Focusing in on Forestry Issues in Alaska
Review of the Alaska Log Export Market - An Interview with Bruce Lippke
Alaska Cooperative Extension Forestry Programs - 1998
A Focus on Ecosystem Management
Log Rules and Conversion of Board Feet to Cubic Measurements
Trees of the Boreal Forest - Birch
This summer 1998 edition of the Alaska Cooperative Extension (ACE) newsletter finds Alaskans wondering what is happening with the log export markets. For this newsletter, I was able to obtain an interview with Bruce Lippke of CINTRAFOR (Center for International Trade in Forest Products, University of Washington, College of Forest Resources) for his comments on the Asian market situation. ACE continues to be concerned about the development of new primary and secondary wood manufacturing in the state and we currently are in the process of developing associated computer web sites. We are currently seeking information of value-added businesses that would like their manufactured forest products represented on the web site.
ACE continues to be closely involved with several workshops and training sessions in support of healthy, viable, productive, and sustainable Alaskan forests and an associated Forest Products Industry. It is our belief that both are essential to the long-term health and survival of our forests. Our efforts in support of these concerns are further described in this newsletter.
A major conference on the University's role in support of the forest products industry in SE Alaska is being planned for December and will be described more fully in the Fall edition of Under the Canopy (UTC). We also are planning technical workshops on sawmilling and kiln drying for Fairbanks, Mat-Su, and the Soldotna areas in mid-October along with workshops on forest products business plan development, accessing financial resources for small forest products industries, and developing negotiated contracts. We hope that many of you will be able to attend these. Announcements about the time and locations of these workshops will be sent out to our UTC mailing list this summer. Contact Amy Simpson or myself for further information on these workshops.
Other activities I have been pursuing include producing a video tape presentation on Forestry in Alaska and two radio information segments on chainsaw safety and tree falling procedures. I have been working on developing a program to evaluate the genetic variability of overstory and understory trees of the Lutz hybrid and white spruce.
I began a program to evaluate permanent growth plot data for characterization of spruce stand structure throughout the Interior spruce forests of Alaska. I hope to use this information in the development of a stand growth model for the Interior forest region.
I served as the editor for the Alaskan Extension Review, a document for reporting observational and research results and extension information. We have totally revised the format and scope of this document and are providing for the first time a complete index of previous publications. Copies are available from your local Extension office.
Finally, in this edition we are providing a review of activities being conducted by the Alaska Cooperative Extension Forestry Program during 1998.
Note: Bruce Lippke is the director of CINTRAFOR, The University of Washington's Center for International Trade in Forest Products in the College of Forest Resources as well as the College's Associate Dean of External Initiatives. CINTRAFOR provides an interdisciplinary program of research, outreach, and teaching focused on international trade of forest products and its importance to the Pacific Northwest and the nation as well as the economic impacts of policies and supply constraints. The center works closely with industry, trade associations, and state and federal agencies.
Q: Could you tell us a little background about your organization and the services it provides?
A: The Center for International Trade in Forest Products (CINTRAFOR) addresses opportunities and problems related to the international trade of wood and wood fiber products. Emphasizing forest economics and policy impacts, international marketing, technology developments, and value-added forest products, CINTRAFOR's work results in a variety of publications, professional gatherings, and consultations with public policy makers, industry representatives, and community members.
Located in the PNW, CINTRAFOR is administered through the College of Forest Resources at the University of Washington under the guidance of an Executive Board representing both large and small companies, agencies, and academics.
Supported by state, federal, and private grants, CINTRAFOR's interdisciplinary research is carried out by university faculty and graduate students, internal staff, and through cooperative arrangements with professional groups and individuals.
Q: Alaskans are especially concerned about the drastic decline in foreign, and especially Asian, log export markets. Could you give us some background information on factors that may have contributed to the existing market condition?
