unmanaged and poorly or de- structively cut.
53
a : F
For the industrial timber owners and larger indi- vidual owners, practical advice and assistance on timber estimating, cutting methods, log grading, tim- ber values, and market opportunities can usually be
obtained from company or private consulting foresters.
For the farmer and for the small nonfarm owner ad- vice and assistance will need to come largely from publicly employed foresters. While both the Federal and State Forest Services now provide some assistance to farmers (as well as limited amounts to larger own- ers), there is great need for immediate expansion of effort if any but a small fraction of Virginia’s timber owners are to be reached. A forester in each heavily timbered county and one in each small group of less heavily forested counties is highly desirable. Virginia has recently expanded its efforts in this field in coop- eration with the Federal Norris-Doxey Act program, but these efforts are still far from the requirements just described, even though the Virginia Forest Service is moving toward this goal as rapidly as available funds permit.
Forest-products cooperative marketing associations offer perhaps another opportunity for improved forest practices. While forest-products cooperatives are relatively untried and while they have many pitfalls, a well-managed and honestly run association, with requirements for forest management by its members, offers protection to both buyer and seller against in- equitable prices, gives the buyer prior knowledge of quantity and quality of timber available, permits pur- chase from one source, and provides the seller with a definite market at established prices.
Funds for protection against fire, insects, and dis- ease have not been adequate. They should be mate- rially increased.
For the most part, private enterprise should own and operate the forest land now in its hands, where such land can be managed so as to be kept reasonably
productive. But where private owners are unable or unwilling to maintain productivity, there is need for public ownership. Such public ownership should be distributed through all levels of government—Federal, State, county, and municipal.
Greatly expanded research is needed in the fields of silviculture, management, utilization and products, and economics to make available sound information on forest use and development to all timber owners and forest administrators. Equally necessary, of course, is research on phases of forestry not covered in this report—watershed management, wildlife man- agement, recreation development, and others. Inten- sive research along the broad lines suggested will pro- vide the basic information requisite to a great im- provement in timber management and utilization.
Responsibility for publicly financed research in Vir- ginia rests mainly with the Virginia Forest Service, the Agricultural Experiment Station of Virginia Poly- technic Institute, and the Southeastern Forest Experi- ment Station of the Forest Service, United States De- partment of Agriculture. Forest research is also car- ried on to a limited extent by some of the larger cor- porations and by conservation and trade associations.
Forest research takes time, however, and known measures to increase the utility of the forest should not be delayed. With existing knowledge there are many opportunities to improve forest practices, growing stock, protection, and timber utilization. These op- portunities can be realized through the active coop- eration of all timber owners and timber operators, both individual and corporate, and public agencies at all levels of government. By such cooperation, Virginia’s forest resource can continue to provide not only the raw materials which make her forest industry possible, but jobs for thousands of additional workers, profits for the owners of both the stumpage and the process- ing plants, and products for all the people of Virginia.
ie Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURGES AND INDUSTRIES
Literature Cited
(1) Avsion, RoperT GREENHALGH. 1926. FORESTS AND SEA POWER: THE TIMBER PROBLEM OF THE ROYAL NAvy, 1652-1862. 485 pp., illus. Cambridge, Mass. (2) Bruce, PHittr ALEXANDER. 1896. ECONOMIC HISTORY OF VIRGINIA IN THE SEVEN- TEENTH CENTURY. Vv. 2, 647 pp., illus. New York and London. (3) CrurksHank, J. W. 1944. NORTH CAROLINA FOREST RESOURCES AND IN- pustTriEs. U.S. Dept. Agr. Misc. Pub. 533, 76 pp., illus. ; (4) Froruincuam, E. H., and Netson, R. M. 1944. souTH CAROLINA FOREST RESOURCES AND IN- -pustrigs. U.S. Dept. Agr. Misc. Pub. 522, 72 pp., illus.
SS
(5) Grixiam, Sara K. 1946. waAGE LEVELS IN VIRGINIA. Va. Univ. News Letter XXII(15) : 1. Charlottesville. (6) Lewis, AL. 1944. vIRGINIA ALMANAC AND COMPENDIUM. 287 pp. Norfolk, Va. (7) MANuFACTURERS RECORD PUBLISHING Co. 1945. THE BLUE BOOK OF SOUTHERN PROGRESS. 188 pp., illus. Baltimore, Md. (8) [U.S.] Forest Service AND War PropuctTIon Boarp. 1945. ESTIMATED WOODS AND PLANT EMPLOYMENT IN "PRIMARY FOREST INDUSTRIES—J ULy 1, 1944. 17 pp., illus. [Processed.] (9) Virernta STATE PLANNING Boarp. 1937. reports. v. 10, sect. III, Water Resources, 20 pp., illus.
VIRGINIA FOREST RESOURCES AND
INDUSTRIES
Appendix
oo
Survey Methods
Field Inventory
The field inventory of the timber resources of Vir- ginia was made in 1940. To facilitate analysis and use of the data, the State was divided into five survey units, varying in size from 4.3 million acres to 6.4 million acres, namely, the Coastal Plain; the northern Piedmont, the southern Piedmont (combined in this report) ; the northern mountains, and the southern mountains (combined in this report).
In the field survey, crews gridironed the State with compass lines spaced 10 miles apart. At intervals of one-eighth mile along each
sample plots were established. Records obtained on
line, one-fourth-acre
31,390 plots form the basis for computing the areas Of these, 18,- 087 were forest plots, and here detailed measurements
devoted to various kinds of land use.
and observations were made concerning the number, size, and species of trees, the forest type and stand con- ditions, degree of fire damage, density and distribution Data for construction of volume tables were collected by sup-
of reproduction, growth, and site quality.
plementary sampling by J. W. Girard, of the Forest Service, who also determined timber-cull percentages.
In estimating forest area there were two possible sources of error: (1) errors in classifying field plots or in compiling the data, and (2) sampling errors. The first arise from mistakes of judgment or technic and were minimized by the exercise of care and skill, even though it was seldom possible to evaluate them. In the Survey of Virginia, every effort was made to main- tain a high order of accuracy in the collection and In the field this took the form of frequent checks and a continuous program of train-
compilation of data.
ing. In the office the work was organized to permit automatic machine verification of the more important operations.
