How Much Left

[mesquite buckeye]

If you read forestry literature from the 1950's, the story was the same. It is sad how little has changed for the better in 60 years. Still some of us keep trying. ;D

[SwampDonkey]

I've talked and written about much of the same things over the years. I've basically concluded from most people's attitudes that I'll look after my own ground and let everyone else worry about theirs. There has been enough educating of landowners about forest management in NB, that if you don't get it by now, then your sure not gonna after the last load of wood leaves the lot. ;) We've had woodlot owner organizations for 40 years and marketing boards, at least 35. Most silviculture on NB private woodlots wouldn't get done at all if there wasn't incentives or contractors to do it. It's not the concept, it's the labour and the time.

[jwilly3879]

What I have seen around this area is that prior to a large parcel being put up for sale the landowner gets a logger to come and cut anything they can get money for. What is left is usually a mess with nothing but low quality wood in the 12" range. This property sells and the new owner contacts a logger to see how much they can make on their newly acquired "forest.

Another thing that happens is that when a large parcel is to be subdivided the owner will cut it heavily and then subdivide, avoiding the restrictions that would be placed on the property by the Adirondack Park Agency and or the local Planning Boards.

There a very few parcels on land in my area that can be purchased with standing timber that is marketable in the near future, everyone takes as much as they can get and then sells. It is an unfortunate situation labeled by real estate agents as future timber value.

[thecfarm]

Just about the same here as far as logging and selling land. Cut it off and put the For sale signs up.

[Tmac47]

If there's an abundance of landowner education, yet landowners aren't getting the message, can you really say landowners are being educated?

Not to harp on my larger point, but the biggest problem I see is how states/organizations quantify educating landowners. They think throwing a book of information at landowners is education. It's not. It's useless information if you're not effecting behavior.

The industry is terrible, I repeat TERRIBLE at educating landowners. I'll simply refer to the experiences in this thread as proof, but I doubt anyone would disagree.

To make a point, let's look at the gun control debate. One of Eric Holders people recently made a statement that said, "We don't have to make guns illegal, we just have to make them uncool."

And there in lies why the "green movement" has so much force and why states and timber organizations consistently fail at changing the behavior of landowners.

They think all it takes is a book full of boring information that no one cares about. It doesn't work. They have to change the conversation and make timber management something worth caring about. They have to make it cool. I'm not talking about a stupid fad, but rather something landowners can put their hearts into.

People don't make decisions with their heads, they make them with their hearts.

[terry f]

    When you say the industry does a lousy job of educating landowners, who is the industry, and do they really want educated landowners. I'm at the age that if something doesn't interest me, I don't need to learn about it. I have a high interest in forestry related topics, and information's there if you want to look for it. Twenty or thirty years ago my eyes would glaze over on things I find interesting today. Forest management was cut the dead trees into fire wood, and don't touch the rest, apparently there's more to it than that.

[SwampDonkey]

The dollar my friend is the biggest attitude adjuster. When your talking about returns decades down the road, you get eyes glazing over. It's not just forestry, when you look at average household debt the attitude gets worst because they have spent someone else's money already. In my grandfather's time, you didn't spend money that you didn't own. It tells us people aren't saving much for later, it's all about now.

[jwilly3879]

There was a organization in this area, "Residents Committee to Protect the Adirondacks," mostly composed of large landowners, labeled by some as "Environmentalists," and by others as "Tree Huggers" that encouraged members to enroll in The Smartwood program, get forest management plans, get FSC Certification and put the land under conservation easements.

The group put on a number of seminars to educate the members about forest management. The organization has had quite a few Foresters that the members have used but with all the info the put out they never took the members to an active timber harvest to show them what it looked like during and after.

Several parcels were marked, put up for bid and some sold some did not. The loggers weren't interested in TSI work with small quantities of pulp wood and very few logs. The lots that were sold were usually overstocked with poor quality logs left over from previous high grading.

