Consulting foresters' choice of scale

[Frickman]

In my area, Southwestern Pennsylvania, the Doyle log scale is the most prevelant scale used. For those of us who are actually cutting wood on a commercial basis it is the only scale we use. There are many consulting foresters running around marking timber who put out tracts for bid using the Scribner and International 1/4 scales. Most consulting foresters working for the landowner use these two scales. Why? Is it to get a higher number to show the landowner? Or is it because that is what they were told to use back when they were in forestry school?

Now I don't want to get into a big discussion about the merits of all the scales. That's been done before. Most everyone in the industry in my corner of the world understands the differences between them. We price everything according to Doyle. Yes, we can multiply Scribner or International by a certain percentage and come up with Doyle, I know that. And I can only pay so much for a log or tree, regardless of the scale. If it is measured in International I will be paying a lower price per board foot than in Doyle. Still the same price for the log or tree, no matter what the scale. Why can't the consulting foresters just measure trees with the scale that is standard in this area? It would make things alot easier on the folks actually cutting the wood.

[Ron Wenrich]

When I was doing marking, we would always talk to the landowner in International scale.  Our prices were on that scale, and most of the state foresters were working on that scale.  The state has since converted to their own scale, which makes it interesting in those areas.  International was the prevalent scale when I was in college.

But, when I put out bid sheets, I always put on 2 scales - Doyle and International.  If I was in an area that Scribner was also used, then I would put Scribner on instead of International.  But, I had a background with mills, and I scaled and graded logs before I marked timber.  So, I knew that loggers wanted mainly the Doyle scale.

Consultants that ignore the prevalent scale used in the marketing of logs aren't doing a good service for the buyer.  With today's computers, its really pretty simple compared to back when we would grind things out with a calculator then go and type out the bid prospectus. 

[beenthere]

If the bdft volume of lumber in a log(s) is of interest, use the International scale. Also knowing the estimated volume in Doyle will give the landowner an idea what the buyer (if he buys on Doyle) will be paying.

As pointed out, the price will adjust the differences.

Depends on what volume in bdft is of interest. International will be closer to what is (or should be) sawn out of the logs.

Both scale estimates would be important information to know, as Ron points out.

Frickman:  What information would you like to have?  A close estimate of board footage in a log? Or what a log buyer will say are in your logs for which he will pay xx dollars a thousand?

[Frickman]

beenthere,

All I am looking for is consistency. I buy timber and logs, and sometimes lumber, and sell logs and lumber. I cut timber and mill logs, everything from the stump to ready to go into the kiln. I do a little air drying and planing too. I'm fifth generation, at least, in the business, and have no problem with understanding the scales and what a log will saw out. All I'm looking for is for the foresters who are measuring and marketing timber to use the same scale that the industry uses in my area. We're the ones who are utilizing the trees that they mark. It's like Ron said that they are doing a disservice to the landowner. It's almost like we're buying in gallons and they're selling in liters. There's nothing wrong with either, just use the same system that the industry uses.

[beenthere]

But, when I put out bid sheets, I always put on 2 scales - Doyle and International.

I agree with what Ron said. 

It's almost like we're buying in gallons and they're selling in liters.

The units for both scales are estimates in board feet.  But then, somewheres they do use cubic feet and cubic meters.   

Over the years, in my recollection, there have been attempts to get just one scale. But, there are those that just won't give up the scale they want to use.   I think some states have decided on an official scale...

I'm not trying to win anyone over to one or the other..just some reasons why several might exist. Doyle, International, and Scribner log scale rules are just the tip of the iceberg too.   

Now dealing with wood, softwood/hardwood log grades, lumber grades, pulp wood measure, firewood cord measure,
and a host of other estimates of volume or quality can take on a multitude of different 'rules' or customs between different users, sellers, and buyers. The value paid sorts a lot of that out, IF the buyer and seller both realize what is really being bought and sold.  That can be a big IF, seems to me anyways.

Buy on Doyle and sell on International. 

[Frickman]

beenthere,

The buyers and sellers, at least the ones doing the actual cutting, understand the scales and realize what is being bought and sold. Our prices reflect that. My region uses just Doyle scale because it always has and we're too stubborn to change. It'd take a long time too. So we just stick with Doyle and everyone is happy with it. Until I get a prospectus from some forester that's measured in International 1/4. Then I spend alot of time converting all the volumes to Doyle. I have to do a lot more thinking with International too. I don't use it everyday so I have to make sure I don't screw up something and cost myself a lot of money.

