Selling Forestry

[PAFaller]

Heres one for you industry vets...How do you handle a client that talks one thing but apparently wants another?? Case in point, I meet with a gentleman in his 70's and his oldest son, guessing mid 40's. We proceed to walk around his 125+ acre woodlot and he is going on and on about wanting better deer and upland bird habitat and how he wants to do what's right for the woods. He also tells me that his sons will be inheriting the property and the camp that goes with it, and how he wants to leave them a healthy forest. This is all fine and I think this guy can really be sold on management. He wanted an area for a food plot, I suggested cutting out what was once an old pasture and is now filled with ugly weevil damaged white pine and tell him that pine is marketable for wood shavings. As we get into a mixed oak forest it becomes apparent it has already been cut pretty hard, and he admits that an area mill did a 14 inch and larger diameter cut 10-11 years ago. His tune then changes and he seems to think that the remaining oak, red maple, and hickory that exceed 14 inches should be cut again. I ask why, and he has the notion of cutting the old ones to let the little ones grow. I then explain the details of how larger doesn't mean older, and how those trees, especially the remaining white and red oaks, should be left if he wants habitat and game on the property. I then suggest a thinning from below and some crop tree release to nurture along whats left, and find a few areas that could be 1/2 acre or so patch cuts to really get the cover coming back. At this point the son is really thinking this is good stuff, but I can tell the dad is not on the same page.
Our meeting ends well, and he tells me he thinks my ideas are good. He wants to discuss the events with his other 2 boys, and together him and the 3 sons will decide what avenue to take. I gather phone numbers from him and his son, wish them good luck hunting, and await a call back. Two weeks and nothing. I call the gentleman, no answer. Call his son, find out that dad feels much differently, wants to do a diameter cut again, fearing his woods will be ruined and he wont make any money cutting all the 'little' trees. Where did I go wrong, or does this sound like an underlying money issue that was never brought out into the open? Furthermore, do I try to win this client back or let it go and chalk it up as good experience?

[BARPINCHER]

I don't think you did anything wrong.  You just didn't tell him what he already decided he wanted to hear.  This is classic PA stuff.  WHen this happens to me (often) I just make sure they have all my contact info and if they have any ??'s at any time they should not hesitate to call me.  Check back after hunting season.  Often times they just need to corner dad around the supper table one night to bring him around and see he may be misjudging things a bit.  He may never admit it but that's o.k. too!!! Follow up again in 6 mos just so they don't forget you.

[Ron Scott]

There are times when the landowner will not practice good forestry and is just "fishing for information" to support their ideas. As the landowner, they will do what they want to do.

All you can do is give them the best and scientific forest managment prescription to meet there objectives. Provide it to them in writing so that they have the record of it. If they want to implement it, they will call you, if not, they won't call you. Just go about your business with another client, and don't let them involve or encourage you to practice "bad forestry" if that is what they want to do for immediate financial benefit. If their mind is made up, they don't need a forester.

[Tom]

Looking at it from a Landowner's standpoint, I agree whole heartedly with Ron.  If it were my place, and I asked a Forester for an opinion, I would definitely try to get him to understand why I thought  certain goals were important.  But, you know what, a Forester knows more about Forestry Management than I do and I, within reason, would value his opinion.  If I had the "plan" in writing, so that I could study it at night and not get myself sidetracked, I would tend to want to follow it.

I had a situation where I didn't want to follow a young forester's suggestions and got a second opinion.  The young fellow was "boiler plating" a plan for my small acreage as if it were a 500 acre plantation.  The site prep alone would have killed me.

My second opinion was from an elder Forester who wrote an opinion that I put into my managemenet plan.  He discouraged a harvest and recommended herbaciding, by injection, to kill some of the unwanted hardwoods.  If he hadn't written it down, I wouldn't have remembered 1/3 of what he told me.

I didn't sell any wood, but I ended up with a better woodlot.

Selling (convincing the landowner), is a Forester's second most valuable tool.  Selling himself, being the first.

[chevytaHOE5674]

Some people just have it set in their mind how they want it done and want someone of "knowledge" to back them up. I've walked away from a few jobs where the landowner wanted me to do things that I didn't agree with or didn't feel was best for the land. Don't take it personally.

[Tom]

I don't think we are talking about two different things.  I know there are unreasonable landowners as well as unreasonable Foresters.  But, here, back when Foresters helped small landowners,  one of the first questions he would ask is what would you like to accomplish.  That was more general than specific and meant that the options were money, clearing, development, conservation, wildlife, recreation or taxes.  That's just to name a few of the options.  Usually the landowner doesn't even know he has those options and a good Forester can educate him.  It takes a special kind of apptitude, and a good Forester, to work with small landowners. 

[Ron Wenrich]

The number one method for cutting timber in PA is by diameter limit cutting.  Its done by foresters and loggers, so it has become a preferred method.  The idea behind it is that it is easy to set up (no timber marking), its easy to administer, and its good forestry since the old (big) trees will let the young (small) trees grow.  The last part has been the selling part since old Gifford Pinchot sold the idea of forestry.  Its just been twisted over the years.