As a result some LO's were happy with the money and the work, some were disappointed with the money and down right appalled with the look of the forest post harvest. Again, it is a lack of education.

The overall success of the program was not good when the costs of maintaining certifications and taxes (operating expenses)
were compared to the short term returns from management. There are those that continue to manage for the future and that is the base our business is trying to work with.

[Ron Wenrich]

A lot of good points in this thread. 

Certification is only popular from a green consumer standpoint.  I know that there are some really good markets in the big city.  You get to the rural areas and nobody cares.  I never had anyone ask about certified lumber when I was sawmilling in PA.  Go to the Newark, NJ market and things change.  But, not on the low grade.  My biggest gripe about the certification process is they try to pull in timberland to certify.  PA is the largest landowner of certified wood at 2 million acres.  If you want to certify the product, certify the producers - foresters and loggers.  The rest falls into place easily, and there is little cost to the landowner.  Until the cost factor is realized in stumpage value, there will be little certification in the US.

SD brings up the point about labor and return.  I agree that many landowners understand the concept of management.  But, when you start talking about precommercial thinnings, its a tough sell.  I only ever did one of those thinnings, and that was back when the government would help finance it, and the landowner was enrolled in the Tree Farm system.  Others weren't interested if it involved them doing the work or having to pull money out of pocket. 

I think most forest management falls into this category.  How do you finance management work?  I never could convince realtors it was beneficial to get an inventory and appraisal for timbered property.  Too much risk, and they would also have to deduct it from their commissions.  New landowners already have a bunch of bills, so a timber inventory is out of their budget.

I always thought it would be beneficial for landowner organizations to be in the wood business.  They would own the foresters and some of the crews.  I would also subcontract some of the work, like logging.  They could even branch out to owning primary and secondary production.  Its done in Sweden.  Give an annual return on operations, in addition to stumpage at harvest.  Enrollment would be on the amount of acreage you have, and it would be directed by a board.  It would be a business plan that would need to be developed.  But, some market research would be needed before you could get it off the ground.  Once you have a sufficient acreage base and a decent management system, you can go after those secondary products, like hunting rights and the like. 

So, is it landowner education or landowner motivation that is the problem?  I'm thinking it may be the latter.

[terry f]

    Some are motivated by doing right by the land, and education will fall into place. Some are motivated by greed, which don't always do right by the land.

[mesquite buckeye]

May sound a little strange, but I have made a promise to the trees and all the little guys that live in and around them that I will watch over and protect them for as long as I am able.

That doesn't mean that I won't cut a tree or eat a deer or try to make some money to take care of my family at the same time. ;D

[terry f]

   Couldn't agree more.

[Tmac47]

When you say the industry does a lousy job of educating landowners, who is the industry, and do they really want educated landowners.

Everyone.  If landowners were educated on the benefits of simple management like thinning, that would be a start.  Only a small percentage of landowners actually do anything with their timberland.  I've talked to thousands of landowners in Georgia over the past year and a half and you'd be amazed at how many are doing nothing, don't want to do anything and see nothing but "woods" when it comes to their timberland.

Landowners that are educated are active.  Active land is healthy land.  Healthy land produces healthy timber and wildlife.

I'm at the age that if something doesn't interest me, I don't need to learn about it. I have a high interest in forestry related topics, and information's there if you want to look for it. Twenty or thirty years ago my eyes would glaze over on things I find interesting today. Forest management was cut the dead trees into fire wood, and don't touch the rest, apparently there's more to it than that.

I think people of all ages share your sentiments.  The trick is making it interesting.

I've mentioned plenty of times in this thread that the industry is great at providing "information".  However, information does nothing for anyone if it doesn't encourage action.

My dad goes into elementary schools in our county to talk to kids about timberland and wildlife.  Whenever he asks, "So, what happens when you cut down a tree?", the kids always answer in unison, "WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF OXYGEN!  AHHHHHHH!"  Haha.

The green movement has done a great job of educating.  It doesn't make any difference if it's right or wrong.  They're influencing culture and people are making decisions based on what they're being told.

