# Thinning Timber - Operator Select or Marked Trees ?



## clinchscavalry (Sep 28, 2011)

I realize that forest management, logging, and markets differ dramatically from one part of the country to the next, but I thought it would be interesting to see what goes on from region to region when it comes to partial harvests or thinnings.

Around here, in the SE, we do a good deal of pine plantation management, and much of it is on relatively easy topography. In fact, many acres have been planted on former farm land. 

In years past, most of the thinnings were marked by foresters, technicians, landowners, and even some timber buyers. However, about 15 years ago, or thereabouts, things changed quite dramatically. I would venture to say that 75% or more of our thinnings are done by the logger. The feller buncher operator decides what trees to leave and what trees to cut. This trend is largely due to the economy, increased costs and declining timber prices. Many foresters in our region make most of their livelihood from timber sales, and other work like inventories, burning, appraisals, etc. contributes a positive cash flow, but just barely. It has gotten too labor intensive and costly for many to mark individual trees, and the rule is to just show the area to be thinned, perhaps give a little instruction as to desired residual basal area and flag or paint around the sale area.

In fact, "operator select" is about the only method of thinning that young foresters and many landowners even know about, it has become that common.

I am an old fart with over 38 years experience in the woods, and I have an idea, right or wrong, of what works and what doesn't. My opinion is that the first thinning in a pine plantation is by far the most important one since it determines what the crop trees will be for the entire rotation. Furthermore, I don't believe anyone can adequately examine each tree to determine which ones need to be cut and left from the seat of a machine. I have enough trouble walking around them on the ground, with sun in my eyes, fighting bugs, snakes, briars, vines, heat and still trying to generate some semblance of production. I have seen both good and bad examples of operator select jobs with the best looking aesthetically good with well spaced trees and the worst being nothing more than a "high grading" operation.

Precious little research has been done comparing operator select to a marked thinning, but the results are quite revealing, indicating that a marked stand has a net present value 30% higher than the same stand after an operator select harvest. This figure is subject to change drastically should the stumpage value differences between product classes move upward in favor of more valuable timber. If everything was always pulpwood and priced accordingly, then the difference would obviously be less, although cutting dominant and co-dominant trees and leaving intermediate and suppressed is still more likely in an operator select situation.

So, what say the rest of you ? I'm sure some loggers think operator select is just as good as a marked thinning, and some foresters would never even entertain the thought of actually marking individual trees for harvest. For what it's worth, every logger I've ever worked with likes working on a tract where I laid out skid trails, decks and marked either take out or leave trees.

I will go so far as to say that I believe any registered forester who allows operator select thinnings is guilty of malpractice and should lose his or her license:msp_mad:

Let the discussion beginopcorn:


----------



## LoggingEngineer (Sep 28, 2011)

I've done both. On our commercial thinning shows that are ground based they are selected by the buncher operator. On cable thinning, I've marked yarding corridors and individual take trees. Our most common practice though is marking leave trees for various riparian management prescriptions where species, diameter, and total count matter so we are in compliance with the state regs. This has all been done in forest practice regulation hell.....the lovely liberal state of Washington.


----------



## stihl.logger (Sep 29, 2011)

seems to be about the same up here. i get a call from a landowner, show up to see the property and they say, "here it is, how much money can i make?" i wish this was not the standard. it puts me on the spot between making it a high grade job, and the quaility job we all know needs to happen. at this point i still find myself out marking trees to be harvested weather it be old growth, storm damage or a respectible veneer tree, but this consept has seemed to be lost by alot of the other small companies just trying to survive and alot of the "newer" landowners. they are more concerned with why i've marked the big ugly tree that is mostly pallet and why i left the nice looking trees on that hillside by the bend in the creek. there are standards in place, but seem to fall by the wayside when the timber price drops. the value of a dollar blinds the fact that they more or less want to rape the overall health of their ecosystem. i've come to the standpoint that only time will tell who will win the battle


----------



## Humptulips (Sep 29, 2011)

I've worked on thinnings with cable logging where it was all hand fell never the buncher stuff. I have to say a faller is just as capable as any forester to decide which trees go. Also It as been my experience that the average faller or forester doesn't have a clue about laying out corridors.
So I guess what I'm saying is it takes a little oversight and working together from all involved so if you tell the faller what you want done, mark some corridors and check the work occasionally I see no reason to mark every tree.
The question is what does the owner want done? Seen a couple pretty ugly jobs where we were told "Take the best and leave the rest. We're only thinning because we have to."
Bremerton watershed would be one of those.


