Bad Forestry

[PAFaller]

This is another one for you seasoned vets, because I'm guessing most of you have seen more acres of bad management than good. How do you explain politely without hurting any feelings the truth about past bad practices? There is certainly no shortage of cutover woods here in PA, and many times it was a standard diameter limit harvest. Is it worth pointing out why that was a bad choice, or just face the management tasks before you? I am trying to find a happy median that makes a landowner aware but then again doesnt put them down or belittle them for doing the wrong thing 15 years ago. Any ideas? Thanks

[Tom]

As long as you are in control now, criticizing what they did 15 years ago won't do anything but put you two on different sides of the fence.

The time to discuss failed management is when they bring the subject up, not as an addendum to another subject.   Even then your marketing sense should tell you that silence is golden.  Usually the safer words are along the lines of  " that wouldn't have been my choice".

Being critical of a man's ways, especially when you can do nothing about it, is not conducive to generating a good business relationship.

My opinion.

[Ianab]

I wouldn't push the issue, but it doesn't hurt to explain why you have set up the new management plan the way you have.

Why are you leaving trees that could be harvested? Seed, shelter, future harvest?
Why are you removing trees that have little value? Rubbish thats just taking up space?
Removing some species and not others?
How have you planned for regeneration and the next harvest?

You need not make the point that the previous management was poor, you just point out the advantages of the new plan.

The landowner learns something, and if they draw the conclusion that the previous cutting plans were not ideal, well they can quietly come to that conclusion on their own.

Ian

[Samuel]

This is another one for you seasoned vets, because I'm guessing most of you have seen more acres of bad management than good. How do you explain politely without hurting any feelings the truth about past bad practices? There is certainly no shortage of cutover woods here in PA, and many times it was a standard diameter limit harvest. Is it worth pointing out why that was a bad choice, or just face the management tasks before you? I am trying to find a happy median that makes a landowner aware but then again doesnt put them down or belittle them for doing the wrong thing 15 years ago. Any ideas? Thanks

First of all, was it bad FM, or just perceived to be?  If its his land he can so choose to screw it up any way he wants to, unless he is impacting riparian areas and downstream water quality, especially in community watersheds.  As far as a FM plan goes, you work with what you got, not what you don't have.  No different than say a large company like ours, managing almost 3 million hectares of land and a fire sweeps through one dry season and destroys a planned harvest area.  Well we just adjust our plans, strategies and move on.

Like Tom said, its very easy to ruin a relationship before it started.  Knowing nothing about the situation, but having dealt with oland owners and older loggers, I have also learned to conduct myself in such a manner that wouldn't seem like I was the know it all, especially with them having 30-40 years experience.  It was trial by fire but nonetheless, take Tom's advice.

[Ron Wenrich]

I have mixed feelings on this.  If you're walking through the woods, you can point out certain aspects that have been brought about by the past management practices.  Be prepared to hear the excuse of "that's the way we've always done it".  Its pretty hard to bring about your point of view when you're up against pappy's wisdom.

You can then go and tell them about how you plan to do things and avoid the pitfalls.  You need something to back you up, and visuals are a good way to go. 

I once did a presentation for a bunch of 5th graders on forest management.  It was a captive audience, and really hard to get or keep their attention.  My visual aid was a cookie off of a log.  I could go back through the tree rings and show previous releases in the stand, and even could point to when the gypsy moth came through.  Few of the kids were impressed, but the teacher loved it and kept the cookie for future reference.  Put a couple of those in your truck for show and tell for the landowner. 

Diameter limit cutting is for the now.  It maximizes today's return by high grading the stand.  There is little concern about the future.  Your style of management is more about the future, and less about the now.  It maximizes the return on the stand at some future date.  Not all landowners see their forest as an investment, but more as an asset that can be liquidated. 

[WDH]

The landowner's objective is key to what is good or bad.  Understanding the landowner's objective helps to frame the discussion about past practices and what needs to be done without appearing critical.

[SwampDonkey]

When a landowner asks my opinion on how they did for recent management activity I'm never afraid to give it, even if it was negative, and explain why. Most generally the landowner has his/her ways, all I can do is give some additional advise or options. Sometimes they listen, most times they don't. It is common practice in these parts to liquidate and sell stumpage based on the plan cruise. Since plans are no longer being paid for by the local marketing board and government, they are rarely requested. Speaks volumes about attitudes. Most of the time, not always, it was a logger involved to get that free cruise information. They were the next fellow through the landowners door. For a time we had a couple new plan compilers. We started getting complaints when the cruise and the harvest didn't jive. Sometimes when I looked at the sights it was obvious the compiler never was there. But, it sure revealed what the plans were used for.

[woodtroll]

What were the objectives 15 years ago? Some times the owner needs the forest to pay. Is it always done the we would do it? No. You have to pick up from where you come in, teach good forestry and still reach the landowners goals. Be subtle in your explaining about the past. Explain how you are going to improve now and what it will do for the future.

[madhatte]

The time to discuss failed management is when they bring the subject up, not as an addendum to another subject.   Even then your marketing sense should tell you that silence is golden.  Usually the safer words are along the lines of  " that wouldn't have been my choice".

