Processors & hand cutters

[Tarm]

The loggers have finished up cutting and forwarding operations from the thinning of my northern hardwood woodland property. It was cut with a Ponsse processor and all products were bucked to eight feet plus trim. This gives me an opportunity to compare this job to the one done at my oak property in 09' where hand cutters did the felling and bucked the logs to random lengths. So my observations in no particular order:
1.   Processors cause significantly more damage than hand cutters. Hand cutters can thin stump clumps without damaging the remaining stems. The processor either caused bark injury or cut into the remaining stem(s). Processors would also bang into an adjacent tree when extruding stems from the bottom of the cutting head. Obviously hand cutters could never do that. The butts of sawtimber trees that were larger in diameter than the saw bar on the processor cutting head were usually damaged in the felling process. It seemed that almost all butt sawlogs ended up with about 2 feet bucked off the stump end.
2.   Log yields are much higher with random length cut hand cutters. The oak job had 3 loads of logs and one load of bolts. (Along with 34 loads of pulp.) The hardwood job will have 3 loads of logs and 6 loads of bolts. (Plus a lot of pulp).
3.   Processors are much better at dead wood salvage. I had a lot of hickory mortality and the processor did a great job of digging those down stems out of the dirt and bucking them up into firewood. I doubt that hand cutters would be willing to cut into the dirt.
4.   The prices I received for the low end products were higher from the processing crew than from the hand cutting crew. Labor is expensive.

So my conclusions are that hand cutters are expensive but are worth their cost when felling and bucking high value stems. So I throw an idea out to you real world loggers. Would it be possible to organize a thinning job so a processor would go through the stand first cutting the small and low value stems? The hand cutters would follow felling and bucking the sawlogs out of the high value trees. The processor would then make a return pass and process the tops out of the hand felled trees. A forwarder would then pick up all of the products. The advantage to me as a woodland owner would be a high yield and value sawlog harvest done by the hand cutters. A higher price for the low value cord products efficiently cut by the processor and less logging damage overall. Am I dreaming or it something like this currently done?

[CTL logger]

DREAMING!! Who was doing the job? Hack and wack logging I wouldn't have a job long doing massive amounts of residual stand damage. Doesn't sound like processor operator was doing too good of a job, what was the diameter of these trees?

[CCC4]

treeslayer2003 runs through a pine set with the Bell cutter removing the smaller stems first then cuts the larger higher value stems by hand...is this what you are asking? I think it is done pretty regular when there is oversize on a tract. On jobs where the crew I cut for runs a Hydro Ax and I do the hand cutting...I will usually do all the steep rougher ground by hand and take up the Hydro Axe's slack when my boss is busy on one of his million things he has going on at once.

I'm kind of with CTL logger thoough on the damage...I would think a good operator could do a minimal damage cut. In FS jobs we always use cutting machines for the thinnings, it's easier and there is less damage due to the fact that they can bunch the timber better and the skidders can use rows to skid instead of "doodle" behind a hand faller.

[Gary_C]

I have never seen two jobs that were alike enough that you could compare yields. So any comparisons you made on yield are somewhat suspect.

And you did not say if this job was a salvage job, a select cut, or a clearcut.

1.   Processors cause significantly more damage than hand cutters. Hand cutters can thin stump clumps without damaging the remaining stems.

While the operator of a harvester is the determing factor in damaging other trees, if you are basing the amount of damage on multiple stem clumps (usually basswood) then you probably had too much low value basswood in the stand. And select cutting of single stems from clumps is difficult to do with any type of felling. Plus basswood is now a very low value tree so I wonder why you were not cutting the entire clump.

Am I dreaming or it something like this currently done?

I have done what you are suggesting some years ago when sawlog prices were far better than they are now. It's way too slow a process for most loggers with processors to use. A processor owner has to process large volumes of pulpwood to survive and pulpwood is where most of the money is today.

Plus good reliable hand cutters are hard to find.

