Fire up the saws!

[mtmuley]

If I remember the articles correctly, supply wasn’t even an issue. Pyramid higher ups stated the reasons for shuttering as: severe labor shortages, a lack of affordable housing in the area, high cost of living, declining lumber prices, and an aging work force. A helluva lot more factors at work than delayed logging projects.

Maybe. Another wormhole to go down in the state of affairs here in Montana. mtmuley

 

[BigHornRam]

If I remember the articles correctly, supply wasn’t even an issue. Pyramid higher ups stated the reasons for shuttering as: severe labor shortages, a lack of affordable housing in the area, high cost of living, declining lumber prices, and an aging work force. A helluva lot more factors at work than delayed logging projects.

All these plus high property taxes, and aging worn out sawmill equipment. Any new sawmill will be modern and highly automated.

 

[INMT]

Maybe. Another wormhole to go down in the state of affairs here in Montana. mtmuley

A wormhole indeed. I’m just quoting what pyramid said.

I’m sure like most of life if you look back far enough, ie spotted owl decision, the downfall of the working class can. E attributed to many factors.

 

[BuzzH]

But if I understand it correctly, at least near me, the mills shut down because of lack of timber. One big thinning project near me is at least four years in the planning process. It has been plotted a long time. And Pyramid shut down. mtmuley

Not entirely due to lack of timber, Pyramid was because they couldn't find anyone to work for $20 an hour combined with a lack of housing, markets, etc. BTW, my parents lived next door to Fred Johnson and his wife in Missoula.

Large Missoula County employer, Pyramid lumber, to close

One of Missoula County's last remaining lumber mills on Thursday evening announced its plans to close, ending a run that began in 1949.

missoulacurrent.com

“As everyone at Pyramid knows, the company has been hit very hard by a variety of circumstances that are outside of its control,” the company said in a statement. “Among other problems, labor shortages, lack of housing, unprecedented rising costs, plummeting lumber prices, and the cost of living in Western Montana have crippled Pyramid’s ability to operate.”

Fred Johnson and Oscar Mood founded what would become Pyramid Mountain Lumber in 1949. At the time, timber operations were a large part of the Missoula economy, though nearly all of them have since vanished in recent decades.

 

[mtmuley]

Not entirely due to lack of timber, Pyramid was because they couldn't find anyone to work for $20 an hour combined with a lack of housing, markets, etc. BTW, my parents lived next door to Fred Johnson and his wife in Missoula.

Large Missoula County employer, Pyramid lumber, to close

One of Missoula County's last remaining lumber mills on Thursday evening announced its plans to close, ending a run that began in 1949.

missoulacurrent.com

“As everyone at Pyramid knows, the company has been hit very hard by a variety of circumstances that are outside of its control,” the company said in a statement. “Among other problems, labor shortages, lack of housing, unprecedented rising costs, plummeting lumber prices, and the cost of living in Western Montana have crippled Pyramid’s ability to operate.”

Fred Johnson and Oscar Mood founded what would become Pyramid Mountain Lumber in 1949. At the time, timber operations were a large part of the Missoula economy, though nearly all of them have since vanished in recent decades.

So why the Darby mill shutdown? Nevermind. I know enough folks I can talk to. mtmuley

 

[Bonasababy]

Good to see some folks understand this has everything to do with industry desires and little hope of considering fish and wildlife needs. The industry works hard to portray things as a tree hugger vs habitat or fire issue....make no mistake they are really pushing for their interests.

It's ironic...very similar to the argument that any cutting of government jobs and budgets is good.

 

[Bonasababy]

Overly simplistic.

I don't disagree with more cutting on NF lands at all, what I went to school for and absolutely trees are renewable.

Its just flat not true that 80% of NF lands should have been logged 30 years ago, many weren't rotation age then, many still aren't today. You live in the south where trees grow at least twice, if not 3 times faster than our best sites in the Interior West.

The other problem is, nobody is bidding on sales now. The guy I rent my house to is a forester for the local district. He put 2 sales up last year and received....exactly....zero bids. He's going to try running them again this year.

Lots of reasons for that, markets, imports, distance to mills, fuel prices, blah blah blah blah.

While this new idea sounds good on the surface, its just flat not going to happen. For one thing, the administration is at best going to be 4 years. Not sure how many timber sales you've prepped, but I'll just let you know that they don't happen over night. Of course, then there's the little self-induced staffing problem that we have going on, the firing of foresters, likely some early retirement authority causing a lot of institutional knowledge of things like timber, heading out the door.

Anyone want to talk about where the funding is going to come from to administer the sales? Build roads? Required cruising? Marking sales? Boundaries? Site prep/burning after the sales?

There's also the question of how you get sales purchased, like I said, many are not getting bids. If they do get bids, where's the profit in hauling logs hundreds of miles to the nearest mills that still remain when diesel is 3.50/gallon?

With a flood of domestic timber, its no different than a flood of domestic oil, price will go through the gdman floor and make sales even less attractive and tighter profit margins for mills.

I got news, this is going nowhere...unfortunately.

Keep in mind the industry does not always have any intention of bidding on or buying sales. What they want is to see the market flooded so the price of what they do buy is driven down.