I've only ever traded in Scribner or International a few times, and that was with veneer buyers. They had their prices set to Scribner or International and that was fine. The actual veneer selling process, grading, scaling, and trimming logs,  has a slow enough pace that I can use my Doyle stick and calculator to convert all the numbers to Doyle. It's bidding on timber in another scale that gives me fits. The timber buyers are the landowner and forester's customers, why can't they just use the same scale we use?

[jrdwyer]

The mills in this area use Doyle scale and so I measure trees and logs in Doyle. As I only sell timber on a lump sum basis and not by the unit, the scale used does not determine the overall value of a tract of timber.

Even with Doyle, different Consulting Foresters use different minimum size standards. So a forester who measures to a 12" top DIB will show less volume than one who measures to 8" or 10" top for sawtimber. I had one buyer get quite upset with me when Doyle log scale of a tract he bought came out the same as Doyle tree scale. He was used to buying from others who typically under scaled by 30%. He never asked me any questions about how I measure trees before he bid, so I did not feel that bad about it. He apparently got over it, because he has bid again on my sales. From that point on, I have made it a point to always list minimum measuring specs and form class used so that new buyers know how I do things.

Landowners have contacted me about timber sales that were sold on the shares and by the unit (where it went bad) who feel they have been ripped off by mills because they have learned how Doyle tree/log scale underestimates sawn volume. I try to explain to them that in a competitive situation for either timber or logs, the Doyle price is the true value of the product. Unfortunately, many of those who contact me in such circumstances did not sell the timber in a way that maximized the price. By this point in time, they typically don't want to hear what I have to say and it is usually a lost cause.

On the same subject, do you buy any Forest Service timber measured in ccf and what do you think about this?

[Clark]

...I think some states have decided on an official scale...

You mean, like Wisconsin!  Unless otherwise noted, all bd-ft. volumes in a WI timber sale are presumed to be in Scribner decimal C.  So my sources tell me...

Trying to get a standard set would be like converting the US to metric.  Sure it's happening, but it's taking a long time.  In '75, '88, '91 and '94 there have been significant laws implemented to "make" the US convert to metric.

Clark

[Frickman]

I don't buy any Forest Service timber, there is none around here. There is some state timber that is sold, but I've never bid on it for various reasons. I only buy private timber, as it is the most abundant in my area.

I just got a prospectus scaled in International down to a nine inch top, and topwood down to a three inch top. In our eastern hardwoods it is generally unfeasible to saw smaller than ten inches and to pull out topwood smaller than six inches. In some straight tulip poplar or soft maple you might pull out down to four inches, but you will rarely go that small in twisted up oak tops. Alot of topwood is left because it is too gnarly to pull out and load on a truck. Now this is a lump sum sale, so you can figure out the topwood however you want. With the conversion factor to Doyle of about 71% and how far up the tree was scaled I'm guessing that it will actually cut out in Doyle about 60% of the stated volume.

[Brian_Rhoad]

I was informed by a log buyer with many years experience that the official scale in PA is the Doyle scale. International, Doyle and Scribner are all used here in Central PA.

[Frickman]

Brian,

Somebody was yanking your chain. There is no official anything in PA when it comes to the hardwood industry. One of the great things about the industry in this state is that we are self regulating. There is no bureau of weights and measures to tell us what a board foot is, the difference between a number one log and number two log, etc. You don't need a liscense to cut timber, buy logs, sell logs, saw logs, or even call yourself a forester. The free market helps regulate everything it all works pretty good. If we could just get some foresters on the same page as the rest of us I'd be a lot happier.

[jrdwyer]

I generally measure to a 10" DIB top for sawtimber. I measure pulpwood trees that will be destroyed by the larger ones. I don't measure topwood that could be utilized for pulp or firewood. This may change in the future if greater utilization for energy starts to occur.

