This effect will be most pronounced in the case of American hardwoods. The foreign demand for such species not only includes cabinet, furniture making, and finishing woods of special beauty, like walnut or quartered oak, but also many woods used in manufacturing essentials of commerce and industry, like oak and hickory wagon stock, hickory spokes, highgrade car stock, ash and hickory handles, woods used in agricultural implements, and the like. The supply of old-growth hardwoods from which most of these products are obtained is nearing its end. Our domestic industries are securing such materials with increasing difficulty and cost. Except as substitute woods or other materials may be found, the growing shortage of these products must in any event seriously handicap American industry and commerce.

The second important bearing of foreign shipments is upon the remaining supply of high-grade southern yellow pine which, up to the present time, has furnished about half of the total lumber exports. The materials which the foreign consumer demands include a large proportion of high-grade flooring and other forms of finish and large timbers for shipbuilding and other structural purposes. The situation as to the supply of these products is less serious, and quite unlike that which holds true of the hardwoods. The total production of yellow-pine lumber will probably decline steadily during the next 10 or 15 years; and the production of high-quality products from old growth will drop off still more rapidly. Such high-grade products will, however, continue to be cut from particular localities or holdings, though in diminished amounts, for 30 to 40 years, and the substitution of western softwoods for both export and domestic products now made of southern pine is entirely practicable.

In the third place, export demands will strike the large supplies of high quality softwood timber in the Western States. The Pacific coast carries on a gradually increasing trade with the Orient, with Australia, with South America, and with Europe. It will logically replace the exports of southern pine as that timber is further depleted. Here, again, the foreign demand will take mainly high-grade products, particularly large structural timbers, shipbuilding materials, and the better grades of clear flooring and other forms of finish. With this demand for high-grade materials will probably be supplied varying quantities of railroad ties and general utility lumber.

The large virgin forests of the West will sustain the maximum demand made upon them by the export trade for many years without serious effect upon domestic markets. The domestic demand for high-quality timber products from the West will, it is true, increase with rapidity as their production in the South falls off. And in the West, as in the South, the first evidence of depletion will be a scarcity of products of high quality. There is this marked difference, however, in the West, that the existence of large National Forests where timber is cut under careful restrictions affords a means for reserving reasonable quantities of high-quality timber and for producing stumpage of this grade.

It must therefore be recognized that a material increase in the export lumber trade would accentuate the shortage of highquality products available to American consumers. The problem presented by lumber exports is not serious from the standpoint of quantity. It may prove serious from the standpoint of quality. Scarcity of high-quality products essential to our ship and car building and many other industries is the first and one of the most serious effects of timber depletion.

|

can not be grown in less than 150 years; and even if every acre of denuded land in the United States were planted to-morrow, a long time would elapse before the depletion of high-quality stumpage which has been cut so freely from our virgin forests could be made good. Furthermore, the private landowner can seldom afford to carry timber crops during the long periods necessary to produce material of high quality. The most effective means of overcoming the shortage of high-grade timber is the creation of public forests which can be utilized to the extent necessary for the production of large timber or special products.

The bulk of the high-quality timber produced in France and other countries of Continental Europe is grown in public forests, it being a recognized function of the Government to produce on its forest lands the classes of material which will not be grown in sufficient quantity on private lands because of the time and cost involved. This policy has already been applied to the hardwood forests acquired by the United States in the southern Appalachians pursuant to the Weeks Act. As far as practicable, these forests will be handled so as to produce highquality hardwoods rather than railroad ties and common lumber, so that they may be at least a factor in meeting the shortage of such products. But no adequate provision for the growing of high-grade eastern woods has yet been made. It can be made only by largely extending the public forests in the Eastern States.

IMPORTS OF FOREST PRODUCTS.

During the four years preceding the war the imports of lumber and logs ranged from 1,100,000,000 to 1,300,000,000 board feet, or about one-third the volume of exports during the same period. Beginning with 1917, there was a marked increase in wood imports. In 1918 imports exceeded exports by 100,000,000 board feet, and in 1919 the excess of imports was probably much greater. Aside from the importation of 1,370,000 cords of pulp wood from Canada in 1918, the United States imported 596,000 tons of wood pulp and 516,000 tons of paper, chiefly from the

same source.

