United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Forest

Products

Laboratory

Research

Paper

FPL–RP–559

S. Willits

R.J. Barbour

S. Tesch

D. Ryland

J. McNeel

R. Fight

S. Kumar

G. Myers

B. Olson

A. Mason

The Colville Study:

Wood Utilization for

Ecosystem Management

Preliminary Results of Study

of Product Potential From

Small-Diameter Stands

National Project on Wood Utilization for Ecosystem Management
Abstract

The Colville Study was developed in 1994 to identify and

evaluate a series of management options for achieving ecosystem objectives in dense stands of small-diameter trees while

also producing wood products. The Colville National Forest

selected the Rocky II Timber Sale as an example of this type

of stand that needed management to achieve the following

goals: (1) create late successional forest structure, (2) decrease

forest health risk from fire, insects, and disease, (3) improve

wildlife habitat by providing large green trees and snags, and

(4) improve stand aesthetics by decreasing stand density.

The Colville Study was divided into four technical focus

areas: Silviculture and Ecology, Forest Operations, Timber

Conversion, and Economics. Results of each technical focus

area indicate that (1) vegetative management activities are

necessary to achieve the ecosystem goals, (2) there are alternative harvesting systems for removing the timber in an

ecologically sound manner but costs need to be considered,

(3) both species and material size are important in the recovery of wood products, and (4) financial analysis needs to

incorporate all of these factors and many more to effectively

evaluate the relative merchantability of different types of

treatments.

December 1996

Willits, S.; Barbour, R.J.; Tesch, S.; Ryland, D.; McNeel, J.; Fight, R.;

Kumar, S.; Myers, G.; Olson, B.; Mason, A. 1996. The Colville study: wood

utilization for ecosystem management—Preliminary results of study of

product potential from small-diameter stands. Res. Pap. FPL–RP–559.

Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest

Products Laboratory. 11 p.

A limited number of free copies of this publication are available to the

public from the Forest Products Laboratory, One Gifford Pinchot Drive,

Madison, WI 53705–2398. Laboratory publications are sent to more than

1,000 libraries in the United States and elsewhere.

The Forest Products Laboratory is maintained in cooperation with the

University of Wisconsin.

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information

and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of

any product or service.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in its programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex,

religion, age, disability, political beliefs, and marital or familial status.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication

of program information (braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact

the USDA Office of Communications at (202) 720–2791. To file a complaint, write the Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Washington, DC 20250, or call (800) 245–6340 (voice), or (202) 720–

1127 (TTD). USDA is an equal employment opportunity employer.

 Contents

Page

Introduction................................................................1

Study Team ...............................................................1

Technical Focus Areas..................................................2

Silviculture and Ecology ...........................................2

Forest Operations.....................................................4

Timber Conversion ..................................................4

Veneer ................................................................5

Lumber...............................................................5

Composites .........................................................6

Kraft Pulp............................................................6

Thermomechanical Pulp.........................................7

Economics..............................................................8

Conclusions .............................................................10

Literature Cited.........................................................10
The Colville Study: Wood Utilization

for Ecosystem Management

Preliminary Results of Study of Product

Potential From Small-Diameter Stands

S. Willits, R. J. Barbour, Research Forest Products Technologists

Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon

S.Tesch, Department Head

D. Ryland, Graduate Student

Oregon State University, Corvallis, Washington

J. McNeel, Research Forest Engineer

R. Fight, Principal Economist

PNW Research Station, Seattle, Washington

S. Kumar, Graduate Research Assistant

University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

G. Myers, Research Forest Products Technologist

Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, Wisconsin

B. Olson, Graduate Student

Washington State University, Pullman, Washington

A. Mason, Staff Officer

Colville National Forest, Colville, Washington

Introduction

The Colville Study was developed in 1994 to identify and

evaluate a series of management options for achieving ecosystem objectives in dense stands of small-diameter trees while

also producing wood products. These stands are common in

forests of the Intermountain West and east of the crest of the

Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington. Many of these

stands originated after stand replacement fires, where natural

regeneration was abundant and self-thinning was minimal.

Traditionally, these stands have been marginal for economic

operations and have been left alone while stands with larger

trees have been harvested.

A recent survey of 110,000 acres (44,550 ha) of smalldiameter stands conducted by the Colville National Forest

(CNF) (Fig. 1) provided a good basis for considering various

management options (Colville National Forest 1994). The

CNF selected the Rocky II Timber Sale as an example of the

type of stands that needed management to achieve the following goals:

• create late successional forest structure,

• decrease forest health risk from fire, insects, and disease,

• improve wildlife habitat by providing large green trees

and snags, and

• improve stand aesthetics by decreasing stand density.

The stands on this sale were characterized by high densities

of trees <9 in. (<22.9 cm) diameter at breast height (dbh),

which commonly consisted of lodgepole pine (Pinus

contorta Dougl. ex Loud), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa

Dougl. ex Laws.), western larch (Larix occidentalis Nutt.),

and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco),

often with a thick understory of grand fir (Abies grandis

(Dougl. ex D. Don) Lindl.) and western redcedar (Thuja

plicata Donn ex. D. Donn).

Study Team

The Colville Study team originally consisted of researchers

from the Pacific Northwest (PNW) Research Station and the

Forest Products Laboratory of the USDA Forest Service and

from Oregon State University in cooperation with the CNF.

The study has been expanded to include a host of partners

and cooperators, including Boise Cascade Corporation,

Vaagen Brothers, Riley Creek Lumber Company, University

of Washington, University of Idaho, Washington State

University, and Idaho Panhandle National Forest. This study

is part of a National Research Project on Wood Utilization

for Ecosystem Management coordinated by the Forest Products Laboratory and funded in part under a Forest Service

Five-Year Ecosystem Research Initiative (Skog and others

1995).
2

Technical Focus Areas

The Colville Study is divided into four technical focus areas:

Silviculture and Ecology, Forest Operations, Timber

Conversion, and Economics.

Silviculture and Ecology

The objective of the Silviculture and Ecology technical focus

area is to project the development of the selected smalldiameter stands over 150 years under various silvicultural

regimes. The resulting stand conditions are then evaluated to

determine the extent to which the regimes improve wildlife

habitat, increase structural diversity, and reduce the risk of

insect and disease attack (Ryland 1996).

Stand exam data provided by the CNF were sorted into four

hypothetical stand types by combining plots with similar

overstory species:

• western larch/Douglas-fir

• western larch/lodgepole pine

• western redcedar

• mixed

On average, these stands had 5,300 trees/acre (tpa)

(13,090 trees/ha (t/ha)) that were <4 in. (<10.2 cm) dbh;

290 tpa (717 t/ha) between 4 and 10 in. (10.2 and 25.4 cm)

dbh; and 20 tpa (49 t/ha) >10 in. (>25.4 cm) dbh. The

Inland Empire variant of the Forest Vegetation Simulator

(FVS) was used to model the effects of no treatment and four

silvicultural regimes over time in the hypothetical stands.

The silvicultural regimes were (1) group selection, (2) single

tree selection, (3) thinning, and (4) clearcut with green tree

retention.

Not every prescription was applied to every stand. Rather,

prescriptions were applied to stands where the initial conditions suggested that treatment might be feasible. Timber

production was a secondary consideration for this project.

The primary objectives were to speed development of healthy

stands better able to support wildlife, to improve aesthetics,

and to develop structural and biotic diversity. The timing

and intensity of harvests were constrained to be reasonably

cost-effective and practical to implement. Intolerant species

were favored for retention and regeneration.

Criteria to judge the success of treatments were developed in

accordance with the goals developed by CNF personnel and

with regard to the Eastside Screening Process for timber sales

in Forest Service Region 6 (R-6), the Eastside Forest

Ecosystem Health Assessment (Everett and others 1994),

Madison, WI

Oregon State

University

Portland, OR

Kettle Falls, WA

University of

Washington

Colville National Forest

University of Idaho

Priest River, ID

Figure 1—Approximate location of Colville National Forest, the sawmill (Priest River, ID), the veneer plant

(Kettle Falls, WA), and cooperating laboratories and universities.
3

and the CNF Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service 1988). The

criteria were somewhat constrained by the types of output

data available through the FVS. The following criteria were

determined to be important:

• Stand structure—Stands should contain large-diameter

early seral trees.

• Wildlife habitat—Stands should contain large-diameter

(>16 in. (>40.6 cm) dbh) snags for cavity excavators, and

average overstory height should be > 40 ft (> 12 m), with

60% crown cover for hiding and thermal cover for deer.

• Forest health—Site quality, host abundance, canopy

structure, and total canopy cover are important factors for

modeling risk of fire, insects, and disease.

• Stand aesthetics—Stands should maintain western larch

for fall color, hardwoods for species diversity, and some

areas with minimal visual evidence of vegetative management.

The modeling exercise illustrated that changes in the pattern

and rate of stand development could be induced through

silvicultural treatment to create desired ecological features

and generate timber outputs. 

The most evident change was in the development of largediameter trees. Unthinned stands rarely had any 20-in. (50.8-

cm) dbh trees, even after 150 years. Alternatively, thinning

or other more intensive treatments resulted in a large number

of 20-in. (50.8-cm) dbh trees within 50 years and several

trees >30 in. (>76.2 cm) dbh within 100 years. These largediameter trees could be killed or otherwise treated to encourage rapid development of snags or decay within green trees,

thereby increasing cavity nesting habitat. The large trees are

also valuable for timber. Thermal and hiding cover were

maintained for white-tail deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in all

scenarios. Without more intensive treatments, such as group

selection or clearcutting, shifts in species composition toward more shade-tolerant species occurred, and shadeintolerant western larch was relatively difficult to maintain in

the stand. In general, activities that improved individual tree

vigor (e.g., thinning of existing stands, establishment of new

vigorous trees) and encouraged the presence of intolerant,

early seral species led to a lower risk rating for insects and

disease. The simulations illustrate the effects of varying

degrees of disturbance (Table 1) and suggest that meeting

stated ecosystem objectives will require some form of intervention.

Table 1—Characteristics of western larch–Douglas-fir from Rocky Timber Sale for initial stand conditions

and results of 50-, 100-, and 150-year simulations

Treatmenta Year

Trees

>10 in./acre

(>25.4 cm/ha)

Max dbh

in. (cm)

No. of

species

No. of

canopy

layers

Snags/acre

(hectare)

Deer

habitatb

Nesting

habitatb

Insect/disease

ratingc

None 1991 27 (67) 17.9 (45.5) 8 5 0 Y N M/L/L

2041 53 (131) 19.9 (50.5) 9 5 0 Y N M/M/L

2091 64 (158) 19.9 (50.5) 9 6 0 Y N M/M/L

2141 57 (141) 21.9 (55.6) 9 6 1 (2.47) Y N M/M/L

Thinning 2041 110 (272) 19.9 (50.5) 7 6 1 (2.47) Y N M/L/L

2091 92 (227) 31.9 (81.0) 7 6 2 (4.94) Y N M/M/L

2141 90 (222) 35.9 (91.2) 6 6 5 (12.4) Y Y M/M/L

CC–GTR 2041 21 (52) 29.9 (76.0) 8 5 0 Y N H/L/L

2091 126 (311) 33.9 (86.1) 6 6 1 (2.47) Y N M/M/L

2141 114 (282) 37.9 (96.3) 5 6 3 (7.41) Y N H/M/L

Group 2041 112 (277) 25.9 (65.8) 9 6 1 (2.47) Y N H/M/L

 selection 2091 115 (284) 31.9 (81.0) 6 6 3 (7.41) Y N M/M/L

2141 153 (378) 35.9 (91.2) 5 6 6 (14.8) Y Y M/M/L

a

CC–GTR is clearcut with green tree retention.

b

Yes or no.

c

Spruce budworm or Douglas-fir tussock moth/root disease/dwarf mistletoe ratings. L is low; M, medium; H, high.
4

Forest Operations

The objective of the Forest Operations technical focus area is

to evaluate harvesting alternatives for various silvicultural

prescriptions and to provide information on the costs and

productivity of different harvesting systems. The CNF specified harvesting systems for various units on the Rocky II

Timber Sale with the goals of (1) minimizing soil degradation in the forms of disturbance, compaction, and rutting,

and (2) minimizing damage to the residual stand. Work was

performed cooperatively by the PNW Research Station, the

CNF, the University of Idaho, the University of Washington,

and Vaagen Brothers (purchaser of the Rocky II Timber

Sale).

A “cut to length” (CLT) system was required on some

units. This system processes the trees at the stump, thereby

leaving nutrients on site for recycling and minimizing nutrient drain. The system also places limbs and needles on the

path created by the harvester; this material acts as a cushion

for the equipment and minimizes soil compaction during

thinning. Since only processed logs are taken to the landing,

most nutrients remain on the site, where they are welldistributed in the mat; the resulting fuels are compacted and

present only a minor fire hazard after 1 or 2 years. McNeel

and Ballard (1992) evaluated the impact of a CLT system in

western Washington forests and found that less than 5% of

the stand was negatively impacted. A low proportion of the

sale area was used by equipment and compacted as trails

(<7% heavily traveled and <14% lightly traveled), and the

spacing between trails was a constant 82 ft (25 m). While

there was some minor soil compaction in the trails, it was

not enough to significantly affect tree growth.

Cut-to-length systems are expensive and the matter of cost is

important. Can a CLT system operate profitably in smalldiameter stands where the removed timber has low value?

The harvester handles single stems in up to 1.5 min/stem

depending on tree size, but only 34% of the time is actually

spent processing. Barbour and others (1995) showed that

changes in average stand diameter of as little as 0.5 in.

(1.3 cm) can result in large differences in harvesting cost and

wood product value.

Four units on the Rocky II Timber Sale were analyzed

(Table 2). Predicted costs for harvester production based on

these data are shown in Figure 2. The relationship depicted

in Figure 2 shows that the cost of production for the harvester declined rapidly with increasing tree size for trees

between about 6 in. (15.2 cm) dbh (0.2 tons (0.18 tonnes)

per tree) and about 9.5 in. (24.1 cm) dbh (0.40 tons

(0.36 tonnes) per tree). For practical purposes, the relationship becomes constant for trees larger than about 10 in.

(25.4 cm) dbh.

This relationship has implications for the field forester. As

average stand diameter drops below 10 in. (25.4 cm) dbh,

potential buyers face increasing difficulty in operating profitably on sales when harvester–forwarder systems are specified.