An increment borer comes in real handy in these types of discussions.  I once showed a guy where his young 4" white oak was 40 years old.  Then I proceeded to tell him that it wasn't going to be in the next forest, since it won't release as well as any seedlings or stump sprouts.  In 15 years, we'll be back here talking about letting the young 5" white oak grow.  I also tell them that good farmers don't kill their best milkers.

Its hard to sell different forest techniques.  The landowner will stand there and agree.  He may even let you do your job.  But, I will guarantee that after you are done, someone will come in and convince him to do that diameter limit cut.  It happened to me several times.  Its an uphill battle. 

Although you want to do good forestry work, there are 10 guys out there that just don't get it.  They're selling the old style of highgrading techniques that have become an industry mainstay. 

I heard a forester once say that landowners deserve the kind of management that they get.  That's a harsh statement, but in many cases, they really do deserve it.

[Ron Scott]

We have the diameter limit cutting mentality here also. I've had to change a number of landowner's minds, especially when that was the way the stand was previously cut

Tree diameter is only one indicator of whether the tree should ber harvested. Cutting the larger trees removes the healthiest, best growing trees from the stand, leaving behind the weaker, less competitive trees. Health, vigor, age, stand density, and species are among the main factors needed for considertation.

Diameter limit cutting, or simply"cutting the best and leaving the rest" is not sound forestry. Unfortunately, it still is being conducted on some properties yet today.

[Texas Ranger]

There may be a third party buyer that has convinced the landowner, and PAFaller was a back check.  Have been in a few of these, and you can seldom tell if you are there for a real reason, or just there because a son, wife, father, etc, demanded another opinion.

Kind of a brother in law deal.

[Tom]

In my opinion, selling forestry doesn't happen with a one day walk in a 100 year-old woods with an owner who is a mechanic.

The one day trip is to get the job.  Selling forestry should be an ongoing effort by those who know, teaching those who don't and overcoming the resistance to learning. A landowner may not picture himself as a grower of trees until the day that he thinks he can make money by cutting them.  He's not going to go to college to be able to talk to a Forester on the same level, when he doesn't even know what a forester is.  To most, a forester is the guy on the skidder cutting down the trees. The problems communicationg with woodlot owners today is a result of not acknowledging them as woodlot owners 50 or 100 years ago.  Unless they are groomed, the same scenario will exist 100 years from now.

[SwampDonkey]

Diameter limit cutting, or simply"cutting the best and leaving the rest" is not sound forestry. Unfortunately, it still is being conducted on some properties yet today.

9/10 landowners still think this way even when you show them the result of what they did.....well it's too late. Oh well, their bank account just got bigger at least.  :-\

Can't tell you how many woodlots I've prepared plans for where the cutting was already complete. Clearcut or high graded was the site I was presented with. They think silviculture will fix their woodlot because some logger, "my forestry guy", told them so. Yes, sometimes their logger was a forester or a forest technician, most aren't however. Their forestry guy knows more than so and so because he cut wood for 30 years, when most often it should read: "he knows a lot about cutting and selling wood and less in managing it". Managing $$ is somewhat different than managing timber, but surprisingly (or not) a very similar game. :D

[Ron Wenrich]

Okay Tom, you think that its all on the forester to educate the landowner.  I'm here to tell you that the majority of landowners don't give a squat about forest management until its time to cut timber.  It may be different down in your area, but up here, that's not the case.

In the past, I was involved in the education of landowners.  I helped several landowner organizations start up.  All failed due to lack of interest.  I donated my expertise to the local community college when they were offering informal courses on a variety of topics to the local population.  "Forest management for landowners" needed to have 8 people interested to have the course.  It never happened.  Population in the area at that time was well over 250,000 and I couldn't attract .003%.  The Pennsylvania Forestry Assn. has all but disappeared when they stopped having an insurance program for loggers.  I haven't heard from them in decades, and I was on the Board of Directors for a time.

The only way I've ever had the opportunity to discuss forest management with a landowner is by invitation, usually theirs.  I do get to hear a lot of war stories about how they got hosed after the fact.  But, most landowners think they got the best deal going.  You look at their woodlots and you know that they've been highgraded.  But, talk to them and they'll beam with pride about how good of job they got.  I never argue after the fact.

So, as a landowner, maybe you can give us pointers on how you think we should be going about educating the public.  The Internet has been one of the biggest helps, but there's still a lot of misinformation out there.  Look up forest management in a search engine and it quickly goes to sustainable forest management.  A good highgrade job can be sold as sustainable. 

[SwampDonkey]

At many of the courses we put on at the marketing board I would look around the room and see who was there. I knew most of them, but I was seeing who was sitting around the tables for one reason mostly. I was looking to see if there were people who were out there making a living at it and cutting a significant volume of wood to make it a business. What I was seeing were folks that barely cut enough wood to heat the house and some would never cut any amount to add up to beans. I never once saw a logging contractor or any of his men sitting on any course we offered. Fact was, the real loggers got their education out on the job and they weren't about to cut wood all day and sit all evening on a course wishing they were home in bed. The courses were free, but the lost wages of losing a good day in the woods under sunshine weren't reimbursed.

[pappy19]

When I had a landowner with the mindset of a diameter limit cut, always cutting the "larger" trees and allowing the runts to grow, I explained it to him in a genetics mentality. If he, the landowner, say had 100 cows that all had calves and at the end of the year he sold all of his best cows and best calves, what would he be left with? And further down the road if he continued to sell the best and feed more to the runts, what would be the result in say 50 years? They generally get the picture. It's the same way with our forests. If we continually harvest the best and most dominant trees thinking that the co-dom's and lesser trees will release, which they will to a degree, but over the years we will down grade the genetics of the stand. I always liked to take just enough dominants to make it worthwhile for the logger, but then take as many merch trees that were co-doms and below, always trying to upgrade the stand as much as possible. That being said, some landowners are just looking at a pay check and don't really care about stand genetics. When I got those landowner types, I would cut just like they wanted, but I documented our conversation or mentioned it in the contract that the cutting practice was what the landowner wanted. That's all you can do.

[Tom]

The flip side of the coin to educating landowners is to not have foresters who service that segment of the population.  I'm sure that there are enough big mills, with land holdings large enough to keep a few foresters aboard.  Their procurement foresters wouldn't even have to be Foresters, just someone to offer a price good enough to get onto the land.  Government Foresters have no reason whatsoever to delve into private lands of any size.  Even wildfire could be turned over to the local fire departments.  We wouldn't be happy with that, but it could be done.

The education of landowners has to happen on a personal level.  No, you're not going to reach everyone, and you're definitely not going to satisfy everyone.  But, until a citizen realizes that there is such a thing as a Forester and gets some semblance in mind about what a Forester does,  all the forestry in the world isn't going to change the mind of someone who is after just money.

I have awakened "Master Gardeners" who didn't know what a Forester was.   I had one, when I was getting ready to thin my pines, tell me that I should get an Arborist.  She was so far out of touch with Forestry that I don't think she recognized the difference, nor that a logger needed to be involved.

I'm not a Forester.  I have to get opinions and instructions from one, the same as most of the rest of the population.  But, I do see the need to promote Foresters.  Now, I'm not saying that, meaning that I tell people what trees to plant or how to dig up a road.  I honestly mean that I promote Foresters.  I've been doing it since I was awakened to the differences in Foresters, about 25 years ago.  My concern over my trees started with money, but I was lucky to have met two Foresters who were interested in telling me about the industry I had joined.  One is dead now, and the other probably retired.  I lost touch with him.  One took me by the hand after I was directed to The Division of Forestry and hand fed me.  He made owning the land fun and challenging.  He made me want to know more.  He visited my property and identified plants and told me why one tree grew while the one next to it didn't.  He made me aware of markets, loggers, felling, BMP's and presented me the names of organizations whose interest was the landowner.  He was a State Forester and never made a cent off of me, though I would have turned my plantation management over to him in a hear-beat.

The other was an old codger who used to be a State Forester.  He had one foot in the grave when I met him, but he was feared by Government officials because he stood up for the landowners in the county and would show up at city council meetings, Zoning board meetings or anywhere else where he heard that Farmers (especially tree farmers) were to be the subject.  

He began showing up on my road unannounced and shaking hands with people he had met at the meetings.  He got to where he would regularly show up at my place and I would get on the phone and call neighbors that he was here.  We drank coffee, talked trees, politics, markets, cattle, chickens and pretty women. He was always anxious to get to the woods. So, we would go to the woods of a neighbor, usually mine since it was out the back door, and he would ID under-story, trees, indicate good and bad growth, diseases, what trees were good for which markets, identifying ancient logging roads and telling us the story of them. He would research one and come back with the tales the next trip.  We followed him around like puppy's.  We didn't know, until after he died, that  he just liked trees and that he was a Consulting Forester who saw us as future customers.

He was grooming landowners, whom he might never service, the same as we were growing trees we may never saw and sell.  He took his job seriously, doing it personally and drawing as many into the fold as he could touch.  He did it here, at the Extension Office, shaking hands with people he didn't know, at church, at fairs, most anywhere.  He was a walking encyclopedia who had a truck full of instruments we'd never seen before.  Books, samples of limbs and leaves littered his entire cab.

He never made a dime on any of us either.  He didn't work 8 to 5, nor sun-up to dark.  He was working all of the time.

People talk about folks like Pinchot and how he was the Father of Forestry.  But there are Pinchots out there even today.  They might not get much credit, but they deserve all of the recognition that they can be awarded.  

Like I said, I'm no Forester. I do offer my time to promote the profession of Forester every chance I get. It's only right.

I may see the world differently than most.  I don't see my day as having a dollar bill at the end of it.  When I was sawing on the road, I spent spare time promoting sawing. It didn't have to be me they used.  Somebody had to wake up the public that the trees in their yard made lumber that was as good as the lumber in the store.  I didn't see a tree, knock on the door and tell the occupant that I could make 2x4's out of that tree in their front yard and then disappear.  That would have made me more obnoxious than I turned out.  I did take the time to interrupt a sawing job to talk about wood and sawing.  I did go back to a job, when I was in the neighborhood to brag on their lumber, straighten stacks, look at their projects, walk their woods, admire their cattle, ooh and ahh over their new tractor and tried not to miss an opportunity to teach them how to figure board footage, indicate what I knew of grading rules, pass on titles of books, identify trees and spend time with them even if it was getting into my personal time.  I took pictures of the operation, of their families and kept records of their names and their children's names so that I could shake the hand of a 10 year old and try to interest him in  the boards his daddy had sawed.

I don't know about landowners organizations. I don't have the backing of groups that might give meeting rooms.  I don't even have the knowledge that would make others gather around me to search for answers.  But, if I did, I wouldn't run it like a university classroom where you would study one thing and be done.  The education of the Public has to be an on-going process.  People come and people go, you have to take the opportunity provided to enlighten them with as much as you can, even if you never see them again.  The best scenario would be that they wanted to see you again.  You don't do like many college professors will do and say, "I told you that last week."  What you do is tell them again......  and again.... and again.

States and Universities will offer workshops and seminars to the public.  They aren't always the most convenient to attend.  They are usually provided with the auspices of having Mohammad there to teach the multitudes for the day.  Only a few people have the aptitude to 'got to school for the sake of going to school'.  When the seminar is over, you've reached as many people as you could convince to attend and hoped that you taught them something that they could use.  Then it is over. That works for people, like college students, who are going to a school to learn a profession, but it doesn't work as good for landowners who don't know they are tree farmers.

I don't have the answer.  I do know that if the public is to be educated in Forestry, it's going to have to be a Forester that does it.  If there is one thing I can do to help, it's to promote Foresters and make the world know that it is a profession.

We tell people that we have to think in generations of trees, not generations of people when managing a forest.  I think we should all look at our professions with much the same critique.

[Ron Wenrich]

I think the contact you had with those foresters are probably pretty typical of any good forester that's in it for the love of the profession.  And I would also add that your reaction isn't typical, at least from my experience.

I looked at the Sustainable Forest Initiative website for our state.  They offer the bells and whistles that are supposed to turn loggers into master loggers.  Forest management isn't the thing that stands out.  They offer a couple of courses in it, but they are heavy into the other aspects.  They do offer a course on cruising timber and how to buy standing timber.  I wonder which courses get the best attendance. 

State foresters have pretty well been kicked out of the landowner picture.  I was doing more active landowner work when that came about.  I think it was short sighted on the part of the consulting industry to get the government out of the picture.  They were our best window to the landowner, and they closed it.  Now they offer little in the way of advice, and the default is generally to go to the closest mill.

Good forest management is more about what you leave instead of what you harvest.  Too bad others don't see it that way.

[Phorester]

PAFALLER, one thing that might help is to put such advice in writing.  As others stated, a landowner rarely makes a decision in the woods on the spot.  Managing his woodland (actually most likely wanting to make money by selling some trees) might be the hot item on his agenda the day he meets with you, but it's probably #723 on his list of things to actually get done. Remember that you covered numerous topics with him, and....., most important....., introduced him to a way of thinking about his woods that he never knew before.  It's all foreign to him at this point.  He thinks about it, and in a few days, few weeks, a few months, he's forgotten most of what you told him.  Also, his son will have the backup of your written advice to refer back to when he talks with his Dad.  Written advice is the only way to go.  But your experience mirrors mine when working with private woodland owners.  A low rate of follow through with my advice & management plans.

Can't add much to what others have already said about promoting forestry and landowner opinions on forestry, except to say "YEP!"   Been talking that walk and walking that talk all my career.

All I can say is that preachers have been preaching for 1000's of years, they reach a lot more people than foresters do, and they haven't eliminated sin yet.  But they keep trying.  That's what us foresters have to do too.

[WDH]

All I can say is that preachers have been preaching for 1000's of years, they reach a lot more people than foresters do, and they haven't eliminated sin yet.  But they keep trying.  That's what us foresters have to do too.

Now that puts it into perspective.  Humans can be a difficult species to manage!

[PAFaller]

Well heres a second question, and I would like Rons opinion on this as he is from PA and knows the dynamics here. Do you think that  a guy can actually be a forester and a harvesting contractor, or can the two never mesh? In NH and Maine, if you have a foresters license you can be writing management plans one day and cutting timber the next. You are accountable for your actions, and your license can be revoked, but many of the guys who straddle the consultant-timber cutter line do real nice work and have never had problems. Here in PA the consulting field has made numerous stabs at loggers and sawmills, saying they are crooked and hose the landowner so forth and so on. Yet many of these same guys work on a commission, and are merely timber brokers, selling the gravy and taking a commission off the top. There are many that wont even mark pulpwood in a saw timber sale, because the mills will pay less if their loggers have to cut junk that doesnt make sawlogs. Now tell me how this is forestry!! I have also been told flat out that I cannot be a forester and a logger, so how do I sell myself? My background includes the same education, and 8 years of learning by doing with a chainsaw in hand. Most of what I have been cutting is pulpwood and salvage, either gypsy moth or hemlock whoolly adelgid, because it needs to be done but most 'foresters' dont get involved in marking low quality timber.
My fear is that a landowner, if they have done any research, comes into any meeting with a pre-conceived notion of what they are going to get. When a guy shows up in a Toyota pickup loaded with saws and a diesel tank its pretty obvious that I dont just paint trees, so should I just sell myself as a logger, let them believe what they will and hope for the best, or is the goal to get them to come around in their way of thinking? I'm just as happy cutting black birch and beech pulpwood as I am sawlogs, but the pricing obviously has to reflect the product. My fear is that attempting to be both a consultant and the guy doing the work is too much of an uphill battle in a state where every player in the industry seems to prefer talking bad about someone else rather than working at selling themselves.

[hokie97]

Pafeller,
I think you have an advantage over the other guys!  I think as a cutter with the knowledge of a consultant you would be MORE in demand.  I know I would prefer to have someone with both on my property especially if you understood what the long range goals are.  Last I heard there was only one guy in our area with GOOD knowledge of trees cutting and consulting.  As an added bonous if the landowner is upset with anything on the job they can only blame you right?  If people are looking to you for advice can you not give them option one and option two to manage a woodlot?  I know when I seek out a professional I take the opportunity for a learning expierence of someone who has been there, but also educate myselfe before making a decision that will have ramifications long in the future.

[Ron Wenrich]

Here's my opinion.  You are going to do way better forest management work than 90% of the consultants that tell you can't.  They hate competition.  It seems you have a firm grasp of the consultants that perform the same practices as a good deal of the loggers and sawmills.

When they talk about ethics, I can point to several that are below that.  I know of lots of sales that never see the bidding process.  I see lots of sales where there are no small diameter sawtimber, let alone pulpwood. 

I think you have the right idea on how to go about doing the forestry work.  You really have little competition, since most of the consultants are out looking for the next job.  And, they're competing with all the mills that have their own timber buyers. 

But, you're not the atypical forester or logger.  I do know of a few loggers that have forestry degrees.  Many are technicians.  You're more of a hybrid.  Your brand of operations have a higher degree of sustainability than do most of the others. 

How are you running your operations?  Do you take a commission, or are you buying the stumpage?  If you are outside the realm of "normal" operations, it may hurt your business.  Landowners aren't that quick to change.  Make sure you're on the PA forester list. 

One thing you might want to do is to contact the local newspaper.  Tell them what you're trying to do and see if they won't write up an article on you.  Tell them how you're working outside the box. 

[WDH]

Some of the very best professional loggers that I interact with are Foresters.  But, they are not consultants.  They buy timber and harvest it.  The landowners they deal with do not pay a "consultant" fee if they sell timber to them.  In that sense the Forester is acting as a logger buying timber to harvest to deliver to markets, and after the purchase, any gain on the timber goes to the Forester/Logger.  So, you can be a Forester, and apply that knowledge as a logger in a business.

Or, you can be a Forester and apply that knowledge as a consultant.  You can advise landowners for a fee based on the time you spend, or you might charge a % of the value of any timber sold.  You represent that landowner to all other interested buyers.

What might be tricky, is to represent a landowner as a Consulting Forester, charge him a fee or % of the timber sale for your services, and then sell that timber to yourself as the Logger.  In my opinion, that would be a Conflict of Interest.

So, I would say that you can do both consulting and logging, you can only wear one hat at a time when dealing with an individual landowner.  You can represent the landowner as a Consultant to all the other interests and buyers in the market, or you can represent only yourself as a logger buying timber. 

[Ron Wenrich]

Would there be a conflict of interest if he marked the timber, charged a fee for logging, and then a commission on the products that were sold? 

I know consultants that have tried to go that route by having the timber logged by someone else, then trying to market the logs.  The theory is that you'll make yourself and the landowner more money with the value added of the logging, and the better prices for logs than for stumpage.  They usually get burned since their marketing skills in logs aren't that good. 

[jrdwyer]

"In my opinion, a lawyer cannot be on both sides of a lawsuit, and a consulting forester cannot be on both sides of a timber trade." (Tree Farm Business Management, James M. Vardaman, Copyright 1965)

As long as you are only paid by the client for the services provided (no kickbacks or gifts from log buyers at the end of the year), then there would be no conflict of interest.

But if you go this route and charge a fee for logging and a commission for selling the logs, then why wouldn't you also charge a fee for marking the timber (assumed use of scientific forestry practices). Or would this be a loss leader like with some procurement foresters? I have walked through may stands previously marked by timber buyers who told me later that it was a waste of their time because the landowner did not accept their price after marking and tallying. If they are on salary, then they still get paid. If they are a small logging outfit, then it really was a loss.

Most foresters believe the education and experiences necessary to properly mark a stand of timber and carryout a good timber sale are worthy of compensation. I always charge the client a back out fee when I have marked a stand of timber and it does not sell for whatever reason. Of course, there is no backing out after the trees are cut.

I also advise the client on appraised timber value before putting it up for sale. I sell only by lump sum for marked or cruised timber and so there are no hard feelings from the client after the sale. Avoiding surprises is a good thing and I believe this is the main reason share logging has such a bad reputation (other than outright theft or really bad logging practices). I have done the stump/top timber inventory for the little old lady who was promised $3k or 50% of log value and got a check for $3K when the stump appraisal showed $27K for the logs. Lawyers are always involved at this point in time.

