NEWSLETTERWinter 2005

Richard VloskyDirector, Louisiana Forest Products

Development Center, School ofRenewable Natural Resources

Director’s Message

Recently, Louisiana and ourneighboring states on the Gulf Coastsustained two of the most severenatural disasters in history. Inaddition to the untold damage to thepopulations of these states, thetimber industry in the region wasseverely impacted.

In Louisiana alone, more than20,000 forest landowners represent-ing an estimated 1.75 million acresof timberland were included in theparishes stricken by hurricanesKatrina and Rita. Total timberdamages are estimated to be morethan two billion board feet with afinancial loss of nearly $1 billiondollars.

Many efforts are under way toassess the impacts on sectors of theforest industry including timberlandowners, loggers, and manufac-turers. In the past year, Louisiana’stimber economy provided more than$5 billion annually to the state.What the future holds as a result ofthese disasters remains to be seen.All of us at the Louisiana ForestProducts Development Center areinvolved in forest recovery effortsand offer our hopes and prayers tothe people in Louisiana and ourneighbors who were adverselyaffected.

Cornelis F. de HoopLook out! It has been said that more

people are injured during storm cleanupthan by a storm itself. Professionalloggers have made great strides inchainsaw safety, but homeownerchainsaw users tend to violate nearlyevery safety rule in the book. Chainsawaccident rates are high.

Chainsaw cuts are particularlydangerous because they can easily causesevere bleeding. Unlike the clean cut of aknife, chainsaws remove body tissue asthey cut. This makes injury repair andrecovery difficult. Also, chainsaws areloud enough to cause permanent hearingloss. Of course, if one is felling trees,there are many overhead hazards tobeware.

Chainsaw safety starts when the sawis purchased. Don’t just purchase a sawby itself. Buy Personal ProtectiveEquipment (PPE) along with it. Thisequipment is available from most dealerswho sell chainsaws. While this equip-ment does not prevent an accident, it

(continued on page 11)

may keep an accident from being as badas it could have been.

The U.S. Occupational Safety andHealth Administration, or OSHA, requiresthe following protective equipment to beused by any employee who uses achainsaw — a hard hat (if an overheadhazard exists, such as when cutting atree), eye protection, hearing protection,gloves, leg protection and foot protec-tion. Homeowners using chainsawsshould do the same.

If there are overhead hazards, such astrees and treetops, then the need for ahardhat is obvious. In cleanup cases,electric lines are commonly nearby, soone should use a plastic hardhat ratherthan a metal one. If the hardhat is old, itshould be replaced. Plastic hardhatsbegin to deteriorate and weaken after fiveyears. The liners in both plastic and metalhardhats should be replaced every two

Storm Cleanup?Storm Cleanup?

Think Safety Before You Buy that Chainsaw!Think Safety Before You Buy that Chainsaw!

2

Forests will continue to be anintegral part of the landscape of theSouth and Louisiana for years to come,according to speakers at the recentLouisiana Natural Resources Symposiumsponsored by the LSU AgCenter’s Schoolof Renewable Natural Resources.

According to Dr. Todd Shupe, one ofthe organizers of the conference and afaculty member in the LSU AgCenter’sSchool of Renewable Natural Resources,more than 100 people attended thesymposium held in Baton Rouge on July18-20.

The conference focused on regula-tory issues, conservation, sustainabilityand certification of forest lands.

In the keynote presentation, oneexpert pointed out that while increasingurbanization puts pressure on environ-mental issues, forest harvesting is not anannual occurrence, and the land recoversas vegetation comes back.

“Forestry is not a permanent impact,but there is a recovery over time,” saidkeynote speaker Dr. George Ice of theNational Council for Air and StreamImprovement of Corvallis, Ore. “Youhave many options to achieve yourenvironmental goals.”

Ice said sustainable forest manage-ment has been improved by implement-ing best management practices thatrecognize technological, economic andinstitutional considerations.

Forests and forest products willcontinue to be important for ruraleconomies in the South, said Dr. DaveWear of the U.S. Department ofAgriculture’s Forest Service SouthernResearch Station in Research TrianglePark, N.C.

Noting that the South produces moretimer than any other “country” in theworld, Wear said, “The South’s timberproduction won’t go away.”

Wear said forest land is being takenup by urbanization, but some agriculturalcrop and pasture land is being replacedby forests.

He said nearly every acre of timberwas harvested at one time or another,then gave way to agriculture. He sug-gested the shift from agriculture to forestsis reversible while the shift from agricul-ture or forests to urban areas is perma-nent.

As cities grow and if timber pricesare strong, agricultural land would bemoved to forests, he said.

“We’d get forests in differentplaces,” Wear said. “Urbanization is the (continued on page 3)

Experts Say Forest ManagementRequires Environmental Component

dominant dynamic.” But as the South becomes more

urbanized, the aesthetics of managedforests will become more important, oneexpert said.

“Because they can see it, peoplethink they have a right to see an aestheti-cally pleasing forest,” said Dr. BillRockwell of The Plum Line in St. Johns,Mich.

He said landowners and loggersshould consider how their harvestingpractices fit into the landscape.

Rockwell suggested improving theaesthetics of harvested land by selectingsmall areas for harvest, leaving curvedboundaries between harvested andunharvested trees, and cutting treetopsand other material left behind.

Dr. Kenneth Richards of IndianaUniversity talked about climate changeand policy options regarding greenhousegas emissions.

“States have been leading the chargein reducing greenhouse gas emissions,”he said.

Richards reported on his researchthat looked at how plants remove carbonfrom the atmosphere and store it in planttissue. Carbon is one of the componentsof what are generally regarded asgreenhouse gasses, and removing carbonfrom the atmosphere reduces the presenceof these gasses and the global warmingthat results.

He suggested that at some levelgovernment payments could subsidizeforest lands to reduce carbon emissionsin atmosphere.

In other presentations Dr. WarrenFlick, editor and publisher of Forest TaxReview in Athens, Ga., suggested federaltax law provides an opportunity to thinkof ecosystem management as an invest-ment.

“Conservation is widely supportedin Federal tax law,” he said.

Dr. Barbara McCutchan, director ofenterprise stewardship and sustainabilitywith MeadWestvaco in Stamford, Conn.,said forest certification provides third-party credibility for forest managementprograms.

“Stewardship and sustainability arethe price of participating in the market,”she said.Dr. Richard Vlosky, director of the LSUAgCenter’s Louisiana Forest ProductsDevelopment Center, said forest certifica-tion came in response to clearcuttingforests in the United States and illegallylogging tropical hardwoods in other

countries.Vlosky said the industry needed

third-party organizations to certify thecompanies are performing in an appropri-ate manner. The management, not theland, is certified, he said.

E. Scott Poole, chief operatingofficer and executive vice president ofMartin Companies in Alexandria, La,provided a related presentation to that ofVlosky. Poole provided an industryperspective on forest certification.

“Although we were corporatesponsors of the Sustainable ForestryInitiative, the Martin family felt thecertification was hindered, although notflawed, by its origin and historic mem-bership makeup,” Poole said.

He added that the Martin Companieswere searching for something a littledifferent. The Forest StewardshipCouncil certification provided a strategymore in line with what the family wasafter.

John L. Jechura Jr., senior engineer IIwith the US Department of Energy,

National Renewable EnergyLaboratory (NREL), in Golden, Col.spoke about the utilization opportunitiesof biomass and the concept of abiorefinery. Their research focuses ondeveloping several biomass types intobio-based fuels, chemicals, and energy,which can aid in economic developmentand lessen US demand for foreign oil.

