. I.
la 3.
S???
Lida...
v

1.9.1.. . ,
.,._..............“6 .. .31.. :5.
.. 5......1! , .. L #:454.
.1: . .
. an. . ting...“
I. i. .
xx. .
. .5...
z
, 224..., ..
7S l.”~ l3 5
an 3.". .3 .
:1. :3
.1
a.

L:
... z:
” civic-p"
... a...
. .. :15... .21
.gfiLuuwraérx? tuwuu 9......“
, . ..!......... ..m.... ..
, Firs... a... 3!. .25.. .muuwv.?uu e,
. if .g.
, i. .
. :1
1 . -.
. .haunfiic...2:
.. :11; a

. LEN.-.
.3... .32..
.n: a a... .3.
t1... 8 .u. 1:. tags!
23.11;“: .t .333...
.1 53...... .
.5503

Lil;
I...

at If!!! m.
.. .. 23....
3.1.2.3..
. an... 3......
.9... .6 .1; ..
{.53. ...: in:
3.2.... .
.22.. 6....
3123....
379!

.W&
)\.
.. sumw...

2Pr§BuMJeL

.
~f1uq t.)
3:...i...s.;. e...

4:..;Sx!...l"\.

91.5.)... b.

.. bi... has.-.

i 3.. 2......qu t.
e. p . nus tn

N .

.3...

till}.

it

1 11,1.“

.. h .33.... 2.0.6... ~. .ulilxitir «a...
oi (i .

rairr‘xntyt 19...... .2

-
r {Fig

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. ..
L... ..
. 5.. . 5...... Q...
i...
. \
. 3:... .
3.2.4.93.“
al..XJc5;—.»l...£.
If,
,1 . ’v of.
singly...
9.55.3.1

.06... .3 ..

 

.. .. unsafimmwfinuwmw «L..l....-:.,.

..
.r v x
1.: 3:59.41

.2 a... 35%,...55
3...... 2.... .55.... . 4 l

 

ESHS

SOC)

Date

0-7 639

VERSITY Li

lllllllljflljllllImmmrmlllllll

106 1829

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Measuring the Perception of Scarcity of the Veneer Log
Resource in the Lake States, Illinois, and Indiana

presented by

Micheal McGuire

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Master of Science (1egree hi Forestry

 

 

gammy

Major professor

4/2 é/Zooo

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE ‘ DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11/00 chlRCJDaioDuopflS—p. 14

 

MEX

 

 

MEASURING THE PERCEPTION OF SCARCITY OF THE VENEER LOG
RESOURCE IN THE LAKE STATES, ILLINOIS, AND INDIANA
By

Michael McGuire

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
Department of Forestry

2000

UMI Number: 1401152

®

U1\/II

 

UMI Microform1401152

Copyright 2000 by Bell 8. Howell Information and Learning Company.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

 

Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
PO. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

)llq

 

MEASURING THE PERCEPTION OF SCARCITY OF THE VENEER LOG
RESOURCE IN THE LAKE STATES, ILLINOIS, AND INDIANA
By

Michael McGuire

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
Department of Forestry

2000

UMI Number: 1401152

U1\/II®

 

UMI Microform1401152
Copyright 2000 by Bell 8. Howell Information and Learning Company.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

 

Bell 8. Howell Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
PO. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

ME

 

 

 

ABSTRACT
MEASURING THE PERCEPTION OF SCARCITY OF THE VENEER LOG
RESOURCE IN THE LAKE STATES, ILLINOIS, AND INDIANA
By

Michael McGuire

Forest Industry professionals have expressed concern about physical scarcity and
diminishing quality in veneer logs of the preferred species’ contradicting USDA Forest
Service inventory results which report an expanding resource base. This study examined
factors influencing economic supply of select white oak, select red oak, hard maple, ash,
black cherry, and black walnut veneer logs in the Lake States, Illinois, and Indiana.
Increased competition due to international demand is placing additional pressure on
available inventory. Changing demographics are acting to reduce supply as non-timber
land uses increase in importance. Industry professionals were queried to quantify their
perception of scarcity and determine which factors they consider most important. The
dominant perception is that quality is decreasing. Profitable architectural and panel grade
veneer logs are perceived to be diminishing while furniture grade veneer logs are not.
Quantity is perceived to be decreasing in the large and medium diameter classes but
increasing in the small diameter classes. Expectation is for future real prices ten years
hence to increase between 20-30%. Factors for the perceived scarcity ranking highest in
importance were increased international demand, previous high grading, landowner
mistrust of loggers, and increased environmental regulations. Respondents agree that the

world demand for eastern hardwoods is strong and will continue to grow.

To my family,

Al, Ruth, Karen, Patty, Jeanie, Eileen, Tom, Mary, and Cathy

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I greatly appreciate the assistance I received from the many people who helped me
throughout this research effort. I would like to acknowledge Dr. James Stevens who
made this research possible by providing valuable guidance under the Michigan State
University Eastern Hardwood Utilization Program. I am grateful for the generous funding
provided by USDA/CREES Grant No: 96-34158-2697 under the Michigan State
University Bastem Hardwood Utilization Program and by the Michigan Agricultural

Experiment Station.

I am indebted to all of my committee members, Dr. Karen Potter-Witter, Dr. James
Stevens, Dr. Daniel Stynes, and Dr. Michael Vasievich for their guidance throughout the
entire study. All of these people have contributed to the success of this research effort.

I would particularly like to thank my major professor Dr. Karen Potter-Witter for her

undying patience and editorial proficiency.

Finally, I would like to thank all of the forestry graduate students whom I’ve interacted
with during this endeavor. Their friendship has enriched my graduate study experience.
Additionally, I would like to thank several close personal friends who helped me in many
ways contributing to the overall success of this study. Dr. Mel Koeling, Dr. Author
Stoner, Bruce and Dec Ann Davis, and John and Sally Wilson deserve my special thanks.

I would especially like to thank M. Catherine Bramer for her support and friendship.

iv

 

 

usrr
l
LIST I

Chapte
mmflu
0':

Chapter
Literatu-
PI;
Fa
Fa.
Fa.
Qu.
Fly.
Sur

TeSts (,

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LISTOF FIGURES......... . .

Chapter 1

Introduction............... .. .
Objectives ..

Chapter 2

Literature Review... . .
Previous Studies Supporting FIA Data
Factors Affecting Veneer Log Availability

FIA Survey Procedures...

Survey Accuracy...
Net volume of growing Stock
Net volume of saw-timber...

Chapter 3

ResearchMethods...
SurveyDesrgn
SurveyPartICIpants ..

The Research Instruments... .. . ..

Chapter 4

Results and Discussion...
Quality, Quantity, and Future Price
Attitudes Regarding Quality.
Real Price Trends...

Future Availability..... ..
TheExportMarkets
59
62
.. . 63

. 67

Industry Trends... . .. ..
Non-Response...

Comment Section . ..

Tests of Statistical Sigmficance

...vii

.. .xii

fl

Factors Affecting the Interpretation ofFIA Data... .. 14
Factors Affecting the Selection ofLogs for Veneer......

Qualifying the Resource
...23

.......24
.....25
...26

18

.22

...31

31

.32
SurveyProcedures........... 41
DataAnalysis.... ..

43

52
53
. 55

56
58

Chapter 5
Conclusions...

ImplicatiOns and Recommendations

AppendixA.1.TreeSpeciesGroups............. ..
AppendixA.2.SamplingErrors......................... ..

AppendixB.l.PriceData................ ...

Appendix C. l. Veneer Mills...

Appendix C. 3. Veneer Mill Questionnaire

AppendixC,4,First LoSgfirsCover Letter

Appendix C. 5. Loggers Survey...

Appendix C 6. Reminder Postcard

Appendix C. 7. Second Veneer Mill COver Letter
Appendix C. 8. Second Loggers Cover Letter...

Appendix C. 9. Third Veneer Mill Personalized CoverLetter
Appendix D. Tables Reporting Survey Results... ... .. ..
Appendix E. Tables Reporting ANOVA Results... .. .... .... ...

References......... .

.......70
.....76

...81

82

....83

.....84
......86
......87
......95
.96
.....103
......104
...105

106

107

.....134

141

LISTOFTABLES
Table 1. Area of land by state, survey year, and major land use class, in
thousandsofacres2
Table2. FIAinventorydatesbystate.........................................................14

Table 3. Average net annual growth and removals of hardwood on timberland
by state and survey date, in thousand board feet International V4 inch rule....17

Table 4. Forest Product Laboratory veneer grades...... 19

Table 5. Ground plots measured and photo points classified by state and survey
date .....23

Table 6. Percent increase between inventories of growing stock on timberland
by species group, state, and survey dates, in thousand cubic feet... ..27

Table 7. Net volume of saw-timber on timberland by species group for current
survey, in thousand board feet International V4 inch rule... ...27

Table 8. Current net annual growth of saw-timber on timberland by species group
for current survey, in thousand board feet International V4 inch rule... ..28

Table 9. Net volume of hardwood saw-timber on timberland by state for 1952,
1962, 1977, 1987, and 1992, MMBF International V4 inch rule... .29

Table 10. Saw-log production by species group, state, and survey date, in
thousand board feet International V4 inch rule... ...30

Table 11. Veneer log production by species group, state, and survey date, in
thousand board feet International V4 inch rule... ...30

Table 12. Number ofveneer mills between USFS mill surveys... ...35

Table 13. Respondent’s years involved in the veneer log industry, veneer mill
survey... 109

Table 14. Respondent’s years in veneer log procurement, sales, or consulting,
logger’s survey...... .....109

Table 15. Number and percent of respondent’s answers to factors affecting
domestic availability, veneer mill survey... ..1 10

vii

 

Table 16. .‘
Table 17. ;
Table 18. .
Table 19. .
Table 30. '
Table 21.

Table 22.

Table 23.
Table 24.
Table 35
Table 1.5

Table 2';

 

 

Table 16.

Table 17.

Table 18.

Table 19.

Table 20.

Table 21.

Table 22.

Table 23.

Table 24.

Table 25.

Table 26.

Table 27.

Table 28.

Table 29.

Table 30.

Number and percent of respondent’s answers to factors affecting

domestic availability, veneer mill survey...

Means and standard deviations reported for factors affecting

domestic availability, veneer mill survey......

Means and standard deviations reported for factors affecting

domestic availability, logger’s survey... ..

Frequency and percent of answers to factors perceived to be

contributing to scarcity of the veneer log resource, veneer mill survey ......

Frequency and percent of answers to factors perceived to be

contributing to scarcity of the veneer log resource, logger’s survey ......

Means and standard deviations for factors perceived to be

contributingto scarcity, veneermill survey.....

Means and standard deviations for factors perceived to be

contributing to scarcity, logger’s survey................

Frequency and percent of responses to market characteristics

perceived to be contributing to scarcity, veneer mill survey... .. ....

Frequency and percent of responses to market characteristics

perceived to be contributing to scarcity, logger’s survey... ..

Means and standard deviations for market characteristics perceived

to be contributingto scarcity, veneer mill survey...

Means and standard deviations for market characteristics perceived

tobe contributing to scarcity, logger’s survey... .. ..

Frequency and percent of respondent s perception of quality by

species group, veneer mill survey...

Frequency and percent of respondent’ s perception of quality by
species group, logger’ 5 survey... .. . ...

Means and standard deviations for perception of quality by species

group, veneer mill survey...

Means and standard deviations for perception of quality by species

group logger’ 8 survey”

viii

111

112

113

114

115

116

116

117

.118

119

120

...121

...121

.....122

..122

Table 31.

Table 32.

Table 33.

Table 34.

Table 35.

Table 36.

Table 37.

Table 38.

Table 39.

Table 40.

Table 41.

Table 42.

Table 43.
Table 44.

Table 45.

Table 46.

Means and standard deviations for perception of quality by diameter
class, veneer mill survey” ..... .. .. . . . ...

Means and standard deviations for perception of quality by diameter
class, logger’s survey... ..

Frequency and percent of respondent’s beliefs about real prices over

tenyears, by species group for veneer mill survey..............

Frequency and percent of respondent’s beliefs about real prices over

ten years, by species group for logger’s survey.......

Mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values of
respondent’s beliefs about real prices over ten years, by species

group, veneer mill survey...

Mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values of
respondent’s beliefs about real prices over ten years, by species
group, loggerssurvey . . . .

Minimum, maximum, and mean predicted future price increases

with standard deviation, veneer mill survey... ..

Minimum, maximum, and mean predicted future price increases

with standarddeviafionlogger survey.............. ..

Frequencies and percentages of factors influencing future

availability, veneer mill survey ..

Frequencies and percentages of factors influencing future

availability,loggersurvey.......

Means and standard deviations for factors affecting future

availability,veneermill survey

Means and standard deviations for factors affecting future

availability, veneer mill survey...... ..
Percentage of veneer logs respondents export, veneer mill survey... ..

Percentage of veneer logs respondents export, logger survey... ....

Frequency and percent of responses to export statements, veneer mill
survey.......

Frequency and percent of responses to export statements, logger survey...

ix

.. 122

....122

123

.123

124

....124

125

125

126

127

128

128

129

129

...130

.130

Table 47.

Table 48.

Table 49.

Table 50.

Table 51.

Table 52.

Table 53.

Table 54.

Table 55.

Table 56.

Table 57.

Table 58.

Table 59.

Table 60.

Table 61.

Table 62.

Mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum for export

statements, veneer mill survey... .. ..

Mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum for export

statements,loggersurvey.......... .. . ..

Frequencies and percents regarding industry trends, veneer mill survey... ..

Mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum values for industry

trends, veneer mill survey.......... ..

ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding domestic availability,
logger’s survey...

ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding domestic

availability,logger’ssurvey................... ..

ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding future availability,

logger’s survey......

ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding future
availability, logger’s...survey .. .. ....... .

ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding availability,
logger’ 5 survey... .... .... .. ..
ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding availability,
logger’ 5 survey. . .. .... ....

ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding log eXports,

logger’ssurvey........

ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding log exports,
logger’mssurvey

ANOVA values for logger s attitudes regarding quality, logger’ 5
survey... .. .

ANOVA values for non-logger attitudes regarding quality, logger’ 3

survey...

ANOVA values for logger and non-logger attitudes regarding quantity,

logger’ s survey...

ANOVA values for logger attitudes regarding real price over the

next ten years, logger’s survey...... .. ..

131

I31

132

..133

...135

135

136

...136

...137

...137

138

...138

. ...138

...139

...139

...139

 

Table

 

Table 63. ANOVA values for non-logger attitudes regarding real price over the
next ten years, logger’s survey... ......140

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Timberland area by ownership group for the study region, 1992... 10
Figure 2. US. hardwood log exports, 1989-1996... ......12
Figure 3. Preferred species exported from United States by percent, 1989 and 1996. .. 13

Figure 4. Net volume of saw-timber on timberland in study region, by diameter

Figure 5. Net volume of hardwood saw-timber on timberland in the Illinois,

Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin by diameter class,

xii

Chapter 1

Introduction

The veneer log resource in Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin
is a valuable component of the region’s forested lands. These high quality logs command
price premiums which provide economic benefit to timber producers, logging
professionals, regional veneer mills, and log exporters as well as secondary producers and
consumers. The status of this resource has been the focus of debate since the mid-1960’s
when the industry shifted to producing veneer from smaller diameter logs (Hair 1966).
Known as the “hardwood quality controversy” among researchers and the hardwood
using community, this issue revolves around the USDA-Forest Service Forest Inventory
and Analysis (F IA) conclusions regarding veneer log availability. Statistics reported by
the FIA unit have indicated timber inventory increases in all diameter classes, including
those necessary for efficient veneer production from 1952 through 1992 (Powell et
a1. 1993). Further, Powell et a1. (1993) concludes that the resource is increasing both in
quality and quantity. In contrast, many industry professionals, including veneer log
buyers, claim the procurement of veneer timber is becoming increasingly difficult and
assert that the supply of the preferred species is dwindling and the quality diminished.
This study explores reasons for this discrepancy by reporting the forest statistics for six
preferred hardwood species groups and examining the factors that may explain why the
perception of scarcity is prevalent among forest industry professionals. The preferred
species defined in this research effort are select white oak, select red oak, hard maple,
ash, black cherry, and black walnut The common and scientific names for the tree

species groups under study by state are given in Appendix A. 1.

The five states involved in this research effort are located in the USDA-Forest

Service (hereafter referred to as Forest Service) North Central region. Of the region’s

180,567,000 acres, 60,672,000 acres are forested (Table 1). The veneer industry (SIC-

2435) is a small but important sector of the region’s forest product industry and

hardwood veneer logs represent slightly greater than 1% of the total volume of

hardwoods produced in the north central region (Powell et a1. 1993). The forested lands

in the study area supply the veneer mills with the premium saw-timber necessary to

efficiently manufacture fine hardwood face veneer. Face veneer is here defined as the

veneer sheet on the upper side of a plywood or particleboard panel serving primarily a

decorative rather than a structural function (The Veneer Association 1935).

Table 1. Area of land by state, survey year, and major land use class, in thousands of

 

 

acres.
State Total land Total Timberland Reserved Other Other land
area forest forest forest land
land
Illinois 35,580 4,266 4,030 236 0 31,314
(1984)
Indiana 22,957 4,439 4,296 143 0 18,518
(1985)
Michigan 36,358.2 19,280.8 18,615.9 574.7 90.2 17,0774
(1993)
Minnesota 50,910.9 16,680.9 14,723.2 1,1 17.2 840.5 34,2298
(1990)
Wisconsin 34,760.9 16,005.2 15,702.5 242.0 60.7 18,7557
(1996)
Total 180,567 60,672 57,3676 2,312.9 991.4 1 19,8949

 

Source: Powell et al., 1993; Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles at al., 1995; Schmidt,

1997.

An abundant number of studies regarding hardwood timber supply have been

conducted. There is limited information however, regarding the adequacy of the portion

 

 

of III:
This
rear;

end pi

TOIaII
\‘ene
legs.
knit
Ven
Sher
req-

the

re fl

mg

of this supply necessary to meet the hardwood veneer industries strict quality criterions.
This study selected the veneer log resource from which manufacturers process face
veneer using log ‘flitches’ which are longitudinally or stay-log rotary sliced because the
end product requires the highest grade log to achieve efficient results. These two
manufacturing processes produce the highly valued decorative face veneer used in
architectural, panel, and furniture products. A third process of rotary peeling logs was not
included in this study because rotary veneer can be manufactured efficiently using Grade
1 saw-logs versus veneer logs. Callahan (1985) defines a log flitch as “the longitudinal
section of a log which has been milled specifically to enhance given characteristics of the
veneers to be produced.” Stay-log rotary veneering, also referred to as half round cutting,
rotates one half of the log past a fixed knife producing rift-cut and half round sliced
veneer (Callahan 1990). Longitudinally slicing veneer is a manner of cutting by which
logs or sawn flitches are held securely in a slicing machine and passed across a large
knife which shears off the veneer in sheets with flat or quarterosawn grain patterns (The
Veneer Association 1935). Defect free wood is essential to produce the clear veneer
sheets of the widths and lengths that industry demands. Certain quality characteristics are
required for a log to become acceptable for sliced face veneer as the relationship between
the quality of a log and the quality in the end product is direct

Some of the hardwood quality controversy can be attributed to anecdotal stories
referring to the industry’s early history when there was a seemingly unlimited supply of
high quality veneer timber. References to these times still occur in the anecdotes-blurring
myth with the historical record. The fine hardwood veneer industry was established in the

United States in the early 1800’s when America’s old growth forests provided an

abundant supply of large diameter hardwood logs. When veneer manufacturers depleted
the timber resource in one area they would often relocate to a new area where the timber
had not yet been harvested. Large diameter old grth timber, with the characteristics
desirable for high quality veneer, was mined with little thought to future harvests. Log
production in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s was particularly destructive and forest
management non-existent.

Today’s veneer logs are produced from maturing forests that are the natural
regeneration resulting from harvesting during that earlier era. West and Hansen (1996)
report the eastern hardwood forests of the United States as “an example of the resiliency
of nature.” They note that after two centuries of timber decline due to industrial wood
demand and agricultural land clearing, the inventory of the eastern hardwood forests
today is similar to what it was prior to 1800. Saw-timber volume has doubled over the
last forty years. Although those hardwood saw-timber volumes may not represent
volumes that are available to industry, regional assessments reveal that the growth of
commercially available timber still exceeds demand. Stone (1992) documents that in
1952 stands of saplings and seedlings represented 58 percent of the Lake States
timberland By 1992, two thirds of these stands were saw-timber and pole-timber size,
cited by Stone as “a remarkable case of forest rebuilding.”

Contradicting this positive assessment of the eastern hardwood forests are
complaints by industry professionals regarding the quality and quantity of veneer grade
logs. For example, in a recent interview in an industry trade journal, a prominent veneer
industry executive stated “a veneer mill seeking the highest quality logs has to go much

farther to obtain the volume and quality they need to maintain production levels (Panel

World 1998).” In the same interview the mill owner claims that “local supply is declining
and the quality aspect is diminishing.” Significant research has been done to determine if
the Forest Service FIA statistics accurately portray the true status of the resource. For
example, Kellison (1988) reports that the eastern deciduous forest has been degraded by
partial harvests without removing cull trees and without provision for desired
reproduction This study notes that every forest survey for the past 30 years has shown
hardwood inventory increasing at a rate approximately 65 percent greater than removal,
and log qualities increasing at a rate comparable to the total resource. Luppold and
Dempsey (1996) addressed the issue of scarcity of eastern hardwood saw-timber and
contrast saw-timber inventories with hardwood lumber production. They noted that there
was strong evidence that the US. Department of Commerce (1970-1991) underestimated
hardwood lumber production, affecting the production to inventory ratios (P-I ratios).
After revising estimates of hardwood lumber production as a percentage of hardwood
saw-timber inventories, the authors concluded that the PI-ratios still indicate that saw-
timber growth exceeded lumber production in all but the north central region where
harvests exceeded growth during the 1988-1992 time period

No study to date has effectively refuted the Forest Service position that the overall
condition of the eastern hardwood forests is improving. Previous research has been
deficient in examining why veneer trees are perceived to be harder to obtain, contributing
to the prevailing industry position that the resource is becoming scarce. This thesis
measures the perception of scarcity of the veneer log resource among industry
professionals. In this study the industry professionals are loggers who produce veneer

logs, veneer log buyers, and veneer mill managers. The results of this study will be useful

to government and academic researchers as well as the forest products industry.
Quantification of the factors contributing to the perception of scarcity will determine
which issues are considered most important to veneer mill managers and loggers. This
research will help industry deal effectively with the economic implications of changes in
timber supply affecting the veneer sector. Future research will benefit from new and
important research questions on topics such as trends in utilization and technologies

revealed through this study.

9.139291%

More specifically, this study was designed to achieve the following objectives:

1. To measure the attitudes and perception of availability of hardwood face
veneer logs among industry log buyers and logging professionals.

2. To determine the factors which are perceived to be contributing to scarcity of
the veneer log resource.

3. To measure the attitudes of industry professionals regarding the quantity and
quality of available supply.

4. To measure the beliefs of the industry professionals regarding future
availability of the veneer log resource.

Chapter 2 is a review of existing literature pertaining to veneer log availability,
the interpretation of F IA data, veneer log quality criterion, and resource quantification.
Included in this chapter is a description of the Forest Service F IA survey procedures. The
methods section, Chapter 3, includes a description of the survey design, the survey

participants, the research instruments, survey procedures, and a description of the data

analysis. Chapter 4 is a detailed presentation of the survey results. Finally, Chapter 5
consists of the discussion of the survey results and the conclusions based on the major

findings. Recommendations for future research are also included in the summary.

Chapter 2

Literature Review

Previous Studies Supporting FIA Data;

Literature relevant to this study is subdivided into four main categories: factors
affecting veneer log availability, factors affecting the interpretation of FIA data, factors
affecting the selection of logs for veneer, and quantifying the resource. The first and
second sections review trends in availability and problems associated with the FIA
process from a historical perspective. The third section provides a definition of quality
and relates this to the resource under study. The fourth section details the Forest Service

statistics for the species groups relevant to this research effort.

