[Carl Russell]

Yes Andy, that is a good alternative.

In this case however we are traveling 1/2-3/4 mile uphill the whole way back into the woods. It is a deal breaker for the horses. Also, as I have been to alluding to, this is not so much about creating the most efficient, cost effective forwarding method, but trying to deal with growing demand from all sides to apply more horse-powered forestry on a landscape scale.

I still believe that 1 person with a team with cart and a few different sleds can take on most timber harvesting in the most cost effective way. Low investment, no supervision, etc. However there are a lot of woodlots that have access issues, with substantial volumes, where it could be advantageous to bring more operators in. To accomplish this we feel we need to concentrate the advantage of the horse where it is best suited…. getting off the trail and skidding wood. There is no doubt that horses pulling a forwarding device has benefits of low cost, small carbon foot print, etc., but in terms of the forestry product, they have their greatest import in the ground work from stump to haul road.

There is no doubt that the current rig we are working with is expensive, but Ben feels he has made good investments in equipment, and this is what we have to work with, so we are trying to work out those aspects of the best applications in the situations we are working with.

Part of what we are doing is using this harvest as a way for us to get all of our heads around some of the basics of the horses/forestry process. Over the years I have found specific differences between the way I apply forestry for machinery vs. horses. Because the production mentality of mechanical logging is so prevalent, it takes some practice for people to stop trying to replicate mechanical production using horses, and get down to applying the horse to the task at hand, improving the forest.

The first thing that comes to the mind is that this adds extra cost, and Tom has alluded to this, but the truth of the matter is that we do bring a production mentality to this too, trying to figure out the most cost effective way to apply the different moving parts.

AND one of the keys is that in my own operation I am the supervising forester, so there is virtually no administrative expense. We are trying to get enough of us in one place for long enough that we can share this perspective, so that when these other horse-loggers go out and work on smaller lots, I can supervise them in a similar way….. ie, very little.

As I said to Tom, I think this cultural change has to start with the foresters. A part of this is training/educating operators to be able to see/read the forest in a way that requires very little administrative oversight. The forester as timber sale administrator model is breaking the back of the North American forest. I know, supply and demand…. but as animal-powered practioners we need much fewer clients and can choose to work with the ones who want to improve their woodlands. The professional horse-powered forestry practitioner model can work without adding the extra cost that is regularly attributed to it.

And not to get too divergent here, but when we get into the financial crunch of trying to satisfy LO interests, the forestry product gets squeezed between the mill price and the cost of the operation. With machinery so much land is, and has been, worked under this model that it has become a convention. When loggers are expected to pay a certain stumpage value for each species because that is what the going rate is within a given region, then there is more emphasis on minimizing harvesting costs to accommodate the market…. and unfortunately when the forestry product delivered through harvest, it is tied directly to the cost of operation. If the logger and forester are constantly trying to work within a fixed window between mill price and stumpage price, then there is only so much that can be done in terms of providing an improved residual stand…..and this becomes the conventionally accepted standard for the forestry product.

So not only are we trying to find cost effective ways to log more terrain with horse-power, we are trying to train new and experienced horse-loggers, and we are trying to break down well-established cultural conventions………

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Countymouse 28863 wrote:

…. This is really alot of musing from someone with almost no logging experience…

All good stuff Andy. You sound about like me in my own mind every day we work at this. We basically work through all those scenarios in various manners.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Scott, it’s not so much the forwarder as the landscape scale horse-powered forestry that is motivating me. I’m motivated by the need to address the needs of my client base, whom I have been working with in any way that I can manage. Mostly I have harvested by myself and my team on a small portion, sometimes in combination with other horse-loggers, the others have either done cutting themselves, or we have made arrangements with mechanical operators. Until a few years ago, I was pretty much committed to just doing some god work on a small scale, as there was no way I could make a big enough splash by myself. But now I am surrounded by other horse-loggers looking for work, apprentices looking for experience, and foresters and landowners looking for guidance.