Dr. Jim L. Chambers, WeaverBrothers Professor of Forestry in the LSUAgCenter School of Renewable NaturalResources, spoke about conservation ofcoastal wetland forests in Louisiana.Large-scale efforts to protect and restorecoastal wetlands and the concurrentrenewal of forest harvesting in cypress-tupelo swamps have brought newattention to Louisiana’s coastal wetlandforests in recent years. The LouisianaGovernor’s office commissioned aScience Working Group, chaired byChambers, to examine these forests andmake recommendations for their conser-vation, protection and use.

Chambers’ presentation summarizedthe report findings and provides recom-mendations for what state government,professional foresters, research scientists,landowners, and the public can do toensure the sustainability of Louisiana’scoastal wetland forests well into thefuture.

Richard Martin, director of conserva-tion programs and associate state director

3

The enhanced Website will allow Louisianacompanies to more easilylocate sources of newmarkets, identify customersand suppliers, locatebusiness developmentinformation, and generallyfacilitate transactions,Smith said, adding that theproject will also enhanceLouisiana’s officialeconomic developmentportal,www.Access.Louisiana.gov,by incorporating into itinformation regardingexisting forest productsupply chains.

“Information onexisting forest products businesses aswell as their 1st and 2nd tier suppliers andconsumers from other industries will bemined from the 88,000 businesses thatare part of the AccessLouisiana data-base,” he said. “This will create opportu-nities for the creation of new linkagesand supply chains within the industry.”

Another focus of the project will bedetermining the skills necessary for theindustry’s growth. According to Smith,the project will determine what skills arenecessary to improve the productivityand profitability of wood processingcompanies. The grant will be used toidentify any training sources that may beavailable through existing programs inthe state’s technical colleges/highschools. If no such sources exist, Smithsaid the project will develop recommen-

The Louisiana Forest ProductDevelopment Center (LFPDC) andCenter for Business and InformationTechnologies (CBIT) have received aLouisiana Board of Regents grant tohelp in funding a project for the forestproducts industry.

According to Dr. Mark Smith, E.P.Nalley professor of management andassociate director of the CBIT at theUniversity of Louisiana at Lafayette,this project will identify the competi-tive advantages of the wood productscluster, as well as help companiesimprove their access to new marketsand link the wood cluster companies toavailable resources.

“This proposed project will launchan entirely new direction to itsongoing supply chain and web siteresearch,” Smith said.”Partnering withthe Forest Product DevelopmentCenter allows Center for Business andInformation Technologies to leverageexisting industry partnerships and tobenefit from the LSU Ag Center’seconomic development and outreachnetworks.”

The grant will fund the enhance-ment of the Louisiana Forest ProductsCommunity Web site.

“The project will conduct market-ing research to map the industrysupply chain, identify potential newproducts, and identify new markets(including international markets) forcompanies that are adding value toforestry products,” Smith said. “Thisinformation will be used to enhancethe Louisiana Forest Products Commu-nity Web site.”

CBIT works with LFPDCon Supply Chain Initiative and Web Site

dations and resources to compensate forthe lack of such training.

Finally the project will examine thepossibility of banding small woodprocessors together to enable them toseek larger contracts. This would beparticularly feasible in the cabinetmaking group, Smith said. This task willpreserve and sustain small businesses inthe Louisiana forest products supplychain.

“The personnel here at the Center forBusiness and Industrial Technologieslook forward to working with theLouisiana Forest Products DevelopmentCenter personnel in advancing theindustry,” Smith said. “We hope that thisproject is the first of many cooperativeefforts to advance the economic develop-ment of Louisiana through its forestproducts cluster.”

for the Louisiana nature conservancy,provided a presentation on mitigationbanking to enhance biodiversityconservation. According to Martin, thereare approximately 230 active or ap-proved wetland mitigation banks in theUnited States. Sixty-seven mitigationbanks are currently active or are close toapproval within the Mobile, Ala.,Vicksburg, Miss., and New Orleansdistricts of the Corps of Engineers, whichis nearly 30 percent of all active orapproved mitigation banks in the UnitedStates.

For many years Louisiana StateUniversity hosted the premiere forestry

education event in the U.S. South, thenknown as the LSU Forestry Symposium.A recent resurgence of interest inrenewing the symposium led to itsrevival. Topics and sessions of thesymposium were selected to include thebroad array of natural resource policy,management, and utilization issues thatare critically important in the southeast-ern U.S. The symposium featuredpresentations from leading internationalexperts covering a vast array of importantnatural resources topics.

The audience this year includedprivate and corporate landowners,consulting and company foresters, milloperators and representatives of govern-mental agencies and environmental

organizations.A comprehensive and professional

summary of the proceedings will bedelivered to all registrants and isavailable to the general public for a fee.Anyone interested in serving on theplanning committee for the next sympo-sium, please contact Shupe attshupe@agctr.lsu.edu or tel. (225)578-6432.

The symposium was cosponsored bythe USDA Forest Service SouthernResearch Station, Boise Cascade,;Louisiana Society of American Foresters,Louisiana Forestry Association, TheNature Conservancy of Louisiana,Southern Regional Extension Foresterand Mockler Beverage Budweiser.

Forest Management(continued from page 2)

4

At the time of writing this article,the economic development communityis concentrating on the businessrecovery efforts related to the Hurri-cane Katrina disaster. The LouisianaDepartment of Economic Development(LED), the state’s economic develop-ment agency, has announced severalprograms designed to alleviatepressure on Louisiana businessesaffected by Hurricane Katrina. Theseprograms include: Direct CorporateOutreach, Federal Aid Package, SmallBusiness Administration Aid, andwww.AccessLouisiana.com.

More than 70,000 Louisianabusinesses across 10 parishes wereimpacted by Hurricane Katrina. Theprimary mission of LED is to facilitatea return to operation for those busi-nesses as quickly as possible bymatching them with the resourcesavailable in the 54 parishes notdirectly affected by the storm. LED isalso working diligently to put theinfrastructure and plan in place so we

Forest Products Economic Development Update

Kelsey ShortDirector of Agriculture/Forestry/Food

ProcessingLouisiana Department

of Economic Development

can rebuild Southeast Louisiana into oneof this nation’s premiere cultural andeconomic assets.

Details on each LED relief programare outlined below:

1. Direct Industry Outreach bySector

LED is actively contacting im-pacted businesses by industry sector.Direct communication between LED andimpacted companies is being used togauge industry specific needs and todetermine unique needs for each indi-vidual company in the face of relocationand a return to operations.

2. Federal Aid Package LED is working closely with

officials from Mississippi and Alabamato develop a comprehensive federal aidrequest modeled after the 9/11 RecoveryAct. This package is expected to includetax incentives for returning individualsand businesses, as well as bond programsdesigned to jumpstart infrastructuredevelopment.

3. Small Business Financial Aid The Small Business Administration

(SBA) relocated to LED offices in thewake of Katrina. This has provided forunprecedented levels of cooperationbetween the state and federal entities,resulting in increased levels of aid forsmall businesses impacted by the storm.LED is facilitating assistance for thesecompanies by initiating discussions toraise limits on low interest small businessloans and lower the threshold for loanrequirements.

The Louisiana Association ofBusiness & Industry (LABI) has estab-lished the Small Business Disaster ReliefFund to provide grants to help smallbusinesses damaged by Hurricane

Katrina get back into business asquickly as possible. These grants willserve as “gap funding” to pay expensesnot covered by insurance. Informationon how to contribute to the fund andhow to apply for assistance can befound on LABI’s website atwww.labi.org.

4. AccessLouisiana(www.accesslouisiana.com)

This tool matches impactedbusinesses in need of resources or aphysical location with those able toprovide it. This can range fromworkforce or supply needs to a 42,000-square-foot industrial workspace inShreveport, La. Individuals or busi-nesses with commercial property forsale or rent can use a short form tosubmit their property electronically soit can be served up through links on aLouisiana map to those searching forspace. Currently, the commercialproperty listing includes 3,500 entriesposted since Hurricane Katrina.

In partnership with LABI,AccessLouisiana is also surveyingimpacted businesses about theirspecific needs to maintain or return tooperations. These needs are thenmatched with resources that can fulfilltheir requests. The database currentlyhas 88,000 businesses around Louisi-ana able to supply various resources.

These programs, along with theresolve and resiliency of our businessleaders, will not only make Louisianathe case study in economic recovery,but also the global model for regionalplanning and development.

For additional information or torequest updates on these programscontact Kelsey Short at short@la.govor tel: (225) 342-5892.

A process for recycling treated woodproducts could save on disposal costsand liability concerns by keeping treatedwood out of high-cost landfills, accord-ing to developers at the LSU AgCenter.

According to Dr. Todd Shupe, aresearcher in the LSU AgCenter Schoolof Renewable Natural Resources’Louisiana Forest Products DevelopmentCenter, disposal of decommissionedpreservative-treated wood has increas-ingly become a major concern becausethe popular disposal options – incinera-

lumber production is treated with sometype of preservative. Most of thismaterial was treated with chromatedcopper arsenate (CCA) prior tovoluntary phase out of CCA forconsumer uses. Creosote, penta, andchromated copper arsenate are largelyused for industrial applicationsranging from utility poles to highwayand bridge guardrails.

“Wood treaters in the UnitedStates can no longer treat wood with

(continued on page 5)

Process Holds PromiseFor Recycling Pressure Treated Wood

tion or land filling – are becoming morecostly and impractical.

“Recycling – both of treated woodand of the preservatives – must beconsidered as a viable alternative,”Shupe said.

Open burning of treated wood isgenerally not allowed by law and notrecommended by the treating industry,he said.

Finding new uses for these productsis important to Louisiana because nearlyhalf of the state’s southern yellow pine

5

chromated copper arsenate for residentialuses such as lumber,” Shupe said.

CCA is a chemical wood preserva-tive containing chromium, copper andarsenic. It has been used to treat lumbersince the 1940s, and is used to protectwood from rotting due to insects andmicrobial agents.

The U.S Environmental ProtectionAgency has classified CCA as a re-stricted-use product for use only bycertified pesticide applicators. Theagency has worked with manufacturers tovoluntarily phase out CCA use for woodproducts around the home and inchildren’s play areas.

Effective Dec. 31, 2003, no woodtreater, nor manufacturer may treat woodwith CCA for residential uses, andpressure treated wood containing CCA isno longer being produced for use in mostresidential settings, including decks andplay sets.

Nevertheless, CCA-treated woodproducts are still widely used in indus-trial applications such as utility poles,railroad crossties and guardrails, Shupesaid.

The products will eventually comeout of service and have to be dealt with,said Doug Arnold president of ArnoldForest Products in Shreveport.

“We need to do something with itwhen it’s out of use,” he said.

Arnold’s company produces CCA-treated products such as guardrail postsfor state agencies. He said the industryneeds a less-expensive method fordisposing of treated wood products, andhe sees the LSU AgCenter process as areasonable alternative.

“The drive behind it is to use whatwe’ve put on the market in the past andrecycle it,” Arnold said. “The technologyis here, we just need to take advantage ofit.”

In a process called liquefaction,treated wood is ground and liquefiedwith an organic solvent.

“The process uses relatively lowtemperature, short reaction time andsmall amounts of organic reagents,”Shupe said.

Shupe said the process is economi-cally viable and environmentallyfriendly.

“This approach has the best opportu-nity for success,” he said. “There’s zerodischarge and it produces multipleproducts.”

The end products from the processinclude the chemicals originally used totreat the wood as well as non-toxic

(continued from page 4)Process liquefied wood that can be used for

resins, molded wood products, foams andplastics.

Liquefaction turns wood into liquidwith or without a catalyst using atemperature that will vary depending onthe catalyst used or not used. Thereaction requires higher temperatures if acatalyst is not used.

The liquefaction technology wasdeveloped in the 1970s in Japan. There,the liquid wood is used for manufactur-ing a variety of resins and moldedproducts, said Chung Hse, a researcherwho has been working with Shupe on theproject.

In the LSU AgCenter process, thewood is put in solution with an organicsolvent, said Hse, a principal woodscientist at the U.S. Department ofAgriculture Forest Service, SouthernResearch Station in Pineville and anadjunct professor in the LSU AgCenter.

The liquefied wood can be dilutedwith an aqueous solvent and then mixedwith complexion/precipitation agents sothat the CCA can be removed from thesolution. After the metals are taken out,the process yields liquid wood for otherapplications, such as molded products

Hse said the work is done in apressurized cooker at about 150 degreescentigrade.

Shupe said the process efficientlyand effectively takes the metals out ofthe liquid wood at a rate greater than 99percent for all three elements.

“Nobody has shown an ability toremove those three elements at that high

of a removal rate,” Shupe said.“We can do it quickly andefficiently.”

The next step is a pilot plant to see ifthe process can be done economically aswell, he said.

The wood that comes out of thereaction is “finer than finely ground – it’svery, very viscous, syrup. It’s actuallyliquefied,” Shupe said.

“The process is now technologicallyviable,” he said. “Once the technologyproves economically viable, there will bea domestic market.”

Shupe noted competitive productsinclude steel, which is non-renewableand requires significant energy consump-tion for production.

“Research along these lines ishelpful in facilitating the long-termviability of the wood preservativeindustry,” he said. “The industry uses arenewable resource and provides jobs.”

Even if CCA-treated wood productsare no longer produced, there’s still a lotof CCA material being decommissioned,and it needs to be disposed of.

“The material that’s obsolete,damaged, whatever – will sustain arecycling industry for many years,”Shupe said. “Also, the liquefactiontechnology can easily be used to createproducts from non-treated wood.”

One of the products that can be madefrom the preservative-free liquefied woodis phenol. Shupe says that with oil pricescurrently more than $50 per barrel,liquefied wood can be used to provide aviable alternative for oil-based phenol.

Shupe ReceivesJapanese Patent

A Japanese patent has been awarded to Dr. ToddShupe, an associate professor in the Louisiana ForestProducts Development Center, a unit of the LSUAgCenter’s School of Renewable Natural Resources.

The patent, titled “A Process to Convert Celluloseto Methanol,” has been assigned patent number 2005-254073.

“The present invention generally relates to thecellulose hydrolysis reaction and increase the conven-tion rate of cellulose to glucose or oligosaccharides,”Shupe said.

The technology is being patented and marketed inJapan because the lead scientist on the project, Dr.Lianzhen Lin, lives and works in Kyoto, Japan. Linformerly worked as a postdoctoral research scientistwith Shupe and was housed at the USDA Forest Service,Southern Research Station in Pineville. Dr. Chung Hse, principal wood scientistwith the USDA Forest Service, is also a co-inventor of the technology.

6

With the devastation to commercial timber brought byHurricane Katrina, there will be much dead, dry timber on theground in the Florida Parishes and in southern Mississippi andAlabama. This wood has the potential to become a severe fireproblem in the next few years.

The Louisiana Forest Product Development Center(LFPDC), a unit of the LSU AgCenter’s School of RenewableNatural Resources, is ahead of the game by already studyingmechanical forest fuel reduction operations.

Traditionally, foresters have used prescribed fire to reduceexcess brush, low branches and other forest fuels to reduce thelikelihood of catastrophic fires. This tactic is becoming increas-ingly difficult because of issues such as smoke management andliability.

Alternatives, such as mechanical forest fuel reduction, arebeing tried and studied. Some mechanical operations involveforestry mower/mulchers that grind brush and small trees downto ground level (no utilization of the biomass). Other operationschip the brush and small trees, creating a revenue stream (seeLFPDC Newsletter, Fall 2003, P. 5). These operations are oftenfollowed by a “cool” fire, which subsequently allows foresters toprescribe a regular burning regime.

Cornelis F. de Hoop, Amith Hanumappa-Reddy, Robert H. Dupré and W. Ramsay Smith

Mechanical Forest Fuel Reduction vs. Burn-Only

Figure 2. Types of forest fuels targeted in prescribed burns.Figure 1. Types of fuels targeted in mechanical forest fuelreduction operations.

Mechanical Burn-OnlyAcres Days Acres Days

Mean 1,396 248 3,180 12

Min 5 1 5 1

Max 12,325 2,555 46,000 62

Table 1. Comparison of two types of forest fuel reductionoperations by size and length of operations. Burn-only (pre-scribed burn) operations can cover more area in much less timethan mechanical operations (such as masticating machines andchippers). However, prescribed burns suffer increasingrestrictions because of liability, smoke management, and limitednumber of ideal burning days.

Mechanical Burn-OnlyRevenue Cost Revenue Cost

Mean $108 $390 $0 $105

Min $0 $0 $0 0

Max $3,000 $4,000 $0 $1,000

Table 2. Comparison of two types of fuel reduction operations byrevenues and costs per acre. Prescribed burns are cheaper buthave no offsetting revenues.

One of the research activities recently conducted by theLFPDC was a survey of 197 foresters and similar administratorsnationwide who are familiar with forest fuel reduction opera-tions. An unexpected and interesting result of this survey wasan opportunity to compare mechanical operations with burn-only operations.

Mechanical operations were more common in conditions ofheavy ladder fuels and dense small-diameter conifer stands (Fig.1). Burn-only operations were commonly used where groundfuels, grass and brush were heavy (Fig. 2).

The mechanical and burn-only operations contrasteddramatically in size. Burn-only operations were three timeslarger, yet they were performed in much less time (Table 1).

While mechanical operations often had a revenue stream tooffset costs to landowner, the revenues were not sufficient toovercome the costs (on average Table 2). Most of the reallycostly mechanical operations (over $1,000 per acre) had verylittle offsetting revenues (often less than $100 per acre).

Many other factors were also studied in this survey,including problems associated with fuel reduction operationsand public awareness of fuel buildup and fire danger. For a fullreport, contact Dr. Cornelis de Hoop atcdehoop@agcenter.lsu.edu.

Visit our Web site at:www.rnr.lsu.edu/lfpdc

7

The Louisiana Department ofEconomic Development offers severaltax incentive programs that couldpotentially mean more money forwood processing companies. Whilemany of the larger companies are awareof these incentives, we are listing thethree most popular programs below forthe benefit of the many smallerLouisiana companies that are notaware of the existence of theseprograms.

Industrial PropertyTax Exemption

New and expanding manufacturersare eligible to receive five-yearproperty tax exemptions, renewable foran additional five years on newcapitalized purchases. The exemptionmay include buildings, machinery,equipment, furniture, and fixtures fornew, expanded, or renovated facilities.For information, call (225) 342-5382,or go to http://led.state.la.us/businessresources/pdf/TY%205-2004.pdf.

Enterprise ZoneLouisiana’s Enterprise Zone

Program provides tax credits and sales/use tax refunds to businesses that hireat least 35% of their new employees

from one of four targeted groups. A one-time $2,500 tax credit is generated foreach certified net new job created. Anadditional $2,500 tax credit may begenerated in the second year of employ-ment if the new employee is certified asreceiving assistance through the FamilyIndependence Temporary AssistanceProgram (FITAP). Participation in thisprogram excludes the use of the QualityJobs Program. For information, call (225)342-9228, or go to http://led.state.la.us/businessresources/pdf/EZ%20Facts%207-2004.pdf.

Louisiana Quality Jobs ProgramLouisiana’s Quality Jobs Program

provides an annual rebate for up to 10-years of 5% of gross annual payroll forminimum hourly wage rates of $9.01, or6% of gross annual payroll for minimumhourly wage rates of $11.59. Theemployer must offer a basic health plan(basic hospital care and basic physiciancare) within 90 days of qualifying for theprogram. For employees whose wages areless than $50,000 per year, the employermust pay at least 85% of the totalpremium for health insurance coveragefor full-time employees, or at least 50%of the total premium for health insurancecoverage for full-time employees andtheir dependents. For employees whose

Tax Incentive Programs Offered for Louisiana Companies

wages are equal to or greater than$50,000 per year, the amount of theemployer decreases from contributionfrom 85% to 70% for those employees.In addition, the program also providesa rebate of state sales/use tax (4%) onmaterials for building materials,machinery and equipment purchasedduring the construction period andused exclusively on site. Participationin this program excludes the use of theEnterprise Zone Program. For informa-tion, call (225) 342-5402, or go tohttp://led.state.la.us/businessresources/pdf/QJ%20Facts%206-2005.pdf.

Note: All of these programsrequire an Advanced Notification formand fee be submitted to LouisianaDepartment of Economic Development(LED) prior to any construction,renovations, purchases, etc. If you failto submit this Advanced Notification,you will not be eligible to participatein the program(s). You may completethe application online at http://led.state.la.us/businessresources/adv_noti.aspx. Businesses andcontractors receiving state tax rebatesor credits under these programs areencouraged to give consideration toLouisiana manufacturers, suppliers,contractors, and labor for their project.

Several LSU AgCenter researchers have been busy workingwith other researchers on several projects relating to the woodindustry.

Dr. Richard Vlosky, professor in the LSU AgCenter’sLouisiana Forest Products Development Center, and Dr. MichaelDunn, associate professor, Agricultural Economics Department,have partnered with Dr. Glenn Hughes, an Extension professorfrom Mississippi State University Extension Service in a studytitled “Certified Forests: Preparing Private Landowners for theFuture.”

The $102,000 project is funded by a grant from the South-ern Region Sustainable Agricultural Research and EducationProgram (SARE). The two-year effort will be a combinedresearch and extension effort to identify the potential forproviding certified forest products in Louisiana and Mississippi.

Vlosky also recently completed a study titled “IdentifyingEmployment Structure and Training Needs in the LouisianaValue-Added Wood Products Industry.” The study was fundedby the Louisiana Governor’s Office of Rural Development, theLouisiana Department of Economic Development and theLouisiana Department of Labor.

In addition, Vlosky and Drs. Ramesh Kolluru and MarkSmith from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette received an$87,300 grant from the Louisiana Board of Regents to researchLouisiana wood products supply chain processes and determine

LSU AgCenter Experts Involved in Research Projects

Robert Dupré is workingtoward a masters ofscience degree under Dr.Cornelis de Hoop intimber harvesting. Duprégraduated with abachelor’s degree inforestry from LSU in 2002and went to work for theNational Park Service asa wildland firefighter fortwo years before comingback to LSU for hisgraduate research program. The research he is doing will helploggers increase the productivity of their operations.

improvements to improve the state’s competitive position inthis industry sector.

In another project, Vlosky, together with Dr. Todd Shupe ofthe Louisiana Forest Products Develoment Center and Dr. MattFannin of the LSU AgCenter’s Department of AgriculturalEconomics, have received a $27,500 grant from the SouthernForest Products Association to conduct an analysis of the U.S.pressure-treated wood industry.

Diana Simek, Vice President, Ark-La-Tex Regional Export and Technology Center (ARETC), Inc.

8

Todd F. Shupe

News at the CenterCornelis F. de Hoop

Grants and ContractsCan Woody Biomass Utilization BeProfitable? USDA Forest Service andTravis Taylor Logging & Chipping. C.F.de Hoop and Travis Taylor. $186,473.

Analysis of Productivity, Efficiency andCost Distribution of Travis Taylor Loggingand Chipping, Phase I & II. Travis TaylorLogging & Chipping. C.F. de Hoop.$16,387

Analysis of Productivity, Efficiency andCost Distribution of Slaughter LoggingLLC, Phase I & II. C.F. de Hoop. $16,387

Publications de Hoop, C.F. 2005. LSU AgCenter

and Travis Taylor Logging & Chippingare awarded a research grant from theU.S. Forest Service. The LouisianaLogger 10(3):8. Louisiana LoggingCouncil, Alexandria, LA.

de Hoop, C.F. 2005. Learning First AidOnce is Enough, Right? The LouisianaLogger 10(3):10. Louisiana LoggingCouncil, Alexandria, LA.

de Hoop, C.F. 2005. 2004 StrategicPartnership Accidents. The LouisianaLogger 10(2):9. Louisiana LoggingCouncil, Alexandria, LA.

de Hoop, C.F. 2005. AccidentResearch Helps Save Lives of Loggers.Research Brief # 33, Louisiana ForestProducts Development Center, School ofRenewable Natural Resources; Louisi-ana Agricultural Experiment Station,Louisiana State University AgriculturalCenter, Baton Rouge, LA. 2pp.

de Hoop, C.F. 2005. AccidentResearch Helps Save Loggers’ Lives.Impact Statement. LSU AgCenter. 1 p.http://www.lsuagcenter.com/impacts/publicold.asp?id=785

de Hoop, C.F. 2005. Follow themanual for safe operations. The Louisi-ana Logger 10(1):9. Louisiana LoggingCouncil, Alexandria, LA.

de Hoop, C.F., W.R. Smith, A.M.Sterling and J.T. Houston, Jr. 2005.Comparison of soybean wax firelogs,commercial firelogs and firewood withrespect to air emissions. Forest ProductsJournal 55(5):52-58.

de Hoop,C.F., A. Hanumappa-Reddy,R.H. Dupré and W.R. Smith. 2005.Survey of Forest Fuel Reduction Manag-ers. Proceedings of the Annual Meetingof the Council On Forest Engineeringheld at Fortuna, Calif., July 11-14.Corvallis, OR. 7pp.

Dupré, R.H., C. Brown, M.J. Donnelly,F. Aghazadeh and C.F. de Hoop. 2005.

An Ergonomic Comparison of SwedishStandards for Forest Machines toAmerican-Made Forest Machines.Biographies & Abstracts, Forest ProductsSociety 59th International Conventionheld in Québec, Canada. Madison, WI.P. 49.

de Hoop, C.F., A.F. Egan, W.D. Greeneand J.H. Mayo. 2004. Are “PreferredSupplier” Contractors Representative ofthe Logging Business Community? ASurvey Analysis. Business ResearchYearbook 21:230-234. InternationalAcademy of Business Disciplines.McNaughton & Gunn, Inc., Saline, MI48176. ISBN 1-889754-08-0.

Greene, W.D., J.H. Mayo, C.F. deHoop, A.F. Egan. 2004. Causes andCosts of Unused Logging ProductionCapacity in the Southern USA andMaine. Forest Products Journal54(5):29-37.

de Hoop, C.F., and A.J. Lefort, Jr.2004. Loggers and Bureaucrats: AStrategic Partnership Improves AccidentRecording and Safety Education.Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of theCouncil On Forest Engineering held atHot Springs, Arkansas, April 28-29.Corvallis, OR. 5pp. www.cofe.org .

deHoop, C.F., W.R. Smith, A.Hanumappa-Reddy, J.N. Lee, R.Y. Vun,R.H. Dupré, M. White, and T. Dufour.2004. Final Report, Reduction of ForestFuel Loading in Louisiana. LouisianaForest Products Development Center,LSU AgCenter. Baton Rouge, LA.187pp.

de Hoop, Cornelis F., Jody Campo andClyde M. Todd, Jr. (compilers). 2004.Advanced Logging Safety. LouisianaLogging Council and Louisiana ForestryAssociation. Alexandria, LA. 80 pp.

Shupe, T.F. and W.R. Smith. 2005. Aninternational assessment of an internet-based technology transfer program onwood pallet phytosanitation. WestVirginia University. $12,000.

Shupe, T.F. 2005. Near infraredinvestigation of wood quality factors.USDA Forest Service. $79,629.

Shupe, T.F. 2005. Louisiana naturalresources symposium sponsorship.Various Sponsors. $14,100.

Shupe, T.F. and Q. Wu. 2005. Wooddurability testing. Various Sponsors.$20,500.

Shupe, T.F. and Q. Wu. 2005.Formosan subterranean termite wooddurability research. LSU AgCenterSpecial Grant. 29,000.

Publications Shupe, T.F., Francisco X. Aguilar,

Richard Vlosky, Mirna Belisle, and ArturoChavez. 2005. “Wood Properties ofSelected Lesser-Used Honduran WoodSpecies.” Journal of Tropical ForestScience. Malaysia. 17(3):349-357

Dunn, M.A., R.P. Vlosky, and T.F.Shupe. 2005. What homebuilders thinkof southern yellow pine lumber. Louisi-ana Agriculture 48(1):11-12.

Bogren, R. and T.F. Shupe. 2005.Keeping treated wood out of landfills.Louisiana Agriculture 48(3):25.

Shupe, T.F. and R. Bogren. 2005.Recycling preservative-treated wood.LSU AgCenter Fact Sheet. 2 p.

Via, B.K., C. So, T.F. Shupe, M. Stine,and L.H. Groom. 2005. Capability ofnear infrared spectroscopy to monitor air-dry density distribution and variation ofwood. Wood and Fiber Science.37(3):394-402.

Via, B.K., T.F. Shupe, M. Stine, C.L. So,and L.H. Groom. 2005. Tracheid lengthprediction in Pinus palustris by means ofnear infrared spectroscopy: the influenceof age. Holz als Roh- und Werkstoff.63:231-236.

Via, B.K., I.D. Hartley, T.F. Shupe, S.Y.Lee, and B.G. Lee. 2005. The swellingresponse of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda)juvenile wood to water submersion.Korean J. Wood Science and Technol-ogy. 33(2):17-23.

Via, B.K., Q. Wu, I.D. Hartley, T.F.Shupe, S.Y. Lee, and B.G. Lee. 2005.Theoretical sensitivity of warp to varyinglayer thickness in 5-layer plywood.Korean J. Wood Science and Technol-ogy. 33(2): 24-28.

Shupe, T.F. and W.J. Catallo. 2005.Hydrothermal processing of Chinesetallow tree (Triadica sebifera syn. Sapiumsebiferum) biomass. Wood and FiberScience. 37(3).

Grants and Contracts Shupe, T.F. and W.R. Smith. 2004.

Moisture meter correction factors for ACQtreated wood. Elder Wood PreservingCo. $5,000.

Shupe, T.F. 2004. 3-D engineeredfiberboard project. USDA Forest Service,Forest Products Laboratory. $65,065.

Shupe, T.F. and S. Lee. 2005.Heterogeneous nucleation on the fibersurface of a semicrystalline polymer.National Science Foundation EPSCoRLinks with Industry, Research Centers,and National Laboratories (LINK) andLouisiana Board of Regents. $6,102.

Shupe, T.F. 2005. Long-term wooddecay and rot testing. CraftMaster.$5,000.

