U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Forest Seruice Resource Bulletin SE- 43 

Coastal Virginia's Timber Resource -Trends, Present 

Conditions, and Opportunities for Improvement 

by 

Raymond M. Sheffield 

ure- Forest Service 
February i978 

Southeastern Forest Experirner?t Station 

Asheoilie, North Carolina 
Coastal Virginia's Timber Resource-Trends, Present 

Conditions, and Opportunities for Improvement 

by 

Raymond M Sheffield, Associate Resource Analyst 
CONTENTS 

- 

Page 

INTRODUCTXv3N .............................. 1 

PURF'OSE AND SCOPE ........................ 1 

IMPORTANCE OF THE FOREST RESOURCE ............. 1 

TIMBER RESOURCE TRENDS ...................... 1 

COMMERCTAL FOREST ACREAGE DECLINING ........... 1 

NONFARM JWNERSHIPS INCREASING ................ 2 

SOFTWOOD INVZNTORY DECLINING ................ 3 

SOFTWOOD REMOVALS EXCEED NET GROWTH .......... L 

VIRGINIA'S RESPONSE TO THE SOFTWOOD GROWTH DEFICIT .... 6 

FOREST INDUSTRY'S RESPONSE ................... 6 

Reduced Harvesting of Softwoods in the Coastal Plain ....... 6 

Importing Softwood Roundwood ................... 7 

Increased Use of Hardwoods .................... 8 

Increased Use of Wood Residues .................. 9 

Exporting Roundwood ....................... 9 

Results of Forest Industry's Actions ................ 9 

THE STATE OF VIRGINIA'S RESPONSE ............... 9 

Virginia's Seed Tree Law ...................... 9 

Virginia's Reforestation of Timberlands Act ........... 10 

STAND-AGE DISTRIBUTION OF COASTAL PLAIN FORESTS ...... 11 

RELATION TO PAST LAND USE. FORESTRY PRACTICES. 

AND PROBLEM AREAS ...................... 12 

STAND-AGE DISTRIBUTION BY OWNERSHIP ............ 13 

PREDICTING SHORT-TERM TIMBER SUPPLIES .......... 15 

TIMBER MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES ............... 15 

POOR AND ADVERSE SITES ..................... 15 

STANDS IN GOOD CONDITION .................... 16 

STANm THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM TREATMENT ....... 17 

Stand Liquidation .......................... 17 

Intermediate Treatments ...................... 17 

Stand Conversion ......................... 17 

Artificial Regeneration ................ 17 

OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE IMMEDIATE IMPROVEMENT ...... 18 

CONCLUSIONS .............................. 18 

APPENDIX ................................ 19 

DEFINITION OF TERMS ........................ 19 

LITERATURE CITED ......................... 24 
INTRODUCTION 

PURPOSE AND SCOPE 

The present condition and future of the timber resource in the Coastal 

Plain of Virginia have caused increasing concern among resource planners, 

land managers, and citizens. Problems identified in past forest surveys contributed to this concern. This report focuses on some of the timber resource 

problems of the Coastal Plain by presenting forest resource trends, remedial 

actions taken to solve the problems identified, additional mensurational analyses of the data from the latest survey, and opportunities for improving present 

stand conditions. The findings of the latest survey of the Coastal Plain are included in "Forest Statistics for the Coastal Plain of Virginia, 1976"(Cost 1976). 

That report contains 26 detailed statistical tables and can be obtained from the 

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, P. 0. Box 2570, Asheville, North 

Carolina 28802. 

IMPORTANCE OF THE FOREST RESOURCE 

The forest resources of the Coastal Plain of V'rginia are or sia~ importance to the people and economy of the entire State. Nearly 51,000 people are 

employed in timber-based manufacturing industries throughout Virginia (Virginia Department of Labor and Industry 1977). This statistic does not include 

employees in forest management and related fields, or government employees 

whose jobs are closely tied to the forest resource. A large number of people 

employed by forest industries work in the Coastal Plain, and more of Virginia's 

Forest Product Tax comes from that region than any other. For instance, 

more than 60 percent of the tax for softwood lumber originated in Coastal Plain 

counties in recent years. For hardwood lumber, over one-third of the tax was 

collected from mills located in Coastal Plain counties. As well as being a 

source of income, coastal Plain forests also provide recreational opportunities 

for landowners and many others. 

Forest industries in the Coastal Plain rely on regional woodlands, and 

those of adjacent areas, for their raw materials. An ample supply of pine timber is particularly important in producing lumber, plywood, and pulp. Southern 

pine's long fibers are necessary to the paper industry. These factors, coupled 

with the resource problems identified in previous surveys, have led to increasing concern among forestry leaders in Virginia. 

TIMBER RESOURCE TRENDS 

COMMERCIAL FOREST ACREAGE DECLINING 

In 1940, when the first forest survey was conducted in the Coastal Plain 

i* of Virginia, the area of commercial forest land was increasing. This trend 

began many decades before 1940 (Cruikshank 1943). Commercial forests occupied 3.9 million acres in 1940 and increased by 148,000 acres during the following 16 years (table 1). The third survey in 1966 revealed a slight increase 

in commercial forest acreage, but this increase was due to reclassification of 

lands formerly considered as unproductive forest land; total forest land de- 
clined during this period. A downward trend in forest land was confirmed by 

the fourth survey in 1976; commercial forest acreage declined by 2 percent 

between 1966 and 1976. 

Table 1.--Land use areas, by land use class and survey 

completion date 

Survey completion date 

Land-use class 

: 1940 1956 : 1966 1976 

- - - - - Thousand acres - - - - - 

Forest land: 

Commercial forest 11 Noncommercial forestTotal 

Agricultural land: 

21 Cropland-- 

Pasture 

Total 

31 Other nonforest- 502.1 574.9 711.2 831.0 

Water 506.2 580.4 597.3 624.2 

Total area 6,869.1 6,869.1 6.869.1 6,869.1 

11 Includes unproductive forest land and productive-reserved 

forest land. 

- 21 Includes idle farmland. 

- 31 Includes urban areas, marsh, and other farmsteads. 

The changes in forest area can be interpreted by studying the land use 

trends for Coastal Virginia. Between 1940 and 1956, total agricultural land declined by 319,000 acres, resulting in large increases in forest land, other nonforest land, and areas classified as water. The rate of decline in agricultural 

lands slackened between 1956 and 1966, and this trend continued through 1976. 

This decline resulted in fewer acres reverting to forest land. During this same 

period, other nonforest lands, primarily urban areas, continued to increase at 

rapid rates. The result was a reduction in forest land in the third and fourth 

surveys. This trend is likely to continue in the near future if present patterns 

in land use continue. 

NONFARM OWNERSHIPS INCREASING 

The changes in land use in Coastal Virginia during the past 20 years are 

reflected in changed ownership patterns (table 2). Commercial forests held by 

miscellaneous private owners have increased by over 1 miilinn acres; farmerowned forest land declined by over 1 million acres during the same period. 
Table 2.--Area of coumm?rcial forest land, by ownership 

class and survey completion date 

1 I Survey completion date-- 

Ownership class : 

1956 1966 1976 

Public 

---- Thousand acres - - - - 

116.0 131.3 146.2 

L 1 Forest industry-. 758.6 758.8 768.9 

Farmer 2,813.2 1,857.0 1,650.4 

Miscellaneous private 379.3 1,332.2 1,438.0 

All mers 4,067.1 4,079.3 4,003.5 

1/ 1940 data omitted because of differences in 

sources of data and changes in definitions. 