Imports of timber and timber products fall into three classes: (1) Cabinet woods, like mahogany and cigar-box cedar, and other valuable woods, like South American greenheart, which can not be obtained in the United States. The imports of cedar amount to nearly 20,000,000 board feet annually, and the imports of mahogany to 50,000,000 board feet.

(2) Saw logs and manufactured lumber from Canada, shipped into the United States by the natural routes of commerce on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and by favorable railroad channels. Such imports aggregate about 1,000,000,000 feet per year, aside from which Canada also ships close to a billion shingles into the United States annually. These imports compete directly with similar products manufactured in the United States. There is, indeed, approximately the same flow of lumber across the Canadian boundary in each direction, determined by the favorable location of consuming regions in one country with respect to lumber-producing centers in the other.

(3) Paper and materials for making paper. The imports of pulp wood, pulp, and manufactured paper in 1918, practically all of which came from Canada, were approximately 2,071,000 tons. Imports of corresponding products were still greater in 1919. They furnish about two-thirds of the newsprint paper consumed in the United States, a proportion which will grow steadily unless the foreign trade policy adopted by

Other imports of forest products are at the present time of negligible importance. Prior to the war the United States imported considerable quantities of chemical pulp and high-grade papers from Scandinavia, a trade whose partial resumption is to be expected. A small quantity of lumber is shipped to our west coast from Japan and Korea. The enormous timber re

sources in Siberia have not yet been developed sufficiently to support a foreign lumber trade.

The two important classes of products for which the United States now depends upon foreign countries are cabinet and other extremely valuable woods from tropical countries and paper or its raw materials. Our dependence upon Canada for paper is an extremely important factor which must be reckoned with for many years to come. This results in part from the depletion of pulp-making woods in the eastern United States and in part from transport and manufacturing conditions which have prevented the paper-making industry from utilizing pulp timbers available in the Western States and Alaska. Adequate development of our western pulp-wood resources could make the United States independent of foreign supplies of paper.

EXPORT TRADE POLICY.

It must be recognized that, unlike most articles of commerce, the replacement of a considerable part of the raw material con

sumed in lumber exports will, under the best conditions, be a slow and difficult process. Foreign trade in softwoods has less serious effects than the export of hardwood products; a foreign trade in such articles as softwood railroad ties and common lumber is the least serious of all since such commodities can be produced with comparative rapidity in large quantities once growth replaces devastation of our forest lands. On the other hand, foreign demands for high-grade hardwoods endanger certain of our "key" industries such as the manufacture of agricultural implements, vehicles, and handles. Without any exports we face a serious shortage in their raw materials. These facts should be considered in determining the foreign-trade policy of the country and in weighing the advantages of reciprocity. Our fundamental national policy, however, should be for timber growth rather than the regulation of timber use. If the export trade in lumber is to be regulated, such regulation should be discriminating and should apply to the grades and products in which a shortage is most imminent and most menacing to domestic industries.

A thorough investigation of timber ownership in the Lake States, the southern pine region, and the Pacific Northwest was made by the Bureau of Corporations in 1910. At that time these three great forest regions contained about 80 per cent of all the standing timber in the United States. The two most striking facts reported by the Bureau of Corporations, following its investigation, were the concentration of control of standing timber in comparatively few large holdings and the vast scale upon which the speculative purchase and holding of timber in advance of its use had been conducted. Both of these conditions were attributed directly to the public-land policy of the United States. The Bureau of Corporations found that 48 per cent of the standing timber privately owned in these three regions, or 839.7 billion feet, was held or controlled by 195 owners. Three large corporations held between them 238 billion feet, or 11 per cent of all the privately owned timber in the United States. The concentration of standing timber in large holdings was most fully developed in the Lake States and the Pacific Northwest.

The degree of concentration of standing timber in 1910 in the States covered by the investigation of the Bureau of Corporations, and subsequent changes or tendencies in so far as it has been possible to determine them, are summarized in the following brief account of timber ownership in a number of the more important forest regions:

TIMBER OWNERSHIP IN THE NORTHEAST.

