Skip to Main Content
Mechanized or hand operations: which is less expensive for small timber?Author(s): Robert Rummber; John Klepac
Source: Small Diameter Timber: Resource Management, Manufacturing, and Markets, Spokane, Washington.
Publication Series: Miscellaneous Publication
PDF: View PDF (143.67 KB)
DescriptionTwo harvesting systems, one manual post-and-rail and one small-scale cut-to-length harvester, were compared in a lodgepole pine thinning. Elemental time study data were collected, along with estimates of residual stand damage. The harvester was about as productive as a manual crew of five. For material 5" and larger, the cost for felling, processing and piling small material with the harvester was less than the manual operation. However, the mechanized system resulted in considerably more residual stand damage.
- You may send email to email@example.com to request a hard copy of this publication.
- (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
- 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.
CitationRummber, Robert; Klepac, John. 2002. Mechanized or hand operations: which is less expensive for small timber?. Small Diameter Timber: Resource Management, Manufacturing, and Markets, Spokane, Washington.
Keywordscosts, cut-to-length, harvester, lodgepole pine
- Pulp quality from small-diameter trees.
- Response of advance lodgepole pine regeneration to overstory removal in eastern Idaho
- Relationship of seed microsite to germination and survival of lodgepole pine on high-elevation clearcuts in northeastern Utah
XML: View XML