iDRY Vacuum Kilns

Sponsors:

For the Foresters

Started by Cntrybo2, May 04, 2011, 09:21:32 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Cntrybo2

I really want everyone to think about this. Is there another profession that works harder to put itsself out of business than being a consulting forester?
Everyone is working so hard to cut each others throats on timber sale commissions, boundary line work, etc. I honestly think many people have forgotten we are professionals and should be paid as such. The same commission structure has been in place since the early 80's and has never changed. With timber prices falling, wouldnt it make sense for commissions to raise to allow for the same "take home" from a sale? Or do away with the commission all together and do work on time and materials like EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY except for car salesmen.
Maybe I am missing something here, but I think it is high time we make a shift in the industry. Lets hear it, what do you all think?
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

beenthere

Are you suggesting "collective bargaining" ?

south central Wisconsin
It may be that my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others

Cntrybo2

No not at all. I am suggesting that we take inventory of our worth and realize we are selling our services and ourselves short.
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

Maine372

a lawyer knows the law and the court system and works for the best intrest of his client.

a forester knows the forest and the forest products industry and works for the best intrest of his client.

i sure would like to make lawyer money!

Cedarman

If I was a forester, I would hate to be compared to a lawyer. Just my opinion of lawyers.
I am in the pink when sawing cedar.

beenthere

Cntrybo2
Quotewouldnt it make sense for commissions to raise
Quotebut I think it is high time we make a shift in the industry

Who do you feel sets the commissions now? 
south central Wisconsin
It may be that my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others

Cntrybo2

Presently I think the commissions are set off of the standard generated in the early 80's (at least this is the case in my area). I do not see any issue with dropping the whole commission structure as a whole and work on a time and materials basis like other industries. In order to do this though, you have to combat the competition who is working at throat cutting rates. In our current day forest industry structure, we Foresters are making it extremely hard to allow for growth within our own field and this is by our own doing.
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

Cntrybo2

sorry, I hit post before I was done...

In a direct response to your question, I understand the price of timber is largely responcible for the commission structure, but again, when you examine the amount of time, effort, and fuel that we put in assisting a landowner with a timber sale/ harvest you really dont make a "professional" salary.
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

Tom

What's to stop you from charging more?   Where are all of the foresters?  I don't see any out there marketing their wares (knowledge).  I don't see any shingles being hung out.  Most Foresters have signed on with one of the governments and draws a paycheck.  The others have hired on with big landowners and mills.  What's left?  You have organizations and clubs that have sealed doors such that even the foresters don't know what is going on inside.  You would like for landowners to hire a service that most don't even know exists.  Competition brings higher wages, believe it or not, and there is no competition.  Your customer base needs to be educated.  Who is doing that?  As a matter of fact, it's getting harder and harder to define Forestry as an Industry. 

Ron Wenrich

I've been on both sides of the fence.  I've been a procurement forester and a consulting forester.  Personally, I hate the commission structure of consulting foresters.  Its what I call the sharecropper method of payment.   The consultant can mark the timber any way he likes and convince the landowner that he's done a good job.  No one checks his work.

I've seen jobs where they marked the most valuable trees and left junk.  Afterall, those junk trees pay very little commission.  They also bring down the value of the timber sale.  The stand that's left behind is the landowner's problem, as they've been sold bad advice, and never know there's a problem. 

I've seen consultants get paid way more than there services were worth.  Many times, they make more than the loggers that log the stand.  When times are good, they never reduce their commissions. 

And, with a commission system, landowners with poor quality timber get services at cheaper rates than do those with good quality timber.  Some consultants will walk away from jobs with too low of quality or too low of volume.  Same goes for some loggers.

If you want to do the work, then charge by the Mbf or ton or cord for marking.  That takes away a scepter of higher income for high grading stands.    It also puts your services on even keel on any type of job.  It takes the same amount of time and talent to mark poor quality stands as it does high quality.  Charge extra for line work, or whatever excess you have to do.  I also think that before any management recommendations should be made, a timber inventory is in order.  Rarely are they done in my area.

If you want to charge any commissions, charge it for selling the timber.  I did that when I was active in the consulting side.  We charged $X for marking the timber, and Y% of the timber sale.  That way, if the landowner didn't like the sale price, they would be charged for the marking of the timber.  It also ended up with those with poor quality timber actually paying a percentage on their timber for the management than those with higher quality timber.  And that's the way it should be.
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Tillaway

I always bid piece work for cruising (X $ Plot be sure to factor in data processing and cruise reports to your bid) marking timber by the acre, property lines by the foot, presale layout and traverse by the boundary length, sale administration by the hour or day rate, Management plans by the hour.  I would consider commission rates for selling and sale administration as Ron said.