The sampling method used did not permit compu- tation of sampling errors of the area estimates under
correct statistical procedures. However, comparisons
of forest area obtained by the Forest Survey plot method of sampling with the same forest area planim- etered from aerial photographs indicated that the plot method of sampling gave results within 2 percent of the planimetered area for forested areas as small as 1.5 million acres. These empirical checks indicate that the Forest Survey estimate of the forest area of Vir- ginia should be rather precise and that estimates for the three major physiographic regions of the State were also reliable.
In estimating timber volumes, the possible sources of error included (1) and (2) above and, in addition, (3) inaccurate measurements of tree diameter, height, or cull, and (4) bias resulting from impreper construc- tion, selection, or use of tree volume tables. As in the case of forest area determinations, every effort was made to obtain accurate measurements through fre- quent checks and training. The volume tables used also were checked and were found to give reasonably accurate results. It was not possible to compute sampling errors of the volume estimates, but on the basis of subsequent experience with random samples of roughly comparable intensity and the computation of sampling errors, it seems safe to assume that the error of the estimated saw-timber volume in the State does not exceed =2.5 percent.
The reliability of one statistic as compared to an- other presented in the same or a related table can be judged roughly by its relative magnitude. In general, the larger values warrant greater confidence, while the smallest should be considered indicative rather than as absolute quantities.
Increment
Measurements for growth calculations were. ob- tained from increment borings made in a mechanically selected sample of all trees over 3 inches in diameter. In general, computational procedures consisted of de- termining the volume of small trees that grew to mer- chantable size during the period and of increasing the sample tree diameters by the measured diameter growth of the preceding decade. ‘The differences be-
56 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
tween present and projected volume of the sample trees was then expressed as a percentage increase and applied directly to the inventory volume.
Drain
Data on forest industries and estimates of com- modity drain for 1940 were based upon an intensive field canvass of primary forest-products plants and domestic wood consumers. Since 1940 the Forest Service has cooperated with the Bureau of the Census, and since 1942 also with the War Production Board and its successor, the Civilian Production Administra- tion, to obtain data on production of lumber and other forest products and related wood-products statistics.
Computations
Compilation of the inventory and growth data was accomplished through the use of punch cards. The machine tabulations obtained from the punch cards could be used directly in the preparation of the final tables. The flexibility, uniformity, and economy of this method made possible the rapid, precise compila- tion of a large volume of data at reasonable cost.
Defimtions of Terms Used
The technical and uncommon terms used in this report, as well as certain common terms given spe- cial meaning, are defined as follows:
Land Use Classes
Commercial forest—Forest land having qualities essential to the production of merchantable timber.
Public reserved forest—Forest land in Federal and State ownership upon which commercial timber cutting is pro- hibited.
Noncommercial forest—Forest land too poor in quality to produce merchantable timber in a reasonable time.
Cropland—Nonforest land used for production of farm crops within the last 5 years.
Abandoned cropland—tLand once cultivated, now defi- nitely abandoned for farm crops and not being used for pas- ture. No forest cover present.
- Pasture—Cleared, fenced lands that are used primarily for grazing.
Marsh—Low, boggy, nonforested areas bordering water
' bodies and streams, where drainage is too poor to permit
agricultural use.
Other nonforest—Includes areas within the corporate limits and suburban or industrial sections of towns and cities; power, rail, and highway rights-of-way; sand dunes, beaches, water areas, and other miscellaneous nonforest land.
Forest Types
Loblolly pine—Stands in which softwoods form 25 percent or more of the dominant and codominant trees, with loblolly
Virginia Forest Resources and Industries
pine predominating. Includes pond pine in the Coastal Plain.
Shortleaf pine—Stands in which softwoods form 25 per- cent or more of the dominant and codominant trees, with shortleaf pine predominating. Redcedar is included here, although it forms a distinct type over limited areas.
Virginia pine—Stands in which softwoods form 25 percent or more of the dominant and codominant trees, with Virginia pine predominating.
White pine—Stands in which softwoods form 25 percent or more of the dominant and codominant trees, with white pine predominating.
Bottom-land hardwoods—Stands of mixed hardwoods in swamps and along streams, with hardwood species forming 75 percent or more of the dominant and codominant trees. Includes cypress and white-cedar in the Coastal Plain.
Cove hardwoods—Stands in which yellow-poplar, cucum- bertree, red maple, white ash, river birch, and basswood form 75 percent or more of the dominant and codominant trees; usually found on lower north slopes and in coves along small streams. This type includes stands of northern hardwoods, with sugar maple, beech, and yellow birch making up 75 per- cent or more of the overstory.
Upland hardwoods—Stands on well-drained, upland sites in which mixed oaks and other hardwoods form 75 percent or more of the dominant and codominant trees.
Diameter Classification
D. b. h. (diameter at breast height)—Diameter in inches, outside bark, measured at 4.5 feet above average ground level.
Diameter class—All trees were recorded in 2-inch diameter classes, each class including diameters 1 inch below and 0.9 inch above the stated midpoint; e. g., trees from 7.0 to and including 8.9 inches are placed in the 8-inch class.
Tree Classes
Sound saw-timber tree—A softwood tree at least 9 inches d. b: h.,; or a hardwood tree at least 13 inches d. b. h., with not less than one sound butt log 12 feet long, or with at least 50 percent of the gross volume of the tree in sound saw timber.
Sound under-sawlog-size tree—Any straight-boled tree be- tween | inch d. b. h. and-sawlog size, sound enough to indicate that it could eventually make a sound saw-timber tree as de- scribed above. Cord and cubic-foot volumes include trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger.
Cull tree—Any tree that fails to qualify as a sound tree because of poor form, excessive limbiness, rot, or other defect.
Pole tree—A pine tree that will produce a pole conforming to specifications of the American Standards Association.
Forest Conditions
Old-growth timber—Mature or overmature forest growth having characteristics of the original mature timber.
Second-growth timber—Trees that have come up after the removal of the old stand by cutting, fire, or other cause, or young trees left after logging old timber.
Saw-timber stands—Stands containing at least 600 board feet per acre in pine types, and 1,000 board feet in hardwood types.
Cordwood stands—Stands of trees below sawlog size but averaging more than | inch d. b. h. which may contain some
57
eae ee an A ee a
saw-timber volume but less than the minimum required for saw-timber stands. Reproduction—Stands too young to classify as cordwood, but with at least 80 well-distributed seedlings per acre. Clear-cut—Cut-over areas having insufficient young growth- to qualify either as cordwood or reproduction.
Volume Estimates
Board-foot volume—Includes only the saw-timber portion of saw-timber trees. Top diameters vary with the limits of Deductions are made for woods cull and
for loss in sawing at the mill.
usable material.
Cord volume—This volume (including bark) includes the following at all times:
1. The sawlog portion of saw-timber trees.
2. The upper stems of saw-timber softwoods to a minimum diameter of 4 inches outside bark.
3. The full stem of cordwood trees at least 5 inches
d. b. h. to a variable top diameter of at least 4 inches out- side bark.
In certain tables (see footnotes) the following additional wood is included:
1. The sound wood in cull trees.
2. The upper stems and limbs of saw-timber hard- woods and cypress to a minimum diameter of 4 inches outside bark.
Deductions for cull include only the volume in defects which cause the material to be unsuited for cordwood. Sweep and slight crook are not regarded as defects.
Cubic-foot volume—This volume includes the same ma- terial as the cord volume excepting the bark.
International 44-inch rule—This rule was used for obtain-
p
ce the small end of the section. Taper allowance=¥ inch per 4 linear feet.
Standard cord—The equivalent of a stack of round or split. wood measuring 4 by 4 by 8 feet. The solid content of wood and bark varies with the diameter and form of the individual pieces; for softwoods it averages about 90 cubic feet, for hardwoods about 80 cubic feet.
Growth and Drain
Growing stock—The sum of the volumes of all sound trees 5 inches d. b. h. and larger. Dead and cull trees and tops and limbs of hardwoods and cypress are not included.
Gross increment—The gross volume of wood produced on the growing stock in a given period—usually one year—with- out correction for losses by mortality and deterioration.
Mortality—The volume lost from the growing stock by the death or destruction of individual trees through such natural causes as fire, tree competition, insects, disease, and wind.
Net increment—Gross increment minus mortality.
Saw-timber or board-foot increment—The net increment on the saw-timber portion of saw-timber trees, plus the saw- timber volume in sound trees reaching saw-timber size.
Net increment of the total stand—The net increment on all sound trees 5 inches d. b. h. and larger, with the exception of the upper stems and tops of saw-timber hardwoods, plus the sound-tree volume of all trees reaching 5 inches d. b. h. during the increment period.
Commodity drain—The sound-tree growing stock removed from the forest, the sound usable material left in felled tops, and trees destroyed in logging.
Board-foot drain—Commodity drain of sound sawlogs.
Cordwood drain—Commodity drain, measured in cords, from all sound trees 5 inches d. b. h. or larger, except the tops
and limbs of hardwoods and cypress. Bark volume is in-
ing the board-foot volume of logs, and was derived from the cluded.
formula: V=(0.22D °—0.71D) X0.905 for a 4-foot section, Cubic-foot drain—lIdentical with cordwood drain, except where V=volume in board feet and D=diameter in inches at that bark volume is excluded. °
Species SOFTWOODS
Lumber or trade name
Gedar rede eee s ao eee, Atlantic white-cedar.... Gedan-wihiter to in ee : Z Northern white-cedar.. . Baldceypress-=-2- 2 ee Cy pness ste ete yP Pondcypresse ae. eee Mirseastenneeynier cin: ait Eraserchitge sue ance sue senee
Hleml ockewarete nee ee
Pine, southern yellow... ...
Wireimniay pine) nts cee
Pine; swihkteres ae secant: Spruceeastenms sso.
58
Recognized common name Mastenm ered Ce clair ews isha ee creer
Basternhemlockw 4). eee os (Carolina hemlocks so 7 2. ae oblolly wine ses ee ee Iongleat. pines <2. Pitchy pines eee Ronde pine sss ve nanee ease Shortleatpimetn risen Table-Mountain pine...
Basternswihtte spines cra tats sacs eae IRedispruce®. soi) antes:
Botanical name
Juniperus virginiana. Chamaecyparis thyoides. Thuja occidentalis. Taxodium distichum. T. ascendens.
Abtes frasert.
Tsuga canadensis.
T. caroliniana.
Pinus taeda.
P. palustris.
P. rigida.
P. rigida var. serotina. P. echinata.
P. pungens.
P. virginiana.
P. strobus.
Picea rubens.
Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
)
|
Lumber or trade name IAS eImOUItAITY oy Ph eee oe
| IBUCKEVER men menses
; IBUIGNS ates ote oge oda or
Oeste ee we
BC OULonWOoOd «5.2 06
DOC WiOOG coches ee
Helin softe 7. etic ean
Gru seolacke a7 ee yes (Grub cars ates ee tea ese ieee ct
Hackberry >. 32) 3. ey sy
OMe VOCUS tanita etch <r
Petlombeams 2 5).
IiromwWOOCs= ee east eee.
WGoOGustaice eer eh
HARDWOODS
Recognized common name American mountain-ash............... iWWilatter ashi tga irate Rare ime RCL iyo
Pumpkinsashie ech et a a er American basswood (related species)... .. PNIMIETI CAM SCE CIE erates ton ten iene mere ee RAVER bITa eae a eet Lem SWeet Dinca tei acs ae ment wenn UNE ese ie
@htoebuckeyer ah bt Gee ee MWelllowabuckeyerue item ene BUCteR MULE Ga haste cee na ec ayer Blackvcherrys Go 3 hee So ee Pimtchernyin ica Ge. ace poe, ee tierue a fly Gommon, chokecherty 4323s Amenican: Chestnut 72s een eae Hastermecottonwood! Gi. ee a Swamp Cottonwood 2204 idee e. Bistoothvaspensy cece seen Gane Blowermmerdogwood:ae fae. ae far, WAT erICAmMNelme ss Ai siete tres peur awnen Whneedcelimes erie ies as cr wees ia an Slipperyselmi. ia oe oe c nee ec Blackstupelo (blackewma) sa 3 ies as. SMC CUO UM yr anc ease Sidi err ic
| lack Derive sieht vin uen erage tial ea
SUPARWCEEY.. Zeer ie Othe een Watersbickorycntapaice pena ste Paes me Carolina hickory ise Shee eae Bitternut hickory eee chee ne Pigniitehickorys fai eee © a ee Shreliibarkzhickonya aes esc hie fence Rreduinickonr yan tra ei rec tad Siiae barkshickony yo c2 hea creo aa Mrockernutihickorny oii neces Americans no ly ear ee attr Ants Honey locustes¢-wo Ae eet otal eee so teres American NOLnDEAlNc {etn wesc, Eastern hophornbeam 2s 2: ere e ee Black locust ax. acdsee Gee eae a dere hits @ucumbertree nt gaa ae ee Seely Hrasersmacnolla ss. Aan ria toe aes eth Sweetbaysies muy cer ie ceo cae ein 2k, Sileanmaplewr. sec sc Ware ewe Silver maple xian wea ne meget cicae Redtimaple ssn fates ct eet epic ayes: ReGamiutlpennyecensiscy eae eck acca cian
Botanical name Sorbus americana. Fraxinus americana. F.. pennsylvanica. F. pennsylvanica var. lanceolata. F. caroliniana. F, quadrangulata. F. tomentosa. Tilia americana. Fagus grandifolia. Betula nigra. B. lenta. B. lutea. Aesculus glabra. A. octandra. Juglans cinerea. Prunus serotina. P. pensylvanica. P. virginiana. Castanea dentata. Populus deltordes. P. heterophylla. P. grandidentata. Cornus florida. Ulmus americana. U. alata. U. fulva. Nyssa sylvatica. Liquidambar styraciflua. Celtis occidentalis. C. laevigata. Carya aquatica. C. carolinae-septentrionalis. C. cordiformis. C. glabra. C’. laciniosa. C. ovalis. C’.. ovata. C. tomentosa. Ilex opaca. Gleditsia triacanthos. Carpinus caroliniana. Ostrya virginiana. Robinia pseudoacacia. Magnolia acuminata. M. frasert. M. virginiana. Acer saccharum.
A. saccharinum. A. rubrum. Morus rubra.
HARDWOODS— Continued Lumber or trade name Recognized common name Botanical name Blackwoakes sooo oe Stee ree nagsose eRe Quercus velutina. Blackjackoak ae ee ee ee ee Q. marilandica. Nother redvoakes) 25 are es se Q. borealis. BimcOaky eee ote ie sae a ae Q. palustris. Scarletoak ssa ye ea Se Q. coccinea. Oalurcd ta ee ce Shineles ake cgi ctrn pen eens y omnes Q. imbricaria. Sihumard Oakes se os a eo sierra Q. shumardit. Southern red Oakes eee oe eee Q. falcata. SWamaps red: Oak oes se deere Q. falcata var. pagodaefolia. Wha tertoaks S24 in einen erty ete peas Q. nigra. WhilloweOalk ex 3 ht ase as Doha etu se oe ces Q. phellos. BurrOale saris a ee ee are ean Q. macrocarpa. Chestnutoakie(- 3 ee ee Q. montana. Chinquajpinvoalk = oes eee Q. muehlenbergi. DVedOalk coy eos yr te an ee ere ear Q. virginiana. Oalc white «Sas Se Overcup Oaks Gi Os re ene Q. lyrata. Bostioake:: 30 yi ee ee ee ee Q. stellata. SWamp.chestnut oak: @ 49.3 255 Q. prinus. Swamp wiite Oakes tae aie ak ee ea Q. bicolor. White Oake sachsen es ae ee Q. alba. Bersnmimony se eats cc: Common? persimmon? 2) sie Diospyros virginiana. Wedipud ee asc eae Bastermeredbudirg 6 te ea es Cercis canadensis. WaSsatraseecs sores ye Sassalrast ssc reseed es seen iets Same Sassafras albidum. Dilveqoeller se seen forse Carolina: silverbelle = eee ee Halesia carolina. Sourwood.......... ere SOUCWOOGS = Bes Ny. enn cee ee ree Oxydendrum arboreum. SVGalMmOhe@aits suk ae sree ay AMELiCanysy Camm One aie ee ee Platanus occidentalis. Wratertupelo ss) os eee ee Nyssa aquatica. ee Swamp ne Be eee ee rere a N. sylvatica var. biflora. Wrallnutsin sn ee eee Blackiwalnuty 325 eee ee Juglans nigra. WAG We tate eae cect Black-willow 3: 2eee Sage as Nees Salix nigra. Nellow-=poplan 2:82:54 .65.-:: Yellow-poplars- = 20a eae Liriodendron tulipifera.
