[Carl Russell]

There are plans….. Somewhere. I lost track of that project. I will contact Les soon, and get back to you all….

[Carl Russell]

He is on here as Mitchmaine….. You will find some of his comments on a thread entitled “Hames” if you search the forum.

Earle Mitchell is also pretty active on FB if you search my friends or go to the DAPNEet FB page I’m sure you’ll find his posting close to the top.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I have a pair of 14’s and a pair of 16’s…. unfortunately I can’t part with them. I think Earle “Mitch” Mitchel is knowledgeable about Dick, and his operation.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I have broken down my horse expenses over the entire enterprise, and when I was doing a larger percentage of logging, I found it to be just about the same. I keep track of all horse expenses and from time to time I keep track of production numbers, to come up with a general working average like you have.

Generally speaking I have found that my horses cost me about $5/day year round, so when figuring profit centers it is important to keep that in mind. whether I make $200, or $300 in a day from logging production, that cost doesn’t change. There aren’t too many investments in production enterprises that will actually represent such a small percentage of operating expense.

When thinking about increasing return on investment from logging it is really difficult not to think about some piece of equipment that can ultimately increase production, like a crawler, or tractor, or forwarder, but all of those things have costs directly associated with production, and those costs are much higher than horses. These factors ultimately lead to relying heavier on the machinery as those carrying costs exist whether they are used or not, and most generally they are recouped best by using the equipment.

However, looking at enterprises such as fuelwood processors, or sawmills actually add value to logs outside of the operation and take advantage of the low expenses of the horses.

I was talking to a logger friend of mine today who says that a local fuelwood processor is paying $50/ton, @ about 5400lbs per cord that is about $135/cord. That comes down to close to $100/cord on the landing. The processor is then selling split green wood for $300/cd…. another is selling it for $275/cd delivered.

The deal that George has going with his neighbor is sweet, and one of the benefits to small low cost enterprises is that we are not backed into a corner to just move wood, so we can look for those sweet deals…

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Wow George, that is some breakdown….. how does that figure in estimated dollars per day, or dollars per hour for your woods work?

I would be really interested to find out if that guy would do that again at that price. Most guys I know operating processors are looking for more like $100/cd processing and delivering.

There is no doubt that any handling of the raw product prior to processing is a great profit center to focus on. On-site fuelwood, or lumber production eliminates trucking the product to either end user or processor. Also on-site processing is the best way to maximize yield, as log-length truck loads of fuelwood must have more wood on them than they are sold for (actually the only way to make sure estimates are legally substantiated), and on-site milled lumber can have nearly 20% over-run compared to stick scale at destination sales.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Seems my autocorrect thinks stumpage should be spelled, stumapge….. 🙂

[Carl Russell]

Jared, there are several ways to work at it. Generally we have a bit more flexibility in markets than farming, but the markets for sawlogs are basically controlled regionally by competition between buyers. You can find buyers who will move one species more than another, so they may be able to come up with a few more bucks than others. You can also find niche markets that may add a few bucks.

The bottom line though is that you are competing in a production world. Log buyers want a lot of what they want, and they want to buy it for as little as they can get away with. Meanwhile landowners want as much money as they can get for their timber. This leads to operators finding ways to produce as much as they can for as little cost as possible. This is extremely difficult to do with horses.

Most of the logging business is conducted on a piece-work basis…. In thousands of board feet (MBf). Generally stumapge, (the value of the logs standing in the woods… On the stump… ) is purchased from landowners, and after logging the logs are sold to a mill. The profit is in the process between stump and mill. You can buy high, log for low cost, and sell at the going rate and be profitable. The challenge that crops up is that low logging costs generally lead to compromises in the residual forest, in terms of ecological resiliency, access, and even future timber value.

With animals we really cannot compete in production, which is why many of us are focusing on the silviculture, because once under way it really doesn’t cost us any more to focus on workmanship than if we try to cut corners, thus shifting the focus to the potential value of increased logging services costs.

I personally have always logged as a forest improvement service. Rather than “buying” stumapge, I set a straight through rate of logging, say $200/Mbf, and then subtract that from the market value of logs sold. That way I can make a profitable wage, I have provided a service of improvement, and the LO generally have found that in the end my stumapge rates have been reasonably competitive enough to justify the added cost of working with me.