A: Decline in log-export markets: Cut backs in harvest in two regions of the world in the 1990s: (1) the US Pacific Northwest in order to conserve the Northern Spotted Owl and (2) reduced harvesting of tropical hardwoods as a result of liquidation of most commercial species and efforts to make the remaining supply more sustainable (Indonesia and Malaysia). These resulted in substantial timber price increases in PNW markets in 1991 and more broadly across Pacific Rim markets by 1993. These price increases motivated increased substitute supply around the world, including the use of more non-wood products and engineered wood products from lesser used species. This adjustment process required time for new investments to be put in place. Wood supply increased in the US South, Canada, and Europe as well as in new radiata plantation countries like New Zealand and Chile. Engineered wood replaced dimension lumber. Even without an Asian financial crisis, there would have been some moderating of the tight markets as these new supplies came on-line (incremental increases year after year).
The Asian crisis has somewhat suddenly and substantially reduced the demand for wood in the Pacific Rim causing a backflow of wood once going to Asian markets into North American markets. The high-quality wood going to Asia is now competing with the recent inroads of engineered products. The underlying causes of the Asian financial crisis were excessive investments in projects not supported by market demands resulting in rising delinquencies in private debt, both financial and non-financial, followed by inept governmental actions to restore any confidence. Hence, the currencies of many of these countries collapsed under the pressure of capital outflows with the consequences in one country affecting the others. Until there is more transparency in the debt structure of Asian companies and investment decisions become more responsive to markets than political subsidies, it will be difficult to restore international confidence in these developing country's markets. Even Japan has failed to put the issue of restoring the health in its banking system so that they can lend again ahead of subsidies to the construction sector.
Recovery in these markets will take place when the Asian countries outside of Japan can export with their deflated currency. This is also dependent upon their ability to obtain trade credits, which in turn requires some improvement in the solvency of banking institutions as well as their competitiveness in markets for which Japan is a major consumer. Without some recovery in Japan there is insufficient consumer demand for the products from other Asian countries
Recovery in Japan will require improvement in their banking liquiditya task they have failed to adequately addressand exports to other developed countries, primarily the US. Given the substantial decline in the yen (40% below earlier highs), they will succeed in exporting more to US and Europe making improvements in their banking liquidity most important to recovery.
Q: Given the history of this decline, how would you assess the existing log export market and do you have any short or long-term projections for the future of the market?
A: Recovery in Asian markets will take time. The already 7-year stagnation of the Japanese economy is now being compounded by declines in many other Asian economies. While 10 years down the road we may again experience a strong set of product demands in Asia, the total economic activity will remain well below the projected growth profile of the 80s. With demand levels several years behind prior trends and the wood supplies having responded to prior high prices with new supply sources, the likelihood of near-term markets as tight as experienced in the mid-90s is very low. This is in spite of the fact that supply constraints are likely to continue to expand to other regions, such as the impact of environmental pressures on reduced harvests in BC. While long-term demands may again outstrip supply, it will likely take 5-10 years to get demand growth back up to high enough levels to even use the current supply capacity. Additional timber supply constraints could accelerate the timing of stronger markets.
Q: Do you have any suggestions for manufactured wood product export from Alaska?
A: Log exports vs. product exports: With the surplus in log markets greater than the surplus in product markets, it has been possible for consuming countries to rely more on domestic production or the lowest cost log sources. New Zealand and Chile will likely put in more conversion facilities just to move their available volume. Alaska's higher-quality wood sources are not very suitable for attempting to compete in the US market, which generally relies on lower-quality wood for residential construction. There may not be many attractive alternatives for Alaskan wood except to work toward the coming recovery in Japan and Asia. The critical issue will be to improve the service relationships with Asian consumers in order to lose less share to their domestic production. It is more important than ever that producers know how their products have been used and who they compete with in order to determine how to become more competitive in an otherwise declining market. More attention to market research on how to better serve overseas customers is a key.
Q: Do you see any promising new technology for domestic wood product markets?
A: New technologies: The most important wood opportunity lies in the effectiveness of carbon mitigation efforts that enhance the value of wood relative to other structural materials. Almost all other structural materials are more fossil fuel intense than wood and hence are greater contributors to carbon emissions and presumably global warming. A properly levied carbon tax would raise the demand for wood and more quickly restore strong wood product markets. Unfortunately, the political non-acceptability of a tax will dictate the use of carbon credit trading systems as the alternative with the likelihood that the rules may not even motivate increased use of wood to replace more energy intensive substitutes.
Q: As we go into the summer period do you have any suggestions for companies holding large quantities of export log decked in Alaska in hopes of a return to better market prices? We have considerable salvage needs on spruce bark beetle killed areas.
A: Inventories and salvage: It is rarely profitable to hold product inventories for the time when prices are higher. The process of reducing the inventories takes too long. It may be very difficult to reduce inventories until other higher-cost producers are forced out of the market making the supply reduced more in line with short-term demand. The need for salvage activities to effectively move wood during weak markets almost requires local processing. While such volumes may be able to flow to off-shore uses in good markets, they may not be able to compete as a raw material in bad markets. The option is the production of composite products for export. The issue may be how to make the investment in conversion facilities more attractive. Tax credits or other incentives may be appropriate.
While stagnant in the growth sense, the Japanese domestic production of pulp and paper will be maintained at stable levels. However, the supply of residual chips is being reduced with less reliance on imported logs and more on imported wood products. There may be adequate opportunities to increase the export of chips to Japan, replacing the declining chip flows from Canada and the PNW.
Forestry and Natural Resource Issues in Alaska - I will continue to report new web site addresses as we find them. Please advise us if you know of additional sites that we could announce through our newsletter.
http://www.xyz.net/~clerk/fhsproj.htm (City of Homer Forest Health and Safety Project)
http://www.fs.fed.us/r10/spf (USFS S&PF programs including Forest Stewardship, Urban Forestry, Forest Health, Fire, Insect Condition Report and others)
http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/forestry (State of Alaska - Urban and Community Forestry (UCF) Program - to find the UCF you must first open the site and then "click" on resources to access information on the Urban and Community Forestry and other programs.)
http://www.dnr.state.ak.u s/forestry/comtimb.htm (DNR - Division of Forestry 5-year schedule of timber sales for the Kenai-Kodiak area)
http://www.go2net.org/pest (Integrated Pest Management Demonstration, Alaska Cooperative Extension, University of Alaska Fairbanks)
Web sites being developed: Alaska's Primary Wood Products Industries (Alaska Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development , the Alaska Cooperative Extension, the Department of Community and Regional Affairs, and the Industry Network Corporation)
Alaskan Value-added Wood Products (Alaska Cooperative Extension)
Forestry Extension Grant
During December 1997 ACE sponsored a forestry conference in Fairbanks entitled: "How Can the University of Alaska Assist Alaska's Forest Products Industry?" This conference was attended by a range of professionals from the University system, government agencies, and the public in general. The diversity of questions and suggestions stemming from the conference indicated that a number of actions were needed. In response to these results I received support for a grant proposal to the University of Alaska Natural Resource Fund entitled "University Programs in Assistance of the Forest Products Industry in Alaska."
This grant contained support for the following activities:
Conduct a series of Forest Products workshops that would entail one day training sessions on the following topics. We intend to present these workshops in Fairbanks, Anchorage, and the Soldotna areas.
- "Sawmill Operations and Kiln Drying of Hardwoods and Softwoods" (September 1998)
- "Small Forest Products Business Marketing Strategies" (October 1998)
- "Forest Products Business Plans and Financial Support Opportunities" (October 1998)
- "Developing and Understanding Negotiated Contracts Between Private Parties. Also to Understand Opportunities for Negotiated Contracts Between Private Parties and Government Agencies" (October 1998)
Conduct a three day in-service training session for Alaska
Cooperative Extension District agents to improve their understand of
forestry issues and improve their outreach to the forest products
community. This will serve as an
opportunity to review the future of the forestry Extension program. I
am planning on conducting the Forestry In-service in October.
Conduct a follow-up conference to the December 1997 conference on How Can the University of Alaska Assist Alaska's Forest Products Industry? This conference will be held in SE Alaska and will serve to follow-up on the issues and activities identified by the round-table discussions held in the 1997 conference.
ACE Forest Products Web Sites: One web site would be developed to display value-added Alaskan wood products along with information on developing forest products business plans, product marketing, accessing financial support and a bibliography on sawmill operations, kiln drying, lumber grading, timber sales, and other local, regional, or statewide information. We presently are also coordinating development of a Primary Processing (sawmilling) web site with Michael Johnson of the Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development.