The exact point where operations become unprofitable in

these stands depends on factors besides diameter, such as

prevailing market conditions, stand characteristics and topography, sale lay-out, and species mix. The potential ecological advantages offered by alternative systems needs to be

weighed against the increased costs associated with CLT

systems.

Timber Conversion

The main objective of the Timber Conversion focus area is

to explore the range of existing and potential products that

can be manufactured from the small-diameter resource. Products evaluated included lumber, veneer, composites, pulp,

and engineered products. Information on lumber and veneer

volume recovery was developed for Douglas-fir, western

larch, and lodgepole pine trees (8 to 14 in. (20.3 to 35.6 cm)

dbh). Quality of both lumber and veneer was determined by

visual and mechanical grading. Recovery of chips for pulping

(mechanical and chemical processing) and of flakes for composites was established for the three species from several

sources of material: (1) sawmill residuals, (2) tree tops and

Table 2—Summary of unit characteristics for harvested component for Rocky Timber Sale

and estimated production and costs for harvester operation on thinning units

Net weight Cost (US$)

Unit

Area

(acres (ha))

Mean dbh

(in. (cm))

Stand density

(per acre (ha))

Tons

(tonnes)

per tree

Tons/acre

(tonnes/ha)

Machine

typea

Productivity

(ton/MHb

(tonne/MH))

Per

MH

Per ton

(tonne)

3 128 (51.8) 6.2 (15.7) 231 (571) 0.195

(0.177)

45.15

(101.2)

FMG 990

KB1

 6.88 (6.24)

 8.89 (8.06)

68.08

54.66

9.90 (8.98)

6.08 (5.51)

12 47 (19.0) 7.2 (18.3) 145 (358) 0.230

(0.209)

33.35

(74.76)

FMG 990

KB2

 6.83 (6.20)

 6.83 (6.20)

68.08

54.66

9.97 (9.04)

8.00 (7.26)

14 13 (5.3) 9.3 (23.6) 127 (314) 0.399

(0.362)

50.67

(113.5)

FMG 990

KB2

15.38 (13.9)

14.65 (13.2)

68.08

54.66

4.43 (4.02)

3.73 (3.38)

18 81 (32.8) 6.6 (16.8) 198 (489) 0.270

(0.245)

54.05

(121.2)

KB1

KB3

 8.80 (7.98)

 9.62 (8.72)

54.66

54.66

6.21 (5.63)

5.68 (5.15)

a

FMG 990 is a harvester produced by the Forest Machine Group (FMG) in 1980s. KB1, KB2, KB3 are hybrid harvesters

 using a Kobelco 5142 type carrier (tracked excavator base) with a Keto 150 harvester head.

b

MH is machine hour or 1 h of machine operation.
5

trees considered too small for lumber or veneer (<8 in.

(<20.3 cm) dbh), and (3) logs generally considered unmerchantable for lumber and veneer (<5 in. (<12.7 cm)).

Several tree or log characteristics, in addition to size, are

important in determining product quality and value. These

characteristics include species, specific gravity, size and

distribution of knots, taper, growth rate, and defect. Initial

results showed significantly reduced specific gravity of Douglas-fir (15% to 20% less than established standards in the

Wood Handbook (Forest Products Laboratory 1987)). These

results have implications for the suitability of this wood for

various products. For lumber and veneer, lower specific

gravity indicates material with lower stiffness; for composites, it could indicate lower processing costs; and for pulp, it

could result in different fiber properties.

Veneer

Fifteen Douglas-fir and 19 western larch trees were selected

for processing into veneer. The sample ranged from 8 to

14 in. (20.3 to 35.6 cm) dbh, and the average age was

roughly 70 years. The trees were bucked tree-length to a

3-in.- (7.6-cm-) diameter top. Veneer blocks (102 in.

(2.59 m) long) were manufactured from the tree-length logs

up to a 5.5-in. (14-cm) small-end diameter, and the smaller

tops were used for tests on composites. The blocks were

marked for identification and then steamed in preparation for

peeling. They were peeled into 0.164-in. (0.42-cm) veneer,

which was color coded with dye to maintain the block identity. The veneer was dried, graded (C or D), tallied, bundled,

and sent to Washington State University for testing for

laminated veneer lumber (LVL).

Tree height is a significant factor in the production of veneer

because it limits the number of blocks recoverable from a

tree. To hold the blocks in the lathe, the logs must be 8.5 ft

(2.6 m) long. In this mill, the smallest diameter block that

could be transferred from the x–y charger to the lathe was

5.5 in. (14 cm). Since the Douglas-fir tree sample was on

average 20 ft (6.1 m) shorter than the western larch sample,

we recovered more blocks from western larch than Douglas-fir

trees of the same diameter.

Veneer recovery (full sheet and strip) increased with block

diameter (Fig. 3). For a given size block, no difference was

found between Douglas-fir and western larch in the total

recovery of veneer. However, more full sheets were produced

from small-diameter western larch logs than from Douglas-fir.

The core was a constant 3.9 in. (9.9 cm) in diameter; the

proportion of the block volume remaining as core decreased

as the block size increased. Because the veneer was graded for

C and D grades only, the value per diameter followed the

same pattern as that of veneer recovery. Results of mechanical

testing for stiffness for LVL production are forthcoming.

Lumber

Twenty trees of each species (lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir,

and western larch) were selected for processing into lumber.

The logs were bucked into sawmill lengths and scaled for

volume. They were then sawn into 1- and 2-in. (2.5- and

5-cm) lumber, 11% and 89% respectively.

There was no significant difference in volume recovery for the

different species (Fig. 4). Value recovery based on visual

lumber grades was quite different between the lodgepole pine

and Douglas-fir–western larch samples (Fig. 5). The major

difference was in the recovery of higher grade lumber—47%

of the Douglas-fir–western larch sample was recovered as

Select Structural and only 29% of the lodgepole pine sample.

These differences are based on visual grading only. Differences in strength and stiffness related to specific gravity can

be identified only by mechanical testing of each board.

Nondestructive and destructive testing of the lumber are

being conducted by Washington State University. Additional testing of a subsample of the lumber will be conducted

at Oregon State University to evaluate the potential of this

resource for recovery of “cut-stock” or “fingerjoint” material

(small, relatively clear material recovered during remanufacturing).

▲

Production cost ($/ton)18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

▲

▲

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55

Mean weight per tree (tons)

Production cost ($/tonne)

.0198

.0176

.0154

.0132

.0110

.0088

.0066

.0044

.0022

0

181 227 272 318 363 408 454 499

Mean weight per tree (kg)

Based on Rocky Timber Sale

$60 per machine hour

▲ $90 per machine hour

Figure 2—Harvester costs for thinning treatments

on Rocky II Timber Sale.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Cubic recovery (%)

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Block diameter (in.)

12.7 15.2 17.8 20.3 22.9 25.4 27.9

Block diameter (cm)

Roundup

Core

Strip

Full sheets

Figure 3—Distribution of products from processing

of western larch blocks into veneer. Roundup is

material lost to chips during rounding a conical log

into a cylinder.
6

Composites

Composites being tested include oriented strandboard

(OSB), particleboard, and LVL. All the material was prepared and tested for basic properties (specific gravity, chemical composition, moisture content). The OSB and particleboard panels were made and tested for internal bonding,

strength and stiffness, and differences between resource

sources (sawmill residue, small tree tops, and small logs).

