ls The Odd Foot The Risht Foot?

Bv H.V. Simpson, ExecutivEYice President \Uest Coast Lumbermen's Association

It could be. \\'e think so. The results of a recent inr-estigation of odd-length lumber in house building were startling.

As a means of conserving the lumber supply and producing the best grades of lumber possible, the revised rules of the West Coast Bureau of Lumber Grades and Inspection specified that a reasonable number of odd lengths might be included in shipments of random lengtl-r common lumber.

This rer.ision brought protests from several sources. Three retail associations filed official objections in the form of resolutions condemning odd foot lengths of dimension lumber and small timber as "not acceptable in most residential construction."

There can be no doubt that these resolutions rvere offered in all sincerity. They command respect.

There are several points on which the framers of the resolutions and the lumber manufacturers are in complete agreement. Both have an interest and a stake in the conservation of our timber resources. Both .ivish to see lumber used to the best advantage, in an economically profitable way, rvith a minimum of waste. Both wish to see established procedures interrupted as little as possible.

It is not impossible that a fuller understanding of the situation can lead to agreement in the matter of lengths.

In the process of manufacturing lumber at the mill a considerable amount of trimming is necessary. Splits, checks and other defects must be trimmed in order to Dro- r.ide the trade with the best-graded, best-manufactured lumber we can produce. It has been the practice of the industry in all of these cases to trim 2' or multiples of.2', although in many instances a 1' trim would have served the purpose.

The manufacture of odd length common lumber is not nerv. Douglas fir mills in Western British Columbia provide a practical example of the savings which can be made.

These mills were compelled to supply a specific amount of odd lengths in their shipments to Europe, particularly the United Kingdom. This amounted usually to a minimunr of one-third of the shipment. The mills resisted the practice and adopted it only with reluctance in the middle 30's. Their experience over the past 10 or 12 years, however, has been that their recovery from the log was greater; more lumber went into the market ; less into the burner.

An argument offered in opposing odC lengths was the fact that studs are normally set at 16" and 24" centers, and rafters and framing at 24" centers. This of course is true. Still. there is always considerable trimrning on the site of any construction job.

\Ve rvere interested in finding out just horn' much trimming was done on the job site in the construction of an averag'e house, and how much of a saving could be effected there as u'ell as at the mill.

Three a\rerage, typical housing units in the process of construction in the Portland area \vere selected at random. Every piece of framing and sheathing in each of the tl.rree units rvas measured. What \ve \\rere after lvas the actual lengths used.

In the first house surveyed, a five-room unit, there rn'ere 9,015 feet of framing and sheathing lumber. Of this, 2,640 feet, or approximately 29 per cent, should have been odd

(Continued on l'ige 38)