What message is the timber industry sending?  What message are foresters sending?  They're not.

[SwampDonkey]

It tells me that your school teachers and public funded television are using government money to send that message. Even includes who knows how much the government pumps into some fellow chasing birds in the jungle and tigers in India. The landowners should be also entitled to that same money for incentives to do good forestry. If there is no reward, you'll not get much done.

[thecfarm]

There are so many people out there too that think cutting a tree is bad. I'm not talking about landowners,I'm talking about city people,the ones that live on a 500 square piece of land with 5 trees on it. I had to deal with a few of them at work.I was a bad person for cutting trees. I would invite them up here,but only one came. He had no idea about working in the woods. I showed him areas that I have just cut,one year,two year and 3 years one. He had a whole different when he left my place.
Where my Grandkids go to school,Hallowell,ME,they take the whole 6 grade class out to a logging operation for the day. I went once to help out with the kids. It was a very nice talk.
I admit I could do better with my trees. I try,but alot to keep up on.

[Tmac47]

It tells me that your school teachers and public funded television are using government money to send that message. Even includes who knows how much the government pumps into some fellow chasing birds in the jungle and tigers in India. The landowners should be also entitled to that same money for incentives to do good forestry. If there is no reward, you'll not get much done.

Not really.  Kid's aren't learning it in school.  They're learning it in magazines and on TV. If there are teachers sending that message on a large scale, it's in the University system.

The message is being propagated through the media and has been for the past 30 years.  The Ad Council even released an ad within the past 3 years that included a message about deforestation and featured footage from "rain forests" being logged.  The ad was about child labor being used in the production of blue jeans, so I'm not sure why they used the rain forest.  Probably shock-value.

Maybe most people in the industry simply don't access the same channels of information of the younger generation (I'm 28), but the environmentalists certainly do a good job sending a clear and concrete message.  "Cutting trees is bad."  They generally cite deforestation as a big danger too, which is funny, since the biggest cause of deforestation in America is urbanization and the environmentally religious tend to live in the city.  Ironic.

[Claybraker]

When you say the industry does a lousy job of educating landowners, who is the industry, and do they really want educated landowners.

Everyone.  If landowners were educated on the benefits of simple management like thinning, that would be a start.  Only a small percentage of landowners actually do anything with their timberland.  I've talked to thousands of landowners in Georgia over the past year and a half and you'd be amazed at how many are doing nothing, don't want to do anything and see nothing but "woods" when it comes to their timberland.

The best slogan I've seen concerning the benefits of management is "Doing nothing costs you money."

It's not much different from the countless number of folks I know that haven't saved squat for retirement until they hit their 50's. Then it's too late to accomplish much, unless they plan on working into their 80's.

[terry f]

    That's a good comparison Claybraker, thinning is like compounding, the earlier the better.

[Tmac47]

The best slogan I've seen concerning the benefits of management is "Doing nothing costs you money."

It's not much different from the countless number of folks I know that haven't saved squat for retirement until they hit their 50's. Then it's too late to accomplish much, unless they plan on working into their 80's.

That slogan paints an accurate picture for those that already have an understanding that there's money in trees and there's more money in trees when you manage them.  But, what about landowners that still don't understand their timberland is an investment?

I mentioned earlier that there's a "Curse of Knowledge" in the industry.  From foresters all the way up the ladder to c-level execs in the big companies like Plum Creek and Weyerhaeuser.  When the Curse of Knowledge exists, it's nearly impossible to relate with those without knowledge.

I'm not criticizing that slogan either, I think it's great.  However, I think it leaves behind those landowners that look at it and think, "I'm not spending any money, how is it costing me money?"  It almost acts as a reminder for landowners who already have an understanding that management is valuable, so when they read it they're thinking, "Oh yeah, I've got to remember to thin in 3 years," rather than uneducated landowners thinking, "Oh... I should probably look into this idea of timber management!  I'll do that now."