I met with a retired lady and her unemployed son the other day and I was third in line after two loggers. I sensed that she had already made up her mind (not really listening to what I was saying/quickly cutting me off/looking for free useful information), but I gave it the best sales pitch anyway. She ended up choosing a share logger who will cut it by diameter limit. The stand has not had harvesting activity for 70-80 years and now will be cut hard for cash.

She likely won't compare what she gets for the timber to other tracts sold by sealed bid for similar timber. She didn't even second guess herself after I explained that all state and federal timber sold in Indiana is done by sealed bidding. I have realized that some people are not interested in forestry and quickly make decisions based on a few opinions of neighbors or friends. Many people don't plan ahead with trees or forests. This stand has mostly yellow poplar and red oak that should have been cut 10 years ago. I move on to other, more receptive, landowners.

[SPIKER]

One thing that I remember back in school as an FFA student was getting some proper forestry technique in class from our instructor, he had a degree in forestry so we all had a heads up, he also took us out to several stands to grade we built cruising sticks as well prior to use :D  was a great course of study as an add on to the standard class info...   Our group of kids went to state finals almost every year while I was in school even though my poor finances kept me from being able to attend a good number of the off site classes it was great way to get more info out into the area while helping us kids out...   

Not sure about other stuff .

Mark

[PAFaller]

Couple of things on my end. Most of what I am looking to do is utilize pulpwood and scrag, and essentially buy it by the ton. There is a lot of time consumed in marking and tallying low-grade material, but I offer competitive rates. They aren't real high, but neither is the delivered price at any of the paper mills or pellet manufacturers. As for sawlogs, i prefer to contract myself to the landowner. Essentially I take a flat per thousand rate to cut skid and market sawlogs. Being in the logging business and moving timber to these mills already, I've never really had issues getting competitive bids on logs. Its always worked out well too, as these mills pay for all logs before a single one gets removed from the sight.
I truly believe this is one of the fairest ways to go, but I am sure others will argue. I charge a rate higher than any mill pays their contract crews, but then again I am doing the road bonding, doing the marketing, and know without boasting too much that I do a neat job. I also feel that marketing logs brings the most accurate  value for each piece, and every stick of timber is paid for. I dont usually charge for the first visit, as most guys dont and I am afraid that would be a turnoff. Landowners that I know are interested in long term management I do offer to write them plans and chare accordingly. I dont charge comission on any jobs unless I am not going to be doing the hands-on work.
The main reason I started this thread was because I feel as my ideas may have come off wrong to a couple of landowners, so any input on how to refine the sales pitch would be appreciated. Thanks, Greg

[Tom]

PAFaller,
I've found, in most of my contact with the public, that people are looking for knowledge, neighbors, honesty, humility and sincerity.  So many customers are turned off because what they see is brashness, heavy fists, this-is-how-it-is-or-else attitudes and the inclination that every last penny is being swept from the table.

So, putting your knowledge aside,  You have to sell yourself.  That doesn't always mean convincing them that you are so smart, as much as it is convincing them that they want you around.   Just think of what it takes to be a friend.  You have to be willing, first of all, to give someone your time.  That means doing things for someone who is a customer or a potential customer that lets them know that they are special to you.

I'm not saying this because I'm a goody-goody-two-shoes, 'cause I'm not.  But, I would make one or many trips to look at a saw site if they had a question. I took every opportunity to let them know that I thought they had pretty wood and I could hardly wait to saw it.  If they needed help moving something,  I helped. Even after the job was completed, I went back and visited.  I still have customers from over 10 years ago that I stop to see when I'm in the neighborhood.   I've even straightened stacks of stickered wood, or helped the elderly woodworker search for a special piece.  It made me feel good to see them smile if I turned into their driveway.  It still does.

There is so much more to selling oneself than doing a good job.  It's what is called in economics as "good will" and it has dollar value, though many don't acknowledge it.

So listen to Ron and these guys about getting each job, but pay attention to the long term advertisement of yourself as well. You don't go out there and BS a customer more than one time. Your best sales tool is your presence and smile.  You will find that they aren't just hiring your marking tape and skidder, they are hiring you.

[tughill]

PAfaller, your sales pitch and business practices seem reasonable to me.  I'm not a forester, but grew up in my grandfather's sawmill, which was a commercial operation, but small. (Handset circular mill, pretty much retailling to local customers)  So I'm pretty familiar with logging, loggers, and the like, and have done a bit of logging here and there, mostly to help out people who wanted their own logs milled, or for the sawmill when we were 'in a pinch' for some wood.

I think you are just running into the lack of knowledge that Tom has described.  Also, the 'little old ladies' don't know you from any of these other guys, and without any knowledge, how can she know who to trust?  Probably older people who are likely to own land are not looking years ahead, because they will not be around that long, so $$ in hand is primary focus for them.