Most of the buyers in this area are still chainsaw/ skidder and so don't mess with topwood or pulpwood trees because it is not worth their time. We do have a few buyers with timbco machines and they cut it tight, probably down to 3" top DIB. Because of the reductions in sawmill output, the one local paper mill has become more desperate for chips and one timber buyer is chipping at the woods for direct shipment to the mill.

[Ron Wenrich]

I never bothered too much with trying to figure out whether it was an 8" top or a 12" top.  When you're cutting hardwoods, they don't always drop the way you expect them too, and those tops get busted up.  Trying to get logs out of limbwood is a losing proposition.  I scale a tree to where the top breaks up, unless it has something that looks like it will sustain the fall.

What I have seen guys do is cull out a bunch of trees or underscale those miscellaneous species.  That gives them some padding for when they overscale the better stuff.  One forester will cull out all the miscellaneous species, whether they are good or bad.

I've also run into those guys that like that 30% overrun.  The only business the forester has is to give an honest estimation of the amount of timber that is there.  His scale should be close to the actual harvest.  If its too high or too low, then he needs to adjust his scaling techniques.  Mine have always been close, but allowed for an overrun. 

There is no official scale in PA.  I know of mills that buy on International, Scribner and Doyle.  Some even buy some logs on one scale, and other logs on a different scale.  The state uses the International scale on their timber sales. 

[Brian_Rhoad]

By "official" he/I meant what is used by the court system when settling cases.

[jrdwyer]

I should clarify, I only measure to a 10" DIB top if it is a straight main bole (common with tulip or sweetgum, as examples). With heavily branched oaks, the top diameter could easily be greater than 10" and the branchwood wouldn't be measured.

[jrdwyer]

On the subject of miscellaneous species, I am a splitter and separate all species. My reason for this is that even a lowly beech could possibly be worth more than tie log prices to a mill like Frank Miller who is a big quartersawn player. I know some of my buyers sell into the QS market. The same story could be applied to some miscellaneous species for veneer. Indiana has great veneer markets!

[Ron Wenrich]

We've been selling black birch as veneer, as well as hickory.  We even sold some large sycamore for near veneer prices. 

[cheyenne]

O.K. color me Dumb. Why isn't there just one scale so everyones on the same page. ...Cheyenne

[woodtroll]

Scales are just estimations of volume. They try to adjust for taper, form and kerf. These are all different in different areas. So to come up with an accurate way to estimate volume of standing trees someone(s) came up with these calculations. Well, after they came up with them some other people thought they were not accurate for their use and came up with new calculations. And so on. That's what happens when you let mathematicians in forestry. In measurements classes they will tell you repeatedly how one scale will rip off the landowner, or is misleading. But If you all are consistent and bidding on the same trees it would not matter. It is an estimate. So If I am selling 100 trees I estimate each to have 250 bdft ave. and you come in and know you have a special market for the top wood, bid the price up. If your mill has a band saw and small kerf you know you can get more. You know soon learn that you can always get 30% more then the Doyle scale. Or which ever scale you use.
I have not seen any one perfect scale for all situations. The markets and trees are to diverse across our wonderful country.

So my short opinion is no one is getting ripped of by the scale if everyone is using the same one on a sale.

[Ron Wenrich]

I'd even take it a step further as no two foresters will scale a woodlot the same, and even the same forester wouldn't scale it the same twice.

Lump sum bids do away with value per bf. 

[Ron Scott]

Understanding Log Scales and Log Rules

http://www.utextension.utk.edu/publications/pbfiles/Pb1650.pdf

[SwampDonkey]

Then along comes the softwood of the far NE.

In NB we scale softwood and hardwood logs on NB Rule. If we have US markets it's Bangor Rule, softwood sawlogs and hardwood veneer. On Both sides of the border the mills buy pulp on tonnage and the price is differentiated based on aspen, birch, hardwood and softwood and trucking zones. All woodlot owners and loggers want to know volume in cords and those figures for NB are based on NB standardized volume equations developed from different sites. We aren't just measuring volume in our cruises to high grade out logs, we use everything down to as small as 4", limbs to. Some mills buy wood with 2-1/2" tops. I don't know anyone in NB cruising just for saw logs, they wouldn't last too long in the business because our markets are so diverse and total utilization is a must to survive.

