Table 1.--Salt (NaCl) in bark of salt-water-transported logs
| Species and weeks in sea |
NaCl | ||
| Log No. 1 | Log No. 2 | Log No. 3 | |
| - - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - - - - |
| Douglas-fir: | ||||
| 3 | 0.48 | 0.45 | 1.32 | |
| 6 | .52 | 2.22 | .74 | |
| 12 | .96 | 2.04 | 1.11 | |
| 25 | 1.23 | -- | 1.59 | |
| Western hemlock: | ||||
| 2 | 1.06 | 1.05 | 1.07 | |
| 6 | 1.54 | 2.06 | 1.98 | |
| 12 | -- | 2.45 | 3.50 | |
| 25 | -- | 3.27 | -- | |
| Western redcedar: | ||||
| 2 | 1.58 | 1.79 | 1.74 | |
| 6 | 2.59 | 2.44 | 2.98 | |
| 12 | 3.36 | 3.50 | 2.84 | |
| 25 | -- | 1.46 | 2.00 | |
Source: MacLean, H., and B. F. MacDonald (1968). Salt distribution in sea-water transported logs. Inform. Rep. VP-X-45, 23 p. Forest Prod. Lab., Vancouver, B.C.
Table 2.--Salt (NaCl) in bark from salt-water-floated sample logs
| Sample number and species |
Total time rafted[1] | Time stored in salt water |
NaCl | |
| Investigator's analysis |
Commercial laboratory analysis | |||
| --Months-- | --Days-- | ------------Percent------------ |
| 1, Douglas-fir | 2 | 14 | 0.75 | 0.65 |
| 2, Hemlock | 2 | 70 | 1.16 | .98 |
| 3, Douglas-fir | 4 | 75 | 1.56 | 1.23 |
| 4, Hemlock | 12 | 20 | 1.27 | 1.31 |
| 5, Douglas-fir | 11 | 15 | .88 | .86 |
| 6, Hemlock | 11 | 20 | 1.29 | 1.14 |
| 7, Douglas-fir | 16 | 15 | .80 | .70 |
| 8, Douglas-fir | -- | -- | .92 | .80 |
| 9, Douglas-fir | -- | -- | .98 | 1.17 |
| 10, Douglas-fir | -- | -- | 1.94 | 1.80 |
| 11, Douglas-fir | -- | -- | 1.41 | 1.42 |
| 12, Douglas-fir | -- | -- | .86 | .85 |
| 13, Douglas-fir | -- | -- | 1.44 | 1.31 |
| 14, Douglas-fir | -- | -- | 1.63 | 1.72 |
- ↑ In brackish water at mill.
2