Initial results indicated that all species and panel densities

of OSB meet or exceed the standards set for O-2 panels.

It would appear that panels from the small-diameter

slow-grown resource could be manufactured with

<37 lb/ft3

 (<593 kg/m3) wood fiber or <3.5% resin and still

meet standards. This means that panels may be less expensive because less wood fiber and less high-cost resin would

be used. Particleboard results showed that panels manufactured with <40 lb/ft3

 (<641 kg/m3) wood fiber did not meet

the standards. This result is consistent with that found in

normal manufacturing. Additional analysis of species and

material source differences is being conducted. Tests on LVL

are ongoing at Washington State University.

Kraft Pulp

Results of kraft pulping to date suggest that this raw material

source is important for pulp characteristics. Douglas-fir submerchantable logs pulped significantly slower than did western larch and lodgepole pine submerchantable logs or either

sample of sawmill residual chips. This means that mills that

pulp a high proportion of Douglas-fir submerchantable logs

would experience measurably higher residual lignin contents

for any cooking time than if pulping a resource primarily

composed of any of the other raw material sources (Fig. 6).

Pulp yield also varied by raw material source (Table 3). The

yield of lodgepole pine submerchantable logs at all Kappa

numbers was about 2% higher than that of lodgepole pine

sawmill residue chips. (Kappa number is an indirect measure

of pulp lignin content.) This difference is great enough that a

mill would realize measurable gains if a high proportion of

this type of raw material were pulped over a long period. For

example, at an equal Kappa number, the yield from lodgepole pine sawmill residual chips was 48% compared to 49%

for small lodgepole pine logs (Fig. 7). About 2.08 tons

(1.89 tonnes) of sawmill chips would be needed to produce

a ton of paper but only 2.04 tons (1.85 tonnes) of small logs

are needed. For a 1,000-ton (907-tonne)/day mill running

360 days/year, this represents a wood savings of 15,480 tons

(14,043 tonnes) or about three-quarters of a million dollars

at wood cost of $50/ton. The yield from western larch

100

80

60

40

20

0

Recovery (%)

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Small-end diameter (in.)

Small-end diameter (cm)

10.2 12.7 15.2 17.8 20.3 22.9 25.4 27.9

Chips

Sawdust

Lumber

Figure 4—Distribution of products from sawing logs

into lumber. Product recovery was not significantly

different between species.

400

350

300

250

200

$/CCF

2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Small-end diameter (in.)

Small-end diameter (cm)

▲

▲

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

▲ Lodgepole pine

Douglas-fir/larch

5.1 10.2 15.2 20.3 25.4 30.5 35.6

11.3

9.9

8.5

7.0

5.7

$/m3

Figure 5—Gross value of lumber produced from

Douglas-fir–western larch and lodgepole pine

samples. Average difference of $25 per hundred

cubic feet reflects higher grade produced from

Douglas-fir sample.

65

55

45

35

25

Kappa no.

800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

H factor

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

Larch - logs

LPP - logs

DF - logs

LPP - chips ▲ Larch/DF - chips

Figure 6—Douglas-fir (DF) submerchantable logs

pulped significantly slower than did western

larch or lodgepole pine (LPP) submerchantable

logs or sawmill residue chips.
7

submerchantable logs was low enough at all Kappa numbers

to be of concern if large amounts of this resource were included in the chip supply of a mill. If western larch submerchantable logs were compared to lodgepole pine submerchantable logs in the previous example, the added wood

costs for using western larch would be $1.5 million per year.

Pulping results for small trees and results of handsheet tests

(pulp quality) for all raw material sources are slated to be

ready soon.

Thermomechanical Pulp

Thermomechanical pulps (TMPs) were prepared from five

fiber sources: (1) mixed Douglas-fir–western larch sawmill

residual chips, (2) lodgepole pine sawmill residual chips,

(3) submerchantable Douglas-fir logs (small-end diameter

<3.5 in. (<8.9 cm), (4) submerchantable western larch logs,

and (5) submerchantable lodgepole pine logs. The sawmill

residual chips represent the existing resource and were used

as a control for comparison to the small-diameter resource.

The results are presented as ratios of each variable for each

species of submerchantable log to the corresponding sawmill

residual chip source (Fig. 8). Each value is an average of four

refiner runs, for a total of about 26.5 lb (12 kg) (ovendry) of

raw material. Additional pulping work is in progress for

small-diameter trees (<5 in. (<12.7 cm) dbh) and tops (largeend diameter <3.5 in. (<8.9 cm)), along with testing of

handsheet properties.

The amount of energy consumed in thermomechanical pulping is important because energy is the largest operating cost

associated with this type of pulping. Raw material sources

that consume less energy are generally favored over those

with higher energy consumption. However, low energy

consumption is sometimes an indication of poor fiber integrity and may be associated with inferior handsheet properties.

The Douglas-fir and western larch submerchantable logs

consumed more energy than did the Douglas-fir–western

larch sawmill residual chips. Energy consumption for the

lodgepole pine submerchantable logs was only half that for

the lodgepole pine sawmill residual chips. This difference is

great enough to be of considerable interest to mills that

produce these types of pulps.

52

51

50

49

48

47

46

Yield (%)

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

Kappa no.

Logs

▲ Chips

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

Figure 7—Lodgepole pine submerchantable

logs had about 2% higher pulp yield than

lodgepole pine sawmill residue.

Table 3—Yield of unscreened pulp obtained per unit of wood material for submerchantable logs

and sawmill residual chips for three species at different H factors

Pulp yield (%) for various H factorsa

Species Source 954 1160 1349 1531 1708

Western larch–Douglas-fir Sawmill chip residue 52.03 51.28 49.25 49.88 48.98

Western larch Submerchantable logs 50.50 49.44 46.99 46.67 47.02

Douglas-fir Submerchantable logs 53.07 51.83 49.31 48.65 48.18

Lodgepole pine Sawmill chip residue 50.70 50.17 48.87 48.20 47.10

Lodgepole pine Submerchantable logs 51.97 50.50 49.25 49.57 46.80

a

H factor is a measure of amount of heat energy imparted to wood chips during pulping.

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0

Douglas-fir Lodgepole pine

Proportion logs/chips

Energy

Shives

Fiber length

Fines

Coarseness

Western larch

Figure 8—Ratio of submerchantable logs to

sawmill residual chips of same species in

thermomechanical pulping.
8

Material that is not completely fiberized in the refiner is

called shives. Shives are undesirable in paper because they

are visible and create inconsistencies in sheet appearance, and

they are a source of tear initiation. Douglas-fir submerchantable logs produced about 72% as many shives as did the

sawmill residual chips, and western larch submerchantable

logs produced about 88% as many shives. Lodgepole pine

submerchantable logs produced only about 15% as many

shives as did the sawmill chips. This is also a favorable

result, but it may be an indication of fragile fibers that broke

down during the refining process.

Fiber quality was estimated using a Kajaani FS-100 and is

reported as fiber length, fines, and fiber coarseness. Fiber

length is known to be important in the formation of interfiber

bonds, which influence several paper strength properties.