Data by Physiographic Provinces
venient means of appraising and comparing the gen-
The following tables present area, volume, incre- eral forest situation in these distinct divisions of the ment, and drain statistics for the.three major physio- State. 60 "Miscellaneous Publication 681, U. S. Department of Agriculture
graphic provinces of Virginia. They provide a con- —
i F |
; Tasre 25.—Commercial forest area by physiographic province, forest type group, and forest condition, 1940
k Bottom- Province and forest | Loblolly | Shortleaf | Virginia | White land Cove Upland condition pine ! pine 2 pine pine 2 hard] hard-_ hard- Total softwoods Total hardwoods 4 Total all species woods + | Woods > woods Coastal Plain: Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Percent A. P. Saw timber___--- 1, 279, 600 94, 100 TP 7AO)O) Vi eae et 409°'700|o 2c) ee 521, $00] 1, 545, 900 eo seiuen eae None pies Cordwood_____--- 548, 800 65, 200 1353200 (ee te 160:5100|Es-2 367, 000 749, 200 31 527, 100 35! 1, 276, 300 33 Reproduction__-___ 91, 000 4, 800 235400 |e ae S800 (Sane 8, 800 119, 200 5 46, 600 3 165, 800 4 All conditions__| 1,919, 400 164,100} 330, 800]_-_-_____ 6073:600|2os202 88 897, 300} 2, 414, 300 100} 1, 504, 900 100} 3,919, 200| 100 Piedmont: Saw timber_-_-__-_ 49,500} 681,600) 474,500) 27, 200} 192,500] 95, 700} 1, 189, 700| 1, 232, 800 45] 1, 477, 900 48| 2, 710, 700 47 Cordwood_____--- 31,600} 480,700} | 731, 200 8, 800} 129, 600} 54,000] 1, 272, 10U| 1, 252, 300 45] 1, 455, 700 47| 2, 708, 000) 46 Reproduction____-_ 15,300 70, 800 185,800 |U22 222 124000 | Seen 125,300} 271, 900 10 137, 300 5| 409, 200 7 All conditions _- 96, 400} 1, 233, 100) 1, 391, 500) 36, 000} 334, 100] 149, 700) 2, 587, 100) 2, 757, 000 100| 3, 070, 900 100} 5, 827, 900 100 Mountain: Sawatimben=seaaes |= see es 234, 800 71, 500} 138, 700 8, 100} 221, 100) 1,292,800) 445, 000 42] 1, 522, 000 42] 1, 967, 000 42 Cord wood aie es |b ens 324, 500 174, 500} 59, 800} 17,000) 184, 400] 1, 808,800} 558, 800 53} 2,010, 200 56| 2, 569, 000 55 Reproduction_____|--------_- 14, 600 39, 100 1, 600 800 3, 300 69, 500 55, 300 5 73, 600 2 128, 900 3 All conditions__]--------_- 573, 900 285, 100} 200,100} 25,900) 408, 800) 3,171, 100} 1,059, 100 100} 3, 605, 800 100| 4, 664, 900 100 State: : ~ Saw timber__---- 1, 329, 100] 1, 010, 500 718, 200| 165, 900} 610, 300} 316, 800] 3, 004, 000} 3, 223, 700 52| 3,931, 100 48] 7, 154, 800 50 © Cordwood--_------ 580, 400 870, 400} 1,040,900} 68, 600) 306, 700} 238, 400) 3, 447, 900} 2, 560, 300 41| 3, 993, 000 49) 6, 553, 300 45 Reproduction_____ 106, 300 90, 200 248, 300 1,600) 50, 600 3, 300; 203,600) 446, 400 7| 257, 500 3 703, 900 5 All Conditions__| 2,015, 800} 1,971, 100) 2,007, 400) 236, 100) 967, 600) 558, 500} 6,655, 500) 6, 230, 400 100} 8, 181, 600 100} 14, 412, 000 100 Percent Percent Percent | Percent 1 Percent | Percent Percent 14.0 13.7 1389, 1. 6} 6.7 3119) CUS D | sine Bases ata LEY A Rozen 2% BY Sp fey ate es. 100 | | | I \ 1Includes pond pine, 12,100 acres. 4 Includes cypress, 24,900 acres; white-cedar, 11,300 acres; and stream-margin 2 Includes redcedar-hardwoods, 61,600 acres. hardwoods, 25,900 acres. 3 Includes hemlock, 74,40U acres. 5 Includes northern hardwoods, 128,400 acres.
TaBLe 26.—Net saw-timber volume! (International %4-inch log rule), by species and physiographic province, 1940
| | { | j | ¢ | Species ecaste! Piedmont | Mountain State Species Sone Piedmont | Mountain State Softwoods: -| M bd. ft. M bd. ft. | M bd. ft. M bd. ft. Hardwoods—Continued M bd. ft. | M bd. ft. | M bd. ft. | M bd. ft. y
Loblolly pine 2____------_ 6,839,400 220; 000k fesse Ss 7,059,400 Whiteloakiecsce es lT es oe 363 ,000 843,300 696,300 | 1,902,600
Shortleaf pine 3___________ 450,000 |1,753,900 509,600 | 2,713,500 Chestnut) oake 2 cere 15,700 353,200 804,700 | 1,173,600
fees Virginia’ pine==--—2s-— == 2 - 352,500 |1,058,400 130,600 | 1,541,500 Other white oaks________- 35,400 65,200 7,400 108 ,000
Wihitespine si) cares eee ed | aes Se 85,600 328,300 413,900 SB irc ney ee tes |S es eee ge | Page 237-5500; 37,300
Hemlock ttatnmnnisnta ss weteuiae ei iee os 2 11,700 240,000 251,700 Beech snare aah senate tales 223 ,600 621 00k eens 285 ,700
Rledced arena saa eres 10,500 19,300 11,400 41,200 Hickoryiss ae ea 145,200 254,600 236, 100 635,900
White-cedar____-___---___ (6. CUO ES Be seiner Ee es 64,900 GCherryzpwalnutes. see ots | ane es eee 50,200 50,200
Gypressme = ee = DO TEI OO 'S | ercesetee eects.) en Ne 201,900 Sugar maple seco e oa |e Ree Roe | eee 96,500 96,500
ee IA shea cao ie Me ae ee 91,800 54,700 29,700 176,200
PRotalenstse mets sr yas a 7,919,200 |3,148,900 |1,219,900 |12,288,000 Other hardwoods____----- 177,900 271,500 250,400 699 , 800
Hardwoods: Potala sstvee Sosa eee 3,828,800 |4,461,500 |3,755,900 |12,046,200
Redimaples 2225 =e 221,900 | 108,400 62,500 392,800
Blackgumsceseor tae 648 , 200 78,800 | 120,600 847 ,600 All live species_-_-_-_-- 11,748,0UU |7,610,400 |4,975,800 |24,334,200
Sweetgume== ae ta eh eet 777 ,900 24373005 | Bes secet ae 1 OD 200G | Deadychestnutaesae a serene se Auer | ee 758 ,400 758,400
Yellow-poplar____________ 529,700 |1,002,200 | 348,000 | 1,879,900 {SS | | |
Northern red oak________ 152,200 437,700 474,200 | 1,064,100 Allispecies -ia ease |11,748,000 {7,610,400 5,734,200 |25,092, 600 Other red oaks___------__ 446,300 686,500 542,000 | 1,674,800
1 Figures include board-foot volume in cordwood stands. 2 Includes pond pine, 3,500 M board feet. . Includes pitch pine in Mountain province.