Egctors Affectirg Veneer Log Availability

A wide variety of social and economic factors have been identified as influencing
the general availability of timber to the market, subsequently affecting the market supply
of high quality veneer logs. Understanding the dynamic nature of these factors is crucial
to ascertaining why the perception of scarcity endures contrary to FIA survey
conclusions. Schallau (1965) reported that Michigan’s physical timber supply was
increasing but this fact did not necessarily mean more timber would be marketed. This
study identified land fragmentation, property turnover, and absentee ownership as factors
that act to restrict economic supply. Current research confirms these trends on non-
industrial private forests (NIPF), in addition to changing demographics and non-timber

forest land uses, continue to influence hardwood supply (Jones 1994). As is the case with

the rest of the eastern hardwood forests of the United States, the largest ownership group
consists of NIPF owners (Figure 1).

Jones and Paxton (1977) address the issues of urban development on lands
classified by the Forest Service as commercial forestland and conclude that much of the
timber on these lands is unavailable to industry. Factors such as parcel size, average land
tenure, and landowner attitudes, combined with the economies of scale for efficient forest
management, make some percentage of these lands unavailable for timber production.
Twenty years later, Ball (1997) finds the continuation of these trends and notes that
upland forests are viewed as prime development land unencumbered by the legal
complications of wetlands or the zoning and tax protection conferred on agricultural
lands. Further supporting this trend, Cassens (1998) notes that the small, densely
populated northeastern states show some of the largest ratios (3.48 to 6.48) of growth to
removal.

Powell et a1. (1993) report that since 1952, the area of timberland has decreased
nationally by 4%, or 19.3 million acres, a decline attributed to withdrawals of public
timberland for wilderness or other lands that do not permit timber harvests. A study by
Plantinga et a1. (1989) reports a 153% increase of reserved forest land in the Lake States
from the mid-1960’s to the early 1980’s. A recent survey of land managers in the Lake
States was conducted by Resh (1994) to assess the current and future availability of
timberland for harvest in the region. The results of this study reveal a predicted decrease
in all lands available for harvest, except for forest industry lands and Minnesota NIPF
lands, and a predicted increase in all lands not available for harvest except Michigan and

Minnesota forest industry lands. Factors identified affecting public land available for

timber production include policy, ecological, and economic factors. Factors identified
influencing private land available included non-timber uses such as wilderness recreation,
forest preservation, and individual landowner management objectives. Important forest
management trends identified relevant to veneer log production and procurement were an
expected decrease in even age management such as clear-cutting, and that single tree
selection, often associated with high-grading, is expected to be used more extensively.
Single tree selection is often used by loggers to procure the species in demand and often

results in tree stands of degraded genetic stock.

Figure 1. Timberland area by ownership group for the study region, 1992.

 

...... ... .~ _4._-_..b.._._._.._._._.. ......»— w,_ -—————- -—-

Timberland Ownorflilp Groups for Illinois, Indiana,
Mlelflgan, Minnow, and Vitamin. 1992

national Forest
1 1%

Non-industrial
privdo

 

 

 

 

Source: Powell et al., 1993.

The sustained international demand for eastern hardwoods has intensified
competition for the preferred species. As world demand has increased, the rate of harvest
has also increased to meet the new level of demand. In economic terms, if markets
function pr0perly resources tend to be allocated efficiently. Market failure in the

allocation and use of resources will tend to waste resources today and not provide enough

10

in the future. Many industry professionals contend that previous unsustainable harvest
rates, partially attributed to international demand and detrimental management practices
such as high grading, have led to diminished supply, reinforcing the notion that the Forest
Service statistics are incorrect. The economic pressure on available supply, created by
international demand, is a factor in the scarcity issue often referred to anecdotally by
industry professionals. Many company managers concerned about future supplies of
veneer quality timber view the veneer log export policy of the United States as a threat
(Callahan 1985). It is not uncommon to hear industry professionals recommend a ban on
hardwood log exports as a solution to industry domestic supply problems. The
Department of Commerce (DOC) reports increasing quantities of high quality logs being
shipped to foreign manufacturers (U. S. Dept. of Commerce 1997). Once confined to
veneer logs, recent reports indicate that significant quantities of grade saw logs are now
being eXported (Weekly Hardwood Review 1997). From 1989 through 1996 the log
export volume increased about 50% (Figure 2). Data for earlier time periods is inaccurate
for specific species due to reporting problems since corrected by the DOC, however
total log exports increased steadily from 1975 to 1988 (Luppold and Thomas 1991).

Noticeable changes in demand are reflected in export volumes from 1989 and
1996 (Figure 3). For example, cherry represented 1% and maple 19% of the preferred
species exported in 1989. By 1996 these two species increased to 9% and 37%
respectively. Walnut and white oak declined from 10% and 35% in 1989 to 3% and 19%
in 1996, respectively. Caution must be employed in interpreting these data as the

percentage decreases do not reflect the fact that total log export volumes have increased.

11

Th:

the

Fig

5

..t.....,_.l..slr.l.u.e:§_cf

SOUch

The increase in popularity of lighter colored woods however, illustrates the dynamics of

the export markets and how preferences change.

Figure 2. US. hardwood log exports, 1989-1996.

 

   

     

     

    

   

    

  

 

 

1400

1200--
I!
g 1000-.
5.; ago-
5
s °°°"
It».
I5

2a)-.

1%9 1990 1991 1992 1993 194 1% 1%
You

Source: US. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1997.

Figure 3. Preferred species exported from United States by percent, 1989 and 1996.

 

198. Log Exports

 

Willa Oak
35%

 

 

 

 

1996 Log Exports

Wlhut
3%

 

 

 

 

Source: US. Depmtment of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1997 .

Factors Affectirghe Interpretation of F IA Data,

A wide variety of factors influence the interpretation of Forest Service inventory
statistics. For instance, the states conduct their inventories during different time periods,
typically about every ten years (Table 2). Discrepancies also arise when there are changes
in procedure and definitions between inventories. Comparisons between inventories are
conducted in order to identify trends but direct comparisons between the current
inventory and the previous inventory can be misleading due to these changes. The Forest
Service addresses this issue by checking for consistency through the use of the Timber
Resource Analysis System (TRAS). TRAS is Forest Service computer program for
“updating, backdating, and projecting timber volume, growth, mortality and removals
(Raile 1985)”. Inconsistencies are identified and resolved and corrected values for
previous inventories are available for comparisons.

Table 2. FIA inventory dates by state.

 

 

State Current Inventory Previous Inventory
Illinois 1986 1967
Indiana 1985 1962
Michigan 1993 1980
Minnesota 1990 1977
Wisconsin 1996 1983

 

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

Illustrating several of the problems which arise between surveys are two studies
conducted by Forest Service researchers from the Southern Forest Experiment Station
which address the concerns of the hardwood using community. Beltz et al. (1990) report
a decline in top quality hardwoods due to a procedural change in tree grading. The 1987
Mississippi FIA statistics reported an increase of 30 percent in Grade 1 hardwood over

the previous survey conducted in 1977. In 1977, survey crews graded the butt log and

14

predicted the grades of the upper stem logs. The results were reported as “log grades.” In
1987, all saw-timber volume in the stem was tabulated by the grade of the butt log in a
process called “tree grade”, using standard log grades published by the Forest Service.
Beltz et al. recalculated the 1977 log grade using the 1987 tree grade standard and
compared 1977 tree grade values with 1987 survey results. When compared on the same
basis, the Grade 1 volume showed a decline.

The Beltz et al. research effort did illustrate that Forest Service butt log grading is
reasonably comparable to private industry hardwood specialists and perhaps is
conservative. The FIA surveys require a 12-foot minimum butt log, while industry relies
on published grades for hardwood factory logs which allow for 10 foot logs in all grades.
Additionally, several differences between industry log grading and standard Forest
Service inventory practices were isolated as factors contributing to the hardwood quality
controversy. Among these are the standard units, International ‘A: inch rule, in which the
Forest Service reports its results. Industry generally uses the Doyle log rule that contains
values that are roughly 71 percent of the International ‘A inch rule values (Smith and
Hackett, 1991). Another factor influencing the interpretation of FIA data is the fact that
states grade hardwood saw-timber trees by rules established in three different sources.
Michigan and Minnesota grade hardwood saw-timber trees by rules established in
“Hardwood Tree Grades for Factory Lumber (Hanks, 1976).” Wisconsin and Illinois
grade trees by rules established in the research report “Hardwood Log Grades for
Standard Lumber (Vaughn et al., 1966).” Indiana grades its hardwood saw-timber

according to rules established in “A Guide to Hardwood Log Grading (Rast, 1973).”

IS

May and LeDoux (1992) developed a procedure for assessing timber availability
from reported inventory statistics for upland hardwood forests in Tennessee. This study
was initiated in response to criticisms leveled at the southern FIA unit (SOFIA). A
profitability model was constructed to predict stump to mill cost of the growing stock of
selected SOFIA sample plots. Inventory that is profitable to log was determined and then
discounted for owners who are not willing to sell. Their results conclude, “about a quarter
of the timberland, containing about 40 percent of the reported inventory volume, was
estimated to be available for harvest.” However, this research also concluded that the
smaller “available inventory is essentially capable of meeting harvest demands, but its
growth to removals ratio is not nearly as favorable as that of the reported inventory.”

In addition to changes in procedure and definitions, the aggregate nature of the
Forest Service FIA data require that caution be employed during the interpretation
process. Luppold and Dempsey (1996) note that because the Forest Service statistics are
based on aggregate data, species specific and quality specific timber shortages are
difficult to identify. In contrast, industry conclusions tend to be drawn from species
specific and quality specific data in local procurement areas. Further, these researchers
also cite the infrequency of timber surveys as a potential problem when interpreting the
FIA statistics. The state inventories are completed on staggered time schedules and “any
estimate of saw-timber volume for a single year must be projected by assuming historic
timber growth and removal trends” (Luppold and Dempsey 1996). They note differences
in assumptions, supporting data, and estimation procedures can result in inventory
projections that are inconsistent between regions. Luppold and Dempsey (1996) for

example note that in Minnesota, statewide growth and harvest rates for red oak saw-

16

timber have remained about even, but in southern Minnesota harvests of red oak have
greatly exceeded growth. In sum problems regarding data are a concern to researchers
(Stevens 1994).

A key component of the Forest Service inventory analysis is the ratio of
hardwood saw-timber growth divided by removals. Recent analysis of timber supply in
the Lake States documents a very favorable relationship between growing stock and
timber harvests (Table 3). Noting that a growth to removal ratio less than one indicates
resource depletion, analysis of the most recent Lake States surveys reveal this ratio to be
2.1 :1 (Vasievich et al., 1995). This is the case despite an overall increase in saw-timber
production since the 1970’s. This research further indicates that increase in demand for
saw-timber has led to rising real prices for stumpage. The impact of rising real prices to
the veneer sector may be reflected in the economics of price expectation. Economic
theory states that expectations of a higher future relative price of a product can affect
sellers’ willingness to supply (Allen 1994). Hardwood Market Report data support the
assertion that prices have risen in real terms (Appendix B).

Table 3. Average net annual growth and removals of hardwoods on timberland, by state
and survey date, in thousand board feet International 'A inch rule.

 

 

State Year Growth Removal Ratio
Illinois 1964 610 173 3.53
1984 425 305 1.39
Indiana 1966 218 344 .63
1985 687 461 1.49
Michigan 1986 1690 836 2.02
1993 2665 776 3.43
Minnesota 1976 73 1 290 2.52
1989 1105 568 1.95
Wisconsin 1982 984 693 1.42
1996 1187 818 1.45

 

Source: Cassius, 1998; Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt,
1997; Smith and Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

17

Factors Affectingthe Selection of Logs for Veneer

The trend toward the use of small-diameter logs for veneer was evident in the
1950’s. Initial reports were that veneer manufacturers were pleasantly surprised with the
quality of the veneer obtainable from small diameter logs (Fleischer 1965). Over time
however, complaints by the veneer industry regarding quality were addressed and the
Forest Service proposed a systematic set of veneer grading rules designed to promote
uniformity of grading (Haskell 1963). The Forest Products Laboratory defined quality as
“those properties that make it suitable for conversion into end products for a given use,
and lead to a system of sorting the products into groups with similar characteristics
(Henley et al. 1963).” The authors reported that in order to establish grades for hardwood
veneer logs or veneer in standing timber, grades that specify type, number, distribution
and size of defects for the end product must be first established. Three quality classes that
reflect value and veneer grades were proposed (Table 4). Grade A would be required to
produce face veneer. Unlike hardwood lumber, which has standardized grades that are
accepted throughout the industry, the veneer sector resisted product standardization.
Today the veneer industry is highly specialized and veneer log grading continues its
historic trend of varying between manufacturers and individual graders. This factor
makes quality evaluation problematic and contributes to the scarcity issue.

Veneer grading tends to be proprietary, differentiated by product end use. Veneer
grades are typically classified as architectural, panel, desktop, door, and furniture. These
classifications are indicators of value (Workman 1996). Architectural, panel, desktop, and
door grade veneer bring premium prices based on length, width, and appearance

characteristics. Furniture grade veneer tends to be low priced and the utilization of

18

imperfect veneer is increased at the clipping line where defects are removed. Anecdotal
evidence suggests that few manufacturers slice for furniture grade veneer as they
accumulate large quantities in the pursuit of hi gh-grade material. Clipping line
technology allows manufacturers to make veneer from logs that otherwise would not
qualify as veneer grade. Previous research indicates that the clipping lines are a major
source of waste as significant quantities of clear veneer are discarded to eliminate defects.
Clipping line waste for red and white oak manufactured in 1980 was reported to be 13

million square meters valued at $11.6 million (Davis and Callahan 1986).

Table 4. Forest Products Laboratory veneer grades.

 

 

Grade Quality Description

A Clear Smooth and free of defects

B Sound Smooth and free of open defects

C Utility and Defects permitted in B grade plus open knots, holes,
Back and insect damage up to 2 inches in diameter.

 

Source: Haskell, 1963.

Specific quality indicators must be present for logs to be accepted as face
hardwood veneer grade. Haskell (1963) defined grade defects as “any irregularity
occurring in or on wood that adversely affects its appearance, strength, durability, or
utility values.” External characteristics of trees and the cross sections of cut logs only
provide clues to the quality of the wood inside. Harrar (1954) lists external imperfections
that are likely to disqualify logs as potential veneer. Defects that are found on the
circumference of the tree are defined as bird peck, adventitious and dormant buds, bulges,
burls, butt swell, flanges, grooves, holes, knots, seams, spiral bark, and tension wood.

Defects that can be seen on the ends of logs are flag worm, gum spots, heart rot, pith

l9

flake, ring shake, stain, spider heart, double pith, wind shake and out—of-round. Today
some defects, such as burls and other figured woods, are highly prized for their unique
appearance characteristics. Consequently, veneer defects are categorized as desirable and
undesirable.

The premium saw-timber necessary to efficiently manufacture fine hardwood face
veneer is found in the Forest Service log Grade 1 category. When industry specialists are
extrapolating quality criteria from these Forest Service statistics, the highly subjective
nature of quality evaluation tends to contribute to the hardwood quality controversy.
Veneer log price premiums are based on diameter, length, straightness, the absence of
visible defects, uniformity in both color and growth ring count, and the texture of the
wood itself. Additionally, economic factors such as supply, demand, and competition
strongly influence veneer log prices.

It is critical that veneer logs are straight, as a slight crook or sweep will affect the
quantity of veneer yielded from the log. Often logs are sliced for specific veneer grain
patterns and log straightness is mandatory to achieve the desired end result. The heart of
the log must be centered and round logs are preferred to those that are out of round. Most
veneer logs will have defects close to the heart and when the pith is off centered these
defects will show up sooner in the slicing process resulting in a lower valued end product.
These problems can often be addressed when the tree is bucked into logs and research has
indicated that improved log bucking practices increases the value of the logs with an
average potential gain of 3 1% (Dwyer 1995).

Log length is crucial and premiums are paid for veneer quality logs of desirable

lengths. Buyers purchase logs to meet specific customer requirements such as the

20

manufacture of architectural, panel, desktop, door or furniture products. Logs destined to
become veneer are first milled into flitches and must be free from major cracks and splits
which would reduce overall length in the clipping process. When mills inventory logs,
longer lengths represent more manufacturing options so additional value is attached.
Veneer log lengths may be in odd increments when compared to lumber log lengths. For
example, veneer logs may be 9, 11, 13, or 15 feet long instead of the customary 8, 10, 12,
14, or 16 foot seen in standard lumber lengths.

Workman (1996) reported color and texture as two important indicators used by
veneer graders as quality determinants. For uniformity of color the log must be 1) the
desired color, and 2) have consistent color throughout the flitch. Often designers are
attempting to solve finishing department problems by procuring veneer that is uniform in
color and easily matched to solid wood components. Color requirements differ in the
domestic and international markets with foreign competitors paying higher prices and
being extremely selective for color. Selection for color presents special problems in
veneer log procurement and color varies with site (Nelson et al.1969). This factor may
contribute to perceived scarcity, as competition for quality logs, reflected in price and
production pressures, tends to be concentrated in geographic regions known for
consistent color. For example, Workman (1996) reported walnut grown in southern
Indiana had a higher concentration of the desired light chocolate brown color than
Missouri walnut leading to higher demand for Indiana walnut. Soil factors were attributed
to the reddish color predominantly found in Missouri grown walnut of less value to

veneer mills.

21

Diameter growth rate, or the nrunber of growth rings per inch, is also a major
quality determinant. Logs with evenly spaced tight growth rings command a price
premium and certain aesthetic characteristics can be manufactured only from these logs.
For example, the quarter-sawn tight grained pattern found in traditional Japanese
furniture must be sliced from logs that have a minimum of 10-15 growth rings per inch.
Old growth timber consistently yielded logs with uniformly tight growth rings. With
single tree selection harvesting being increasingly used, the residual stand is released to
grow rapidly. Consequently, future supplies of logs exhibiting dense, even spaced growth

rings may be further reduced.

Quantifying the Resource

Are high quality veneer logs of the preferred species becoming scarce? The US.
Forest Service, in cooperation with the states, spends a great deal of money and effort to
compile reliable resource data. Statistics are arrived at through well—established sampling
techniques reliable within published error limits. The Forest Service inventory data,
published in the FIA surveys, have consistently reported increases in all diameter classes
including those necessary for efficient veneer production. One problem in trying to
ascertain if veneer quality is changing is that F IA data do not quantify veneer statistics as
such. Instead statistics are reported for growing stock and saw-timber volumes. The
perception that the FIA data are incorrect in both quality and quantity stems partly from
the fact that availability is not reported with the survey conclusions. Clearly, not all saw-
timber is available for industry use. A brief review of the survey procedures is necessary

to increase understanding of the FIA process.

22

 

 

com
STE
0f Cl
inter

gath

Tab!

FIA Survey Procedures

The FIA survey design includes interpretation of current aerial photography, new
and old inventory plot measurements, and estimates of area, volume, growth, mortality
and average annual removals. The survey techniques are updated between inventories to
improve accuracy. As mentioned earlier, however, this can result in comparison problems
between inventories. The current inventories completed by the states under study use a
two phase sample design, similar to sampling with replacement, and the Stand and Tree
Evaluation and Modeling System (STEMS). STEMS is the tree growth projection
component of the Forest Resources Evaluation Program (Belcher et a1. 1982). The
STEMS grth model is used to ‘grow’ the old plot and tree data to produce an estimate
of current data (Leatherberry et a1. 1996). Phase one analysis include aerial photo
interpretation of plots used in the previous survey plus additional new plots. The data
gathering effort taken by the Forest Service to ensure statistical accuracy yields over

100,000 ground plots in the five state region (Table 5).

Table 5. Ground plots measured and photo points classified by state and survey date.

 

 

State Total Ground Total Photo
Plots Measured Points
Classified
Illinois (1985) 10,847 184,815
Indiana (1986) 11,440 126,629
Michigan (1993) 18,584 196,951
Minnesota (1990) 43,959 284,420
Wisconsin (1996) 20,940 203,326

 

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

23

Phase two consists of the field measurements in which the plots from the previous
survey classified as ‘disturbed’ or ‘undisturbed’ are quantified. All of the disturbed plots
are remeasured. One-third of the undisturbed plots are remeasured, while the remaining
2/3 of undisturbed plots are not remeasured but are updated with STEMS.

Questions regarding the accuracy STEMS growth model have been addressed.
Weaknesses have been identified in the data collection phase and corrected by taking
sample sizes large enough to guarantee statistical accuracy. While “no projection system
can perfectly represent the real system being modeled,” the STEMS modeling system
solves a variety of inventory and management problems (Buchman and Shifley 1983).
Two components of the STEMS model are designed to ensure that the results are
biologically reasonable. First, STEMS contains “a growth potential function estimating
maximum expected growth for trees of a specific species, size, and crown ratio on a
specific site.” Second, STEMS contains “a modifier function to reduce potential growth

based on the amount of competition from other components (Shifley 1987).”

Survey Accuracy

States in the study region quantify area, number of trees, volume, growth,
removals, and mortality using Forest Service analytical processes. The FIA sampling
procedure is “designed to provide reliable statistics at the state and survey unit levels
(Leatherberry et al. 1996).” The figures reported are estimates only and reliability is
measured by sampling error. For each of the five states in this study the sampling errors
mean “that the chances are two out of three that if a 100 percent inventory had been

taken, using the same methods, the results would have been within the limits indicated

24

(Leatherberry et al. 1996).” By design, the sampling error increases when the survey data
is analyzed in sections smaller than the state totals.

The current inventories have a goal of reporting figures with a sampling error of
less than ten percent at the county level. Minnesota funded the collection of additional
data in order to reduce the sampling error of three percent per million acres of timberland
in the standard F IA inventory by one-half. Michigan increased survey accuracy by
intensified field sampling funded by the State of Michigan, industry, and forest products
associations. Michigan’s goal of reporting figures with sampling errors less than ten
percent was reached in the heavily forested counties. Counties with less than 35,000 acres

of timberland however exceed ten percent (Leatherberry et al. Appendix A2).

Net volume of growing stock

The FIA statistics are reported in standard units and tables. The inventory is
reported for growing stock and saw-timber, saw-timber being a subset of growing stock.
Growing stock volume is defined as “net volume in cubic feet of growing stock trees 5.0
inches diameter breast high and over, from 1 foot above the ground to a minimum 4.0-
inch top diameter outside bark of the central stem, or to the point where the central stem
breaks into limbs (Miles et al. 1995).” There are 19,261,858 cubic feet of growing stock
trees of the preferred species in the study area.

The growing stock figures reported between surveys indicate increase for all five
states in the study region. Factors influencing this trend include changes in survey
procedures, abandoned cropland and pasture reverting back to timberland, and the
reclassification of nonproductive timberland to marginally productive timberland (Powell

et a1. 1993). Substantial increases in growing stock volume have occurred (Table 6).

25

Net volume of say-timber

Saw-timber volumes contain the diameter classes necessary for the efficient
manufacture of veneer. A saw~timber tree is defined as “a live tree of commercial species
containing at least a 12-foot saw log or two noncontiguous saw logs 8 feet or longer,
meeting regional specifications for freedom from defects which for hardwoods must be at
least 11.0 inches (1. b. h. (Leatherberry et al. 1996).” Veneer log minimum diameters
generally begin in the 13-inch diameter class, with larger diameters being more desirable
and a select few logs taken from the 12-inch diameter class. Examination of diameter
class distribution for net volume of saw-timber for the preferred species (Figure 4),
illustrates the “wave of maturing timber” in the 21-28 inch diameter classes reported by
Stone (1992). The total net volume of saw-timber for the species groups under study is
greater than fifty-nine billion board feet measured in International '/4 inch rule (Table 7).
The net annual growth for these Species is greater than two billion board feet
International 'A inch rule (Table 8). The current annual timber removals for the species
groups under study are reported to be slightly greater than a billion board feet and annual
mortality for these species groups is reported to be about 220 million board feet
(Leatherberry and Spencer 1996; Miles et al. 1995; Schmidt 1997; Smith and Golitz
1988; and Hahn 1987). This leaves slightly greater than one billion board feet annually
added to the inventory, representing a net annual growth of approximately 43%.

