SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CHAINSAW LOGGING

1

• SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CHAINSAW LOGGING

CONVERSION STUDY
2
BACKGROUND

• 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 order 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.

3
OBJECTIVES

• To determine the conversion recovery of raw logs
  into saleable lumber for the local and export
  markets.
• To assess lumber recovery using conventional
  methods and best practices to compare actual
  recovery rates with what could be potentially
  recovered.
• To determine the grade and volume of lumber after
  sawing from chainsaw operations and static
  sawmills.

4
STUDY SITE

• Criteria 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

5
Overview of the study area
SITE 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

6
Overview 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

7

• 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

8
METHODOLOGY

• Preparation
• Inventory
• Conversion team
• Selection of trees
• Felling/tagging
• Data collection (Logs)
• Grading
• Measurements
• Waste

9

• 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

10
(No Transcript)
11
DATA 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

12
RESULTS
Chainsawn 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
13
RESULTS CONTD
Mill-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
14
ANALYSIS

• The mean number of merchantable boards cut per
  log was significantly greater (plt0.05) from the
  chainsawn logs (27.9) than the mill-cut logs.
• With the exception of nominal volume recovery,
  mill-cut recovery is higher than chainsawn
  lumber, but this is only significantly so for
  GR04-volume recovery.

15
ANALYSIS

• For chainsawn lumber there is no significant
  difference between the actual lumber volume
  recovery and the nominal volume recovery for Mill
  B, whereas the difference is significant for
  mill-cut lumber (plt0.05) for Mill A.
• In both cases, GR04-graded lumber volume is
  significantly lower than actual lumber cut
  (plt0.001 and plt0.05 for chainsawn and mill-cut
  lumber respectively). GR04-nominal lumber volume
  recovery is significantly lower than other
  recovery volumes with the exception of GR04
  chainsawn lumber.
• The mean proportion of GR04 reject boards, by
  number, is significantly greater (plt0.05) from
  chainsawn logs (27.5) than mill-cut logs
  (16.2), though there is marked variation among
  study sites.

16
ANALYSIS

• For chainsawn lumber there was a pattern between
  typical size of board cut and recovery with a
  lower recovery when 2-boards alone were cut
  (37.6) compared with 1 boards (42.9 n.s.) or
  mixtures of 1 and 2 (47.4 Plt0.05).
• For mill-sawn lumber there was no relationship
  between number of boards cut or mean
  cross-sectional area of boards and actual volume
  recovery. However, there was a significant
  negative relationship between log volume and
  actual recovery (R -0.50 Flt0.005).
• When logs are separated by type of lumber cut
  there is a higher recovery from cutting box heart
  and 1 boards (53.4) or 2 boards (53.2) than
  cutting 1 and/or 2 boards alone (37.0
  Plt0.001).

17
ANALYSIS

• When an analysis was conducted by operator type
  the concessionaires method of sawing as opposed
  to the Forestry Training Centre method of sawing
  there was a consistently higher recovery (by
  between 5.13 and 7.49) across all categories
  from the FTC operators (though significantly so
  only for actual local market recovery and
  GR04/nominal recovery plt0.05).

18
CONCLUSIONS

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

19
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

• Based on the findings and analysis is evident
  that several factors influence the operator
  decision making process.
• These include the target market that the operator
  is selling to, the type of product that is
  produced to be sold on that market (by extension
  linked to the demand for that operators
  products), the size of the operation, the grade
  of product that is being demanded, economic
  returns for different products and community
  pressure.

20
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

• It was evident that large sawmills cut for
  specific orders for the export market that
  require GR04 grades typically of Select and
  Prime. Their focus is to get the highest recovery
  of the two highest grades and sell the offcuts to
  the local market.
• The chainsaw operators typically produce to
  sell or cut to order for the local market, which
  exercises an arbitrary grading standard. From
  observations of the cutting at the site, much of
  the rejected GR04 material that was considered
  acceptable to the local market, could have been
  resawn to produce a considerably higher volume of
  GR04 material.

21
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

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

22
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

• There was no clear trend or significant
  differences in mean recovery across the log
  quality classes in the chainsawn lumber study or
  the sawmill study, though generally low quality
  logs returned the lowest recovery of non-rejected
  graded (GR04) lumber.
• It was observed that in general the operators
  were very skilled in chainsaw ripping, it is
  clear that with further training volume and
  quality recovery from the logs would be improved.
  In addition, safety to the operator by having
  more control over the felling and ripping
  operations would be improved.

23
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

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

24
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

• The average merchantable percentage of lumber for
  the chainsaw operation is 3 lower that that of
  the static mills.
• The mean number of merchantable boards cut per
  log was significantly greater from the chainsawn
  logs than the mill-cut logs.
• With the exception of nominal volume recovery,
  mill-cut recovery is higher than chainsawn
  lumber, but this is only significantly so for
  GR04-volume recovery.

25
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

• For chainsawn lumber there is no significant
  difference between the actual lumber volume
  recovery and the nominal volume recovery for Mill
  B, whereas the difference is significant for
  mill-cut lumber for Mill A.
• In both cases, GR04-graded lumber volume is
  significantly lower than actual lumber cut.
  GR04-nominal lumber volume recovery is
  significantly lower than other recovery volumes
  with the exception of GR04 chainsawn lumber.

26
CONCLUSIONS CONTD

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

27
LESSONS LEARNED

• The selection of species, felling technique and
  market demand are influencing factors on the
  level of recovery.
• The location that is sampled, influences the
  findings since it affects cost, species
  composition, and demand among other factors.

28
LESSONS LEARNED CONTD

• The level of experience of chainsawyers, mill
  operators and felling crew influence the level of
  recovery.
• In chainsawing the selection of logs is less
  discriminatory that is the case in logging for
  sawing at static mills.
• A representative sample is vital for the
  formulation of more concrete data on recovery
  rates.