[Brian Beauchamp]

There are many consulting foresters running around marking timber who put out tracts for bid using the Scribner and International 1/4 scales. Most consulting foresters working for the landowner use these two scales. Why? Is it to get a higher number to show the landowner? Or is it because that is what they were told to use back when they were in forestry school?


If it is measured in International I will be paying a lower price per board foot than in Doyle. Still the same price for the log or tree, no matter what the scale. Why can't the consulting foresters just measure trees with the scale that is standard in this area? It would make things a lot easier on the folks actually cutting the wood.

We do it just to mess with people.

Actually, I give the footages in all 3 of those scales as well as a tonnage. I agree with your analysis that a tree has a value and price should be adjusted for the scale used though. I use that same concept when calculating stumpage values for each scale. Have to have that in your mind when markets buy on different standards.

As far as 'why', it may be because they compare their cut-out accuracy and the scales they give are the most accurate for their tendencies in measurement. I'd suggest asking the individual forester next time and compare what you actually cut out to the numbers that they gave you originally.

[Frickman]

Brian,

I won't share my numbers with a forester, of anyone else for that matter. What I cut out of a tract is my business, not their's. If I'm dealing directly with the landowner on a a pay as I cut sale I share everything with them, but noone else. The problem with a lot of our local consulting foresters, most of them in fact, is that they don't have a clue about anything in the forest products industry other than painting trees and looking up deeds at the courthouse. I know one who had been at it for over a decade, yet had never run a saw. Ever. How is he going to administer a sale when he has never actually worked in the business? I know some that I doubt have ever seen the insides of a sawmill. Yet they have a piece of paper from some forestry school somewhere and they think they are automatically a forester. And they're not afraid of bragging to landowners that they are a "degreed forester".

Alot of the volume numbers depend on your utilization. Some guys have good markets for pallet and blocking logs and push that over firewood. Some are doing real well at firewood and will run alot of blocking into it. I've seen some outfits cut the tree off at the first limb and leave the rest, while others clean up every scrap of firewood they can get.

If I start sharing information with a forester he may think he's underscaling the tracts and push the volumes even higher. I wish all foresters were like Ron W. and had a practical work background in the industry.

[SwampDonkey]

I won't share my numbers with a forester, or anyone else for that matter. What I cut out of a tract is my business, not their's. If I'm dealing directly with the landowner on a pay as I cut sale I share everything with them, but noone else.

Yup, and same with the fellow who cruises the timber. He should only share with who paid for the cruise. Cruises are estimations, but they should be reasonable. Don't expect cruises to be bang on 95 % of the time. Generally, the sample size is too small to ever be that confident. Believe me I've seen some wild numbers. Edge effect will toss the numbers for a loop to, also not knowing stand boundaries and size is a big influence. Is this a new stand? or should I group it in with this previous one? Or is this operable, can I access it to cut it?

The problem with a lot of our local consulting foresters, most of them in fact, is that they don't have a clue about anything in the forest products industry other than painting trees and looking up deeds at the courthouse. I know one who had been at it for over a decade, yet had never run a saw.

Strictly talking here on day one from graduation: They would have been in saw mills and pulp mills and veneer mills. But, most never worked in their operations unless through a relative and as a summer student. It's part of the learning process to ask questions and follow through the process at the mill even if they don't touch a piece of lumber.

I was somewhat lucky and worked my summers for mill owners, not in mills however. And also worked and later employed by our local forest products marketing board. I've worked with scalers on different products we sold through the board. I know how to read a scale stick and use our scales, even though I never ran a log through a mill. And I know balm-of-gilead from red oak sitting in a  pile.

But where cruising falls short is you can't say that sugar maple veneer tree is actually veneer with any confidence until it's severed. It's not sitting in a log pile with both ends opened up by a saw. As far as tree marking, it's based on basal area and external visual qualities and BMP's for that stand. No mill around here buys standing trees scaled, hearts sight unseen. A cruise and a log scale are not necessarily the same thing. Log scaling is just high grading the harvested timber. Not necessarily high grading the forest. Your not going to get the same volume from that saw log for lumber as your are going to get from the pulp content. You sell the saw dust, debarked slab wood and top wood and yes, it's closer.  As a logger your looking at a log, it's severed and then scaled. A cruise gives you total volume down to a minimum top size. The logger cuts for his markets. A seemingly decent veneer maple log could have 50 % heart and bumped to a low grade log that is worth not much more than it's pulpwood equivalent and you may not even use a lot of the wood around the heart as you would from a maple with clear heart or a yellow birch where heart is not a defect. I know it's tough in an area with limited markets and your forester should keep this is mind with his cruise. There is always firewood, but a guy can only deal with so much firewood, he would like to be busy cutting saw log and veneer material.

How is he going to administer a sale when he has never actually worked in the business? I know some that I doubt have ever seen the insides of a sawmill.

Although, it would be of great benefit to have had that experience. It is not the only way to get experience. You can also work with a procurement forester or a forest products association of some sort so you see the stick or tonnage scale coming off the cruise. The disadvantage however in doing that is not knowing the overrun or underrun  to compare the numbers. Most loggers won't say a word unless they have a sizable under run and most won't talk figures. When they don't talk and provide figures, they have no case with me.

Like the guy that doesn't need a compass, "I always walk straight lines in the woods".

If I start sharing information with a forester he may think he's underscaling the tracts and push the volumes even higher.

Maybe he is underscaling, although it doesn't sound it or you wouldn't be complaining.

I've been involved in one cruise where the guy, on nothing but gut feeling, said the volume wasn't there. A third party, that actually got the sale in the end, cut it and said the cruise was very good. And I've been thinning ground for this first guy for years now and he told me last spring I'm the only one that he'll allow to thin his ground. Both these loggers are buddies with one another and have sat as directors on our board.

So, there ya go, "the tale of two loggers", er three "and know nothing forester".

[Brian Beauchamp]

I won't share my numbers with a forester, of anyone else for that matter. What I cut out of a tract is my business, not theirs. If I'm dealing directly with the landowner on a a pay as I cut sale I share everything with them, but no one else.

Most of the loggers around here want to cut on shares, so it's pretty transparent as long as you can confirm that they are taking the logs where they are supposed to be taking them and not shaving loads somewhere. You must do a lot of lump-sum buys when dealing with foresters there. We (a collective foresters' "we") will ask, but it is up to you to share the information in that case. It is so we know that we are not cheating the landowner or the buyers. We have to be as close as we can to the actual value or someone is losing. If we scale low, the landowner loses. If we scale high, the buyer loses and may be reluctant to do business with us again.

A lot of the volume numbers depend on your utilization. Some guys have good markets for pallet and blocking logs and push that over firewood. Some are doing real well at firewood and will run a lot of blocking into it. I've seen some outfits cut the tree off at the first limb and leave the rest, while others clean up every scrap of firewood they can get.

I agree utilization depends on how well the markets are understood, but it is also a matter of deciding how much time it is worth to you. Unfortunately in my area, the loggers have tunnel vision when it comes to the available markets here. There are only a couple that even consider taking anything 'less' than pallet material. It makes it difficult to get proper forest management implemented sometimes when utilization of certain materials reduces profitability for a logger. I completely understand that though and do not blame a logger for making a sound business decision.

If I start sharing information with a forester he may think he's underscaling the tracts and push the volumes even higher. I wish all foresters were like Ron W. and had a practical work background in the industry.

It is our job as foresters to help the landowners make decisions and market their timber to the buyers. With your input, we can do a better job for both of you. It's not a competition; it's a business interaction. I have a lot of respect for honest loggers...they do a lot of dangerous work for very modest pay and they earn every penny they get. I want them to know what they are getting as accurately and as precisely as I may provide it to them, then they have more confidence in placing their bids. If they have markets and utilization ability beyond what has been tallied, great...I expect the offers will reflect those markets.

[Frickman]

Brian,

Every sale here that a forester is involved with is a lump sum, pay before you cut sale. That includes both public and private timber. This is all high or higher quality hardwood, no softwood. Every tree over 10" dbh is scaled and marked. Some of the larger sales will be broken up into blocks and you pay a certain percentage of the sale price before starting each block. The timber buyer takes all the risk on volume and quality. The sales prospectus will state that the volumes and quality listed are the forester's best judgement but are not guaranteed. The bidders are welcome and expected to scale the timber themselves. It is a good way to sell timber, especially larger tracts. The trees will be individually marked and everyone is bidding on the same thing, so it is a level playing field. I just wish that the foresters would keep score the same way the buyers are. They're counting touchdowns and we're counting home runs.

This sale works the best is if the forester and landowner determine the harvest prescription and then market what they want removed from the stand. If they are looking toward the future they can just mark everything they want gone and sell it to the highest responsible bidder. The buyer figures out how to market everything.

You say that this is not a competition, it is a business transaction. Yes it is a business transaction, but it is a competition too. And a fierce one at that. I'm trying to find the same timber the forester is and buy it outright from the landowner rather have it go through a forester. And not just to save some money. I have a personal policy of paying as much as I can for timber, not as little. It helps me find more tracts as my happy landowners spread the word about me. It's about doing what's right for the timber stand and the landowner. Now this is off the track of what this thread was originally about, but I know of only two consulting foresters who do not high grade/ diameter limit every tract. And one of those only works part time. They'll mark a few cull trees for show but mostly they high grade. So as much as loggers are sometimes bad mouthed for being all cut and run, slash for cash, and foresters are heralded as being the saviors of the forest, I've found the opposite to be true. I have logger friends who like me care about the future of the forest and the industry and are willing to make a little less money now in exchange for better, healthier timber in the future. Most, but not all, of the consulting foresters I know are in it for the quick cash and retirement in Florida in twenty years. They didn't come from a timber background, or even a rural background, and all they seem to know is what some professor told them in college. It's ok to not come from a timber background, not everyone has. But you better know the industry and local markets well before you start representing yourself to landowners as a professional consulting forester.

This isn't intended to be a rant, it's just the way I see things. I have bought alot of timber over the years, and intend to buy alot more. And I have looked at alot more than that, so I've seen what goes on. As soon as I learned to walk I was out with grandpa in the woods buying timber. Even way back then one of his biggest gripes was the sme thing, the foresters were using different scales than what the local industry used. Why can't they just get on the same page as the rest of the industry?

[SwampDonkey]

You can blame the forester for high grading, you can also question whether the landowner is knowledgeable about his practices or out for a buck to. It's hard to know sometimes. I can't imagine a landowner, who wants his ground managed properly, letting foresters and loggers leave all that top wood around and their woods ground high graded. I would assume the word would get around quick. Of course woodlot owners are awfully independent and figure what they do is nobody else's business and when things go wrong many are too embarrassed to say much especially when being advised to get help before hand.

[Ron Wenrich]

Its all about credentials and reputation.  I've heard all those stories about loggers who will trash your land and ruin your timber.  I can even give you names and tell you what truck they drive.  They don't buy timber from consultants, because most consultants know them as well.

But, the better loggers pay as much as you will get from a consultant, and they will leave a better job.  There's a lot of ways to trash a stand of wood.  Diameter limits is one of the easier ways to do it while telling the landowner you have their best interests at heart.

Landowners have swallowed the pill that only foresters can do them right.  Its a matter of credentials.  They have experience (although not all of it good), and they have the letters behind their name that some organization has said they were "certified".  Some have to pass a test to be licensed.  But, how many of them have ever had their work checked by anyone other than a logger? 

Passing the buck to the landowner is the easiest thing in the world.  A forester who claims that they do things a certain way because a landowner said so is taking the easy way out.  How many landowners really know what is best for their woodlot?   That's where being a professional comes in.  I only know of a few foresters that will walk off of a woodlot when the landowner doesn't want to do what he recommends.  Although the landowner owns the woodlot, I don't have to put my stamp on the way they want to manage it.

[SwampDonkey]

Forester's or technicians certified under an association that does not peer review isn't worth salt. The only association of professional foresters in Canada that I've heard of about a peer review process is the BC association. That's one reason I've never joined the NB association, there is no peer review. You write and pass a test, and your in for life. It's not much more than becoming a member of the Lion's club.


As far as doing the right thing by the landowner, well who's the boss? You offer advise, if it ain't taken, it's now the Forester's fault? Hmm. It's easy to walk away if the government is covering your pay cheque, if your on your own you might go hungry.

[SwampDonkey]

I'll add one more scenario to the mix, which is extremely common around here. One logger, usually a forester or technician in this case, will do a good stand improvement or use a selection system to remove the worst first and leave a good neat job behind. Goes onto his next job. Landowner calls up another logger in 2 months to come harvest the rest because he gets greedy or wants a new car. Or it's possible he gets coerced into thinking the previous logger high graded his woods, so he's told "you might as well cut the rest".