Profitability however is a strange and personal thing.i personally have a take on it that is more holistic, and I have used my skills and capital investments to secure a livelihood in which my personal expenses are quite low, so I am not forced into competitive arrangements, and I draw “profit” from a wide array of enterprises…. So you can take my perspective however you want.

The bottom line is that you need to find some way to make the operation pay for the cost of stumapge and logging, and it doesn’t always come down to numbers. You can buy low, sell high, be profitable, but make a mess, or any number of variations. You could have a great financial opportunity, and not be able to capitalize because you work over yourself in the woods because of inexperience.

It really is not a simple equation of trees, money, and horses. Much of it comes from paying dues…. Making mistakes…, making relationships. I personally had quite a bit of conventional logging experience before I started with horses, so felling, bucking logs, and marketing were already part of my vernacular. Even so, I had to work at a minimal profit level for a few years because my skills of using horses in the woods were weak.

So the basics are, find a woodlot, determine the residual stand, find a market for what you are going to harvest, get reasonable estimates of the value of those logs and what others are paying for stumapge, and work out a deal to get started. Once you get under way you should find those points in your formula that need to be addressed. Maybe you have paid well, but your saw work needs to be more proficient…. Maybe you need a different arch…. Maybe you need a crawler or tractor for the landing and long skids…. Maybe you need to pay less, or sell to someone else.

There are a lot of moving pieces, so it is hard to really hand someone a formula for being profitable. However, I feel that without basic forestry and horsemanship skills profitability is less likely….. I also believe that forestry is based so much on judgement, and we are so focused on finances as a culture, that judgement often is only as good as how profitable it is, which compromises the underpinning of good forestry…. So it is a personal thing with me to get people to step up to the conservation plate and bring judgement and morality back into land-use activities….. And to be profitable in that regard requires a whole other set of qualifiers…..BUT I do know that animal power is a smooth fit”..

Good luck, Carl

[Carl Russell]

I thought that it might be fun to share with you our daughter Tulie’s journal entry from yesterday morning…she is mentoring with me for her senior project….

Tulie McCrory
Mrs. Pratt
Senior Project
October 21, 2014
Journal Entry 11: Three to One
This morning, when I arrived at the barn to meet with my mentor, he informed me that I would be leading the three horses up to the barn… all by myself. At first, I didn’t really think it was going to be all that difficult; I had led each of these horses alone many times, and I see my mentor leading all of them at once often. When we actually got to the pasture I started to think about the whole thing a little, and once all three lead ropes were in my hand, I started to think a little more. It wasn’t going to be as easy as throwing some halters on the horses and walking away with them.
When one person wishes to lead two or more horses simultaneously, it is a necessary step to loop each lead rope in the halter underneath the chin between haltering each horse. The purpose of this is to keep the lead rope from dragging on the ground. Once I had all the horses haltered is when things started to get more complicated than I had anticipated.
Leading each horse over the fence, I started to think about the order in which I should line the horses up to make the walk to the barn as cooperative as possible. Leaving the pasture, I thought I had ordered them quite perfectly. The walk to the barn was great! The horses were calm and responsive, no one was stepping on anyone, and the pace was reasonable. It wasn’t until I got to the barn that I realized my ordering could have used improvement. This task really put an emphasis on the fact that whenever you work with any animal, planning ahead is always an important step.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Carl Russell]

Nice Pic Erika….

My suggestion might be to practice around the barnyard, or after they have fed, or try it for the first time on the way IN from pasture so you have full and relaxed animals.

Cattle are really easy to drive, so depending on where you intend to lead them, I might be inclined to let the cows go ahead, and follow behind with the horses…. the only problem being somewhat different gaits while leading.

And, nothing will replace effective communication. If your animals follow your lead, then this is just another exercise, and as long as you think it through, you should have no problems. However, there are great opportunities for those edgy animals to take advantage of the situation, so try to set it up with as few openings as possible.

When I leave the barn I tie one, two, or three, then bring along the last one or two, untying each one as we approach, before I lead them to the field. I will snap the lead, or rattle the halter to get the attention of frolickers. Also, I usually walk faster than they do, with them following me…. not that I am trying to outpace a fast horse, just that I have a confident and “in-charge” pace that they must match.

In the field I put on halters, tucking leads looped into the chin strap and work back to the gate if they haven’t met me there. Sometimes I need to ground tie a few at the gate waiting while I go get a loafer. Then I can pull the leads free, open the gate, and head down the road.