Long fibers are generally considered more favorable than

short fibers. The fibers from both the Douglas-fir and western

larch submerchantable logs were 75% to 88% as long as

those from the sawmill residual chips. These differences are

relatively small. The lodgepole pine sawmill residues, on

the other hand, produced fibers that were almost twice as

long as those of the corresponding submerchantable logs.

This is a further indication that the fibers from this species

deteriorated during the refining process.

The amount of small particulate matter in pulp is called

fines. Excessive fines are generally viewed as undesirable and

are an indication of fiber deterioration during the pulping

process. Pulps from all species of submerchantable logs had

much higher fines contents than did the sawmill residues,

with lodgepole pine exhibiting the greatest increase in fines.

Fiber strength is also affected by fiber texture. Coarse fibers

collapse more easily than smooth ones, making them desirable for certain types of paper. Fiber coarseness did not vary

greatly between the two raw material sources for any species,

which indicates that slow growth does not change the anatomical characteristics of the fibers to any great extent.

Taken together, these results suggest no great differences in

thermomechanical pulping behavior or pulp properties between the existing resource and submerchantable logs for

Douglas-fir and western larch. The differences apparent for

lodgepole pine suggest that the quality of paper made from

submerchantable logs of this species may suffer.

Economics

The main objective of the focus area on economics was to

address the question of the feasibility of various treatments

and to develop appropriate tools. In this time of rethinking

public policy and forest management strategies in the Pacific

Northwest, a great deal of effort has gone into analysis of

current conditions, the causes of those conditions, and the

shortcomings of current ecosystem conditions in providing

the preferred mix of benefits from public lands. Society and

public agencies are changing their views of what is desired

from public forests in the future and what can be done to

existing stands to move them in the desired direction. The

desired conditions must be tempered by what is affordable.

A complete analysis of the economics of ecosystem management treatments would require estimating the value of ecosystem conditions, wildlife habitat, and other environmental

benefits and comparing it to the true cost of management

options. However, estimating all ecosystem values is very

costly, has seldom been more than modestly successful, and

is never comprehensive. The resources available to this

project make such efforts out of the question.

In discussions with representatives from the CNF, one stumbling block to implementing ecosystem management in the

small-diameter stands is the increased risk of no-bid timber

sales. Receiving no bids on a timber sale can be related to

several factors: high costs of harvesting, transportation,

manufacturing, and stand treatments; lack of mills designed

to manufacture small-diameter material in the area of the

timber sale; low product prices; and current state of capacity

adjustment within the forest products industry. The no-bid

situation is particularly important in implementing ecosystem management because achieving desired future conditions

often requires removing trees. Appropriated budgets often

will not be adequate to treat all stands; therefore, commercial

use of wood to underwrite part or all of desired treatments

will likely be the common method of achieving desired

future conditions. Therefore, we decided that it would be

helpful to understand the relative merchantability of different

types of treatments, in different stands, at different locations.

To address the issues reliably and consistently has required

the development of software for financial evaluation of ecosystem management activities (FEEMA). The FEEMA software

is being developed to evaluate alternatives, improve interaction between clients and forests, and provide a sounding

board for ideas. A major value of this software will be to

provide a means to explore alternative configurations of

harvesting systems, product options, tree selection, and

utilization or removal limits to determine the sensitivity of

residual value to those decisions. An integral part of this

analysis is the economic evaluation of different processing

technologies and products (Spelter and others 1996).

Samples of output formats from FEEMA are shown in Figures 9 to 12. The data are hypothetical and are only provided

for generating ideas, since the model is still under development. All tables will have dialog boxes that allow the user

to select information in the units that are most meaningful to

them: volumes or values, values per acre/hundred cubic feet

(equivalent hectare/cubic meter), values at the mill, and

values at the stump. Data with an even greater level of detail

will be available in flat file form for users who have unique

questions or interests that are not addressed in the preformatted tables.

Figure 9 shows the Project screen that contains the most

compressed results. The columns show the estimated net

value for a list of analyzed stands. The rows show the estimated net value for one stand being evaluated under different

market scenarios, which might include different logging

systems, types of products manufactured, and product prices.
9

Figure 9—FEEMA Project screen comparing stands included in analysis project.

STD124.STD--Status Quo

Figure 10—Screen showing summary results for single

stand and scenario combination (a single cell in Project

screen). 1 ft3

 = 0.0283 m3. 1 acre = 0.405 hectare.

STD124.STD--Status Quo

Figure 11—Stand Table screen showing values for stand by tree dbh and species.
10

Every cell in the Project screen is tied to a set of more detailed tables. Figure 10 shows the summary information on

important cost and revenue components for a single cell in

the Project screen. Figure 11 shows the net value at the

stumpage level broken down by species and diameter. These

calculations involve some arbitrary cost allocations, which

requires that these results be used with caution. The results

do not indicate the financial cutoff point for including or

excluding stand components in the harvest; they do indicate

the relative value of stand components. Adding or removing

stand components can be accurately analyzed by making

additional simulations. Figure 12 shows the net value of

logs at the mill by the type of product and species.

Conclusions

Although this paper presents only the preliminary results

from each of the four technical focus areas in the Colville

Study, we are beginning to see some significant trends and

relationships. Results of the Silviculture and Ecology modeling exercise illustrate the effects of varying degrees of disturbance and suggest that meeting stated ecosystem objectives

will require some form of intervention. Results of Forest

Operations show that the harvester–forwarder system can

remove wood while leaving important material on the site

and reducing the soil compaction as compared to a more

conventional system. However, depending on market conditions, as average stand diameter drops below 10 in. (25 cm),

potential buyers face increasing difficulty in operating profitably on sales when harvester–forwarder systems are specified.

Results from the Timber Conversion focus area indicate that

both species and type of raw material resource (small trees,

submerchantable logs, and sawmill residue) are important in

determining the recovery and value of some manufactured

products. Significant differences were found in the grade yield

of lumber (yield of Douglas-fir–western larch was much

greater than that of lodgepole pine), in the yield of kraft pulp

(yield of lodgepole pine submerchantable logs was better

than that of sawmill residuals and yield of Douglas-fir–

western larch submerchantable logs was worse than that of

sawmill residuals), and in the yield and quality of thermomechanical pulp (TMP) (yield of lodgepole pine submerchantable logs was worse than that of sawmill residues).

Little differences were found in visually graded veneer, lumber yield, production of oriented strandboard (OSB), or

production of TMP from Douglas-fir–western larch samples.

Continuing studies of paper quality, additional composites,

and mechanically tested lumber and veneer will provide more

information about the potential for the small-diameter resource. The key to providing this information in a “userfriendly” format in the financial analysis package is being

developed in the Economics focus area. FEEMA will be the

tool that allows timber planners and others to evaluate the

financial feasibility of alternative actions designed to achieve

ecological goals.

Literature Cited

Barbour, R.J.; McNeel, J.F.; Tesch, S.; Ryland, D.B. 1995.

Management and utilization of mixed species, smalldiameter, densely stocked stands. In: Sustainability, forest

health and meeting the nation’s needs for wood products:

Proceedings, 18th annual meeting of the Council on Forest

Engineering; 1995 June 5–8, 1995; Cashiers, NC.

Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University.

Colville National Forest. 1994. CROP creating opportunities—A study of small-diameter trees of the Colville

National Forest. Colville, WA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Colville National Forest. 36 p + 6

Appendices.