9News at the Center

Qinglin Wu

Piao, C., T.F. Shupe, R.C. Tang, andC.Y. Hse. 2005. Finite element analysesof wood laminated composite poles.Wood and Fiber Science. 37(3): 535-541.

Pugel, A.D., E. W. Price, C. Y. Hse, andT.F. Shupe. 2004. Composites fromsouthern pine juvenile wood part 3:Juvenile and mature wood furnishmixtures. Forest Products Journal.54(1):47-52.

Via, B.K., M. Stine, and T.F. Shupe, C.L.So, and L.H. Groom. 2004. Geneticimprovement of fiber length and coarse-ness based on paper product perfor-mance and material variability — Areview. International Association ofWood Anatomists Journal. 25(4):401-414.

Lee, S.Y., T.F. Shupe, and C.Y. Hse.2004. Utilization of Chinese tallow treeand bagasse for medium densityfiberboard. Forest Products Journal.54(12):71-76.

Piao, C., T.F. Shupe, and C.Y. Hse.2004. Mechanical properties of small-scale wood laminated composite poles.Wood and Fiber Science. 36(4):536-546.

Li, X., T.F. Shupe, and C.Y. Hse. 2004.Physical and mechanical properties ofmedium density fibreboards frombamboo and tallow fibres. Journal ofBamboo and Rattan. 3(4):383-392.

Shupe, T.F., W.R. Smith, and S.Rollosan. (eds.). 2004. Palletphytosaniatiaon for international trade.USDA Forest Service and LimestoneBluffs RC&D. ISBN: 0-9763632-0-8.Princeton, WV.

Shupe, T.F. and M.A. Dunn. 2005.Louisiana Natural Resources Sympo-sium Proceedings. LSU AgCenter.ISBN 0-9763632-1-6. Baton Rouge, LA.160 p.

Li, X., T.F. Shupe, and C.Y. Hse. 2004.Specific gravity and bending propertiesof bamboo (Phyllostachys pubescene)grown in central Louisiana. In: 4th

Regional Coordination Council of WoodScience (RCCWS) International Sympo-sium. Wood Structure, Properties, andQuality ‘04. October 13-16, 2004. St.Petersburg, Russia. pp. 269-271.

Hse, C.Y., C. Piao, T.F. Shupe, andR.C. Tang. 2004. Development ofbamboo-like structural wood compositepoles: A finite element analysis. In: 4th

Regional Coordination Council of WoodScience (RCCWS) International Sympo-sium. Wood Structure, Properties, andQuality ‘04. October 13-16, 2004. St.Petersburg, Russia. pp. 387-389.

Piao, C., T.F. Shupe, C.Y. Hse, andR.C. Tang. 2004. Nondestructive test of

Young’s moduli of full-size woodlaminated composite poles by freetransverse vibration. In: Y. Hua (ed.).7th Pacific Rim Bio-based CompositesSymposium. Oct. 31- Nov. 2, 2004.Nanjing, P.R. China. Nanjing ForestryUniversity. Vol. 2. pp. 291-298.

Piao, C., T.F. Shupe, C.Y. Hse. 2004.Effects of a new caul system on strengthand stability of structural flakeboard. In:Y. Hua (ed.). 7th Pacific Rim Bio-basedComposites Symposium. Oct. 31- Nov. 2,2004. Nanjing, P.R. China. NanjingForestry University. Vol. 2. pp. 316-326.

Piao, C., T.F. Shupe, C.Y. Hse, and J.Tang. 2004. Bio-composites made frompine straw. In: Y. Hua (ed.). 7th PacificRim Bio-based Composites Symposium.Oct. 31- Nov. 2, 2004. Nanjing, P.R.China. Nanjing Forestry University. Vol.1. pp. 288-296.

Shupe, T.F. and R.P. Vlosky. 2004. Acomparison of U.S. home builder-newhome homeowner perceptions andconcerns about mold. In: Conferenceon Wood-Frame Housing Durability andDisaster Issues. Forest Products SocietyOctober 4-6, 2004. Las Vegas, NV. pp.191-200.

Shupe, T.F. 2004. Development ofhigh value-added products to reduceforest fuel loading in Louisiana forests.Sponsor report. Louisiana Department ofAgriculture and Forestry. 14 p.

Shupe, T.F. and W.R. Smith. 2005.Final report - A regional educationalprogram to increase awareness of woodpackaging phytosanitary requirementsfor international trade. Limestone BluffsRC&D. 8 p.

37(1):95-111. Lu, J.Z., Q. Wu, and I.I. Negulescu.

2005. Maleated wood fiber-high densitypolyethylene composites: coupling agentperformance. Journal of Applied PolymerScience 96:93-102.

Wu, Q., Cai, Z., and J.N. Lee. 2005.Tensile and dimensional properties ofwood strands made from plantationsouthern pine lumber. Forest ProductsJournal 52(2):1-6.

Smith, W.R., and Q. Wu. 2005. Durabil-ity improvement for structural woodcomposites- Current state of the art.Forest Products Journal 52(2):8-17.

Xu. X., Q. Wu, and D. Zhou. 2005.Kenaf core composites: a laboratory trial.Journal of Nanjing Forestry University29(1):10-16.

Lu, J.Z., Q. Wu, and I.I. Negulescu.2005. Maleated wood fiber-high densitypolyethylene composites: couplingmechanisms and interfacial characteriza-tion. Composite Interfaces 12 (1-2):125-140.

Zhang, B., Q. Wu, L. Wang, and G Han.2005. Characterization of Internal VoidStructure of Strand-Based Wood Com-posites Using X-Ray Tomography andDigital Tools. In Proc. the McMat2005 –The 2005 joint ASME/ASCE/SESConference on Mechanics and Materials.June 1-3, 2005. Baton Rouge, LA. Paper255.

Zhang, B., Q. Wu, L. Wang, And G Han.2005. The Influence of In-Plane DensityVariation On Engineering Properties ofOriented Strandboard: A Finite ElementSimulation. In Proc. the McMat2005 –The 2005 joint ASME/ASCE/SESConference on Mechanics and Materials.June 1-3, 2005. Baton Rouge, LA. Paper257.

Wu, Qinglin, Richard P. Vlosky,Michael E. Salassi and Benjamin L.Legendre. 2005. “The Economic Feasi-bility of Using Sugar Cane Rind forStructural Composite Board Productionin Louisiana.” Sponsor Report. LouisianaForest Products Development Center,Louisiana State University AgriculturalCenter. June. 71 pages.

Grants and Contracts Extruded natural fiber and polymer

composites as advanced engineeredmaterials. Louisiana Education QualitySupport Fund – Industrial Tie. $150,000.Industrial match: $60,000.

Wu, Q. and T.F. Shupe. 2005. Wooddurability testing. Industry Sponsor.$9,500.

Publications Via, B.K., Q. Wu, I.D. Hartley, T.F.

Shupe, S.Y. Lee, and B.G. Lee. 2005.Theoretical sensitivity of warp to varyinglayer thickness in 5-layer plywood.Korean J. Wood Science and Technol-ogy. 33(2): 24-28.

Lu, J.Z., and Q. Wu. 2005. Surface andinterfacial characterization of wood-PVCcomposites: imaging morphology andwetting behavior. Wood Fiber Science

Richard P. VloskyGrants and Contracts

Spatial Mapping and Analysis ofLouisiana Forest Products Manufactur-ers. Louisiana Department of Agricultureand Forestry. $12,000.(Co-Investigator:Todd Shupe)

Enhancing Louisiana Forest ProductsIndustry Development and Competitive-ness. Louisiana Board of Regents-

10 News at the CenterEnhancement Program. $83,700. (Co-Investigators:Ramesh Kolluru, MarkSmith)

Certified Forests: Preparing PrivateLandowners for the Future. SARE:Sustainable Agriculture Research &Education. $113,398. (Co-Investigators:Glenn Hughes, Michael Dunn)

A Strategic Analysis of the U.S. TreatedWood Industry. Southern Forest ProductsAssociation. $23,287. (Co-Investigators:James M. Fannin, Todd F. Shupe)

Identifying Employment Structures andTraining Needs in the Louisiana WoodProducts Industry. La. Governor’s Officeof Rural Development, La. Dept. ofLabor, La. Dept. of Economic Develop-ment. $15,000.