----------



## slowp (Sep 29, 2011)

The Forest Service here went to Designation by Description. It isn't a good prescription silviculturally. The leave trees are picked out by leaving the desired species leaving the largest tree--measured at stump height. Sounds good? Well, the tree up above that height may be crooked, full of mistletoe, or have multiple tops. There's a unit that has mistletoed hemlocks left. They met the designation criteria. 

We don't have trees in rows. I've had 90% of loggers hire somebody else to mark their cut trees. Some prefer to mark leave trees, some put flagging on trees. Like loggers and everybody else, there are good markers, and bad markers. They are easier to fire when the purchaser hires them.

The loggers all agree they cannot do an accurate job from a machine. The fallers don't want to be bothered on the hand felled units. However, one outfit sent their cutters out ahead with paint. I gave a quick training on how to do it, and they did a better job than one of the marking crews. They did a great job and actually enjoyed running around without having to pack saws and gear.

Timber marking is a job that will never please everybody. It used to be the entry level job in the FS. I did it. I did not know a thing about falling, or yarding. 

The sale administrator (formerly me) has to correct a lot of the old marking jobs. Limb locked trees, leaners, etc. all usually have to come out to get the job done safely. I agree with Humptulips, hooktenders should be the ones to lay out the corridors. The rigging crews usually end up selecting different tail trees than the fallers, and that adds more time. One company had corridors laid out by the fallers, and I always had to scramble down, or up the corridors trying to keep the hooktender in sight :smile2:after the falling to OK new tail trees. 

On private ground, a friend hired an exceptional logger. She told him what she wanted--a thinning from below, they talked, he explained that he'd have to take a few trees extra to move the processor around. She agreed, he was honest, and a beautiful and silviculturally sound job was done. 

The thing about marking timber is, you'll always have to take additional operations trees no matter who does it. It also takes teamwork, and honest folks.


----------



## madhatte (Sep 29, 2011)

slowp said:


> The thing about marking timber is, you'll always have to take additional operations trees no matter who does it. It also takes teamwork, and honest folks.



Both of these statements are 100% true. Our thins are Variable-Density, with group selection and retention, nearly without exception. This was originally done to favor spotted owl habitat, but we have since adopted the practice as our own because it actually works on our terrain and soils better than many other methods employed in the past. Where we leave a group, there is no need to disturb soils or plant communities, and we can use the airphotos and some common sense to plan skidding routes as we mark. 3P cruising means we get our volume data collected at the same time as the marking is done, so we can put the whole project in the bag at pretty much the same time, less the inevitable paperwork. We also try to re-use old skid trails and landings, further reducing unnecessary complications. Finally, regarding honesty, we have some crews who give lots of feedback, and some who do not. There are almost always fewer surprises with the former than with the latter. Just talking regularly makes a huge difference.


----------



## clinchscavalry (Sep 29, 2011)

> Timber marking is a job that will never please everybody. It used to be the entry level job in the FS. I did it. I did not know a thing about falling, or yarding.





And therein lies the problem. Too many people think timber marking is an entry level job that just anyone can do. I hired nine forestry technicians over a year and a half period trying to find the right ones. None of them came out of school knowing anything useful, and they didn't have a clue about how to mark a thinning. Marking timber so that it is done right silviculturally, economically, and is operable from a logging standpoint is far from elementary. Beginners need to work right beside someone with experience for how ever long it takes or there will be big problems. A timber thinning is somewhat like a haircut. If you take a little off, you can always go back and get a little more. If you take too much off, it cannot be put back.


----------



## Humptulips (Sep 29, 2011)

clinchscavalry said:


> A timber thinning is somewhat like a haircut. If you take a little off, you can always go back and get a little more. If you take too much off, it cannot be put back.



