Horse logging article from Boston Globe
- Thread starter Dalmatian90
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
371groundie
ArboristSite Guru
well that painted the forest industry in a negative light. cute story, but didnt represent the mondern forest industry in the north east well at all. mostly sterotypes about clear cutting short rotation.
ive met Mr. Plowden, wonder what he thinks about the story.
ive met Mr. Plowden, wonder what he thinks about the story.
Everyone does not have a burning desire to feed the mill.
Maybe you missed the part about it being a niche market.
Some landowners aren't interested in seeing the effects of machinery in their woodlot. The volume they want removed may not pencil out for a machine logger.
I would hazzard a guess John knows Rick.
Maybe you missed the part about it being a niche market.
Some landowners aren't interested in seeing the effects of machinery in their woodlot. The volume they want removed may not pencil out for a machine logger.
I would hazzard a guess John knows Rick.
LumberjkChamp
ArboristSite Operative
Thanks for linking that article. Well written. Though it would have been slightly more romantic if instead of "rip starting" his chainsaw he broke the morning silence with the high keening sound of a razor sharp crosscut saw while starting the difficult process of undercutting a tree by hand. But, really, no harm done. A good read. I enjoyed it.
TMFARM 2009
Addicted to ArboristSite
thats a logger with a hard work ethic.. it takes a lot to use horses for any thing.
they alone are work for most people...neat article.
they alone are work for most people...neat article.
forestryworks
Addicted to ArboristSite
Typical city slicker written article - paints clearcutting in a negative light once again.
Oh, and there is no blade on a chainsaw :monkey:
Oh, and there is no blade on a chainsaw :monkey:
logbutcher
Addicted to ArboristSite
An unfortunate urban romantic account of a very tiny niche in harvesting.
Horse logging is an incredible skill that few have. There are many realistic problems with using horses for harvesting for woodlot owners.
First is the impact on the land. The small footprint of hooves is far greater that the 2 ' wide harvester (Timberjack) tracks, or even full size skidder wheels with chains.
We use mechanized gear because of less ground damage.
Second, horses cannot work wet, rocky, or hilly terrain. Snow depths much over a couple of feet are tough on the animals.
Third, on larger, long term harvests, your gear can sit overnight in place ready to work the next morning. Horses not, they need to be sheltered, returned to the barn.
Fourth, the work done by one feller and horses is long and tedious. The net BTU use is higher with animals than gear doing the job faster, more efficiently.
The article does the straw dog ( explanations online for those who don't understand :thinking
about "clear cutting". It hasn't been done in the northeast for decades on any kind of scale. More common are patch cuts, or corridor harvests, leaving trees we mark for later crops.
Most skilled harvester ( fell, delimb, cut, carry ) operators leave the same paths as horse loggers, as well as selectively cut.
Comments ?
JMNSHO
Horse logging is an incredible skill that few have. There are many realistic problems with using horses for harvesting for woodlot owners.
First is the impact on the land. The small footprint of hooves is far greater that the 2 ' wide harvester (Timberjack) tracks, or even full size skidder wheels with chains.
We use mechanized gear because of less ground damage.
Second, horses cannot work wet, rocky, or hilly terrain. Snow depths much over a couple of feet are tough on the animals.
Third, on larger, long term harvests, your gear can sit overnight in place ready to work the next morning. Horses not, they need to be sheltered, returned to the barn.
Fourth, the work done by one feller and horses is long and tedious. The net BTU use is higher with animals than gear doing the job faster, more efficiently.
The article does the straw dog ( explanations online for those who don't understand :thinking
about "clear cutting". It hasn't been done in the northeast for decades on any kind of scale. More common are patch cuts, or corridor harvests, leaving trees we mark for later crops.Most skilled harvester ( fell, delimb, cut, carry ) operators leave the same paths as horse loggers, as well as selectively cut.
Comments ?
JMNSHO
Have you ever actually ever been around a horse logging job?
ChainsawmanXX
Addicted to ArboristSite
We use horses to extract alot of our timber, We can use a skid trail all day and there is barely any trail there haha.
Loved his comment though "Make alitte, spend less."
Loved his comment though "Make alitte, spend less."
logbutcher
Addicted to ArboristSite
Three jobs ( 3 ) in the past 6 years. Why ask ? Why the H would I even mention it if there was no experience. What's up John ?
Since you're challenging some facts and experience, how about your experience with horse logging ? Arkansas ain't here BTW. :messed:
Discuss facts rather than attack personally: footprint, energy use, timeline, your actual ("actually") use of horses for harvesting in a region with snow, boggy ground, bony woodlands, hills. Not warm flatland.
There are 2 horse loggers in this area. It is a definite sideline, hired out for landowners wanting to "make a green statement" not harvest for forest management, or profit. The 2 guys know this. Their draft animals are used on their farmland.
What is not understood is why so many of you online here get bent out of shape defensive. They're only opinions: some scratched online ( huh ? ), and some from real world, on the ground life.
Hey, it's virtual.:musical-note:
logbutcher
Addicted to ArboristSite
Guess the logs are levitated.:confusedn:
What do your animals use for fuel ? Cost ? Winter feed ? Vet care ? Shoes ?