The 1910 investigation did not cover this region. The only timber holdings of large size in New England are located in its northern softwood forests and have been consolidated primarily to secure large supplies of pulp wood. Fifteen owners have acquired something over 5 million acres in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, or nearly one-fourth of the forest area of these three States. These 15 owners undoubtedly control at least half of the supply of pulp wood in New England. The process of timberland concentration is still going on to a considerable degree, especially in Maine, where the large properties of one of the paper companies were acquired and assembled during the past three years. In New Hampshire the United States itself has acquired a comparatively large timber holding through the purchase of over 400,000 acres in the White Mountains under

the Weeks law.

The pulp-wood forests of New England are very largely held on an operating rather than a speculative basis. The nonoperating owners in practically all cases are selling timber to operating companies for current logging requirements, retaining the land.

In New York 17 pulp and paper companies have aggregate holdings of nearly 800,000 acres. The largest of these ownerships exceeds 200,000 acres, and the second in size exceeds 150,000 acres. Practically all of the softwood stumpage in New York is very strongly held, and there is little tendency toward further concentration at the present time.

A significant fact in New York is that the State itself is the largest owner of merchantable timber, having acquired 1,886,000 acres of forest land in the Adirondack and Catskill Preserves, which contain 60 per cent of the pulp timber in the State. The cutting of these lands is prohibited by the State constitution. The situation in New York is thus in striking contrast to that

private ownership.

OWNERSHIP OF SOFTWOOD TIMBER IN THE SOUTHERN STATES.

The Bureau of Corporations reported in 1910 that 14 holders controlled three-fifths of the cypress in Louisiana, and that 11 owners controlled one-half of the cypress in Florida. Each of these 25 owners had acquired more than 250 million feet of cypress stumpage. There has been comparatively little change in the ownership of cypress land since 1910. The limited supply and high value of this timber and the large investments required for operating plants tend to keep the stumpage in the hands of relatively few owners. The enlargement of the existing cypress holdings is becoming more and more difficult, and the total quantities of timber held by the groups of large owners are diminishing as cutting progresses.

The Bureau of Corporations reported that 29 holders in 1910 owned 22 per cent of the yellow-pine timber in the Southern States, each of these owners having acquired over 2 billion board feet. Sixty-seven owners held 31 per cent of the southern pine, but the ownership of 50 per cent was distributed among 307 holdings.

The concentration of southern pine in large holdings appears to have practically stopped about 1909. The number of holding companies which are not operating is very limited, sales of timber are very few, and practically all of the remaining stumpage is definitely related to manufacturing plants.

The southern pine belt well illustrates the increasing degree of concentration of timber of high quality as the depletion of forest resources continues. The South contains to-day approxi

mills.

mately 139 billion feet of virgin pine, controlled by 5,401 sawIt is estimated that in 10 years the remaining stand of old-growth pine will be in the hands of 147 mills, and that in 20 years the 30-odd billion feet of virgin pine timber left will be held by 45 mills. The number of mills alone does not indicate the degree of concentration, since a number of corporations control and operate several mills.

The southern pine region also illustrates the replacement of large sawmills by small operations, as the greater part of the virgin stumpage is cut out and the industry passes over to the cleaning up of odds and ends and the manufacture of second growth. The number of small sawmills in the South is increasing more rapidly than the number of large plants, which are closing down. During 1919 from 800 to 1,000 small mills were established in this region, a movement, of course, greatly stimulated by the high lumber prices.

OWNERSHIP OF HARDWOOD TIMBER.

In 1910 the Bureau of Corporations found that timber ownership was less concentrated in the hardwood forests of the South than in any other region investigated. The same is true to-day. Hardwood forests lend themselves to concentration much less readily than coniferous timber. The number of species in the usual stand is great. Manufacture and marketing must be highly specialized, with diversified products demanded by a wide range of manufacturing industries and other users. Costs of production run higher than in the case of softwood forests. Hence the individual hardwood holdings have averaged much smaller and the average hardwood mill cuts much less timber than in the case of softwoods.

62

The annual cut of 11 of the largest hardwood operators in the southern Appalachians is about 400 million feet. This represents 12 per cent of the cut of the region. The remaining 87 per cent of the output is manufactured by companies which produce less than 10 million board feet yearly in every case. In the Mississippi or "Delta" region less than 30 companies reported a lumber cut of more than 10 million board feet annually. In the whole hardwood region there are no holdings comparable to the large operating groups in the softwood forests of the West and South.