[Frickman]

Ron,

I walk away from alot of timber, both consultant and non-consultant timber, when I don't agree with a harvest prescription. No matter who ordered the harvest and laid out its parameters, my name will be attached to that woodlot for the next fifty years. People forget who the forester was and even who the landowner was, but they'll always remember that so and so logger who came in and destroyed the woods.

Swampdonkey,

That scenario has happened to me. I went in on one job and low-graded a nice stand of cherry. Took my time and didn't skin and bust up the residual stand. Fifteen years later it would have been a gorgeous woodlot with lots of veneer. The week after I left the landowner had someone else come in and clearcut everything I had left. I made money, so I didn't care much. It still broke my heart kind of though.

[Ron Wenrich]

As far as doing the right thing by the landowner, well who's the boss? You offer advise, if it ain't taken, it's now the Forester's fault? Hmm. It's easy to walk away if the government is covering your pay cheque, if your on your own you might go hungry.

If you mark it, you own the management, no matter who writes the check.

[jrdwyer]

Most consultants will accept jobs where landowners want a high grade because a majority of us work on commission. No mark, no sell, no eat!

In my previous job with the Kentucky Division of Forestry, I once marked a light selective harvest for a landowner which was paid for/subsidized by the citizens of Kentucky. The landowner sold the timber as a heavy high-grade (ignoring the time and effort I put in) to a logger who convinced him this was the most profitable way. This was a good lesson for me and also a statement about the folly of government subsidized forestry (the landowner did not have to reimburse the state of Kentucky).

I personally feel no remorse in marking a 14" diameter limit cut if that is what my client wants. If fact, I have a 9 acre sale just like this coming up. I still get my client the highest market price up front, write and administer the contract, and make sure the property is protected from damage throughout the process. Believe me, this is much, much better than a share timber sale where the receipts are disputed after the fact and ruts 2 feet deep are left on the property. If you don't think this happens, then you need to take a trip to western Kentucky and I can show you some examples.

Most ethical consultants will explain to landowners all the options available. Long-term timber management is not often the choice of landowners looking to cash out and then sell the land. It is the choice for many landowners like farmers and families who want to keep the woods healthy, productive, and valuable over the long haul.

I do know other consultants who seem to always have timber for sale with very high volumes per acre which could indicate a high-grade. Is this their ability to persuade landowners to high-grade or just the desires of many landowners? Probably a combination of the two.

It is a very competitive and challenging game, but in the end consulting foresters offer value above and beyond the commission rate they charge.

[Ron Wenrich]

It is a very competitive and challenging game, but in the end consulting foresters offer value above and beyond the commission rate they charge.

I've seen that statement used quite a bit by many consultants.  I guess a lot depends on what you call value.  Its a lot different when you are on the procurement side, and you have to prepare a bid.  Any time you bid on timber you are up against other mills. 

[SwampDonkey]

And I wonder how many mills procuring volumes from private land visit my woodlot to see how I'm managing it. In my circumstances, none of them. The large industrial mills around, have their own freehold and crown. They don't need to buy my wood. The smaller mills have a sublicense for crown volumes from the bigger players and their own wood ground as well. There must be lots to go around, since they are exporting round wood steady. We have one local mill here that is softwood only. They will buy up private woodlots, flatten them, no exceptions, and if it's hardwood ground they won't do any silviculture on it. If the regrowth is poor they will reforest some with spruce. I understand they have a budget to operate on like any mill. You can only spend on silviculture based on what your net profits are. They hire most of the cutting by independent loggers.

[jrdwyer]

"I guess a lot depends on what you call value."

A recent timber sale I completed and sold will sum it up nicely. Selective marking with long-term timber management as the main goal of client. Stand selectively marked (100% mark and measure) and AGGRESSIVELY marketed to over 60 buyers. 5 bids received with the price variation of 220% from high to low bid and 52% from #1 bid to #2 bid. I cannot say the high bidder overbid as these guys have been in this business since the early 1950s with their dad in the business before that. The other bidders were probably too conservative with their pricing of walnut veneer. Walnut veneer logs can vary from $1-$20/bf depending on size/grade, who buys it, and when it's bought.