That right there is the best advice I've heard in quite awhile. 

[Stephen Alford]

   Just a couple of observations ; percieved good forestry (time will judge)is about meeting needs  or objectives as WDH pointed out. This has to be expanded to not only the landowner but the contractor,the forester and the land itself as well.  The key here is insight which can only come from identifing the trigger events for all stakeholders.
  For example the landowner : one event I see alot is a death in the family ,this is a time for compassion, during emotional times decisions may not have clarity and can change quickly. Ownership issues etc.,large financial  needs,   you have  to know why the landowner has decided to act at this point on the time line.
   The contractor: how did he get this particular job, married to landowners daughter? has large payment due on friday? doing property adjacent and can't find the line so wants to cut both properties , environmentalist and wants to save the reparian zone. etc
  The Forester: just followed girlfriend here, left reputation friends behind has to start new ,driven to do it right etc.
  The land; past interactions with man, fires, soils, species ,topography,etc.
All these trigger events have to be integrated into the foundation  before you start to build your "management plan" . It is a challenge but that is what makes it so interesting. 

[Phorester]

I run into this quandry on just about every management plan I write, unfortunately.  I handle it by stating the facts of the current forest.  I take increment borings and show the landowner the growth rates, talk about the soil type there and what trees it is best suited for growing,  point to defect in the existing trees, talk about commercial value by tree species, that they have more low value tree species that higher value ones. If I feel that another timber harvest is needed, I talk in terms of how to handle a future harvest, not how the last one or the last few were handled. That the result of a diameter limit cut is that it takes out the fastest growing trees and leaves the slowest. So it removes the healthiest trees and leaves the unhealthiest. That highgrading gets you more money up front, but reduces the entire income stream from the property for the future. That a timber sale should really be about the trees that are left, not the trees that are cut.  That, in this section of the property, there are really no good quality trees to choose from anymore, so the best thing to do is to create a healthier, more valuable  forest by clearcutting the existing poor quality forest and properly managing the new one that comes up.

 I talk about how a timber sale ought to be part of an overall management plan for the property, that it influences the makeup of the future forest there,  and should not be an end unto itself.  That harvesting timber is not the goal itself, it is a means to reach a goal.  That timber harvests should be set up and used to create a healthier forest, better wildlife habitat, a better forest to pass on their heirs, etc.

So I'm not directly running down their own decisions of the last harvest or that their uncle or dad did 25 years ago.  I'm talking about how the next harvest should be handled. Just explaining the current forest situation and how to improve it for whatever their current objectives are.   Quite often they come to the realization on their own that the wrong trees were taken out in the last few harvests.

[JimMartin9999]

It depends on how that management took  place.  Did the landowner just sign a logger´s contract for a diameter cut or did he , like I did , contract with a consulting forester who basically  high graded the woods.  The former is dumb: the second is fraud.
I told a forester I wanted an improvement cut thirty years ago and wanted to manage the woods in the best possible way taking a harvest every ten to fifteen years for the rest of my life and then hand over the woods to my son.
He high-graded it and I am still waiting for the second cut.  He said later he had done it that way because he could get a good price for red  oak but not for hemlock.  If  the other foresters who saw the job, say from the DEC, had told me   there had been a hose job done on that first sale, I wouldn´t have let him screw up my other woods.
As it was it took me years to realize how bad the property had been mismanaged.

[Tom]

That is a consideration.  And, one I hadn't given too much thought, because I made the assumption that there would be ethics envolved with educated and experienced consulting foresters.   I suppose there is a bad apple in every bag.  Some people like to make the distinction that the term Forester is not actually defining education and experience.  In some situations, the self proclaimed Forester is just someone who was recently laid off from the local Automobile plant.  Then there are comparisons as to the view that a consulting forester will take as opposed to a procurement forester.  The simpleton in me just reads Forester when college educations and diplomas are involved.

I guess that I don't have a good answer for determining that a real Forester is doing you right.  But, as in other businesses, if you start bad mouthing another professsional, you lose credibility yourself.  There is some tack that must be assumed when approaching "your" customer, whether  he's been someone else's customer or not.

It's a shame you had a bad experience, Jim, but I just don't have a answer for that situation.  It's like putting your trust in a Doctor, because you aren't a Doctor, and then having him knowingly cut off the wrong leg just to get two operations from you.

[Stephen Alford]

   I believe this new computer access may  go a long way to reduce these issues. Just look at the evolution of the forestry forum. This web  presence that Jeff is doing for custom sawyer is another example and will go a long way to set the stage (as long as your not a racoon ).
   I can't claim to know much about dia limit cuts other than understand the principle so probably not much help.  Here it is more a case of land use. Management plans are  done here for a land owner for around  $100.00. This allows the land owner to take advantage of any program the gov offers. I see on Friday the number of woodlot owners in PEI posted by the gov is around 12000. I sure hope this is a result of the gov redefining woodlot owner and not shrinkage as that figure used to be around 16000.  These management plans are sometimes mentioned during the set/talk at the kitchen table but so little time is spent with the landowner , when they are produced , landowners do not seem to pay them much attention to them. If you have done your homework the set/talk is  the opportunity to ask questions ( oh ,11 and 4 are the premo appointment times as it is your best chance to be invited for a meal). If the set/talk goes well then its a walk/talk  and usually this is where you get your answers. ( the nudge is way more effective than the ram)

[Ron Wenrich]

I remember talking to an old classmate of mine about the state of forest management and the private landowner in PA.  We both agreed that they could have fared better.  Jim's fate is not an isolated case.