At least 10 million acres of hardwood forest in the Appalachian Mountains are owned by coal, oil, gas, and other mining corporations. One and one-half million acres have been acquired by the Federal Government as National Forests under the act of March 1, 1911. The remaining hardwood areas in this region, and the same appears to be true of the "Delta" hardwood belt, are widely distributed and largely in the hands of operating companies.

TIMBER OWNERSHIP IN THE LAKE STATES.

The Bureau of Corporations reported in 1910 a marked degree of timber concentration in the Lake States, particularly in the most valuable species. Six owners thus held 54 per cent of the white and Norway pine in Minnesota, but only 2 per cent of the hardwoods, then rated as of inferior value. Thirty-two holdings in Minnesota, each exceeding 60 million board feet, aggregated 77 per cent of the valuable pines and but 11 per cent of the hardwoods. Ten holders had acquired 24 per cent of all the timber in Wisconsin and 12 holders had acquired 28 per cent of the timber of Michigan.

Since 1910 a good many owners have disappeared from the rolls in the Lake States through the exhaustion of their hold

ings. The few nonoperating holders appear to be disposing of their lands, and a very large proportion of the timber in the region is now attached to going operators.

TIMBER OWNERSHIP IN IDAHO.

In 1910, 64 per cent of the privately owned timber in Idaho, or 32.3 billion board feet, was held by 10 owners. Each of these holdings comprised over half a billion feet. The three largest owners jointly controlled 46.2 per cent of the private timber in the State.

The concentration of timber ownership in Idaho appears to have practically stopped about 1907. Since that time the larger holdings have remained practically at a standstill, except for depletion from cutting and exchanges between companies to secure a better blocking of stumpage for operating purposes. The stoppage of further timber purchases about 1907 appears to have been due to a full realization of the cost of carrying stumpage for long periods in advance of opportunity for its manufacture and to the general period of lean years which the lumber industry experienced, particularly from 1913 to 1915. For the same reason a number of nonoperating companies have constructed sawmills and become manufacturers.

Timber concentration had, however, gone very far in Idaho, particularly in the case of western white pine, the most valuable timber tree of the Northwest. Of the 20 billion feet of white pine in this region, 5 billion feet is owned by the Federal Government, chiefly in National Forests, the State of Idaho owns 3 billion feet, and 12 billion feet are privately owned. A single group of affiliated companies controls one-half of the privately owned white pine, or 6 billion feet. With the exception of the Northern Pacific Railroad, one of the largest timber holding companies in this territory, there is no tendency to break up or decrease the size of the larger properties. The Northern Pacific is disposing of its timber as opportunity affords. The State of Idaho has announced a policy of disposing of its timber

lands. There is a marked tendency in Idaho, however, to put timber holdings upon an operating basis and to construct additional sawmills in sufficient number to liquidate most of these great properties within 25 or 30 years.

TIMBER OWNERSHIP IN WASHINGTON AND OREGON.

In these States, the Bureau of Corporations found in 1910 the most striking examples of timber concentration. Three owners controlled 191.3 billion board feet of timber. There were Their 83 owners who had acquired over a billion board feet. aggregate holdings were 411.7 billion feet, or 59.4 per cent of the privately held stumpage in the two States.

Since 1910 the three largest holdings in this region have been decreased. By decision of the Federal courts the land grant of 2,425,000 acres to the Southern Pacific Railroad Co. in Oregon has reverted to the Government. The Weyerhaeuser Timber Co. has sold approximately 250,000 acres, chiefly to operating companies, and has itself become a large timber manufacturer. The Northern Pacific Railroad Co. has sold 522,000 acres of timberland in Washington, a considerable part of which has gone to operating companies.

In the State of Washington individual holdings in excess of 25,000 acres, or approximately 1 billion feet of timber, had as a group acquired 155,100 acres of additional timberland between 1910 and 1919 through the consolidation of small holdings. On the other hand, this same group had during the same period decreased its holdings by 970,630 acres through logging, timber sales, failures, etc. The net area of timberland controlled by this group of approximately 32 owners had decreased in the nine years 815,530 acres.