More needs to be done connecting with landowners who don't read forestry forums, aren't members of landowner organizations and have no idea that active management is necessary to a healthy and productive forest.  Which leads me to another big problem in the industry that I call, "incestuous marketing".  Which simply means that you never see timber ads outside of industry magazines, newsletters, etc.

This becomes a problem when you consider that all the money being spent to "market" is competing with a very small, overly educated, segment of landowners.  While, no money is being spent to market to the much larger segment of uneducated landowners.  This makes a lot of sense for seedling and timber companies who are competing for business within this market, but ends up hurting the industry when you consider the amount of landowners who aren't hearing any industry messaging.

[terry f]

    Claybraker's on to something comparing it to retirement. You see all the time where they show a chart where a 18 year old guy puts in $2000 a year from 18 to 30, and stops contributing, the next guy starts putting in at 30, adds the rest of his working life, and has less money than the 18 year old, I don't know why trees would be any different. Give your trees a one up early on with a little thinning, and it should pay dividends later in life, but that's a hard sell when you don't see immediate results, we are a impatient people. As far as magazines outside the industry, if you wrote a article in Outdoor Life about food plots to better your hunting, half the people would read it whether they had land or not. If you wrote a article about thinning, and what it would do for your forest, I would read it, but not too many others would.

[Tmac47]

Claybraker's on to something comparing it to retirement. You see all the time where they show a chart where a 18 year old guy puts in $2000 a year from 18 to 30, and stops contributing, the next guy starts putting in at 30, adds the rest of his working life, and has less money than the 18 year old, I don't know why trees would be any different. Give your trees a one up early on with a little thinning, and it should pay dividends later in life, but that's a hard sell when you don't see immediate results, we are a impatient people.

I'm under 30 and have a Roth IRA.  Why?  Well, because for whatever reason, I've been educated.  I didn't start looking into it just because, but because I was influenced.  How was I influenced?

• TV Commercials
• Radio Commercials
• Radio Shows - Clark Howard
• Internet Newspaper - Business
• Everywhere I don't remember

People don't act simply "because", they act because they are influenced.  I have a Roth IRA, because I've been influenced enough to act.  I've seen the light, so to speak and am planning for my retirement.

The timber industry should afford landowners the chance to "see the light" by advertising in places that landowners are.  Magazines like Garden & Gun, television networks like Discovery and Outdoor, radio markets like NPR and Talk Radio would be a few places to start.

You want to hit your relevant market, but you don't want to see the same type of incestuous marketing that's currently prevalent in the industry.  The same ears, hearing the same message, year after year.  Let's grow the market!

As far as magazines outside the industry, if you wrote a article in Outdoor Life about food plots to better your hunting, half the people would read it whether they had land or not. If you wrote a article about thinning, and what it would do for your forest, I would read it, but not too many others would.

I believe there are ways to make articles interesting.  For example, my editor is currently doing a story on Ryan Klesko, the former Atlanta Brave.  He's telling a story about Ryan that "inadvertently" includes the success he's seen off the baseball diamond managing timber.

You can get people to read articles about timber, by not making it all about timber.  Writing about timber is boring, let's be honest.  However, stories about people are not boring.  Finding the middle ground and using things like sports to introduce the topic of timber is a creative way to get over that hump.

It's called "brand association".  Red Bull does it all the time and they've made a fortune from it.

[SwampDonkey]

You've got your work cut out for ya.  Maybe you have a gift, time will tell. Better than doing nothing, that is for sure.

We have a bi-monthly magazine on forestry up here, but rarely see it on a news stand. I usually read it all the way through. Timber isn't boring, if it's your thing.  ;D When someone talks timber around these parts, one of the first questions is: 'what is the price lately?' or 'where are you cutting?' :D ;)

[Tmac47]

You've got your work cut out for ya.  Maybe you have a gift, time will tell. Better than doing nothing, that is for sure.