In order to assist with the settlement of chronic disputes between public land managers and the public they serve with regard to forest land management issues, a series of forestry conferences or workshops are planned that would be based on evaluating land management options with an emphasis on understanding the potential for Ecosystem Management. As a series, the first (held April 9th and 10th, 1998) addressed biological assessment of the interior forest condition, the second (held June 5th and 6th, 1998) involved developing an understanding of the social aspects of forest management, and the third (intended for this fall 1998) will address consensus building and refining the collaborative process of forest ecosystem management.
Terpene Research Grant
I also received support for another grant submitted to the Natural Resource Fund entitled: "Evaluation of Spruce Derived Terpenoids and Related Compounds in Fresh and Salt Water from South-central Alaska and Potential Salmonid Toxicity." This project is of particular concern to the management of both our forests and fisheries in Alaska. The possible implications of this research are very significant given the large amount of acres and number of trees impacted by the current spruce bark beetle epidemic. The following description is a brief summary of the project and the objectives.
An unprecedented forest health crisis, the current spruce bark beetle epidemic, has ravaged more than 3,000,000 acres in Southcentral Alaska. Many infected stands are characterized by nearly 90 percent or greater mortality of all overstory trees. Fire control and limited logging salvage operations on federal and state lands have left thousands of affected acres with standing dead trees with direct effects on the ground vegetation and hydrology of the forest area and with higher potential for erosion from precipitation.
Spruce defensive mechanisms involve the production of large quantities of pitch or resin which contain high concentrations of defensive compounds such as terpenes. A small percentage of overstory trees are surviving within effected areas. The contributions these surviving trees will make to the genetic composition of the future spruce forests of the area could be significant. It will be important to determine if the defensive compounds produced by these live overstory trees are different or more concentrated than those produced by the dead overstory trees.
A pre-bark beetle attack research project in Resurrection Bay in 1989 reported finding low concentrations on terpenes in seawater. The effects of a large region of spruce forest producing copious quantities of spruce resin concentrated with terpenes leads to the concern that concentrations of terpenes and related metabolic compounds may be being concentrated in nearby fresh and salt water systems. Preliminary indications of toxicity of related metabolic compounds from terpenoids suggest necessary investigation of their effects on salmonids.
This project proposes a four part investigation into spruce defensive compounds and their presence in adjacent water systems.
"Managing for Forest Condition In Interior Alaska: What are our Options?" (April 9th and 10th, 1998, Fairbanks, Alaska)
Proceedings are now available for this workshop which includes all presentations and discussions held at this workshop. They are available at Alaska Cooperative Extension offices at no charge.
The purpose of this workshop was primarily to provide an assessment of the biological and economic health of the Interior boreal forest. The workshop was designed to provide a opportunity for specialists to provide information and collectively discuss aspects of the forest condition. A summary of the proceedings was prepared by the Alaska Cooperative Extension and are available upon request for free. The following is a summary of conclusions drawn from the workshop.
Forest Condition - It was concluded that the forest health in the Interior was declining as a result of increased insect and disease activity, greater fire risk, greater stress on trees caused by drying conditions and moisture stress, and concern over regeneration capabilities. Previous fire control has contributed to an imbalance in the distribution of young to intermediate stand structures in the region. Some degree of disturbance is healthy but excessive mortality leads to loss of biodiversity. Loss of biodiversity on the Kenai Peninsula is a concern.
Insects - Although the spruce bark beetle are present in the Interior, catastrophic timber losses are more likely to be caused by the Ips engraver beetle. The change in climate to warmer and drier conditions adds stress on the trees and increases the likelihood of greater insect related mortality.
Disease - We are finding that diseases are more prevalent than we thought even as much as five years ago. They are an integral part of the forest ecosystem and we are unsure of the interaction between disease and insect attack.
Climate - There was general agreement that a warming shift in the climate occurred about two decades ago. Since then, conditions have been warmer than usual and drier during the growing season. These changes are strongly related to a decline in forest health and an increase in fire risk.
Forest Genetics and Regeneration - There was unanimous agreement that reforestation should use native species. However, there was some discussion about whether we should include genetic material from a wider ecological range. There is a need to collect more seed for reforestation and germplasm protection.
Ecosystem Management - There was broad support for the application of ecosystem management to the Interior forest region of Alaska.
Public Involvement - Workshop attendees agreed that public participation is an essential part of ecosystem management.
What do we mean when we say the Boreal Forest is unhealthy? Unhealthy means that the forest does not have a high degree of resistance and resilience to disturbance.
Massive disturbance and change in the boreal forest is normal but with global warming, increased fire risk, increased bug and disease activity, poorer regeneration success, reduced biodiversity and genetic biodiversity, and lack of corrective forest management we are faced with mortalities that exceed 50%. High levels of forest mortality lead to reduced species biodiversity putting "at risk" both Ecosystem Sustainability and Sustainable Development.
"People and the Forest: Creating a Partnership" (June 5th and 6th, 1998)
A workshop about public participation in the forest resource decision-making process was conducted on Friday, June 5th, and Saturday, June 6th, 1998, at the Wood Center Ballroom on the UAF Campus. The following is a summary of goals and objectives of this workshop. The workshop was developed under support from a grant from the Natural Resource Fund and was co-sponsored by the Alaska Cooperative Extension, the University of Alaska Fairbanks, the Alaska Boreal Forest Council, and the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources - Division of Forestry.
A follow-up field trip was held on Saturday, June 13, 1998. It was lead by Dr. Ed Packee from the University of Alaska Fairbanks Forest Sciences Department.. The trip included several stops at forest areas to discuss aspects of ecological processes and the application of Ecosystem Management. The trip was attended by Dr. Fred Husby, Dean of SALRM, Dr. John Yarie, Dr. Bob Wheeler ACE, and members of the public. The weather was good and provided an opportunity for several informative discussions. The trip was also video taped in preparation for a documentary video being developed by ACE on "Concepts and Public Participation in Ecosystem Management" anticipated to be produced by Fall 1998.
What were the goals for this Conference?
Making Choices to Achieve a Desired Future Condition
What do we as individuals, families, neighborhoods, communities, economies, environments, and society desire for a future condition of the regional forest resources?
While addressing these concerns on a biological basis, a repeating theme voiced by many of the speakers at the April 9th and 10th conference was support for the concept of ecosystem stewardship or what is now commonly referred to as Ecosystem Management. This conference was held as part of a continuing series of conferences sponsored by ACE that seeks to establish a region-wide forest management program that incorporates landscape level ecosystem management.
With all this discussion on Ecosystem Management, it seems necessary that a functional definition of Ecosystem Management be provided, one that is suited to the unique features of the boreal forests of Alaska. According to Hal Salwasser with the University of Montana, Ecosystem Management can be thought of as a process by which we seek " to produce (i.e., restore, sustain, or enhance) desired conditions, uses, and values of complex communities or organisms that work together with their environments as integrated units.
The working guidelines for implementing ecosystem management
include the key steps of delineating ecosystems, statement of
problems, assessing and understanding choices, and acting, learning,
and adapting. The necessary steps are getting people involved;
working within the scope of the processes; integrating information,
technology, management, and research; revitalizing conservation
education and
interpretation; and developing, monitoring, and evaluating vital
signs of ecosystem health."
What is Implied by Ecosystem Management
Some feel that the best approach to obtaining and sustaining forest ecosystem health is through the application of Ecosystem Management. In a general sense, Ecosystem Management forces us to consider the broader dynamics of a region or landscape and through implementation we are seeking to " retain or restore the ecosystem structures, functions, and processes essential to the integrity and sustainability of that landscape." (USFS - Forest Ecosystem Health in the Inland West: A Science and Policy Reader, 1995)
Dr. Bob Pfister of the University of Montana refers to Ecosystem Management as "a balance of human use while addressing environmental concerns a harmony of man and nature coexisting, interdependent, without precluding quality of life for future generations."
With an increasing population and demand for renewable forest products, we know we can manage ecosystems on a sustaining yield basis as long as our removals do not exceed the long-term productivity. Developing the balance for meeting the needs of present populations by sustainable development without compromising the ability of the ecosystems to meet future needs is the challenge to ecosystem management. In order for us to assure the future productivity of these ecosystems under a plan of sustainable development it is essential that we maintain a healthy and productive forest. Through application of methods such as Adaptive
Management, careful monitoring and evaluation of ecosystem responses to management will be conducted. Although science can provide answers to possible management alternatives and probable consequences for alternative management options, it cannot tell us what ecosystem values should be sustained on a localized or broader scale throughout the landscape. This is achieved through the interaction of an informed public and the land managers with concern for scientific, cultural, and economic considerations.
During the recent "Peaceful Settlements Conference" held in Fairbanks, the keynote speaker, Larry Murculieff, a Native American, mentioned that because of our lack of knowledge regarding the intricate interrelationships of biological resources, we do not feel it is possible to make effective long-term plans. Perhaps this is further cause to embrace adaptive management as a means to introduce natural and man-caused changes to the ecosystems and modifying our responses in light of desired outcomes.
Because regional ecosystems change in response to geophysical, social, and economic realities, it is likely that a more localized or regional definition of ecosystem management is needed. This definition was seen as an objective for the June 5th and 6th, 1998, conference co-sponsored by ACE: "People and the Forest: Creating a Partnership."
As a result of recent questions regarding log rules and the conversion of board feet to cubic measurements, I am providing a discussion on methods and problems encountered with such conversions. To assist with this discussion, I have obtained permission from Dr. David Briggs of the University of Washington to use information from his book entitled: Forest Products Measurements and Conversion Factors (1994).
In order to estimate the board foot volume of lumber that can be recovered from a log a procedure called a "log rule" has been developed. These log rules include various assumption, depending upon the log rule used, about lumber measurement, lumber sizes, and sawmill technology. Since log rules only estimate the amount of lumber that can be produced from a log, they ignore the portion of the log converted to sawdust and chippable residues. Limitations in the accuracy of board foot log rules can result from general assumptions used such as they consider that all lumber is one inch thick, that a relatively thick saw kerf is used, and they commonly ignore or poorly account for log taper.
Overrun and Underrun
Once you consider all of the factors that can lead to the calculation of board foot volume obtained from a log, you then find that there is usually a difference between the board feet of lumber predicted by a given log rule and the amount that is actually recovered by the mill. The difference between the amount of board feet predicted by the log rule and produced by the mill is referred to as overrun if it is positive and underrun if it is negative. Overrun can change erratically with small changes in log diameters and lengths and in the mix of lumber sizes cut from a log or by orientation of logs such that pieces of less than the log length can be salvaged from the tapered area or even the slab.
In his 1974 booklet on "A Collection of Log Rules," Frank Freese mentions that at one time there were over 95 recognized log rules found in the United States and Canada with additional local variations in these rules. Freese describes that there are basically three different methods used for developing a log rule.
Log Rule Method (1): Mill Scale or Mill Tally Rules
Example: Braniff Rule (poplar, birch and beech)
These rules are based upon the measurement of volume of lumber derived from straight, defect-free logs for a given diameter and log length. These volumes are summarized over the range of diameter classes and lengths of logs commonly used. A disadvantage of these types of log rules is that the calculation of the volume figures may be based on such a restrictive set of conditions that they are not suited to other mills or manufacturing processes or log forms from different regions.
Log Rule Method (2): Log Diagram Rules
Example: Scribner Rule (1 inch lumber with 1/4 saw kerf)
These rules involve drawing designs on the small end of the log for the various cutting pattern for boards that could be cut from the log given considerations for manufacturing such as saw kerf, wood shrinkage, and board width, thickness, and length. A drawback in using the diagram rules is the ability of an individual sawmill operation to meet the assumptions made in diagram designs for boards produced from a given log end.
Log Rule Method (3): Formula Rules
Example: Doyle Rule (D - 4)2 L
16
These rules start with the formula for some assumed geometric shape and is then modified to allow for losses of volume due factors such as saw kerf, slabs, and edging.
Definitions
Board Foot: A board foot is an American wood volume measurement used to indicate a hypothetical piece of lumber that is 12 inches wide and one inch thick.
Sawkerf: (1) Grooves or notches made in cutting with a saw; (2) that portion of a log, timber, or other piece of wood removed by the saw as sawdust in parting the material into two pieces.
Slab: The exterior portion of a log removed in sawing lumber.
Trim: The amount of extra length allowed when bucking logs or sawing green lumber to compensate for end checking and damage in transit, and for "squaring up" at the mill. The allowance is specified in contracts and by log scaling agencies.
Why is there a difference between board foot measure for lumber at the lumber yard and that calculated by a log rule?
Theoretically, a board foot (BF) represents 144 cubic inches or 0.083 cubic foot of actual solid wood, and a solid cubic foot contains 12 BF. Unfortunately, because of differences in board foot log rule assumption regarding lumber dimensions and actual lumber dimensions produced by sawmills, the board foot does not represent the same quantity of solid wood in these two situations.
For example, consider a 16 foot long piece of lumber 1 inch thick by 12 inches wide. According to the board foot definition, this board contains 16 BF, and a calculation using the dimensions (or dividing 16 BF by 12 BF/cubic foot would indicate that it contains 1.33 cubic feet of wood. This is the interpretation that Log Rules use for measuring wood volume, that a piece of lumber and its stated dimensions (such as 1 in. x 12 in. x 16 feet) are the actual dimensions of the lumber piece.
However, in lumber manufacturing and the sale of lumber, the same piece of lumber referred to as a 1 x 12 (this is called the "nominal" size). When the 1 x 12 piece of lumber is dried and planed, the American Lumber Standards specify minimum dimensions of 3/4 by 11.25 inches. Generally, mills produce pieces with sizes very close to the specifications.
While the above mentioned board is sold as having 16 BF, the actual amount of wood it contains is 0.94 cubic feet. Consequently, the board has actually 17.07 BF/ft3 instead of 12 BF that a solid cubic foot of wood normally would contain.)
Scribner Decimal C Log Rules
The Scribner Log Rule is a "diagram rule" (Log Rule Method 2). Since the assumed sawing patterns change with diameter only when boards can be added, the BF per lineal foot factors do not change smoothly with diameter. When this is combined with the practice of rounding to the nearest 10 BF, the resulting Scribner volumes change in a step-wise manner with increases in log diameter and length. This erratic behavior of step-wise increments of volume results in many inconsistencies.
Examples
As a result of these step-wise volume changes loggers will seek to maximize log scale by bucking short log lengths, thus constraining later utilization options by the mill. In an effort to prevent excessive "volume manufacturing," log buyers often will stipulate a minimum average log length in contracts.
It should also be noted that as a result of these step-wise volume changes that there is not a close relationship between weight and Scribner board foot volume unless log diameters are taken into consideration.
Conversion of Board Feet to Cubic Feet and Cubic Meters
Converting from Board Feet to Cubic Feet In order to convert from board feet (BF) to cubic feet (CF) and then to cubic meters (CM) it is necessary to first determine what is the ratio between BF and CF.
Cubic Conversion Factors
1 ft3 = 12 BF Brererton = .02832 cubic meters
1 m3 = 35.315 cubic feet = 423.78 board feet
There are several methods of calculating cubic foot measurement of log volumes and are referred to as Cubic Log Rules. These log rules attempt to estimate the total wood volume and make no assumptions regarding eventual product recovery and use as in the case with some board foot log rules.
Brererton Cubic Log Rule
This rule involves the use of a subneiloid formula to calculate cubic foot volume of the log which is then multiples by 12 BF per cubic foot to convert to board feet volume. The formula for this rule is as follows.
Brererton Formula
CF = ((p/4)/ 144) x [(d + D)/2]2 x L
CF = cubic feet volume
d = small end log diameter
D = large end log diameter
L = length of log
Board Foot/Cubic Foot ratios will vary considerably depending upon the log rules used. Using the Brererton and West Side Scribner log volume tables we find that 1,000 BF (MBF) of Scribner volume = 0.55 MBF Brererton. This calculation is based upon the assumption of 6.6 BF Scribner per cubic foot. Because the Scribner volume is based on an average of trees from a given area the ratio of BF/CF will vary.