STD124.STD--Status Quo

Figure 12—Log screen showing values for logs by product type and species.
11

Everett, R.; Hessburg, P.; Jensen, M.; Bormann, B. 1994.

Volume I: Executive summary: Eastside forest ecosystem

health assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW–GTR–317.

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 61 p.

Forest Products Laboratory. Wood handbook: Wood as an

engineering material. Agric. Handb. 72. (Rev.) Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 466 p.

McNeel, J.; Ballard, T. 1992. Analysis of site and stand

impacts from thinning with a harvester–forwarder system.

Journal of Forest Engineering. 4(1): 23–29.

Ryland, D. 1996. Evaluating the impact of four silvicultural

prescriptions on stand growth and structure in Northwest

Washington—A modeling approach. Unpub. Master’s of

Forestry rep. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University,

Forest Resources Department. 46 p.

Skog, Kenneth; Green, David; Barbour, R. James [and

others]. 1995. Building partnerships to evaluate wood

utilization options for improving forest health. In: Eskey,

Lane G., comp. forest health through silviculture:

Proceedings, 1995 National silviculture workshop;

1995 May 8–11; Mescalero, NM: Gen. Tech. Rep.

RM–GTR–267. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and

Range Experiment Station. 153–161.

USDA Forest Service. 1988. Land and resource management

plan. Colville, WA: Colville National Forest. 172 p + 7

appendices.
5

trees considered too small for lumber or veneer (<8 in.

(<20.3 cm) dbh), and (3) logs generally considered unmerchantable for lumber and veneer (<5 in. (<12.7 cm)).

Several tree or log characteristics, in addition to size, are

important in determining product quality and value. These

characteristics include species, specific gravity, size and

distribution of knots, taper, growth rate, and defect. Initial

results showed significantly reduced specific gravity of Douglas-fir (15% to 20% less than established standards in the

Wood Handbook (Forest Products Laboratory 1987)). These

results have implications for the suitability of this wood for

various products. For lumber and veneer, lower specific

gravity indicates material with lower stiffness; for composites, it could indicate lower processing costs; and for pulp, it

could result in different fiber properties.

Veneer

Fifteen Douglas-fir and 19 western larch trees were selected

for processing into veneer. The sample ranged from 8 to

14 in. (20.3 to 35.6 cm) dbh, and the average age was

roughly 70 years. The trees were bucked tree-length to a

3-in.- (7.6-cm-) diameter top. Veneer blocks (102 in.

(2.59 m) long) were manufactured from the tree-length logs

up to a 5.5-in. (14-cm) small-end diameter, and the smaller

tops were used for tests on composites. The blocks were

marked for identification and then steamed in preparation for

peeling. They were peeled into 0.164-in. (0.42-cm) veneer,

which was color coded with dye to maintain the block identity. The veneer was dried, graded (C or D), tallied, bundled,

and sent to Washington State University for testing for

laminated veneer lumber (LVL).

Tree height is a significant factor in the production of veneer

because it limits the number of blocks recoverable from a

tree. To hold the blocks in the lathe, the logs must be 8.5 ft

(2.6 m) long. In this mill, the smallest diameter block that

could be transferred from the x–y charger to the lathe was

5.5 in. (14 cm). Since the Douglas-fir tree sample was on

average 20 ft (6.1 m) shorter than the western larch sample,

we recovered more blocks from western larch than Douglas-fir

trees of the same diameter.

Veneer recovery (full sheet and strip) increased with block

diameter (Fig. 3). For a given size block, no difference was

found between Douglas-fir and western larch in the total

recovery of veneer. However, more full sheets were produced

from small-diameter western larch logs than from Douglas-fir.

The core was a constant 3.9 in. (9.9 cm) in diameter; the

proportion of the block volume remaining as core decreased

as the block size increased. Because the veneer was graded for

C and D grades only, the value per diameter followed the

same pattern as that of veneer recovery. Results of mechanical

testing for stiffness for LVL production are forthcoming.

Lumber

Twenty trees of each species (lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir,

and western larch) were selected for processing into lumber.

The logs were bucked into sawmill lengths and scaled for

volume. They were then sawn into 1- and 2-in. (2.5- and

5-cm) lumber, 11% and 89% respectively.

There was no significant difference in volume recovery for the

different species (Fig. 4). Value recovery based on visual

lumber grades was quite different between the lodgepole pine

and Douglas-fir–western larch samples (Fig. 5). The major

difference was in the recovery of higher grade lumber—47%

of the Douglas-fir–western larch sample was recovered as

Select Structural and only 29% of the lodgepole pine sample.

These differences are based on visual grading only. Differences in strength and stiffness related to specific gravity can

be identified only by mechanical testing of each board.

Nondestructive and destructive testing of the lumber are

being conducted by Washington State University. Additional testing of a subsample of the lumber will be conducted

at Oregon State University to evaluate the potential of this

resource for recovery of “cut-stock” or “fingerjoint” material

(small, relatively clear material recovered during remanufacturing).

▲

Production cost ($/ton)18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

▲

▲

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55

Mean weight per tree (tons)

Production cost ($/tonne)

.0198

.0176

.0154

.0132

.0110

.0088

.0066

.0044

.0022

0

181 227 272 318 363 408 454 499

Mean weight per tree (kg)

Based on Rocky Timber Sale

$60 per machine hour

▲ $90 per machine hour

Figure 2—Harvester costs for thinning treatments

on Rocky II Timber Sale.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Cubic recovery (%)

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Block diameter (in.)

12.7 15.2 17.8 20.3 22.9 25.4 27.9

Block diameter (cm)

Roundup

Core

Strip

Full sheets

Figure 3—Distribution of products from processing

of western larch blocks into veneer. Roundup is

material lost to chips during rounding a conical log

into a cylinder.
6

Composites

Composites being tested include oriented strandboard

(OSB), particleboard, and LVL. All the material was prepared and tested for basic properties (specific gravity, chemical composition, moisture content). The OSB and particleboard panels were made and tested for internal bonding,

strength and stiffness, and differences between resource

sources (sawmill residue, small tree tops, and small logs).

Initial results indicated that all species and panel densities

of OSB meet or exceed the standards set for O-2 panels.

It would appear that panels from the small-diameter

slow-grown resource could be manufactured with

<37 lb/ft3

 (<593 kg/m3) wood fiber or <3.5% resin and still

meet standards. This means that panels may be less expensive because less wood fiber and less high-cost resin would

be used. Particleboard results showed that panels manufactured with <40 lb/ft3

 (<641 kg/m3) wood fiber did not meet

the standards. This result is consistent with that found in

normal manufacturing. Additional analysis of species and

material source differences is being conducted. Tests on LVL

are ongoing at Washington State University.

Kraft Pulp

Results of kraft pulping to date suggest that this raw material

source is important for pulp characteristics. Douglas-fir submerchantable logs pulped significantly slower than did western larch and lodgepole pine submerchantable logs or either

sample of sawmill residual chips. This means that mills that

pulp a high proportion of Douglas-fir submerchantable logs

would experience measurably higher residual lignin contents

for any cooking time than if pulping a resource primarily

composed of any of the other raw material sources (Fig. 6).