Timber marking in California has allot of low-ball contractors such as the school teacher that works for little more than the price of paint, stays in their RV all summer and does it just to "get out."  Or the high school forestry teacher that hires his class during the summer.
Making Tillamook Bay safe for bait; one salmon at a time.

Cntrybo2

There is some good response to this. I am happy to see that a few of you are charging by the hour and I totally agree with the point that it takes the same amount of time and talent to mark and sell a marginal stand as it does a quality stand and the marginal stands owner is getting a deal over the quality stand owner.

Ron, in your idea of working a sale off of mbf, what would be the structure? something like.... price = $/mbf x mbf? I think this is a GREAT idea. This alleviates the forester being a victim of poor mill pricing and regardless to who buys the timber the pay structure remains the same which allows the forester to actually have a buisiness structure/ plan for his firm. The more timber you cut the more successful you will be, regardless of the market.

lets hear it, what do yall think?
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

Ron Wenrich

Whenever I look at a business or a project, I look at it as the sum of its parts.  You can break down the parts and bill accordingly or you can lump it together.  But, you won't get a handle on expenses if you work with it lumped together.

When you mark a sale, you have expenses in locating the timber, deed research, line location, pre-harvest inventory.  marking timber, soliciting bids, and sale administration.   

Locating timber is not a landowner expense.  That's prospecting and its your expense.  Line location is a tricky situation.  I would run lines, but not stand behind them unless you are a licensed surveyor.  The landowner has to approve the lines and verify that they're OK.  You can either run those costs separately or run them in with the timber marking fee.

Deed research is purely for my piece of mind.  I also like to do a pre-harvest inventory.  Its sort management plan of sorts.  I fail to see where a forester can go in and give management recommendations without any data to back them up.   Very few foresters in my area work with any data.  They simply mark out the merchantable timber and call it management, then charge 15%.  This usually involves an extra day of work, but it gets you real familiar with the area you're working on and gives you a much better basis to conduct a sale.  I simply run plots, mark down what's there and what I would take.  I would hope you're selling your services on the quality of work you do, not the quantity.  This can be added to your marking fees. 

Marking is a $/Mbf type of charge.  After you're paid, the data is the landowners.  With commission sales, that is your data, since the landowner hasn't paid for it.  If the landowner decides to sell on his own or declines the bid price, then they owe you for the timber marking.   Your work is covered.

Sale solicitation can be on a percentage basis.  You can throw in sale administration with it.  5% would be a decent amount and would likely cover your costs.  If it doesn't, then throw your administration costs at a fee for each visit or an hourly fee. 

You could charge a flat fee for a sale solicitation if you like.  That would get rid of commissions completely.  It would also put the charges for a small sale about the same as a larger sale.  Usually, guys will forgo a tour on the smaller sales since the income isn't as large. 

When you take the value of the timber out of the equation, your handling of costs gets a lot easier.  Commissions are just a bad way of doing business when it comes to timber management.  Just my opinion.


Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Cntrybo2

Ron, I totally agree. There is nothing there to make sure the landowner is taken care of. Everytime you visit a tract, the profit margin gets smaller and smaller and alot of foresters know that and let the loggers run wild. The reason I bring all of this up is that I am working with an older forester (I was just brought in as a partner in a small firm) and when I look as what his expenses are for what he has been making off of his tracts, we are barely breaking even. While I am a forester, my career took me more along the lines of environmental consulting where time and materials is the name of the game. It just perplexes me as to how this industry stays alive with such rediculous profit margins.
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

Ron Wenrich

But, you're looking at it in a down period and projecting that as the way it has been.  Put gas at $2/gal and red oak stumpage at $500/Mbf and see how that kind of sweetens the bottom line.  When prices are high, then you get more competition from the consulting end.  Everyone who has a degree (and some that don't) will hang out their shingle.  Experience or quality doesn't mean too much.

The problems you have right now is that there is a limited demand.  We have cherry mills that are gathering dust due to no markets.  Veneer buyers, log buyers, and lumber buyers have all stiffened their grades.  That means a log that would have been of a certain value years ago now no longer meet the criteria.  And many loggers have gone out of business.  That means less demand for stumpage and less competition to sustain prices.

Consultants use commission because everyone uses it.  It seems that they all have the same rate.  So, the first one at the landowner's door is usually the guy that gets the job. 

Figure out what you need to go over to a per acre or per Mbf figure on your services.  Then figure out what type of commission you would need on a normal valued stand.  In these markets, you won't be able to raise commissions if you're the only one.  But, if you offer your services without a commission bias, you might be able to snag other work.  I always liked the idea of marking the timber and let the landowner do the selling.  Less headaches. 
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Cntrybo2

good thoughts. On the last two tracts I have cut I brought all of the bids back to the landowner then come to find out the landowner had a "buddy" that took the sale and didnt even look at my bids. I was HOT. I was then forced to work with a logger that was less than a professional, the tract looked horrible and my name was on it. Needless to say, I didnt stick my sign  up infront of that tract to get the drive by public.