The net volumes of hardwood saw-timber in the five-state area for the 15-29 inch
diameter classes have increased substantially during the 1952-1992 time period (Figure

5). The net volume of hardwood saw-timber in each state increased during this time

26

period (Table 9). The saw-log and veneer log production data in the study area for the

species groups under study are shown in Tables 10 and 11.

Table 6. Percent increase between inventories of growing stock on timberland by species
group, state, and survey dates, in thousand cubic feet.

 

 

State Survey Select Select Red Ash Hard Black Black
Dates White Oak HOak Maple Cherry Walnut
Illinois 1962—1986 43 56 19 63 NA‘ 54
Indiana 1967—1986 12 10 83 65 86 52
Michigan 1980-1993 43 41 67 43 45 62
Minnesota 1977-1990 41 22 45 40 26 73
Wisconsin 1983—1996 47 22 44 34 22 1.1_4_

 

1. Figures reported with other hardwoods.
Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

Table 7. Net volume of saw-timber on timberland by species group for current survey, in
thousand board feet International ‘A inch rule.

 

 

 

Species Group Lake States, Illinois, and
Indiana
Select White Oak 14,208,867
Select Red Oak 16,864,613
Hard Maple 17,085,624
Ash 8,03 8,808
Black Cherry 2,01 1,002
_Black Walnut 1,167,679
Total $9,376,593

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

27

Figure 4. Net volume of saw-timber on timberland in study region, by diameter class.

 

.3

WW1MMM
S 3

.3

          

 

   

O
1

17.01119 rams 21.0-20.9 3.09
131-w c1.-

11.0-12.9 13.0-14.9 15.0-16.9

 

 

 

 

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Raile, 1985; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

Table 8. Current net annual growth of saw-timber on timberland by species group for
current survey, in thousand board feet International Va inch rule.

 

 

 

Species group Lake States,
Illinois‘, and
Indiana'
Select White Oak 394,013
Select Red Oak 594,026
Hard Maple 672,207
Ash 392,656
Black Cherry 105,016
Black Walnut 47,378
Total 2,205,296

1. Reported as net annual growth.
Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

23

Table 9. Net volume of hardwood saw-timber on timberland by state for 1952, 1962,
1977, 1987, and 1992, MMBF International '/4 inch rule.

 

 

 

State 1952 1962 1977 1987 1992
Illinois 9,488 10,931 14,665 17,156 17,782
Indiana 8,754 10,655 10,713 18,600 18,946

Michigan 16,764 23,365 29,155 34,049 39,451
Minnesota 6,272 8,742 16,077 19,801 22,693
Wisconsin 10,259 13,206 20,614 27,344 30,394
TOTAL 51,537 66,899 91,224 116,950 129,266

Source: Powell et al. 1993.

Figure 5. Net volume of hardwood saw-timber on timberland in the Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin by diameter class, 1952-1992.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0000 7000
1114311111114 Inch rule.

 

Source: Powell et a1. 1993.

29

 

_,\t<tllrf[LE_—ln\arl\ TI. ‘8 ~SSHABB\TSG

 

Table 10. Saw-log production by species group, state, and survey date, in thousand board
feet International 'A inch rule.
Species group Wisconsin Indiana Michigan Minnesota Illinois
1996 1984 1992 1988 1983
Select White Oak 50,652 41,751 18,831 10,121 21,420 142,775
Select Red Oak 128,005 41,560 84,755 47,134 13,730 315,184

 

Hard Maple 70,098 19,969 102,494 1,630 3,261 197,452
Ash 19,316 24,599 3,260 9,502 7,280 79,195
Black Cherry 4,705 6,543 6,141 562 868 18,819
Black Walnut 697 8,845 2,297 736 2,954 15,529
Total 768,954

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

Table 11. Veneer log production by species group, state, and survey date, in thousand
board feet International '/4 inch rule.

 

 

 

Species group Wisconsin Indiana Michigan Minnesota Illinois
1996 1984 1992 1988 1983

Select White Oak 3,083 4,362 1,129 158 2,033 10,765
Select Red Oak 9,319 1,165 3,927 989 101 15,573
Hard Maple 6,494 234 14,475 62 - 21,265
Ash 260 461 1 896 498 18 2,559
Black Cherry 474 34 574 - - 1,082
Black Walnut 234 2,889 324 99 760 4,306
Total 55,550

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles etal., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

30

 

 

int:

ane
pro
axa
thei
Ven-

inst

ten
ma]
ace
“1’11
59%
lat,

\VQ

Chapter 3

Research Methods

Factors potentially influencing the availability of veneer logs, FIA data
interpretation, veneer log quality issues, and the Forest Service statistics regarding the
species groups involved in this research effort were presented in Chapter 2. Currently no
measurement of the industry’s perception of resource scarcity exists outside of the
anecdotes prevalent throughout the veneer sector. This study therefore, developed survey
procedures to measure the attitudes of industry professionals regarding veneer log
availability, quantity, and quality, to quantify the factors perceived to be contributing to
their scarcity, and to measure the beliefs of the population about future availability of
veneer logs. This chapter describes the survey design, participants, the research

instrument, survey procedures, and the data analysis.

Sgwey Desi Q1

The purpose of this study is to quantify the perception of scarcity regarding
veneer logs of the preferred species in the study area. Loggers, sawmill procurement
managers, veneer log buyers, and consulting foresters compete among each other for
access to the veneer log resource in the study region. These individuals are the experts
whose opinions are measured by the survey. Veneer 10g procurement is highly
specialized work. Procurement specialists typically start their workday early and work
late as their job requires significant amounts of travel. The time consuming nature of this
work creates data collection problems solved most efficiently through the use of survey

research. The purpose of a survey is to produce statistics-that is, quantitative or

31

 

 

IC/J

numerical descriptions of some aspects of the study population (Fowler, 1993). Surveys
are excellent vehicles for measuring attitudes and orientations in a large population
(Babbie, 1995). A variety of survey methods are available to elicit expert opinion.
Personal or telephone interviews of this population do not represent the best survey
option. The extensive driving required in personal interviews, and the expense both in
terms of cost and time required in telephone interviews, made these alternatives less
desirable than a mail questionnaire. Self-administered mail questionnaires have the
advantage of reaching a large audience dispersed over the study region relatively
inexpensively. For the purposes of this study, a mail survey was determined to be the
most efficient manner of data collection considering the large number of participants and
the size of the study region. This study therefore, uses a cross-sectional survey design
administered through a mailed questionnaire. The survey data reflects the opinions of
participants in 1997 . The discussion that follows describe the participants selected to

receive the survey.

Survey Participating

The highly specialized nature of the fine hardwood veneer industry is reflected in
its dominant log procurement strategy. Unlike the hardwood sawmill industry, which
largely procures timber from individual landowners, the veneer sector relies on
procurement specialists to purchase produced logs from loggers and regional sawmills.
This allows the veneer mills to select logs of the highest quality which is reflected in the

high prices these logs command. It is this group of industry professionals, those

32

interacting in the production, purchase, and sale of veneer logs, whose opinions are
valuable to this research effort and constitute the survey population.

Callahan’s (1990) historical documentary, “The Fine Hardwood Veneer Industry
in the United States: 1838-1990,” reports that there have been approximately fifty firms
in the US involved in producing face veneer at any one given time. This documentary
concludes that the structure of the veneer industry has been changing and notes that since
World War II, foreign ownership has increased to the point that the veneer sector is
roughly 70% foreign controlled. In the study region there are thirty-eight veneer plants
listed in the primary producer guides (Appendix C. l ). The trend is toward a decreasing
number of veneer mills in the study region (Table 12). Callahan (1985) notes that annual
production has increased while the number of mills in operation has decreased. In
economics, concentration is a measure that shows how much business is done by how
few sellers (Allen, 1994). Production data supports the position that the veneer industry is
becoming more concentrated and efficient. In the hardwood veneer and plywood
industry, output per employee increased 5.5% and total output increased 6.8% during the
1982-1986 time period (Callahan, 1985).

Because the industry is relatively small, it was determined that a survey of the
total population (i.e. census) of veneer log procurement specialists would be appropriate.
This census was conducted on 1) the veneer mills’ log procurement managers, and 2)
loggers, sawmill managers, consulting foresters, and veneer log buyers who listed veneer
logs as a product in the Lake States wood products primary producer guides (Michigan
1996; Minnesota 1997; and Wisconsin 1995 Department of Natural Resources). State

laws in Indiana and Illinois require that all timber buyers must purchase a license. The

33

complete timber buyers license lists for Indiana and Illinois were included in the survey
population (1996 Illinois Licensed Timber Buyers and 1996 Indiana Licensed Timbers
Buyer’s Guide). However, unlike the Lake States primary producer guides, which were
filtered for veneer log producers, the Indiana and Illinois timber buyers’ license lists
included forest products specialists not involved in the veneer log business. Therefore, a
filter question was included in the self-administered mail surveys to determine if the
recipient was involved in the veneer log business. It should be noted that in the Lake
States there are loggers and sawmills that engage in the veneer log business but do not list
veneer logs as one of their products or otherwise are not registered with the states.
Consequently, this census does not include these people. The licensing law in Illinois and
Indiana circumvents this problem.

The recipients of the logger’s survey consisted of 1481 industry professionals. Of
these 568 resided in Indiana, 435 in Illinois, 386 in Michigan, 28 in Minnesota, and 64 in
Wisconsin. The population that received the veneer mill survey consisted of fourteen log
procurement managers in Indiana, one in Illinois, ten in Michigan, eleven in Wisconsin,
and two in Minnesota. Veneer mills included facilities engaged in the production of
rotary veneer, which is not the focus or this study. However, prior to the construction of
the survey instrument, informal conversations with industry specialists revealed that most
of these Operations are engaged in trading face veneer logs or have their high-grade
veneer logs custom sliced. These mills therefore, were included in the survey population
with the specification that the survey answers be directed toward the high grade logs. The
sampling design for this census is single stage. The names in the population were known

and were sampled (Creswell, 1994).

34

Table 12. Number of veneer mills between USF S mill surveys.

 

 

 

 

 

State Survey Number of
Date Veneer Mills
Illinois "1961 8
1983 2
Indiana 1980 16
1990 14
Michigan 1977T 9
1992 7
Minnesota 1975 4
1992 1
Wisconsin 1981 15
I994 12

 

Source: Hackett and Whipple 1995; Hackett and Mayer 1993; Hackett and

Dahlman 1993; May and Pilon 1995; and Blyth et al. 1987.
The Research Instruments

The research instruments used in this research effort are self-administered mail
questionnaires (Appendix CB and C5). The surveys were designed based on issues
identified through informal discussions with academic researchers, government natural
resource agencies, and industry professionals knowledgeable of the veneer log resource
and supported in the review of the literature. The surveys are intended to elicit the
opinions of industry professionals regarding the perception of veneer log scarcity
involving the preferred species groups identified in Chapter One. For comparative
purposes, it was determined that log procurement managers working at the 38 regional
veneer mills should be surveyed separately from the loggers. The two survey instruments
administered were identical with the exception that the veneer mill survey included
questions regarding industry trends and business strategies applicable only to veneer

manufacturers.

3S

The loggers, sawmill managers, consultants, and veneer log buyers were asked
four major categories of questions related to: 1) quality, quantity, and future price of the
preferred species; 2) factors influencing domestic availability, and future availability; 3)
veneer industry market characteristics; 4) and veneer log exports. In addition to these four
major groups of questions’ recipients were asked to identify how many years they had
been in veneer log procurement and to describe their job position. A question regarding
sustainability also was included in the survey. Participants were encouraged to write in
any additional information regarding their knowledge of the veneer log resource in a
comment section available at the end of the survey. A fifth category regarding business
strategies and industry trends was included in the veneer mill survey only. The discussion
that follows is a detailed description of each category of questions.

Respondents were first asked the filter question to determine if they were
involved in the veneer log business. Recipients answering no to the filter question were
asked to return the uncompleted survey in the self-addressed stamped envelope while
recipients who responded yes were to continue the survey. Next, respondents were asked
how many years they had been involved in veneer log procurement, sales, or consulting.
This was designed to compare answers across groups with more or less procurement
experience. Recipients were then asked to describe their job positions as logging, sawmill
management, veneer log buyer, consulting forester, or ‘other.’

In the first major category of questions, respondents were asked if they felt the
quality of veneer logs for the preferred species in the study region is increasing, about the
same, or decreasing. This ordinal measure allowed each species group to be rank-ordered

separately. Respondents were also allowed the option of answering that they don’t know.

36

Respondents were also queried about the quantity of the small (1 1-15 inches), medium
(16-20 inches), and large (21+ inches) diameter size classes of veneer logs. The ordinal
measures increasing, about the same, or decreasing allowed each size class to be rank-
ordered separately. Respondents were also allowed the Option of answering that they
don’t know.

Since the price of a resource growing scarce will eventually rise due to increases
in its extraction cost and/or payments to resource owners, a question regarding future real
price increases Of the veneer log resource was included in the survey (Costanza 1991).
Again the ordinal measures increasing, remaining the same, or decreasing allowed the
species groups to be rank-ordered separately. Respondents were asked to include a
percentage figure they perceived the prices to increase or decrease by. In this question
respondents were not given the Option of answering they don’t know.

The second major category of questions concerned factors influencing
availability, domestic availability, and future availability. Respondents were asked to
indicate to what extent they agreed or disagreed with statements about veneer logs.
Variables measured included location of veneer quality timber, time in procurement,
high-grading and selection harvests, management plans on NIPF lands, whole tree
chipping, standardization Of tree grades, sustainability of current harvest rates, and the
relationship Of price to availability. A Likert scale was constructed to measure the relative
intensity of the statements. Likert scaling calculates the average index score for those
agreeing with each of the individual statements (Babbie, 1996). The ordirml measures
from which respondents were to choose were strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and

strongly disagree.

37

Respondents were further asked to rank in importance factors affecting domestic
availability. Included in these factors were the variables increased international demand,
conflicting landowner Objectives, urban development, forest land fragmentation, property
turnover, absentee ownership, parcel size, previous hi gh-grading, environmental
regulations, and mistrust of loggers. A Likert scale was constructed to measure the
relative importance of these factors to the domestic availability Of veneer logs. The
ordinal measures from which respondents were to choose were very important, somewhat
important, neutral, somewhat unimportant, and very unimportant.

Respondents were also asked to rank in importance factors determining future
veneer log availability. Variables measured included forest management education
programs, tax incentives on non-industrial private forest land (NIPF), elimination of the
estate tax, special capital gains taxes, uniform laws requiring best management practices,
timber buyers certification, and funding stewardship programs. A Likert scale was
constructed to measure the relative importance of these factors in determining future
availability of veneer logs. The ordinal measures from which respondents were to choose
were very important, somewhat important, neutral, somewhat unimportant, and very
unimportant.

The third major category of questions concerned the importance of certain market
characteristics to the veneer industry. Included in these were establishing uniform veneer
log grades, standardizing veneer product grades, banning hardwood log exports,
promoting character marked wood, competition from substitute products, marketing Odd
species, and log color. Respondents were asked to rank these variables in order Of

importance. A Likert scale was constructed to measure the relative importance Of these

38

market characteristics. The ordinal measures from which respondents were to choose
were very important, somewhat important, neutral, somewhat unimportant, and very
unimportant.

The fourth major category of questions concerned the perceived impact of
international markets on the veneer log resource. First respondents were asked if their
customers (domestic and international) want to know whether the veneer logs they buy
originate from sustainable forest management. Nominal measures that applied to this
question were yes and no. Recipients who were unsure were permitted to answer don’t
know. Second, a filter question was asked to determine if the respondent produced or sold
face veneer logs for international markets. Nominal measures applicable to this question
were yes and no. Recipients who were unsure were permitted to answer don’t know. If a
respondent answered no they were instructed to stop the survey and return it in the self-
addressed stamped envelope provided. Respondents answering yes were instructed to
continue the survey by first indicating whether they sell to a broker, directly to
international customers or to domestic veneer manufacturers that export.

Respondents were asked what percentage of veneer logs they produce or purchase
are exported. The ratio measures for this variable were less than 1%, 1 to 10%, 1 1-25%,
26-50%, 51-75%, and 76 to 100%. Further, respondents were asked to what extent they
agreed or disagreed with four statements regarding international demand The variables
included government policy, foreign competition, world demand, and changes in species
demanded. A Likert scale was constructed to measure their relative agreement with the

statements using the responses strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly

39

disagree. The logger’s survey concluded with an open-ended comment section that
encouraged respondents to air their opinions about the status of the veneer log resource.

The veneer mill survey included a fifth major category regarding business
strategies and industry trends. Variables measured in the industry trends question
included veneer log volumes, industry profit margins, specialization, percentage of price
increases to landowners, marketing, yield of architectural, panel, and furniture grade
veneers, and customer acceptance of defects. The ordinal measures increasing, about the
same, or decreasing allowed these trends to be rank-ordered separately. Respondents
were also allowed the Option of answering they don’t know.

Respondents were asked if they were finding it more difficult to purchase veneer
logs Nominal measures to this question were yes and no. Recipients who were unsure
were permitted to answer don’t know. This question acted as a filter to the business
strategy question as respondents who answered no to this question were instructed to skip
the strategy question. Variables in the business strategy question were hiring additional
log buyers, installing new equipment technologies, holding lower log inventories, and an
open-ended ‘other’ comment section. The hiring additional log buyers and holding lower
log inventory questions were arranged so respondents could check a box if that business
strategy applied. Checking the box is equivalent to a nominal measure of yes while
leaving the box unchecked is equivalent to a nominal measure of no. The equipment
technologies and ‘Other’ questions were structured as open-ended comments. Results
from these questions identify which technologies are being implemented or what ‘Other’

factors are considered important by the veneer sector.

Survey Procedures

A six-page draft-survey, designed to elicit the perceptions of loggers and veneer
mill procurement specialists, was pre-tested among researchers and industry
professionals. Revisions were made to improve reliability and validity. The revised draft
survey was reviewed by the survey consulting service of Michigan State University, the
Institute for Public Policy and Social Science Research (IPPSSR), prior to the initial
mailings. Changes to the question format and general survey layout were made as per
IPPSSR suggestions. The final survey was mailed in two stages. First, the 1482 recipients
from the Lake States primary producer’s guides and the Indiana and Illinois timber
buyers license lists were mailed the logger’s version complete with a prepaid return
envelope (Appendix 05). A cover letter was sent with the survey explaining the research
project, how the participants were selected, the voluntary nature of the survey, and the
confidentiality of the results (Appendix C4). The surveys were numbered to prevent the
accidental re-mailing Of reminders to respondents. Three weeks after the initial mailing a
postcard reminder was sent to all non-respondents (Appendix C.6). Another three weeks
passed before a second survey complete with a new cover letter was mailed to all non-
respondents (Appendix C8). Assuming that the independent nature of loggers might
result in a low response rate, a device was built into the second cover letter designed to
get the respondent’s attention. The second cover letter infomed the recipients that a
colleague of theirs with twenty years of experience in the logging and sawmill industry
designed the survey. This factual statement was designed to appeal to their sense of
fraternity. Furthermore, recipients were informed that federal, state, and university

foresters were following this research effort and their opinions would be heard.

4l

Additionally, two untamished 1998 pennies were fixed to the second cover letter
informing the recipients that this survey presented them with the opportunity to ‘get your
two cents worth in.’ Each second cover letter, printed in black ink, was signed
individually in blue ink to give it a personalized touch. A sharpened pencil was also fixed
to the second cover letter in the hope that recipients would immediately take the twenty
minutes needed to fill out the survey. A pre—paid self-addressed return envelope was also
included in the second mailing.

The first veneer mill survey with an enclosed pre—paid return envelope was mailed
a few days after the initial mailing of the logger’s survey was completed (Appendix C.3).
A cover letter was sent with the survey explaining the research project, how the veneer
producers were selected, the voluntary nature Of the survey, and the confidentiality of the
results (Appendix C2). The surveys were addressed to the contact person listed in the
states’ primary producer guides. The returned personalized surveys prevented accidental
re—mailing Of reminders to respondents. Three weeks after the initial mailing, a postcard
reminder was sent to all non-respondents (Appendix 06). When an additional three
weeks had passed, a second survey complete with a new cover letter was mailed to all
non-respondents (Appendix 07). Because there were only thirty—eight veneer mills in
total, it was feasible to contact by telephone all non-respondents and ask for their
cooperation in this project. After an additional three weeks had passed, personalized
letters with a third copy of the veneer mill survey was mailed to all non-respondents
along with a sharpened pencil and a pre-paid return envelope (Appendix C.9). A second
round of telephone calls was placed in an attempt to convince non-respondents to take the

time and return a completed survey. In many cases only the office manager could be

42

reached and a message was left asking for the contact persons cooperation in filling out

and returning the survey.

DatgAngjysis

Returns and non-retums were analyzed for each state. Even though the survey
procedures included persistent efforts to reduce non-response, some non-response was
expected to occur. There are several methods available to deal with non-response and
check for bias. In the logger’s survey wave analysis was the method used to check for
response bias. This method determined if responses clunged substantially from week to
week as the surveys were returned. Non-response analysis of the veneer mill survey
consisted of an examination of the business characteristics of non-responding mills. For
example, the non-response of large veneer producers with considerable market power
would have a greater potential impact on the statistical significance of the survey results
than the non-response from a small veneer producer.

A descriptive statistical analysis of all independent and dependent variables was
conducted. Nominal measures are reported as percentages. Ordinal measures include the
central tendency (mean) and the dispersion statistics such as the standard deviations. The
software used to analyze data collected was Statistical Package for Social Scientists

(SPSS 1997).

43

 

 

Chapter 4

Results and Discussion

The discussion that follows is a presentation of the results for the two surveys
described in Chapter 3. A description of the respondents for both surveys is followed by
the results that are presented by the Objectives defined in Chapter 1. Additionally,
responses to questions concerning the export markets are reported as is the section
regarding industry trends which was included in the veneer mill survey.

In order to provide useful information about the variables from the frequency
distributions reported, statistics provide measures of central tendency. Three useful
measures of central tendency are the mode (the most frequent value), the arithmetic mean
(average), and the median (the middle attribute). This chapter will focus on comparing
means. Babbie ( 1996) reports that averages have the special advantage of reducing raw
data to its most manageable form, a single number. Further, Babbie (1996) notes that the
disadvantages of averages can be alleviated somewhat through the reporting of
summaries of the dispersion of responses. The measure of dispersion used in this thesis is
the standard deviation. The standard deviation is the square root of the variance, which
means it is in the same units as the raw data and tells us the extent to which the answers
are concentrated around the mean. For example, a standard deviation of zero means all
the scores are the same, low standard deviations are interpreted as little variability from
the mean, and high standard deviations result from greater variability from the mean.

Of the 38 veneer mills listed in the primary producer guides mailed the survey, it
was determined that three facilities were classified incorrectly and one had gone out of

business. Four veneer mills, owned by one corporation, were treated as one survey

 

 

because the respondent was in charge of log procurement for all four operations.
Therefore, 27 mills responded to this survey representing an 87% overall response rate
(N=31). Of these, one mill did not fill out the survey noting they do not deal with high-
grade veneer logs. Subsequently, 26 usable surveys were available for analysis
representing an 87% overall response rate (N=30).

Forty-seven logger’s surveys were returned as undeliverable representing 3% of
the population (N=l481). A total of 596 logger surveys were returned representing
slightly greater than 40% of the population. Of these, 216 respondents representing 14%
of the population answered no to the filter question indicating that they are not involved
in the veneer log business at this time. The resulting 380 usable logger surveys available
for analysis represent a 25% overall response rate (N=1481).

Industry professionals with different amounts of time on the job may have
different opinions as to the status of the resource. Therefore both surveys asked the
number of years of experience in veneer log procurement of the respondents. Slightly less
than 70 percent of mill respondents have at least 21 years in veneer log procurement
(Table 13). When compared to the veneer mill survey, only 36.3 percent of responding
loggers have at least 21 years of experience while the largest group, those with 11 to 21
years experience, represent 38.7 percent of the total (Table 14).