- 21 Includes lands under long-term lease. 

Marginal farmland and, in some cases, entire farms were abandoned and reverted to forest land. In many instances, farmland owners were reclassified 

as miscellaneous private owners or sold their land to such individuals. 

Forest industries have increased their forest-land holdings by only 1 percent during the past 20 years. Holdings by public agencies have increased by 

26 percent. 

SOFTWOOD INVENTORY DECLINING 

Trends in net volume of growing stock and the sawtimber portion of growing stock differ significantly by species group (tables 3 and 4). Softwood growirig stock and sawtimber have continuously declined in volume since 1940, 

whereas hardwood growing stock and sawtimber have continuously increased in 

volume over the same period. 

In 1940, volume of softwood growing stock totaled 2.6 billion cubic feet. 

This volume declined slightly between 1940 and 1956, but it fell by 8 percent 

between 1956 and 1966; and, in the next 10 years, it fell another 2 percent. In 

general, trends in volume of the sawtimber portion of growing stock follow the 

trends for all growing stock. However, softwood sawtimber volume declined 

proportionally more than did that of softwood growing stock between 1940 and 

"'1956. This decline reflects a high production of softwood lumber for that 

period. Furthermore, the use of smaller diameter trees for pulpwood was 

lower than in more recent years. 
11 Table 3.--The total and per-acre volume- of growing stock on comercial forest 

land, by species group and survey completion date 

Total net volume Net volume per acre 

Species : Survey completion date Survey completion date 

group : 

i 1940 1956 1966 j 1976 i 1940 1956 i 1966 i 1976 

---- Million cubic feet - - - - ---- Cubic feet - - - - 

Softwood 2,638.2 2,636.7 2,420.6 2,383.1 673 648 593 595 

Hardwood 2,467.4 2,860.7 2,953.1 3,196.4 630 703 724 798 

Total 5,105.6 5,497.4 5,373.7 5,579.5 1,303 1,351 1,317 1,393 

1/ To provide a basis for valid comparisons, adjustments have been made to 

allow-for differences in volume tables and sawtimber specifications used in surveys 

prior to 1976. 

11 Table 4.--The total and per-acre volume- of sawtimber on commercial forest land, 

by species group and survey completion date 

Total net volume Net volume per acre 

Species : Survey completion date Survey completion date 

group : 

---- Million board feet - - - - ---- Board feet - - - - 

Softwood 8,897.3 8,571.6 8,543.2 8,372.1 2,270 2,108 2,094 2,091 

Hardwood 7,068.1 8,050.3 8,148.9 8,923.8 1,803 1,979 1,998 2,229 

Total 15,965.4 16,621.9 16,692.1 17,295.9 4,073 4,087 4,092 4,320 

1/ To provide a basis for valid comparisons, adjustments have been made to 

allocfor differences in volume tables and sawtimber specifications used in 

surveys prior to 1976. 

Trends in volume per acre provide a volume estimate without the influence of a changing commercial forest land base. The trends in softwood volume per acre are basically the same as those for softwood net volume, with 

one exception-volume of softwood growing stock per acre for 1976 increased 

slightly from the 1966 level, signifying some improvement in the past 10 years. 

Net volume of softwood growing stock declined during this period because of 

fewer commercial forest acres. 

In contrast to softwoods, hardwoods have increased in volume in every 

survey since 1940. Volume of hardwood growing stock increased nearly 30 percent during this period, with the sawtimber portion of growing stock increasing 

by 26 percent. Per-acre hardwood volumes also registered significant gains 

with each successive survey. 
SOFTWOOD REMOVALS EXCEED NET GROWTH 

The relationships between net growth and removals are important in analyzing the timber resource of a particular region over a period of time. Such 

relationships in the Coastal Plain of Virginia generally correspond to the 

trends in inventory, with removals exceeding net growth during periods of declining inventory (tables 5 and 6). For softwoods, net annual growth of growing 

stock in 1940 exceeded removals, but this relationship deteriorated until 1966, 

when removals exceeded net growth by 34 percent. This growth deficit resulted largely from the high production of softwood pulpwood prior to 1966. In 

1976, the fourth survey revealed improvement-growing-stock removals exceeded net growth by 8 percent. Relationships between net growth and removals for softwood sawtimber followed the general trends for growing stock, with 

one exception-the sawtimber growth deficit worsened in 1976. 

With hardwoods, these relationships for both growing stock and the sawtimber portion of growing stock have been favorable throughout the period 

1940-76. Hardwood growth surpluses correspond to the increasing hardwood 

inventory during this period. 

Table 5.--Net annual growth and removals of growing stock on commercial forest 

land, by species group and survey completion dad/ 

Net annual growth Annual timber removals 

Species : Survey completion date 

group : Survey completion date 

i 1940 i 1956 1966 j 1976 j 1940 i 1956 i 1966 1976 

------------ Million cubic feet - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Softwoods 125.7 107.6 96.3 103.6 112.6 112.6 129.1 111.6 

Hardwoods 83.0 98.1 98.3 136.8 32.1 81.2 93.5 95.6 

Total 208.7 205.7 194.6 240.4 144.7 193.8 222.6 207.2 

11 In some cases, 1956 and 1966 volumes have been adjusted on the basis of 

subsequent survey findings. 

Table 6.--Net annual growth and removals of sawtimber on comercial forest land, 

by species group and survey completion dad1 

Net annual growth Annual timber removals 

Species : Survey completion date Survey completion date group : 

i 1940 i 1956 i 1966 i 1976 1940 j 1956 i 1966 j 1976 

------------ Million board feet - - - - - - - - - - - - 

' Softwoods 512.9 425.3 423.9 415.4 501.3 460.7 428.1 463.6 

Hardwoods 235.7 317.6 319.5 466.5 104.6 277.5 321.0 322.4 

Total 748.6 742.9 743.4 881.9 605.9 738.2 749.1 786.0 

- 1/ In some cases, 1956 and 1966 volumes have been adjusted on rhe basis of 

subsequent survey findings. 5 
VIRGINIA'S RESPONSE TO THE SOFTWOOD GROWTH DEFICIT 

After the large deficit in softwood growth was identified in 1966, forest 

industries and the Virginia Division of Forestry responded by developing plans 

to remedy the problem. The remedy of each group was different. Forest industry's actions provided a more immediate result, while the State of Virginia 

enacted legislation intended to provide a long-term solution. This legislation 

encompassed the entire State and was not limited to the Coastal Plain. However, since most of the softwood growth deficit for the entire State was in the 

Coastal Plain, the timber situation there greatly influenced the policies adopted. 

FOREST INDUSTRY'S RESPONSE 

Reduced Harvesting of Softwoods in the Coastal Plain 

Forest industry reacted to the growth deficit with an immediate and continuous reduction in harvesting of softwood growing stock from Coastal Plain 

forests. At the same time, harvesting of hardwood growing stock gradually 

increased. These changes are exemplified by the pulp and paper industry's 

procurement of wood after 1966 (figs. 1 and 2). In 1966, pulpmills in Coastal 

Virginia began to decrease the volume of softwood roundwood removed from 

the region. The latest pulpwood data available indicate that this trend has continued through 1973. By 1975, receipts of softwood roundwood from the Coastal 

Plain were down by 67 percent in comparison to the 1965 level, and those of 

hardwood roundwood from the same region were up by 41 percent. 

- TOTAL SOFTWOOD RECEIPTS 

....... TOTAL EOPTWOOD ROUNDWOOD RECEIPTS 

----- 50FTl00D ROUNOWOOO RECEIPTS FROM 

100 ,.. -...-... - ... - ... - ... -. 

0 

1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1913 974 1075 

"EAR 

COASTAL VlRBlHlD 

-- SOFTWOOD ROUNOWOOO IMPORTS 

....... SOFTWOOD RESIDUE RECEIPTS 

Figure 1.-Softwood receipts by Coastal Virginia pulpmills, by type 

and source, with roundwood exports to other regions 1965-75. 

1500- 

1400 

1300. 

1200 

,100. 

1000 

$ 900. 

0 

800- $ 700. 

0 

$ 

BOO 

,OO 

300 

200 

- 

- .............* .... ............... - .... .. ... .... -.. .... ... ...... ....... .. .a. 

600------ __-- --/- 

. --.-.-- \-___ A'\ 

---- - -,' ... >< - ---__ .......... -- -.rd- :.= .. , ... - ._._..,... ....... .. - . --.... ........ 

.__ .._:-- ' .... -- - - -- ............ - - --. - --- ----..._ 
- TOTAL HARDWOOO RECEIPTS 

rre. er TOTAL HARDWOOO ROUNDWOOD RECEIPTS 

------ HARDWOOD ROUNDWOOD RECEIPTS FROM 

COASTAL VIRGINIA 

HARDWOOD ROUNDWOOO IMPORTS 

....... 700 HARDWOOD RESIDUE RECEIPTS 

-- -.. - HARDWOOD ROUNDWOOD EXPORTS 

. - 

0 -. ''7 . ... ... ... ... ...-... -.. - - 

1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 

YEAR 

Figure 2.-Hardwood receipts by Coastal Virginia pulpmills, by type and source, with 

roundwood exports to other regions, 1965-75. 

In order to operate their mills at normal capacity, the pulpwood-using 

industry had to obtain additional raw material. Since softwoods are the predominant species used in the pulping process, other sources of raw material 

had to be found. The additional raw materials were obtained from three 

sources: (1) imports of softwood roundwood from outside sources; (2) increased use of hardwoods in the pulping process; and (3) increased use of softwood and hardwood residues. 

Importing Softwood Roundwood 

Although imports of softwood roundwood increased after 1965, the most 

striking change was in the percentage of total softwood imported. In 1965, 

pulpmills in Coastal Virginia relied on imported roundwood from other regions 

for 53 percent of their softwood roundwood receipts. By 1975, other regions 

supplied 74 percent of such receipts. 

Areas adjacent to the Coastal Plain of Virginia supplied this increased 

volume (fig. 3). Beginning in 1966, pulpmills in the Coastal Plain gradually 

reduced the volume of softwoods obtained from Coastal Plain and Piedmont 

forests in Virginia. At the same time, they began to expand wood procurement 

in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont of North Carolina, Maryland, Delaware, 

South Carolina, and Georgia. This trend continued until about 1971, when the 

volume of softwood pulpwood originating in the Piedmont of Virginia began to 

'increase. Dependence upon North Carolina and other states as sources for 

such wood declined slightly after 1970. In the period 1973-75, more softwood 

pulpwood was obtained from the Southern Piedmont of Virginia than from the 

Coastal Plain. Yet, even though mills increased the amount of imported softwoods, total receipts of softwood roundwood by Coastal Plain mills declined 

between 1965 and 1975. 
Figure 3.-Softwood roundwood receipts by Coastal Virginia pulpmills, by source, 

1965-75. 

550 r -- COASTAL PLAIN OF VIRGINIA 

------ SOUTHERN PIEDMONT OF VIRGINIA 

- - OTHER VIRGINIA REGIONS 

450 - ....... NORTH CAROLINA 

OTHER STATES 

400 - 

0 2 200 - 

Increased Use of Hardwoods 

150. 

50 

0 

By increasing the use of hardwoods, most mills continued to operate at 

normal capacity. Although limited by the short fibers in hardwoods, pulpmills 

increased their hardwood roundwood receipts from 244,000 cords in 1965 to 

577,000 cords in 1973. This increased hardwood volume came from the same 

areas where most of the softwood roundwood was obtained (fig. 4). 

.................... ... -....-.,, . . .? . :: .... . . ............ IOO~--- T.., 

/ /--- -- .... --_-- A"".-"\-,- - - - 7.-

\/' 

- COASTAL PLAIN OF VIRGINIA 

-.--.. SOUTHERN PIEDMONT OF VIRGINIA 

- - OTHER VIRGINIA REGIONS 

...... NORTH CAROLINA 

(OTHER STATES NOT PLOTTED 

BECAUSE OF NEGLIGIBLE AMOUNTS) 

1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 

YEAR 

....................... - - - 

1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 

YEAR 

Fiyre 4.-Hardwood roundwood receipts by Coastal Virginia pulplnills, by source, 

1965-75. 
Increased Use of Wood Residues 

The increased use of wood residues, a common trend throughout the 

United States, also played an important role in counteracting the reduced consumption of softwood roundwood. In 1975, receipts for residues, both softwood 

and hardwood, represented a 134 percent increase over the 1965 level. This 

trend reflects the improved utilization of raw materials at sawmills and other 

wood product plants. Most of the residues were obtained from Virginia and 

North Carolina mills. 

As a result of the utilization of wood residues, imported softwood, and 

local and imported hardwood, receipts of all wood by pulpmills in Coastal Virginia increased substantially between 1965 and 1975. 

Exporting Roundwood 

The volume of softwood roundwood exported from Coastal Plain forests 

to other regions could alter the effectiveness of plans for improving the timber 

resource. Roundwood exports have been small in comparison with imports 

and, in general, have declined at a rate proportional to the decline in harvesting of softwood growing stock from Coastal Plain forests. 

Results of Forest Industry's Actions 

Forest industry's actions over the past 10 years helped reduce the large 

softwood growth deficit found in 1966. As already noted, the deficit of softrvood 

growing-stock growth in 1976 was much less than in 1966. 

It would be difficult to determine how changes in the industry's wood procurement have affected each area of wood supply, since interactions involve 

different regions and states. However, as of the most recent surveys, softwood growth deficits have been identified and softwood inventory volume has 

declined in Delaware, Maryland, and the Northern Coastal Plain of North 

Carolina (Ferguson 1967); Ferguson and Mayer 1974; Welch and Knight 1974). 

Increased softwood procurement in these areas might not be feasible over an 

extended period. 

THE STATE OF VIRGINIA'S RESPONSE 

In response to the softwood growth deficit identified in 1966, Virginia 

forestry leaders began to strengthen an existing law and formulate a new one. 

The resulting legislation-the amended Virginia Seed Tree Law and the Reforestation of Timberlands Act-works together to form the State of Virginia's reforestation policy. 

Virginia's Seed Tree Law 

The original Law required landowners harvesting timber to leave four 

pine seed trees per acre wherever loblolly, shortleaf, pond, or white pine constituted 10 percent of the live trees 6 inches or more in diameter at stump 

height. Wherever yellow-poplar contributed to stocking of trees 6 inches or 

larger in diameter, the Law required that two yellow-poplars be left. Seed 

trees had to be 14 inches or larger in diameter. 
After the 1966 survey findings, it became apparent that the Seed Tree 

Law was not sufficient to provide adequate regeneration on cutover lands. The 

Law was subsequently revised to increase the requirements for pine seed trees 

to eight pines 14 inches or larger in diameter per acre. If no pines 14 inches 

in diameter are present, the Law requires that two of the largest existing trees 

of the same species be left in place of each 14-inch or larger pine. In 1972, 

another revision specified that yellow-poplar stocking on acres where the Law 

would apply be raised to 10 percent-the same as pine stocking. At present, a 

landowner is not required to leave seed trees if he carries out an alternate reforestation plan approved by the State Forester. 