It can be a handful of lead ropes, but I like having individual leads (not that I have ever tried a multiple lead). I can send messages directed at a particular horse by sending a wave up the rope. I will pass leads behind my back, taking up and letting out slack, putting three horses on one side, or mixing it up depending on what’s going on. Sometimes I find turning them back on themselves, insy-outsy, is a great exercise to practice to get them following…

Also field manners will help. I found my four horses 3 miles from home in a nearby yard, walked up to each one, haltered them, took the leads, and headed for home, no fence, and no assistance.

Have fun and be safe, Carl

[Carl Russell]

I use standard length chokers…. 8 feet -ish. Haven’t had too many instances where that wasn’t enogh chain that I couldn’t make the extra trip with just one stick.

Every situation is different, I just wanted to mention this method as it can be very helpful.

Again, in these cases in the woods, or anywhere really, but in the woods in particular, I will make felling, skid lay out, and bucking choices all based on how I intend to handle the logs. My standard is a single chain and a hook when ground skidding, and that is where I start, so that during that work I rarely find a situation where I might change that standard midstream.

If a choice arises that might lead to considering a different hitching method, then I am apt to change other components before I change how I choke and hook. The way my brain works, this consistency gives me a baseline that directs all other choices.

This all may have risen from not having a good and easy way to use more than one chain, when I started out, and I have just developed a habit ….. So it will be good to try this hook.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Picture from The Draft Horse Primer, by Maurice Telleen, showing hitching two logs with one chain. I have used this method easily and effectively for many years, and it has saved me needing to carry two chains when ground skidding.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Carl Russell]

So…. while I have yet to employ the DAPNet hook, this discussion reminds me that no one tool will do everything we need.

For ground-skidding large logs, tongs or grabs are hard to beat…. lower the draft, and much faster than manipulating two chains.

Also one needn’t use two chains to hitch two logs laid end to end. The choker end on the end of one log, and a half hitch on the other log will roll together smoothly with forward pull…..

Carl

• This reply was modified 10 years, 8 months ago by Carl Russell.

[Carl Russell]

Hey Donn, glad you are using the hook. I haven’t put it to use directly, but I did get to see it in use by John Haney. It seems to be a good design in many ways.

I personally have had so few times when I have ever felt I needed…. let me rephrase…. I have never felt the need to hitch two chains at the same time (when ground-skidding), so I am not as concerned with that aspect as others may be…I see it mostly as a convenience of not having to switch the hook around to find a slot… one is always available no matter which hand you are using, or which side of the log you are on. Also, I am uncertain that the cradle hitch will work without a cart….. may be a lot of extra chain handling for no benefit… there will be no lift from a loose wiffletree.

I will be getting it soon, and I will put some time on it. My concern with all logging equipment is not the average hitch, but the one that counts, because that’s the one that will either add to the checkbook, or detract from it. In that vein, I will be focusing on how the off-center pull affects the weld and clevis. If those straighten, or chafe, then I expect that will be the limiting factor.

The new price sounds great….. maybe that means that some extra could be added back on to use slightly heavier gauge steel…..

Anyway, it is nice to see this project come to fruition. I’ll get back to you once I’ve hooked it a while.

Carl

• This reply was modified 10 years, 8 months ago by Carl Russell.

[Carl Russell]

Nice…. good to know a bit more about those characters….. 😯

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Here is a link to a Facebook album of photos from our recent cooperative harvest at Hidden Valley Nature Center in Jefferson, ME…

These photos came from the 2014 Northeast Biological Woodsmen’s Week, a cooperative timber harvest conducted on 10.5 acres of recovering high-graded Maine forestland belonging to the owners of Hidden Valley Nature Center in Jefferson, ME. The effort is part of an initiative to build regional consensus among draft-animal powered timber harvesting practitioners about methods and practices that can differentiate our work from that of the conventional forestry industry.

We involved 3 teams, 2 singles, 4+/- cutters, and 5-7 additional helpers from all over the Northeastern United States. All involved have varying degrees of experience, and serious interest in animal-powered forestry. We spent 4 working days releasing white pine crop trees, and red and white oak understory, while harvesting what we could of hardwood fuel and white pine pulp.

This operation was not commercially viable without funding assistance from USDA/NRCS cost-share, and the insightful support of the property owners. The resulting residual stand has much improved potential for future production of quality forest products, and because of targeted surgical harvest with work horses, there is minimal impact, and the stand can rebound immediately.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10205002858897592&type=1&l=b975cc334f

Carl

[Author]

Posts