Seasonal Impacts on Bark Loss for Douglas-fir and Ponderosa Pine Harvested on the Pacific Northwest Coast of the USA

Abstract Although only a few harvesting systems today intentionally remove bark prior to transporting logs to the mill, little is known about how much bark is lost during harvesting operations at different times of the year. Depending on where you are located in the forest to mill supply chain, the presence or absence of bark can be seen as a cost or a benefit. Understanding the magnitude of bark loss and the factors that affect it should lead to minimization of the costs and maximization of the benefits. Quantification of seasonal bark loss (expressed as a percentage of the surface area of the stem) for two commercial tree species was conducted monthly over a 10-month period. All assessments were carried out on Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine harvesting operations that were using mechanized processor heads with chains over rubber feed wheels. Over 400 stems were assessed. There was a substantial (up to five times) increase in bark loss during late spring and early summer compared with the winter season. We were also able to show that the amount of bark loss is species dependent, with Douglas-fir incurring more than twice the bark loss than found for ponderosa pine. It is possible that the distribution of bark loss along the stem is also species dependent; we found greater bark loss towards the top of the stem in ponderosa pine than towards the bottom of the stem, but no such trend for Douglas-fir.

[1]  Bruce R. Hartsough,et al.  Fiber Recovery with Chain Flail Delimbing/Debarking and Chipping of Hybrid Poplar , 2000 .

[2]  G. Murphy,et al.  Effects of bark thickness estimates on optimal log merchandising , 2006 .

[3]  Robert J. Ross,et al.  Nondestructive evaluation of wood , 1994 .

[4]  K. Lee,et al.  An investigation of the influence of harvesting practice on the development of blue-stain in Corsican pine logs , 1996 .

[5]  T. L. Laufenberg,et al.  Parallel-laminated veneer: processing and performance research review , 1983 .

[6]  H. Kubler,et al.  Natural loosening of the wood/bark bond: a review and synthesis , 1990 .

[7]  Robert J. Ross,et al.  Acoustic assessment of wood quality of raw forest materials - A path to increased profitability , 2007 .

[8]  Paul M. Smith,et al.  Wood residue utilization in Pennsylvania: 1988 vs. 2003. , 2007 .

[9]  David J. Dickinson,et al.  The role of mechanized harvesting in the development of bluestain in pine , 1999 .

[10]  Glen E. Murphy,et al.  EFFECTS OF BARK REMOVAL ON ACOUSTIC VELOCITY OF DOUGLAS-FIR LOGS , 2012 .

[11]  M. Philip,et al.  Measuring Trees and Forests , 1994 .

[12]  T. A. McMahon,et al.  Bark/Wood Bond Strength and its Association with Material and Environmental Variables , 2007 .

[13]  John W. Swanson,et al.  Bark and wood properties of pulpwood species as related to separation and segregation of chip/bark mixtures. Project 3212, report three: a progress report to members of Group Project 3212 , 1975 .

[14]  Timothy P. McDonald,et al.  POTENTIAL FOR SHARED LOG TRANSPORT SERVICES , 2001 .