Virginia's Reforestation of Timberlands Act 

Shortly after the 1966 Virginia Survey, the State Forester called together 

forest industry leaders and interested landowners to discuss the softwood 

growth deficit and develop a solution to the problem. The Pine Reforestation 

Action Committee was formed and, after several public meetings, the Committee requested the 1969-70 General Assembly to enact remedial legislation. 

The result was the Reforestation of Timberlands Act. 

The purpose of the Reforestation of Timberlands Act is to reforest former pine-growing land that is currently growing only noncommercial and lowquality hardwoods. Financial assistance is provided to private landowners for 

the reforestation of lands where pine or yellow-poplar constitutes less than 

10 percent of the stand. In stands where pine and yellow-poplar comprise as 

much as 10 percent, the Seed Tree Law applies. 

The Division of Forestry is authorized, upon the request of a landowner, 

to examine the timberland and provide State-owned equipment, seedlings, and 

other materials necessary for preparing and reforesting the land with pine. 

The landowner may also use his own equipment and materials, or he can hire 

contractors to prepare and reforest the land. He may receive incentive payments of up to 50 percent of the total cost of the project, not to exceed a set 

per-acre value. Another option allows the landowner to receive up to 75 percent of the total cost of the project if he takes a 30-year lien plus an interestfree loan on the reforested land. 

This Act was funded by increasing the forest product tax on pine products 

by approximately 400 percent. This increase was recommended by the pineusing forest industries, a testimony to their concern over the pine timber supply. Tile State matches the product-tax revenue with monies from the General 

Fund. 

The goal of the Reforestation of Timberlands Act is to overcome the 

financial barriers to intensive forest management for the private nonindustrial 

landowners. Only 5 years have passed since this Act became effective, yet 

already there is evidence that it is accomplishing its designated goal. An increased rate of forest plantings on nonindustrial private ownerships since 1971 

indicates that the cost-sharing incentives are helping some landowners overcome the financial barriers (table 7). Most of these landowners are located in 

the Coastal Plain and Southern Piedmont of Virginia (Horton 1976). 
11 Table 7.--Acres of forest planting,- by ownership class, 

Virginia 

Ownership class 

Fiscal : 1 All 

year National : Other Forest : Other : owners 

: Forest : public : industry : private : 

- - - - - - - - - - - Acres - - - - - - - - - - 

1965 1,424 1,312 42,377 28,689 73,802 

1966 2,418 1,707 35,039 25,603 64,767 

1967 2,748 1,412 43,963 26,797 74,920 

1968 2,038 904 36,636 24,590 64,168 

1969 2,006 1,286 41,381 25,706 70,379 

1970 1,364 1,387 38,493 27,461 68,705 

1971 1,804 2,472 35,072 32,539 71,887 

1972 2,157 2,833 39,750 53,087 97,827 

1973 1,511 3,966 30,419 47,559 83,455 

1974 1,530 2,303 27,338 51,618 82,789 

1975 1,407 2,449 24,849 59,218 87,923 

- 11 Includes acres planted by direct seeding. 

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 

Forest and windbirrier planting and seeding in the united 

States. Issued annually by the Forest Service in Washington. D. C. In 1974. the title of the series was chaneed - to: 

Forest Planting, Seeding. and Silvical Treatments in the 

United States. 

STAND-AGE DISTRIBUTION OF COASTAL PLAIN FORESTS 

The distribution of commercial forest acreage by stand-age class and 

major forest type provides a new way to evaluate the forest resource. Standage distributions reflect past land use trends, forestry practices, and problem 

areas within the forests. In addition, stand-age data can be used to estimate 

short-term trends in the timber supply. 

During the fourth survey of the Coastal Plain of Virginia in 1976, each 

sample location was assigned a stand age on the basis of the average age of 

representative trees in the manageable stand. These data permitted the formation of age profiles by ownership class, forest type, and other area and 

management classifications. Areas classified as not having a manageable stand 

were omitted from the age groups since many of these acres had few growingstock trees. These acres, however, were profiled to provide a comparison 

with the various age classes. 

Age profiles by softwood and hardwood forest types were compiled for all 

). Coastal Plain stands (fig. 5). The softwood types included areas where southern yellow pines or cedars, singly or in combination, comprised 50 percent or 

more of the stocking. Cypress, although a softwood species, was included with 

hardwoods according to the conventional separation of forest types. The oakpine type was also included with hardwoods because, by definition, hardwood 

species comprise 50 percent or more of the stocking in this type. 
SOFTWOOD FOREST TYPES HARDWOOD FOREST TYPES 

Figure 5.-Area of commercial forest land occupied by softwood and hardwood forest 

types, by stand-age class, Coastal Plain of Virginia, 1976. 

RELATION TO PAST LAND USE, FORESTRY 

PRACTICES, AND PROBLEM AREAS 

Stand-age profiles reflect past land use trends and forestry practices in 

the area. Knight (1977) showed that a strong relationship existed between the 

reduction in cropland acreage in past years and the present acreage in each 

softwood age class in North Carolina. Abandonment of marginal farmland accounted for the reductions in cropland acreage. Many of the abandoned acres 

seeded in with southern yellow pines, or were planted with pines, and are now 

the source of much of the softwood timber in North Carolina. Similar trends 

in reduction of cropland acreage have occurred in Virginia (Boyce and others 

1975). Much of Coastal Virginia's softwood timber probably originated on 

abandoned farmland. 

The rate of cropland retirement and subsequent reversion to forest has 

recently decreased throughout most of the South (Boyce and others 1975). This 

trend is also occurring in the Coastal Plain of Virginia. A continued rotation 

between cropland and forest is expected, but at a much lower scale than in past 

years. Without the reversion of large acreages of abandoned farmland, the 

harvesting of the older softwood forests will result in reductions in softwood 

forest types unless adequate pine regeneration after harvest is achieved. 

The acreage of softwood types in the two youngest classes-"less than 

10 years"and "10 to 19 years"-reflects the pine planting efforts of the past 

20 years. Pine plantations accounted for nearly three-fourths of the softwood 

stands less than 10 years old and for 57 percent of those 10 to 19 years old. 
Hardwood stands, unlike softwoods, originate largely as a result of timber harvesting. Knight (1977) showed that a relationship existed between past 

lumber production in North Carolina and the acreage of hardwood types by 

stand-age class. The number of acres harvested and the lumber production for 

a given gear were assumed to be related. Generally, even-aged hardwood 

stands become established on the cutover land. Similar relationships between 

past levels of lumber production and hardwood acreages, by stand age, probably 

exist for Coastal Virginia. 

A healthy increase in the acreage of the youngest hardwood age class over 

that of most older hardwood stands is evident. The acreage in this "less than 

10" age class exceeds that in the older classes because 86,000 acres of pine 

plantations were included in the youngest class. These plantations were classified as hardwoods either because of poor survival of pine seedlings, or because 

they contained more hardwood than pine. Future competition for growing space, 

water, and available nutrients may transform some of these acres to pine types. 

However, hardwood encroachment in pine plantations established on harvested 

stands is likely to be a continuing problem. An examination of forest types on 

old-field plantations reveals that there is no hardwood problem after pine is 

planted on abandoned fields, but old-field planlings have declined substantially 

since the expiration of the Conservation Reserve Soil-Bank Program. Thus, 

most pine plantations are now established on cutover forest land, and severe 

hardwood competition usually occurs unless there is intensive site preparation. 