Pulp yield also varied by raw material source (Table 3). The

yield of lodgepole pine submerchantable logs at all Kappa

numbers was about 2% higher than that of lodgepole pine

sawmill residue chips. (Kappa number is an indirect measure

of pulp lignin content.) This difference is great enough that a

mill would realize measurable gains if a high proportion of

this type of raw material were pulped over a long period. For

example, at an equal Kappa number, the yield from lodgepole pine sawmill residual chips was 48% compared to 49%

for small lodgepole pine logs (Fig. 7). About 2.08 tons

(1.89 tonnes) of sawmill chips would be needed to produce

a ton of paper but only 2.04 tons (1.85 tonnes) of small logs

are needed. For a 1,000-ton (907-tonne)/day mill running

360 days/year, this represents a wood savings of 15,480 tons

(14,043 tonnes) or about three-quarters of a million dollars

at wood cost of $50/ton. The yield from western larch

100

80

60

40

20

0

Recovery (%)

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Small-end diameter (in.)

Small-end diameter (cm)

10.2 12.7 15.2 17.8 20.3 22.9 25.4 27.9

Chips

Sawdust

Lumber

Figure 4—Distribution of products from sawing logs

into lumber. Product recovery was not significantly

different between species.

400

350

300

250

200

$/CCF

2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Small-end diameter (in.)

Small-end diameter (cm)

▲

▲

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

▲ Lodgepole pine

Douglas-fir/larch

5.1 10.2 15.2 20.3 25.4 30.5 35.6

11.3

9.9

8.5

7.0

5.7

$/m3

Figure 5—Gross value of lumber produced from

Douglas-fir–western larch and lodgepole pine

samples. Average difference of $25 per hundred

cubic feet reflects higher grade produced from

Douglas-fir sample.

65

55

45

35

25

Kappa no.

800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

H factor

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

Larch - logs

LPP - logs

DF - logs

LPP - chips ▲ Larch/DF - chips

Figure 6—Douglas-fir (DF) submerchantable logs

pulped significantly slower than did western

larch or lodgepole pine (LPP) submerchantable

logs or sawmill residue chips.
7

submerchantable logs was low enough at all Kappa numbers

to be of concern if large amounts of this resource were included in the chip supply of a mill. If western larch submerchantable logs were compared to lodgepole pine submerchantable logs in the previous example, the added wood

costs for using western larch would be $1.5 million per year.

Pulping results for small trees and results of handsheet tests

(pulp quality) for all raw material sources are slated to be

ready soon.

Thermomechanical Pulp

Thermomechanical pulps (TMPs) were prepared from five

fiber sources: (1) mixed Douglas-fir–western larch sawmill

residual chips, (2) lodgepole pine sawmill residual chips,

(3) submerchantable Douglas-fir logs (small-end diameter

<3.5 in. (<8.9 cm), (4) submerchantable western larch logs,

and (5) submerchantable lodgepole pine logs. The sawmill

residual chips represent the existing resource and were used

as a control for comparison to the small-diameter resource.

The results are presented as ratios of each variable for each

species of submerchantable log to the corresponding sawmill

residual chip source (Fig. 8). Each value is an average of four

refiner runs, for a total of about 26.5 lb (12 kg) (ovendry) of

raw material. Additional pulping work is in progress for

small-diameter trees (<5 in. (<12.7 cm) dbh) and tops (largeend diameter <3.5 in. (<8.9 cm)), along with testing of

handsheet properties.

The amount of energy consumed in thermomechanical pulping is important because energy is the largest operating cost

associated with this type of pulping. Raw material sources

that consume less energy are generally favored over those

with higher energy consumption. However, low energy

consumption is sometimes an indication of poor fiber integrity and may be associated with inferior handsheet properties.

The Douglas-fir and western larch submerchantable logs

consumed more energy than did the Douglas-fir–western

larch sawmill residual chips. Energy consumption for the

lodgepole pine submerchantable logs was only half that for

the lodgepole pine sawmill residual chips. This difference is

great enough to be of considerable interest to mills that

produce these types of pulps.

52

51

50

49

48

47

46

Yield (%)

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

Kappa no.

Logs

▲ Chips

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

Figure 7—Lodgepole pine submerchantable

logs had about 2% higher pulp yield than

lodgepole pine sawmill residue.

Table 3—Yield of unscreened pulp obtained per unit of wood material for submerchantable logs

and sawmill residual chips for three species at different H factors

Pulp yield (%) for various H factorsa

Species Source 954 1160 1349 1531 1708

Western larch–Douglas-fir Sawmill chip residue 52.03 51.28 49.25 49.88 48.98

Western larch Submerchantable logs 50.50 49.44 46.99 46.67 47.02

Douglas-fir Submerchantable logs 53.07 51.83 49.31 48.65 48.18

Lodgepole pine Sawmill chip residue 50.70 50.17 48.87 48.20 47.10

Lodgepole pine Submerchantable logs 51.97 50.50 49.25 49.57 46.80

a

H factor is a measure of amount of heat energy imparted to wood chips during pulping.

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0

Douglas-fir Lodgepole pine

Proportion logs/chips

Energy

Shives

Fiber length

Fines

Coarseness

Western larch

Figure 8—Ratio of submerchantable logs to

sawmill residual chips of same species in

thermomechanical pulping.
8

Material that is not completely fiberized in the refiner is

called shives. Shives are undesirable in paper because they

are visible and create inconsistencies in sheet appearance, and

they are a source of tear initiation. Douglas-fir submerchantable logs produced about 72% as many shives as did the

sawmill residual chips, and western larch submerchantable

logs produced about 88% as many shives. Lodgepole pine

submerchantable logs produced only about 15% as many

shives as did the sawmill chips. This is also a favorable

result, but it may be an indication of fragile fibers that broke

down during the refining process.

Fiber quality was estimated using a Kajaani FS-100 and is

reported as fiber length, fines, and fiber coarseness. Fiber

length is known to be important in the formation of interfiber

bonds, which influence several paper strength properties.

Long fibers are generally considered more favorable than

short fibers. The fibers from both the Douglas-fir and western

larch submerchantable logs were 75% to 88% as long as

those from the sawmill residual chips. These differences are

relatively small. The lodgepole pine sawmill residues, on

the other hand, produced fibers that were almost twice as

long as those of the corresponding submerchantable logs.

This is a further indication that the fibers from this species

deteriorated during the refining process.

The amount of small particulate matter in pulp is called

fines. Excessive fines are generally viewed as undesirable and

are an indication of fiber deterioration during the pulping

process. Pulps from all species of submerchantable logs had

much higher fines contents than did the sawmill residues,

with lodgepole pine exhibiting the greatest increase in fines.

Fiber strength is also affected by fiber texture. Coarse fibers

collapse more easily than smooth ones, making them desirable for certain types of paper. Fiber coarseness did not vary

greatly between the two raw material sources for any species,

which indicates that slow growth does not change the anatomical characteristics of the fibers to any great extent.

Taken together, these results suggest no great differences in

thermomechanical pulping behavior or pulp properties between the existing resource and submerchantable logs for

Douglas-fir and western larch. The differences apparent for

lodgepole pine suggest that the quality of paper made from

submerchantable logs of this species may suffer.