The first Objective of this research was ‘to measure the attitudes and perception of
availability Of hardwood face veneer logs among industry log buyers and logging
professionals. Survey questions 7 and 8 were designed to measure respondents attitudes
regarding factors affecting domestic availability for the veneer mill and loggers survey

respectively. These factors were increased international demand, conflicting landowner

45

objectives, urban development, forest-land fragmentation, property turnover, absentee
ownership, parcel size, previous high-grading, environmental regulations, and mistrust of
loggers. A Likert scale measuring relative importance offered respondents the choice
very important, somewhat important, neutral, somewhat unimportant, and very
unimportant.

Increased international demand was the factor considered most important to
domestic availability by both groups (Tables 15 and 16). When queried about the relative
importance of international demand, sixteen veneer mill respondents (64%) reported this
factor very important while seven (28%) considered this somewhat important.
Respondents to the logger’s survey answered similarly as indicated by the 179
respondents (49.6%) who answered very important and the 132 (36.6%) who considered
this somewhat important.

Respondents from both groups held similar opinions regarding the relative
importance of previous high grading and considered this factor second most influential to
the domestic availability of veneer logs. Eleven veneer mill respondents (44%) answered
that this factor is very important while an additional 11 (44%) answered somewhat
important. Similarly 161 respondents (44.8%) from the logger’s survey answered that this
factor is very important while 131 respondents (36.5%) answered somewhat important.

Veneer mill respondents ranked increased environmental regulations as the third
most important factor. Twelve respondents (48%) reported this factor as very important
while nine respondents (36%) answered somewhat important. Differing on this factor,
respondents to the logger’s survey ranked increased environmental regulations eighth in

importance behind landowner mistrust of loggers, increased forest-land fragmentation,

46

conflicting landowner Objectives, decreasing parcel size, and urban development.
Ranking the relative importance of owner mistrust of loggers the third most important
factor, 147 loggers (40.7%) answered very important while 115 respondents (31.9%)
answered somewhat important.

The factor considered least important by both groups was increasing absentee
ownership. Only two veneer mill respondents (8%) answered that this factor is very
important while 12 respondents (48%) answered somewhat important. Similarly, 4O
responding logger’s (11.6%) answered that this factor is very important and 103
respondents (29.9%) answered somewhat important.

The means for the independent variables measuring attitudes and perception of
domestic availability for veneer mill reSpondents ranged from 1.44 to 2.36 (Table 17).
The mean score for a variable indicates relative importance where a score of 1= very
important, 2= somewhat important, 3= neutral, 4= somewhat unimportant and 5= very
unimportant. Mean scores of less than two indicate that the central tendency leans toward
very important. This confirms that ‘increased international demand’ (1.44), ‘previous
high-grading’ (1.68), and ‘increased environmental regulations’ (1.72) are the
independent variables with central tendencies leaning toward very important by veneer
mill procurement specialists. The variable ‘absentee ownership’ was reported as least
important (2.60), and the mean reveals respondent’s attitudes tend toward neutrality. The
standard deviations are consistently low to moderate for these variables (Table 17).

The means and standard deviations for the independent variables measuring
attitudes and perception of domestic availability from the logger’s survey results are

reported in Table 18. ‘Increased international demand’ (1.69), ‘previous high-grading’

47

 

 

 

(1.81), and ‘Owner mistrust of loggers’ (1.98) are the independent variables seen as very
and somewhat important by logging professionals. The other variables measured are
somewhat important. The variable reported as least important was ‘increasing absentee
Ownership’ (2.72), which reveals respondent’s attitudes tend toward neutrality. The
standard deviations for the variables measured generally report moderate variability
around the means (Table 18).

The second research objective was ‘to determine the factors which are perceived
to be contributing to scarcity Of the veneer log resource.’ Respondents were asked to
indicate to what extent they agreed or disagreed with several statements about veneer
logs in order to quantify the factors perceived to be contributing to scarcity. Variables
measured were location of veneer timber, time in procurement, hi gh-grading and
selection harvests, management plans on NIPF lands, whole tree chipping,
standardization of tree grades, sustainability of current harvest rates, and the relationship
of price to availability. The Likert scale from which respondent attitudes were measured
was strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree. The statements were
presented in Questions 6 and 7 respectively on the veneer mill and loggers surveys.

Veneer mill respondent’s perceptions regarding the statement “the amount of time
spent in procurement for veneer log buyers is increasing” reveals that slightly greater
than 92% of respondents believe it is (Table 19). Twelve respondents (46.2%) strongly
agreed and twelve respondents (46.2%) agreed. Similady the survey results shows that
the dominant perception among loggers is also agreement (Table 20) as 79.2% of loggers
either strongly agreed or agreed with this statement. Table 21 and 22 respectively report

the means and standard deviations for the factors perceived to be contributing to scarcity

48

for the veneer mill and logger surveys. Respondents mean score for this statement was
1.65 for the mill survey and 1.96 for the logger survey confirming the central tendency is
toward strongly agree.

Both groups of survey respondents generally agree that “whole tree chipping is
decreasing the next generation of veneer logs” (Table 19). Of veneer mill respondents
58.9% either strongly agreed or agreed while 63.8% of loggers concur (Table 20). The
means for this statement were 2.34 and 2.31 for the mill and logger groups respectively.
Similar frequency and percent statistics were recorded for the statement “selection
harvesting for veneer promotes high-grading and stand degradation” for both groups.
However the mean for the veneer mill survey (2.80) tended toward neutrality while the
logger group (2.41) still leaned toward agreement.

Additionally, respondents perceptions tended toward agreement with the
statement ‘quality veneer logs are obtainable if we are willing to pay higher prices’
contradicting the notion of physical scarcity but supporting the idea of economic scarcity.
The veneer mill mean (2.50) was similar to the logger mean (2.61) and was about half
way between agree and neutral. The respective standard deviations (.98 and 1.09) show
moderate variation around the mean. Similar results were recorded for the statement
‘standardized tree grade between the U.S. Forest Service and industry are necessary.’

Regarding a statement that contradicts Forest Service FIA results, ‘the majority of
standing timber of veneer quality suitable for face veneer is located on public timberland
withdrawn from harvest or reserved on other lands that do not permit timber harvests,’
veneer mill respondents were almost evenly divided. Loggers tended toward agreement

on this incorrect statement. The mean for the veneer mill survey (3.03) demonstrates the

49

respondent’s central tendency toward neutrality. The standard deviation (1.11) showed
moderate variability around the mean The logger survey (2.61) recorded a mean score
about half way between agree and neutrality. The standard deviation (1.18) showed
moderate variability around the mean.

The frequency and percent statistics for veneer mill respondents slightly leaned
toward disagreement with the statement “the current harvesting of veneer is being done at
sustainable cutting rates” while loggers leaned toward agreement. However the means
showed strong neutrality for the mill group (3.15) and a central tendency toward
neutrality for the loggers (2.88).

The statement ‘management plans should be required on non-industrial private
forest lands’ would presumably promote better forest management and thereby a superior
future veneer supply. However the majority of veneer mill respondents were in
disagreement with this statement as nine (34.6%) disagreed and six strongly disagreed
(23.1%). Similar to the mill survey, the majority of loggers were in disagreement with
this statement as 69 respondents (18.8%) disagreed and 127 strongly disagreed (34.6%).
The mean for mill respondent’s (3.57) indicated this tendency toward disagreement. The
standard deviation (1.13) showed moderate variability around the mean. Similarly, the
mean for logger’s (3.45) indicated that respondents were strongly neutral leaning toward
disagreement. The standard deviation (1.42) shows greater variability around the mean.

To help determine the factors which are perceived to be contributing to scarcity Of
the veneer log resource, Questions 8 and 9 were designed to quantify certain market
characteristics perceived to be contributing to veneer log scarcity. Variables included

establishing uniform veneer log grades, standardizing veneer product grades, banning

hardwood log exports, promoting character marked wood, competition from substitute
products, marketing odd species, and log color. A Likert scale designed to measure the
relative importance Of these market characteristics offered respondents the choice very
important, somewhat important, neutral, somewhat unimportant, and very unimportant.

Veneer mill respondents ranked ‘competition from substitute products’ as the
most important market characteristic (Table 23). Eight respondents (33.3%) reported this
market characteristic as very important and 13 respondents (54.2%) thought it was
somewhat important representing greater that 87 percent of respondents. Similarly, mill
respondents ranked the relative importance of ‘log color’ highly as 80 percent of
respondents answered either very important or somewhat important. The means for the
market characteristics ‘competition from substitute products’ (1.83) and ‘log color’ (1.84)
reveal this trend in respondent’s perceptions. The respective standard deviations reported
(.76 and .85) show low variability around the mean. In the logger’s survey ‘log color’
was ranked as the most important market with a mean (1.89) indicating a central
tendency between somewhat and very important (Table 24). The standard deviation (.93)
shows little variability around the mean. The means for ‘competition from substitute
products’ (2.25), ‘establishing uniform veneer log grades’ (2.20), and ‘marketing efforts
aimed at Odd species’ (2.27) all showed central tendencies toward somewhat important.
To a slightly lesser degree, responding loggers similarly reported the relative importance
of the characteristic ‘standardizing veneer product grades’ (mean = 2.30).

The veneer mill respondents’ attitudes toward ‘promoting character-marked
wood’ tended toward somewhat important Five respondents (20%) reported this market

characteristic as very important and 14 respondents (56%) answered somewhat

51

important The mean (2.16) indicates this view and the standard deviation (.94) shows
moderate variability around the mean. Responding loggers ranked the relative importance
of ‘promoting character—marked wood’ similarly (mean = 2.35).

Veneer mill respondents ranked the relative importance of ‘marketing efforts
aimed at odd species’ above the characteristic ‘establishing uniform veneer log grades’ or
‘standardizing veneer product grades.’ The mean for the characteristic ‘marketing efforts
aimed at odd species’ (2.56) reveals a central tendency half way between somewhat
important and neutral. Respondent’s attitudes about the other two characteristics were
reported as largely neutral. The reported means were 2.96 for ‘standardizing veneer
product grades’ and 3.08 ‘establishing uniform veneer log grades.’ The respective
standard deviations (1.28 and 1.24) for these characteristics showed greater variability
around the means. The characteristics ‘establishing uniform veneer log grades’ and
‘standardizing veneer product grades’ were proposed by the Forest Service in the early
1960’s as an effective measure to resolve quality controversies.

Responding loggers’ attitudes about the characteristic ‘banning hardwood log
exports’ is largely neutral (mean = 2.91) and the standard deviation (1.40) shows
significant variability around the mean. The comment section of the survey results
revealed confusion among respondents on the question wording. This indicates failure of

pro-testing for this question.

Wham grid Future Price

Objective three was ‘to measure the attitudes of industry professionals regarding

 

the quantity and quality of available supply.’ Question 3 on the veneer mill survey and

Question 4 on the logger survey measured the reSpondent’s perception of quality.

52

Perceptions were measured through a Likert scale constructed to measure whether
respondent believed the resource was increasing, about the same, decreasing or don’t
know.

The majority of veneer mill respondents perceive the quality of red oak, white
oak, and hard maple to be declining (Table 27). This group tends to perceive ash to be
about the same. While none of the respondents answered that they think the quality of
cherry or walnut veneer logs is increasing, the frequencies and percentages do not report
a clear majority Of respondents tending toward decreasing quality (Table 27). The veneer
mill survey clearly shows that white oak (mean = 3.00) and walnut (mean = 3.25)
respondents perceive decreasing quality (Table 29). The standard deviations for white
oak (.72) and black walnut (.67) reflect moderate variability around the mean.

In contrast the means reported for the logger’s survey strongly lean toward
decreasing quality for white oak (2.82) and black walnut (2.88) (Table 30). To a lesser
degree loggers tended to perceive black cherry (2.64) also to be decreasing. The mean for
red oak (2.51) was directly in between about the same and decreasing. However, hard

maple (2.37) in addition to ash (2.48) tended toward being about the same.

Attitudes RegardingQuantitX

Respondents’ perceptions regarding quantity was measured in Question 4 on the
veneer mill survey and Question 5 on the logger survey. Respondents were queried
regarding their beliefs about veneer logs in the small (1 1-15 inch), medium (16-20 inch),

and large (21+ inch) diameter classes. The means for both are similar (Table 31 and 32).

53

In the veneer mill survey thirteen respondents (50%) answered that the quantity of
veneer logs in the small diameter classes is increasing. Nine respondents (34.6%)
answered that the quantity in the small diameter classes has remained the same. Three
respondents (11.5%) answered the quantity in the small diameter classes is decreasing
and one respondent (3.8%) answered don’t know.

None of the respondents however, answered that the quantity of veneer logs in
the medium diameter classes is increasing. Ten respondents (38.5%) answered that the
quantity in the medium diameter classes has remained the same. Fifteen respondents
(57.7%) reported that that the quantity in the medium diameter classes is decreasing. One
respondent (3.8%) answered don’t know.

No respondents reported that the quantity of veneer logs in the large diameter
classes is increasing. One respondent (4.0%) answered that the quantity of veneer logs in
the large diameter classes has remained the same. Fully 92 percent of the respondents, 23
survey respondents, believe that the quantity of veneer logs in the large diameter classes
is decreasing. One respondent (4.0%) answered don’t know (1 missing).

Regarding the frequency and percentage statistics for the logger survey 191
respondents (51.8%) answered that the quantity of veneer logs in the small diameter
classes is increasing. One hundred and sixteen respondents (31.4%) answered that the
quantity in the small diameter classes has remained the same. Forty-four respondents
(11.9%) answered the quantity in the small diameter classes is decreasing and 11
respondents (4.9%) answered they don’t know (11 missing).

Twenty-seven respondents (7.2%) answered that the quantity of veneer logs in

the medium diameter classes is increasing. Two hundred and two respondents (54.2%)

54

answered that the quantity in the medium diameter classes has remained the same. One
hundred and thirty four respondents (35.9%) reported that the quantity in the medium
diameter classes is decreasing and ten respondents (2.7%) answered they don’t know (11
missing).

Only ten respondents (2.7%) reported that the quantity of veneer logs in the large
diameter classes is increasing. Thirty—six respondents (9.8%) answered that the quantity
of veneer logs in the large diameter classes has remained the same. Fully 84.4% of the
respondents (309) answered that the quantity Of veneer logs in the large diameter classes

is decreasing. Eleven respondents (3%) answered don’t know (14 missing).

3531 Price Trends

Rising real prices as an indicator of scarcity was discussed in Chapter 2. To
further achieve objective three, respondents from both surveys were asked their Opinions
regarding the real price of veneer logs for each species group over the next ten years.
Question 5 on the mill survey and Question 6 on the logger survey were designed to
measure respondent’s beliefs regarding future veneer log prices. Beliefs were measured
through a Likert scale constructed to measure whether respondent believed the resource
was increasing, about the same, or decreasing. This scale recorded the value one as
increasing, two as about the same, and three as decreasing. The non-response frequencies
in both surveys show a significant number of recipients chose to ignore this part of the
question (Tables 33 and 34).

The mean scores for all species groups clearly show that respondents from both

surveys central tendency heavily points toward future price increases (Tables 35 and 36).

55

For mill respondents the species group with the lowest reported mean (1.04) and standard
deviation (.20) was hard maple indicating respondents strongly feel the future price of
maple will rise. White oak (1.10), black cherry (1.14), red oak (1.13), and ash (1.26) all
recorded mean scores leaning strongly toward price increases with standard deviations
revealing small variability around the mean. The mean for black walnut (1.35) was the
largest reported but still heavily pointed toward future price increases. Black walnut’s
standard deviation (.48) shows relatively little variability around the mean. Loggers
responded similarly to all species except ash (1.57), which was between increasing and
neutral.

The dominant belief for both groups is that real prices will increase for all species
groups. But because the population of the mill survey is small (N=26), and so many
respondents elected to ignore this section Of the question, the usefulness of the mill
averages are questionable. In the loggers survey however, the response is large enough to
give us useful averages. In general terms, mill respondents predict prices to increase
about twenty percent while loggers believe prices will rise slightly greater than one-third

in real terms over the next ten years (Tables 37 and 38).

Future Mafiability

Question 10 on the logger’s survey and 12 on the mill survey were designed to
elicit respondents’ opinions regarding factors important in determining future veneer log
availability. These factors included forest management education programs, tax
incentives on NIPF land, elimination of the estate tax, special capital gains taxes, uniform

laws requiring best management practices, timber buyers certification, and funding

56

stewardship programs. A Likert scale allowed respondents to choose from very
important, somewhat important, neutral, somewhat unimportant, and very unimportant.

Both groups reported ‘increased forest management education programs’ as the
most important factor (Tables 39 and 40). Similarly, the three factors that dealt with tax
issues were reported high in relative importance for both groups. The factor ‘additional
tax incentives for timber management on private lands’ was the most important of the tax
issues followed by ‘Special capital gains rates for timber investments.’

The mill survey included ‘banning hardwood log exports’ as a factor and the
reported mean (2.32) indicates reSpondents central tendency is between somewhat
important and neutral. As in the logger’s survey, it must be noted that several respondents
were confused about the question wording and applicable levels of importance to this
factor indicating that this question failed in pre-testing.

To a greater degree the means for the remaining three factors tended toward
neutrality for both surveys. The mean for the factor ‘instituting uniform laws requiring
best management practices’ was 2.65 for the mill survey and 2.76 for the loggers. The
means for the variable ‘funding stewardship programs’ was 2.61 for mill respondents and
2.49 for loggers. Finally, the relative importance of ‘instituting timber buyers
certification’ was reported the least important factor by both groups. The mean for mill
respondent’s (3.03) shows that respondents are definitely neutral to this factor in
determining future availability. The reported mean for responding logger’s (2.72) shows
a central tendency towards neutrality but still is somewhere between somewhat important

and neutral. The standard deviation (1.40) reports significant variability around the mean.

57

The Export Markets

An export section was designed to elicit the opinions of veneer mill and logger
respondents regarding the perceived impact Of international markets on the veneer log
resource. A filter question was asked to determine if the respondent produced or sold face
veneer logs for intemational markets. For the veneer mill survey, eleven respondents
(42.3%) reported that they export logs while the remaining fifteen respondents (57.7%)
reported that they do not export logs (Table 43 and 44). Two respondents reported that
they sell their export logs through a broker, ten respondents reported that they sell
directly to international customers, and three respondents reported that they sell to other
domestic veneer mills which in turn exports the logs.

For the logger survey, two hundred and fifty respondents (67.8%) reported that
they export logs while sixty-nine respondents (18.7%) reported that they do not export
logs. F ifiy respondents (13.6%) answered they don’t know. One hundred and forty—five
of these respondents reported that they sell their export logs through a broker, 48 reported
that they sell directly to international customers, and 150 respondents reported that they
sell to other domestic veneer mills which in turn exports the logs.

Finally, Question 16 on the mill survey and 14 on the logger survey asked to what
extent they agreed or disagreed with four statements regarding international demand. A
Likert scale Offered respondents the choices strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and
strongly disagree. Variables measured included government policy, foreign competition,
world demand, and changed in species demanded.

Respondents from both groups tended to agree with the statement ‘world demand

for eastern hardwoods is strong and will continue to grow’ (Tables 47 and 48). A

58

 

 

significant difference between both groups is reported for the statement ‘the government
policy of allowing unprocessed log exports is good for the economy.’ The mean for mill
respondent’s (3.41) indicated strong neutrality drifting toward disagreement while the
mean for logger’s (2.43) generally reflects agreement. Both groups differed on the
statement ‘foreign competition for high quality logs is unfair to American producers.’
Mill respondents were between agree and neutral (2.82) while loggers (3.50) were
between neutral and disagree. Also loggers (2.43) tended toward agreement with the
statement ‘changes in species demanded result primarily from changes in foreign

demand’ while mill respondents (2.94) were neutral.

Industry Trends

The veneer mill survey included a section that did not appear on the logger’s
survey. Respondents perceptions regarding the industry trends were measured through a
Likert scale designed to measure whether respondent felt the trend was increasing, about
the same, decreasing, or don’t know. This scale recorded the value one as increasing, two
as about the same, three as decreasing, and four as don’t know. These trends included
veneer log volumes, industry profit margins, specialization, percentage of price increases
to landowners, marketing, yield of architectural, panel, and furniture grade veneers, and
customer acceptance of defects.

Regarding the status of the ‘volume of veneer logs used’ the mean (1.36) indicates
respondents strongly agree the volume is increasing (Table 49). The standard deviation
(.56) shows small variability around the mean (Table 50). Conversely, the mean for the
trend ‘veneer industry profit margins’ (2.70) indicates respondents think that profit

margins are decreasing. The standard deviation (.55) also shows small variability around

59

the mean. The mean for the trend ‘specialization within the veneer industry’ (1.56) is half
way between increasing and about the same as is the mean for the trend ‘percentage of
price increases going to landowners’ (1.56). The standard deviation (.71) for this trend
shows greater variability around the mean.

The central tendencies for two industry trends were repOrted as being about the
same. The means for the trends ‘marketing efforts directed at niche markets’ (1.92) and
‘customer acceptance of veneer with more visible defects’ (1.92) indicate that
respondents tend to think these trends have remained the same. The respective standard
deviations (.81) show moderate variability around the means.

When the three grades of veneer are compared, the mean for the trend ‘the
percentage of veneer logs yielding furniture grade veneer’ (1.52) lies between increasing
and about the same. The standard deviation (.82) shows moderate variability around the
mean. The mean for the trend ‘the percentage of veneer logs yielding panel grade veneer’
(2.5) shows respondents central tendency is somewhere between about the same and
decreasing, slightly leaning toward decreasing. The standard deviation (.71) shows
moderate variability around the mean. The mean for the trend ‘the percentage of veneer
logs yielding architectural grade veneer’ (2.70) shows respondents central tendency leans
toward decreasing. The standard deviation (.75) also shows moderate variability around
the mean.

Veneer mill respondents were asked if they are finding it more difficult to buy
veneer grade logs. Nineteen respondents (76%) answered yes to this question. Four
respondents (16%) answered no and two respondents (8%) reported they do not know

(1missing).

60

A question regarding the implementation Of business strategies was posed to
respondents who had answered that they were finding it more difficult to buy veneer
grade logs. Eleven respondents (42.4%) indicated that their firms have hired additional
veneer log buyers as a business strategy. Fifteen respondents (57.7%) failed to answer
this question. Thirteen respondents (50%) reported that their firm has installed new
equipment as a business strategy while the remaining thirteen (50%) failed to answer this
question. A comment section was made available to let respondents indicate what type of
new equipment has been installed. New veneer press dryers, computer controls for the
slicers, metal detectors, clipping equipment, and new knife grinders were among the
technologies noted to increase efficiency. Three respondents (11.5%) noted that their firm
was holding lower log inventories while the remaining twenty-three respondents (88.5%)
failed to answer this question Other comments included expanding the distance that
buyers go to procure logs, purchasing from suppliers outside their region to keep the mill
supplied, and difficulties in finding willing workers.

Respondents on both surveys were asked whether their customers want to know if
the veneer logs they purchase come from sustainable forest management Three mill
respondents (11.5%) answered yes, twenty-two (84.6%) answered no, and one respondent
(3.8%) answered don’t know. Similarly, forty loggers (10.9%) answered yes, two
hundred ninety-one (79.3%) answered no, and thirty-six (9.8%) answered don’t know

(13 missing).

61

 

 

Non-Response

As mentioned above, the veneer mill survey response rate was a strong 87%.
Included among the twenty-seven mills that responded were the large business
conglomerates with the most market power. Two firms in Indiana and two firms in
Wisconsin failed to respond The Wisconsin firms were rotary veneer producers and may
have judged the survey inapplicable to their operations. The non-respondents in Indiana
are small operations producing face veneer. While their input was desirable, no bias has
been determined because of their non~response due to their small volume.