Developing a Strategic Framework forCertified Tropical Wood Products in theUnited States. Metafore.10,000.

Publications Duery, Shadia and Richard P. Vlosky.

2005. “Bolivia: A Global Leader inCertification.” Forest Products Journal.Cover and Feature Article.

Ince, Peter, Sanna Kallioranta andRichard Vlosky. 2005. “ ICT and thePaperboard and Packaging Industry”. In:Information Technology in the ForestSector. Laurie Hetemaki and StenNilsson. (Eds.). International Union ofForest Research Organizations (IUFRO),Vienna. ISBN 3-901347-56-9

Vlosky, Richard P., Francisco Aguilarand Shadia Duery. 2005. “Future Statusand Potential Future Developments forForest Certification.” Proceedings of theLouisiana Natural Resources Sympo-sium. Shupe, T.F. and M.A. Dunn. (Eds.).2005. LSU AgCenter. Baton Rouge, LA.ISBN 0-9763632-1-6

Donkor, B.N, R.P. Vlosky and A. Attah.2005. “Appraisal of Government Interven-tions for Diversification of SpeciesUtilization in Forest Product Exports:Lessons from Ghana.” Journal ofInstitute of Wood Science. 17(1):1-10.Issue 97. Summer 2005.(UK)

Aguilar, Francisco X. and Richard P.Vlosky. 2005. “The Forest Sector inEcuador: The Current Situation and aFramework for Sustainable Develop-ment.” Louisiana Forest ProductsDevelopment Center Working Paper #69.July 26.

Vlosky, Richard and ChristopherGaston. 2005. “Better Than Bugs.”Timber Processing. April. Pp. 28-32.

Vlosky, R.P. and T.F. Shupe. 2005. “Implications for the future oftreated wood from the perspective of fourU.S. demand sectors.” Proceedings of American Wood Preservers AssociationAnnual Meeting. New Orleans, LA. May15-17, 2005.

Gaston, Christopher, Richard P.Vlosky, Todd F. Shupe, Francisco X.Aguilar, Sanna Kallioranta, Ben NathanDonkor. 2005. “Attitudes and Awarenessabout Treated Wood Products: The U.S.South Homeowner Perspective.“Louisiana Forest Products DevelopmentCenter Working Paper #68. April 17.

Vlosky, R.P. and Francisco X. Aguilar.2004. “El Sector de Productos Forestalesen Ecuador: Análisis y recomendacionespara su desarrollo.” Revista Alternativas.Universidad Catolica de Santiago deGuayaquil, Ecuador. 6(8):22-26

Reyes, Rudy, Arturo Chávez, FranciscoX. Aguilar and Richard Vlosky. 2004.“Diagnóstico y análisis de mercadeo depequeñas y medianas empresastransformadoras de madera en

Siguatepeque y San Pedro Sula,Honduras”. Recursos Naturales yAmbiente. Turrialba, Costa Rica. No.42:86-92.

Vlosky, Richard P. and David T.Wilson. 2004. “Technology in theClassroom: Teaching Business Market-ing in the Twenty-First Century.” Part V:Alternative Technologies. Fundamentalsof Business Marketing Education-AGuide for University-Level Faculty andPolicymakers. J. David Lichtenthal,Editor. Best Business Books. HawthornePress. New York, London, Oxford. ISBN0-7890-0121-7.

Vlosky, Richard P. and Todd F. Shupe.2004. “Buyer Perceptions and Purchas-ing Patterns Related to Treated WoodUse in Children’s Playground Equip-ment.” Forest Products Journal.54(12):307-312.

Holmes, Timothy P, John Carlson andRichard P. Vlosky. 2004. “An ExploratoryComparison of the Internet Use By SmallWood Products Manufacturers intheNorth Adirondack Region of New Yorkand the State of Louisiana.” ForestProducts Journal. 54(12):277-282

Vlosky, Richard P. and Todd F. Shupe.2004. “An Exploratory Study of HomeBuilder, New-Home Home Owner andReal Estate Agent Perceptions andAttitudes about Mold.” Forest ProductsJournal. 54(12):289-295

Vlosky, Richard P. and Todd F. Shupe.2004. “What Do U.S. Homebuilders ThinkAbout Treated Wood?” Forest ProductsJournal. 54(10):41-48

Shook, Steven R., Richard P. Vloskyand Sanna M. Kallioranta. 2004. “WhyDid Forest Industry Dot.coms Fail?”.Forest Products Journal. 54(10):35-40

Heng Gao started a doctoralprogram under the guidance of Dr.Todd Shupe in January 2005. Sheearned her M.S. degree in Environmen-tal Engineering at the Beijing Instituteof Technology in Beijing, China. Herdoctoral work is examining theantioxidant activity of extracts fromthe heartwood, sapwood, inner barkand bark of Port-Orford-Cedar. Thisresearch has diverse potential applica-tions such as human health improve-ment (i.e., anti-cancer agents) andenvironmentally friendly woodpreservatives.

New Graduate Students, Post-Docs and Research AssociatesLanying Lin is a new research

associate for Dr. Shupe working on woodcarbonization. She is a research associateat the Chinese Academy of Forestry(CAF) in Bejing, China, and is pursuingher Ph.D. degree at CAF. Wenjing Kuois an associate professor also at CAFworking with Dr. Shupe on wood-plasticcomposites. They are the latest in a longhistory of collaborative research ex-change between the LFPDC and CAFinitially established in a Memorandum ofUnderstanding between the LSUAgCenter and CAF in 1999.

Dr. Yong Lei – Postdoc Research

Associate, Wood/natural fiber polymercomposites. Dr. Lei holds a Ph.D. inpolymer chemistry from Sichun Univer-sity, Chengdu, China. He is workingprojects developing natural fiberreinforced plastics composites.

Dr. Weihong Guo – Postdoc Re-search Associate. Wood/natural fiberpolymer composites. Dr. Guo holds aPh.D. in polymer engineering from EastChina University of Science and Tech-nology, Shanghai, China. She will beworking projects developing co-polymercomposites from recycled plastics

(continued on page11)

11

years because they become brittle withage.

Because the most commonly injuredbody parts are the legs, the next mostimportant piece of protective equipmentis for leg protection. Leg protection ismost commonly provided in the form ofsaw chaps. These chaps have multiplelayers of KEVLAR® or ballistic nylon,similar to bullet-proof vests, that areeasily drawn into the saw by the sawteeth. Once the material is drawn into thesaw, it stops the chain from running. Ipersonally know two occasionalchainsaw users who prevented a severeinjury to the leg because they werewearing saw chaps. The cost of thesechaps, about $70, is cheaper than adoctor’s visit. Many loggers will tell youthat saw chaps are hot in summer, butstill worth wearing because of theprotection they provide.

Pants with saw-resistant materialsewn in are also available, but they aredifficult to find.

A person’s feet should also beprotected. Foot protection is technicallymore difficult. Chainsaw-protectiveboots cost $150 to $400 per pair. Despitetheir cost, they are not as effective as legprotection because of natural designlimitations. One solution for the occa-sional user is a protective overshoecalled the SawJammer®. For information,call 1-800-969-9276.

The most economical solution is aballistic nylon sock, available fromLabonville; see contact info below. Thissock requires use of a boot that is severalsizes larger. Stout rubber boots that havethe saw protection molded in are themost effective because the saw teeth havedifficulty biting into rubber. By contrast,

chainsaws cut very easily into heavyleather.

Hearing protection is also veryimportant. Operating a properly function-ing chainsaw for more than two hourswithout hearing protection will beginpermanent hearing loss. If the muffler isremoved, permanent hearing loss willstart in 15 minutes. Hearing protectioncomes in two forms – ear plugs and earmuffs. Muffs are slightly more effectivethan plugs and do not aggravate earwaxbuildup. Either kind works well withnormal chainsaw use.

Because chainsaws spray small woodchips in all directions, some kind of eyeprotection is needed. Common safetyglasses, goggles and face screens areeffective. In hot weather, perspiration cancause fogging of goggles and faceshields. Luckily, screens or glasses thatwrap around to the side of the eye areeffective.

For about $45, one can purchase achainsaw helmet system, a popular one isfound at www.peltor.com. This is ahardhat with earmuffs and face screenattached. The muffs and screen can beflipped out of the way easily when notneeded. This is a very convenientpackage for occasional users, as well asprofessionals. The major drawback is thatthe muffs are hot during Louisiana’ssummers.

A popular and effective alternativein hot weather is an ordinary hardhat, earplugs, and the wrap-around sunglassesthat are stylish today.

Other types of Personal ProtectiveEquipment for chainsaw users includegloves and upper body protection, suchas vests. Gloves are available that have aballistic nylon lining on the back

Personal Protective Equipment isavailable from most dealers who sellchainsaws and from catalogs, such as:

Storm Cleanup(continued from page 1)

Construction Safety Prod-ucts, Shreveport, LA, 800-592-6940, www.cspforestry.com

Forestry Suppliers, Jackson, MS,800-647-5368, www.forestry-suppliers.com

Ben Meadows, Atlanta, GA, 800-241-6401, www.benmeadows.com

Bailey’s, California and Tennessee,800-322-4539, www.baileys-online.com

Forester’s Friend, Pennsylvania, 800-782-2407, www.forestersfriend.com

Labonville, New Hampshire, 800-764-9969, www.labonville.com

Being properly outfitted forchainsaw use is only the beginning ofchainsaw safety. Proper training, fueling,starting, cutting techniques and mainte-nance are all important, too.

There are several good publicationson chainsaw safety and use, but none ofthem are very commonly available. Websites on chainsaw safety are more easilyaccessed. North Dakota StateUniversity’s Extension Service has anexcellent Web site on the topic:

http://www.ag.ndsu.nodak.edu/abeng/links/safety.htm#top

This Web site is good because it haslinks to several particularly good Websites. OSHA also has a good Web site(www.osha.gov – click on “L”, then go to“Logging Technical Advisor”). TheOSHA Web site also has other safetyinformation on storm cleanup.

Many chainsaw manufacturers offergood safety information on their Websites. Some also carry their own lines ofchainsaw PPE. Some professional loggerassociations (such aswww.laforestry.com,www.maineloggers.org andwww.americanloggers.org ) also havelinks to safety sites.

For other information on disastermanagement, go to http://www.lsuagcenter.com .

All chainsaw users should obtainand wear proper PPE to reduce thechance of serious injury. Obtain thembefore cleaning up storm-damaged trees.They also make excellent Christmaswish-list items for the firewood season.

For more information contactCornelis F. de Hoop,cdehoop@agcenter.lsu.eduBrand names and businesses namedherein are for the convenience of thereader only and are not endorsements.Businesses that market or manufacturechainsaw PPE that are not included inthis article are encouraged to contact theauthor so that a more comprehensive listcan be presented to loggers and casualchainsaw users in the future.

reinforced with wood/natural fibers.Yao Fei – Ph.D. Student. Wood/

natural fiber polymer composites. Yaoholds an M.S. degree from NanjingForestry University, Nanjing, China. Hewill be working on mechanical perfor-mance of polymer composite reinforcedwith wood and straw fibers.

Yanjun Xu – Ph.D. student. Wood/natural fiber polymer composites. Xuholds an MS degree from SichunUniversity, Chengdu, China. He will beworking on composite interface analysis.

Zhenyang Wang – Ph.D. student.

Wood/natural fiber polymer composites.Wang holds an M.S. degree fromNortheast Forestry University. He will beworking on wood modification throughchemical treatments and carbonizationprocesses.

Priyan Perera is a new M.S. studentfrom Sri Lanka working in ForestCertification. Priyan’s thesis research ison small non-industrial private landown-ers' perceptions and drivers to participatein certification. His study examines theseissues for forest landowners in Louisianaand Mississippi.

(continued from page10)

LFPDC FACULTY & STAFFLSU

Rich Vlosky Director and ForestProducts Marketing

Niels de Hoop Environmental and SafetyQinglin Wu Wood ProcessingTodd Shupe Material PropertiesPat Lefeaux Administrative Assistant

LA TechMark Gibson Material PropertiesGeorge Grozdits Research Associate

Louisiana State University Agricultural CenterWilliam B. Richardson, ChancellorLouisiana Agricultural Experiment Station

David J. Boethel, Vice Chancellor and DirectorLouisiana Cooperative Extension Service

Paul D. Coreil, Vice Chancellor and DirectorSchool of Renewable Natural Resources

William E. Kelso, Interim DirectorLouisiana Forest Products Development Center

Richard Vlosky, DirectorRenewable Natural Resources BuildingBaton Rouge, LA 70803-6202Tel (225) 578-4155 Fax (225) 578-4251www.rnr.lsu.edu/lfpdc

The LSU AgCenter provides equal opportunities inprograms and employment.

Produced by LSU AgCenter Communications

Non-profit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDPermit No.733

Baton Rouge, LALouisiana Forest Products Development CenterRenewable Natural Resources BuildingLouisiana State UniversityBaton Rouge, LA 70803-6202

LSU AgCenter Hurricane RecoveryEfforts for Forest Industry

LSU AgCenter faculty members are providing leadership for the Louisianaforest products industry as a result of hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Dr. Richard Vlosky of the LSU AgCenter’s Louisiana Forest Products Devel-opment Center said many faculty members from the School of Renewable NaturalResources, Louisiana Forest Products Development Center, Department of Agricul-tural Economics and Agribusiness, and the Southeast Region have been activelyinvolved in the recovery effort and attending various meetings throughout thehurricane impacted area to provide information to forest industry, loggers andprivate non-industrial forest landowners.

The Louisiana Forestry Association and Louisiana Department of Agricultureand Forestry organized a meeting in Hammond to form committees to investigatevarious aspects of the recovery process such as communications, legislative policy,wood utilization, etc. LSU AgCenter faculty members are participating in thesecommittees and co-chairing a committee on data collection and reporting. Dr. KurtGuidry, an associate professor in the LSU AgCenter’s Agricultural EconomicsDepartment, led the effort to ascertain the economic impacts of the two storms.

The economic impact on the Louisiana forest sector was determined to beapproximately $611 million and $256 million for Katrina and Rita, respectively.In addition, LSU AgCenter Chancellor William B. Richardson has established atask force to address hurricane recovery efforts and develop strategies across allsectors served by the AgCenter. Vlosky is leading the forest sector effort on thistask force. For more information, please visit www.lsuagcenter.com,wwwlaforestry.com, http://www.ldaf.state.la.us/, and http://sref.info/. For moreinformation, contact Dr. Todd Shupe at tshupe@agcenter.lsu.edu, or Vlosky atrvlosky@agcenter.lsu.edu.