cubic volume as a standard

[OneWithWood]

The National Woodland Ownders Association has gone on record as supporting the movement to decree all timber sales be figured in cubic measure.

The resolution can be found at www.woodlandowners.org/logscale.htm

What do you all think?  Will this result in fairer prices paid to the landowner?  Will it have a cacading effect on the market price of lumber?

I noticed there is a slight difference in the calculation of volume between the resolution and our calculator.  The resolution calls for the inclusion of the big end area plus the small end area divided by 2 whereas our calculator calls for the area mesurement to be at mid log.  I don't think on average this will make a large difference.

[Texas Ranger]

Hmmm, we went from board foot to tons, and the buyers were ahead of us, and we have the same results with tons, except fewer people understand it.

Bet money that if they go to cubic volume there will be a long list of methods of figuring volume, none on the land owners side.  with or withou bark, small end or large end, grade deduct, sweep deduct, knot deduct, etc.

[SwampDonkey]

Smalian's volume calculation isn't a new scale. Its been around for a long time. How is the Association going to factor in waste? That's what the log rules do, some are more liberal than others. Doyles seems to favor the buyer untill you get diameters above 24 inches. Locally, Maine's Bangor Rule has been better for landowners than the New Brunswick Rule. If you go by weight like tons, the mills know their are seasonal variations in moisture content (MC%) and variations between species, so they compensate for this, obviously in their favor. Some mills will have seasonal adjustments here, same outcome. We have one softwood mill (Nexfor/Frasers) that asks if you want Bangor Rule or ton, most choose bangor if they have experience. With Smalian's your going to get a better scale then the log rules, depends on how hard the scaler is on deductions though. Newton's is most accurate though, taking the mid-diameter into account. Tree bolts are neither cylindrical, nor conical and Newton's more closely takes taper into account. Compare the 2 formulas for yourself.  ;)

[Jeff]

I think its a crock. Just when a good number of people start to grasp a concept they change it. I'll stick with the whack method.

[SwampDonkey]

Jeff:

Is the whack method the same as hack and slash? ;)

[Jeff]

Come on now, you have not researched the whack method on the forum? Its the only method recognized and approved here. I'll dig up that link if'n I have to.

[Tom]

Yeah, and it's a Canadian devised measurement that has taken over the continent(s) by a storm.

[SwampDonkey]

 :D  :D ;D  ;D  :D  :D

  Isn't that just a shame?

[Jeff]

Once agin,  some of you need ejukated.

https://forestryforum.com/cgi-bin/board/YaBB.pl?board=sawmill;action=display;num=1006903197;start=12

[SwampDonkey]

Yup I got bush wacked on that post  :D  :D  ;D

cheers

[DanG]

It don't matter what rule you use, or whether you're talkin' about logs or toilet paper. If you use a different rule of measurement, the price setters will set the price to suit themselves.  You ain't gonna win unless you're the one setting the price.

[SwampDonkey]

DanG

All too true.

[dail_h]

  I'm still using the shot rule. I know it's not officialy reconised here on the Forum, but it's fair ,easy to use,accurate,and I'm used to using  it.  That's my story, and I'm stickin to it.

[SwampDonkey]

Tom:

How many continents are in North America again? maybe I mean consonants? Is this consentaneous? Maybe I'm just unconscience.

 :D  ;D  :D  ;)  ;D

cheers

[Tom]

The Forestry Forum is bigger than you are aware. It's not just North America that enters these doors but Europeans, Australian and South Americans alike.  That term "Whack" developed by one of your countryman is world renown. :P 8)

[SwampDonkey]

Tom:

I was quite aware of that fact, as Swede and I quite often act in jest. I was only playing with words, hoping to get a chuckle from you, instead of a bush wackin.  ;)