Trouble with going back to fix a mistake is it runs up logging costs, especially in cable thinning. 
In cable tinning it pretty much needs to be done right the first time or it doesn't get done. It is just not economical to go back for a few trees. Often times we would leave a few more trees then neccesary and cut damaged trees to get to the proper count. We'd kind of eyeball plots as we picked up a road and fall what we needed to make things right. You can't do that with premarked timber.

One thing that I did was the corridors, tail trees and support trees were all marked before the cutters showed up. I always thought that was key to getting the trees layed out right. I've seen where different outfits fell the timber and then figured out the corridors. Never could see how that could work unless you're OK with a lot of skinned up trees.


----------



## clinchscavalry (Sep 30, 2011)

> Trouble with going back to fix a mistake is it runs up logging costs, especially in cable thinning.




I agree with that, and I was not clear on when to go back in for another thinning. Around here where timber grows relatively fast (if we ever have rain again) we typically space thinnings about five years apart. Traditionally, it was first thin at age 18-20, again at around age 24 and then clearcut and start all over at age 30 or so. We can grow small sawtimber in 25 years on a decent site.

My practice was to lightly thin the first time between the skid trails or take out rows in plantations (which unfortunately remove 20% of the entire stand) and then go back in two or three years to do another light thin and refine the job. Now, with the price of chip-n-saw in the toilet, I have started thinning a little heavier to try to grow sawtimber a few years earlier. That price is also horrible but still much more that c-n-s so the extra five years or so it takes to get to small sawtimber is worth waiting. 

I have some stands that have been thinned three times now with a fourth one possible trying to wait until sawtimber prices justify a clearcut.

If you remove government regulations and requirements from the equation, then sound forestry economics are dictated by stumpage prices. All the fancy silviculture out there can't make up for selling at the wrong time. And back to the original subject of this thread, you better be leaving the correct crop trees to begin with or losses over the course of the entire rotation can be huge.


----------



## Oldtimer (Sep 30, 2011)

I buy and cut my own stumpage. So I, as the "operator", select. But I only select what the landowner has directed me to cut: Doesn't matter to me if it's a thinning or a cut it all situation.
I prefer to thin it and be able to come back, but whatever the landowner wants is what I do. If I don't, the next guy WILL. Might as well be me making the money. Lot I just finished is a fine example of "I WANT THE MONEY- but leave it wooded" cutting. There's still 100-200 hardwoods per acre, but the biggest is maybe 10" DBH. It's perfect hardwood ground, and it will be fine. Not all are like that though...what bugs me most is the logger gets the bad rap for a slash and run cut when it's what the landowner wanted.


----------



## madhatte (Sep 30, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> what bugs me most is the logger gets the bad rap for a slash and run cut when it's what the landowner wanted.



Too true, all too true.


----------



## Humptulips (Sep 30, 2011)

Around here the thinning except for precommercial has pretty much ended on private ground. The only place I see it being done is Federal or State land and it seems like silviculture is not a consideration especially FS. Makes me scratch my head sometimes wondering what they are trying to acomplish. Actually I think I figured the FS out. It looks like they are trying to grow the trees to a size where it will be considered old growth or murrelet/owl habitat so it can be closed to logging in perpetuity. :msp_unsure:
I think on the Olympic National Forest the plan calls for a 200 year rotation. What do you think the chances are of them ever letting us clearcut 200 year old trees. Not likely.:frown:
When we thinned private it was precommercial, commercial thin then clearcut.


----------



## slowp (Sep 30, 2011)

Humptulips said:


> Around here the thinning except for precommercial has pretty much ended on private ground. The only place I see it being done is Federal or State land and it seems like silviculture is not a consideration especially FS. Makes me scratch my head sometimes wondering what they are trying to acomplish. Actually I think I figured the FS out. It looks like they are trying to grow the trees to a size where it will be considered old growth or murrelet/owl habitat so it can be closed to logging in perpetuity. :msp_unsure:
> I think on the Olympic National Forest the plan calls for a 200 year rotation. What do you think the chances are of them ever letting us clearcut 200 year old trees. Not likely.:frown:
> When we thinned private it was precommercial, commercial thin then clearcut.


 

I agree. The reason stated in the NEPA document seems to be "to accelerate the achievement of old growth characteristics." Of course, you have to realize that you can only thin in the LSR (late seral reserve) areas and that is the only reason. Then, when they reach that size, you are right. I would guess that most of the Olympic NF is LSR. 

Unfortunately, the same seems to hold true for Matrix designated areas. Thinning is all that can get by the enviro industry. I am curious to see if the silviculturist was successful in getting some 5 acre clearcuts into a sale that was being worked on. I don't think it sells until next year. 

In order to change things, the Northwest Forest Plan has to be changed or done away with.


----------



## hammerlogging (Sep 30, 2011)

This is a very good topic. I have seen all sides of it in Appalachian hardwoods. 

Naturally, a large part of the industry operates on diameter limit cuts. This is essentially thinning from above, except for of course leaving the trashy big trees. So its a high grade. Whats worse, is that a thinning is a stage in EVEN AGED management. And these woods have been "thinned" adn thinned from above, often 2 times since the whole damn country was clearcut somewhere between about 1870 and 1915. If you're thinning, and thining, eventually you need to regenerate. So, I hate thinning, cause it sure looks like the value is really shot after this round. You'll see dia. limit cuts from 11" to 14" to 18", just depends. Its a giant misconception by landowners and perpetuated by the consulting foresters pandering to landowners desire to thin rather than educating and mills not wanting to deal with anything without atleast one piddly little log in it. If landowners think thinning is uneven aged mgmt, its rarely so. Oh, an dthe conventional logging (dozers, skidders) that is the norm is better suited to this high grading than, say, cable, or other more advanced systems where a more significant regen component is good for productivity.

I guess thats an off topic rant, somewhat related

So, on point, as far as marking stands goes, the diameter limit cuts are not painted. On marked cuts, I WAY prefer cutting a pre marked cut. I have gone out for a half day and gotten enough leave trees marked for 3 fallers to last 2 days, once they had "the look" then we went on, it was just a new tract break in period. I've marked for fellerbunchers too, and that worked better than operator select. I think you will always get a better product marking rather than operator select because when it comes to falling/logging, the productivity thing is so fierce that its hard to hold to the guidelines as well as we ought to.

If anyone is marking, please mark BOLDLY on the uphill and downhill side. WAY better as we work through a stand. I HATE looking for paint.


----------



## 056 kid (Sep 30, 2011)

Going back for paint is even worse than hunting for it.


----------



## hammerlogging (Sep 30, 2011)

like on a old FS sale marked 3 years before, in yellow, in a laurel thicket?


----------



## 056 kid (Oct 1, 2011)

Or where they marked 14' tall 4''dbh chesnut oak tooth picks 200 feet over a ridge line covered with rhododendrons. You had to get close enough to spit on the trees before you could tell if they where marked, being so small it was hard to even find the trees let alone the paint. Had to go back and get every last one where someone else had cut, tops everywhere. . Hell on earth. .


----------



## slowp (Oct 1, 2011)

hammerlogging said:


> like on a old FS sale marked 3 years before, in yellow, in a laurel thicket?



There was a problem when the change was made from oil based paint to water based paint. The new paint didn't last long and couldn't be applied in rain. The latter made it hard to use out here. The weather window would be short.

Some remarking was done. However, there are incidents when the purchaser bought a sale and then sat on it for years. Extensions allowed for that. Then the paint was faded. In this case, the FS could make the purchaser pay for redoing the paint. When that is mentioned, the eyesight of the fallers becomes much keener. 

To me, the most important mark is the stump mark. There is no stump mark when the sale is marked by the purchaser. 

Did you know that the faller is responsible for the outcome of purchaser mark sales? So, if you are doing that and notice that the marking is not getting the correct trees cut, you'd best stop and get things fixed. Or cut the correct trees. 

Then do what is normal, cuss the markers. :smile2: It seems to be the job nobody wants to do anymore.


----------



## hammerlogging (Oct 1, 2011)

I am kind of hoping that if we transition to stewardship sales from conventional sales that it will come with cut by prescription- purchaser marked, adding to a source of work for me. All my marking has been on private ground. I like marking, at least I like marking leave trees.