A non-response analysis of the logger’s survey was conducted using a wave
analysis. The first wave of surveys returned consisted of 275 responses, the second wave
66 responses, and the third wave 39 responses. Response frequencies for the respective
waves were recalculated and compared to determine if bias exists between waves.
Comparisons of the frequencies revealed no bias. For example, in Question four 42.2% Of
respondents in the first wave answered that red oak quality was about the same while
respondents in the second and third waves answered 35.4% and 36.8% respectively.
Further, the percentage of respondents who think large diameter logs is decreasing
(question 5) was 83.9%, 83.9%, and 89.2% for waves 1, 2, and 3 respectively.
Additionally, the wave analysis revealed that 70.8%, 64.5% and 72.7% of respondents
believe the real price of hard maple (question 6) will increase for waves 1, 2, and 3
respectively. When asked if customers want to know if veneer logs originate from
sustainable forest management (question 11), the wave analysis revealed that 78.9%,

80%, and 81.1% of respondents answered no for waves 1, 2, and 3 respectively.

62

Chapter three noted that the survey population was divided as follows: 568
loggers resided in Indiana, 435 Illinois, 386 Michigan, 28 Minnesota, and 64 Wisconsin.
The Illinois and Indiana populations were derived from a state published licensed timber
buyers list and contained buyers who resided outside those states. For the purpose of the
non-response analysis they will be included in the state where they purchased their timber
buyers license. Of the 435 surveys mailed to Illinois loggers, 76 usable surveys were
returned representing a 17% response rate. Indiana loggers were mailed 568 surveys of
which 143 usable surveys were returned representing a 25% response rate. Michigan
loggers were mailed 386 surveys, of which 131 usable surveys were returned
representing a 34% response rate. Minnesota loggers were mailed 28 surveys, of which 8
usable surveys were returned, representing a 29% response rate. And finally, Wisconsin
loggers were mailed 64 surveys, of which 22 usable surveys were returned, representing a
24% response rate. The comparably low response rate from Illinois loggers may reflect
the fact that veneer is not a big part of the state’s forest products economy as indicated by
the presence of only one veneer production facility. The response rates from the other

states are close enough to conclude no response bias exists between states.

Comment Section

The comment section of the logger’s survey requested respondents to tell us
anything else they felt we should know about the veneer log resource. One hundred and
seventy-two respondents used the space provided to give us additional information. This
represents 11.6% of the survey population and 45% of all returned surveys. One of the

themes repeated in the comment section was that loggers hold consulting foresters in low

63

regard. Loggers generally feel that consulting foresters mark timber with their
commission as the priority ignoring best management practices, essentially hi gh-grading
for higher commissions. For example, one respondent wrote “If the timber industry wants
to do something responsible, eliminate the cutting of live healthy trees under 15” d.b.h.,
and have the foresters realize what a 15" tree is. They mark many trees too small
themselves.” Another respondent wrote, “Forestry dept. relies too much on consultant
foresters thus marking timber based on money instead of forest management.” A different
respondent commented “I find that the average consulting forester is no better at marking
timber than the average logger; in fact some are far worse. Our so called forestry
professionals are high grading for bigger commissions, mark dangerous pull trees, and
rarely come to a job they have sold.” One respondent commented “consulting foresters
are NO: as white as the driven snow as all newspaper and TV reports lead the general
public to believe.” Additionally one respondent commented “comment about certifying
timber buyers- much more important to certify consultants or whoever is marking the
trees.”

State and USDA Forest Service personnel were generally praised for good
management practices. One respondent commented “the state seems to do a good job
marking their timber.” Another commented “I feel there would be additional veneer
available at present and in the future if US Forest Service foresters instead of wildlife and
environmentalist personnel would be allowed to manage the land that is in the timber
harvesting program.” One respondent compared US. Forest Service foresters to
consulting foresters by commenting “U.S. Foresters (not too bad) and consulting foresters

(don’t know nothing).

Government policy regarding the management of public timberlands however was
criticized. For example one respondent wrote, “There seems to be a policy on the Ottawa
National Forest to ‘Not’ harvest a large number of over mature, past their prime, and
dying large trees. This takes away a large area of prime veneer growing land.” Another
wrote “The state and Gov. owns many acres of which I believe more selective harvesting
should occur. I see many grade trees that will be lost because of the unavailability of

'Q’

management contact Still another respondent commented that “There seems to be a
mentality in the Forest Service not to manage the forests for the good of the forest, but for
the highest money return. Untold millions of feet of logs are being wasted by letting them
grow well past prime grade where they deteriorate into pulp grade.”

Several references to ‘best management practices’ (BMP’s) were written in the
comment section. One respondent commented that “Any uniform laws requiring best
management practices should be required of the state and federal forest first because it
belongs to the public and they should practice what they preach.” Another commented
“Continual high grading of smaller and smaller trees without regard for best management
practices and regeneration will continue to deplete the veneer and grade log growing
stock base. A requirement that all mills and brokers buy from sustainable forest
management would be a good start. In the current system of supply and demand greed
wins out over forest stewardship.” Still another respondent wrote “I feel veneer logs-
especially in the species of hard maple, black cherry, red oak, and walnut will continue to

become harder to find if the logging within the private sector is not controlled more

strongly by BMP’s.”

65

Another dominant attitude was logger opposition to government regulation of
private property. One comment stated “I feel we already have enough regulations and
laws in Indiana.” Another stated “I feel we should avoid government intervention in the
timber industry. Government laws and regulations often do more harm than good.”
Additionally one respondent commented “there is too much government regulation now!
We don’t need more regulations!” And another commented “We need government out of
everyone’s business. Further one respondent commented “Education! Education! Not
Laws!”

Several respondents wrote comments that support landowner education. For
example, one respondent wrote “the best thing to help the veneer log resource is to
educate the landowner to select harvest so there will always be good timber for the
future.” Another respondent commented “The log industry as a whole needs to wake up.
Loggers need to be educated on good forestry practices. Selective harvest not just high-
grading or butcher jobs (clear-cut anything over 10” goes).” Still a different respondent
commented “All parties concerned needs more education on when, how, and why trees
should be harvested. To many times woods are being harvested that are not mature.”

The Opinion that diameter limits are necessary on hardwood timber harvests was
also expressed in the comment section. One comment stated “Far too many small trees
are being harvested (20 inches and under on the stump). Another commented “Timber in
our area is being cut way too small and a size limit should be put on all timber sales
unless it’s for cleared ground for Ag product A standard size of 18” or bigger at breast

height should be regulated in order to inform the harvest of the future.”

Additionally, several respondents commented on the perceived impact of forest-
land fragmentation. One respondent commented “When land changes owners the timber
is cut to the bone to pay for the land and no future veneer coming on.” Another
commented “I’m concerned that land contractors are buying ground heavily, then cutting
the timber with no regard for timber management.” A respondent from southern Indiana
commented “Tirnberlands are being chopped up and sold off decreasing our quantity of
timber for development. Small parcels of timber ground is satisfactory, but when they
divide large parcels up, usually the areas developed which is not good for our future
timber demands.” Another comment stated “too much timberland is being sold in 5-20
acre plots for private building sites.” And a different respondent commented “We have a
problem with subdivision of forest lands to build houses. That is a major problem.” One

comment stated “Development has really taken atoll on the forest resource.”

Tests of Statistical Significance

Babbie (1995) reports that there is no scientific answer to the question of whether
a given association between two variables is significant, strong, important, interesting, or
worth reporting. However, Babbie (1995) notes that tests of statistical significance are
widely reported in social scientific literature and among these analysis of variance
(ANOVA) is frequently used. The purpose of these tests of significance is to provide a
yardstick against which to estimate the significance of association between variables
(Babbie 1995). This thesis will use analysis of variance and report relationships as
statistically significant at the .05 level. At the 95% confidence interVal or greater we

assume that there is an association between the variables. No hypothesis testing will be

67

conducted on the results from veneer mill survey, as the population of that census was
small.

Objective 1 was ‘to measure the attitudes and perception of availability of
hardwood face veneer logs among industry log buyers and logging professionals.’
Respondents answering their job description as sawmill management, veneer log buyers,
or consulting foresters (Question 3) were collapsed into a new category labeled non-
loggers. Respondents who answered their job description as logger in addition to sawmill
management, veneer log buyers, or consulting foresters were also put into the non-
logger’s category. Answers from this new category were compared against those
respondents who only answered logger as their job description.

To meet Objective 1, factors influencing domestic and future availability were
measured in Questions 8 and 10 respectively. ANOVA tests were conducted to determine
whether or not the respondent category loggers vs. non-loggers were statistically
significant in explaining the variable ‘owner mistrust of loggers’ for loggers (Table 51
and 52). Regarding attitudes about factors influencing future veneer log availability, the
ANOVA values indicate a difference between loggers and non-loggers responses for the
variables ‘additional tax incentives for timber management on private lands’, ‘elimination
of the estate tax’, and ‘instituting special capital gains tax rates for timber investments’
(Table 53 and 54).

Analysis of variance was performed to measure the significance of respondent
category for several other factors that influence availability. The ANOVA tests indicated
statistical significance for loggers vs. non-loggers for the statement ‘standardized tree

grade between the Forest Service and industry are necessary’ (Table 55). The analysis of

variance test showed significance for respondent group for the statement ‘The majority of
standing timber of quality suitable for face veneer is located on public timberland
withdrawn from harvest or reserved on other lands that do not permit timber harvests’
(Table 56).

Analysis of variance also tested for Objective three: “to measure the attitudes of
industry professionals regarding the quantity and quality of available supply.” The
respondent group was statistically significant for perceptions about the quality of hard
maple (Tables 59 and 60). ANOVA values for logger vs. non-logger perceptions about
quantity shows statistical significance for both the medium (16-20 inch) size classes
(Table 61).

Respondents were asked their opinions whether the price of the species under
study would increase, remain the same, or decrease over the next ten years after being
discounted for inflation. For none of the dependent variables tested was respondent group

significant at the .05 level or less (Tables 62 and 63).

69

Chapter 5
Conclusions

This research supports Luppold and Dempsey’s (1996) conclusion that no single
explanation can explain the contradiction between industry’s perception of decreasing
availability and the Forest Service’s documentation of increasing inventories. However,
the survey results help to explain this disconnect, as it is related to the veneer log
resource, by identifying which issues procurement specialists perceive to be most
influential to quality, quantity, and availability. Consequently, while the results of this
survey quantify this sense of a dwindling resource among loggers and veneer mill
managers, they simultaneously reveal a pattern of dynamic social and economic
pressures, which may largely be responsible for this perception.

The measurement of the factors designed to achieve Objective 1; ‘to measure the
attitudes and perception of availability of hardwood face veneer logs among industry log
buyers and logging professionals,’ reflect some of these social and economic dynamics.
For instance, the means testing showed that the two factors cited by both groups as most
important in influencing domestic availability were 1) international demand and 2)
previous high grading. Regarding increased international demand, most economists view
this as a positive result of the global economy. Further, in the export section, loggers
largely disagreed that foreign competition is unfair to American producers indicating that
they profit from this activity.

Concern over past or present high grading, a direct responsibility of the
respondents, can be compared to the results for the statement ‘management plans should

be required on non-industrial private forest lands.’ Means testing showed that most

70

respondents disagree with this solution to the high-grading problem although its
implementation would ultimately result in improved stands of timber.

However, the results from the ANOVA analysis point to another important factor.
The variable ‘owner mistrust of loggers’ was rated significantly different by loggers and
non-loggers. On its own ‘owner mistrust of loggers’ negatively affects availability. But
when combined with factors such as forest land fragmentation, conflicting landowner
objectives, decreasing parcel size, frequent property turnover, urban development, and
increasing absentee ownership, the perception of veneer log scarcity is increased because
procurement is much more difficult. These changing ownership characteristics have real
supply consequences for the veneer industry. Procurement specialists informed of these
changes will increase their chances for success when buying standing timber. When
ownership characteristics are viewed collectively the assertion that procurement
professionals need the skills of public relations managers and social scientists seems
convincing.

Mill respondents’ third most important factor, ‘increased environmental
regulations,’ also reflects the social and economic dynamics of the scarcity issue.
Institutional factors such as restrictive environmental regulations can be costly to
industry, but they represent a social demand for non-market amenities and indirectly
support Stynes (1997) who asserts that forestland in the Lake States is undergoing a
transition from commodity to amenity use. Regulatory uncertainty is a relatively new
factor NIPF owners must consider in addition to wide market swings when evaluating

forest investments and this influences availability (Argow 1996).

71

The variables mentioned above may offer some clarification for some of the
results seen for Objective 2. For instance, the greater than 92% of respondents who agree
that ‘the amount of time spent in procurement is increasing’ may view increasing
physical scarcity as the logical explanation and dismiss the complex social and economic
interactions previously listed. General agreement by respondents with the statement that
‘quality logs are obtainable if we are willing to pay higher prices’ supports the notion of
economic scarcity.

Another statistically significant statement, ‘standardized tree grade between the
Forest Service and industry are necessary,’ was shown to have greater relative agreement
among loggers when compared to veneer mill respondents. Without the clarification
standardization would provide, the veneer mills continue to derive considerable market
power from the status quo. Therefore, it is not surprising that since the Forest Service
proposed standardization in the 1960’s, the veneer sector has consistently resisted this for
both tree grade and veneer grades (Haskell et al. 1963, Haskell 1963).

Means testing showed that the issue of log color, a site—specific quality indicator,
was high in relative importance to both groups. This market characteristic, while
indicative of the “artistic” nature of the veneer industry, illustrates how market power can
play out. Anecdotally, loggers repeatedly complain of potential veneer logs being
rejected because buyers state that the logs are the wrong color. Consequently, loggers
have no known standard against which they can make comparisons and often accuse the
buyers of rejecting the logs for various economic reasons (e. g. changes in demand).

The veneer industry shift toward the use and acceptance of small diameter logs

has been well-established (Hair 1966; Hendricks 1967). Because the long-term market

72

dynamics do not indicate physical shortages, it could be hypothesized that the increasing
supply of smaller diameter logs manufactured with advanced utilization technologies are
satisfying demand. Objective 3, ‘to measure the attitudes of industry professionals
regarding the quantity and quality of available supply,’ revealed that at least half of both
survey groups concur with Forest Service F IA conclusions and believe that the quantity
of veneer logs in the small (ll-15 inch) diameter classes are increasing. Respectively,
92% and 84.4% of mill and logger respondents believe the veneer logs in the large
diameter classes are declining directly contradicting Fl A conclusions that increases are
occurring in all diameter classes. However, ANOVA tests revealed that only for
responses regarding the medium diameter classes (16-20 inches) was respondent category
highly significant The mean reSponse for logs in the medium diameter classes was
between about the same and decreasing.

The industry trend section of the veneer mill survey supports the literature that the
veneer industry is becoming more efficient (Callahan 1990). Means testing revealed that
the majority of respondents believe that the volume of veneer logs being used is
increasing but industry profit margins are decreasing. Because logs are purchased on the
Doyle log scale an incentive is built in to promote the use small diameter logs as
compared to those in the medium or large diameter classes. The yield of veneer is
significantly higher from small logs purchased on the Doyle log scale so the use of small
diameter logs increases profit potential. This may account for veneer log buyers
preference for smaller diameter logs and further support the perception that large
diameter veneer logs are scarce. Further, respondents largely perceive that ‘customer

acceptance of veneer with more defects’ is the same, indicating that the quality from the

73

 

 

 

 

current supply of small logs is satisfying the same demand as did previous supplies of
larger logs.

One area that supports the respondents’ contention that large diameter veneer logs
are becoming scarce concerns the perception that ‘the percentage of veneer logs yielding
architectural grade veneer’ is decreasing. Architectural veneer often has length, width,
and clarity requirements that large diameter logs easily satisfy. Absent standardized
grades however, it is difficult to contest Forest Service findings of increasing quality and
quantity in the large diameter classes. Further, it is not likely that Forest Service FIA
conclusions are incorrect regarding quality or quantity. The Forest Service and the states
have addressed industry complaints and have significantly increased samme sizes,
improving statistical accuracy. Additionally, the ANOVA tests regarding quality revealed
that hard maple perceptions of scarcity were significantly different between both loggers
and non-loggers. This species is in high demand both domestically and internationally
and the economic pressure from strong demand is likely to be contributing to the
perception of scarcity.

Measurement of factors designed to achieve Objective 4, ‘to measure the beliefs
of the population about future availability of the veneer log resource,’ revealed the
respondents’ belief in the importance of ‘increased forest management education
programs.’ Kuhns et al. (1998) note that non-industrial private forest owners are a diverse
group with small individual impacts but with a large collective impact on forests and
forestry. Additionally, amenity and non-income personal benefits such as scenic
enjoyment, wildlife appreciation, or hiking are valued over income related benefits such

as timber income. Changing demographics, such as increasing affluence and a more

74

educated population, add to the diversity among NIPF owners. Increased forest-land
fragmentation makes education more difficult because the growing number of
landowners may know less about forestry and have different motivations and different
educational needs than did past owners (Kuhns et al. 1998). Other studies have shown
property turnover rates have significantly increased and NIPF owners come with various
and oflen ‘conflicting objectives’ (DeCoster 1998). Kuhns et al. ( 1998) note that the
average parcel size is moving toward 1? acres and decreasing parcel size makes it more
difficult to be economically efficient in the production of hardwood veneer logs.
Respondents may have ranked the need for ‘increased forest management education’ high
in relative importance because they perceive that informed landowners are more willing
to sell. However, there is ample evidence from previous studies to refute this position
(Jones 1994).

Required management plans on NIPF lands received a negative assessment from
respondents. Obviously professional foresters would play a major role in either education
programs or the writing of management plans. However, the survey results indicate that
private consulting foresters are not well respected by responding loggers. The logger’s
survey contained a comment section in which private consulting foresters drew
considerable wrath as they are perceived to be marking timber largely for increased
commissions as compared to marking timber for stand improvement. Conversely, state
and Forest Service foresters received high marks in the comment section.

The three tax issues ranked high in relative importance to future availability
among respondents. Respondent category was significant for the three tax variables in the

ANOVA analysis for loggers vs. non-loggers (Tables 53. and 54). High property taxes

75

and estate taxes have been documented as causes of forest land fragmentation (Argow
1998). ‘Additional tax incentives for timber management on NIPF lands’ and ‘a special
capital gains tax rate for timber investments’ were reported higher in relative importance
than the ‘elimination of the estate tax.’ This reflects respondents’ preference for market
based solutions such as ‘increased forest management education’ as opposed to
regulatory solutions such as required management plans or instituting timber buyers

certification.

Implications and Recommendations

The perception of veneer log scarcity is likely to continue to grow in the near
future. Decoster (1998) reports that nationwide there are about 146,000 more ownership’s
created from a basically static forest-land base every year and most of these pieces come
from the midsize ownership’s of 100-500 acres. This fragmentation increases the
difficulty of log procurement and contributes to the perception of resource scarcity.

Rising real prices behave as an indicator of economic scarcity. These survey
results indicate that veneer log buyers and loggers expect real prices to rise
approximately 20-30% over the next ten years. The social and economic factors
measured in Objectives one and two clearly would support the hypothesis of economic
scarcity. To some degree it is surprising that factors which would act to alleviate the
scarcity issue, such as standardization, required management plans, or timber buyer
certification, ranked low in relative importance. However, both survey populations have a
history of being independent and the tendency to prefer market based solutions is

understandable.

76

Several other factors indicate that the issues involved in this study will continue to
be controversial into the foreseeable future. For example, the predicted reduction of clear-
cutting as a management tool and the increased reliance on selection harvests is likely to
make the hardwood quality controversy worse (Resh 1994). Respondents from both
surveys reported previous high-grading high in relative importance and loggers tended
toward agreement that selective harvesting for veneer promotes high grading and stand
degradation. From an economic perspective it reflects the tendency to place short run
profit motives before long run management strategies. If the trends identified in
Objectives 1 through 4 (ie. increased international demand, increased importance of log
color) continue and demand remains strong, the pressure to purchase large volumes of
quality logs may act to disconnect buyers from stewardship while the trend among the
new NIPF’s landowners is toward increased stewardship values (Tyson et a1. 1998).
Furthermore, procurement pressure in regions where species with the desired attributes
are known to grow will increase, competition will continue to drive the prices upward,
and buyers driving longer distances to procure in these regions may again equate more
time on the road with dwindling supply.

The Opportunities for economic development in the forest products sector in the
study area are enormous due to plentiful supplies of eastern hardwoods. However, many
other opportunities including recreation and tourism will continue to compete for the
resource. In competitive markets resources theoretically move to the highest valued use.
There is abundant evidence that high quality veneer logs are economically scarce.
Conclusions that the resource is physically scarce may actually reflect that the resource

was historically undervalued and in some cases amenity value now exceeds commodity

77

value. Forest Service timber supply projections through the year 2040 predict continued
nationwide reductions in timberland area (Haynes et al. 1995). This will act to put
increasing pressure on available supply as competition for the resource intensifies.

A greater degree of cooperation between the veneer sector and the Forest Service
F IA unit is necessary if the quality issue is to be resolved. It is imperative that quality is
defined and that industry’s perception of quality is consistent with the resource.
Currently, the desired homogenous look completely free of any blemish or discoloration
seems inconsistent with the veneer resource and character marked wood should be
included in any standardization program. Even though there are market considerations
that would be difficult to address through veneer log and product standardization, no
realistic solution can be advanced without it. With standardization the Forest Service
could report veneer grades in the inventory process. A positive contribution that the
Forest Service could make is to report measures of availability. Additionally, since 96%
of veneer mill respondents and 84% of the loggers perceive veneer logs in the large
diameter class to be decreasing, agencies should revisit this issue. Perhaps the Forest
Service could report the estimated percentage of veneer contained in each diameter class
of tree Grade One.

The rapid increase in the numbers of forest owners presents both new
opportunities and new challenges for forestry professionals. Landowner education will be
the key to the future success of the nation’s hardwood resource. The increase in forest
owners also supports Stynes (1997) assertion that the forested regions of the Lake States
are undergoing a transition from commodity to amenity uses. The survey results further

support this as reflected in the increasing procurement difficulties reported by 76% of the

78

veneer mills. Tyson et al. (1998) note the importance of knowing rather than making
assummions regarding NIPF owners and this will become more difficult as diversity in
ownership increases. Extension services must address the needs of the new and changing
forest owners in addition to their traditional farm clients. Management plans will play an
increasingly important role and represent greater business opportunities for foresters.
Industry should reconsider the potential benefits timber buyer certification presents when
dealing with a diverse NIPF group. Finally, certification is a credential that can act to
inform NIPF owners that buyers are educated in ‘best management practices’ consistent

with good stewardship.

79

APPENDICES

80

Appendix A.l

State

Mi., Mn., Wi., 1]., In.
Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.

Mi., 1]., In.

Mi., Mn., Ws., II, In.

II, In.

Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.

11., In.

In.

Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.
Mi., Mn., Ws., 1]., In.

Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.
Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.
Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.

11., In.

Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.
Mi., Mn., Wi., 11., In.

Tree Species Groups

Common Names
Select White Oaks
White Oak

Bur Oak

Chinkapin Oak

Swamp White Oak
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Select Red Oaks

Northern Red Oak
Cherry Bark Oak

Shumard Oak
Halt; Maples

Black Maple

Sugar Maple

Aghg
White Ash
Black Ash
Green Ash
Blue Ash

Black Walnut

Black Cherfl

Scientific Names

Quercus alba

Quercus macrocarpa
Quercus muehlenbergii
Quercus bicolor

Quercus michawcii

Quercus ruba
Quercusfalcata var.

pagodifolia

Quercus shumardir‘

A cer nigrum

Acer saccharum

Fraxinus amerr'cana

F raxr'nus nigra

F raxinus pennsylvanica
F raxinus quadrangulata
J uglans nigra

Prunusn serotina

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and

Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

81

Appendix A.2

Sampling Errors

Sampling errors for all species of saw-timber by state and survey date.