So I did my job and the client got the top price (paid upfront) and that alone covers the commission.

Above and beyond, they will get an improved woodland with cull and partially cull trees cut down and/or deadened (some TSI may be required) which will result in higher rates of growth and value in the future. BMPs will be followed during the sale to ensure the site is protected and the soils stay productive. Finally, a good growing stock of healthy timber (remember I looked at each and every leave tree to gauge its health) is being left for harvest 15-20 years down the road.

I hope this sums up the value a good consulting forester can provide to a landowner.

[Ron Wenrich]

That's not really a good comparison.  You've taken one of your sales, and judged all buyers by the outcome.  I might point out that 90% of the potential buyers didn't participate, and that market conditions are pretty flat.

A better comparison is where a landowner had several mills give offers on timber and where a consultant sold that timber for a higher dollar value than the mills were offering.

My point in buying timber is that a lot of factors go into the sale bid.  It doesn't matter if there is another competitive buyer or not.  Bottom feeders bid on sales just to see what the sale price is.  They have no interest in buying the timber, but will take if for a low bid.  Top bidders will buy timber to keep others out of their area, they need the timber, or they are willing to pay a premium for some other factor.

[jrdwyer]

Ron,

I used this sale because it was the most recent (2009) and fresh in my head. It is a valid example and explains how one should never underestimate what the market can pay, even when conditions seem poor. I can't disclose prices per bf or per acre for this sale because of client confidentiality, but the price received was above my expectation and above published averages for high quality stumpage sales in Indiana for 2008.

Although I only received 5 bids on this sale due to its limited total volume, many more buyers did look at the timber. I would never underestimate the fact that buyer A seeing buyer B or buyer C on site could potentially influence his or her bid on the timber. Even on highly desirable sales, I usually only receive 8-12 bids out of 60 or so potential bidders. This does not mean that the client is not receiving the highest market price, rather all the competitive buyers who want to bid are bidding. If a buyer can find less expensive timber elsewhere without bidding, then so be it.

Over the years, I have had numerous sales where a timber buyer approached the landowner prior to me being involved and made an offer on some or all of the timber. I have even had a case where different timber buyers made offers one after another and they each spent their time marking and measuring different trees. It was no wonder that buyer #2 had a higher offer than buyer #1. The landowner in this case (an absentee) did not even realize this fact until I pointed it out to him. In all of these scenarios,  I sold the timber for significantly more than the buyers initially offered. All consultants have such stories to tell, as it is very common.

Competition amongst buyers for a well-defined resource DOES result in higher prices being paid to the seller. This applies to trees, land, or any product. The more scarce/unique the resource or product, the higher the potential for gains to a seller and/or agent who uses good sales and marketing techniques.

Many landowners know very little about timber and its value or how to properly market trees for sale. Why then would a landowner trust the opinion of buyer who makes an unsolicited offer on some or all of the trees? Why would a landowner assume that a buyer is qualified to manage their forest? The independence of a consulting forester, especially one with good credentials and who can actually manage a woodland, offers a desirable middle ground to many landowners.

"A better comparison is where a landowner had several mills give offers on timber and where a consultant sold that timber for a higher dollar value than the mills were offering."

Not sure what you are getting at, but a if you mean a comparison between prices paid to landowners with and without a consultant involved, then please refer to this study:

Valuation of Consulting Foresters'
Contribution to Timber Sale Prices

by
Ian A. Munn
Department of Forestry
Mississippi State University
Mississippi, 39762-9681

and
E. Carlyle Franklin
Woodlot Forestry Research and Development
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8006

In high quality hardwood stands, I would say this study underestimates the value consulting foresters can provide to landowners.

Joe Dwyer

[Samuel]

Forester's or technicians certified under an association that does not peer review isn't worth salt. The only association of professional foresters in Canada that I've heard of about a peer review process is the BC association.

Alberta has one also.

[cheyenne]

O.K. I'm still dumb I've read through this thread ten times and I don't see where anyone has answered the question. Why can't we all use the same scale or is it the fact of money..Scale to the landowner..verus...scale to the buyer...verus scale to the the mill..yadda..yaddda...yadda....Cheyenne