Skip to Main Content
U.S. Forest Service
Caring for the land and serving people

United States Department of Agriculture

Home > Search > Publication Information

  1. Share via EmailShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on Twitter
    Dislike this pubLike this pub
    Author(s): Paul M. Smith; Sudipta Dasmohapatra; William G. Luppold
    Date: 2004
    Source: Forest Products Journal. 52(5): 43-49.
    Publication Series: Scientific Journal (JRNL)
    Station: Northern Research Station
    PDF: View PDF  (816.72 KB)


    A mail survey of all identified hardwood sawmills in Pennsylvania was conducted in the fall of 2000 to better understand firm size, species used, origin of logs, processing technology employed, the hardwood lumber grades produced, and the value-added features performed by these sawmills in 1999. An adjusted response rate of 31 percent was obtained for the study's 161 usable surveys. Pennsylvania's sawmills produced approximately 1.3 billion board feet of hardwood lumber in 1999. Responding sawmills producing over 3 million board feet (MMBF) per year (1/3 of the firms) accounted for 80 percent of total production. Red and white oak comprised 40 percent of the log volume purchased by responding sawmills in 1999 followed by yellow-poplar (13%), cherry (13%), soft maple (9%), hard maple (7%), and ash (5%). Thirty-eight percent of responding sawmills employed foresters. The vast majority (80%) of hardwood logs were purchased from non-industrial private forest land, followed by state forests (10%), industrial private forests (9%), federal forests (1%), and municipal lands (1%). Circle headrigs were used by 75 percent of responding sawmills; however, two-thirds of very large firms (10 MMBF and greater) used band headrigs. Whereas only 35 percent of all Pennsylvania hardwood sawmills used a computer-aided headrig, nearly all (94%) of the largest sawmills sampled used computer-aided headrigs in 1999. Approximately 19 percent of the hardwood lumber produced by our study respondents in 1999 was First and Seconds (FAS)& Select (SEL) grade followed by No.1 Common(24%), No.2 Common (17%), No. 3A and 3B Common (8%), pallet grade (23%), tie grade (6%), and other (3%). The 16 largest sawmills (10 MMBF+) produced a significantly higher percent of FAS & SEL (30%) lumber grade in 1999 as compared to the study's smaller sawmills. NHLA grading was the most common value-added process performed by responding sawmills (47%) in 1999 followed by kiln-drying (30%), surfacing (30%), custom sorting (26%), end-coating (25%), and custom grading (21%).

    Publication Notes

    • Check the Northern Research Station web site to request a printed copy of this publication.
    • Our on-line publications are scanned and captured using Adobe Acrobat.
    • During the capture process some typographical errors may occur.
    • Please contact Sharon Hobrla, if you notice any errors which make this publication unusable.
    • We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
    • This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.


    Smith, Paul M.; Dasmohapatra, Sudipta; Luppold, William G. 2004. A profile of Pennsylvania''s hardwood sawmill industry. Forest Products Journal. 52(5): 43-49.

    Related Search

    XML: View XML
Show More
Show Fewer
Jump to Top of Page