My question is this:  what sort of deals do you guys see from loggers working on shares?  Here in upstate NY, this is very common practice.  I was approached a few years ago by a logger who wanted to cut the woodlot on a piece of farmland I owned and his deal was his share was 60% of mill slip, he kept all firewood (free, no payout to me).  I honestly hadn't been in that woodlot much, didn't know what was there, and when I asked if the skid roads would at least be fixed up at the end (he wanted to log in the springtime, and this is riverbottom land, so it probably would've been a mess), he was really hesitant.  It sounded like a bad deal for me, so I passed, and since have looked through the woods a bit, and there's not any huge value there.  (lots of multistem red maple, some decent ash, some beech).

So what is a 'normal' share percentage for logger and for landowner?  The other thing that put me off was that he wanted to diameter limit cut, down to I think 10" DBH.  I know more about proper forestry now, and I'm glad I didn't have him cut.  Doesn't it seem like shares is especially unfair to the landowner if there is a large amount of veneer or good sawlogs?  It would be a much bigger payout per MBF, thus bigger payout per man-hour, machine-hour, or trucking time/expense.  A low grade cut, like doing TSI or precommercial thinning would seem to be unfair to the logger, by this same rationale, less payout per MBF or cord, more cost in labor, expenses etc. per gross fiber value.  Why do these guys even work on shares then?  I think I can answer my own question, probably to avoid putting $$ out, and shares would seem to work if you were doing diameter limit cutting- take the best, leave the rest.

Personnally I think there are two keys to selling forestry.  Tom hit on the first...and thats to make a name as a forestry guru/fanatic/supporter, or whatever you want to call it.  Do a lot of helpful stuff, educate people, etc. (which will probably not directly bring in any $$, but hopefully boosts the profession, and you in the long run).  I met a young forester in northern central PA years ago who was brokering timber, and would hire woods crews to do the cutting, but buying the stumpage himself.  He told me the secret of his success (I can't say I know him so how successful he really was, who knows) was to be nice to people, find out what their goals were, write up management plans, and cruise timber for cheap or free, help them layout sugarbushes, whatever, and then ask if he could buy their timber, and actually manage the woods long term.  He said explaining that he wanted to stick with them and buy their timber every 5 years or so would be better for him and better for them, than just cutting every stick right now, and having no residual income stream.  Made great sense to me.

Second is marketing...if you are just another guy who shows up with a pickup loaded with fuel tanks and chainsaws, what sets you apart from the last guy that showed up with a pickup load of fuel and saws?  Do you have a brochure, business card, website, list of references? And if you do, great, make sure potential clients know and get this material.  Hopefully this marketing stuff talks about forestry in general, as well as you and your skills.  Whoever said that landowners need to calm down and read over your proposal and marketing stuff later on was absolutely right.  Its a big decision to market logs that have spent the last several decades growing and once they are gone, it's gonna be a while before they grow back.  So it's kinda overwhelming, I think, for people to talk to a forester/logger and make some decisions right there on the spot. 

Another thing to think about is...what image do you show to potential clients...do you show up in an old beat up truck wearing greasy carharts, without having shaved in the last month?  I'm not the most clean cut guy in the world, but I'm not trying to sell myself either.  I can definitely say that if two different loggers showed up on any of my neighbors doorsteps with equal sales pitches, the guy who was polite, clean shaven, with decent clean clothes (you don't have to wear a blue suit, but greasy carharts aren't gonna help), not smoking a cigarette or cursing, and all that sort of thing...has a much better chance of cutting some trees the next day.

just my .02$

[Tom]

I'll have to agree with that.  8)

[Ron Wenrich]

Selling on shares is just an invitation to allow highgrading.  They're going to take the trees that have the most value, so they get the largest paycheck.

I like PAfaller's idea, but I might think of going one more step.  Organize the landowners into a cooperative.  It looks a little bit more legitimate if you're an organization than being a one man show.  You can offer your services, or get more like minded loggers to log by the Mbf or ton.

The logger's advantage is they don't have to bid on sales, and have no money tied up in standing timber.  Prices can go down or up while the money is tied up.  The logger would also have a steady income and would be able to plan his jobs much better.  

The landowner's advantage is that their ground wouldn't be highgraded.  They would also get the highest amount for their timber.  That $2/bf red oak veneer wouldn't give the landowner $1/bf, but $1.80/bf.   The downside is that the landowner would take all risk on value.  That unseen stuff on stumpage can kill a guy.  Landowners would also have a better woodlot in the long run.  

I remember talking to a guy I graduated with from Penn State.  He asked me how well I thought the industry is treating the landowner.  We both agreed that they are getting the short end of the stick.  It makes little difference who was involved.

I tried the cooperative angle a number of years ago.  I wanted to get it started with the Grange.  I figured farmers would be easier to talk to about crops.  Consultants nipped it in the bud.  

[tughill]

Very interesting idea Ron!  I'm assuming when you say consultants, you mean consulting foresters?  So under your COOP model, the forester would work on commission for the coop, or would he be paid some salary from the coop?  Basically you are making a group of landowners of smaller tracts into a larger timber company, and following the model of how a large company forest would be managed right?  I wonder how this would work when the landowners have different goals, one guy wants to make $$ another manage for sugarbush, another for wildlife?

Please tell us more about the coop model...I think it's workable, especially in areas where there's lots of private timber in smaller tracts...like you said gaining critical mass is tough, but I think appealling to farmers might work.