 

 

M State Totals Sampling Error

Saw-timber (Million board feet) (percent)

Michigan

Volume (1993) 70,971.2 0.94

Average annual grth 2,665.2 1.06
(1980-1992)

Average annual removals 776.5 4.73
(1980-1992)

Minnesota

Volume (1990) 34,9065 1.02

Average annual growth 1,312.2 1.45
(1977-1989)

Average annual removals 515.4 6.03
(1977-1989)

Wisconsin

Volume (1996) 48,0204 1.09

Growth (1996) 1,680.5 1.67

Removals (1996) 986.1 3.72

Indiana

Volume (1986) 19,2242 1.86

Growth (1985) 729.1 5.47

Average annual removals 314.0 5.68
(1966-1985)

Illingis

Volume (1985) 17,4946 2.50

Growth (1985) 437.1 5.27

Removals (1985) 308.8 18.14

Source: Leatherberry and Spencer, 1996; Miles et al., 1995; Schmidt, 1997; Smith and
Golitz, 1988; and Hahn, 1987.

82

Appendix 8.1.
Price Data

Hardwood Lumber Prices, FAS Grade, 1976-1995.

 

YEAR PPI Ash Cherry Maple Red Oak Walnut
Lumber Price in Lumber Price in Price in
Price in 1982 Price in 1982 1982

 

1982 dollars 1982 dollars dollars
dollars dollars
1976 56.5 735 832 596 693 2035
1977 60.6 685 872 602 685 1898
1978 64.9 798 1038 591 722 1829
1979 73.5 769 1020 544 687 1907
1980 87.1 649 861 448 5 80 1653
1981 96.1 568 780 412 536 1498
1982 100 530 750 390 530 1440
1983 101.2 609 742 385 610 1423
1984 102.2 714 756 386 678 1441
1985 103.3 634 752 378 686 1489
1986 98.5 621 797 396 740 1589
1987 100.7 628 807 405 748 1572
1988 103.1 731 921 461 786 1557
1989 108.9 756 886 459 748 1474
1990 115.3 677 837 434 707 1392
1991 118.7 588 816 429 687 1352
1992 120.8 563 822 541 698 1329
1993 121.7 559 879 711 778 1322
1994 121.6 578 938 720 812 1328
1995 124 616 975 701 827 1277

 

83

Source: Purchased from The Hardwood Market Report 1997 .

vw

 

88.82 8 3mm .52 8595 :52 em 5% .3 8% 882a 8822 .8
55-2286 82% .3 .am 88m .2 83- 28 58:3 .3
83-238 :58 52 58% .m 8.: .8: .80 088 855:3 .45
838-: m 8% 55 .2858 85m 85 2% .5 88> .8358 .2
58-288 8% 52 85552 53 8m .05 .8 8:85 85: .Nm
2 2-5288 8%. ..2 8850 2m 8m .05 e88> 85052 8582 .5
23.25-20 Ea. 22 888 E 285552 8% a5 5582 .8
Rea-$225 83¢ .55 585 85 a: .5 mm 8:8 28 85$ 5. 5: e803 .2
28-8-8 use. 55 8:52 ..m .m 88 a2 .3 82 a5 .55 e 88> meg .2

as? ,2 858 8% 552 N2. 556 25:5 2:. .2

82. 52 «88 .3 8-2 .8: 383.05 .55 8.2 880 .2
ave-$.25 SE. .5 8:388 .82 8382 .m 2: .8 .52 e 88> 588m .2
33.2 2-3 _ m was. .5 2:882 855 58 com .8 88> 2852. .3
5238-: m 32;. .5 58865 8% 5% 8m 5: .25 288> 865 .2
82.289: m 88 .5 5.8865 “8% 5.: 8m 5m .25 e8; .552 85 .2
Sega-25 v23. .5 8858 .5 85.0: 55% com 5858 83 .5 285 .:
84.8.: m 2:3 .5 8.55.3 3. 8m .om 55.888 85$ 882 .2
85-82-25 422. .5 52353 a 8m .om 8588 :5 -88 .a
8242.2 5 ED. .5 858 seem 55 83 82 .5 88> 888-50 .5
3213-25 2 E. .5 e888: 2:5 885 8% 888> 5882 .3
£8.82 5 G E .5 852 82 E 83 85 SR 8885 5
28-8-25 85 .5 852 82 can 55 .m :2 8m e 8.6 5 .m .m
5235-25 8 E. .5 532 82 .82 58850 8». 8 825$ 5280 8.583. .4
Rom-21; was. .5 83 “88% 8 8 .m .5 e85> 88. .m
3.32.: m am? .5 8:882 55558 .m am .98 8555 88> 2525 .5
22183-2:- vo2e .5 88.5 585 .5 as a .08 at” so .55 e se.-S 858 .2

28.323. EN 23m .30 36.—Bi «Eel ~53an
252 “0023/

2.0 5283.

mm

502% 82605 beficm 535.50% 12352 .«0 «nonhuman 558023 wee .88er2 68.322 .2865 .5655 ”ooSem

 

2mm-§m-m :-
55453-25
"mmmémqw:
~vwm-me-m E.
Sow-owYm:
moflmémmrm :
22.-69%:-
fimmmégm E.
shun-Scorn:-
Gav-$8358
Nan-”.6056 :.
oiwévméfin

ceme
women
emon
h~wvm
Omvvm
©©_vm
mmfivm
OVVVw
women
mflmvm
v_me
emocm

23
23
.5)
.5,
2.3
23
.52
.5»
.5,
.5,
.5)
.52

8:82
33 8E
8&2
885m
5382
2.535%
5:680
882
8.55
8m :85
SESSm
53m coon

QED 5850223 coo
2m Emcee-82 .m mm
.o>< 385—Sm .m NNN

85 55 m 2.
.5 858
um 5:52 .m
52 8m .05

.8 58858 :K
.5 582 .m 85

.8 :88 $2

.5 58. .3 a;

mum xom Gm

.800 2.28m 5:25:52

.oU wagon-352 80352.5
.98 e885 88

H88> 6% 55.55 woeBeoem
e833m Q eooeo> 555855»
9.5 @855 a. 8255 “one?
63 85 508m 55:6on

.05 .oU cooeo> 835$

.88 855525 a:

.05 cooco> egamm

.00 80:82 08255

BESS sad-m

.wm
.bm
.cm
.mm
.3.
.mm
.mm
A m
.om
mm
.mm
SN

Appendix C.2.

First Veneer Mill Cover Letter

March 23, 1998

Dear forestry professional,

We at Michigan State University’s Department of Forestry would like to know your
Opinion about the status of the veneer log resource. Your opinion will be useful to us in
determining the supply of veneer logs in the Lake States, Illinois and Indiana. The
questions in this survey are directed at six fine hardwood species. These are red oak,
white oak, ash, hard maple, black cherry, and black walnut. We are studying high grade
veneer logs which are sliced for products such as panels, fine furniture, or architectural
uses. Logs that are peeled for veneer are not the focus of this study.

You were chosen for this survey because your business is listed in the state primary
producer guide as a veneer producer. Your participation in this survey is completely
voluntary, but we urge you to participate to ensure that opinions of veneer producers are
accurately represented. If you chose to participate, you may skip any questions you do
not wish to answer and may stop the survey at any time. We expect this survey to take
approximately 20 minutes of your time. The completed survey will be strictly
confidential and your name will not be associated with any of your answers. Completing
and returning this questionnaire will be taken as an indication of your voluntary
agreement to participate.

If you have any questions about the project or the survey, please contact Jim Stevens at
(517) 432-3353. Thank you very much for your help with these surveys!

Sincerely,
Jim Stevens Mike McGuire
Assistant Professor Graduate Research Assistant

86

Appendix C3.

Veneer Mill Questionnaire

87

Q1. Which Of the following best describes your type of operation?

 

Veneer Mill Cl Concentration Yard Cl
Sawmill D Other
Logging Cl

Q2. How many years have you been involved in the veneer industry? (Check one)

Less than 1 year Cl ll to 20 years Cl
1 to 5 years [I] 21 to 30 years Cl
6 to 10 years 0 More than 30 years D

Q3. Do you feel the quality of veneer logs for each of the following species in the Lake
States, Illinois, and Indiana is: (Check one box for each specie)

 

Increasing About the Decreasing Don’t Know
Same
Red Oak D D D D
White Oak D D D 0
Ash 0 Cl Cl C!
Hard Maple D D D D
Black Cherry 0 D D D
Black Walnut 0 [3 D 0

Q4. For each size class below, indicate whether you feel the quantity Of veneer logs in
the Lake States, Illinois, and Indiana is: (Check one box for each class)

 

Diameter Class Increasing About the same Decreasing Don’t know
_(inches)

Small (11-15) C1 D D 0

Medium (16— 20) D D D 0

Large (21+) 0 D D 0

Q5. Over and above inflation, in order to obtain the same quality and quantity of veneer
logs for each of the following species in the Lake States, Illinois, and Indiana in the next
ten years price will: (Check one box for each specie)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increase Remain the Decrease By what percentage
Same (fill in blank)
Red Oak 0 D D
White Oak 0 D 0
Ash E] Cl C]
Hard Maple D D 0
Black Cherry 0 D 0
Black Walnut 0 D D

 

88

Q6. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each Of the following
statements about veneer logs. (Check one box for each statement)
Strongly Agree (SA) Agree (A) Neutral (N) Disagree (D) Strongly Disagree (SD)

SA A N D SD

 

The majority Of standing timber of quality suitable for
face veneer is located on public timberland withdrawn Cl Cl Cl E] El
from harvest or reserved on other lands that do not permit

timber harvests.

The amount Of time spent in procurement for veneer log
buyers is increasing. ‘3 D D D D

Selection harvesting for veneer promotes hi gh-grading and
stand degradation. Cl C] 0 Cl C]

 

Management plans should be required on non-industrial
private forest lands. D D D D 0

Whole tree chipping is decreasing the next generation Of
veneer logs. D D D D D

Standardized {Leg grade between U. S. Forest Service and
industry are necessary. D D U D C]

The current harvesting of veneer is being done at
sustainable cutting rates. 0 D D D U

Quality veneer logs are obtainable if we are willing to pay
higher prices. D D D D D

89

Q7. How important are each Of the following factors to the domestic availability Of

veneer logs? (Check one box for each factor)

 

 

Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very
Important Important Unimportant Unimyortant

Increased international demand 0 D D D D
Conflicting landowner Objectives D D D D D
Urban development D D D D D
Increased forest land
fragmentation D D D D D
Frequent property turnover D D D D D
Increasing absentee ownership D D D D D
Decreasing parcel size D D D D D
Previous high grading D D D D D
Increased environmental D D D D D
regulations
Owner mistrust of loggers D D D D D
Q8. How important do you feel each of these market characteristics are to the veneer
industry? (Check one box for each issue)

Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very

Important Important Unimportant Unimportant

Establishing uniform veneer log
grades D D D D D
Standardizing veneer product
grades D D D D D
Promotion Of character marked
wood D D D D D
Competition from substitute
products 0 D D D 0
Marketing efforts aimed at Odd
species (e. g. Sassafras) D D D '3
Log color D D D D D

90

Q9. Please indicate whether you think you the following industry trends are increasing or
decreasing. (Check one box for each item)

Increasing About Decreasing Don’t

 

the Know
Same

Volume Of veneer logs used

D D D D
Veneer industry profit margins D D D D
Specialization within the veneer industry
(e.g., custom slicing) D D D D
The percentage of the veneer log price increases
going to landowners D D D 0
Marketing efforts directed at niche markets
(e. g., automobile dashboards) D D D D
The percentage Of the veneer log’s yielding
architectural grade veneer D D D D
The percentage Of the veneer log’s yielding panel
grade veneer D D D D
The percentage Of the veneer log’s yielding
furniture grade veneer D D D D
Customer acceptance Of veneer with more visible
defects (e. g., gum, pin knots) D D D D
Q10. Are you finding it more difficult to buy veneer grade logs?

Yes D NO D Don’t Know D

 

If you answered No to Q10, do not answer question Q11. Instead proceed to question
Q12 and continue to the end Of the survey If you answered Yes to QIO, please check all
strategies which apply in Q11.

 

9l

Q11. Which of the following business strategies has your firm employed. (Check all that
apply)

Our firm has hired additional veneer log buyers as a procurement

strategy to solve supply issues. D

Our firm has installed new equipment technologies as a strategy to
remain competitive. For example: 0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our firm is holding lower log inventories because of price increases
of veneer logs. D

Other

 

 

 

 

Q12. How important do you feel each of the following factors are in determining future
veneer log availability? (Check one box for each factor listed)

 

Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very

Important Important Unimportant Unimportant
Increased forest management
education programs D D D D D
Additional tax incentives for timber
management on private lands D D D
Elimination of the estate tax D D D D D
Institute special capital gains tax rate
for timber investments D D D D D
Banning hardwood log exports D D D D D
Uniform laws requiring best
management practices D D D D D
Institute timber buyers certification D D D D D
Funding stewardship programs D D D D D

92

Q13. DO your customers want to know whether the veneer logs originate from sustainable
forest management? Yes D No D Don’t Know D

Q14. DO you export veneer logs?
Yes D NO D Don’t Know D

 

 

If you answered No to Q14, do not answer questions 15 and 16. Instead proceed to
question 17 and then return the survey in the self addressed stamped envelope provided.
If you answered Yes to Q14, please check the category which best fits your export
description and continue to the end Of the survey. (Check all that apply)

Sell to broker [3
Sell directly to international customers D
Sell to domestic veneer plants which export D

 

Q15. What percentage Of the veneer logs you produce or purchase are exported? (Check
one)

Less than 1 Percent D 26 to 50% D
1tO 10% D 51 to 75% D
11 to 25% D 76 to 100% D

Q16. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following
statements about veneer log exports. (Check one box for each statement)
Strongly Agree (SA) Agree (A) Neutral (N) Disagree (D) Strongly Disagree (SD)

SA A N D SD

 

 

The government policy Of allowing unprocessed log

exports is good for the economy. D D D D D
Foreign competition for high quality logs is unfair to

American producers. D D D D D
World demand for eastern hardwoods is strong and will

continue to grow. D D D D D

Changes in species demanded result primarily from
changes in foreign demand. D D D D D

93

 

 

 

Q17. Use this space to tell us anything else you feel we should know
about the veneer log resource.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attach an additional page if you have more to say.

94

Appendix C.4.

First Loggers Cover Letter

March 23, 1998

Dear forestry professional,

We at Michigan State University’s Department of Forestry would like to know your
Opinion about the status Of the veneer log resource. Your Opinion will be useful to us in
determining the supply Of veneer logs in the Lake States, Illinois and Indiana. The
questions in this survey are directed at six fine hardwood species. These are red oak,
white oak, ash, hard maple, black cherry, and black walnut. We are studying high grade
veneer logs which are sliced for products such as panels, fine furniture, or architectural
uses. Logs that are peeled for veneer are not the focus Of this study.

You were randomly chosen from primary producer guides and licensed timber buyer lists
produced by the states studied in this project. Your participation in this survey is
completely voluntary, but we urge you to participate to ensure that Opinions Of forestry
professionals are accurately represented. If you chose to participate, you may skip any
questions you do not wish to answer and may stop the survey at any time. We expect this
survey to take approximately 20 minutes of your time. The completed survey will be
strictly confidential and your name will not be associated with any Of your answers.
Completing and returning this questionnaire will be taken as an indication of your
voluntary agreement to participate.

If you have any questions about the project or the survey, please contact Jim Stevens at
(517) 432-3353. Thank you very much for your help with these surveys!

Sincerely,
Jim Stevens Mike McGuire
Assistant Professor Graduate Research Assistant

95

 

Appendix C.5.

Loggers Survey

Q1. Are you involved in the veneer log business?
D Yes. (Continue below)
D NO. (Please return uncompleted survey in the self addressed stamped envelope)

Q2. How many years have you been involved in veneer log procurement, sales, or
consulting? (Check one)

Less than 1 year D 11 to 20 years D
1 to 5 years D 21 to 30 years D
6 to 10 years D more than 30 years D

Q3. Which category bests describes your job position. (Check one)

Logging D Veneer Log Buyer D
Sawmill Management D Consulting Forester D
Other

 

Q4. DO you feel the quality Of veneer logs for each of the following species in the Lake
States, Illinois, and Indiana is: (Check one box for each specie)

 

Increasing About the Same Decreasing Don’t Know
Red Oak 0 D D D
White Oak D D D D
Ash D D D D
Hard Maple D D D D
Black Cherry D D D D
Black Walnut D D D D

Q5. For each size class below, indicate whether you feel the quantity of veneer logs in
the Lake States, Illinois, and Indiana is: (Check one box for each class)

 

Diameter Class (inches) Increasing About the same Decreasing Don’t know
Small (ll-15)
D D D D
Medium (16- 20)
D D D D
Lar e 21+
3 ( ) D a D D

97

 

 

 

 

 

Q6. Over and above inflation, in order to Obtain the same quality and quantity Of veneer
logs for each Of the following species in the Lake States, Illinois, and Indiana in the next

ten years price will: (Check one box for each specie)

 

Increase Remain the Decrease By what
Same percentage
(fill in blank)
Red Oak 0 D D
White Oak 0 D 0
Ash Cl C] D
Hard Maple D D D
Black Cherry D D D
Black Walnut 0 D 0

Q7. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following

statements about veneer logs. (Check one box for each statement)
Strongly Agree (SA) Agree (A) Neutral (N) Disagree (D) Strongly Disagree (SD)

The majority Of standing timber of quality suitable for
face veneer is located on public timberland withdrawn
from harvest or reserved on other lands that do not permit

timber harvests.

The amount Of time spent in procurement for veneer log
buyers is increasing.

Selection harvesting for veneer promotes high-grading and
stand degradation.

Management plans should be required on non-industrial
private forest lands.

Whole tree chipping is decreasing the next generation of
veneer logs.

Standardized Egg grade between the U S Forest Service
and industry are necessary.

The current harvesting Of veneer is being done at
sustainable cutting rates.

Quality veneer logs are obtainable if we are willing to pay
higher prices.

98

 

SA A N D SD
D D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D
D D D D D

Q8. How important are each of the following factors to the domestic availability of

veneer logs? (Check one box for each factor)
Very
Important

Increased international
demand

Conflicting landowner
Objectives
Urban development

Increased forest land
fragmentation
Frequent property turnover

Increasing absentee
ownership
Decreasing parcel size

Previous high grading
Increased environmental

regulations
Owner mistrust Of loggers

DDDUDDDDDD

Somewhat
Important

DDUDDDUDUD

DD'DUDDDDUD

Neutral

t

DUDUUDUDUD

Somewhat
Unimportan

Very

Unimportant

DUDDDDDDDD

Q9. How important do you feel each of these market characteristics are to the veneer

industry? (Check one box for each issue)

 

Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very

Important Important Unimportant Unimportant
Establishing uniform veneer
log grades D D D O D
Standardizing veneer product
grades D D D D
Banning hardwood log D D D D D
exports
Promotion of character
marked wood D D D D D
Competition from substitute
products 0 D D D 0
Marketing efforts aimed at
Odd species (e. g. Sassafras) D D D D D
Log color D D D D D

Q10. How important do you feel each of the following factors are in determining future
veneer log availability? (Check one box for each factor listed)

 

Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very
Important Important Unimportant Unimportant

Increased forest management
education programs D D D D D
Additional tax incentives for timber
management on private lands D D D D D
Elimination Of the estate tax

D D D D D
Institute special capital gains tax rate
for timber investments

D D D D D
Uniform laws requiring best
management practices D D D D D
Institute timber buyers certification
Funding stewardship programs

D

Q11. DO your customers want to know whether the veneer logs originate from sustainable
forest management? Yes D NO D Don’t Know D

Q12. Do you produce or sell face veneer logs for international markets?
Yes D NO D Don’t Know D

 

 

If you answered No to Q12, do not answer questions 13 and 14. Instead proceed to
question 15 and then return the survey in the self addressed stamped envelope provided.
If you answered Yes to Q12, please check the category which best fits your export
description and continue to the end of the survey. (Checking all that apply)

D

 

Sell to broker
Sell directly to international customers D
Sell to domestic veneer plants which export D

 

100

 

 

 

 

 

Q13. What percentage of the veneer logs you produce or purchase are exported? (Check
one box only)

Less than 1 Percent D 26 tO 50% D
1 to 10% D 51 to 75% D
11 to 25% D 76 to 100% D

Q14. Please indicate to what extent agree or disagree with each of the following
statements. (Check one box for each statement)

Strongly Agree (SA) Agree (A) Neutral (N) Disagree (D) Strongly Disagree (SD)

SA A N D SD
The government policy Of allowing unprocessed log
exports is good for the economy. D D D D D

Foreign competition for high quality logs is unfair to
American producers. D D D D D

World demand for eastern hardwoods is strong and will
continue to grow. D D D D D

Changes in species demanded result primarily from
changes in foreign demand. D D D D D

Q15. Use this space to tell us anything else you feel we should know
about the veneer log resource.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lOl

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attach an additional page if you have more to say.

102

Appendix C.6.

Reminder Postcard

April 16, 1998
A few weeks ago a questionnaire seeking your Opinions of the veneer log resource was
mailed to you. Your name was drawn at random from the primary producer guides and
licensed timber buyers lists published in the Lake States, Illinois and Indiana.
If you have already completed and returned the questionnaire to us, please accept our
sincere thanks. If not, please complete and return it as soon as you can, since your
Opinion is vital to this project.

If for some reason you did not receive a copy Of the survey, or got it misplaced, please
contact Mike McGuire at (517) 432-5932, and another will be sent to you. Thank you!

Mike McGuire

Research Assistant

103

Appendix 07.

Second Veneer Mill Cover Letter

June 12, 1998
Dear forestry professional,

I would like to invite you again to participate in a survey which I believe is very
important to the fine hardwood veneer industry. From 1977 through 1997 I have worked
in the hardwood industry and know many controversial issues face the veneer sector. I
returned to the university hoping my work experience would be an advantage in
examining some Of these issues. I have the attention Of federal, state, and university
forestry professionals interested in the veneer log resource. It would be very helpful to
me if I could have your Opinion. The questions in this survey are directed at six fine
hardwood species. These are red oak, white oak, ash, hard maple, black cherry, and black
walnut. We are studying high grade veneer logs which are sliced for products such as
panels, fine furniture, or architectural uses. Logs that are peeled for veneer are not the
focus Of this study. If you have already completed and returned the questionnaire to us,
please accept my sincere thanks. If not, please complete this replacement questionnaire
and return it in the envelope supplied.

You were chosen for this survey because your business is listed in the state primary
producer guide as a veneer producer. Your participation in this survey is completely
voluntary, but we urge you to participate to ensure that Opinions of veneer producers are
accurately represented. If you chose to participate, you may skip any questions you do
not wish to answer and may stop the survey at any time. We expect this survey to take
approximately 20 minutes of your time. The completed survey will be strictly
confidential and your name will not be associated with any Of your answers. Completing
and returning this questionnaire will be taken as an indication of your voluntary
agreement to participate.

If you have any questions about the project or the survey, please contact Mike McGuire
at (517) 432-5932. Thank you very much for your help with these surveys!

Sincerely,

Mike McGuire
Graduate Research Assistant

104

Appendix 08.

Second Loggers Cover Letter

May 27, 1998
Dear forestry professional,

I would like to invite you again tO participate in a survey which I believe is very
important to the forest products industry. From 1977 through 1997 I worked in the
logging and sawmill occupation and know many controversial issues face our industry. I
returned to the university hoping my work experience would be an advantage in
examining some Of these issues. I have the attention Of federal, state, and university
forestry professionals interested in the veneer log resource. It would be very helpful to
me if I could have your Opinion and it will be useful in determining the supply of veneer
logs in the Lake States, Illinois and Indiana. This is your Opportunity to get your two
cents worth in. If you have already completed and returned the questionnaire to us,
please accept my sincere thanks. If not, please complete this replacement questionnaire
and return it in the envelope supplied.

The questions in this survey are directed at six fine hardwood species. These are red oak,
white oak, ash, hard maple, black cherry, and black walnut. We are studying high grade
veneer logs which are sliced for products such as panels, fine fluniture, or architectural
uses. Logs that are peeled for veneer are not the focus Of this study.

You were randomly chosen from primary producer guides and licensed timber buyer lists
produced by the states studied in this project. Your participation in this survey is
completely voluntary, but we urge you to participate to ensure that Opinions of forestry
professionals are accurately represented. Ifyou chose to participate, you may skip any
questions you do not wish to answer and may stop the survey at any time. We expect this
survey to take approximately 20 minutes of your time. The completed survey will be
strictly confidential and your name will not be associated with any Of your answers.
Completing and returning this questionnaire will be taken as an indication of your
voluntary agreement tO participate.

If you have any questions about the project or the survey, please contact Mike McGuire
at (517) 432-5932. Thank you very much for your help with these surveys!

Sincerely,

Mike McGuire
Graduate Research Assistant

105

 

Appendix 09.

Third Veneer Mill Personalized Cover Letter

June 12, 1998
Dear [insert name],

I am nearing completion Of my survey regarding the veneer log resource in the Lake
States, Illinois, and Indiana. I know you are very knowledgeable of this resource and it
would be very helpful to me if I could have your opinion. If you chose to participate, you
may skip any questions you do not wish to answer and may stop the survey at any time. I
expect this survey to take approximately 20 minutes Of your time. The completed survey
will be strictly confidential and your name will not be associated with any of your
answers.

The questions in this survey are directed at six fine hardwood species. These are red oak,
white oak, ash, hard maple, black cherry, and black walnut. We are studying quality
issues and have focused on high grade veneer logs which are sliced for products such as
panels, fine furniture, or architectural uses. While logs that are peeled are not the focus of
this study, even though your mill is a rotary facility your Opinion Of high quality veneer
logs will be valuable to us. If you have already completed and returned the questionnaire
to us, please accept my sincere thanks. If not, please complete this replacement
questionnaire and return it in the envelope supplied

You were chosen for this survey because your business is listed in the state primary
producer guide as a veneer producer. Your participation in this survey is completely
voluntary, but we urge you to participate to ensure that opinions of veneer producers are
accurately represented. Completing and returning this questionnaire will be taken as an
indication of your voluntary agreement to participate.

If you have any questions about the project or the survey, please contact Mike McGuire
at (517) 432-5932. Thank you very much for your help with these surveys!

Sincerely,

Mike McGuire
Graduate Research Assistant

106

 

Appendix D

Tables Reporting Survey Results

107

Table 13. Respondent’s years involved in the veneer log industry, veneer mill survey.

 

 

 

Years Frequency , Percent
Less than one 1 3.8
1 to 5 1 3.8
6 to 10 3 11.5
1 1 to 20 3 11.5
21 to 30 9 34.6
Over 30 9 34.6
Total 26 100

Table 14. Respondent’s years in veneer log procurement, sales, or consulting, logger’s

 

 

 

survey.
Years Frequency Percent
Non-response 7 1.8
Less than one 1 0.3
1 to 5 25 6.6
6 to 10 62 16.3
11 to 20 147 38.7
21 to 30 82 21.6
Over 30 56 14.7
Total 380 100

109

 

o:

 

 

 

2 o 22 2 m 2 2. em 2 e2 2. common co 232a: 2256
macaw—223m
2 o o 2. 2 2 m em a we «2 Eeeaeeaam 332222
2 o o o 22 .222 m 3 22 3 22 machine 8.55
2 2. 2 22 m 222 2. 23 2 2a e 3% 233.2 823280
2 22 m 22 N am a 222. N2 22 N h2222.62.25 8222822 messes
m e 2 22 m em e 3. 22 om m 22252. ease 282226222
m m... 2 S a 2. e e. 2 2. 2: 22m m eeeaeeaaem 2.223 28.522 Bases
2 22 m 2 m 22 N NW 2 cm W 28522238 535
2 o o o o 22.8 m 22.2 2.2 m.» N 23228.30 8385.2 “222220222228
2 o o o o 22 N am 2. 3 e2 Essen 252222383222 e88282
.x. .2272 .x. .2272 .x. .2272 .x. 52 .x. .32
2225222322225 «228.232.2225 225.39:— 225.235—
wfinmmz may? 22.3255 1.52202 2.22.3953 .Co> 2.23.32» 32:22—er

 

Sufism 2:8 28:? 5.2253295 0.22888 weuoobw 283.2 3 E0398 $259288. .20 2223.23 new 2382.22 .2 033.

 

m:

 

 

 

e2 22 m 22 em 32 8 22.: m2 2 Se $2 8&3 2e 2322.022 5:30
mm 3 R .8 mm 92 me 2.2 m 222 can 22 82322822 25582222222222 2.385222
2N 2.2 2. m 222 22 me new 22 22.3. 2222 2222232222222 83222
22m 3 e 22 2.2. 22.222 3 22m 222 222 we been 2822a messed
mm 22 m2 :2 2e 2.: 222 3m 82 e2 2 8 22.222855 825.22? 8282222
mm 3 N2 21.222 R e. 2” we em 22 2 mom 2: 238.3 9222.5 2582.2
em 3 22 3. mm 3.2 E «R a2 3». 2.2 2 52235228222 22223 28822 852222
22m 2% m2 3 2 2. .22 en 2 .8 82 2.3 E 2eeaae2a>eo :85
em 22 a 3 2m 22.8 ~22 22.3. 2.2 new 82 32228.50 28385.2 $220222an
2 22.2 e Z 22 .22 em eem m2 es. s: 2222222225 282383222 22882222
a. .222 .x. .2272 .x. .2222 .x. .2272 .x. .2272
2225238225 225.23.222.29 2225.23.22: 22:22.89:—
uEfiE be.» Estuaew 29222672 2222.32.85 ES, 22.3.2.5 Eon—2&2...—

 

xotam :28 23:2, 522532223 22888 wannabe 288.2 8 £63.25 552222882 .6 222828 2222 23222222 .2 0322.2.

Table 17. Means and standard deviations reported for factors affecting domestic
availability, veneer mill survey.

 

 

Independent Variables N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
- Deviation
Increased international demand 25 1.00 5.00 1.440 .650
Conflicting landowner Obj ectives 24 1.00 5.00 2.125 .536
Urban Development 25 1.00 5.00 2.360 1.186
Increased forest land fragmentation 24 1.00 5.00 2.333 1.049
Frequent property turnover 25 1.00 5.00 2.320 1.029
Increasing absentee ownership 25 1.00 5.00 2.600 1.040
Decreasing parcel size 25 1.00 5.00 2.200 1.040
Previous high grading 25 1.00 5.00 1.680 .690
Increased environmental regulations 25 1.00 5.00 1.720 .842
Owner mistrust Of loggers 25 1.00 5.00 2.240 .879

 

112

Table 18. Means and standard deviations reported for factors affecting domestic
availability, logger’s survey.

 

 

Independent variables N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Increased international demand 361 1.00 5.00 1.698 .863
Conflicting landowner Objectives 344 1.00 5.00 2.081 .909
Urban Development 352 1.00 5 .00 2.159 1.136
Increased forest land fragmentation 346 1.00 5.00 2.086 1.012
Frequent property turnover 347 1.00 5.00 2.230 1.098
Increasing absentee ownership 345 1.00 5.00 2.721 1.007
Decreasing parcel size 352 1.00 5.00 2.213 1.047
Previous high grading 359 1.00 5.00 1.810 .917
Increased environmental regulations 357 1.00 5.00 2.243 1.231
Owner mistrust of loggers 361 1.00 5.00 1.988 1.038

 

ll3

 

:—

 

 

 

32.2.2.2 22222222

 

 

22 22 22 $2 2 men a 2222 222 282 2. 8.2 222828220 ea .83 88> e235
22 22 m SN 2. 22.8 22 «.8 8 mm 2 222822.28 a2 822822.22 282.25 28.56
22 N82 2 v.2 2. n2 2 m 222. 22 n2 2 m 32.225 82.2. 2.822582%
22 22 22 «.82 m «.2 m 22.3 222 2.8 e 8222222220 8: ”222222222
22 R 22 2.222.. 8 R e 4.2 2. 22a 2 82.2.2 288852 2.2272 822228.22
2 22 2.. 8 e 2 m 22% 2 22.2. 2 822588.222 wages $825.22 822828
22 22 22 22A 2 22m 2 N222. N2 32. 2 328282 e 282228282; 222 as;
22 E N 2.22... 2 22A 2 22m 2 22 22 28228222: 0222232 8 2.3.8.2 2825>
.... .ez .\. .222 a. .2222 .\. .ez .\. .32
32mg:— a4.
E22822 Dwaehm 8533 3.22232 35¢. bweehm 03.22.23; 23.232.er
Sufism

:28 28223 .8588 wo2 28223 222 .20 2029288 3 $2223.55”. on 3 83088 838.2 3 95262222 .20 2223.222 225 352502..” .2 0322.2.

 

 

 

m:

 

 

 

8.52 288E

 

 

5 Nm 2 Sam .8 m.m 2 hm ad. of 5.2 E 20.2 222822222220 68 awe; 2852/ b.2230

2222222233m

22 2.2. cm 3N mm NR 3 Ewm av 90 mm a gamete: 2852/ 252.2220

22 k. on QR S 6mm 3 ”an o: 9cm on 28222220 8E. B€2€§m

m2 3. ea 8.22 2n 2.2.2 8 8.22m 82 22.8 32 8222x225 82F 822.22.22,

2 0.2.». R2 ma. 00 2.2 on m .3 me m2 3. medi 2eoEom22§E 222:2 BMSWMM

222

N2 06 mm 0.2 3 e2: 20 N? on 2 hem on 3&5 8822.295 3825222 cocoa—om

S no N m.m 2.2 m2: 8 mdm £2 m.wm 82 $282222 m2 22222222285 222 2222.2.

a a2. 3 5mm mm oi as m.2m e2 2 New mu 2228226222223. 0252222 :22 B233 5223’
2x. .2272 2x. .222 2%. 672 e\.. .25 .\e .222

3&35 momma.
”222222 hair—2m 8.2932: .2532 3.23.. bunchm 32.3.2.5 25.2222.er
Sufism

€0wa .8288. we. 28:? 222 .222 2222283. 02 322255228 on 8 3.3828 388.2 8 802652 .20 222328 2222 35223.2...“ .8 032d.

o:

 

m0

 

mgr—m wofimm

 

83 :3 8w 8; m8 5 28:88 am 83 .85> 8:80
8:: 888 8.“ 2: 8 gfiafimsm a 8.535: 38> 82.5
E: 82 8a 8._ 8 28:53 a 8:82“: “85> 8850
8 _ ._ 83 8a 8." 88 38.5 88. 855:8
8 _ ._ 83 88 8." 8m 885 8; 885:3
SS 2 2 8w 8.. 8m 8:55 3.: 283
SS 2 2 8w 8." 8m 3820 8; 32$,
82 was 8.,“ 8." 8 an; 80588.8 “32 888m
83 3% 8w 8._ 8m £28 8088332 .82 883m
oz ._ 3.8 88 8.“ 8m 882»in £35 88% 8803
88. $3 88 2: OR 88205 8 “552328 5 25
a: .8 :88 8.m 8.. :m 85:38; 238 8 8.83 h88>
53.3.69
...«m .302 n..—5:32 ESE—:2 Z 83 at!» «52.0%....—

 

Sotsm 9.5wa 5688 8 mansnEcoo on 8 Bioohom 820$ Eu 22833 @3988 98 9822 .mm 2an

 

 

805 any:

88. 82 88 8._ 8 be 03258 as 83 85> 8:80
83 X _ .m 88 8.“ 8 0.985% 2 888% 35> .859
82 W88 88 8._ 8 “88¢ 8:. 8885qu
83 8mm 8.,“ 8; 8 8820 88 223
E 4 ER 86 8.~ 8 235 .5888: $2 8.98m
8 fl ._ 82 88 8.. 8 8:88-88 8855 38%: 8883
m8. 884 88 2: 8 85385 3 8050385 5 ~58
2 fl ._ 83 88 8._ 8 88358 235 8 8283 H8&5

8:359

.3m :82 Basia: 8355: Z 833...; Eon-.335—

 

.zoiam ES “85> #2938 3 m:.:=nE=oo B 8 8386a 3808 .5.“ 288.5% Eggm Ea 8:82 AN 2an

 

 

 

 

 

n:

 

 

 

 

_ o o v 8 8 v 8 2 8 2 .28 m3

88on 308

H w 8 v M 8 h 8 3 v _ BEE 88m 888:

$885 3888

8 o o 3 fl 3 N 8.8 2 m8 8 SE 88888

“.83 882

_ 8 fl 8 _ 2 v 8 z 8 W 58808 8885

885 885

H a m 8 n S m 8 2 m N “85> 888388

33.5

H S m 8 a S m 8 a S m 84 8&8: 8288mm
8 ...z 8 dz 8 ...z 8 .oz 8 ...z
Ear—382: 33.5.5.3; 25.3mm: «:5..an—

MEEE E05 253085 .2302 «anion—om 85> 033:3 Eve—5:28:

 

59:3 58 30:? 5888 8 wagnEcoo on 9 3388a 85:88:20 8888 9 8838: .8 8023 98 xocoavoum .mm 053

 

w:

 

 

 

S u; c Ev 2 mn— mm 9mm o3 Qmm mi 830le

860mm 30

2 m.m fl m mm oém so v.3 2: «2R em 3 38.3 35mm mane—32

333$

w. m m. _.o mm ad. Q. mm 2; “Rm 3 28.535 88m consumes

953 @332

2 mé 2 ad mm Nom 2: 5.2.. on. :m on 38830 .«o cocoEoE

mtoaxm

2 fia ac 92 ow ; N: 92 3 w.m~ om m3 vooacam wEEBm

835

2 an a 3 cm 2m 3 a 2: 3m E 832558; megawasm

835

2 0 mm N: 2. mg on :‘m ca m.mm m3 m3 9:833 wafimsnfimm
.x. 62 .3 62 ex. 62 o\. 62 .3 52
35.8959: Satan—ED 2.8.898— Ear—2::—

wfiwmmz 53> Eaton—cm 3.5.32 Eaton—cm 53> 033...; Sou—.83.:—

 

xotsm {ammo— 5688 2 mESnEcoo an 8 338th 8558820 “858 9 mom—8&2 mo «58% new xoauzcui .vm 03¢

om—

 

 

Rm. 3.... 8w 8.. men 8.8 we.
2.... :3 8w 8.. 8m 8.8% Be 3 Ba... €ch 38.32
8. .. and 8m 8.. men 388... 23.33 82. 82.2.88
2.... $2 8% 8.. .8 .395 Base .2255 ..o 8.8.8:.
3.... 2mm 22 8.. .8 3393 mo. 3.3%.. 5m
3... .02 8.“ 8.. 8». 88a .88... .85., manages.”

mg
3.. .53 8a 8.. men we. .88., 55...... $5.356

£5; E

....m =8: 553:. 58.52 z 8.3....» «529.3...

 

.538 {0me 5.88m 8 mausnfiaoo on 8 3209.8 mofigofifio .335 8.. 82338 235% 2:. 8.82 .mm 033‘

~N_

 

 

 

om ON... on ...av on. 9% ow «w a. 5:35 x85
3 m . 3 .5. on. e. . m I. m.» om .920 .85
.. 3 mm .... X. “.2 .2 3. G 2%: B...
.N Na mm wen mm. 09. em . o.» .m :3.
mm NE 3 ”3 SN fivm 3 9m .2 .30 2.33
m _ ed on «.3. m... Wow «3 0.0 «N ....0 3m
.x. ...z .\o 62 .3 .oz .3 ...z
36; 056m
9:32 .....5 3:3..qu o... «:23. 3.23.2: 98.0 8.925

 

$3.... “Comma. duo.» 8.80% .3 .83.... .8 5.38.2. 9.59.88. .0 58.2. 98 35:3... .3 03m...

 

 

 

m own a 0.3 N. ON. m od o 5585 x85
m odm m 0.3 2 o.mm M. od 0 Eon—U v.85
. o... m a... n. o... m o... N 2%: ......
m wdm m msm m 6:. 0. ed o :3.
m mdm n 0.3 m . Wm. m N... . .30 833.
. oé . ode ... oém o o... n .30 3m
.x. 62 .\. 62 e\.. 67. ..\. 62
>65— 2.3m
3.3.2 ...—.5 37.3.32— 05 ...27. «£28.85 93.5 8.90am

 

.533 ES .85.» daew 3.8% 3 3.3:. .8 538.2. £202.88. ..o 2.8.2. v.3 >883... Km 05....

Table 29. Means and standard deviations for perception of quality by species group,
veneer mill survey.

 

 

Species Groups N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Red Oak 25 1.00 4.00 2.720 .613
White Oak 24 1.00 4.00 3.000 .722
Ash 24 1.00 4.00 2.791 .779
Hard Maple 25 1.00 4.00 2.840 .746
Black Cherry 24 1.00 4.00 2.875 .740
Black Walnut 24 1.00 4.00 3.250 .675

 

Table 30. Means and standard deviations for perception of quality by species group,
logger’s survey.

 

 

Species Groups N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Red Oak 365 1.00 4.00 2.517 .701
White Oak 358 1.00 4.00 2.826 .708
Ash 359 1.00 4.00 2.484 .779
Hard Maple 369 1.00 4.00 2.376 .831
Black Cherry 361 1.00 4.00 2.648 .810
Black Walnut 354 1.00 4.00 2.889 L808

 

Table 31. Means and standard deviations for perception of quantity by diameter class,
veneer mill survey.

 

 

Diameter Class N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
- Deviation

Small (1 1-15) 26 1.00 4.00 1.692 .837

Medium (16-20) 26 1.00 4.00 2.653 .561

Large §21+)_ 25 1.00 4.00 3.000 .288

 

Table 32. Means and standard deviations for perception of quantity by diameter class,
logger’s survey.

 

 

 

Diameter Class N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation

Small (1 1-15) 369 1.00 4.00 1.699 .862

Small (1 1-15) 369 1.00 4.00 1.699 .862

Medium (1620) 373 1.00 4.00 2.340 .651

Medium (16-20) 373 1.00 4.00 2.340 .651

Large (21+) 366 1.00 4.00 2.877 .472

 

Large (21+) 366 1.00 4.00 2.877 .472

 

122

Table 33. Frequency and percent of respondent’s beliefs about real prices over ten years,
by Species group for veneer mill survey.

 

 

 

Species Group Increasing Remain the Decrease Non
Same response
No. % No. % No. . °/o
Select Red Oak 20 87.0 3 13.0 0 0 3
Select White Oak 18 90.0 2 10.0 0 0 6
Ash 14 73.7 15 26.3 0 0 7
Hard Maple 22 95.7 1 4.3 0 0 3
Black Cherry 19 90.5 1 4.8 1 4.8 5
Black Walnut 13 65.0 7 35.0 0 0 6

 

Table 34. Frequency and percent of respondent’s beliefs about real prices over ten years,
by species group for logger’s survey.

 

 

 

Species Group Increasing Remain the Decrease Non
Same response
No. % No. % No. %
Select Red Oak 238 69.4 94 27.4 11 3.2 37
Select White Oak 221 67.8 91 27.9 14 4.3 54
Ash 171 51.4 133 39.9 29 8.7 47
Hard Maple 243 69.8 75 21.6 30 8.6 32
Black Cherry 239 72.2 72 21.8 20 6.0 49

Black Walnut 212 67.5 83 26.4 19 6.1 66

 

123

Table 35. Mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values of respondent’s
beliefs about real prices over ten years, by Species group, veneer mill survey.

 

 

Species Groups N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Red Oak 23 1.00 3.00 1.130 .344
White Oak 20 1.00 3.00 1.100 .307
Ash 19 1.00 3.00 1.263 .452
Hard Maple 23 1.00 3.00 1.043 .208
Black Cherry 21 1.00 3.00 1.142 .478
Black Walnut 20 1.00 3.00 1.350 .489

 

Table 36. Mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values of respondent’s
beliefs about real prices over ten years, by species group, logger’s survey.

 

 

Species Groups N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Red Oak 343 1.00 3.00 1.338 .537
White Oak 326 1.00 3.00 1.365 .564
Ash 333 1.00 3.00 1.573 .648
Hard Maple 348 1.00 3.00 1.387 .641
Black Cherry 331 1.00 3.00 1.338 .588
Black Walnut 314 1.00 3.00 1.385 .599

 

124

Table 37 . Minimum, maximum, and mean predicted future price increases with standard
deviation, veneer mill survey.

 

 

Species Groups N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
(dollars) (dollars)

Red Oak 13 10.00 40.00 18.0769 8.5485
White Oak 9 10.00 40.00 18.6667 11.6082
Ash 6 10.00 30.00 17.5000 8.8034
Hard Maple 1 1 10.00 70.00 25.7273 16.3039
Black Cheny 8 10.00 60.00 22.5000 16.4751
Black Walnut 5 10.00 50.00 21.0000 17.4642

 

Table 38. Minimum, maximum, and mean predicted future price increases with standard
deviation, logger survey.

 

 

Species Groups N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
(dollars) (dollars)
Red Oak 124 5.00 300.00 33.70 37.95
White Oak 111 3.00 300.00 36.45 39.17
Ash 95 1.00 300.00 33.25 38.00
Hard Maple 124 2.00 300.00 35.17 38.00
Black Cherry 116 10.00 300.00 37.33 38.24
Black Walnut 103 2.00 300.00 37.24 41.07

 

125

02

 

 

 

mfifiwei

o w.m _ w.m fl 0.? S O? 2 mm _ aEmEssoum wcficsm

noumomubo

o m: m m: m w.mm E v.2 V vs m €on 598:. 8:265

mag/Hm

o 3 a E N ”.3 S o o on 2 were? :23 gee:

mtoaxm

_ m N a. a 2 5 mm x mm 5 83 80%;: 8.3.5

85.58%: 598:. 8m Sam

0 o o o o mg W W? Z m.wm 2 e8... 2:5 REED 36on

o o o o o mac # w 0.3. 0 mm c 5d. 28mm 05 we aoumagzm

355

o o o o o w. I m 5% 2 wdm w “KHZ 8.“ 33885 5d.

aouaozvm

o o 0 ma _ w.m _ we? : cm 2 EoEummcmE “woken womaosfi
..\o .ez e\.. 52 .x. 62 .x. 62 .x. .oz
Eaten—=2: Ear—3829 2.5.89:— 2.3.89:—

wEEE b5» Eaton—em .2252 «2.395% D9, 033:; Eugene—.5

 

.533 58 “35> .bEnwzgm 236 @6535: Eofifl we momflcoeoa 93 865335 dm 033.

n2

 

 

 

mESwoi

: 2: mm 3 2. 2m 2: man me new. a 3833on $6.5»

souaoEtoU

2 mg 3 0:2 3 m.mm mm mm ow w.mm co £995 “38:. 8:2me

86:an 808%ng

M: 0.3 om ma: om fimm 3 2h om New mm «mom 9:358 was €863

355335 con—EC. .8 08m

2 am 3 cm 2 ...: mm mm 2: 3m x: 3. 230 396 .383

S Nam w «2v 3 w.mm vw mom cm 0.3 v8 and. 83mm 05 .«o congresm

855

2 5m 5 ad 2 v.2 me Ema 2: 5.9V mi ”EH2 com 83585 53.

85835

N: Gm S Em 3. Na vm NHN o3 New Sm EoEowEaE 380m 3322:
.\e 52 ..\o 62 e\. 62 ..\e 62 .x. 52
Ear—383: “atoms—ED 23.8%:— 35.8%:—

wefiaz b8» Eaton—em .3252 Eaton—em Eo> «35.—Er Eocene—z:

 

$023 .5me cam—553% 033 365.65 €88.“ mo mowficoeoa use mossoscoi .ov 2an

Table 41. Means and standard deviations for factors affecting future availability, veneer

 

 

mill survey.
Independent variables N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
- Deviation
Increased Forest Management 26 1.00 5.00 1.615 .752
Education Programs
Tax Incentives for NIPF lands 26 1.00 5.00 1.807 .633
Elimination of the Estate Tax 26 1.00 5.00 2.192 .801
Special Capital Gains Tax Rate 26 1.00 5.00 1.807 .749
for Timber Investment
Banning Hardwood Log Exports 25 1.00 5.00 2.320 1.180
Uniform Laws Requiring Best 26 1.00 5.00 2.653 .797
Management Practices
Institute Timber Buyers 26 1.00 5.00 3.038 1.038
Certification
Funding Stewardship Programs 26 1.00 5.00 2.615 .803

 

Table 42. Means and standard deviations for factors affecting future availability, veneer

 

 

mill survey.

Independent variables N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation

Increased Forest Management 368 1.00 5.00 1.758 1.051
Education Programs
Tax Incentives for NIPF lands 368 1.00 5.00 1.885 1.1451
Elimination of the Estate Tax 368 1.00 5.00 1.934 1.020
Special Capital Gains Tax Rate 361 1.00 5.00 1.831 1.055
for Timber Investment
Uniform Laws Requiring Best 362 1.00 5.00 2.762 1.341
Management Practices
Institute Timber Buyers 364 1.00 5.00 2.725 1.406
Certification
Funding Stewardship Programs 363 1.00 5 .00 2.490 1.231

 

128

Table 43. Percentage of veneer logs respondents export, veneer mill survey.

 

 

Percentage of logs Number of Responses
exported respondents (in percent)
Less that 1 percent 6 23.1
1 to 10% 7 26.9
11 to 25% 1 3.8
26 to 50% 1 3.8
Non response 11 42.3

 

Table 44. Percentage of veneer logs respondents export, logger survey.

 

 

Percentage of logs Number of Responses
exported respondents fin percent)
Less that 1 percent 29 7.6

1 to 10% 100 26.3

1 l to 25% 41 10.8

26 to 50% 55 14.5

51 to 75% 19 5.0
Over 75% 13 3.4
Non response 123 32.4

 

129

02

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

eoeaanQ
no ”a w a: Q. as we ".2. we 2 a. 368m a 836
mo 3 v 3‘ E 0.3 «u now NE 0.0m mm e585 253
N
om ngm me m.mm 3 :N no 5.: 3. m.m em 823350 amazon
5:8
3 5m mm m.w vm v.2 em mdv 3 ~ MEN mo taxm wed EoEEo>oO
.x. 62 .x. 62 .x. 62 .x. 62 e\.. 62
833.5 evade
3:342 2325 «9&me 3.5.52 02w< buEEm 935:3 2.2.552...—
quSm Smwo. .mEoEBSm :35 3 momaoame mo Enema 28 3:26on .3 2an
328809
a a: N 0.: m a? 0 2m 3. m: N aeoam a mousse
o ow _ o o 0.2 m fimv N. m.mm e 28an 283
o ow g m.m~ v You m Yam m w: m cogoqfieo $6.0m
5:3
a on e 3 _ «mm m n2 a. an _ caxm won 2065.38
.x. 52 .x. 62 .x. 62 .x. 62 ..\. .ez
occwama vocw<
wEE—z m_w=e...m vacuum:— _a.==oz oucw< hair—um 023:5 Eugene—z:

 

5033 E8 Soc? .ficofiowflm :85 8 3383. we Beacon can xocoscoum .mv 2an

Table 47. Mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum for export statements,
veneer mill survey.

 

 

Export Statements N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Government Log Export Policy 17 1.00 5.00 3.411 1.372
Foreign Competition 17 1.00 5.00 2.823 1.131
World Demand 17 1.00 5.00 1.941 .899
Changes in Foreign Demand 17 1.00 5.00 2.941 1.197

 

Table 48. Mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum for export statements,
logger survey.

 

 

 

Export Statements N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.

fl Deviation
Government Log Export Policy 289 1.00 5.00 2.432 1.197
Foreign Competition 290 1.00 5.00 3.503 1.191
World Demand 288 1.00 5.00 1.989 .875

Changes in Foreign Demand 288 1.00 5.00 2.430 1.023

131

NM—

 

 

 

3 v 3 33 N 3N 8 38 83 85> 23385 3333.838; 58.3 8 .x.
3 3. 3 on 33 N». 33 m N 85> 3858 N33338:. W83 8 .x.
3ooco>
N S N “No 2 3N m N.» N 3883833332333 33:88; 53 .8 .x.
38.35 838.55 8832
3 3s 3 3: v 38 N3 NM 33 33333 85> 8 8.3982 55280
$8332
3 33 N o o 8 m3 NN N 85328 583.8 “comm 85352
93233353 3
3 3. 3 o o 3. 33 Nm N3 38 588333 8.5 583 85> 8 .x.
3 o o o 8 cm 3.3 38 33 5.553838m 288m
N o o E 333 33N m N3. 3 233.532 38.3 3.8383 85>
3 o o v 3 NN N 38 N3 55 53 85> 8 253.5

x. ...z .x. .82 .x. ...z .8 82

uEnm

M33332 >55— ..3335 9.328.389 on. 33:54. M33888:— nzew 860nm

 

$033 :38 3ooco> £9383 #38363: 368w»: 3333.23 28 me3oco33co3m .23 0333.3.

m2

 

 

$8.3m
N333. CNS 8.3. 8.3 mN 23355 888 .3333 85> 8 835338< 58280
NNN. ONE 8.3. 83 NN 85> 880 23383; 8838; 83 8 .x.
3 3N. 8N 8.3. 83 NN 85> 855 3853 8.88; 83 8 .x.
35. ”EN 38.8 8.3 3N 85> 8385 38583352 N535; 8138 .x.
N333. 338.3 8.3. 8.3 mN 8382 2832 8 38835 3385 33333383553
3 3N. 383 8.3. 8.3 mN 835853 2 meow 3822.3 83.3 8 .x.
8%. 338.3 8.3. 8.3 mN 383383 85> 233 33333333 533333888
own. 382 333 8.3 «N 88533 338:3 353.383 85>
38m. 383 8.3. 8.3 mN 3833 53 85> 8 25335

fictwtroa

.Ew :82 Ban—mg: 5532:: Z nap—Guru. tans—3:—

 

.»ota :38 823? $2323 E3363: 8.3 82? 3333333388333 333333 53333333338 43033333533 E36388 .3382 .3 0333.3.

 

 

 

Appendix E

Tables Reporting ANOVA Results

134

Table 51. ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding domestic availability,
logger’s survey.

 

 

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Sig.
Deviation
Increased international demand 208 1 .74 .9155 .227
Conflicting landowner objectives 196 2.08 .9101 .900
Urban Development 205 2.14 1.1118 .661
Increased forest land fragmentation 198 2.11 1.0095 .681
Frequent property turnover 205 2.22 1.0917 .822
Increasing absentee ownership 202 2.70 .9879 .682
Decreasing parcel size 206 2.18 1.0692 .477
Previous high grading 209 1.84 .8874 .443
Increased environmental regulations 206 2.25 1.2627 .876
Owner mistrust of loggers 210 1.89 1.0083 .0334:

 

"' Statistically significant.

Table 52. ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding domestic availability,
logger’s survey.

 

 

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Sig.
Deviation
Increased international demand 150 1.63 .7808 .230
Conflicting landowner objectives 145 2.04 .8809 .487
Urban Development 144 2.17 1.1587 .917
Increased forest land fragmentation 145 2.04 .9922 .480
Frequent property turnover 141 2.21 1.0942 .803
Increasing absentee ownership 140 2.70 1.0143 .824
Decreasing parcel size 143 2.24 1.0085 .639
Previous high grading 147 1.77 .9656 .472
Increased environmental regulations 148 2.21 1.983 .723
Owner mistrust of loggers 148 2.10 1.0699 .069

 

'- Statistically significant.

135

Table 53. ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding future availability, logger’s

 

 

survey.

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Sig.
Deviation

Increased Forest Management 214 1.82 1.0687 .167
Education Programs
Additional Tax Incentives for NIPF 215 2.00 1.2342 023.
Lands
Elimination of the Estate Tax 214 2.02 1.0678 050:-
Special Capital Gains Tax Rate for 210 1.94 1.1412 .023:
Timber Investment
Uniform Laws Requiring Best 212 2.74 1.3747 .713
Management Practices
Institute Timber Buyers Certification 211 2.64 1.3634 .199
Funding Stewardship Programs 212 2.46 1.2365 .548

 

“ Statistically significant.

Table 54. ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding future availability,
logger’s survey.

 

 

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Sig.
Deviation

Increased Forest Management 152 1.66 1.0171 .125

Education Programs

Additional Tax Incentives for NIPF 151 1.71 .9891 .017:

Lands

Elimination of the Estate Tax 152 1.78 .9149 _012¢

Special Capital Gains Tax Rate for 149 1.69 .9072 .035:

Timber Investment

Uniform Laws Requiring Best 148 2.79 1.2897 .741

Management Practices

Institute Timber Buyers Certification 151 2.83 1.4503 .242

Funding Stewardship Programs 149 2.55 1.2271 .439

 

* Statistically significant.

136

Table 55. ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding availability, logger’s survey.

 

 

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Sig.
Deviation

Veneer Located on Public 217 2.50 1.2023 .027:
Timberland

Time in Procurement is Increasing 218 2.01 .7944 .189
Selection Harvests Promotes Hi gh- 216 2.38 1.1229 .564
grading

Required NIPF Management Plans 215 3.41 1.4175 .466
Whole Tree Chipping 216 2.30 1.2785 .864
Standardized Tree Grades 218 2.49 1.1369 .0291!I
Current Veneer Harvesting is 216 2.83 1.0826 .265
Sustainable

Quality Veneer Logs are Obtainable 220 2.67 1.0651 .195

for Higher Prices

 

"‘ Statistically significant.

Table 56. ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding availability, logger’s

 

 

survey.

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Sig.
Deviation

Veneer Located on Public 155 2.78 1.1525 025*
Timberland
Time in Procurement is Increasing 153 1.90 .8173 .191
Selection Harvests Promotes Hi gh- 153 2.46 1.1697 .529
grading
Required NIPF Management Plans 153 3.52 1.4378 .487
Whole Tree Chipping 152 2.30 1.3174 .921
Standardized Tree Grades 152 2.76 1.2448 033*
Current Veneer Harvesting is 152 2.97 1.0607 .186
Sustainable
Quality Veneer Logs are Obtainable 154 2.51 1.1447 .148

for Higher Prices

 

* Statistically significant.

137

 

Table 57. ANOVA test results of logger attitudes regarding log exports, logger’s survey.

 

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Deviation Sig.
Government Log Export Policy 162 2.48 1.1754 .433
Foreign Competition 163 3.40 1.1687 .11 1
World Demand 162 2.04 .9147 .238
Changes is Species Demand 161 2.39 .9366 .465

 

" Statistically significant.

Table 58. ANOVA test results of non-logger attitudes regarding log exports, logger’s

 

 

survey.

Dependent variables N Mean Std. Deviation Sig.
Government Log Export Policy 125 2.37 1.2084 .425
Foreign Competition 126 3.64 1.1964 .081
World Demand 124 1.92 .8224 .237
Changes in Species Demand 125 2.51 1.1189 .238

 

 

" Statistically significant.

Table 59. ANOVA values for logger’s attitudes regarding anally, logger’s survey.

 

 

 

Species Group N Mean Std. Deviation Sig.
Red Oak 215 2.48 .7223 .207
White Oak 210 2.81 .7134 .583
Ash 213 2.44 .7540 .204
Hard Maple 220 2.26 .8282 .001!-
Black Cherry 215 2.60 .8134 .171
Black Walnut 208 2.92 .7974 .430

 

* Statistically significant.

138

lable 60. ANOVA values for non-logger attitudes regarding gualig, logger’s survey.

 

 

Species Group N Mean Std. Deviation Sig.
Red Oak 151 2.57 .6684 .237
White Oak 149 2.84 .6981 .785
Ash 147 2.53 .7964 .353
Hard Maple 150 2.53 .7915 003*
Black Cherry 147 2.70 .7887 .308
Black Walnut 147 2.84 .8196 .298

 

* Statistically significant.

Table 61. ANOVA values for logger and non-logger attitudes regarding guantigg,
logger’s survey.

 

 

Size Class N Mean Std. Deviation Sig. Respondents
(inches)

Small (1 1-15) 217 1.63 .8065 .071 Logger’s
Medium (16-20) 220 2.24 .6560 000* Logger’s
Large (21+) 217 2.84 .5122 .099 Logger’s
Small (1 1-15) 153 1.79 .9344 .066 Non-logger’s
Medium (16-20) 154 4.49 .6182 .000: Non-logger’s
Large (21+) 150 2.93 .4030 .094 Non-logger’s

 

"' Statistically significant.

Table 62. ANOVA values for logger attitudes regarding real price over the next ten
years, logger’s survey.

 

 

Species Group N Mean Std. Deviation Sig.
Red Oak 199 1.35 .5476 .583
White Oak 187 1.37 .5670 .731
Ash 195 1.59 .6626 .589
Hard Maple 204 1.39 .6457 .884
Black Cherry 197 1.34 .5913 .799
Black Walnut 183 1.39 .6187 .778

 

"‘ Statistically significant.

139

Table 63. ANOVA values for non-logger attitudes regarding real price over the next ten
years, logger’s survey.

 

 

Species Group N Mean Std. Deviation Sig.
Red Oak 144 1.32 .5243 .583
White Oak 139 1.35 .5629 .731
Ash 138 1.54 .6292 .477
Hard Maple 144 1.38 .6368 .884
Black Cherry 135 1.31 .5815 .611
Black Walnut 131 1.37 .5712 .636

 

* Statistically significant.

 

140

REFERENCES

Allen, B. T. 1994. Managerial Economics 2nd ed. Harper Collins Publishers. 703p.

Argow, K. A. 1998. This land is their land.the potential and diversity of non-industrial
private forests. Journal of Forestry. 94(2):30-33.

Babbie, E. 1995. The practice of social research. Seventh Edition. Wadsworth Publishing
Company. 476p.

Ball, J. 1997. On the urban edge: A new enhanced role for foresters. Journal of Forestry
95(10): 6-10.

Belcher, D. W.; Holdway, M. R.; Brand, G. J. 1982. A description of STEMS the stand
and tree evaluation and modeling system. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-79. St. Paul, MN: US.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 18p.

Beltz, R. C., Burkhardt, E. C., and May, D. M. 1990. Interpreting 1987 Forest Survey
Results for Mississippi Hardwood Sawtimber. Southern Journal of Applied Foresz
14(4): 170-173.

Blyth, J. E., Sester, J. A., and Raile, G. K. 1987. Illinois timber industry-an assessment of
timber product output and use. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment
Station. Resource Bulletin NC-100.

Buchman, R. G. and Shifley, S. R. 1983. Guide to evaluating forest growth projection
systems. Journal of Forestry. 81(4): 232-234.

Burcham, V., Bertch, R., and Weatherspoon, A. 1996. Wood products in Michigan: a
directory of mills & manufacturers. Forest Management Division Michigan Department
of Natural Resources.

Callahan, J. C. and Davis C. J. 1986. Optimum clipping strategies for hardwood face
veneer. Forest Prod. J. 35(1): 47-52.

Callahan, J. C. 1985. Structural changes in the hardwood face veneer industry. Forest
Prod. J. 35(6): 11-16.

Callahan, J. C. 1990. The fine hardwood veneer industry in the United States: 1838-1990.
National Woodlands Publishing Company. 368 p.

Cassens, D. 1998. Using forest survey data in making strategic supply decisions.
Unpublished

141

Costanza, R. 1991. Ecological economics: the science and management of sustainability.
Columbia University Press, New York. 525p.

Creswell, J. W. 1994. Research design: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage
Publications. 228p.

DeCoster, L. A. 1998. The boom in forest owners-a bust for forestry. Journal of Forestry.
96(5): 25-28.

Dwyer, J. B. 1995. Log quality from stump to mill. Hardwood Symposium Proceedings.
Pp. 27-35.

Fleischer, H0. 1965. Use of small logs for veneer. USDA Forest Service Forest Products
Laboratory Research Note FPL-0101. Madison, Wis.

Fowler, F. J. 1993. Survey research methods. Second Edition. Sage Publications. 150p.

Hackett, R. L. and Whipple, J. W. 1995. Wisconsin timber industry-an assessment of
timber product output and use, 1992. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest
Experiment Station. Resource Bulletin NC—164.

Hackett, R. L. and Mayer, R. W. 1993. Indiana timber industry-an assessment of timber
product output and use, 1990. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment
Station. Resource Bulletin NC-146.

Hackett, R. L. and Dahlman, R. A. 1993. Minnesota timber industry'an assessment of
timber product output and use, 1990. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest
Experiment Station. Resource Bulletin NC-143.

Hahn, J. T. 1987. Illinois forest statistics, 1985. USDA Forest Service, North Central
Forest Experiment Station. Resource Bulletin NC-103.

Hair, D. 1966. Projected demands for hardwood veneer emphasize research-management.
Forest Products Journal 16(1): 28-30.

Hanks, L. F. 1976. Hardwood tree grades for factory lumber. USDA Forest Service,
Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Res. Pap. NE-333.

Harrar, E. S. (1954) Defects in hardwood veneer logs: their frequency and importance.
USDA Forest Service Forest Southeastern Forest Experiment Station Paper No. 39.
Ashville.

Haskell, H. H. 1963. Using the FPL hardwood veneer grades. USDA Forest Service
Forest Products Laboratory Research Note F PL-025. Madison, Wis.

Hendricks, L. T. 1967. A study of the hardwood face veneer and plywood industry in
Michigan and Wisconsin. Michigan State University. Ph.D. Thesis 160 p.

142

Henley, J. W., Woodfin, R. 0., and Haskell, H. H. 1963. Recommended veneer grades
for the development of hardwood veneer log grades. USDA Forest Service Forest
Products Laboratory Research Paper FPL-9. Madison, Wis.

Illinois Department of Natural Resources. 1996. Illinois licensed timber buyers.

Indiana Department of Natural Resources. Division of Forestry. 1996. Indiana licensed
timbers buyer’s guide.

Jones, S. B. 1994. Who are these NIPF owners and what do they know about silver
culture. Proceedings Annual Hardwood Symposium Hardwood Research Council,
Memphis, Tenn, The Council. (22) pp. 37-52.

Jones, R. E., and Paxton, J. S. 1977. The 296 million acre myth. American Forests. V. 83,
November, pp. 6-8.

Kellison, R. C. 1988. Extending the hardwood timber supply. Maine Agricultural
Experiment Station Miscellaneous Report 327.

Kuhns, M. R., Brunson, M. W., and Roberts, S. D. 1998. Landowners’ educational needs
and how foresters can respond. Journal of Forestry. 96 (8): 38-42.

Leatherberry, E. C. and Spencer, J. S. 1996. Michigan forest statistics, 1993. North
Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn. (USDA Forest Service, Resource
Bulletin NC-170.

Luppold, W. G. and Dempsey, G. P. 1996. Is eastern hardwood sawtimber becoming
scarcer? Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 13(1): 46-49.

Luppold, W. G. and Thomas, R. E. 1991. Revised estimates of hardwood log exports to
major EC and pacific rim markets. Forest Products Journal 41(7/8): 35-40.

May, D. M. and LeDoux, C. B. 1992. Assessing timber availability in upland hardwood
forests. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 16(2): 82-88.

May, D. M., and Pilon, J. 1995. Michigan timber industry-an assessment of timber
product output and use, 1992. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment
Station. Resource Bulletin NC-162.

Miles, P. D., Chen, C. M., and Leatherberry, E. C. 1995. Minnesota forest statistics,
1990, Revised. North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn. USDA Forest
Service, Resource Bulletin NC-158.

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 1997 . Minnesota primary forest products
directory. Minn. Dep. Of Natur. Resour., Div. For, St. Paul, Minn. 131 p.

143

Nelson, N. D., Maeglin, R. R., and Walgren, H. E. 1969. Relationship of black
walnut wood color to soil properties and site. Wood and Fiber 1(1): 29-37.

Panel World. 1998. F ive-year upgrade lifts veneer operation back into prominence. V
(39) 1. PP 8-11.

Planinga, A., Boungiomo, R., Alig, J. and J. S. Spencer. 1989. Timberland area changes
in the Lake States: past causes, trends, and projections. USDA Forest Service North
Central Experiment Station. Research Paper NC-287.

Powell, D. S., Faulkner, J. L., Darr, D. R., Zhu, Z. and MacCleerey, D. W. 1993. Forest
resources of the United States, 1992. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report
259.

Raile, G. K. 1985. Wisconsin forest statistics, 1983. North Central Forest Experiment
Station, St. Paul, Minn. USDA Forest Service, Resource Bulletin NC-94.

Rast, E. D., Sonderrnan, D. L., Gammon, G. L. 1973. A guide to hardwood log grading
USDA Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Upper Darby, PA. Gen.
Tech. Rep. NE-l. 31 p.

Resh, S. 1994. Assessing the availability of timberland for harvest in the Lake States.
Masters Thesis, Michigan State University. 201p.

Schallau, C. H. 1965. Fragmentation, absentee ownership, and turnover of forest land in
Northern Lower Michigan. USDA Forest Service Lake States Forest Experiment Station
Research Paper LS-17.

Schmidt, T. L. 1997. Wisconsin forest statistics, 1996. North Central Forest Experiment
Station, St. Paul, Minn. USDA Forest Service, Resource Bulletin NC-183.

Shifley, S. R. 1987. A generalized system of models forecasting central states tree
growth. North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn. USDA Forest Service,
Resource Bulletin NC-279.

Smith, W. B. and Golitz, M. F. 1988. Indiana forest statistics, 1986. USDA Forest
Service North Central Forest Experiment Station. Resource Bulletin NC—108.

Smith, W. B. and Hackett, R. L. 1991. Veneer industry and timber use, North Central
Region, 1988. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. Resource
Bulletin NC-125.

Statistical Package for Social Scientists. 1997. SPSS Inc. version 8.0. Prentice Hall
Publications.

144

ii“ KIN.”
I

 

 

Stevens, J. 1994. How dependable are state-level forest products trade data? Paper
presented at the Midwest Forest Economist Meeting, August. Traverse City Mi.
http://wildfire.for.msu.edu/JAS/MJ__expor.htm.

Stone, R. N. 1992. Great lake forest trends 1952-1992. Lake States Forestry Alliance
Project Report. 29p.

Stynes, DJ. 1997. Recreation activity and tourism spending in the Lake States. USDA
Forest Service North Central Experiment Station General Technical Report NC-189. Pp.
1 39-150.

Tyson, B. C., Brodererick, S. H., and Snyder L. B. 1998. A social marketing approach to
landowner education. Journal of Forestry. 96(2): 34-40.

US. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1997. Schedule B: statistical
classification of domestic and foreign commodities exported and imported from the
United States database. US. Dept. Commer. Bur. of Census.

USDA Forest Service. Forest Economics. Price trends for standing timber in the Lake
States. [Online] Available:www.ncfes.umn.edu/units/4804/ls-prices/ls-pricehtml,
September 1 1998.

Vaughn, C. L., Wollin, C. A., McDonald, K. A., Bulgn'n, E. H. 1966. Hardwood log
grades for standard lumber. USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. Res. Pap.
F PL-63. Madison, WI. 52 p.

Weekly Hardwood Review. 1997. Opinions on log exports and hardwood log exports.
13(1/3).

West, C. D. and Hansen, B. G. 1996. Forest resource issues and the sustainability of
hardwood resource supplies. American Hardwood Export Council First Southeast Asia
Convention.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1995. Wisconsin primary wood using
industry directory. Publ-FR-025-95Rev. 44p.

Workman, E. C. 1996. Influence of geographic origin and soil properties on walnut
veneer color. Masters Thesis. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. 212p.

Vasievich, J. Michael, Potter—Witter, Karen, and Leefers, Larry A 1995. Timber supply
and market trends in the Lake States. Lake States Forestry Assessment-1995 Govemor’s
Conference Proceedings. PP 404-433.

The Veneer Association. 1935. Faces and figures; A story of the manufacture of plywood
and veneer. Reprinted from the spring-summer 1935 home furnishing arts. Pp79-94.

145

MICHIGAN srarE UNIV. LIBRARIES
lllWill”HIIIHIWIWHIWillillllllllilll
31293021061829