----------



## hammerlogging (Oct 1, 2011)

056 kid said:


> Or where they marked 14' tall 4''dbh chesnut oak tooth picks 200 feet over a ridge line covered with rhododendrons. You had to get close enough to spit on the trees before you could tell if they where marked, being so small it was hard to even find the trees let alone the paint. Had to go back and get every last one where someone else had cut, tops everywhere. . Hell on earth. .


 
As awful as it may sound, if its a cut tree marking on FS, group selection, as they like to do in the rhododendron/laurel thickets, I'll cut everything, go ahead and do the whole deal, not just the merchantable. Yes, takes a little time, but Im just treat it like mowing the grass, and it looks so much better, and I don't have to worry about those 8" 14' chestnut oaks I missed.


----------



## Gologit (Oct 1, 2011)

slowp said:


> Did you know that the faller is responsible for the outcome of purchaser mark sales? So, if you are doing that and notice that the marking is not getting the correct trees cut, you'd best stop and get things fixed. Or cut the correct trees.


 
Yup. And being color-blind isn't an acceptable excuse for going over the line.  We used to work every year on a selective sale that had three different agencies regulating it. There were also representatives from other "interested agencies"...mostly 'ologists of many different kinds. The three main agencies argued with each other a lot about paint colors, marking techniques, skid trails, and anything else they could think of.
I tried everything I could think of just to get them to _talk_ to each other, and talk to me too, so I'd know what they wanted.
We solved the confusion by going out with the marking crew when they did the actual marking and then cutting quick before they changed their minds.

MY BIL, who was also my falling partner, summed it up pretty good..."Hell, those people would argue about _oatmeal mush"._


----------



## slowp (Oct 1, 2011)

Those people are the planners. Another reason to retire. 

When told real life prob...ooops "challenges" with their proposal, one usually gets a blank start, a pause, and then they continue planning as if no information was given.

If it can't be cut and pasted from another timber sale plan, it won't be added to the document.  

I'm being rather cruel, I was not perfect and tended to lose my cool in such meetings. No more.


----------



## Gologit (Oct 1, 2011)

slowp said:


> Those people are the planners. Another reason to retire.
> 
> When told real life prob...ooops "challenges" with their proposal, one usually gets a blank start, a pause, and then they continue planning as if no information was given.
> 
> ...


 
Planners are good at planning. They're also good at defining goals and objectives. What they're _not_ good at is applying logic and common sense to a situation that isn't covered in one of their many manuals and training films. Their standard answer to any question that takes them outside their rather small comfort zone is "NO". To really rile them up, when they say NO, ask them WHY NOT.

Don't get me wrong, there are some extremely bright and well educated young people in a lot of the agencies that I deal with. They just don't really _know_ how to do anything beyond the scope of their training and job description. They don't seem too interested in finding out, either.


----------



## SCForester (Nov 13, 2019)

As a consulting forester as far as operator thinning it can work very well with with proper supervision. My thin contracts are written to thin to a specific basal area say 80 square feet per acre. which is easy to check with a 10 BAF prism and also worded that the smallest and worse trees are the the priory removal trees outside the clear-cut row, usually every 5th. I check the site nearly every day and if thing are not right can adjust the cutting before much more is cut. I also only bid to thinners I know and trust. If you have a thinner unsure of an option is just mark a few acres to set the tone then check every day as mentioned. Yes I can mark timber better then an operator on a cutter machine can pick and cut but the difference if properly supervised is not worth it to me. Thinnings especially the first one are not really profitable at a 10% commission. My state forestry commission charges $5 a cord just to mark the trees. That is like a 20-25% commission at local pulpwood prices and I have to do the bid prospectus, write the contract, inspect the logging with a lot of driving and fuel costs so add in the days of marking and the paint cost its not worth it. Marking is a very difficult job prone to injuries due to looking up a lot while walking in the woods and some of my worse injuries in the woods were while marking. I have marked thousands of acres but at age 67 I am done with it unless its saw-timber marking possibly.


----------