[deastman]

CTL logger is right,  sounds like the processor crew wasn't too concerned about residual damage. Also the Ponsse had a dangle head with causes more damage than a fixed head. Where I am the state foresters want fixed head processors and not dangle heads. A fixed head has more control of the tree and you can put it where you want, causing less damage. In my opinion a. fixed head processor with a good operator can do an excellent job and leave no residual stand damage

[treeslayer2003]

boys we all know it depends on the stand, they every one different.
super hard to compare apples to oranges. that said, there are guys that just don't care and contractors that just don't have time to. I can't condemn any one with out seeing the job and knowing all details.

[ABTS]

My brother and I have done a couple jobs like what you suggest. One problem is the time it takes to go back and cut tops it's not very profitable. it just takes to much time to go running around the woods looking for the tops . I have also seen that the hand cutters I have worked with are not anymore careful dropping trees than a dangle head all they want is the stem. We hand a job that the handcutters left numerous trees hanging because they could not put than on the ground . Now that is not what most handcutters are like . Most will do a bangup job. It all comes down to money the faster in and out and the more wood on the ground the better.

[1270d]

A dangle head, fixed head, or hand sawyer can all do excellent work. Or poor work.  Residual damage is totally dependant on the operators skill level.

Why did the processor not buck random length logs?  The equipment is capable of any measurement you choose. I regularly cut high grade hardwood logs with a dangle head harvester with no issues. 

I do work occasionally with a hand faller who falls and limbs large hardwood AHEAD of the processor.  I then do all the bucking/log merchandising mechanically.

[barbender]

I agree with 1270d and Gary C. I'm forwarding on a northern hardwoods thin right now, the processor (Ponsse Bear) has left very minimal residual damage. There are too many variables to make a blanket statement of one being better than the other. Typically a dangle head machine has a longer reach (the Bear can reach 40' I think)  and can snake a tree back to itself, maybe a residual will get rubbed pulling it out, but a fixed head may have had to cut that tree down to get to the target tree. I'm not knocking fixed heads either, just saying both have strengths and weaknesses, and more importantly different methods of operation. Any of the three listed options are capable of doing a nice job. If it were my property, I would have a contract that clearly spelled out what the job would look like when finished, and the allowable amount of damage and penalties for violations.

[Mark Wentzell]

Around here they'll usually just leave the trees that are too big to cut with a harvester. Most of the time it's just junk pine that isn't worth anything. The hawks like them though.

[Tarm]

Gary C:
This job was a intermediate thinning in a small sawtimber evenaged northern hardwood stand.

You are right. Each job is different. However a lot of those eight foot logs could have been cut random length and that would have increased the sawlog yield. Spotting log defects from the seat of a processor is hard.

Yes, the stand is 50% basswood so I'm thinning the clumps to release adjacent hard maple trees. What I got is what I got.

CTL logger:
Damage is a relative term. If a logger barks up a pulpwood tree I don't care. If he knocks off a softball size bark chunk from a four side clear 12" one and a half log hard maple tree I become very unhappy.

I've done a limited amount of hand cutting. The real grunt work is hand piling the pulp for the forwarder. If that could be done by a second (or first) pass of the processor and the hand cutter only felled and bucked the sawlogs out of the stems then human labor could be applied where it would be the most useful.

[deastman]

A dangle head, fixed head, or hand sawyer can all do excellent work. Or poor work.  Residual damage is totally dependant on the operators skill level.

Why did the processor not buck random length logs?  The equipment is capable of any measurement you choose. I regularly cut high grade hardwood logs with a dangle head harvester with no issues. 

I do work occasionally with a hand faller who falls and limbs large hardwood AHEAD of the processor.  I then do all the bucking/log merchandising mechanically.

Great point 1270d, each can do an excellent job and not all stands and conditions are the same. The operator or sawhand is key in doing a good job or not. Each system has its advantages and I should have acknowledged that.

[BargeMonkey]

 We can debate this till the cows come home and my skidders thaws out... lol.
   Ive seen guys with a 230 and a chain saw make such a mess it looks like a tornado, but ive been harassed by home owners who see my Timbco and think im all set to destroy the forest.
I have a 23yr old kid hand cutting for me who makes it look like an art, but some people never pick it up. With a decent operator a harvester will out shine most hand cutter, we call it "controlled smash". We go thru and cut everything under 24" or so, and hand cut the bigger stuff at the same time, then run over the tops and slash, or pile it with the head. Yes we tend to cut the roads wider being mechanical, and we remove the junk everyone else has cut around, but it looks so much better and the young growth isnt all torn up. A marginal hand cutter and a cable / grapple makes the biggest mess.
Around here so many of the wood lots have been high graded, and its so tough to explain to people that in order to grow good wood you have to remove the junk. The neighbors gawk when I cut 20-30 load of pulp / firewood off a 50 acre woodlot, but when im done its right.
Just my 2 cents.