Economics

The main objective of the focus area on economics was to

address the question of the feasibility of various treatments

and to develop appropriate tools. In this time of rethinking

public policy and forest management strategies in the Pacific

Northwest, a great deal of effort has gone into analysis of

current conditions, the causes of those conditions, and the

shortcomings of current ecosystem conditions in providing

the preferred mix of benefits from public lands. Society and

public agencies are changing their views of what is desired

from public forests in the future and what can be done to

existing stands to move them in the desired direction. The

desired conditions must be tempered by what is affordable.

A complete analysis of the economics of ecosystem management treatments would require estimating the value of ecosystem conditions, wildlife habitat, and other environmental

benefits and comparing it to the true cost of management

options. However, estimating all ecosystem values is very

costly, has seldom been more than modestly successful, and

is never comprehensive. The resources available to this

project make such efforts out of the question.

In discussions with representatives from the CNF, one stumbling block to implementing ecosystem management in the

small-diameter stands is the increased risk of no-bid timber

sales. Receiving no bids on a timber sale can be related to

several factors: high costs of harvesting, transportation,

manufacturing, and stand treatments; lack of mills designed

to manufacture small-diameter material in the area of the

timber sale; low product prices; and current state of capacity

adjustment within the forest products industry. The no-bid

situation is particularly important in implementing ecosystem management because achieving desired future conditions

often requires removing trees. Appropriated budgets often

will not be adequate to treat all stands; therefore, commercial

use of wood to underwrite part or all of desired treatments

will likely be the common method of achieving desired

future conditions. Therefore, we decided that it would be

helpful to understand the relative merchantability of different

types of treatments, in different stands, at different locations.

To address the issues reliably and consistently has required

the development of software for financial evaluation of ecosystem management activities (FEEMA). The FEEMA software

is being developed to evaluate alternatives, improve interaction between clients and forests, and provide a sounding

board for ideas. A major value of this software will be to

provide a means to explore alternative configurations of

harvesting systems, product options, tree selection, and

utilization or removal limits to determine the sensitivity of

residual value to those decisions. An integral part of this

analysis is the economic evaluation of different processing

technologies and products (Spelter and others 1996).

Samples of output formats from FEEMA are shown in Figures 9 to 12. The data are hypothetical and are only provided

for generating ideas, since the model is still under development. All tables will have dialog boxes that allow the user

to select information in the units that are most meaningful to

them: volumes or values, values per acre/hundred cubic feet

(equivalent hectare/cubic meter), values at the mill, and

values at the stump. Data with an even greater level of detail

will be available in flat file form for users who have unique

questions or interests that are not addressed in the preformatted tables.

Figure 9 shows the Project screen that contains the most

compressed results. The columns show the estimated net

value for a list of analyzed stands. The rows show the estimated net value for one stand being evaluated under different

market scenarios, which might include different logging

systems, types of products manufactured, and product prices.
9

Figure 9—FEEMA Project screen comparing stands included in analysis project.

STD124.STD--Status Quo

Figure 10—Screen showing summary results for single

stand and scenario combination (a single cell in Project

screen). 1 ft3

 = 0.0283 m3. 1 acre = 0.405 hectare.

STD124.STD--Status Quo

Figure 11—Stand Table screen showing values for stand by tree dbh and species.
10

Every cell in the Project screen is tied to a set of more detailed tables. Figure 10 shows the summary information on

important cost and revenue components for a single cell in

the Project screen. Figure 11 shows the net value at the

stumpage level broken down by species and diameter. These

calculations involve some arbitrary cost allocations, which

requires that these results be used with caution. The results

do not indicate the financial cutoff point for including or

excluding stand components in the harvest; they do indicate

the relative value of stand components. Adding or removing

stand components can be accurately analyzed by making

additional simulations. Figure 12 shows the net value of

logs at the mill by the type of product and species.

Conclusions

Although this paper presents only the preliminary results

from each of the four technical focus areas in the Colville

Study, we are beginning to see some significant trends and

relationships. Results of the Silviculture and Ecology modeling exercise illustrate the effects of varying degrees of disturbance and suggest that meeting stated ecosystem objectives

will require some form of intervention. Results of Forest

Operations show that the harvester–forwarder system can

remove wood while leaving important material on the site

and reducing the soil compaction as compared to a more

conventional system. However, depending on market conditions, as average stand diameter drops below 10 in. (25 cm),

potential buyers face increasing difficulty in operating profitably on sales when harvester–forwarder systems are specified.

Results from the Timber Conversion focus area indicate that

both species and type of raw material resource (small trees,

submerchantable logs, and sawmill residue) are important in

determining the recovery and value of some manufactured

products. Significant differences were found in the grade yield

of lumber (yield of Douglas-fir–western larch was much

greater than that of lodgepole pine), in the yield of kraft pulp

(yield of lodgepole pine submerchantable logs was better

than that of sawmill residuals and yield of Douglas-fir–

western larch submerchantable logs was worse than that of

sawmill residuals), and in the yield and quality of thermomechanical pulp (TMP) (yield of lodgepole pine submerchantable logs was worse than that of sawmill residues).

Little differences were found in visually graded veneer, lumber yield, production of oriented strandboard (OSB), or

production of TMP from Douglas-fir–western larch samples.

Continuing studies of paper quality, additional composites,

and mechanically tested lumber and veneer will provide more

information about the potential for the small-diameter resource. The key to providing this information in a “userfriendly” format in the financial analysis package is being

developed in the Economics focus area. FEEMA will be the

tool that allows timber planners and others to evaluate the

financial feasibility of alternative actions designed to achieve

ecological goals.

Literature Cited

Barbour, R.J.; McNeel, J.F.; Tesch, S.; Ryland, D.B. 1995.

Management and utilization of mixed species, smalldiameter, densely stocked stands. In: Sustainability, forest

health and meeting the nation’s needs for wood products:

Proceedings, 18th annual meeting of the Council on Forest

Engineering; 1995 June 5–8, 1995; Cashiers, NC.

Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University.

Colville National Forest. 1994. CROP creating opportunities—A study of small-diameter trees of the Colville

National Forest. Colville, WA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Colville National Forest. 36 p + 6

Appendices.

STD124.STD--Status Quo

Figure 12—Log screen showing values for logs by product type and species.
11

Everett, R.; Hessburg, P.; Jensen, M.; Bormann, B. 1994.

Volume I: Executive summary: Eastside forest ecosystem

health assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW–GTR–317.

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 61 p.

Forest Products Laboratory. Wood handbook: Wood as an

engineering material. Agric. Handb. 72. (Rev.) Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 466 p.

McNeel, J.; Ballard, T. 1992. Analysis of site and stand

impacts from thinning with a harvester–forwarder system.

Journal of Forest Engineering. 4(1): 23–29.

Ryland, D. 1996. Evaluating the impact of four silvicultural

prescriptions on stand growth and structure in Northwest

Washington—A modeling approach. Unpub. Master’s of

Forestry rep. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University,

Forest Resources Department. 46 p.

Skog, Kenneth; Green, David; Barbour, R. James [and

others]. 1995. Building partnerships to evaluate wood

utilization options for improving forest health. In: Eskey,

Lane G., comp. forest health through silviculture:

Proceedings, 1995 National silviculture workshop;

1995 May 8–11; Mescalero, NM: Gen. Tech. Rep.

RM–GTR–267. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and

Range Experiment Station. 153–161.

USDA Forest Service. 1988. Land and resource management

plan. Colville, WA: Colville National Forest. 172 p + 7

appendices.