Posted by David Sherman on Monday, January 16, 2006 at 4:47PM :
In Reply to: Re: Good logging and bad posted by matthew on Monday, January 16, 2006 at 3:57PM :
Part of the problem is that logs and lumber are sold by volume (MBF). Lumber is graded by species not by strength or density. On the coast it's mostly "Hem/fir" (hemlock or true fir). Inland it's "D-fir/larch" (douglas fir or larch) and in the south it's "SPF" (spruce pine or fir) The difference between #2, #1, and Sel-Str (Select structural) is defects such as wanes, splits, and size of knots. The price difference between grades is minimal and usually all grades are intermixed in a unit. If the sawmill is buying based strictly on volume, what incentive is there for a landowner to try to produce better quality wood? Sure, VG-CLR or "D" doug fir is selling for close to $10,000/MBF these days vs $500/MBF for the plantation stuff, but who's going to wait 1000 years for their clear firs to grow up?
I think if a person wants to manage the entire process from growing trees to carefully logging them to milling them into the highest quality products to making furniture or cabinets or boats out of them, he can get a premium for growing top-quality wood, but that almost takes a multi-generational commitment. On the other hand the big timber companies and timber land owners are producing a commodity for a competitive market where price is all that matters. If the building inspector sees a grading stamp on the framing, that's good enough for him. The building codes specify sizes of joists based on species and grade so any hunk of a tree that's the right size and shape and species and doesn't have big splits or giant knots in it is good enough, even if the "wood" has growth rings half an inch apart and is sort of the consistency of foam. The timber companies want to produce the maximum MBF/acre/year (or in Canada it's cubic meters per hectare per year) because the customers buy it by volume not by strength.
Follow Ups: