pa4, United States 

3& Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest Service 

Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station 

Research Paper 

NE-565 

The Cost of 

Maple Sugaring - I in Vermont 

/ 

1985 Paul E. Sendak 

John P. Bennink 
- - 

The Authors 

Paul E. Sendak is a forest economist and Project Leader engaged in 

maple marketing and wood energy economics research at the George D. 

Aiken Sugar Maple Laboratory, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, 

Burlington, Vermont. He received his B.S. degree in forestry from Rutgers 

University, and his M.S. degree in forestry and Ph.D. degree in forestry economics from the University of Massachusetts. He began his career with the 

Forest Service in 1969. 

John P. Bennink is a biological lab technician for tree physiology 

research at the George D. Aiken Sugar Maple Laboratory, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station, Burlington, Vermont. He received a B.S. degree 

in forestry from the University of Vermont. He began his career with the 

Forest Service as a cooperative education student for maple marketing and 

wood energy economics research in 1979. 

Manuscript received for publication 15 October 1984. 

Abstract 

We developed an annual maple-syrup-production cost series for the 

period 1972 to 1984. We specified the physical input required for a 3,000- 

tap, plastic tubing 'with vacuum system with an oil-fired open-pan evaporator. Current value data were used to estimate the annual production cost 

of a gallon of syrup. Cost increased from 6.16 per gallon in 1972 to $15.93 

in 1984; however, much of this increase is the result of inflation. The sugarhouse, where syrup is processed, accounted for a relatively larger share of 

the total cost of production in 1984 (66 percent) than it did in 1972 (53 percent). A sensitivity analysis indicated that total cost is most sensitive to 

changes in wages for labor and cost of fuel oil. 
Introduction 

What does it cost to make a 

gallon of maple syrup? This 

question was answered for a few 

points in time. However, an annual 

series of syrup production cost had 

never been developed so that the 

trend in cost could be studied. Such 

a series could be used to examine 

the effects of changing technology 

and the relationships between major 

cost areas, such as sap collection 

and syrup processing, over time. It 

could be used to assess the potential benefits of new technology by 

equipment developers, manufacturers, and syrup producers. Financial 

analyses by syrup producers and 

lenders supplying capital to the 

industry could be done more accurately using information from a production cost series. Public policy 

analysts and planners could use the 

information to improve their understanding of the industry. 

Our objectives were to develop 

time series of maple production 

costs and to observe the effects of 

changing technology, fuel price, 

interest rate, and sap sugar content 

on production cost. In addition, the 

relationships between major production cost items were examined. 

The USDA Forest Service 

reported costs of maple sap production for 1972 to 1973 and the cost of 

maple syrup production for 1977 

(Huyler 1975, Huyler and Garrett 

1979). That information was updated 

in 1980 (Huyler 1982a, Huyler 1982b). 

These studies specified the relationships between physical inputs, such 

as labor and equipment, and syrup 

production. 

The production cost index was 

based on cost data estimated for a 

3,000-tap tubing with vacuum operation and an oil-fired evapo'rator. Cost 

increased steadily from 1972 

through 1981. From 1982 through 

1984, the last year in the series, the 

index stabilized. Costs increased 

more than 2.5 times from 1972 

($6.16 per gallon) to 1984 ($15.93 per 

gallon). The farm price for maple 

syrup almost doubled over the same 

period, from $9.30 to $17.20 per 

gallon. 

Methods 

Obtaining actual costs of maple 

syrup production even for a small 

sample of maple syrup operations is 

difficult. Moreover, unless collected 

on an annual basis, annual costs are 

difficult to reconstruct. The highly 

variable nature of the industry in 

terms of syrup yield per tap, sugarbush size and layout, and sap 

collection and syrup processing 

techniques makes analysis of these 

data potentially difficult. 

An alternative method is to: 

(1) specify the equipment necessary 

to produce maple syrup for a 

commercial size operation; (2) 

define the relationship between 

physical inputs of production, such 

as labor and fuel, and physical outputs, such as sap and syrup; and (3) 

convert physical units to dollars by 

applying annual estimates of prices 

or values of items for which no 

money need be exchanged, such as 

volunteer labor. 

Huyler (1975) has shown that 

the tubing with vacuum system is 

the lowest cost method of sap 

collection. We chose this system 

for our production cost trend analysis. For comparison, production 

costs for the traditional bucket system were also estimated. 

Syrup processing in a conventional open-pan evaporator is standard for the industry. The two major 

fuels are wood and No. 2 fuel oil but 

natural gas and LP gas are sometimes used. No. 2 fuel oil was 

compared to wood because price 

information for these fuels is readily 

available. 

A 3,000-tap operation was 

selected for analysis. Huyler and 

Garrett (1979) have shown that this 

size is large enough to achieve 

most of the cost economies of 

larger operations in both average 

investment and annual operating 

costs. It is large enough to make a 

significant contribution to the 

owner's total income, but not so 

large as to be more than a supplemental source of income, the typical situation in the maple syrup 

industry. For comparison, production costs for 2,000- and 4,000-tap 

operations were also estimated. 

Figure 1 shows the process we 

used to create the maple syrup 

production cost index. The Appendix contains tables that include 

standard equipment lists; labor and 

energy requirements; and sources 

for property tax, insurance, and 

price information. 

Two factors not considered in 

the analysis were appreciation of 

land value accruing to the landowner and income tax. The addition 

of both items would add unnecessary complexity to the analysis 

without much benefit. Widely varying land values, due to factors 

largely external to maple syrup 

production, would make a statewide 

average difficult to obtain and 

questionable. 
Identify physical relationships, 

for example, 

Sap collection labor - 0.16 hr/tap 

Specify annual 

value information: 

Labor cost = $4.51/hr 5- 

I Cost at defined production level: 

Total labor cost = 0.16 hr/tap x $4.51/hr x 3,000 taps 

1 

Maple syrup production cost index 

Sum of individual cost 

items in year N 

x 100 

Total cost in the base 

year 11 977) 

Figure 1.-Schematic of the method used to calculate the maple syrup 

production cost index. 

Results 

Production Cost Index 

Figure 2 shows the annual 

production cost per gallon of syrup 

expressed as an index (1977 = 100) 

for the period 1972 to 1984. This 

index includes the value of input 

factors for each year including 

equipment and building depreciation based on current cost. The cost 

data were estimated for a 3,000-tap 

tubing with vacuum operation and 

an oil-fired evaporator. 

Cost increased steadily over 

the period until 1982, when the 

index began to stabilize. Major 

increases in cost occurred in 1979, 

1980, and 1981. Cost increased more 

than 2.5 times from 1972 ($6.16 per 

gallon) to 1984 ($15.93 per gallon). 

Much of the increase in cost was 

inflationary. 

The trend in annual maple 

syrup price is also shown as an 

index (1977 = 100) in Figure 2. This 

index is based on price reported by 

the Statistical Crop Reporting Service for Vermont which is an average 

price received at the farm for all 

sales including retail and wholesale 

(USDA, Stat. Rep. Serv. 1972-84). In 

1972, the exceptionally high price 

was most likely the result of below 

average production in both the U.S. 

and Canada in 1971 leading to a 

world'khortage of maple syrup. 

After 1973, the trend in price was 

steadily upward until 1982. In 1982, 

the decline in maple price was most 

likely the result of above average 

production in both the U.S. and 

Canada leading to a world surplus 

of maple syrup. Price almost 

doubled from 1973 ($9.30 per gallon) 

to 1984 ($17.20 per gallon). 

Figure 2 also shows the ratio of 

the maple syrup price index and the 

production cost index. A value of 

100 indicates that the two indexes 

were equal, that is, prices and 

production costs changed in the 

same proportion relative to their 
PRODUClION COST IND 

73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 

COST OF MAPLE SYRUP 

YEAR MAPLE SYRUP PRICES RECEIVED RATIO^ 

a~~~l~ OF INDEX OF MAPLE SYRUP PRICES RECEIVED BY 

PRODUCERS TO INDEX OF COST OF MAPLE SYRUP PRODUCTION 

b PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE 

Figure 2.-Production cost index for maple syrup, maple syrup price 

index, and ratio of price index to cost. index. 
/---- n 

--r) 

-- 

A PRODUCTION COST --_I_ 

X MAPLE PRICE 

72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 

YEAR 

Figure 3.-Product cost and farm price for maple syrup in Vermont In constant (1977) dollars, 1972-84. 

respective base year value. The ratio 

for most years is near 100. However, 

in 1972, the mapie price index was 

significantly higher than the production cost index yielding a ratio of 

126. In 1982 and 1983, the reverse in 

the upward maple price index trend 

is reflected in values significantly 

lower than the production cost 

index yielding a ratio of 82 for both 

years. Perhaps this reflects an 

adjustment toward equilibrium 

between supply and demand in the 

maple syrup market after a major 

change in quantity of syr'up 

produced. 

The study period included the 

worst period of inflation in modern 

U.S. history. The year to year 

change in the Consumer Price lndex 

(CPI) exceeded 10 percent for 1979, production cost and syrup price 

1980, and 1981. Only in 2 other series in 1977 (constant value) 

years since World War II did the dollars. Measured in constant value 

year to year change in the index 

exceed 10 percent. The change 

exceeded 5 percent in 16 of the last 

39 years (Council of Economic 

Advisers 1984). To remove the effect 

of inflation, production costs were 

adjusted by the lndex of prices paid 

by farmers for production items. 

Maple syrup prices were adjusted 

by the lndex of prices received by 

farmers for livestock and products 

(Council of Economic Advisers, 

1972-84).l Figure 3 shows the maple 

The annual syrup production cost or syrup price was divided by the appropriate index number and the quotient multiplied by 100 to obtain the adjusted cost 

or price. 

dollars, production costs have 

varied little over the period-only 17 

percent from the lowest cost, $9.26 

(1976), to the highest, $10.84 (1981). 

Maple syrup prices showed greater 

fluctuation over the period-about 

45 percent from the lowest price, 

$8.86 (1973), to the highest, $12.82 

(1972). The production cost 

weighted by annual syrup production averaged $9.97 (1977 dollars) 

per gallon over the period and 

weighted syrup prices averaged 

$11.16 per gallon. 
YEAR 

Figure 4.-Investment in sap collection equipment and syrup processing equipment 

and building for a 3,000-tap operation: tubing with vacuum, with an oil-fired evaporator, 1972-84. 

Comparative Analyses provides for both repaymh of the 

Investment versus annual operating cost. lnvestment is the money 

needed to purchase the equipment 

and building for the production of 

maple sap and syrup and is linked 

to arnual operating cost through 

calculation of an annual equivalent 

of inve~tment.~ Annual equivalent 

where A .= annual equivalent of investment. 

investment and a return on the 

investment for the life of the building or equipment (Smith 1968). 

Annual operating cost is incurred 

each year in the production operation and includes cash items, such 

as fuel and wages, and non-cash 

items, such as annual equivalent of 

investment in equipment and the 

opportunity cost of the operator's 

time. The annual operating cost is 

the same as production cost presented in Figure 2. 

B = investment, 

i = interest rate, Investment can be separated 

and n = lifeof building orequipment. into the woods or sap C0lle~ti0n 

Note: Salvage value is assumed to be zero. 

activity and the sugarhouse or syrup 

processing activity (Fig. 4). Investment in both woods and sugarhouse 

increased steadily since 1972 but 

leveled off in 1983 and 1984. During 

this period, investment doubled 

from $12,500 in 1972 to $25,000 in 

1984 (3,000 taps, tubing with vacuum, and oil-fired). lnvestment 

increased more rapidly for syrup 

processing than for sap collection. 

In 1972, sap collection was about 50 

percent of total investment and only 

40 percent in 1984. 
A WOODS 

72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 

YEAR 

Figure 5.-Production cost per gallon of syrup for sap collection and +C 

syrup processing activities, 1972-84. 

Woods versus sugarhouse: 

annual operating cost. The sap 

collection (woods) and syrup 

processing (sugarhouse) activities 

changed at different rates for annual 

operating cost as well as investment cost (Fig. 5). In 1972, the 

woods activities accounted for 47 

percent of the total syrup production cost compared to 34 percent in 

1984. The higher investment for 

syrup processing and the iricrease 

in fuel oil price account for most of 

the increase. 

Changing technology: tubing 

versus buckets. Collecting sap in 

galvanized iron buckets was standard in the industry for many years. 

In the 1950's plastic tubing was 

introduced. After several years of 

trials and experimentation, a 

superior technique was developed-the closed dropline aerial 

system with vacuum pumping 

(Walters 1982). 

Advantages of tubing over 

bucket systems are reflected in cost 

of operation. Huyler (1975) estimates that a tubing system requires 

22 percent less labor time than a 

bucket system and yields 28 percent more sap per tap. In addition, 

tubing systems require a lower capital investment per tap than buckets. 

In 1972, the annual operating cost 

per gallon of syrup was $7.56 for 

buckets and $6.16 for tubing. in 

1984, it was $21.33 for buckets and 

$15.93 for tubing (Fig. 6). The cost 

gap between the two systems has 

steadily widened. In 1972, tubing 

represented 81 percent of the 

annual cost per gallon for buckets; 

in 1984 it was 75 percent. 

Fuel choice: wood versus oil. 

In the 195OYs, fuel oil began to 

replace wood as an evaporator fuel 

because it was cheap, clean, and 
A - BUCKETS 

X -- TUBING 

YEAR -. .- . 

Figure 6.-Production cost per gallon of syrup for tubing with vacuum 

operation compared to a bucket operation, 1972-84. 
Figure 7.-Production cost per gallon of syrup for an oil-fired operation compared to 

a wood-fired operation, 1972-84. 

more efficient. During the 1970's, oil 

had increased in price to such a 

level that its impact on syrup 

production cost overwhelmed its 

convenience value and other advantages. From 1972 to 1984, the price 

of No. 2 fuel oil rose from $.30 to 

$1.24 per gallon. Figure 7 shows 

how rising oil prices affected the 

annual cost of producing syrup. In 

1972 through 1978, the two fuels 

yielded comparable production 

costs. However, in 1979 this 

changed and by 1984 wood-fueled 

production cost was 12 percent 

lower than oil-fueled. 

Sap Sugar 

Natural variabiliiy among 

individual trees and environmental 

factors influence sap-sugar content 

and flow (Gabriel 1982, Gregory 

1982). Gabriel (1972) reported a 

range in sap-sugar content of from 

0.7 to 10.8 percent for 21,080 trees 

in the Northeast. A widely accepted 

average for commercial sugarbushes in Vermont is 2.5 percent 

sugar content and a yield of 10 

gallons of sap per tap, A base of 

2.15 percent sugar and a yield of 10 

gallons was used for calculating 

production costs per gallon of syrup 

for a bucket operation. 

Production costs vary with 

sugar content because of changes 

in the amount of water removed per 

gallon, of syrup. For example, 100 

gallon3 of 2 percent sap will yield 

2-1/3 gallons of syrup, while the 

same amount of 4 percent sap will 

yield 4-213 gallons of syrup, or 

twice the syrup for about the same 

total processing cost. 

Figure 8 shows how production 

costs per gallon of syrup change 

with changing sugar content. A 100 

percent change in sugar content 

from 1.5 percent to 3.0 percent 

resulted in a 40 percent decrease in 

production cost from $20.98 per 

gallon of syrup to $12.64. 
I I I I 1 I 

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 

SUGAR CONTENT (% SUGAR) 

Figure 8.-Production cost per gallon of syrup related to average 

sugar content of sap. 

Scale Effects of Economies of Size 

Scale effects in maple sugaring 

can be attributed to more efficient 

use of equipment with increasing 

size. For example, items such as 

tools, tree power-tapper, vacuum 

pump system, and many items in 

the sugarhouse are needed for all 

operations regardless of size. They 

are fixad costs with respect to the 

operation. However, when averaged 

over more taps and gallons of syrup 

in larger operations, they decrease 

on a per tap or per gallon basis. In 

1984, production costs per gallon 

were $17.64, $15.93, and $15.14 for a changes in the major cost items 

2,000-, 3,000-, and 4,000-tap opera- was tested. 

tion, respectively. Change in fuel oil and labor 

Sensitivity Analysis 

Total production cost is a 

summation of the individual cost 

items. Over time, the items change 

in price or value in absolute terms 

and relative to each other. Small 

changes in major cost items can 

have a greater impact on the total 

than large changes in minor cost 

items. The sensitivity of total 

production cost in 1984 to individual 

costs resilted in the largest change 

in total production cost per gallon 

of syrup (Table 1). An increase of 50 

percent in the cost of fuel oil 

resulted in an increase of 14 

percent in total cost. An increase of 

50 percent in the cost of labor 

resulted in an increase of 10 percent in total cost. An increase of 50 

percent in the other major cost 

items resulted in increases in total 

production cost of from 2 to 9 

percent. 
Summary and Conclusions 

Cost of maple syrup production 

increased from 1972 to 1984 reflecting the rise in the general price 

level as measured by the CPI. However, the difference between the 

maple syrup production cost index 

and the CPI was as great as 18 

points for 1 year. Although the 

maple industry cost trend may follow the trend in the CPI, characteristics of the industry may cause 

production costs to change more or 

less than changes in the CPI. For 

example, maple production is fuel 

intensive so that increased fuel oil 

prices have a greater influence on 

syrup production cost than on the 

CPI. 

Syrup price has also increased 

over the period studied. However, 

after removing the increase caused 

by inflation, there was no change in 

either production cost or price 

expressed in dollars of constant 

value. 

During the study period major 

shifts related to cost have occurred 

in the industry. The sugarhouse or 

syrup processing center has 

become the major cost center in the 

production process. In 1972, syrup 

processing accounted for 53 percent of total cost, and in 1984, 66 

percent. Production cost using 

plastic tubing has decreased relative to production cost using 

buckets. In 1972, syrup production 

cost using tubing was 81 percent of 

cost using buckets. In 1984, the 

percentage dropped to 75 percent. 

Additions to existing maple operations and new operations will most 

likely use plastic tubing. 

The analysis identified changes 

that could lower the cost of syrup 

production. In 1984, wood-fueled 

evaporation yielded total cost 12 

percent lower than oil-fueled 

evaporation. Processing sweeter 

sap, say 3 percent sap versus 1.5 

percent sap, can lower cost by 40 

percent. Production cost per gallon 

at the 3,000-tap level is lowered by 

10 percent compared to production 

at the 2,000-tap level. These options 

are not always a matter of choice 

for the operator. But when options 

are available, the operator can estimate the effect on production cost. 

The analysis indicates that 

efforts to increase fuel efficiency 

and labor productivity have the 

greatest potential to reduce total 

production cost. It helps explain 

why an innovative technology such 

as sap concentration using reverse 

osmosis is a serious alternative to 

oil-fired evaporation (Sendak and 

Morselli 1984). 
Literature Cited 

Council of Economic Advisers. Economic report of the President. 

Washington, DC: Council of EcoI nomic Advisers; 1984. 343 p. 

1 Council of Economic Advisers. Economic indicators, 1972-1984. 

Washington, DC: Council of Economic Advisers; 1972-1984. 

Gabriel, William J. Phenotypic selection .in sugar maple for superior 

sap sugar production. Res. Pap. 

NE-221. Broomall, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1972. 12 p. 

1 Gabriel, William J. Genetic improveI ment in sap-sugar production. 

In: Sugar maple research: sap 

production, processing, and I marketing of maple syrup. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NE-72. Broomall, 

PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station; 

1982: 38-41. 

Gregory, Robert A. Release of sap 

sugar and control of sap pressure. 

In: Sugar maple research: sap 

I production, processing, and 

I marketing of maple syrup. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NE-72. Broomall, 

PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Forest Experiment Station; 

1982: 1-7. 

Huyler, Neil K. Tubing vs. buckets: 

a cost comparison. Res. Note 

NE-216. Broomall, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1975. 5 p. 

Huyler, Neil K. Sap collection systems. In: Sugar maple research: 

sap production, processing, and 

marketing of maple syrup. Gen. 

Tech:Rep. NE-72. Broomall, PA: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 1982a: 

71-78. 

Huyler, Neil K. The economics of 

open-pan evaporators. In: Sugar 

maple research: sap production, 

processing, and marketing of 

maple syrup. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

NE-72. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station; 1982b: 79-82. 

Huyler, Neil K.; Garrett, Lawrence D. 

A cost analysis: processing 

maple syrup products. Res. Pap. 

NE-430. Broomall, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1979. 6 p. 

New Hampshire Department of 

Resources and Economic 

Development. New Hampshire 

forest market reports, 1972-1 984. 

Coop. Ext. Serv. Publ. No. 11. 

Durham, NH: New Hampshire 

Department of Resources and 

Economic Development; 

1972-1984. In cooperation 

with: University of New Hampshire, Cooperative Extension 

Service. 

Sendak, P. E.; Morselli, M. F. 

Reverse osmosis in the produc- . 

tion of maple syrup. Forest Products Journal. 34(718):57-61;1984. 

Smith, Gerald W. Engineering economy: analysis of capital expenditures. Ames, !A: Iowa State 

University Press; 1968. 652 p. 

Walters, Russell S. Sugar maple sap 

collection. In: Sugar mapie 

research: sap production, 

processing, and marketing of 

maple syrup. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

NE-72. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1982: 

16-24. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Statistical Reporting Service. New 

England Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service, Maple Syrup, 

1972-1984. Concord, NH: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Statistical Reporting Service; 

1972-1 984. 

Wells, George D. Sugarhouse 

design. Burlington, VT: University 

of Vermont, Extension Service; 

1977. 25 p. 
Appendix 

Table 1.-Sensitivity of total maple syrup production costa to change in major cost items, 1984 costs as a base 

Change 

Change in in total 

cost or value production 

Item of item cost 

- - - - Percent - - - - 

Fuel oil + 50 + 14 

Labor + 50 + 10 

Sap collection equipment + 50 + 9 

Evaporator + 50 + 7 

Interest rate + 50 + 5 

Packaging + 50 + 5 

Sugarhouse + 50 + 2 

a Assumes a 3,000-tap operation, tubing with vacuum and an 

oil-fired evaporator. 

Table 2.-Standard equipment list for bucket 

systems 

Item Quantity -- -- 

15-quart sap bucket 

Sap bucket cover 

Metal sap spout 

20-quart gathering pail 

Bucket washer 

Snowshoes (pair) 

Power tree tapper 

Tapping bit 

Bit file 

Spark plug 

Hand tool set 

Tractor (prorated) 

Sap sled 

10-barrel gathering tank 

Source: Huyler 1975. 

1 per tap 

1 per tap 

1 per tap 

2 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

1 per operation 

Table 3.-Standard equipment list for tubingvacuum systems 

Item Quantity 

Nylon sap spout 1 per tap 

5116-inch sap tubing 15 feet per tap 

112-inch mainline tubing 2 feet per tap 

314-inch mainline tubing 1.2 feet per tap 

1-inch mainline tubing 0.7 feet per tap 

5116-inch connector 0.05 per tap 

112-inch connector 0.02 per tap 

314-inch connector 0.012 per tap 

1-inch connector 0.007 per tap 

5116-inch end cap 0.04 per tap 

5116-inch tee 1 per tap 

4-way wye 0.02 per tap 

1- x 314-inch reducer 0.002 per tap 

314- x 112-inch reducer 0.004 per tap 

Quick clamp 0.082 per tap 

Aluminum fence wire 0.7 foot per tap 

Quick clamp pliers 1 per operation 

Wire ties 1 per operation 

Wire tier 1 per operation 

Fence wire stretcher 1 per operation 

Spout puller 1 per operation 

Sap Pump 1 per operation 50-gallon vacuum storage 

tank 1 per operation 

Snowshoes (pair) 1 per operation 

Power tree tapper 1 per operation 

Tapping bit, bit file 

and spark plug 1 per operation 

Hand tool set 1 per operation 

Source: Huyler 1975. 
Table 4.-Standard equipment list for syrup processing by fuel type and tap sizea 

Wood Oil 

Item 2,000 3,000 4,000 2,000 3,000 ' 4,000 

taps taps taps taps taps taps 

Evaporatorb (feet) 5x 12 5x 16 6x 16 5x12 5x 16 6x 16 

Sap storage tank 

capacity (gallon) 

Buckets 2,500 3,750 5,000 

Tubing 3,160 4,740 6,320 

a Additional equipment that does not vary with size of operation or fuel type includes: 30-gallon filter tank, 3- x 3-foot flat rayon 

filters, syrup hydrometer and cup, syrup skimmer, syrup grading set, automatic draw-off. 

b Evaporators are fully equipped as recommended by the manufacturer including grate for wood-fired evaporators, oil burners and 

a 1,000-gallon fuel tank with oil-fired evaporators, arch insulation, fire brick, and retort cement as required. 

Source: Huyler and Garrett 1979. 

Table 5.-Variables and value used in production cost computer 

program, 1972 to 1984 

Variable Value Source 

Sugarhouse size (square feet) Wells 1977 

Wood-f ired 2,000-tap 71 0 

3,000-tap 880 

4,000-tap 1,000 

Oil-fired 2,000-tap 560 

3,000-t ap 650 

4,000-tap 680 

Labor 

Sap collection (hourltap) Huyler 1975 

Buckets 0.205 

Tubing 0.160 

Syrup processing (hourlseason) Huyler and Garrett 1979 

Wood-fired 140 

Oil-fired 130 

Packing (hourlgallon) Report of the Governor's 

Bulk 0.0080 Maple Industry Task 

Wholesale 0.01 10 Force 1975a 

Retail (gal) 0.0167 

(qt) 0.0278 

Energy consumption Huyler and Garrett 1979 

Wood (cordlgal syrup) 0.04 

No. 2 oil (gallgal syrup) 3.50 

Electricity (kwhltap) 0.033 

Economic life (years) 

Buckets 30 Huyler 1975 

Tubing 10 

Sugarhouse 25 Huyler and Garrett 1979 

Evaporator 20 

Percentage of maple United States Department 

syrup sales of Agriculture, 

Retail 51.6 Statistical Reporting 

Bulk 32.3 Service 1972-1 984 

Wholesale 16.1 - - - 

a Report of the Governor's Maple lndustry Task Force. 1975. Unpublished, on file at USDA Forest 

Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Burlington, VT. 
Table &-Source of price information for maple 

syrup production cost and revenue, 

1972 to 1984 

Item Source 

Standard equipment 

Maple equipment 

Hand tool set 

Snowshoes 

Fuel storage tank 

Tractor (60-horsepower, 

Ford F-4000) 

Operation expenses 

Property tax rate 

Wages 

Interest rate (3-month 

U .S. Treasury Bills) 

Insurance Rate 

Energy 

No. 2 fuel oil 

Fuelwood 

Electricity 

Revenue 

Average syrup price 

(all sales) 

Syrup sales proportion 

G. H. Grimm Co., Rutland, 

VT (Annual Catalog) 

Leader Evaporator Co., 

St. Aibans, VT (Annual 

Catalog) 

Reynolds' Sugarbush Co., 

Aniwa, WI (Annual Catalog) Sears Roebuck and Co., 

Chicago, IL (Annual 

Catalog) L. L. Bean Co., Freeport, 

ME (Winter Catalog) 

Webb Fuel Co., Williston, 

VT (personal communication) 

Yandow Sales and Service, 

North Ferrisburg, VT 

(personal cornmunication) 

Real Estate Guide, Andover, MA 

Vermont Department of 

Employment and Training, Research and 

Statistics Section, 

1972-1982, Montpelier 

Council of Economic Advisers 

Hickok and Boardman Inc., 

Burlington, VT 

Energy news. VT Department of Energy, Montpelier 

New Hampshire Department of Resources and 

Economic Development 

Green Mountain Power 

Corp., Burlington, VT 

(Annual Report) 

Central Vermont Public 

Service Co., Middlebury/St. Albans, VT (Annual Report) 

United States Department of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting Service 

United States Department 

of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting Service 
Sendak, Paul E.; Bennink, John P. The cost of maple sugaring 

in Vermont. Res. Pap. NE-565. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station; 1985. 14 p. 

An annual maple syrup production cost series was developed 

for the period 1972 to 1984. Comparisons were made between 

plastic tubing and metal bucket technology and wood- and 

oil-fired evaporation. The effects of sap-sugar content and 

size of operation were examined together with the relationships among major cost items. The information will be useful 

to maple syrup producers and lenders needing financial analyses, equipment developers and manufacturers, and public 

policy analysts and planners. 

ODC 892.68 

Keywords: Cost analysis; maple sugar production 

*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1985-505-928:20009 
Headquarters of the Northeastern Forest Experiment Station are in 

Broomall. Pa. Field laboratories are maintained at: 

Amherst, Massachusetts, in cooperation with the University of 

Massachusetts. 

Berea, Kentucky, in cooperation with Berea College. 

@ Burlington, Vermont, in cooperation with the University of 

Vermont. 

Delaware, Ohio. 

Durham, New Hampshire, in cooperation with the University of 

New Hampshire. 

Hamden, Connecticut, in cooperation with Yale University. 

Morgantown, West Virginia, in cooperation with West Virginia 

University, Morgantown. 

Orono, Maine, in cooperation with the University of Maine, 

Orono. 

Parsons, West Virginia. 

Princeton, West Virginia. 

0 Syracuse, New York, in cooperation with the State University of 

New York College of Environmental Sciences and Forestry at 

Syracuse University, Syracuse. 

University Park, Pennsylvania, in cooperation with the 

Pennsylvania State University. 

0 Warren, Pennsylvania.