SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CHAINSAW LOGGING

CONVERSION STUDY

BACKGROUNDBACKGROUND-This conversion project forms part of a larger international study investigating various aspects of chainsaw lumber production.

- In Guyana, the aim is to undertake four linked studies, in orderorder to contribute to the development of a set of guidelines that can be used to determine where chainsaw logging is a useful development intervention, and how chainsaw logging can be used to assist in the improvement of livelihoods.

OBJECTIVESOBJECTIVES To determine the conversion recovery of raw To determine the conversion recovery of raw

logs into saleable lumber for the local and export logs into saleable lumber for the local and export markets.markets.

To assess lumber recovery using conventional To assess lumber recovery using conventional methods and best practices to compare actual methods and best practices to compare actual recovery rates with what could be potentially recovery rates with what could be potentially recovered. recovered.

To determine the grade and volume of lumber To determine the grade and volume of lumber after sawing from chainsaw operations and static after sawing from chainsaw operations and static sawmills.sawmills.

STUDY SITESTUDY SITE

Criteria for selectionCriteria for selection

- Selection of area was based on the criteria that

it covers three strategic geographic locations

- The study sites therefore encompassed: a) A community forest area b) An individual SFP operator and an c) Indigenous community group (also a community forest

Overview of the study areaOverview of the study areaSITE A – Region 10

-This area is situated North East of central Guyana and has a total area of approximately 9,856 hectares with mix forest type.

- classified as a medium one compared to Timber Sales Agreement (TSA) and Wood Cutting Lease (WCL

- Production is based on orders from local lumber dealers

Overview of the study areaOverview of the study area

SITE B – Ituni Road This area is easily accessible through Ituni road.

It has an area size of approximately 2,904 hectares with Dakama Forest type which is found abundantly on white sand.

This concession holder markets his produce through his own lumberyard

SITE C – North Rupununi

-This concession is located on the Left Bank of the Essequibo River, Left Bank Rupununi River. It can be easily accessed from the road linking Linden, Mabura and Lethem or by the Essequibo River

- There are five major forest types within this concession

METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY Preparation: Preparation: - Inventory Inventory - Conversion teamConversion team- Selection of treesSelection of trees- Felling/taggingFelling/tagging Data collection (Logs):Data collection (Logs):- GradingGrading- MeasurementsMeasurements- WasteWaste

Lumber:

-Cutting pattern technique

- Grading

- Measurement

- Re-sawn and re-measure

- Waste (cutting & defects)

Mill cut lumber:

-Measurements of bucked logs

- Grading

- Marking of logs and lumber

- Grading of lumber

DATA ANALYSISDATA ANALYSIS

-Field data was entered into a customized spreadsheet for analysis.

-A second worksheet was used for entry of lumber and waste data which was linked to the log data worksheet in such a way as to allow simultaneous calculation of recovery statistics

RESULTSRESULTSChainsawn lumber

Lumber (merchantable)Actual GR04 Nominal GR04/Nominal

Site A 44.69% 30.67% 40.23% 26.60%

Site B 44.38% 33.65% 42.35% 32.06%

Site C 43.92% 34.43% 41.97% 32.95%

All 44.40% 32.72% 41.49% 30.23%

RESULTS CONT’DRESULTS CONT’DMill-cut lumber

Lumber (merchantable)Actual GR04 Nominal GR04/Nominal

Mill A 54.73% 46.95% 40.66% 34.81%

Mill B 40.10% 32.69% 39.53% 31.94%

All 47.03% 39.44% 40.07% 33.30%

ANALYSISANALYSIS

The mean number of merchantable boards cut The mean number of merchantable boards cut per log was significantly greater (p<0.05) from per log was significantly greater (p<0.05) from the chainsawn logs (27.9) than the mill-cut the chainsawn logs (27.9) than the mill-cut logs.logs.

With the exception of nominal volume With the exception of nominal volume recovery, mill-cut recovery is higher than recovery, mill-cut recovery is higher than chainsawn lumber, but this is only significantly chainsawn lumber, but this is only significantly so for GR04-volume recovery. so for GR04-volume recovery.

ANALYSISANALYSIS For chainsawn lumber there is no significant difference For chainsawn lumber there is no significant difference

between the actual lumber volume recovery and the between the actual lumber volume recovery and the nominal volume recovery for Mill B, whereas the nominal volume recovery for Mill B, whereas the difference is significant for mill-cut lumber (p<0.05) for difference is significant for mill-cut lumber (p<0.05) for Mill A. Mill A.