[SwampDonkey]

One of the reasons I don't mind calling a spade a spade when asked of my opinion. Landowners are often looking for feedback, many have been hood winked and like to know.

[Phorester]

I know of other situations with foresters that happened like yours, Jim.  As Tom says, there're no good answers for you; there's good foresters and bad ones.  It's difficult for a landowner to know if he's getting good advice or not. Some States have licensing for foresters with Boards set up  to investigate and decide upon ethic or work concerns about foresters.  Just like law Bars or medical Boards.  Some States don't.   There's some things a landowner can do to help find a reputable forester with good ethics for advice.  I'm not saying that you didn't do these things, Jim, just stating them for other landowners reading this thread.

First, determine if the forester has at least a BS degree from a forestry college.  Yes, there are people with a lot of woods experience and a feel for good forest management that don't have a college degree, but they are few and far between.  You wouldn't get advice from a doctor who did not go to medical school or a lawyer who did not have a law degree.  Keep that same standard for a forester.

Get advice from a forester who is working for you.  In other words, you are paying his fee to give you advice.  That could also be a State forester like me who is paid by your taxes. You cannot get objective management advice from a forester who is there to buy your trees.  He is working for his employer, not for you. 

A contract with a management forester should put in writing what you expect him to do for you, the fees he will charge, what services he will do for those fees, what he requires from the landowner.  Reserve the right to back out if you become disasstified with him, paying him only for what he did before you let him go. He will also have a clause that he can back out from working with a landowner if he feels the landowner wants him to do bad forestry.

If he is doing a timber sale for you, be in the woods with him the first day or 2 he is marking to observe how he is doing it and to ask questions.   Set up in advance of his marking that you want to look at the entire job after he finishes marking but before he puts your timber on the market. Most consulting foresters in my area will readily scrape their marking paint off a tree that the landowner doesn't want cut.  You still have control of your woods.

Just like with doctors, lawyers, auto mechanics, you can always get 2nd and 3rd opinions with forest management on your property. 

I'm sure there's other ideas out there too.

[Ron Wenrich]

Get advice from a forester who is working for you.  In other words, you are paying his fee to give you advice.  That could also be a State forester like me who is paid by your taxes. You cannot get objective management advice from a forester who is there to buy your trees.  He is working for his employer, not for you. 

Here's where I part company with a lot of foresters.  If you can't get objective management advice from a buyer of timber, why can you expect that you'll get a whole lot better advice from a guy that derives his income from selling your trees?  The buyer of timber gets the same amount of money for any timber he buys.  The seller of timber gets more money for high grading the stand than doing the objective work.  How much of a difference is there to put paint on a low value tree vs a high value tree?  To the procurement forester, none.  To the consultant working on commission, a great deal.

I've been on both sides of the fence, both as a buyer and seller of timber.  My forest management advice was the same.  In other words, its the ethics of the forester, not necessarily who he works for. 

Take commissions out of the equation and things would change a whole lot more.  Its why landowners with small acreages can't get any work done.  No commission work.

[SwampDonkey]

The buyer of timber gets the same amount of money for any timber he buys.  The seller of timber gets more money for high grading the stand than doing the objective work.  How much of a difference is there to put paint on a low value tree vs a high value tree?  To the procurement forester, none.  To the consultant working on commission, a great deal.

Wait a minute, if your a sawmill and your forester leans hard on bringing in low grade, how long is he going to have a job? Regardless if the mill pays him an hourly wage to mark the trees, it's in his interest to bring in some nice logs. However, it's his responsibility to do it with the best interest of the land and land owner in mind. No different in the end, than the consultant. The veneer and log buyers for hardwood in my area have had it pretty good for the last 15 years. All the product is centralized in wood handling yards and handled by private woodlot owner run marketing boards. We did that to get more value from wood and to save the procurement forester from having to run all over creation to make up a load of nice wood. Take this service out of the equation and no one would be selling logs and veneer off woodlots. Has it actually been a profitable venture for these marketing boards to provide this service. No. The volumes aren't there. But, their marketing board staff are being paid anyway, from wood sales of any product they market. Pulp, logs, veneer, softwood or hardwood has a 2.2% wood levy deducted. That's the downfall here, the effort is into marketing and not so much on the management. 99% of the hardwood log and veneer sales are from liquidations.

[bill m]

Not every property a consulting forester goes on to will generate a timber sale. His reason for being there is to manage the forest. A mill forester is looking to buy stumpage. SwampDonkey is right, If the procurement forester is bringing in a lot of junk he will be out of a job by weeks end. The forester I work with charges by the hour - no incentive to high grade a lot. Some time I should tell the story about a local forester who works on commission and how he tried to get me out of the sugarbush I had been tapping for many years.