61
ES | N a Taste 27.—Distribution of net saw-timber volume in each physiographic province, by species and tree-diameter class, 1940 | cus | Coastal Plain _ Piedmont Mountain at Species | l 10-12 | 14-18 20+ 10-12. | 14-18 20-++ 10-12 14-18 20+ inches inches inches inches inches inches inches inches inches Softwoods: Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent | Percent Lablollyipine eet es ee cl hn eZ 40.2 45.7 14.1 49.3 43.1 Fi On| see sere doa | Maumee sae Sears | Shortleatep iesaip ate eeepengest te a yw nesses ee 61.7 33.4 4.9 63.2 31.3 5.5 50.4 39.3 10.3 Mirginiaspines sec asp mite one eee Ee Chae Nets 57.8 39.1 3.1 TA. 3 25es1: -6 79.9 2051 ee AWihi te ppm] met eses eo naeie net tau tne enon ett Che Oa os Eee ES AA | ee ee 30.1 35.3 34.6 28.0 40.1 31.9 i FT emia katepneeey car equaeaten ane ean See P a PRIS NN char eatiadd sl CARAS NRIOL AS 2 [inde mooa pC oe a oi ela a S235) 41.9 25.6 13.0 31. 8 55.2" 31.4 7.6 92.7 Useless eared 69.3 30h 7c |ES ae 45.4 ASS G13 | Sei aecennind [nates EOS. ORS Se SY SS | ee ee ee! | 43.7 DOE Gx | Sea eas SOE OS Ne ot a a tl | | cs | ee 44.6 13.7 65.2 30.0 4.8 40.4 S5n9) 23.7 65.5 By Ty esses Sas eas mk 70. 5 DR loys | eactcies Bee ot 54.2 45.8 56.5 432.5h | arom teas 78.0 225 08) ae 63.9 36.1 70.0 30} OR eee 75.4 24.565) PaaS rs | sae | i 60.0 40508 See 63.7 36:35 Sse 56.2 43.8 31.9 68215 |2eeeee 37.1 6229 eee ne 43.8 56.2 54.7 4507911) — eee, 58.1 41295 Lee eras 67.2 32.8 61.2 B SES saree sere 53.9 EVO RA ieee ea 42.0 58.0 43.3 Gf acute nace 51.6 2 Ne Ok hee err) 48.1 51.9 65.3 YL fal eee 70.2 DORR | eetetrratetees 68.9 31.1 Sa a en (cope ghey a gs he | EST | eS 61.1 38.9 52.2 7383 See een [Sel DOs Or] SEER Ee ea | eco es 63.6 BG sda sore ae 71 2827 | roses etn 63.4 36.6 Ghernysiwal mutes ee ee aes eee ee SE NS SRS eae | ESBS Si As | ES TO te | neg cat| (Cee | eeep en 62.2 37.8 Supammoaple savers inci sc ue EAS San ee eet See eS S |----------]----------|----------|----------|------<---|---------- 40.6 59.4 INS Ve SES Sai ane ee aa ete bea | esos erate 68.7 sh Meas fed aes eae he 79.5 PAAR era ee) UE 64.6 35.4 @thrersih arr wre S ene a aS SN SEAN) ae | ete 61.7 8823 7| ie ea ceas 60.2 Sey He astra Sc, 58.3 41.7 STs les re eee ee ge a i a eee aaa 39 /.95| eee ae {eee 5951 40:94) sean 52.5 47.5 IA ilies peches ees a see we sre a tee 28.1 49.7 2222 26.9 47.1 26.0 9.9 48.4 41.7 LD YONG PES eee pag Nk Sa YS nr | Pa ca ee rs Re a |----------|----------]-------+--|--------_- 49.7 50.3 SAlespecies sete se PS Ne | 28. 1 | 49.7 22.2 26.9 | 47.1 26.0 8.6 | 48.6 42.8 | | | TasLe 28.—Distribution of saw-timber area and volume in each physiographic province, by volume-per-acre class, 1940 a Coastal Hiam Piedmont Mountain State | Coastal Plain| Piedmont Mountain State if Volume Bee acre in j Molving Da acre in | 7 board feet 7 7 7 oard feet 7 7 7 F rs Vol- Vol- Vol- Vol- Vol- Vol- Vol Vol- i Area ‘imme Area Pate Area ume | Area fearme Area rae Area Sa Area a Area ae ; } Per-'\ Per-_|-Per- | Per- | Per- Per- Per- | Per- Per- | Per- | Per- | Per- | Per- | Per- | Per- | Per- 5 Softwood: cent | cent | cent | cent | cent | cent | cent | cent Hardwood: cent | cent | cent | cent | cent | cent | cent | cent Less than 2,000___| 28.0 | 6.9 | 48.1 | 21.1 | 61.0 | 27.6 | 40.2 12.5 Less than 2,000___| 37.9 | 12.8 | 53.1 | 24.2 | 60.3 | 29.1 | 52.4} 22.2 2,000-3,999_______ 25.4 | 14.2 | 31.5 | 32.5 | 22.5 } 25.6 | 27.3 20.1 2,000-3,999 ______ 30.8 | 24.2 | 28.8 | 31.3 | 24.3 | 29.6 | 27.5 | 28.6 \ 4,000-5,999_______ V5 Anta 71122991 23:0 791s Al 1324 17.0 4,000-5,999_____ 14.8 | 19.5 | 11.3 | 21.4 |} 8.9 | 18.4 |] 11-2} 19.8 6,000-7,999_______ V2. 05.1 | 2404 P11 04.9.) 14-3 Heth 13.9 6,0U0—7,999__- = = TAN MNS Tol 3 242| OL OM Se 72 elle ON ean aa eel dest 5 8,000-9,999_______ Were AZ Te Oul ee Gele | P76: Os |e ae 10.2 | 8,000-9,999_______ SEO 8-67 15m ee pds eee ieee Se geen: 7? 10,0004-__=-____= TDS S6. 6] L310 623 220 a1 2116298) 2653 10;000--e se Sed tere eS ES See) -8 | 4.1 | 2:3 11.2 = 7 | | 4 | 3 62 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U.S. Department of Agriculture
apt
oe LABER 29.—Net cordwood volume of all live timber in each physiographic province, by species group and class of material, 1940}
1 Does not include dead ches
{
tnut.
TaBrE 30.—Net cubic-foot volume of all sound wood, by species and class of material, 1940}
| Species group and class of Coastal oe | : i 3 | zt P. ier Plain | Piedmont |Mountain State Species proapiand GES Oi Se Piedmont | Mountain State Softwoods: Hardwoods:
Sawlog-size trees: 1,000 cords | 1,000 cords | 1,000 cords | 1,000 cords Sawlog-size trees: | 1,000 cords | 1,000 cords \ 1,000 cords\ 1,000 cords Sawlog material_______ 19,497.8 8,778.8 3,006.2 31,282.8 Sawlog material_______ 10,125.8 | 12,454.7 | 10,418-3 32,998.8 IWpperstemses= 5" 2a 4,289.0 2,566.2 795.1 7,650.3 Upper stems and limbs_| 5,801.4 | 6,931.2 | 5,630.9 18, 363.5
Sound trees under sawlog Sound trees under sawlog
size-_~~---~--~_-------- 9,369.0 | 10,357.7 1,883.0 21,609.7 SIZ Ca ee aren RR 16,887.2 | 23,436.1 | 13,234.7 53,558.0 Gullétreesseee tie wore eu ge 991.9 1,298.9 749.1 3,039.9 Gullétrees 2 2s ia eee 7,365.1 | 6,853.4 | 12,175.9 26,394.4 | | | | Nota lear eee ote 34,147.7 | 23,001.6 | 6,433.4 63 582.7 S1@ tall Se seit anion Fegan) Meee aes 40,179.5 | 49,675.4 | 41,459.8 | 131,314.7 | | Allespeciess se =e apart ess | 74,327.2 | 72,677.0 | 47,893.2 | 194,897.4
os I — i I——I—I—I—I I
ES aD ee lo Geena e meen Under 2 Saw-timber trees decal | 5 sawlog- ull All” 3 sawlog- | Cull All Species Upper SIze trees | material Species Upper size trees | material Sawlogs eee trees Sawlogs eae trees ‘ Million | Million | Million | Million | Million Milli Milli Milli Milli Milli Softwoods: cu. ft. cu. ft. cu. ft cu. ft. cu. ft. Hardwoods—-Continued Ke Bye Meaapele east eee Moblollyspines<= see 1,213.4 | 254.9 | 475.6 44.6 | 1,988.5 Wihiteroake 20's aos 342.7 167.4 | 600.0 156.3 | 1,266 Shortleaf pine____-2______ 531.9 152.5 476.8 46.7 | 1,207.9 Chestnutioak- 328.29 Sea 221.7 103.6 277.6 319.5 922 Mirginiappines2=s === 305.0 89.5 | 447.4 | 103.0 944.9 Other white oaks_________ 21.3 9.6 71.2 26.8 128 White pine--2= ==) = 2 === 71.6 15.3 23.2 10.2 120.3 Bincheece eee Ses Bere Sy 7.0 3.6 14.2 19.6 44 Taenlhe(ell ote See SO 45.1 8.6 8.0 6.9 68.6 Beech aerate Scene 52.8 28.3 40.8 37.7 159 Redcedaresnn sammie Cho eh tees 20.0 ae 28.1 ickory.yanieat ans cas obi 126.4 58.7 | 221.1 60.7 466 Wihite-cedansenm ssw on 12.0 a9) SAE A aE SSI a 13.3 Cherry,cwalnut= 232 kes 8.7 3.8 10.8 523 28 (Gypressaueee a eect 37.1 9.0 Dh 6.7 59.9 Sugarimaplessi2se 6a 17.7 9.4 10.6 21.3 59 ee IN hi see ape eee Fer oh ee 29.8 13.9 65.8 40.0 149 RLOpA | aeha es saa ee oO 2,224.0 | 530.7 |1,458.5 218.3 | 4,431.5 Og WOO sekes eels Sed hares soe [may S| eee 74.7 18.3 93 ee Blackslocus ttase= eae ee tee | Only aE oa ema 61.0 10.1 71 Hardwoods: Other merchantable hard- Redtmaplesa2 2252 = 73.1 37 141.2 178.0 430.0 WOOdSe=s= aaa wee 129.0 64.5 180.9-} 153.1 527.5 Blackg um ssi teres ere ee 159.8 74.5 169.7 163.0 567.0 Scrubrhard woods sss festa einige coma colin | een eae 82.9 | 82.9 Sweetgum______-_-__-_- SAIN AOTAS 87.6 | 311.8 73.6 | 640.8 Yellow-poplar____-_______ (315.8 149.3 381.8 82.5 929.4 ALO tall eee nse eset 2,165.3 |1,054.7 |3,306.6 |1,685.1 | 8,211.7 Northern red oak_________ 178.7 9251 110.2 79.0 460.0 Other red oaks____-____+_ 313.0 150.7 | 563.2 157.4 | 1,184.3 Allispeciesi220" estes 4,389.3 |1,585.4 |4,765:1 |1,903.4 |12,643.2 1 Volumes shown represent State average for the year. In Coastal Plain 2 Excludes chestnut. and southern Piedmont they are as of Jan. 1; in the northern Piedmont and nountains they are as of Dec. 31. TasLe 31.—WNet cubic-foot increment of all sound trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger, by species group and province, 1945 | ears Species group once Piedmont | Mountain State Species group soar Piedmont | Mountain State Softwoods: — M cu. ft. | M cu.ft. | M cu.ft. | M cw. ft. Hardwoods: M cu. ft. | M cu. ft. | M cu. ft. | M cu. ft. Wirginiaspine-se= sees 13,610 65,750 7,841 87,201 Oaktree en See eee eat 29,619 55,125 37,230 121,974 - Other yellow pines-.___-___| 115,362 50,874 6,295 | 172,531 Gums and yellow-poplar____ 40,409 43,552 10,000 93 ,961 Other softwoods—___-______ 1,466 3,593 6,571, 11,630 Other hardwoods__________ 17,103 | 31,262 28,557 76,922 Ee a Beers Sn ers tts 130,438 | 120,217 20,707 271,362 Total hardwoods-_______ 87,131 129,939 75,787 292,857 Aillispeciessee ta ener 217,569 | 250,156 96,494 | 564,219
Tasie 32.—WNet cubic-foot drain onall sound trees 5.0 inches d. b. h. and larger, by species group and province, 1945 : Be,
Species group coastal Piedmont | Mountain State Species group “ Sonera Piedmont | Mountain State Softwoods: M cu. ft. | M cu. ft. | M cu. ft. M cu. ft. Hardwoods: M cu. ft. | Mcu. ft. | M cu. ft. | M cu. ft. Vireinia tpi semana nie 9,109 | 25,633 3,160 37,902 Wakes 0 Suse na ecenad T 17,912 | 33,914] 29,704 81,530 Other yellow pines___—-____ 79,569 45,766 6,305 | 131,640 Gums and yellow-poplar____ 11,029 14,373 7,217 32,6197 Other softwoods___________ 1,858 4,376 6,427 | 12,661 Other hardwoods___*___-_- 3,485 8,894 12,169 24,548 Total softwoods______<_ 90,536 | 75,775 15,892 182,203 Total hardwoods________ 32,426 57,181 49,090 138,697 | Allfspeciest=e sae ee 122,962 132,956 64,982 320,900 | |
TasiE 33.—Net change in cubic-foot volume of total growing stock, Fan. 1, 1940, to Jan. 1, 1946
Softwoods Hardwoods Item | All species Virginia Other yellow] Other soft- | Total soft- Comeau Other hard- | Total hard- § s Oaks yellow-pop- Z pine pines woods woods ee woods woods Growing stock, Jan. 1, 1940: M cu. ft. M cu. ft. M. cu. ft. M cu. ft. M cu. ft. M cu. ft. M cu. ft. M cu. ft. M cu. ft. Coastal¥P laine een yee chee 158,290 | 2, 047, 430 62,980 | 2, 266, 700 567, 600 766, 800 381, 580 1, 715, 980 3, 982, 680 Biedmon testa satcren a age ees } 589, 070 868, 250 43, 020 1, 500, 340 1, 193, 830 573, 890 465,570 | 2,233,290 3, 733, 630 Mountains os eke 77, 590 189, 500 149, 860 416, 950 915, 400 153, 140 396, 890 1, 465, 430 1, 882, 380 Motal epee wah sewers Fn 822,950 | 3,105,180 255, 860 | 4,183,990 | 2,676, 830 1, 493, 830 1, 244,040 | 5, 414, 700 9,598, 690 Growing stock, Jan. 1, 1946: Goastal Plains esr eee es 166, 990 | 2, 143, 250 51,590 | 2, 361, 830 627, 000 918, 820 454, 870 | 2,000, 690 4, 362,520 ied mom tg me eetcte nen ae Be 770, 550 801, 030 49, 420 1, 621, 000 1, 308, 910 722, 540 591,480 | 2,622, 930 4, 243,930 Moun ta insets tees arenes tee bee 100, 990 189, 290 151, 030 441, 310 952, 550 169, 420 486, 350 1, 608, 320 2, 049, 630 PA CCoxae sass sh SN | 1,038,530 | 3,133,570 252,040 | 4,424,140 | 2, 888, 460 1,810,780 | 1,532,700 | 6,231, 940 10, 656, 080 Net change, Jan. 1, 1940, to Jan. 1, 1946: | @oastalePlainSsae= ne sees ae | +10, 700 +95, 820 —11, 390 +95, 130 +59, 400 +152, 020 +73, 290 +284, 710 +379, 840 — Piedmonta see nae | +181, 480 —67, 220 +6, 400 +120, 660 +115, 080 +148, 650 +125, 910 +389, 640 +510, 300 Mountain tesserae +23, 400 —210 +1, 170 +24, 360 +37, 150 +16, 280 +89, 460 +142, 890 +167, 250 Mota liseeae wes See Ue iy eae Le +215, 580 +28, 390 —3, 820 +240, 150 +211, 630 +316, 950 +288, 660 +817, 240 | +1, 057, 390 if Percentage change, Jan. 1, 1940, to Jan. 1, 1946: Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Coastal ébainesee ee ae eee +6. 8 +4.7 —18.1 +4.2 +10. 5 +19.8 +19. 2 +16.6 +9. 5 Riedmontaso eas Se +30. 8 —T1 +14.9 +8.0 +9.6 +25.9 +27.0 +17.4 +13.7 Mountainse=2 Ss eee +30. 2 oil +.8 +5. 8 +4.1 +10.6 +22.5 Belle +8.9 ‘Alleprovinces #22042 en apes +26.2 | +.9 1.5 +5.7 +7.9 +21.2 23:2 +15.1 | +11.0 64 Miscellaneous Publication 681, U.S. Department of Agriculture
U, S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1949
F ¥ iy
a
“eAIREAX®
Fairfax
+
Ft. Meyer Hts.
“”
Pa
MAJOR FOREST TYPES
STATE OF VIRGINIA 194]
LEGEND
SHORTLEAF PINE - HARDWOODS VIRGINIA PINE - HARDWOODS
[sg LOBLOLLY PINE - HARDWOODS
MOUNTAIN HARDWOODS
SHORTLEAF — PITCH PINE - HARDWOODS
WHITE PINE-HARDWOODS
(mn MARSH OR BEACH
Type symbols show areas where the major
BOTTOM-LAND HARDWOODS
types predominate. No attemp! has been made
fo delineate minor types or agriculfural land.
SCALE IN MILES 10 20
N K
) I
LIN
nterey fo
HGH L
NIA,
IL
FL Meyer Hts.
BYorktown
alin
[A CITY ampton Oo
Sins in Thm oop So : SSeS x Sp Sate a ee ee eae Sas <= Ee aaa ETA RR
SE a ee a rn rs RE aa.
a athe ian oir Oe a ee fre 2 4 ze