Economics of Harvesting 4" DBH trees.

[SteveB]

4" are prety small to be marking, although in an ideal silvicultural world it makes sense to remove undesirables of any size.  Operationally, it would be much better to get them with brush saws before they get to this size.  I would imagine cutting these minni sticks would totally kill single grip productivity, not quite so bad for bnchers, but still not ideal.  When I did markign we went to about about 6-8".  About 20-22$/acre for hardwood selection or w pine shelterwood is about the norm in Ontario.  That includes boundaries but no trial layout (not sure why gov. go to the trouble of insisting marking the trees but not trails?).  About 5ha/12acres is reasonable for experinced markers under these conditions.  Paint cost is not included in price, transport, other equipment is.  The most I ever got extra for overnight was about 2$/acre for staying overnight, but you could usually increase your production substantially if staying right there.

[jayfed]

The company I work for pays me an good hourly rate and assigns me annual budget which they have willingly bumped up as needed towards the year end.  They pay travel one way on the same hourly basis + time getting back to the nearest county road after the day is done.  If I stay overnight, I convert the room cost into 'work hours'.  I also pro-rate the travel and motel hours based on 'Marking' or 'Other' so that a more accurate picture of the marking cost per acre is obtained.  From this I obtain my average cost of marking 4" material within a sawlog / pole stand (with opposing marks and stump marks for 10" DBH+) of ~$15 / acre.  A more 'poley' stand would definitingly be nearer to the $18-20 range.   If it is a pure pole stand, which is rare in our area, then the leave trees are marked . Even though one marks less leave trees, it takes almost as long as the log / pole stands because of the decision time needed to chose those crop trees.  Our jobbers actually prefer having the trees marked.  The company will, however, let the better jobbers go on their own in poor stands where a 'bad' choice would not really be notice this time through the woods.
Jay F.

[SwampDonkey]

Looks like we are all in the same ball park to me. If anyone wants to try to do it for less, they won't be your competition for long. I know some of these industrial giants like to play the numbers game and I'de rather walk away than work for nothing.

[Ron Wenrich]

I'd say that rate would probably stick around here, but no one is marking pulp.  They've been marking sawtimber only in most stands.  Norm is 200-250 trees/day or about 40-50 Mbf.  I used to have a rate of $8/Mbf for sale setup.

[SwampDonkey]

We have such a large volume of hardwood pulp, that if we just marked hardwood sawlogs, your better off clearcutting it. Otherwise you are left with junk and junk can only grow into bigger junk. Our sawlogs in softwood have a higher percentage of the volume.

[jayfed]

It appears that from a marking and harvesting perspective within a pole / sawlog stand, a few 4" trees near other larger trees is a doable concern. Whether it's really economical is highly debatable.  A pure pole stand seems to be a more optimal area of operation if the leave trees are marked and the harvesting equipment is geared towards smaller diameter stock. Trucking's main concern is probably the handling if there is a noticeable amount of small material which rarely handles well unless there is a small diameter spread among the sticks.  At the mill end there is likely little concern if there is a biofuel outlet.  If they did not have this biofuel option, I wonder if they would even want the 4-3"material. Until last year, 4" trees were considered operational trees and were not marked.   I spoke to one of the company foresters this week and even he thinks that the multiple-stage economics of the 4" wood is dubious.  To me, the 4 " limit makes the marking almost drudgery.  When I worked with Mead in the days of cable skidders and marking down to 8 "( if that tree was close to another tree), I could mark 40 acres a day. Along came the personally 'dreaded' 6" marking because of mechanization.  My marking acreage went down to 20-25 acres a day.  Eventually, I could see some benefits to the 6" marking, yet I thought the woods were taking more of a beating with the larger and heavier skidders damaging more roots. Now I am lucky to get to 17-20 acres a day on flat ground.  Thanks for the comments, folks!   Jay F.

[jrdwyer]

I'm in the land of chansaws and grapple/cable skidders. Timber harvesters are just starting to make an impact with several of the timber buyers and loggers.

With a selective harvest, I obviously mark the pulpwood that will be  destroyed by the larger sawtimber when it is felled. My current limit is 6" DBH due to the fact that those with the timber harvesters can cut them profitabliy. If you go below 6",  the merchantable height is generally too short. Even with clearcuts, 6" is generally the economic limit in this area for hardwoods. Not a true clearcut when all is done, but it is reasonably close in most stands.

Our pulpwood markets are pretty weak with only two papermills and one takes chips only.

I have had light selectively marked timber sales with valuable sawtimber where the high bidder doesn't even mess with the pulpwood that is marked.  I attempt to get some of the poor quality pulpwood sized trees, culls, grapevines, etc. through TSI.

Prior to timber harvesters, I use to limit marking to 8" DBH and even then the smaller stuff was often left in the woods.

[SteveB]

I think it's reeally good to make sure the small stuff that should be cut is cut.  man of the degraded stands we harvest today are the result of poor forestry practices including high grading and diameter limit cutting.  If it's diseased or old and suppressed it should go, even if it's small.  Mind you, people can't be expected to do silviculture work for free while harvesting.  If it's too small to be economical to pull out and use (basically won't be scaled), there should be some type of payment program (ie. per/ha improvement fee) paid to loggers to fall small crappy stuff.  If I was writing up a contract for my woodlot to be harvested, I would make sure that it is very clear that even the small unacceptable stuff is cut.  It has to be set up so that payment isn't made unless everything that you wanted cut gets cut.  On crown land in any place i've worked in eastern canada you are required to cut eveything that's marked... or else.  I know that the large heavy handed companies working on crown land arent' too popular sometimes, but the fact that you can tell a contractor the he's either getting on the float to go back and clean up the second half of the job he didn't properly finish, or he's going home (and not to another crown job) is a good thing.  I know the rates aren't great, but you can't sign up to do a job, do half of it, and then say that the rate's too crappy to do the rest properly.  Most in the game should be experinced enough and plann ahead to look over the land ahead of time (not when the machine's sitting idle at 100$/hr) and make the decision wether they can economically do the job properly (as always, good planning, including that done on the part of the logging contractor is key).  Of course, the comany managing the forest should also be plannign ahead enough to give the loggers a good idea of where they're going next so that everyone can plan ahead appropriately (too many times this is where everyone looses money).  Weather is hard to plan around, but you can at least always depend on weather being unpredicatble, ane the one thing you can count on is plan B (and C-Z) being used form time to time.