Transport (trailer)? Damage to that skid trail wet or unfrozen ?
What's "alitte" ?
PB
Addicted to ArboristSite
An unfortunate urban romantic account of a very tiny niche in harvesting.
Horse logging is an incredible skill that few have. There are many realistic problems with using horses for harvesting for woodlot owners.
First is the impact on the land. The small footprint of hooves is far greater that the 2 ' wide harvester (Timberjack) tracks, or even full size skidder wheels with chains.
We use mechanized gear because of less ground damage.
Second, horses cannot work wet, rocky, or hilly terrain. Snow depths much over a couple of feet are tough on the animals.
Third, on larger, long term harvests, your gear can sit overnight in place ready to work the next morning. Horses not, they need to be sheltered, returned to the barn.
Fourth, the work done by one feller and horses is long and tedious. The net BTU use is higher with animals than gear doing the job faster, more efficiently.
The article does the straw dog ( explanations online for those who don't understand :thinking
Most skilled harvester ( fell, delimb, cut, carry ) operators leave the same paths as horse loggers, as well as selectively cut.
Comments ?
JMNSHO
I have to disagree about ground damage. A single tire spin from a ringed tire will do more damage than running a team of horses over a piece of ground several times. I spend a lot of time in logged woods and have never seen skid trails as narrow or clean as horse trails. The PSI for a horse may be worse, but that is only the area of a hoof print every few yards compared to a constant pressure from a tire or track.
For large operations, there is no comparison of mechanized vs. horses. Horses are used in small woodlots to reduce the impact on the soil and maneuver around tight spaces and limit the need for large skid trails.
Horse logging is quite common back in PA for hardwood logs. I have seen it done several times and helped on one job and cut firewood with another. You are talking about a specific situation, you even say so, but your broad generalizations fall short of the truth.
Carry on fellow Mainah (I'm just a transplant).
horseloger
ArboristSite Operative
Hey log butcher I think you should check your facts before throwing rocks ! Number one if you read the address of chainsaw man xx its Missouri not Arkansas although they are plenty of good horse loggers in ark,! Number two you wish too address the cost of horse logging verses s conventional logging, here it is the total cost for feeding vet and horse shoeing is no more than 400.00 per month there is no carbon used too produce the the fuel the horses regenerate there waste back too nature and reproduce there own food can your skidder do that? The foot print of a skider is two foot wide and it destroys more regeneration than it ever saves in compression and we all know what the ruts are like when a skidder goes through the woods ! It cost at least 500.00 in our area too move equipment and I carry my horses back and forth with me going from thee house to the woods and back ! This is a expense I would have too pay regardless and it allows me too carry all my gear with me in the horse trailer so I have almost all my tools and drill press welder oil gas and spare parts with me if something breaks I don't have to travel to town to get it fixed! That is a huge savings! I am not chained to my business my equipment is payed for and if I want too take a day or two off I can without worrying about making that huge skkider payments, and I have no problems finding more work and better timber because all I have too do is show pic of my last job and people jump at the chance to have us work there property! Although there is no way that the horse can skid out as much as a skidder can the bennefitts of using horses out way the extra timber the skidder will produce, and will far out way the damages that a skidder crates!
As far as working the animals on hilly rocky ground we live in the Ozark mountains some of the hilly est and rockiest terrain in the US and we do it very day, the horses skidd up hill down hill and over rocks and never have a problem we work rain days here and back in my home state of Indiana and where I took my forestry training in Vermont when heavy equipment cant work with out damaging the soil! And as far as Rick is concerned he has probably twice as much knowledge about logging as the both of us combined!!!!!
As far as working the animals on hilly rocky ground we live in the Ozark mountains some of the hilly est and rockiest terrain in the US and we do it very day, the horses skidd up hill down hill and over rocks and never have a problem we work rain days here and back in my home state of Indiana and where I took my forestry training in Vermont when heavy equipment cant work with out damaging the soil! And as far as Rick is concerned he has probably twice as much knowledge about logging as the both of us combined!!!!!
Sorry, I should not have used the word actually. Hahaha, I'll try not to get all bent out of shape and defensive.
I just see that ground inpact comment a lot by people that have never been around animal extraction.
I have no experience with horse logging, but I logged with mules from 98 to 08 here in central Arkansas.
I did not read the article mentioned and am not commenting on it. Your right, Arkansas is not Maine or ?
I used them in very little snow, but they were on plenty of rocks and occaisonal steep ground. They were usually smart enough to stay out of wet and boggy ground.
I have never tried to say that horse/mule logging is the answer to every logging situation. I talked myself out of quite a few jobs when I told the landowners that thay should have machine logging done for what they wanted.
It all depends on the situation, but there are certain jobs that can be done with animals that the only way it could happen mechanicaly with the same footprint/impact is with small tractors. I dont think you will find any horselogger that is trying to say their way is the answer to every job. There are a lot of disadvantages and problems to logging with animals. Some people are not willing to work with them. A crappy job can be done with animals the same as machines.