Conversion from Cubic Feet to Cubic Meters
To convert MBF (1,000 BF) to cubic meters, first divide 1,000 by the assumed ratio of board feet to cubic feet. In our example above we show the ratio is 6.6.
1,000/6.6 = 151.51 cubic feet
Then divide this result by 35.315 cubic feet per cubic meter to estimate the equivalent volume in cubic meters.
151.51/35.315 = 4.29 cubic meters
It is important to note that every combination of a board foot rule with a cubic foot rule will yield a different result and that the results are sensitive to log size and taper. The above procedure can be used properly as long as users are very careful in their interpretation of which rules are involved and do not assume that 35.315 ft3/m3 applies to all combinations of cubic log rules.
In Alaska we find that there are several species of birch which are generally classified as a group as white birch. Individual Alaskan species include:
Ecological Concerns: The white birch group has suffered significant population decline over their broad range in North America which has been referred to as birch dieback. The condition and causes are not fully known. Symptoms include a progressive dieback of the twigs and branches, reduced vigor and tolerance of stresses such as caused by insects, diseases, drought, and frost. With the concern over stresses in the boreal forest stemming from an extending warming trend throughout the Alaskan boreal forest over the past 20 years there may be reason to be concerned for maintaining birch vigor and diversity.
General Features of the White Birch Group
Information provide by Beth Schulz of the U.S.F.S. State and Private Office, Anchorage
Forestry Technician Program to start up in 1998.
The Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc. Interior Athabascan Tribal College is proceeding to set up a forestry technician program. The 14 month program is anticipated to start in the fall of 1998 in Seward, Alaska. Dr. Robert Kesling has been contracted to set up the program.
The scope of the program is industry wide, including both public and private sectors. The program intends to attract serious career oriented students, providing them with realistic quality training, and placing graduates in jobs that will benefit them and their employers. The success of this program depends on support from forestry firms, organizations, and professionals in Alaska. Assistance is desired in: recruitment of students, scholarships, finding grants, setting up internships and cooperative education programs, instruction, and career placement.
For information about the program you may contact: Dr. Robert Kesling at (907) 224-5503 or Chris Maisch and Reva Shircel at (907) 452-8251 ext. 3371 or 3185.
Commentary from Tony Nakazawa, Interim Director for the Alaska Cooperative Extension
Collaboration is an integral part of the process that Alaska Cooperative Extension utilizes in carrying out its mission of working together with clientele, partner agencies and organizations, and UAF colleagues to bring the University of Alaska to the people.
Collaboration is also an important key component of ecosystem management. Dr. Bob Wheeler, our Extension forestry specialist, has been advancing ecosystem management as an alternative for forest resource management. Ecosystem management is seen as a more realistic way to approach forest management in this time of increasing public concern and involvement in Alaskan forest resource issues including the spruce bark beetle epidemic, forest product market stability, road building, logging, and limited resource of federal and state resource agencies.
To better understand ecosystem management, note the following comments of the former USFS chief Jack Ward Thomas in 1994:
" Ecosystem management is a holistic approach to natural resource management . . . . . . it [ecosystem management] integrates the human, biological and physical dimensions of natural resource management. . . . . .its purpose is to achieve sustainability of all resources. . . . . . [and it] requires the application of our best scientific knowledge."
Extension's forestry program is helping to actively introduce the discussion of ecosystem management in various educational settings as indicated by the December 1997 conference "How Can the University of Alaska Assist Alaska's Forest Products Industry," the April 9-10, 1998, conference "Managing for Forest Condition in Interior Alaska: What are our Options," and the June 5-6, 1998, conference "People and the ForestCreating a Partnership" as well as with this newsletter. Cooperative Extension has a long history of collaboration and providing the educational resources for land resource management discussions here in Alaska. This is particularly true regarding forest resource management. In these times of limited resources, there is an increasing need for good science and for good public policy decision-making. The educational role of the University and Extension clearly has an important role to provide research based information on important natural resource issues such as ecosystem management.