The large accumulation of mature and overmature hardwood stands reflects the long hardviood rotations and a shortage of hardwood markets. Adverse 

conditions limit forestry operations on some acres. Another factor leading to 

accumulation of mature stands is that some landowners are unwilling to sell 

their timber. 

Hardwoods dominated nearly 463,000 acres classified as having no manageable stand. About 43 percent of these stands have not been disturbed during 

the past 10 years. Therefore, the conditions in these stands are not likely to 

improve without intervention from man. Further buildup in this class will occur 

unless harvested stands are adequarely regenerated. 

STAND-AGE DISTRIBUTION BY OWNERSHIP 

Age profiles for each broad ownership class reveal significant differences 

in the forest lands of each group of owners (figs. 6 and 7). Owner attitudes, 

management objectives, and financial status all contribute to these differences. 

Forest industry's lands are generally managed on short rotations for pine. 

This management is reflected in the profiles for softwood and hardwood types. 

Over 54 percent of forest industry's softwood stands are less than 20 years old; 

80 percent of these stands are pine plantations. Forest industry's stands are 

. younger than those of any other ownership class, averaging 27 years for softwood types and 39 years for hardwood types. Yet, substantial acreages of both 

pine and hardwood remain available for future harvest by industry. Some portion of this acreage is owned by lumber companies who may not manage their 

lands on short rotations, as do most pulp and paper companies. 
PUBLIC 

a FOREST INDUSTRY 

0 OTHER PRIVATE 

10 

STAND-AGE CLASS IYEARS) 

Figure 6.-Total area of commercial forest land occupied by softwood forest types, by 

stand-age and ownership class, Coastal Plain of Virginia, 1976. 

Figure 7.-Total area of commercial forest land occupied by hardwood forest types, by 

stand-age and ownership class, Coastal Plain of Virginia, 1976. 

Publicly owned forests are used for many purposes other than timber 

production. Age profiles for public forests reflect this multiple use. Older, 

predominantly hardwood forests accumulate when timber production is not the 

primary goal. For instance, pu~lic hardwood forests average 60 years in age, 

whereas the overall average age for hardwood forests is 43 years. 
The other group of private owners includes those whose management 

practices range from none to the most intense. The problems private, nonindustrial landowners have faced in practicing intensive management are exemplified by the acreage @f their forest land without a manageable stand. Nearly 

87 percent of all stands so classified are located on private, nonindustrial 

woodlands. Failure to achieve adequate regeneration after harvest led to this 

poor stocking. 

Whatever the reason for the lack of regeneration after harvesting-be it 

lack of concern, knowledge, or financial resources-improved management of 

private woodlands is a must in Virginia and throughout the Southeast. In Virginia, the Reforestation of Timberlands Act was designed to achieve this goal, 

and evidence that improvement is underway has been shown. The age profile 

for softwoods held by nonindustrial, private owners provides additional evidence to substantiate this improvement. The greater acreage in the "less than 

10" age class, in comparison with that of the next two older classes, is particularly significant because of the reduced rate of reversion of idle farmland to 

forest during the past 10 years. With continued concern and landowner participation, the Reforestation of Timberlands Act can accomplish its long-term goals. 

PREDICTING SHORT-TERM TIMBER SUPPLIES 

Stand-age data are valuable in predicting the relative acreage of softwood 

and hardwood forests available for harvest now and in the near future. The 

age profile for softwoods indicates an increase in softwood acreage and, consequently, in volume likely to become available for harvest after the next decade. 

These stands are assumed to be harvestable at age 30. Pine plantations in the 

two youngest age classes account for most of this projected increase in harvestable softwood acreage. 

The profile for hardwoods shows a buildup of acreage in the older age 

classes. Because adverse sites limit availability on only 5 percent of all 

Coastal Plain stands, most hardwood stands in this region should be available 

for harvest now or in the future, assuming that all landowners will eventually 

he willing to sell their timber. The hardwood inventory, growth surplus, and 

age profile all attest that hardwoods offer the best opportunity for increasing 

the volume cut from Coastal Plain forests. 

, 

f TIMBER MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES 

Each sample plot in the Coastal Plain of Virginia was assessed to determine if treatment would be needed in the next 10 years to improve stand conditions. Factors considered included stand volume and stocking, species composition, stand age, mortality, and site quality. The acreages to which these 

potential treatments were assigned were compiled according to broad management and ownership classes (table 8). 

POOR AND ADVERSE SITES 

To adequately evaluate the opportunities for intensive timber management, we must first exclude certain areas as being unsuitable. In Coastal Virginia, these unsuitable areas include poor sites (Site Class 5) and those with 
mblc 8.--ires idle md co-rcial inrear land. by broad management, uvnership, and rrrarnenr 

oploriuniry clraser, CaerLal Plain of Virginia, 1916 

Broad zrearmenr oppoTrunity classes 

aroed management and j Ioral j 

aun3rri,ip claise&i : area : :~~~~~~i~ljofh~~ Stand 2/;~e%eneia- j Good PO"^ mmrsement 

:Sa'Y'~=:Ha-'e"j isinnlna :iopro"emenr:con"er~~~~ , Lion : candirron: ~"r~"ti~L2i 

-...-...--....--.....*crcr...----....-.--..-...- - Idle cropland: 

Public .. -. .- .- .. .- .- .. .- 

roresi iilduSrrY -. -- -- .- .. .- .. .. -. 

Ocher privrre 10.133 -- .. -- .- -- 10,113 -. .. 

Toral 50.L33 -- .. .. .. .. 10,131 .. -- 

x."Etocked ioresr: 

Pine plancarl"ns: 

Public 

Poierr LnduorN 

ocher privrre 

Ioral 

xaturr, pine stands: 

Public 

Foreat indvirry 

Other ?riurre 

rara1 

Public 

ioresc industry 

orher private 

.-..-. .~,.~. ~,~~ . Forasr industry 130,171 -- 26,187 .. 2,981 16,688 26,356 49,026 12,536 

Ofher private 1,311,618 2.162 139,298 1,129 122,185 iiO.IM 206,501 56Ld52 157.112 

Tmpn7 lili, RIR 2762 106 868 5.528 124.166 167.068 233.570 647.148 L6q.128 

ii Poiear industry includes lands under long-term leare. - 

21 *rean DEcu~~c~ -iith iPeEieB itable able TO %he site from <he ~iand~oini of rimbe7 ?roducriaa. 

- 31 Areas "here the rimbei managemcnr pocentia1 i% severely limited hecause of poor ar ad.3er.e sires 

year-round water problems. Altogether, such areas total over 450,000 acres. 

The following analysis assumes that funds for timber management should not be 

expended on these acres because of low yields on the poor sites and poor operability on the adverse sites. 

STANDS IN GOOD CONDITION 

Another type of site that should be excluded from potential treatment is 

the 2 million acres (56 percent of the commercial forest land) already supporting stands in relatively good condition. By ownership class, the proportion 

ranges from 54 percent of all publicly owned commercial forests to 60 percent 

of all lands controlled by forest industry. These acres are in good enough condition that intensive management to increase timber yields during the next decade would not be beneficial. The remaining acreage exclusive of that on poor 

or adverse sites, however, could be improved by intensive management during 

the next 10 years. 
STANDS THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM TREATMENT 

Conditions on the remaining 1.6 million acres range from heavily damaged stands in need of salvage to poorly stocked stands requiring artificial 

regeneration. Recommended treatments for the various types of stands in 

these categories and the acreages involved are summarized below. 

Stand Liquidation 

Stand liquidation and subsequent regeneration are needed on approximately 412,000 acres. Some of these stands need to be harvested because they 

have reached or passed maturity; others need to be salvaged because of serious damage from insects, diseases, and weather. In the stands assigned these 

two treatments, mortality was more than double the overall average, indicating 

that further volume losses will occur unless action is taken. 

Intermediate Treatments 

Stands on 237,000 acres could be commercially thinned. These areas 

support dense stands of merchantable but immature timber. Such stands consist primarily of pine types, both planted and natural. An additional 329,000 

acres were assigned treatments such as precommercial thinning, cleaning, 

release, or other intermediate cutting. Precommercial thinning was assigned 

primarily to stands where growth losses are likely because of a dense stocking 

of seedlings or saplings. Cleaning, release, or other intermediate cutting was 

assigned to stands with sufficient stocking for management but which are receiving serious competition from rough or rotten trees and other inhibiting 

vegetation. Altogether, intermediate treatment would enhance growth on an 

estimated 567,000 acres. 

Stand Conversion 

Stand conversion could potentially benefit 233,000 acres of commercial 

forest land. Such conversion is needed when the present species composition 

is incompatible with the site from the standpoint of timber production. Most 

such stands consist of low-quality hardwoods growing on sites suitable for 

pine. 

Artificial Regeneration 

The most promising opportunity to improve stand conditions and increase 

future timber supplies in Coastal Virginia is artificial regeneration of existing, 

poorly stocked, commercial forest land. 4n estimated 383,000 acres are so 

poorly stocked that they do not support manageable stands. These acres are 

characterized by low volumes per acre and a higher-than-average stocking because of the presence of rough and rotten trees and other inhibiting vegetation. 

However, artificial regeneration of these stands is not financially attractive .' except immediately after harvest, when the landowner is likely to have snfficient funds available. Conditions in these areas probably will not improve 

without intervention from man. By ownership class, the percentage of commercial forests suitable for intensive management but needing regeneration 

ranges from 2 percent of all public forest land to 12 percent of all private, nonindustrial forests. 
Landowners should also be encouraged to plant pines on over 50,000 

acres of idle cropland. In old-field plantations, the costs of site preparation 

and planting are low and competition from hardwoods is not severe. 

OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE IMMEDIATE IMPROVEMENT 

Although the stand treatments discussed are valid methods of improving 

the timber resource, the benefits derived are not immediate. Additional opportunities exist for more immediate improvement. 

One possibility is to increase the utilization of mill and logging residues. 

Since most larger mills already utilize their residues, further increases in 

such use may be limited. However, an opportunity exists for more complete 

utilization of logging residues such as rough and rotten trees and treetops, 

thereby allowing more wood to be consumed without increasing removals of 

growing stock. Total-tree chipping is another way to increase the utilization 

of previously unmerchantable wood. 

Finally, increased use of hardwoods to the extent allowed by present 

technology would decrease the demand for softwoods. In many instances, such 

an increase may be limited by the poor quality of existing hardwoods, but advances in technology will undoubtedly allow greater hardwood utilization in the 

future. 

CONCLUSIONS 

In-depth analysis of the timber supply in the Coastal Plain of Virginia 

reveals a declining forest land base and softwood inventory and unfavorable 

relationships between growth and removals of softwoods. These trends, however, do not imply a lack of progress in recent years. On the contrary, the 

data show that there has been improvement. Yet, if Coastal Virginia is to provide the increasing amounts of wood that will be required in the future, additional progress will be necessary. 

Furthermore, while timber requirements are rising, nontimber uses and 

benefits of the forest are becoming increasingly important. Today's forest 

management practices are being evaluated for their effects on recreational 

uses, wildlife habitat, and water quality. Forest managers must be aware of 

the many nontimber resources of the forests. The ultimate challenge in f~rest 

management is to meet both the timber requirements and the needs of other 

forest users in future years. 
APPENDIX 

DEFINITIONS OF TERMS 

Basal area.-The area in square feet of the cross section at breast height of a 

single tree or of all the trees in a stand, usually expressed as square feet or 

basal area per acre, 

Commercial forest land.-Forest land producing or capable of producing crops 

of industrial wood and not withdrawn from timber utilization. 

Cropland.-Land under cultivation within thepast 24 months, including orchards 

and land in soil-improving crops, but excluding land cultivated in developing 

improved pasture. Also includes idle farmland. 

Farm.--Either a place operated as a u~lit of 10 or more acres from which the 

sale of agricultural products totaled $50 or more annually, or a place operated 

as a unit of less than 10 acres from which the sale of agricultural products for 

the year amounted to at least $250. 

Farm operator.-A person who operates a farm, either doing the work himself 

or directly supervising the work. 

Farmer-owned lands.-Lands owned by farm operators. 

Forest industry lands.-Lands owned by companies or individuals operating 

wood-using plants. 

Forest land.-Land at least 16.7 percent stocked by forest trees of any size, or 

formerly having had such tree cover, and not currently developed for nonforest 

use. 

Forest type.-A classification of forest land hased upon the species forming a 

plurality of live-tree stocking. 

White-red-jack pine.-Forests in which eastern white pine, red pine, or jack 

pine, singly or in combination, comprise a plurality of the stocking. (Common 

associates include hemlock, aspen, birch, and maple. ) 

Spruce-fir.-Forests in which spruce or true firs, singly or in combination, 

comprise aplurality of the stocking. (Common associates include whitecedar, 

tamarack, maple, birch, and hemlock. ) 

Longleaf-slash pine.-Forests in which longleaf or slash pine, singly or in 

combination, comprise aplurality of the stocking. (Common associates include 

oak, hickory, and gum. ) 

Loblolly-shortleaf pine.-Forests in which loblolly pine, shortleaf pine, or 

other southern yellow pines, except longleaf or slash pine, singly or in combination, comprise a plurality of the stocking. (Common associates include 

oak, hickory, and gum. ) 
Oak-pine.-Forests in which hardwoods (usually upland oaks) comprise a plurality of the stocking, but in which pines comprise 25 to 50 percent of the 

stocking. (Common associates include gum, hickory, and yellow-poplar. ) 

Oak-hickory.-Forests in which upland oaks or hickory, singly or in combination, comprise a plurality of the stocking, except where pines comprise 25 

to 50 percent, in which case the stand would be classified oak-pine. (Common 

associates include yellow-poplar, elm, maple, and black walnut. ) 

Oak-gum-cypress.-Bottomland forests in which tupelo, blackgum, sweetgum, 

oaks, or southern cypress, singly or in combination, comprise a plurality of 

the stocking, except where pines comprise 25 to 50 percent, in which case 

the stand would be classified oak-pine, (Common associates include cottonwood, willow, ash, elm, hackberry, and maple.) 

Elm-ash-cottonwood.-Forests in which elm, ash, or cottonwoods, singly or 

in combination, comprise a plurality of the stocking. (Common associates 

include willow, sycamore, beech, and maple. ) 

Maple-beech-birch.-Forest s in which maple, beech, or yellow birch, singly 

or in combination, comprise a plurality of the stocking. (Common associates 

include hemlock, elm, basswood, and white pine. ) 

Gross growth.- Annual increase in net volume of trees in the absence of cutting 

and mortality. 

Growing-stock trees.-Live trees of commercial species qualifying as desirable or acceptable trees. 

Growing-stock volume.-Net volume in cubic feet of growing-stock trees 5.0 

inches d.b.h. and over from a 1-foot stump to a minimum 4.0-inch top diameter 

outside bark of the central stem, or to the point where the central stem breaks 

into limbs. (Net volume in primary forks is included.) 

Hardwoods.-Dicotyledonous trees, usually broad-leaved and deciduous. 

Soft hardwoods.-Soft-textured hardwoods, such as boxelder, red and silver 

maple, hackberry, lohlolly-bay, sweetgum, yellow-poplar, magnolia, sweetbay, 

water tupelo, blackym, sycamore, cottonwood, blackcherry, willow, basswood, 

and elm. 

Hard hardwoods.-Hard-textured hardwoods, such as Florida and sugar maple, 

birch, hickory, dogwood, persimmon (forest grown), beech, ash, honeylocust, 

holly, black walnut, mulberry, all commercial oaks, and black locust. 

Idle farmland.-Includes former croplands, orchards, improved pastures, and 

farm sites not tended within the past 2 years, and presently less than 16.7 percent stocked with trees. 

Improved pasture.-Land currently improved for grazing by cultivation, seeding, irrigation, or c1ear;ng of trees or brush. 

Lqhibiting vegetation.--Cover sufficiently dense to prevent the establishment of 

tree seedlings. 

20 
Logging residues.-The unused portions of trees cut or killed by logging. 

Manageable stand.4ommercial forest land generally 60 percent or better 

stocked with growing-stock trees of any size or species composition as long as 

they are suited, in the aggregate, to a single primary treatment opportunity. 

Miscellaneous Federal lands.-Federal lands other than National Forests, lands 

administered by the Bureau of Land Management, and Indian lands. 

Miscellaneous private lands-orporate.-Lands owned by private corporations 

other than forest industry. 

~ Miscellaneous private lands-individual.-Privately owned lands other than forest industry, farmer-owned, or corporate lands. 

Mortality.-Number of sound-wood volume of live trees dying from natural 

causes during a Specified period. 

National Forest land.-Federal lands which have been legally designated as 

National Forests or purchase unlts, and other lands under the administration of 

the Forest Service, including experimental areas and Bankhead-Jones Title I11 

lands. 

Net annual growth.-The increase in volume for a specific year. 

I 

Net volume.-Gross volume of wood less deductions for rot, sweep, or other 

defect affecting use for timber products. 

Noncommercial forest land.4a) Unproductive forest land incapable of yielding 

crops of industrial wood because of adverse site conditions, and (b) productivereserved forest land. 

Nonforest land.-Land that has never supported forests and land formerly forested where timber production is precluded by development for other uses. 

1 Nonstocked land.--Commercial forest land less than 16.7 percent stocked with 

I growing-stock trees. 

I 

Other Federal lands.-Federal lands other than National Forests, including 

lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

and other Federal agencies. 

Other public lands.-Publicly owned lands other than National Forests. 

Other removals.-The net volume of growing-stock trees removed from the inventory by cultural operations, such as timber stand improvement, land clearing, and other changes in land use that result in the removal of the trees from 

' the commercial forest. 

Plant byproducts.-Wood products such as pulp chips, obtained incidental to 

production of other manufactured products. 
Plant residues.-Wood materials from manufacturing plants not utilized for 

some product. 

Poletimber trees.-Growing-stock trees of commercial species at least 5.0 inches in d.b.h. but smaller than sawtimber size. 

Productive-reserved forest laud.-Forest land sufficiently productive to qualify 

as commercial forest land, but withdrawn from timber utilization through statute or administrative designation. 

Quality class.-A classification of sawtimber volumes by log or tree grades. 

Rotten trees.-Live trees of commercial species that do not contain at least one 

12-foot saw log, or two uoncontiguous saw logs, each 8 feet or longer, now or 

prospectively, primarily because of rot or missing sections, and with less than 

one-third of the gross tree volume in sound material. 

Rough trees.--(a) Live trees of commercial species that do not contain at least 

one 12-foot sx.v log, or two noncontiguous saw logs, each 8 feet or longer, now 

or prospectively, primarily because of roughness, poor form, splits, and 

cracks, and with less than one-third of the gross tree volume in sound material, 

and (b) all live trees of noncommercial species. 

Saw log.-A log meeting minimum standards of diameter, length, and defect, 

including logs at least 8 feet long, sound and straight, and with a minimum diameter inside bark for softwoods of 6 inches (8 inches for hardwoods). 

Saw--log portion.-That part of the bole of sawtimber trees between the stump 

and the saw-log top. 

Saw-log top.-The point on the bole of sawtimber trees above which a saw log 

cannot be produced. The minimum saw-log top is 7.0 inches d.0.b. for softwoods and 9.0 inches d.0.b. for hardwoods. 

Sawtimber trees.-Live trees of commercial species containing at least a 12- 

foot saw log, or two contiguous saw logs, each 8 feet or longer, and with at 

least one third of the gross board-foot volurne between the 1-foot stump and 

minimum saw-log top being sound. Softwoorls must be at least 9.0 inches and 

hardwoods at least 11.0 inches in diameter at breast height. 

Sawtirnber volume.-Net volume of the saw-log portion of live sawtimber in 

board-foot International $-inch rule. 

Seedlings.-Live trees less than 1.0 inch in diameter at breast height that are 

expected to survive and develop. 

Site class.-A classification of forest land in terms of inherent capacity to grow 

crops of industrial wood based on fully stocked natural stands. 

Class 1.-Sites capable of producing 165 or more cubicfeet per acre annually. 

Class 2.-Sites capable of producing 120 to i65 cubic feet per acre arnually. 

Class 3.-Sites capable of producing 85 tc 12s cubic feet per acre annually. 
Class 4.-Sites capable of producing 50 to 85 cubic feet per acre annually. 

Class 5.-Sites incapable of producing 50 cubic feet per acre annually, but excluding unproductive sites. 

Softwoods.-Coniferous trees, usually evergreen, having needles or scale-like 

leaves. 

- Pines.-yellow pine species which include lobloily, longleaf, slash, pond, 

shortleaf, pitch, Virginia, and Table-Mountain pine. 

Other softwoods.-Cypress, eastern redcedar, white cedar, eastern white 

pine, eastern hemlock, spruce and fir. 

Stocking.-The degree of occupancy of land by trees, measured by basal area 

or the number of trees in a stand and spacing in the stand, compared to a minimum standard, depending on tree size, to fully utilize the growth potential of 

the land. 

Fully stocked.-100 percent or more stocking 

Medium stocked.-60 to 100 percent stocking 

Poorly stocked.-Less than 60 percent stocking 

Survivor growth.-The increase in volume of growing-stock trees that survive 

cutting and mortality for a specified year. I 

I Timber products.-Roundwood products and plant byproducts. 

Timber removals.-The net volume of growing- stock trees removed from the 

inventory by harvesting; cultural operations, such as stand improvement; land 

clearing, or changes in land use. 

Unproductive forest land.-Forest land incapable of producing 20 cubic feet per 

acre of industrial wood under natural conditions, because of adverse s't e conditions. 

Upper-stern portion.-That part of the main stem or fork of sawtimber trees 

above the saw-log top to a minimum top diameter 4.0 inches outside bark or to 

the point where the main stem or fork breaks into limbs. 

Urban and other areas.-Areas within the legal boundaries of cities and towns, 

suburban areas developed for residential, industrial, or recreational purposes; 

school yards; cemeteries; roads; railroads; airports; beaches; powerlines and 

other rights-of-way; or other nonforest land not included in any other specified 

land use class. 
LITERATURE CITED 

Boyce, Stephen G., Joe P. McClure, and Herbert S. Sternitzke 

1975. Biological potential for the loblolly pine ecosystem east of the Mississippi River. 

USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. SE-142, 27 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn., Asheville, 

N. C. 

Cost, Noel D. 