In both cases, GR04-graded lumber volume is In both cases, GR04-graded lumber volume is significantly lower than actual lumber cut (p<0.001 and significantly lower than actual lumber cut (p<0.001 and p<0.05 for chainsawn and mill-cut lumber p<0.05 for chainsawn and mill-cut lumber respectively). GR04-nominal lumber volume recovery respectively). GR04-nominal lumber volume recovery is significantly lower than other recovery volumes with is significantly lower than other recovery volumes with the exception of GR04 chainsawn lumber.the exception of GR04 chainsawn lumber.

The mean proportion of GR04 reject boards, by The mean proportion of GR04 reject boards, by number, is significantly greater (p<0.05) from number, is significantly greater (p<0.05) from chainsawn logs (27.5%) than mill-cut logs (16.2%), chainsawn logs (27.5%) than mill-cut logs (16.2%), though there is marked variation among study sites. though there is marked variation among study sites.

ANALYSISANALYSIS For chainsawn lumber there was a pattern between For chainsawn lumber there was a pattern between

typical size of board cut and recovery with a lower typical size of board cut and recovery with a lower recovery when 2”-boards alone were cut (37.6%) recovery when 2”-boards alone were cut (37.6%) compared with 1” boards (42.9%; n.s.) or mixtures of 1” compared with 1” boards (42.9%; n.s.) or mixtures of 1” and 2” (47.4%; P<0.05). and 2” (47.4%; P<0.05).

For mill-sawn lumber there was no relationship between For mill-sawn lumber there was no relationship between number of boards cut or mean cross-sectional area of number of boards cut or mean cross-sectional area of boards and actual volume recovery. However, there was boards and actual volume recovery. However, there was a significant negative relationship between log volume a significant negative relationship between log volume and actual % recovery (R = -0.50; F<0.005). and actual % recovery (R = -0.50; F<0.005).

When logs are separated by type of lumber cut there is a When logs are separated by type of lumber cut there is a higher recovery from cutting box heart and 1” boards higher recovery from cutting box heart and 1” boards (53.4%) or 2” boards (53.2%) than cutting 1” and/or 2” (53.4%) or 2” boards (53.2%) than cutting 1” and/or 2” boards alone (37.0%; P<0.001).boards alone (37.0%; P<0.001).

ANALYSISANALYSIS When an analysis was conducted by operator When an analysis was conducted by operator

type – the concessionaire’s method of sawing type – the concessionaire’s method of sawing as opposed to the Forestry Training Centre as opposed to the Forestry Training Centre method of sawing – there was a consistently method of sawing – there was a consistently higher recovery (by between 5.13% and higher recovery (by between 5.13% and 7.49%) across all categories from the FTC 7.49%) across all categories from the FTC operators (though significantly so only for operators (though significantly so only for actual local market recovery and actual local market recovery and GR04/nominal recovery; p<0.05).GR04/nominal recovery; p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS

For chainsaw lumber production the volume For chainsaw lumber production the volume recovery did not necessarily relate to value recovery did not necessarily relate to value recovery as illustrated by the relatively low rate recovery as illustrated by the relatively low rate of GR04-graded logs. In other words, the of GR04-graded logs. In other words, the tendency for chainsaw loggers to focus on the tendency for chainsaw loggers to focus on the less demanding local market may not be less demanding local market may not be optimizing the financial return from the log. optimizing the financial return from the log.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D Based on the findings and analysis is evident Based on the findings and analysis is evident

that several factors influence the operator that several factors influence the operator decision making process. decision making process.

These include the target market that the These include the target market that the operator is selling to, the type of product that is operator is selling to, the type of product that is produced to be sold on that market (by produced to be sold on that market (by extension linked to the demand for that extension linked to the demand for that operator’s products), the size of the operation, operator’s products), the size of the operation, the grade of product that is being demanded, the grade of product that is being demanded, economic returns for different products and economic returns for different products and community pressure. community pressure.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D It was evident that large sawmills cut for specific It was evident that large sawmills cut for specific

orders for the export market that require GR04 orders for the export market that require GR04 grades typically of Select and Prime. Their focus grades typically of Select and Prime. Their focus is to get the highest recovery of the two highest is to get the highest recovery of the two highest grades and sell the offcuts to the local market. grades and sell the offcuts to the local market.