As I have said previously, I believe the key to animal-powered forestry is the forestry component. This aspect takes time to implement operationally… cutters and teamsters seeing the forest in these terms. Add to this the intensive labor factors of AP logging and the group/coop model begins to take on favorable light. Building a model where 4-8 individuals can get together to share labor and learn some replicable methods so that these same individuals can then reach out to other smaller jobs is my main objective.

Our biggest hurdle right now is finding the people with the skills within the region to keep the machine running efficiently. A few years ago I would have said, and did say, these machines bring too much cost to the scale that I have experience with, but now I feel like we need to bring the forwarder into the equation. The economics is tough, but seeing the forwarder just as a way to facilitate the gathering of force is sufficient for me right now.

We have had trouble with all you mention….enough wood on the ground to keep the rig moving loaded….enough cash to handle the 2-3 weeks production to get that far ahead…enough side-work for choppers or teamsters to do when snags in production are encountered etc. I have a hard time seeing this machine being a component of a small operation, unless it is really inexpensive…..

Right now our problem is that we had worked for 3 weeks stockpiling logs so that the forwarder could move wood full-time for a week, and we had about 20MBF of logs beside the road ready to go….and then come Irene….. now it will be a few more weeks before we can get a truck anywhere near….:mad:

This clip shows some big logs being loaded, but it also shows the roadside log pile.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mr9UfvbALk

Tom, in my experience the problem is not with the LO. It definitely is with the foresters. The change has got to start with the foresters…. believing in and understanding animal-power, and the forestry product that can be produced with it…. 😮

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Baystatetom 28853 wrote:

Like I said before Carl, Your preaching to the choir brother! I am still not sure this can happen on a landscape level because of that whole supply and demand thing, until the price of oil shifts the scales into into the horses favor. But I want to do it like you because that’s the way I like to do it.
I am sure you have tried everything. What about making a portable ramp to roll the logs onto a trailer, then you save the cost of the log loader. A set of forks on the tractor could unload and sort the logs on the header.
~Tom

Tom, I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but I’m also trying to work it out through discussion and feedback so the WE can preach to others. When/How do you think the supply/demand thing is going to change? I think we need to push the envelope. If we aren’t finding ways to prepare ourselves for landscape scale animal-powered forestry, we will always be relegated to the niche market.

I know it is a chicken-and-the-egg thing. We can’t press the issue if we don’t find ways to make our solution more viable, and we have a hard time developing that viable capacity without more opportunity. For me, the key has always been the link between my forestry expertise and my harvesting desire and skills. That is why I keep “preaching” to you. I feel that the more of us foresters who think like we do, the more the LO’s get challenged to consider a different product, the more opportunity there is for folks to practice and refine methods, the more viable the offering, the more demand…..etc.

Preaching to the choir to build/enliven the network…

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Carl Russell 28837 wrote:

It passed here over a month ago headed for Raged View Farm and moving in this direction…. …[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl26, colspan: 4″][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl27″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl31″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl32″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl31″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl32″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl29, align: right”][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″][/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Ragged View…..

[Carl Russell]

Yes Jen thanks for getting this together. Also thanks for putting out that proposal.

I think the opening remarks should be made by the President or VP. Perhaps Geoff can send a statement if necessary.

Lisa and I would like to have some time to make a few remarks expressing our gratitude for all that has been done in the last year, etc. Doesn’t need to be high profile, nor does it need to take a lot of time, we just want to make some acknowledgments.

One comment I would have about Jen’s NEAPFD proposal is that the smaller sanctioned regional educational events are an excellent and long-term goal of ours, and truly are a natural progression of NEAPFD. If the annual meeting can replace the “community” event at lower cost and more impact then there may never be a need for another NEAPFD, but it doesn’t mean that these things are mutually exclusive. DAPNet can shift financial and planning emphasis, but we don’t need to do away with something that may find a purpose again…… For example, I don’t think letting NOFA ,or another Org., take over NEAPFD just because we don’t want to do it would be a good idea. I think we hold that card, and if we don’t play it, fine, but when we do want to play it, it will still be our property…and DAPNet can decide whether it has a place in future efforts.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Yes Geoff, I know I updated that list before I included it in the envelope…..I just can’t find that version and overlooked that when I pasted it in here….

