[Guy]

OK… Here’s a little bit about Firth Maple Products.
Between Troy Firth’s land and our established clients we manage about 10,000 acres in NW Pennsylvania and SW New York. 98% or more of this land we skid with horses. Right now we have 4 horse crews working for us, in the recent past we’ve had as many as 12. We’re practicing uneven aged management in stands of primarily black cherry and sugar maple with some red oak, tulip poplar, white ash components. We borrow Jason’s phrase “worst first” to describe our single tree selection but also incorporate 1/2 to 5 acre group selections to regenerate shade intolerant species.

In addition to the forestry operation we run a sawmill, maple syrup business and several timberland investment groups. In 2004 Troy started the Foundation for Sustainable Forests, a nonprofit group to own and manage timberland in the area.

The markets here have been poor. There is some demand, but prices are low enough that there is little activity. Like most folks in the lumber business we’re just trying to get by.

We do conduct some woods walks and horse logging demos with local groups every year. We’re always interested in opportunities to talk about or show people what we’re doing in the woods.

And no, I don’t get a chance to work a team myself. Like you said, Jason, there are plenty of folks up here to learn from but I haven’t made an opportunity to hold the reins yet. For now I stick to the paint gun, chainsaw and occasionally *shhhhh* a small tractor in my own woods.

[Guy]

Yes, this is Guy Dunkle. Hello!

In my area we face most of the problems that you mentioned, Jason. Landowners are accustomed to receiving income from their forests rather than investing in them. Also many are reluctant to enter into long-term agreements.

The problem is that with increasing pressure from invasive species, high-grade harvests, and regeneration problems I think landowners will be forced to start investing money and time if they want a sustainable forest. I think the days of active ownership every 15 years during a commercial harvest are over.

Another big problem we run into is landowners who practice good forestry for a 5 or 10 year period and then whack their timber to send kids to college or pay the bills. It’s a real setback for us to lose a woodlot in which we’ve invested 10 years.

This post has mostly been me griping, sorry. On a positive note, I suspect that between new markets for low grade material and increased gov’t costshare programs there will be money for CSFs or co-ops to do TSI work, invasive control, etc. Like I said previously I think the future of forest management involves more of these activities and that may mean that we can work on fewer acres and stay busy.

I assume that the landowners most apt to utilize CSFs or co-ops would also be more likely to appreciate the need to invest in forest management. Now if all those landowners would just move to NW Pennsylvania I’d be set.

[Guy]

I’m late getting into this conversation, but appreciate the concept. A thought I’ve been mulling over for a while might be an alternative CSF model. Rather than providing a finished product to the CSF customer (boards, furniture, etc.) what if the CSF provided forest management?
For example 40 landowners agree to longterm contracts with one “biological woodsman” (to borrow from Jason) and pay a set amount per year. In return the woodsman is responsible for marking property lines, doing TSI work, controlling invasives and when necessary doing commercial harvests. The landowner keeps proceeds from the harvests, so the woodsman doesn’t have to be worried about timber bidding, markets etc.
I realize that this may resemble scenarios that some of you already work in. Maybe this is appealing because not all woodsmen are able to invest in sawmills, wood shops, marketing and the other costs involved in selling a finished product. Personally I’m much better off with a paint gun or chainsaw in my hands than a sander or drill.

[Author]

Posts