We have a bi-monthly magazine on forestry up here, but rarely see it on a news stand. I usually read it all the way through. Timber isn't boring, if it's your thing.  ;D When someone talks timber around these parts, one of the first questions is: 'what is the price lately?' or 'where are you cutting?' :D ;)

Eh.  I think it has more to do with the timber industry being an incredibly niche market with zero marketing penetration.  I'm not gifted, haha.  I simply see an amazing industry, full of amazing people, who's stories should be told and championed.

Timber isn't boring if you get people excited about it.  To get people excited about it, you've got to get them to understand why it's valuable.  To get them to understand why it's valuable, you've got to use something on their grid that they already find valuable.  That's marketing.

I think the biggest reason the industry doesn't do any marketing is because the folks in the industry don't like selling themselves.  They feel like it's "bull$%!^" or dishonest, when in reality marketing simply affords landowners the luxury of understanding why timber professionals are valuable.

The worse part however, is that when people actually decide to market, they do it in a way that makes them invisible.  Swampdonkey, the next time you read through that forestry magazine, take a look at the ads and tell me they don't all look the same!  :D

[SwampDonkey]

Hmmm diesel engines (Cummins), processors, outdoor furnaces, Aerial photography, kiln, firewood processors, chainsaws, Morbark flail debarker and chipper, trailors, logging winches, books on tree ID,  grapple attachments, mills buying wood, truck/trailer repair, directory of forestry Associations and groups, meeting announcements, portable sawmills.

All the toys and advice one would want. ;D

[Ianab]

Here in NZ the forestry scene appears to be very different.

A major thing is probably the cost of land. No one owns any large area of land (millions of $$) without considering how to make it pay. Trees are treated as just another crop. Longer to mature than corn or tomatoes, but growing them is still a business decision. About 99.8% of the industry is exotic planted trees, and maybe 0.2% is natural indigenous forest. So someone made a conscious business decision to plant those trees.

But this still leaves the smaller owners with a similar problem when it comes to harvesting and marketing.

This company has been set up to handle that issue.
http://www.foms.co.nz/

They handle all that messy stuff with loggers, trucks and mills. Because they have 10 or more separate harvests going on at any one time they can generate steady work for their contractors, and log supply to the various mills. They get best prices for logs because they can grade them on the landing and get them hauled to the best market for that particular log.  So no pulp grade logs end up at a mill that wants pruned veneer quality (and is willing to pay the premium) Logs from one harvest, and even one individual tree can end up at 3 or 4 different destinations. Selling to a single mill, they will get logs that they don't really want, and wont be willing to pay the full potential value for?

FOMS are not in "competition" with the loggers or mills. The logging crews get the jobs, the mills get the logs (at the grade and cost they are prepared to pay for) and the land owner gets paid. The land owners they are dealing with are farmers who may have planted unproductive areas of a farm out in trees, or investors that that bought smaller blocks of marginal farm land and had trees planted on it. Might be 5-500 acres of pine trees.

So a smaller harvest might just be a couple of guys with a skidder and excavator. This is at my old farm when the ex had one of the forest blocks harvested. Maybe a months work there?

Then on to the next job that FOMS has lined up for them.

You can see the logs being stacked according to grade, some going to local mills, some to export, some to pulp mills depending on distance and prices at the mill.

As for "how much is left"? Sharon's current property is much smaller, and has maybe a dozen trees.. BIG "old man" pines. Never been pruned, over mature, and becoming a hazard. I had them down as firewood, and din't want to touch the things. Did I mention they are HUGE and old?  :D  Anyway, she's taliking to Blair that logged the job above. "Yeah, we are getting $50 a ton for those old logs and they are being sold for heavy duty pallet wood. Shorter lengths needed, and stronger mature wood."

Each tree would be scaling out about 10 ton of wood.  Take out the harvesting and trucking, and there was still $3000 in it.

Now a properly managed and pruned log is more like $200+ a ton. Harvesting and trucking cost the same. So the return is MUCH better.

Ian