Hybridized Timber Harvest – Horses and Fowarder

[Carl Russell]

@Scott G 29500 wrote:

Carl,

Even though I know you didn’t delve into time/motion on tracking numbers, do you have any rough mental figures on PH(ProductiveHours) vs SH(ScheduledHours) and/or the rough utilization% of PH (i.e. how often was someone standing waiting for someone else to finish or get out of the way)?

Also, do you feel as though you were maximizing each turn, both skidding(twitching) and running loads with the forwarder?

-S

OMG, I just worked for an hour and then lost all of this….. here goes again.

We worked in two distinctly different areas this year, using two different systems.

The first area we worked in was about 1700 feet from the landing. It was characterized by very small (75-100 bf) red spruce trees growing in dense thickets surrounding patches of spruce and white pine regen. We started in there with one chopper, a team twitching and a team forwarding with a bobsled. It was all downhill to the landing, but it was all uphill back, and it was 80-90º, so the sled was tough on the horses.

We were hand-loading the sled, and stacking by hand on the landing, surgically harvesting small logs from out of pockets of regen, girdling trees and chopping down CWD, working at an hourly rate of $25/hr/saw, and $30/hr/team.

These are the number we put together;

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl25, colspan: 3″]2011 Team/Chopper/Sled
[/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]10mbf / 6 days = 1.667mbf/day[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]$2226 income / 10mbf = $222/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl24, colspan: 4″]Total cost = $3945 / 10mbf = $394.50/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Chopping = 44% of cost @ 64.5 hrs / 10mbf = 6.5hrs/mbf / 2 Men =3.3Mh/mbf = $174/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Twitching = 33% of cost @ 43 hrs / 10mbf = 4.3 hrs/mbf / 1.25 Men = 3.4Mh/mbf = $130/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Team/sled = 22% of cost @ 29 hrs / 10mbf = 2.9 hrs/mbf / 1 Men = 2.9Mh/mbf = $87/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 4″]Forestry = 1% of cost @ 1 hrs / 10mbf = 0.1 hr/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 5″]Forwarding with sled = 2.9 hrs/mbf x $30/hr = $87/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 5″]2.3 Mhrs chopping and twitching / 1 Mhr with teams and sled[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

In this case we were working at a rate that far outstripped the value of the wood. The costliest portion of the work was chopping and twitching, most likely reflective of the non-commercial nature of the forestry prescription.

The 2.3 ManHours of chopping and twitching per ManHour with sled does not represent a bottleneck, as the sled team could easily disconnect and start twitching. Each of us is capable of stepping into any part of this system, so there was never anyone standing around waiting. The only exception was related to saw-time. Because there was so much saw-work, when there was only one chopper, the teamster was often waiting for a hitch or chopping himself. Once we got a second chopper, there was too much wood for the team on the sled to keep up.

At that point we decided to stockpile logs on small landings along our main haul roads. At that point we had also finished the section with small timber and moved into a are we had opened up during the previous harvest. This portion of the stand had much larger trees (150-200bf) within close proximity of land areas where we could pretty much unhitch and go back, very little hand work. This section was about 4000 feet from the landing, and located on well-made main haul roads.

We worked for about a week before the forwarder came in, when he was able to move stockpiled wood and keep up with fresh-cut material.

This is what the numbers look like;

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD=”class: xl24, colspan: 3″]2011 Chopper/Team/Forwarder
[/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[TD=”width: 75″][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]41mbf / 11 days = 3.7 mbf/day[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]$9872 income / 41mbf = $241/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 4″]Total cost = $8780 / 41mbf = $214/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Chopping = 32% of cost @ 99 hrs / 41mbf = 2.4 hrs/mbf / 2.5 men = 0.96Mh/mbf = $69/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Twitching = 31% of cost @ 90 hrs / 41mbf = 2.0 hrs/mbf / 2 Men = 1.0Mh/mbf = $66/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Forwarder = 34% of cost @ 40 hrs / 41mbf = 1.0 hrs/mbf / 1 Men = 1.0 Mh/mbf = $73/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 5″]Forestry = 4 % of cost @ 5.5 hrs / 41mbf = 0.1 hrs/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 4″]Forwarder = 1.0 hrs/mbf x $75/hr = $75/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 5″]1.96 Mhrs chopping and twitching / 1M hr with forwarder[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

In this case the ManHours of chopping and twitching do represent a bottleneck. We never really had enough wood on the ground to keep the horses moving, so it seems reasonable that another chopper or two would significantly increase efficiency. I’m not sure that it would necessarily increase profitability as we don’t pay for the forwarder when it isn’t working, except that if we could keep it moving we might find that the hourly rate might go down.

I also combined last year with this year to show how things have averaged out.

[TABLE=”width: 525″]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]2010 & 2011 Combined totals[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]120mbf / 65 days = 1.8 mbf/day[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]$29473 income / 120mbf = $246/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 4″]Total cost = $27058 / 120mbf = $226/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Saw= 33%cost @ 404 hrs / 120mbf = 3.4hrs/mbf / 2.5 Men =1.4mh/mbf = $75/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Twitching = 32% of cost @ 339 hrs / 120mbf = 2.8hrs/mbf / 2 Men = 1.4Mh/mbf = $72/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 7″]Forwarding = 33% of cost @ 160 hrs / 120mbf = 1.2hrs/mbf / 1 Men = 1.2Mh/mbf = $75/mbf[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 5″]Forestry = 2% of cost @ 13.5 hrs /120mbf = $4.50/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 5″]2.3 Mhrs chopping and twitching / 1 Mhr with forwarder[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 4″]2010 Road building 1 mile @ $ 4117.50[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]2010 Logging cost = $15,615.00[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]2010 Logging income = $17,374.99[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 4″]2010 Stumpage payment = $1,760 = $25.50/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]2010 Total Harvest Volume = 69mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 6″]2011 Logging Cost = $12,725 – $1,275 cost share for patch-cut = $11,450[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]2011 Logging Income = $12,098[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 4″]2011 Stumpage payment = $650 = $13/mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]2011 Total Harvest Volume = 51mbf[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 2″]Logging cost = $27,065[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=”colspan: 3″]Logging income = $29,473[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Carl

[Baystatetom]

I am going to have to read this 5 times and really think about it for it all to sink in, but my first reaction is that most people hold this info pretty tight to their chest. Thanks for sharing, I do believe sharing information will help all of us become better at what we do.
~Tom

[Carl Russell]

One thing that I was interested to see was that forwarding with the sled, hand loading and hand stacking only cost $87/mbf as apposed to the mechanical forwarder at $75/mbf…… I have long been questioned about the comparable cost of horse and hand versus mechanical, and while this is not a scientifically accurate study, it does show that the machine doesn’t automatically increase financial functionality by a large degree…. (especially as the portion of the woodlot where we worked with the horses and sled was where the smallest timber was, and it was mid summer…. I will try to start keeping these types of records in other situations, like on snow and ice to see how these figures change)….

This brings me back to the purpose for having a forwarder on this job. As a way to bring more horse-power (live power) into the forestry enterprise, a mechanical forwarder is a practical compliment.

Carl

[Tim Harrigan]

@Carl Russell 29680 wrote:

This brings me back to the purpose for having a forwarder on this job. As a way to bring more horse-power (live power) into the forestry enterprise, a mechanical forwarder is a practical compliment.

Carl

If I understand this correctly you have the flexibility to bring the forwarder in when needed and only pay for it when it is working? So this forwarder is sort of on-call for multiple jobs? That is a nice option to have. From a machinery economics perspective once you make the equipment investment you are locked in x number of mbf/year to cover fixed costs at a minimum. That is when the equipment investment sort of takes the drivers seat.

[Carl Russell]

@Tim Harrigan 29685 wrote:

If I understand this correctly you have the flexibility to bring the forwarder in when needed and only pay for it when it is working? So this forwarder is sort of on-call for multiple jobs? That is a nice option to have. From a machinery economics perspective once you make the equipment investment you are locked in x number of mbf/year to cover fixed costs at a minimum. That is when the equipment investment sort of takes the drivers seat.

This is complicated….. The machine belongs to one of our operators, Ben Canonica. The cost to him is ongoing, which is why we have to pay for it at the high hourly rate. I think that if it were to be integrated into an operation that utilized it more efficiently, it could be operated at a lower rate. I suppose we could get into other situations where we rented or leased it by the month, but currently we are working close enough, and we try to plan ahead, so that when we get wood stockpiled he can move it onto the job and then try to use it to its fullest capacity.

Carl

[Scott G]

Very nice, Carl! If you were to write this up I’m sure Joe M. would buy it and publish it in RH. Every bit of coin helps.

Questions beget more questions…

-average turn distance (twitch & forwarding)
-average turn time (twitch & forwarding)
– average volume per turn (twitch & forwarding)

Also, were you looking for this harvest to pick up all of the road costs?

[Carl Russell]

@Scott G 29706 wrote:

Very nice, Carl! If you were to write this up I’m sure Joe M. would buy it and publish it in RH. Every bit of coin helps.

Questions beget more questions…

-average turn distance (twitch & forwarding)
-average turn time (twitch & forwarding)
– average volume per turn (twitch & forwarding)

Also, were you looking for this harvest to pick up all of the road costs?

