Old and new / cross breed logging

[TaylorJohnson]

I think from what I have seen in horse logging some of us try to mix old and new and that is fine as long as it is not the horses we are pushing. Some of the old standards for distance are still good to follow. I have talked to a lot of old loggers who say they very seldom skidded any thing over 300′ and if they could they skidded shorter. This would mean for us as horse loggers a hole different set of ideas on road building . A small truck, horse-drawn forwarder or , some kind of forwarder is the answer I think but even then if you have to go a long ways you need to be able to move some volume on your forwarder the longer the haul the more volume you need to carry per trip. The old trucks that hauled 3 to 6 cords were perfect for horse logging , a lot of jobs with a little work you would not even need a forwarder just some trail work and a little extra back work. I love the old ways and wish I did not have to deal with the new.
We are in a transition right now ,, kind of going back in a way. the last generation of horse loggers were doing the opposite . They were in the past starting to use technology so to speak we are at the other end of the spectrum. We we all heading in the same direction with a very different mind-set and approach to similar situations. They were use to the old ways and trying to use the new to speed up their old standard we are on the opposite end of this ,, I am talking as a logging industry here. We are trying to figure out how to use our horses in the new technological area we are working in. it is interesting how prospective and view have an affect at how we are going at the same problem. Boys every thing we are talking about and doing has been done successfully before. It is not a matter if it will work but how it will work it does work for sure. We all have to look back to the time era when the men in the wood were working this cross-breed of logging ( horse and mechanized ) successfully. Every region will be a little different because they all changed at different rates. I was lucky to come from an odd place were people were very clickish and clannish , back wards some would say. What this did was in way preserved some old way . I would bet there are a lot of places like this out there especially in the Appalachians. I think that late 50s thought the 70s again depending on were you are from is where we have to keep looking .We can learn a lot from their job lay out to their equipment . Even if our equipment is not the same exactly if the purpose and general function is there you could save your self a lot of steps by looking back.
Use technology to help you horse log not the other way around. Lay it all out like it will be done very manual then use technology to help you speed that process up . I think it can be done the other way around because ultimately you end at the same place but to look back and think the way they did in the past using their prospective will help us get there easier .
One thing that really holds us back is liability and not being able to hire help freely. Sometimes extra hands would be nice

[Carl Russell]

We have been having discussions like this one on the job recently. There are a lot of mechanical/technological alternatives these days, but one of the more important aspects of the old versus the new, is how we use our horses to do the work. I notice sometimes that there is a tendency to use horses like they were a machine.

Most of us these days have grown up in a culture that uses machines to do a lot of work for us. Well if you want to use horses successfully, you need to do a lot of work for them first. This is one of the basic lessons I learned from several of the old-timers I traipsed around behind. Takes a lot of work to work horses. Can’t just push levers, you gotta be able to directionally fell a tree, clear skid trails, roll logs, etc.

I think it is fine to try to mix technologies, but we have to watch out that we don’t let the machines affect the way we see the work. That is one of the difficulties with this endeavor. The machine costs a lot to buy, maintain, and run, and it increases productivity, but it also operates on a different time line, and has a different functionality than a human using hand and animal power.

To be successful with horses mixed with machinery, you can’t work on the time line of the machine, which is why I see a lot of horse loggers end up logging with skidder or tractor.

Carl

[Tim Harrigan]

Carl, I agree, there is a tendency for folks to use draft animals like they are a machine. We usually have excess power when we work with machines so we tend to build the excess into our approach. But working with draft animals is about energy conservation, how to accomplish the task with an energy cost that is appropriate for the team, the task at hand, and the amount of work that needs to be accomplished. So the assessment of how long and how big is the skid load, how many and how deep are the tillage operations, what is accomplished by the tillage operation, how big is the mower cutterbar, frequency of tedding, raking etc. have real meaning when they challenge the limited power of a team. This need to be clever in the approach and perceptive to the needs of the team and task are things that make working with draft animals challenging and rewarding. I suppose it could be frustrating, though, for those who find the transition difficult.

[TaylorJohnson]

One of the things I tell people is that you can not just shift a gear on a horse when the going gets tough , they are not a skidder don’t even think of them that way if they have a problem you need to solve it for them . It is true that it is a lot of work to work a horse. Carl I do think this is why so many people who try it end up with skidders . It is a cultural mind-set we let machines work for us and that is the difference in our culture today as opposed to the culture of even 50 years ago . We need to find that mind-set and use it to be succesful. I am talking as an industry. Taylor Johnson

[Scott G]

@Carl Russell 20131 wrote:

To be successful with horses mixed with machinery, you can’t work on the time line of the machine, which is why I see a lot of horse loggers end up logging with skidder or tractor.
Carl

The reason a lot of horseloggers end up running a skidder is that they were going broke and/or could not support their family, plain & simple. Been there.

