Adapting conventional harvesting equipment to small diameter stands - The Fritz Experiments
Document Type: Conference Proceedings
Author(s): L. Johnson
Editor(s): David M. Baumgartner; Leonard R. Johnson; Edward J. DePuit
Publication Year: 2002

Cataloging Information

  • cable yarding
  • harvesting
  • small diameter timber
  • whole tree
Partner Site(s):
Record Maintained By:
Record Last Modified: December 7, 2015
FRAMES Record Number: 7709


ANNOTATION: In this study, two units, one on steep slopes and one on gentle slopes, were harvested using variations to conventional harvesting systems in northeastern Washington. On the steep slope unit, cut-to-length processing and forwarding were observed on the steep slopes in small diameter timber. Adjacent stands were harvested using the cut-to-length processor and a feller-buncher, but were transported to the landing with a cable yarder. On the gentle slope units, cut-to-length harvesting at 40-foot trail spacing was compared to whole tree harvesting, a unit felled mechanically but processed at the forwarder trail, and a unit felled by hand but processed at the trail when trail spacing was set at 130 feet. Comparisons are made between production and cost for these system variations. Harvesting costs on the gentle slope units were significantly less than on the steep slopes. Whole tree harvesting was the least costly system. On steep slopes, the lowest costs were observed with the cut-to-length processor and forwarder, followed by the costs of cable yarding and bunched logs uphill. The processing and bunching provided by the cut-to length processor appeared to improve production of the cable yarder when handling small timber.

Johnson, L. 2002. Adapting conventional harvesting equipment to small diameter stands - The Fritz Experiments. In: Baumgartner, D.M.; Johnson, L.R.; DePuit, E.J. Small Diameter Timber: Resource Management, Manufacturing, and Markets, proceedings from conference held February 25-27, 2002 in Spokane, Washington. MISC0509 Pullman, WA: Washington State University Cooperative Extension. 268 p.