I am already putting this all together in a format that can lead to a pretty in-depth article. I have several reason for that, not necessarily to be published. I am also putting together a multi-media presentation with text, photos, and video for workshops etc.

The road cost should be covered by the time we actually complete the sale area….. we got cut short this year by Irene. I will say though that we have separated the cost of the roads from the timber harvest, as a long-term infrastructural investment in the property, so the cost is not directly attributed to the current logging operation….. however, in reality, they are seeing the income from logs go directly to paying the cost of the road.

Turn distances were 100-300 feet for twitching across the entire job. I would say they averaged closer to 100 feet. The twitching volume is really hard to estimate as it has to do with chopping, swamping, and product, but I would guess between 75-200bf per team. Twitching turn time is another one that we would need to have a data collector for, as there are factors associated with all the different activities that can occupy the time of the teamster. Thinking purely in terms of driving, hitching, and unhitching, I would say the average was between 5-10 min depending on how full the landing areas were. When using the sled, the teamster spent more time pre-decking logs to be loaded.

Turn distance for the forwarder was usually about 3/4 mile, as there was one landing area from which he could not bring a full load, being an uphill haul with slimy soil, topping off the load from other piles on his way back. The average was about 1 hours per round trip, hauling 1000 bf per load.

Turn distance with the sled was 1/3 mile, averaging 50 minutes round trip, including loading and unloading, averaging about 450 bf per load.

Carl

[Anonymous]

Thank you Carl for all you have done. Its intresting to see that both your cost for labour and extraction are very close to ours. The other week a LO and I were planning out this years work on his woodlot I took the opertunity to take a few pictures of his well built forwarder.We will be selective cutting and skidding to a network of old hauling roads with the horses. Then hauling to the truck road with the tractor. This wood lot has one very steep hill that can’t be avoided and his choice of fowarders has some fetures that are to help tackle steep ground. The trailer has a rear end from a heavy spec cement truck and is driven by the tractors pto. This tractor has ground speed and at 540 the trailer is matched for the tractor. The trailer is only engaged when needed. Having a power trailer helps push going up and hold back going down hill. The large head board helps prevent logs from sliding forward and hitting the operator on steep decents. It also has tie down staps and spikes, as going up steep hill wood can slide back of the trailer. We are hoping to get this Job rolling some time in December, when the ice and snow come Owen will run ice chains on all four corners of the tractor and cross chains on the trailer. With out a forwarder like this one this fairly large tract of land would be impracticle to be using horses.

I’m looking forward to some colder weather, hard ground and good skidding. Happy logging

Tristan

[Gabe Ayers]

Tristan-
Nice looking forwarder. That looks like a great match for horsepower in the woods. Keep us updated on how that job progresses.
-Brad

[solar power horselogging]

Tristan I,ve never seen a power trailer without a transmission to gear it down. What gear does it match the tractor. I,m in the process of building one, Used them before and they work great!

[Anonymous]

@solar power horselogging 30046 wrote:

Tristan I,ve never seen a power trailer without a transmission to gear it down. What gear does it match the tractor. I,m in the process of building one, Used them before and they work great!

I left the the tranny out in the descrition but it has one. With ground speed in tractors like MF and others if one gear matches they will all match. Best not to run the trailer in gear down the road at higher speeds its hard on the drive line. This trailer has what was the ruxle set up that it can be put in neutral. This alows the entire drive line to free wheel. Theres guys around here that can list of by heart what tires and gears match what rear ends and tractors but I’v never buit one just uesd them. I know a few people who use them with International tractors and no ground speed they only match up in one or two gears and don’t match in reverse but I don’t recomend going that way.

Good luck and post some pictures.

Tristan

[Carl Russell]

Here is a powerpoint presentation about this operation….. you all know pretty much everything from this thread, but I thought you would like to view this….

Slide timings seem to be off as a result of saving to you-tube….. Pausing and dragging the red button along the time line will give you manual control so that you can have the time to read the info….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO3sQLGv2dA

Carl

[Tim Harrigan]

Thanks for putting this up. I can go through it at my own speed and think about it, good stuff.

[Baystatetom]

I am working on crunching the numbers for a logging job I am lining up for this winter. It is excellent quality hardwood that should bring a premium, the problem is a mile long skid. No exaggeration its exactly a mile. I have a small valmet forwarder and operator looking at the job. My plan is to lay out trails so that my oxen never skid more then 1,000 feet. Although 500 would be a lot better. Then the forwarder can run the logs out to the header. I am considering getting somebody to chop as well. I always enjoy felling trees but if I had somebody else do it I could concentrate on driving the bulls, maybe work them hard half days and go do other forestry projects in the afternoon.
Tom

[Author]

Posts