A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry

Paul Michael Smith, Sudipta Dasmohapatra, William G. Luppold

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A mail survey of all identified hardwood sawmills in Pennsylvania was conducted in the fall of 2000 to better understand firm size, species used, origin of logs, processing technology employed, the hardwood lumber grades produced, and the value-added features performed by these sawmills in 1999. An adjusted response rate of 31 percent was obtained for the study's 161 usable surveys. Pennsylvania's sawmills produced approximately 1.3 billion board feet of hardwood lumber in 1999. Responding sawmills producing over 3 million board feet (MMBF) per year (1/3 of the firms) accounted for 80 percent of total production. Red and white oak comprised 40 percent of the log volume purchased by responding sawmills in 1999 followed by yellow-poplar (13%), cherry (13%), soft maple (9%), hard maple (7%), and ash (5%). Thirty-eight percent of responding sawmills employed foresters. The vast majority (80%) of hardwood logs were purchased from non-industrial private forest land, followed by state forests (10%), industrial private forests (9%), federal forests (1%), and municipal lands (1%). Circle headrigs were used by 75 percent of responding sawmills; however, two-thirds of very large firms (10 MMBF and greater) used band headrigs. Whereas only 35 percent of all Pennsylvania hardwood sawmills used a computer-aided headrig, nearly all (94%) of the largest sawmills sampled used computer-aided headrigs in 1999. Approximately 19 percent of the hardwood lumber produced by our study respondents in 1999 was First and Seconds (FAS) & Select (SEL) grade followed by No. 1 Common (24%), No. 2 Common (17%), No. 3A and 3B Common (8%), pallet grade (23%), tie grade (6%), and other (3%). The 16 largest sawmills (10 MMBF+) produced a significantly higher percent of FAS & SEL (30%) lumber grade in 1999 as compared to the study's smaller sawmills. NHLA grading was the most common value-added process performed by responding sawmills (47%) in 1999 followed by kiln-drying (30%), surfacing (30%), custom sorting (26%), end-coating (25%), and custom grading (21%).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)43-49
Number of pages7
JournalForest Products Journal
Volume54
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 1 2004

Fingerprint

Sawmills
sawmills
Hardwoods
hardwood
industry
firm size
sorting
Industry
coating
Lumber
ash
lumber grades
Acer
lumber
value added
Ashes
private forest
customs
land
firm

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Forestry
  • Materials Science(all)
  • Plant Science

Cite this

Smith, P. M., Dasmohapatra, S., & Luppold, W. G. (2004). A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry. Forest Products Journal, 54(5), 43-49.
Smith, Paul Michael ; Dasmohapatra, Sudipta ; Luppold, William G. / A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry. In: Forest Products Journal. 2004 ; Vol. 54, No. 5. pp. 43-49.
@article{6bc97803093a4375959ffbbb434ee8e2,
title = "A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry",
abstract = "A mail survey of all identified hardwood sawmills in Pennsylvania was conducted in the fall of 2000 to better understand firm size, species used, origin of logs, processing technology employed, the hardwood lumber grades produced, and the value-added features performed by these sawmills in 1999. An adjusted response rate of 31 percent was obtained for the study's 161 usable surveys. Pennsylvania's sawmills produced approximately 1.3 billion board feet of hardwood lumber in 1999. Responding sawmills producing over 3 million board feet (MMBF) per year (1/3 of the firms) accounted for 80 percent of total production. Red and white oak comprised 40 percent of the log volume purchased by responding sawmills in 1999 followed by yellow-poplar (13{\%}), cherry (13{\%}), soft maple (9{\%}), hard maple (7{\%}), and ash (5{\%}). Thirty-eight percent of responding sawmills employed foresters. The vast majority (80{\%}) of hardwood logs were purchased from non-industrial private forest land, followed by state forests (10{\%}), industrial private forests (9{\%}), federal forests (1{\%}), and municipal lands (1{\%}). Circle headrigs were used by 75 percent of responding sawmills; however, two-thirds of very large firms (10 MMBF and greater) used band headrigs. Whereas only 35 percent of all Pennsylvania hardwood sawmills used a computer-aided headrig, nearly all (94{\%}) of the largest sawmills sampled used computer-aided headrigs in 1999. Approximately 19 percent of the hardwood lumber produced by our study respondents in 1999 was First and Seconds (FAS) & Select (SEL) grade followed by No. 1 Common (24{\%}), No. 2 Common (17{\%}), No. 3A and 3B Common (8{\%}), pallet grade (23{\%}), tie grade (6{\%}), and other (3{\%}). The 16 largest sawmills (10 MMBF+) produced a significantly higher percent of FAS & SEL (30{\%}) lumber grade in 1999 as compared to the study's smaller sawmills. NHLA grading was the most common value-added process performed by responding sawmills (47{\%}) in 1999 followed by kiln-drying (30{\%}), surfacing (30{\%}), custom sorting (26{\%}), end-coating (25{\%}), and custom grading (21{\%}).",
author = "Smith, {Paul Michael} and Sudipta Dasmohapatra and Luppold, {William G.}",
year = "2004",
month = "5",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "54",
pages = "43--49",
journal = "Forest Products Journal",
issn = "0015-7473",
publisher = "Forest Products Society",
number = "5",

}

Smith, PM, Dasmohapatra, S & Luppold, WG 2004, 'A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry', Forest Products Journal, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 43-49.