1976. Forest statistics f o r t h e Coastal Plain of Virginia, 1976. USDA For. Serv. Resour. 

Bull. SE-34, 33 p. Southeast. For. Eap. Stn., Asheville, N. C. 

Cruikshanl~, J. W. 

1943. The forest situation in the Coastal Plain of Virginia. USDA For. Serv. For. Surv. 

Release 12, 45 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn., Asheville, N. C. 

Ferguson, Roland H. 

1967. The timber resources of Maryland. USDA For. Serv. Resour. Bull. NE-7, 93 p. 

Northeast. Far. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby, Pa. 

Ferguson, Roland H., and Carl E. Mayer 

1974. The timber resources of Delaware. USDA For. Serv. Resour. Bull. NE-32, 42 p. 

Northeast. For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby, Pa. 

Horton, Donald A. 

1976. An economic analysis of Virginia's Reforestation of Timberlands Act. M.S. thesis. 

Va. Polytec. Inst. and State Univ.. Blacksburg, Va. 

Knight, Herbert A. 

1977. Stand-aee -. orofile of North Carolina's timberland. USDA For. Serv. Resour. Bull. 

SE-38, 15 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn., Asneville, N. C. 

Virginia Department of Labor and Industry 

1977. Trends in employment hours and earnings, Virginia and standard metropolitan area. 

Vol. 26(1). Div. Res. and Stat., Richmond, Va. 

U'elch, Richard L.. and Herbert A. Knight 

1974. Forest statistics for the Northern Coastal Plain of North Carolina, 1974. USDA For. 

Serv. Resonr. Bull. SE-30, 33 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn., Asheville, Pi. C. 


^sa!~!ii,!lzoddo luawa8rueur 

-raqur!! 'a9e pvelr 'sj-."o!u?.i .zaqcu!i 'ql"0.19 pue arun[on .raq 

-ru!:l 'd!ijslaurna isa.!oJ '~"PI Isaloj je!oraruruos 'SpuaJl lsaloy :s[lron.uCax 

'pamasazd sj Sl!un+zoddo qa-ca zoj 

aIqeI!ene ~Besl~e pal-aruyw? at[? pni: 'paqjzasapaze sa!l!un&roddo %uawa9eueru 

Jaqm!j. 'yoojlno alnlnj pua 'suo!l!puoa luasa~d '&ols!q tsed sn 'a3lnossl 

1Sa.roj s,ua!Sai aql aqvasap ~ar[l~nj uo!mr~!~$s:p a&-pu-ejs uo vjva 'puer Isa 

-zoj i?aq$ jo iuaura2eu~m Smno~dm! ui szaurnopm1 Iz!.qsnpu!uou 'a&en!~d lsjs 

-s% n! ~o!%ejs:Ba~ pajaeua L~qwsssv p.zaua3 z7u!5~m. aqi prie 'uy~~d pjseo3 

ail$ woq SjZAOura.2 aanpal ol mauramao.rd POOM J!aqt pa!3!pow Ba!J%SXip 

u! paloa 'auiissp ?r!l asrannl 07 pau9~snp soo!%ae a,[=% ol smpea1 L~lsa~oj 

s,aju!B.r;A Bugdclmozd ':fanls Bul~ozB pooihgos jo arnnpn aqt u! do~paa~ad 8 

a= pajeanaJ uo19s.z 94% .so San.zns 9967 aq& .'spoorngos jo pnowal pue qmo~5 

uaarnlaq sdjqsuailetaz ajqe.ron*jim pus 'X~o~uanu! poo~uos Bu!u!~aap e %seq 

puiij isa.103 SUJU!I~JP z [P~J.P.I e!u!S~jh $0 U!eId Te%seo3 aq% jo sXan~ns isaloy 

'sa!l!unl~odrio %uaruaSeuew 

Jaqwil 'a& puew 'sIenoruaJ JaClU!l 'riu~hio~9 pue amujon zaq 

--a!+ 'd~qsza~fio tsa~oj 'p~q $SaZOJ jelasaruuIo3 'spuaq isa.ro.g ::spJOO&X 

'papasald s! S~!ui?$roddo qnea loj 

a~qeryear: a9ea.za-e papruTpa aql pue cp~q~~3~ap axe sajj~un~ioddo luarua8~uerr; 

L 'yoojmo a~nlnj pue 'sno!~!puo.~ luasa~d 'biop!q jsed slj 'qsrnasa~ 

?sa~o3 s,uo!5a~ aq? aqrzassp .raq%~nj uo!%nqp%s!p a8e-puels rro slea 'pus1 isa 

-ZOJ ayaq? jo ruauraSeu-eru Su!no.rdur! rr! slaurnopuq pxqsnprrjuon 'aienpd ~sys 

-se 0% uu!t~is!8aT pal3eua LIqurassv Te.rsua3 wju!B~!h aq% pup 'uy~[d Ietseo3 

aql uroJJ s1nAoura.T aanpaJ ol luaura.zn3o.rd pooni -r!aill pn!j!poiri sa!qsnp 

al isazod 'amjsap atti aSJaAaJ ot pauS~sap suoxjaa ayp o~ smpwai Szjsa.roy 

s,eyu!8.r!~ 9u!%duo~d 'yaois 5uj~oz9 poo~ljos jo auinjon 341 u! rio~p $ua;,.rad 8 

ue PajsanaJ no!aa~ aql 30 hanziis 9961 aqL 'spoo~ljos jo 1enorrxa.r piie qq.mo~2 

uaarnlarl sdjr~suage~a~ a~qe~on-ejuii plie 'd~o~ua~uj pooAuas 2u!u!laap -e 'as~q 

pue1 ?saloj 8u!unaap e Ieanal e!uyB.z!h $0 uj.e~d iepeon aql jo sian~ns ~sa.zo& 

'3 'N I .D 'N 

'a-[i!naijsv "ulc; 'dxa '2o.i 'ls~aqlnos 'ii PZ 'EP-ZS 'nn,g 'mosay 'aIi!riaqsv "ux 'dxs 'zad 'lseoillno~ 'd pz '55-as 'lrna ."nosay 

'AZaS '.rod "n!iSt. 'daa 's'n '%uaw?hu.xdw! zoj sar%runj~orldo pue I 'nlas 'JOLI "3!.r58 'clan .s'n .?uamaao~dru! .ro) sarl~unvoddo pu-e 

I 

"suo!l!puo3 prasaril 'spua.rl-aa~no-iax .xaqrn!j s,~nr!%Iih Twseoa '8L61 I ' suo!l!l~uo3 +~asa.zd 'spuall-axnosal ~aqor~l s,e!ujS~!~i lelseo3 "8L61 I 

'm puo~s=x 'PTa!naqs I 'M ~uoUI~?~ 'PI~!JJJ~S I 
The Forest Service, U. S. Department 

of Agriculture, is dedicated to the 

principle of multiple use management 

of the Nation's forest resources for 

sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through 

forestry research, cooperation with 

the States and private forest owners, 

and management of the National 

Forests and Nationai Grassiands, it 

strives-as directed by Congressto provide increasingly greater service 

to a growing Nation. 

USDA policy does not permit discrimination 

because of race, color, national origin, sex 

or religion. Any person who believes he or 

she has been discriminated against in any 

USDA-related activity should write immediately to the Secretary of Agriculture, 

Washington, D. C. 20250.