 

[Bonasababy]

They going to drastically subsidize the cost to haul backcountry logs to front county mills?

They’re also going to need to dramatically reduce stocking rates on new trees they plant post harvest if the too many trees in the woods argument is to be believed. I’m always frustrated when I see a plantation thinned at a 50+% rate when the trees being thinned are ones that were just planted 10 or so years earlier. Sure seems like it would make more sense to have planted less to begin with

I’d also be happy to see replanting done with wildlife/habitat in mind. Monocultures of trees planted simply for production aren’t what I see in a natural forest, plus it would be nice to see areas left unplanted to allow for openings and natural forest succession

The too high initial planting density has a purpose...to help create higher quality wood. At least in many conifer plantings. Which often directly conflicts with high quality wildlife habitat.

 

[BuzzH]

The too high initial planting density has a purpose...to help create higher quality wood. At least in many conifer plantings. Which often directly conflicts with high quality wildlife habitat.

Yep. The expense is getting everything together to plant, hiring, contracting, and then getting them out in the field. The cost of planting a few too many trees is much cheaper than having to go back if you don't plant enough.

It does seem counter intuitive to have to go back and thin, but you just end up with a higher quality stand.

 

[BuzzH]

So why the Darby mill shutdown? Nevermind. I know enough folks I can talk to. mtmuley

I'm guessing similar things to what happened to Pyramid.

I hate seeing those smaller mills close.

 

[shoots-straight]

So why the Darby mill shutdown? Nevermind. I know enough folks I can talk to. mtmuley

The eye opener for me was this. Remember the Great NW log Haul?
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

All those trucks the rolled through to the Mill?

Yea, that small mill consumed that supply up in less than 3 weeks. Automation was a major player. Great NW Log Haul

 

[Bonasababy]

Yep. The expense is getting everything together to plant, hiring, contracting, and then getting them out in the field. The cost of planting a few too many trees is much cheaper than having to go back if you don't plant enough.

It does seem counter intuitive to have to go back and thin, but you just end up with a higher quality stand.

Higher quality timber...not habitat in most cases.

They plant at stocking levels much higher than they need for the final stand before harvest as much for growth and form concerns as covering expected mortality.

 

[BuzzH]

Higher quality timber...not habitat in most cases.

They plant at stocking levels much higher than they need for the final stand before harvest as much for growth and form concerns as covering expected mortality.

Correct.

Done right, its possible to do 2 or 3 harvests in a stand of planted conifers. Think commercial thinning, select cut of some sort, and seed tree removal.

 

[Wildabeest]

One thing I appreciate about the state lands I hunt in MT is that they are selectively thinned vs. clear cut. Makes for great habitat and even better hunting.

 

[Alpine01]

Our biggest bottleneck is getting the heritage clearances done before any ground disturbance takes place. It's the Southwest, most of our grounds have potential cultural resources to address, especially the flat ground that we tend to log. We hire seasonal archaeologists to help with the heritage survey backlog. The same seasonals we did not hire this year. We use funding to hire contractors to do heritage surveys. The same funding that's currently frozen.

What's the "hit" rate where something of high interest/value is actually found? Just curious.

 

[SaskHunter]

Clear cuts definitely has its place and are great habitat for wildlife. We do it plenty up here. It needs to be a multi-facet approach, select clear cuts within the forests and thinnings. They make for great hunting spots in the Northern forest and wildlife gets into them for a reason...

People go to school for this and spend their lives managing forests and their ecosystems. Works well for us.

 

[Bonasababy]

Correct.

Done right, its possible to do 2 or 3 harvests in a stand of planted conifers. Think commercial thinning, select cut of some sort, and seed tree removal.

Don't disagree but done that way it's more like growing corn after you tore out the fencerows killed all the weeds and dumped a bunch of fertilizer to maximize the crop.

It can be different by location and species. For Norway (Red) Pine--although it easily grows big and can last over 200 years--the industry wants it all cut well before 100. Get a few thinnings and then they start over.

The same species can be managed much better for habitat. Plant at a lower stocking rate to start, use variable density (dirty words to timber interests) in planting, or hit it hard with precommercial variable density thinning. Then let it grow old instead of cutting it all just when it hits its teenage years and starting over. After the last thinning maybe run a fire underneath occasionally depending on goals.

Timber industry guys want trees planted much denser and more uniformly than would occur naturally in many cases for form purposes. Then thinnings are just enough to allow them a window to grow straight up and not out as much for another period, then thinned lightly again.

Nature doesn't work that way, sun doesnt hit the forest floor enough to promote diversity, etc. again its more like intensive farming.

Each location and the species present there varies of course.

There could be more cutting in places on NF land in my part of the world, some of that is not their doing at all though--markets just aren't there--which means if there is any increase in cutting it will have to stray from the considerations for more than just timber industry the FS normally has to consider--which means hunters and habitat won't be done any favors.

The national forests here are actually able to sell wood in places where other landowners can't another indication it's less them than other factors. Their sales sure do require a LOT more setup than other agencies or private land though--but if I won the lottery and wanted a place up against public I'd strongly prioritize being near NF land in the lakes states northern forests. So many other landowners are either managing the forest purely for industry purposes or on private land not cutting enough.