A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry. / Smith, Paul Michael; Dasmohapatra, Sudipta; Luppold, William G.

In: Forest Products Journal, Vol. 54, No. 5, 01.05.2004, p. 43-49.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry

AU - Smith, Paul Michael

AU - Dasmohapatra, Sudipta

AU - Luppold, William G.

PY - 2004/5/1

Y1 - 2004/5/1

N2 - A mail survey of all identified hardwood sawmills in Pennsylvania was conducted in the fall of 2000 to better understand firm size, species used, origin of logs, processing technology employed, the hardwood lumber grades produced, and the value-added features performed by these sawmills in 1999. An adjusted response rate of 31 percent was obtained for the study's 161 usable surveys. Pennsylvania's sawmills produced approximately 1.3 billion board feet of hardwood lumber in 1999. Responding sawmills producing over 3 million board feet (MMBF) per year (1/3 of the firms) accounted for 80 percent of total production. Red and white oak comprised 40 percent of the log volume purchased by responding sawmills in 1999 followed by yellow-poplar (13%), cherry (13%), soft maple (9%), hard maple (7%), and ash (5%). Thirty-eight percent of responding sawmills employed foresters. The vast majority (80%) of hardwood logs were purchased from non-industrial private forest land, followed by state forests (10%), industrial private forests (9%), federal forests (1%), and municipal lands (1%). Circle headrigs were used by 75 percent of responding sawmills; however, two-thirds of very large firms (10 MMBF and greater) used band headrigs. Whereas only 35 percent of all Pennsylvania hardwood sawmills used a computer-aided headrig, nearly all (94%) of the largest sawmills sampled used computer-aided headrigs in 1999. Approximately 19 percent of the hardwood lumber produced by our study respondents in 1999 was First and Seconds (FAS) & Select (SEL) grade followed by No. 1 Common (24%), No. 2 Common (17%), No. 3A and 3B Common (8%), pallet grade (23%), tie grade (6%), and other (3%). The 16 largest sawmills (10 MMBF+) produced a significantly higher percent of FAS & SEL (30%) lumber grade in 1999 as compared to the study's smaller sawmills. NHLA grading was the most common value-added process performed by responding sawmills (47%) in 1999 followed by kiln-drying (30%), surfacing (30%), custom sorting (26%), end-coating (25%), and custom grading (21%).

AB - A mail survey of all identified hardwood sawmills in Pennsylvania was conducted in the fall of 2000 to better understand firm size, species used, origin of logs, processing technology employed, the hardwood lumber grades produced, and the value-added features performed by these sawmills in 1999. An adjusted response rate of 31 percent was obtained for the study's 161 usable surveys. Pennsylvania's sawmills produced approximately 1.3 billion board feet of hardwood lumber in 1999. Responding sawmills producing over 3 million board feet (MMBF) per year (1/3 of the firms) accounted for 80 percent of total production. Red and white oak comprised 40 percent of the log volume purchased by responding sawmills in 1999 followed by yellow-poplar (13%), cherry (13%), soft maple (9%), hard maple (7%), and ash (5%). Thirty-eight percent of responding sawmills employed foresters. The vast majority (80%) of hardwood logs were purchased from non-industrial private forest land, followed by state forests (10%), industrial private forests (9%), federal forests (1%), and municipal lands (1%). Circle headrigs were used by 75 percent of responding sawmills; however, two-thirds of very large firms (10 MMBF and greater) used band headrigs. Whereas only 35 percent of all Pennsylvania hardwood sawmills used a computer-aided headrig, nearly all (94%) of the largest sawmills sampled used computer-aided headrigs in 1999. Approximately 19 percent of the hardwood lumber produced by our study respondents in 1999 was First and Seconds (FAS) & Select (SEL) grade followed by No. 1 Common (24%), No. 2 Common (17%), No. 3A and 3B Common (8%), pallet grade (23%), tie grade (6%), and other (3%). The 16 largest sawmills (10 MMBF+) produced a significantly higher percent of FAS & SEL (30%) lumber grade in 1999 as compared to the study's smaller sawmills. NHLA grading was the most common value-added process performed by responding sawmills (47%) in 1999 followed by kiln-drying (30%), surfacing (30%), custom sorting (26%), end-coating (25%), and custom grading (21%).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2642587435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2642587435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:2642587435

VL - 54

SP - 43

EP - 49

JO - Forest Products Journal

JF - Forest Products Journal

SN - 0015-7473

IS - 5

ER -

Smith PM, Dasmohapatra S, Luppold WG. A profile of Pennsylvania's hardwood sawmill industry. Forest Products Journal. 2004 May 1;54(5):43-49.