In Oregon the holdings of the same size had, as a group, dropped 959,930 acres between 1910 and 1919 and added 1,437,580 acres, a net increase of 477,650 acres. The increases represent principally the consolidation of small properties. Much of the timbered area of Oregon is still undeveloped and inaccessible for lumber manufacture. Timber values in this region are still low. The greater number of large holdings in Oregon are in such localities. Several of them have changed hands during the past 10 years, some tracts two or three times, due to the inability of owners to carry taxes, interest, and protection costs any longer. The holdings previously carried more or less as a speculation have in many cases passed into stronger hands.

There are still many thousand timberland claimants and small owners in these less accessible regions who are anxious to unload; and the low values at which they are willing to sell their land has permitted the blocking of small holdings into large properties at prices which have attracted strong investors. In a considerable number of cases, companies preparing for lumber manufacture have not only blocked up small properties but have also purchased extensively from the larger holders themselves. A process of concentrating small properties and one of breaking down the very large properties are thus going on at the same time. These two movements taken together presage a change in timber ownership in Oregon from a speculative to an operating basis and a large increase in its manufacture of lumber.

The individual holdings under 25,000 acres, or of less than about one billion feet of stumpage, aggregate 17,000 in Oregon and 7,000 in Washington. Many of these small holders have retained their timber not from choice but from their inability to sell in locations isolated from present manufacturing centers. The smaller number of such holdings in Washington indicates the much more rapid development of the lumber industry in that State. The enormous number of timber properties of small or unimportant size in the two States on the northern Pacific coast not only show that there is still a very wide distribution of timber ownership in that region notwithstanding the concen

TIMBER OWNERSHIP IN CALIFORNIA.

The timberlands of California illustrated, in 1910, the same tendencies toward a partial concentration in enormous holdings evident in Oregon and Washington. Nearly 75 per cent of the privately owned timber in the State, or 178.2 billion feet, was in 39 holdings.. The seven largest owners carried 100 billion feet of stumpage; and one owner, the Southern Pacific Railroad, had acquired 35 billion feet through its Federal land grant.

The commercial timber lands of California comprise two distinct belts, the redwood forests bordering the coast, and the sugar and yellow-pine belt covering the eastern and northern mountain ranges of the State. In the redwood region the principal nonoperating owners are now 17 in number, with holdings ranging from 200 million to 5 billion board feet of timber. Eleven of these holdings comprise 1 billion feet or more; and in the aggregate they comprise 29,056,000,000 feet. The principal operators in the same region are 13 in number, with timber holdings ranging from 240 million to 3 billion feet. Six of these companies have holdings of 1 billion feet or more; and the aggregate ownership of the 13 is almost 20 billion feet. A large part of the redwood stumpage that can be operated most economically is now controlled by operating companies, who also largely control strategic operating sites from the standpoint of coastwise or other shipments. There is still a large percentage of redwood timber in the ownership of nonoperating companies, but the general tendency since 1910 appears to have been away from further concentration. The number and aggregate hold

The principal holding companies in the pine region of California are eight in number. Aside from the enormous property of the Southern Pacific Railroad, these ownerships range from 600 million to 3 billion board feet. In addition, there are 14 large operating companies, one of which controls 15 billion feet of stumpage, while the holdings of the rest range from 181 million to 2.8 billion board feet. All told, these operating companies own over 29 billion feet of stumpage. There have been several transfers of ownership since the investigation made by the Bureau of Corporations in 1910; but no important change as to the general concentration of timberlands. The present tendency in the California pine region is toward the operation of timber areas and the liquidation of the investments which they represent wherever the location of the property permits. In line with this tendency, in California as in Oregon, a rapid increase in the installation of sawmills and volume of lumber output is to be expected.

CHANGES IN TIMBER OWNERSHIP FROM 1913 TO

1918.

The accompanying table, No. 26, prepared by the Timber Section of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, shows the increases and decreases in timber ownership between 1913 and 1918 by 368 owners. These holdings are distributed by groups through 17 forest regions, representing practically all of the important timber areas in the United States. The figures do not include all of the large timber holdings in the regions represented, but do, through showing what has happened in the case of a sample group of large owners in each region, draw an excellent picture of the tendencies in timber ownership the country over.