The chainsaw operators typically “produce to sell” The chainsaw operators typically “produce to sell” or cut to order for the local market, which or cut to order for the local market, which exercises an arbitrary grading standard. From exercises an arbitrary grading standard. From observations of the cutting at the site, much of the observations of the cutting at the site, much of the rejected GR04 material that was considered rejected GR04 material that was considered acceptable to the local market, could have been acceptable to the local market, could have been resawn to produce a considerably higher volume resawn to produce a considerably higher volume of GR04 material. of GR04 material.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D

In general the operators were very skilled in In general the operators were very skilled in chainsaw ripping, it is clear that with further chainsaw ripping, it is clear that with further training volume and quality recovery from the training volume and quality recovery from the logs would be improved. In addition, safety to logs would be improved. In addition, safety to the operator by having more control over the the operator by having more control over the felling and ripping operations would be felling and ripping operations would be improved. improved.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D There was no clear trend or significant differences in There was no clear trend or significant differences in

mean recovery % across the log quality classes in mean recovery % across the log quality classes in the chainsawn lumber study or the sawmill study, the chainsawn lumber study or the sawmill study, though generally low quality logs returned the lowest though generally low quality logs returned the lowest recovery of non-rejected graded (GR04) lumber. recovery of non-rejected graded (GR04) lumber.

It was observed that in general the operators were It was observed that in general the operators were very skilled in chainsaw ripping, it is clear that with very skilled in chainsaw ripping, it is clear that with further training volume and quality recovery from the further training volume and quality recovery from the logs would be improved. In addition, safety to the logs would be improved. In addition, safety to the operator by having more control over the felling and operator by having more control over the felling and ripping operations would be improved.ripping operations would be improved.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D

Though recovery rates between chainsawn Though recovery rates between chainsawn and mill-sawn lumber have been compared and mill-sawn lumber have been compared these should be treated with caution as mill-these should be treated with caution as mill-sawn logs were not traced from the forest and sawn logs were not traced from the forest and because the two mill samples were cutting to because the two mill samples were cutting to specific orders (box-heart) that did not specific orders (box-heart) that did not correspond to the cutting dimensions in the correspond to the cutting dimensions in the chainsawn lumber.chainsawn lumber.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D The average merchantable percentage of The average merchantable percentage of

lumber for the chainsaw operation is 3% lower lumber for the chainsaw operation is 3% lower that that of the static mills. that that of the static mills.

The mean number of merchantable boards cut The mean number of merchantable boards cut per log was significantly greater from the per log was significantly greater from the chainsawn logs than the mill-cut logs. chainsawn logs than the mill-cut logs.

With the exception of nominal volume recovery, With the exception of nominal volume recovery, mill-cut recovery is higher than chainsawn mill-cut recovery is higher than chainsawn lumber, but this is only significantly so for GR04-lumber, but this is only significantly so for GR04-volume recovery. volume recovery.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D For chainsawn lumber there is no significant For chainsawn lumber there is no significant

difference between the actual lumber volume difference between the actual lumber volume recovery and the nominal volume recovery for recovery and the nominal volume recovery for Mill B, whereas the difference is significant for Mill B, whereas the difference is significant for mill-cut lumber for Mill A. mill-cut lumber for Mill A.

In both cases, GR04-graded lumber volume is In both cases, GR04-graded lumber volume is significantly lower than actual lumber cut. significantly lower than actual lumber cut. GR04-nominal lumber volume recovery is GR04-nominal lumber volume recovery is significantly lower than other recovery volumes significantly lower than other recovery volumes with the exception of GR04 chainsawn lumber. with the exception of GR04 chainsawn lumber.

CONCLUSIONS CONT’DCONCLUSIONS CONT’D

The mean proportion of GR04 reject The mean proportion of GR04 reject boards, by number, is significantly greater boards, by number, is significantly greater from chainsawn logs (27.5%) than mill-cut from chainsawn logs (27.5%) than mill-cut logs (16.2%), though there is marked logs (16.2%), though there is marked variation among study sites. variation among study sites.

LESSONS LEARNEDLESSONS LEARNED

The selection of species, felling technique The selection of species, felling technique and market demand are influencing factors and market demand are influencing factors on the level of recovery.on the level of recovery.

The location that is sampled, influences the The location that is sampled, influences the findings since it affects cost, species findings since it affects cost, species composition, and demand among other composition, and demand among other factors.factors.

LESSONS LEARNED LESSONS LEARNED CONT’DCONT’D

The level of experience of chainsawyers, mill The level of experience of chainsawyers, mill operators and felling crew influence the level of operators and felling crew influence the level of recovery.recovery.

In chainsawing the selection of logs is less In chainsawing the selection of logs is less discriminatory that is the case in logging for discriminatory that is the case in logging for sawing at static mills.sawing at static mills.

A representative sample is vital for the A representative sample is vital for the formulation of more concrete data on recovery formulation of more concrete data on recovery rates. rates.