The “blinded” lure of machines, however, often masks the true financial cost of the operation. In other words, it takes an exponential increase in production to pay for production. Once you get there you realize that to make the final numbers black you need to incorporate economy of scale. That equals more machinery which in turn requires more fuel for the fire so to speak. Again, been there. My personal path was horse > skidsteer > skidder > feller buncher/525 CAT grapple skidder/Morbark whole tree chipper & 5 full-time employees > almost final personal destruction > horse.

This is why I have almost been evangelistic about penciling out the numbers. Not only for the bottom line but from the harvesting system perspective. You can’t know where you’re at or where you’re going unless you know (in your realistic mind at least) what you are doing, what your costs are, and what your realistic production is going to be.

Having spent a lot of time studying forest engineering and operations as well as implementation, I’ve got a pretty good handle on this.

My take, if we want to move forward into the realm of current and future forestry within the context that almost all of us espouse to, we need to think in 21st century terms. Ours is a system that excels at some operations and is piss-poor for others (I’ll catch heat for that one), and yes I refer to ours as a harvesting system, as well as the phrase “base machine”

The reason for those terms is so that the rest of the forestry community, as well as ours, has the ability to compare side by side the different methods of extraction, objectively measure the costs both economic & environmental, and choose the best system for the job at hand.

We all know (hopefully) that we do not treat our draft animals as machines. But within the context of harvesting, they are what the entire rest of the operation is based upon. Keep that in mind as that is extremely important. One of the most common problems that plague a forestry operation are bottlenecks, whether that is from one machine not being able to keep up with the other (i.e. manual harvesting feeding forwarder/grapple skidder) or the other machine being overwhelmed beyond its capability (i.e. two grapple skidders feeding one small chipper). These bottlenecks make the operation completely cost ineffective and usually cause the job to fail or at the very least result in the logger having to pay for work, bad situation.

So, let’s enter the horse. Horses excel at individual tree selection prescriptions where material is skidded short turns and bunched trail/roadside. When that material has to then be forwarded any significant distance to the landing, the numbers go south very quickly if you are skidding that distance with just a hitch’s worth of a couple of chokers.

Enter forwarding, ranging from a simple scoot/wagon to a 6/8 wheel mechanical forwarder. The horse is allowed to continue doing what it excels at, short skids to pre-bunch trailside, and the “forwarder” is doing its ultimate job, hauling large loads fairly long distances to the landing (ideally directly loading truck/trailer). This is what is known as a mixed-harvesting system taking a bit from two distinctly different systems to custom tailor an approach to a job that makes sense, as measured from all aspects.

That said…

The potential for bottlenecks is great for a horse/forwarder combo if implemented incorrectly. There is no way that one horselogger and his team(s) can make a fully mechanical forwarder work (as measured by cost), no matter how “tired the iron is”, if he is pulling the show off by himself in an average timber type. Tired iron still requires maintenance, fuel, and repairs that are not in balance with what an individual horselogger’s (who is doing his own felling) average production is going to be.

If, however, multiple loggers and teams are working the same project feeding one mecchanical forwarder the numbers start pencilling out a lot better until you get to a point where it is the most cost & operationally efficient system that could be utilized, coupled with the environmental and personal satisfaction/sanity aspects, you’ve got a winner.

Another option, because the material would be stockpiled, would be to prebunch an amount of material where you could hire a forwarder operator to come and and move all your wood at one time. You are only paying for fully loaded/fully productive time and your personal operational costs will be much, much lower than if you were to own your own mechanical forwarder. For example, one driveshaft (enter part) from CAT for $1,650 equals one horse purchase.

Other viable options, which are more labor intensive but lower/negligible capital are the scoots/trailers/horse-drawn forwarders. I eventually will purchase a horse-drawn forwarder with a loader. The numbers work out great, it is easy to not only cost out, but make money, with this equipment but also negates the need for a self-loader (cost savings) at the landing. Maintenance repairs are negligible other than grease and an occasional blown hose ($25). I can buy an entire replacement Honda engine for the thing for less than the price of the aforementioned CAT driveshaft. 4-6 cylinder engine for that Timber jack will run $12-15k.

In short folks, we borrow from the past and apply it with some additional tools in the tool box to address the needs/issues of forestry in the 21st century. It can be simple as twitching to a scoot or as complex as multiple teams/teamsters keeping a 2010 Timberjack busy. Myself, I prefer to work by myself and the most I would support personally would be a horse-drawn forwarder. It’s all about balance, by necessity…

[Carl Russell]

Scott, for twenty years I have used the scoot and bobsled as my forwarder. Especially because I work alone. There are no bottlenecks in that equation as the relative cost of the sleds is negligible, and they can sit idle until the load is ready.

The significant cost of mechanical forwarders do require some economy of scale shifts, and that is why in our current operation we have two teams, a chopper, and the forwarder operator. Our plan is to have all four chopping for a n hour in the morning, then get the teams moving while the others chop for another hour, then get the forwarder moving while the others chop and skid as needed.

In reality we are finding that there are days when there is a teamster alone in the woods, or on another day chopper and teamster, or both teamsters with no extra chopper, and the forwarder operator is really busy at home or has breakdown issues so he is just coming and moving wood as his schedule lines up.

The big factor as far as I can see it is that we all have lifestyles that are supported by horse-power which provides a low cost, low-overhead foundation so that we can do what we need to do without going broke.

This leads to the other part of this formula. Using animal power is more than just the application of energy, as Tim pointed out. We are leading diverse lives with farm and other enterprises that interfere with a purely economic model of a logging operation. This is a good thing in reality, but it throws a wrench in the calculations. With machinery this is a much thinner margin of comfort.

The other part of using animal power is not to mimic the modern concept of forestry that supports and is supported by the use of equipment based harvesting systems. In other words, we don’t need to try to move the same material that machines are so “good” at moving. If we are going to base our systems on animal power we need to based the work that we perform on the capabilities and limitation of the animals.

When I used to log exclusively with my oxen, I had a highshool student visit me for his senior project. He had been in 4H and was hanging around pullers, but he wanted to spend some time with someone who was actually working oxen. He said to me “You really try to make it as easy as possible for them, don’t you”? Yep, that’s the point.

It is an efficiency that transcends modern economics.

Carl

[TaylorJohnson]

Scott , that is what is nice about my forwarder it is cheap to fix , like you said you can put a new motor on one for about 1200 bucks. When I am talking old and new I mean a big picture . I mean the whole lay out of the job and the way we forward it. I know what you are talking about as far as bottle necking . I do not know enough about using bob sleds to know about their effecitcy as far as the way I log. I do know with the right amount of guys and the right crew they could be efficient because they have been in the past. In this day and age could it pencil out ? I do not know for most but for here it could not because of the work comp issue. It would sure be nice to have that option and try it .
I spent some time this week-end talking with my Grandpa. He is in his Eighties and was born in a logging camp in the UP of Michigan I mean literally born in a lean-to log cabin in a logging camp. He was telling me about there loading teams and skidding horses. Back then they hauled every thing to the narrow gauge style rail roads. Each teamster had a full-time swamper and there was a team on the loading of the sleigh that was most of the time smaller and fast plus two guys hooking logs. That is lots of guys but with that kind of help there was not a lot of bottle necking . In the 60s they were still using the same job lay out except that they had cable jammer trucks instead of small fast teams and guy hooking logs . The machines changed but the horses and their skidding job stayed the same. What else stayed the same is the basic job lay out. I even have pics of tucks with chains on pulling sleighs full of logs out of the woods . Logging is logging bob sleds , horse loaders , horse hydraulic loaders, cable jammers , hydraulic loaders ,… there all the same basic idea at their core get the wood to the river , train , truck ….. or what ever to get it to the mill. Get the equipment that suits your needs but is not over kill to what you need. A buddy of mine were talking tonight and he use to horse log now he has a dirt business. He said he would not need a giant dozzer and semi to do what he needs to get done he would work himself out of work that way. It is the same with horse loggers , to my a double bunk valmet would be over kill but to have a small horse-drawn forwarder or a small truck with a loader that you could still back down stub road would be good that is what they had at the end of the last stretch of horse logging.
The biggest thing we lack today in the horse logging world is man power . We either can not find guys to work or we can not afford to hire them. This leaves us with the option of using equipment to take the place a couple of men. We can do this but we must still apply the same basic principle to our horse and what we do with them. Taylor Johnson

[lancek]

This is all very interesting Scott and Taylor you have hit on some real good points, but I want to add another perspective! In indiana the wood lotts were small and gave us an edge when we went to look at jobs. But down here in the Ozarks things are differant woodlots are much biger the last three I have looked at are between 300 and 1500 acers! Lots of land to cover with a horse! So I am going back to my origenal idea of a small forwarder. Something the size of a bobcat with a trailer and knucle boom behind it! But the real question is where do you find the engianering help to make such a machine?

[TaylorJohnson]

A 40 , 60, 80, 300, 3000,… acres it is all the same were a guy runs into problems on the big plots is if the road system is not suited for trucks . If you are forwarding much over about 60 acres with any consistency you better be hauling 3 cords or better I think.
Tim when I logged down in MN there were small log trucks there with off-road tires on them that they uses for forwarding wood out to were a log truck could get to it. This type of set up might do you good. I want to get a ford 700 or Chevy C 60 ,, well something in that size range . then on jobs were I have a long forward to get my wood to a trackable spot I will hook my loader to the truck load the truck and loader and drive it out. I will do this if I have hills or if it is just to long for the horses to be efficient. Another thing I am always looking at is how can I use this piece of equipment in other ways. Know if I had a truck of this size I could haul larder loads of hay , small loads of fire wood , pull loader easily from job to job or horses. My cousin had a small gmc with a small hood loader on it . That truck had a fuel mizzer motor in it and he would drive that truck to work every day, he could drive that truck pulling his horses and cheap as a chev with a 350 engine in it. Plus when he got there he could forward his wood and haul small loads to the mill or to fire wood costumers. There are a lot of trucks out there this size and a lot of use loaders off of old forwarders and what not. This would be a cheap what to get into a rig that can do the job for ya. Taylor Johnson

[Author]

Posts