[Ron Wenrich]

There are several different ways of setting up coops.  I was shooting for one similar to the Swedish models.  25% of Sweden's sawmill production comes from forest coops.  They own everything from land to the mills.  My model would have gone the extra step to some sort of secondary processing.  Firewood, fuel chips, lumber could all be set up as long as there is large enough landownership base.  Dividends would be paid based on the amount of land in the coop. 

For a smaller type of operation, landowners can become an organization and conduct their own timber sales.  They don't have to hire a consultant on commission.  Let them bid on the jobs and just do the timber marking.  When they mark and then market the timber, they have a financial interest in the sale.  That allows bias in the timber marking.  Not all consultants do it, but there is always that temptation.  Other consultants can be hired to conduct sale inspections. 

Another type of coop could have their own loggers.  This is pretty much how PAfaller would come into the picture.  Landowners would contract the marking, then contract the cutting, and either allow the logger to do the marketing, or market on their own.  All they need is a concentration yard.  Using this method, its a short step to the secondary markets.

Landowners could have a lot more power in the forest industry if they wouldn't continue to play the part of the pawn.   Right now, they continue to stumble through forest management through ignorance.  Then they start getting advice from a lot of different sources.  Consultants, procurement foresters, state foresters, neighbors, relatives and the net are all sources.  Confusion eventually sets in and they get too scared to make a move.  They know that cutting timber is a final solution...there is no going back.  So, instead of making a wrong decision, they make none.  If they own the management end, then they can eventually own the marketing end.  But, they need to organize.

Coops would also be a really easy way to market carbon credits.  I'd be more than happy to talk to anyone who is interested in making something like that happen.

[PAFaller]

Ron, you make a really good point. I actually have ancestors in Sweden so I have researched their forestry models a bit, and your ideas sum it up well. My wife and I keep talking about taking a vacation to that part of the world and observing how they do it, but I think shes worried I may not want to come back

I think your ideas are well thought out and would likely work with enough support, but the stubbornness of people usually gets in the way. On top of that, and its been stated before, is that there are too many people trying to get one up on the next guy in this business. Until I moved to PA, I had never seen so many people working against each other in one industry. When the mill needs logs they are your best friend, but they will bid outrageous on the next sale just to keep you in your place. The consultants talk of how they can get the most money, but then take a healthy commission and rarely check back in to see the job is done correctly. Furthermore, it seems as though many would rather bad-mouth the other players instead of promote themselves and let the landowner choose. Thats one reason I am not to in to politics, I hate the low blows and unwarranted jabs that go with it.

My frustration stems from my desire to change things, but maybe this issue is as complex as world peace I dont know. How would one person go about altering the publics perception of this business in a favorable manner? Its hard enough for me to sell myself and make landowners see the benefits of good management, but I think there is a bigger underlying problem. I fear that attempting to change the standard diameter limit cut philosophy would be welcomed as much as the antler restrictions on deer!! Those who know different already practice accordingly, but they are certainly the minority. I dont see the feasibility of an organization or round-table discussion with loggers, sawmills, and foresters all deciding to play nice and get along. It may happen for the hour or two of said meeting, but follow through would be nonexistent. This is probably getting away from my original post, but I think its a topic worthy of discussion, especially considering the less than ideal economy we face today. sorry for my long-winded venting, but I am sure some of you wiser gents have some ideas on this.

[SwampDonkey]

We've had private woodlot associations for 30 years or more and forest products marketing boards for about the same. It's been successful in helping people with markets, but not so successful on the management end other than bringing silviculture to woodlot owners for establishment of the next forest. From what I can recall about assisting a woodlot owner with incentives to do the proper thing with managing timber, in the form of wood bonuses and plans, most would head off in the opposite direction. They would follow through on management long enough to get their assistance or bonus and turn around shortly and cut the guts out of the place or flatten it at the highest bid. Why would they do it any different when the government promotes clear cuts and forest cover conversions to softwood on crown. The markets dictate what you can afford to spend doing out there. The timber has to support the activities, from building road to paying the man to work.

[Ron Wenrich]

The timber in our area can support forest management.  But, too often landowners gut the stand on the advice of forest professionals.   Slash for cash.  In our area, we have the mindset that only sawtimber is a commercial product.  The only improvement cuts I've seen in many years are those that the paper company has done.  We only have one paper company in the area.

Doing what PAfaller wants to do is exactly what the forests need in many areas.  We've been depleting the resources for way too long.   The genetics will eventually catch up to us.  I keep on watching the average sawlog size get smaller.  Some woodlots need to get a rest.

The biggest part of selling the plan is marketing.  To do effective marketing, you need to figure out where you can get the free stuff and to your market.  For the most part, long time owners aren't a good source.  They aren't going to change their ways.  New owners are easier to educate.  But, the problem with a one man show is that it takes away from your working time when you market. 

It all starts with a plan.  It has to be attractive to the landowner where he is willing to allow another person to manage their resources.  I wonder if you could do that type of work and have the first refusal rights?  If someone decides to sell their timber to someone else, you get the first chance at it.  That way, you don't do all the work and someone else gets all the gravy.