I am actually in the process now of trying to see how we can shift our methodology over to an mbf structure. I think that is a really smart idea and really should be the way to go.
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

Ron Scott

Why were you forced to work with the unprofessional logger and put your name on a "bad job"? What tied you to it?
~Ron

Cntrybo2

Well the short of it is the landowner had me cruise a very large tract they owned and we split the tract into three different compartments. I pulled the trigger on the first compartment (78 acres) which was about 35 year old loblolly. Got the bids together and presented them and thats when I was told by the landowner his buddy was going to do the work. Well while the buddy was harvesting the loblolly stand, he got eyes for the next compartment (150 acres mature hardwood mostly oak and hickory) and convinced the landowner, against my recommendations, to cut that block "while he was there already". My recommendation was to harvest that compartment three years after the loblolly stand. So I was asked by the landowner to put a contract together and mark the lines and what not. The tract was going to be harvested regardless of my input so I might as well make a few bucks off it. My name is all over it because the landowner tells all his friends I am his forester and who he has working on his tract. Kind of rediculous...
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue" - The Lorax

Ron Scott

I would have walked away from it when the landowner didn't accept your bids on the first unit and then had his buddy also cut the unit that you advised not to cut yet. Was your marking followed on the first unit that you got the bids on? Evidently you weren't allowed to administer the sale for contract compliance either.The landowner doesn't need a professional forester and should be advised as such.

I've walked away from a number of jobs with the saying "I don't practice bad forestry." ;)
~Ron

BaldBob

Quote from: Cntrybo2 on May 09, 2011, 08:15:01 PM

I am actually in the process now of trying to see how we can shift our methodology over to an mbf structure. I think that is a really smart idea and really should be the way to go.

Marking timber with payment based on an MBF basis caries many of the same problems as doing it on a commission basis.  The less than scrupulous consultant will have a strong incentive to mark to maximize the volume to be cut.

Ron Wenrich

I guess it boils down to ethics.  On a per Mbf basis, you have to cut lots of timber to get more money.  For commission, you just have to high grade the stand and do an economic clearcut.  But, at least it looks good. 

You could also skew your scale.  I've seen more than one forester who scaled timber way too hard to make the volume. 
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Kansas

Consulting foresters are a sore spot with me. And I am sure in other parts of the country, there are lots of good ones. But here in Kansas, anyone choosing to call themselves such is considered qualified to be one.

There was a job of timber about 4 miles from me that a forester marked. Walnut, oak, other assorted hardwoods. Another guy bought what was marked. He took the walnut, I agreed to buy everything else. The job gets started, and the other guy discovers whole draws of walnut that were missed. There were trees marked that were worthless. There were good trees that were walked right by. I wasn't the one that signed the contract, but I wound up having to bear the brunt of what happened next. The consulting forester was supposed to keep an eye on the job. The logger and her got into it right away. She just up and left. He was pithed and wound up leaving a bunch of tops in the creek. Being everyone else was out of the area, the landowner comes to me and complains. The contract he signed clearly stated no tops left in the creek. I wound up having to hire someone to take them out. It was either that or risk my reputation, even though I hadn't signed the contract or hired the logger. I was the local.

I wish foresters would work by the hour, and follow up on the jobs. It might also help if they had some training. Sorry for the rant, and I'm sure there are lots of professionals out there that do that.

Ron Wenrich

Well, I mark trees that are worthless and walk right by some good ones.  Its called forest management.  You take out the worst first.  You don't want to take them forward.  They take up growing space, water, and nutrients.  Loggers should understand that, but very few do.  Foresters should know that, and should practice it.  Good ones do.

As to the tops in the creek, a performance bond would have taken care of that.  You get the money back when you perform what the contract stipulates.  I wonder if the forester had a contract with the landowner.  They apparently at least had a verbal contract.  He could be liable.

In our state, anyone can call themselves a forester.  They usually back off that claim when they're in court.  But, they do a lousy job of management that will take decades to overcome.
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Kansas

I am surprised anyone can call themselves a forester back east. Figured with more timber, there might have been more rules. I don't know what agreement the landowner and forester had. I highly suspect she had no performance bond.

I believe in timber stand improvement. I have seen too many times around here that out of state loggers take just the walnut, with all the lesser species left to stand. The problem is, there is little market for those lesser species. And with 4 buck diesel, its hard to put a truck under pallet grade logs that you will get .22 cents a board foot at best and have to truck 120 miles. I have actually seen loggers deduct from their bid if they have to take the bad trees, or undesirable species. People are used to not having to pay to cut firewood around here, so that isn't much of an option. Most of the few local loggers left have a pretty good grasp of timberstand improvement. The problem is economics get in the way. In short, we need better markets for the hackberry, elm,etc. and rougher oak, or more mills to cut them.