[Gary_C]

You are right. Each job is different. However a lot of those eight foot logs could have been cut random length and that would have increased the sawlog yield. Spotting log defects from the seat of a processor is hard.

I'd agree about spotting defects. Bucking logs for maximum value is not easy regardless of the way you are cutting.

But in todays markets, there is very little to gain from random lengths.

As far as damage, in a marked thinning, the person doing the marking bears some responsibility for the end result. I've seen too many select cuts that could not be cut as marked without a lot of damage. Last year I went on a field trip where the DNR had allowed a marked thinning to be converted to a operator select cut because as the job was marked, the operator could not cut it and they were not getting the desired result. Yes, there was a lot of grumbling by foresters that would not want to give up that control, but the cost of marking as well as problems in laying out a sale in a manner that a machine operator can get thru it without doing a lot of damage will probably dictate more of operator select cuts.

In most of my pine thinnings that I do now, they are operator select. I doubt I would even look at another marked pine thinning.

[CCC4]

Marked pine thinnings here are usually pretty operator friendly. I have run into some that were impossible to retrieve the timber w/o damage to the save timber. I talked to the project manager and told him my concerns and he went with me to take a look. Immediately he saw that waaay too much 5.5 pine was marked as save. This was a blowdown salvage unit I was cutting so he remarked some skid routes for us.

[thenorthman]

different ground and different timber out here. 

If the ground will support a processor here they will feller bunch em, or process in the woods and then yard out (skidder, grapple cat, forwarder depending on how steep/wet) If the ground is steep they will hand fall and process on the landing, after being yarded.

Lots of outfits are going to the feller bunchers, and leaving the big stuff to hand fallers, although the big stuff is getting few and far between.

Me I hand fall and line skid, try to be careful, but I also get the jobs no else can afford to do and see to do alright at it so far.

[barbender]

As far as damage, in a marked thinning, the person doing the marking bears some responsibility for the end result. I've seen too many select cuts that could not be cut as marked without a lot of damage.

The hardwood thinning we are working is Basswood/Maple, and yes the foresters have many 6" single stems marked out of the basswood clumps. Some of these there is no way you can cut it without causing damage, even by hand, and these foresters know these sales will likely be harvested mechanically. We've been leaving most of them, they can keep them.

[lynde37avery]

I have seen it a lot. mechanized crew has one guy out cutting hardwood saw log trees with gentle touch of a chainsaw" feller buncher could mangle the tree up" and the mechanical cutter cuts everything else. good crew I know does it every day. 3 or 4 guys on the job n they all ways have wood out. one of the only mechanized crews ive seen that do a nice job. "I dislike mechanical harvesting.

[wannaergo]

Sounds to me like whoever was running the processor didn't really care about damage. I run a fixed head harvester, and the residual damage is minimal. The trees fall exactly where I want them to... usually anyways... but as for log trees, i'll dump them over with the harvester, grab my tape measure and spray paint, and get out of the machine to paint where i'll cut, so I can get a good view of defects, etc. to get the highest grade. It seems to work good, and I'm still getting good production, with the job also looking good.

[Tarm]

Sounds to me like whoever was running the processor didn't really care about damage. I run a fixed head harvester, and the residual damage is minimal. The trees fall exactly where I want them to... usually anyways... but as for log trees, i'll dump them over with the harvester, grab my tape measure and spray paint, and get out of the machine to paint where i'll cut, so I can get a good view of defects, etc. to get the highest grade. It seems to work good, and I'm still getting good production, with the job also looking good.

Yes! This is what I'm looking for. The production (and stumpage price) of a mechanical operation with the bucking skill of a hand cutter.

[BargeMonkey]

 Timbco with a bar saw, cable/grapple and a landing loader. We put down the volume but still can sort out the grade logs. Quite a few guys from Wv-Pa-Ny running this combination.