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@dominiquer60 28836 wrote:

I have not signed or passed it on yet, so I don’t think it is ready yet. But certainly al good thing to remind us about, we should probably try to have this completed by the meeting.
Erika

It passed here over a month ago headed for Raged View Farm and moving in this direction…. Who was the last to see it. Brad and I had signed it.

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl26, width: 297, colspan: 4″]DAPNET BOARD OF DIRECTORS[/TD]
[TD=”width: 279″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]2[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Mark[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Cowdrey[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Ragged View Farm[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]111 Bradley Lake Rd, Andover, NH 03216[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]3[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Brad[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Johnson[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]All Together Farm[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]2435 Ridge Rd, Randolph Ctr, VT 05061[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]4[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Jennifer[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Judkins[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Resting Heart Farm[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]PO Box 965, Grantham, NH 03753[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]5[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Erika [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Marczak[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]292 Lower Pine Valley Rd, Hoosick Falls, NY 12090[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]7[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Carl[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Russell[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Earthwise Farm and Forest[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]341 Macintosh Hill Rd, Randolph, VT 05060[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]8[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Geoff[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Pritchard[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]9[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Jay[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Bailey[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Fair Winds Farm[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]511 Upper Dummerston Rd, Brattleboro, VT 05301[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl28, align: right”]10[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Pat[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]Palmer[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl27″]Thornapple Farm[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl24″]1772 Hunt Rd, New Haven, VT 05472[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl31″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl32″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl31″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl32″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl25″] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl29, align: right”]11[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″]Jean [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″]Cross[/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″] [/TD]
[TD=”class: xl30″]271 plank rd. Vergennes vt 05491
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[Carl Russell]

@Baystatetom 28829 wrote:

Carl it sounds like you are doing what I have been day dreaming about for years while out in the woods marking timber. I always thought I would have a high-bred operation where I used my steers in place of a winch, just bringing trees from the stump to the closest place I could easily get a tractor.
Down here in Mass. our Endangered Species people can make it quite difficult to work within supposed rare habitat. For example in box turtle habitat (the most common land turtle in North America) we must layout skid trails which the equipment cannot leave, then winch the trees to the skid trails. The skid trails cannot cover more then a small percentage of the habitat area. In other cases the presence of dragon flies or salamanders requires a 70% crown cover be retained.
It is very difficult to work on these properties but it would be perfect for the type of operation your describing. Just another niche waiting for us!
~Tom

Yes Tom it is difficult to operate contrary to these parameters, especially if we are constantly focusing on harvesting economics as our measure of forestry success. But if we really understand forestry as being more than harvesting and growing trees for timber then we can see these ecological parameters as being paramount, and we can leave the machinery operations in the dust. If we are willing to take this philosophy beyond the so-called sensitive properties, we can show everyone that all forests have sensitive aspects that are best protected by operators who are aware of them, and committed to protecting and cultivating them. Add on top of that a highly focused multi-dimensional intensive appraisal and performance of tree cultivation, and there is no competition….. really.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Andy, the forwarder isn’t the bottleneck, it is having enough wood that is the problem. We have found that a teamster can keep up with two choppers, especially if skid distance is kept within 300′ and log handling kept to a minimum. We also figure there should be two such teams working to keep the forwarder moving steadily. As you suggest it is difficult to find that many folks prepared to get together within a region at the same time.

This is a start. We are trying to work out the details of interpersonal/business relationships, working schedules, and in-the-woods functionality to developing a cooperative model where we can put together the forestry clientele, the overseeing foresters, the needed number of practitioners, equipment, marketing etc. to amortize the amount of individual investments and financial liabilities over the possible work in order to make animal-powered forestry more practically applicable on a landscape scale.

The forwarder can be a valuable tool, allowing us to deliver what we consider to be a superior forestry product, the residual stand, by using the horses for surgical extraction of material. Using directional felling, short-wood skidding (as apposed to tree-length), combined with non-commercial forest improvement methods such as girdling and crop-tree release and informed forestry oversight, we can deliver a residual stand that escapes most mechanical harvesters and foresters who employ them.

The kind of work we do would require that skidders be limited to main haul roads, using their winches to pull individual logs out of the brush. This would be extremely costly for them, but I have seen a few landowners who use their own skidders and crawlers under similar conditions and the results are comparable. However commercial operators are usually more interested in increasing production to maximize their income over expenses, and most foresters make accommodations for them so that they can get the harvesting done.

It is through harvesting that silvicultural treatments get done. The challenge is that most of the time the foresters are getting paid to oversee the harvest, so with no harvest there is no income, the landowner wants to make income, so the logger is pressed to be economically efficient, and therefore the forestry is often tilted toward facilitating the harvest, and compromises are accepted as necessary evil.

Since we, using horses, need to use the harvesting methods that lend themselves to surgical application we have decided that we should take it to another level. Rather than trying to use horses to compete with machines on production, we are using the horses to support a quality product that is out of reach of most foresters working with machinery. Combining horses with the forwarder allows us to employ enough power and functionality to take on larger harvest areas with access that would typically stymie draft animals. The next step for us is to find enough folks close enough together to provide the person-power and expertise……

Carl

[Carl Russell]

All of the above Andy. With the hydraulics we have to handle the logs very little on our small landings…. that is IF the forwarder can keep up with us, which is a big trick sometimes. If we want the forwarder to be most cost effective on the job, we need to have it moving for most of the day, otherwise the cost of ownership makes it hard to justify sitting around waiting for logs. Conversely, if we have a lot of wood to come out of one area, and the forwarder is not on the job, then we tend to get into trying to stack logs which is more costly in terms of time than letting the forwarder do it…. So we need to plan out our cutting in a way that allows us to stockpile ahead of the machine, but doesn’t create a bottle neck for the teamsters twitching material out.

As far as capacity, especially on dry ground, the forwader can move much more wood than the horses with a sled let’s say. Coming back into the wood 1/2-3/4 mile is a back breaker for the horses, even empty. Whereas with the forwarder, it just keeps plugging along. The improved road allows for more comfortable operation at higher speeds. While the horses cost about 1/3 of what the forwarder does, and they can move a comparable amount per unit of cost, in 80º August weather it knocks the shit out of them, but old iron horse just needs a little more fuel. Then comes the hydraulics again stacking and sorting logs on the landing, requiring much less room…. stacking roadside…. convenient for log trucks and virtually no impact on the landowner’s property.

We believe that improving access is a huge piece of the superior forestry product we are providing. Number one it increases the functional capacity of the forwarder. It also, because the forwarder can be used efficiently, provides opportunity for reasonable off-trail access using the horses…. surgical harvest and forest improvement…. putting the power of the horses to its best use moving the logs out from where they are cut with precision and low impact. And it creates a long-term infrastructural asset that will stay with the property into perpetuity, amortizing its cost over several timber harvests, and allowing landowners multiple-use access to their property.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I agree with Donn, and sometimes will run the discs over the new area first to cut and tear up the sod ahead of time. Either way, plowing under the sod, or breaking it up first, requires a fairly good set of harrows…..

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I like October 1st. Being just after the annual meeting seems like a reasonable time.

Spent the last 2 days shuttling a generator around to neighbors homes, and helping with cleaning up log jams under bridges. More of the same tomorrow….. and for the foreseeable future…

Carl

[Carl Russell]

His cell phone # is 802-238-2138

[Carl Russell]

@Robert MoonShadow 28672 wrote:

I keep getting kicked out after 3 or 4 minutes…try to post and it says I’m “not authorized to post here” and to refresh the page, and sign in….even though I’m already signed in.

This seems to be epidemic. One solution seems to be to change browsers. Internet Explorer is the most ineffective. Firefox works well.

Carl

[Author]

Posts