Ron Wenrich

Markets for lesser species will not improve.  That's why there's an abundance of them in the woodlots.  People have been highgrading for probably a century.  When wood lost its use as a fuel, those lesser species grew into sawtimber size.  No alternative market.

Those markets for elm and hackberry won't improve in the near term or the long term.  Pallet stock and ties is about all there is any demand for.  It doesn't have the quality or stability needed to make it a cabinet wood.  Hardwoods are for show. 

Foresters are faced with many problems.  We have to keep the landowner satisfied.  But, that doesn't mean we have to deplete their resource by leaving poor quality of inferior specie trees.  I have no problem with a logger cutting a tree and letting it lay.  If they deduct the cost for cutting, that's ok.  The value of the stand is the final bid, not what they are willing to pay for a certain species. 

I know you're involved in farming.  Would a farmer allow his herd to become so large that the pasture couldn't support the herd?  Let's put aside the bringing in feed from outside.  No, he needs to thin the herd.  Would he take out the best producing stock or take out the mature and the ones not doing as well?  I always tell a landowner they don't want to kill the milkers.  Most understand.

Foresters need to look to the future and try to determine how to mold the current stand into a future crop.  That involves projecting future markets, current economics, the ecology of the stand, analysis of the current stand, and decide how to get from point A to point B in the stand using current constraints.  Most won't see the final crop because of the length of the rotation.  As one forester told me...Forest management isn't rocket science.  Its much harder than that. 
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

SwampDonkey

Ron W said it well. But there isn't much of a market for foresters in this region. Most of them that stick around become silviculture contractors and loggers. There are only so many DNR and Irving jobs. But, as to the fee structure, I would think $/cord would reduce the high grading. Up here it would go through a marketing board where chain of custody is tracked by legislation. A landowner can check with the marketing board what wood was moved. It could be a stick of pulp or firewood or a sawlog and would not tempt one to high grade just the logs. If you base it one $/mbf that tells me your only looking for the logs. We have markets for all three. Trouble is the loggers have done better knocking on doors and convincing owners to take lump sum resulting in a high probability that harvesting is a clear cut. About 5% you would call good management. Just look around. I've done many management plans over the years that the owner turns around and uses to liquidate his woods. These were subsidized plans. I've stopped doing plans and the marketing board has stopped assistance on cost share. It doesn't promote good management. There was a woodlot that was promoted for good management and signs erected, news coverage, the whole nine yards. Today that same woodlot is all scalped and trashed and lot of it was on steep terrain, shaped like a cow bell.

On the marking, I would set up a fee/acre.   The landowner can see it and measure it if he needs to verify. If it's a cruise $/acre and if a written plan is required $$/plan plus the $/acre cruise. Again the owner can measure it off Google or GeoNB websites. We have access to free GIS data that anyone can use. And a lot of folks have those consumer Garmins and can measure with it. If you have a target basal area, than show the owner how to use a free home made angle gauge to check his job. If the owner isn't going to take an active part in management, that will often lead to many of the problems.
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

SwampDonkey

I drove out the Shikatehawk road, and looks like last winter the heavy rain took the whole road out in places. Tons of gravel hulled in and stream levied. Drove out the head of the stream and you could see why. Every stick on those slopes and gullies and little feeder streams all logged off like a moon-scape. All owned by a local mill and the government. And all hardwood, which the mill doesn't even use. I assume sold for pulpwood and a small percentage of logs. Being hardwood this mill will never thin it. Quite a few lots have been sold to this mill. Many lots I looked up ownership for thinning were once private a few years ago are now industrial freehold by this mill purchase and also 9/10 times clear cut. The trouble with trying to do selection in those hillsides is it's difficult terrain from slopes (although the ground is quite firm and not much surface rocks), they over cut to begin with and this results is scald and die back of the residuals. So they just take it all now instead of needing to come back to clean up the dying hardwood. They bought two lots on our road 25 years ago and cut them off promptly and never thinned those either. They will often plant softwood if the ground isn't coming back good. They will only thin spruce ground.
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

timberjake

I've had the opportunity to work with a couple of pretty good foresters who have taken the time to teach me a little about stand management and tree selection.  With a little instrucion on tree selection most loggers should be able to cut in unmarked timber and do a good job of it.  The forester then spends less time marking timber and the logger has a little more operational discression.  Of course this only works when there is a proven ability by the logger and oversight by the forester.
"Never hire a man who doesn't wear suspenders and smokes.  If he ain't lighting a cigarette he's pullin up his pants."

Thank You Sponsors!