I don't think that anyone that has been around a lot of logging can say that a good horselogging job in the right situation is anything other than LOW impact.
Forget all the reasons not to do it (production, transporting, training the animals and finding/making the tools needed)etc.
I got into it because I wanted to work in the woods with animals. Was'nt out to save the planet. There is a horse logger on the west co. Gregg Caudell. Another logger asked him why he wanted to fool around working with horses. He replied "Because I can". I like that.
Also, there are a lot more horse/mule loggers around than you think. Its just not obvious.
ChainsawmanXX
Addicted to ArboristSite
Nope that just plain old flat dragging.
To answer your question on fuel... its not as much as your skidder is =D hhaha
Cost.. couldn't be as much as the parts for a skidder
transport... Like seriously.. come on I can pull 2 horses with a 1 ton. Although yea you can pull a small skidder with one but they wouldnt be as much wear and tear as a 7ton skidder.
Here's some real horse logging, circa 1955. My uncle Pete is on the right, I'm the 4 year old in the middle, my sister Vicki is on the left. There was a 20 acre woodlot about a half mile from the farm here. My grandfater had a Farmall H but it never went up there, only the horses. Pete had his leg broken a few years before this photo from a rolling log. This was all for firewood, the only heat in the farmhouse was a huge wood furnace & the Andes stove in the kitchen. I've got some more of these somewhere, I'll have to try to hunt them up.
Well said. They are just two completly different ways of logging. The Osarks are short and steep and no inbetween.
The only horse logging I've been around was in AZ. It was flat ground. The ground was too damp for skidders, I think it was in early Spring. The skidder logger had a horse, and decided to put him to use and did. He kept the horse in a portable corral on the unit. One night, the horse broke out and went home. He couldn't work the next day as he was too tired...kind of like some humans do.
Even though the ground was wet, they did a good job. The logger lost weight and got in good shape from running with the horse. He was able to move a few logs instead of staying at home moving no logs.
It wasn't overly productive, nor did anyone expect it to be. It was a case of having a horse and having time to use him.
Even though the ground was wet, they did a good job. The logger lost weight and got in good shape from running with the horse. He was able to move a few logs instead of staying at home moving no logs.
It wasn't overly productive, nor did anyone expect it to be. It was a case of having a horse and having time to use him.
LumberjkChamp
ArboristSite Operative
Here's some real horse logging, circa 1955. My uncle Pete is on the right, I'm the 4 year old in the middle, my sister Vicki is on the left. There was a 20 acre woodlot about a half mile from the farm here. My grandfater had a Farmall H but it never went up there, only the horses. Pete had his leg broken a few years before this photo from a rolling log. This was all for firewood, the only heat in the farmhouse was a huge wood furnace & the Andes stove in the kitchen. I've got some more of these somewhere, I'll have to try to hunt them up.
That is a really nice picture. Thank you for posting.
logbutcher
Addicted to ArboristSite
Stihl can't get why too many here are set up those straw dogs. Too damn defensive about the one and only way of getting a job done in the woods. GOL, horse logging, Humbolts.
Horse logging is fine, it's green TO A POINT if you don't have to produce $$$$.
Footprint: NO harvest is done with heavy gear on wet, soft ground here. None.
When ~400lb tiny hoof hits soft soil where is it going ? We're talking about tracks that are 2' wide each on usually dry or frozen or snowy ground---harvesters. The damage is little if any under those conditions.
Then for production when figuring in a timeline for say a 100a job, the time to complete a managed harvest with a Timberjack harvester may be 30 days. With a horse team, one or two cutters, hauling to a yard, figure at least 3-5 months total. Each fell needs chaining, skidding, bucking, delimbing. Most harvesters do it all in one pass.
Energy costs over time ? Feed, vets, shoes, gear, transport.
Now I don't give a s___ how you want to harvest. Just use your intelligence and listen to other approaches FROM THE REAL WORLD. And, get off ad hominum attacks for simple accounts of other ways. Throw those emotive "rocks" somewhere else.:island:
And you Mr. Slow, time to tell about those PM's ? :go-away:
Horse logging is fine, it's green TO A POINT if you don't have to produce $$$$.
Footprint: NO harvest is done with heavy gear on wet, soft ground here. None.
When ~400lb tiny hoof hits soft soil where is it going ? We're talking about tracks that are 2' wide each on usually dry or frozen or snowy ground---harvesters. The damage is little if any under those conditions.
Then for production when figuring in a timeline for say a 100a job, the time to complete a managed harvest with a Timberjack harvester may be 30 days. With a horse team, one or two cutters, hauling to a yard, figure at least 3-5 months total. Each fell needs chaining, skidding, bucking, delimbing. Most harvesters do it all in one pass.
Energy costs over time ? Feed, vets, shoes, gear, transport.
Now I don't give a s___ how you want to harvest. Just use your intelligence and listen to other approaches FROM THE REAL WORLD. And, get off ad hominum attacks for simple accounts of other ways. Throw those emotive "rocks" somewhere else.:island:
And you Mr. Slow, time to tell about those PM's ? :go-away:
