http://www.wvgazette.com/static/series/timber/ECON.html
http://www.mainerivers.org/sawmill_photographs.htm
http://www.climaxlocomotives.com/sawmills/
http://www.ag.auburn.edu/~cbailey/sawmills.htm
Historical Review of Sawmills in Alabama, Focusing on the Consolidation of Sawmills and the Effects on Employment
Beau Brodbeck
11/24/03
Introduction
Sawmills in Alabama have evolved over the past century into a primarily highly mechanized systems. Sawmills that at one time were small operations that dotted the state of Alabama have evolved into large highly mechanized mills that draw upon a vast land base and require fewer employees. The concept of a small locally owned sawmill run by a family that provide lumber to the local economy has all but vanished. Sawmills like most aspects of the lumber industry in the United States have changed and grown into large capital-intensive operations that have forced many of the smaller less competitive mills out of business. To survive in today’s economy, sawmills have had to become larger and more competitive on the world market. The process of achieving this economical stability has caused the consolidation or decrease in the number of sawmills in Alabama.
Sawmill consolidation has had numerous negative social impacts on communities dependent on the lumber industry. In many cases small landowners are left without a timber market for their products. As small sawmills are no longer competitive and are declining, and employment they generate has steadily decreased. The consolidation of the sawmilling industry has been a historical process, which has been influenced by greater economic and technological trends. The social impacts of sawmill consolidation have been substantial especially in the rural counties of Alabama where timber is an integral part of the local economy.
This paper will outline the importance of sawmills and the lumber industry as a whole in Alabama today, as well as compare the trend of sawmill consolidation with similar trends evident in agriculture. The paper will follow the lumber industry and sawmills in particular through the history and development of the lumber industry in the United States. The technological changes and the differences in sawmills will be discussed as well as their impact on employment and sawmill consolidation. The paper will focus on the census data documenting the changes in the number of sawmills, people employed in sawmills, and the mill output, emphasizing the ongoing consolidation in an increasingly production-oriented industry. The paper will conclude with the social impacts the consolidation of sawmills has had on local communities and society as a whole.
Importance of the Lumber Industry in Alabama
Timber production is one of the most important industries in the State of Alabama. The importance of the timber industry as an agricultural commodity in Alabama is second only to the broiler industry (AL Forestry Commission, 2002). In 2002 the timber industry employed 64,500 people with a payroll of over 2 billion dollars (AL Forestry Commission 2002). Timber manufacturing by some accounts is the leading manufacturing industry in Alabama, contributing in 1999 for $4.3 billion in value added, and $10.7 billion in value of shipments (U.S. Census Bureau, 1999). Additionally timber manufacturing accounted for 18 percent of the total manufacturing in Alabama (AL Forestry Commission 2002). The South produced 14.7 billion board feet of lumber or 44 percent of the all softwood lumber in the United States and Alabama contributed roughly 1.9 billion board feet in 2002 (AL Forestry Commission 2002).
Lumber Industry Shift from West to South
The lumber industry, while having moved the majority of its production to the Pacific North West in the 1920’s, continued operating in Alabama. The South’s lumber production has steadily increased since the 1970’s (AL Forestry Commission, 2002), while the Pacific Northwest has declined from 24.8 percent in 1952 to 16 percent of the lumber produced in the United States in 1997 (Prestemon, Abt, Pg. 299, 306). The declining harvests in National forests have added to the shift in the lumber industry to the South (Prestemon, Abt). Harvests in National forests have declined from 17.5 percent of the total harvests in the U.S. in 1964 to 3.5 percent in 1998 (Prestemon, Abt, Pg. 305). Total harvests have decline in the United States with the exception of the South; the most noticeable change was in the Pacific Northwest where total average harvests went from 5.8 percent in 1950 to 0.7 percent in 1998 (see figure 3)(Prestemon, Abt, Pg 305).
The move back to the South and Alabama in particular has partially occurred because of environmental movements and government’s policies regarding the protection of old growth forests and endangered species (Prestemon, Abt, Pg. 305). The protection of old growth Redwood and Sequoia forests and the movement to protect the Spotted Owl pressured the industry to stop harvesting in National Forests. Additionally environmental pressures from the Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy, and various other environmental organizations, would cause an increased shift of production on private lands. The pressures in the West forced a shift to the South were the industry was on the rise.
The reforestation of private lands in Alabama was put into action due to a declining agriculture industry and a concern for the dilapidated environment. During the Great Depression farmers abandoned or lost their farms, allowing the land to return to forest. Following World War II farms continued to decrease, and in the 1950’s farmland declined further by 20 percent, adding to the land returning to forest (Sternitzke). Programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930’s, and Soil Bank Program in the 1950’s and 1960’s helped plant back thousand of acres of old abandoned farms in Alabama (Healy). More recent programs like Conservation Reserve Program or CRP and county and state reforestation incentives, have continued to reforest old farmland up to present day, adding to the once dilapidated forest resources of Alabama. Consequently Alabama’s forestland has steadily grown since the 1930’s and more recently by one million acres between 1990 and 2002 to reach 22.9 million acres (AL, Forestry Commission, 2002). Where once Alabama’s forests had all but disappeared due to farming and the cut-out-and-get-out logging operations, it began to regenerate due to a declining farming industry (Healy).
Alabama like it had been 100 years in the past had become a favorable place for the lumber industry once again. It had renewed its forests and still had one of the most extensive water resource bases in the country. Labor remained rural and cheap (Abt, Winter, Huggett, Pg, 289), and the introduction of technology to agriculture in the 1950’s and 1960’s left many rural Americans seeking jobs in an era turning to the machine (Alabama, State History). Additionally landownership was in the hands of private owners unlike the Western part of the country where over 80 percent of the land is federally owned (Sternitzke). Alabama boasts 70 percent of its commercial forestland in the hands of private citizens, reducing federal regulations and interference (AL Forestry Commission, 2002).
In addition to the regenerating forests, desirable private land ownership, labor, and water, Alabama unlike the North West has a long, near year round growing season, exceeding 220 days (Bliss, Bailey pg. 5). The soils are rich, and the terrain is easily accessible, making Alabama ideal for logging, as it had been in the past. Alabama can grow pulpwood and sawtimber at a greater rate than most North Western forests where short growing seasons, rocky soil, and high elevations reduce tree-growing capacities. Alabama presented a profitable package to industries looking to the future and again were accepting and ready to embrace the full burnt of the lumber industry.
Impact of Technology on American Farmers
The Consolidation of the sawmilling industry has paralleled the trends that have occurred in agriculture in the South. Agriculture and the right to own land are some of the oldest traditions of American life. Early pioneer farmed 30 to 40 acres, which during early subsistence farming was the most a single family could farm, using the primitive tools available (Healy). Subsistence farming allowed early Americans to provide for themselves what was necessary for survival during a time when a person’s own initiative provided the only source of food. Subsistence agriculture prospered in early American life, and while seldom being easy, it allowed freedom. However this type of farming changed, technology, government institutions, and the push to commercialize the farming industry would cause farming to develop into an industry run by the biggest, capital-intensive producers.
The Homestead Act of 1862 opened farming opportunities to every man by allowing farmers to own and farm federal land (Browne). Farming became a source of income that any man willing to farm could venture into (Browne). Additionally it originally required few capital investments, technology was minimal and the land was mostly free. Early farmers, farmed even the most unproductive sites in the South, due to the growing population and the lack of outside economic opportunities (Healy). The failure rate was high and the government responded by providing farmers with institutions like the USDA, Extension Service, and the Land Grant Colleges to help farmers succeed, and become producers in a developing nation (Browne).
The 1930’s introduced mechanization to the farming industry, which swept the nation, pushing thousand of farmers out of business (Healy). The institutions originally created to educate and disseminate technology to farmers, forced a change from subsistence to capital intensive, technologically advance farming (Browne). The results were a consolidation and decrease of the farming industry, where only the largest highest producing farmers remained (Browne). The small less productive farmers fell behind and increasingly lost their farms to the ever-growing capital-intensive production farmers (Browne).
Additionally technology allowed higher production on less land creating super-farms, where more food was available at a cheaper price (Browne). The ever-increasing production lowered prices, thus forcing large farmers to produce more to cover overhead and expenses, therefore continuously depressing the price through overproduction, the cycle was vicious. The decline in cotton and other traditional crops in the South were substantial, in part due to poor soils in the northern areas of the State, the bole weevil infestations, and the government’s favoring of high production farmers (Healey, Hightower). Farms consolidated and technology allowed more to be farmed on less land (Hightower). Cotton fell from its peak of 23 million acres in the 1920s to 2.9 million in 1982, and corn like cotton fell from 24 million acres in 1929 to 7.4 million acres in 1982 (Healy Pg. 25-26).
The need for labor also declined with the consolidation and movement of agriculture out of the South. Cotton, even as late as the 1940’s required 98 man hours per acre to plant, weed, fertilize and harvest the crop (Healy Pg. 27). This meant plenty of opportunities for farm laborers, but the introduction of mechanization caused the man-hours for one acre of cotton to drop to 6, by the 1970’s (Healy, Pg. 27). The use of tractors reduced jobs for rural Americans forcing a mass migration to urban cities (Healy). Those that remained had “little more comfort than “adapt or die”” (Hightower, Pg. 5). Wendell Berry states “If mechanization has been a boon to agribusiness, its has been a bane to millions of rural Americans. Farmworkers have been the earliest victims. There were 4.3 million workers in 1950. Twenty years later that number had fallen to 3.5 million.” (Berry, Pg. 150). Farmers were forced to enlarge their farms by whatever means necessary to survive, be it renting or buying. This meant large capital investments for land and technology, such as tractors, genetically enhanced seeds, and modern irrigation systems (Healy). Those that could not change disappeared from the farming business. Merle C. Prunty best summarizes agriculture in the South in writing; “The contrast between farming systems of the 1930s and those of the 1970s in the South are perhaps the greatest, the most distinctive, that can be drawn in any American region during that time-span. With few exceptions, the region’s agriculture now is wholly mechanized and capital intensive. What cannot be done with machines is rarely done.” (Healy, Pg. 30)
The American farm has changed, family run farms making a “good ole’ living” are part of a past American tradition. The land grand colleges, and government agencies sealed the rural farmers fate, by pushing technology to make all aspects of American farming more efficient, more productive, and more cost effective. “Since 1940, more than 3 million farms have folded, and farms continue to fold at a rate of 2,000 per week.” (Hightower, Pg. 2)
The Lumber industry like the farming industry has changed from an early colonial system of subsistence to a modern system of improved technology, and maximized capital gains. Sawmills like farming have evolved into large technological, highly efficient mills that require large inputs of timber and have developed to the point of excluding the small woodland owner by increasing the size and production constraints of logging operations. Additionally like in farming, the larger more productive mills drove the price of wood down so far, that small local sawmills were forced to shut down. To fully understand the situation of the sawmilling industry in Alabama and the process of consolidation and increased technology, the reader must look to the origins and the history of the lumber industry in America.
Early History of Sawmills and the Lumber Industry
Sawmills according to Michael Williams were the first local industries established in “semisubsistence economies of the newly settled areas”(Williams, Pg 95). Sawmills located in the early colonies were often very small and run by individual farmers or families. They required little labor, often only two men, but were vastly important to the survival of the communities. As Michael Williams writes “Because the sawmill was so essential to pioneer life, towns made grants and townsfolk held shares in what was, in reality, a cooperative enterprise.” (Williams, Pg. 95). These early sawmills served the community and were an essential to pioneer farmers in rural America, where supplies and all facets of life were handmade.
Timber production in the Eastern United States prior to 1810 was in an infant stage, and production was far from efficient (Williams). Michael Williams writes about his era in saying:
“…the scale of operations was small. Tools were crude and hand-forged, production was restricted, distribution haphazard, and the market local. There was little competition and little incentive to initiate change. Simply, timber getting was still an adjunct to agriculture settlement, and the timber cut was mainly the by-product of the land clearing and the concern of a multitude of small mills that dotted the country to serve the agricultural population.” (Williams, Pg. 163)
The census data of 1840 illustrates this point by contrasting the number of mills in relation to people employed by the industry. There were 31,649 sawmills in the United States but only 22,042 employees on record working in the sawmilling industry (Williams). This according to Williams illustrates the fact that most mills at this time were very small, possibly operated by one person and on a part time basis by local farmers. The lumber industry was still very much a facet of agriculture.
The sawmill industry began to change during the 1850’s and 1860’s (Williams). As the country developed the lumber industry began to change from one and two man operations to large industrialized operations employing 20 to 100 men (Williams). Williams explains that there were four technological and social changes, which developed the industry that moved across the country. The first were the technological advancements in saws, machinery, and the introduction of the steam engine. The second was the development of “local transportation” (Williams pg.167) with the use of the log drive. The third was the development of a national transportation system connecting areas with timber surplus and those with timber demand (Williams Pg. 167). The fourth and last reason was the “development of wholesale centers at focal points in the transport system, which held together a multitude of movements between forests and markets” (Williams Pg. 167). The changes in available technology, transportation systems, and local and nation wide markets enabled lumber production to change into an industry that would eventually consume the vast wood supplies of North America.
Early loggers and sawmill owners cut forests with little thought to future timber production and the environment, and were thus forced to follow the timber supply from the East to the West and South. These early years of the lumber industry are commonly referred to as the “cut-out-and-get-out” era (Williams, Nassey). Sawmilling began in the eastern colonies and crept west in search of plentiful timber supplies. In 1839, New York was the leader in timber production, accounting for 30 percent of all lumber produced (Williams, Pg 161). Additionally the surrounding areas of Maine, Pennsylvania and New England accounted for another 33 percent, thus forming 63 percent of the total wood production (Williams, Pg 161). The East led timber production until 1860 when the industry was forced to move due to a depleted timber resource (Williams).
Increasing lumber demand led to a shift in the timber industry to the Lake States of Michigan and Wisconsin (Williams). Between 1869 and 1889 timber production in Michigan was five times that of New York, timber was ruthlessly cut with no consideration to future or the environment (Williams). By 1870 the Lake States were in full production and by the early 1880’s the sawmill owners were already looking for future timber supplies due to the rapidly declining timber resources (Nassey). Timber resources in the Lake States were almost completely depleted by 1900, during which time the industry shifted to the Southern United States (Williams).
The shift of timber production to the South was much like the shift that had occurred 30 years before from the East to the Lake States. The assault on Southern forests was now far more advanced, as technology in the sawmills and logging operations was more efficient and capable of producing more saw timber. The production of saw timber in the South went from 1.6 billion board feet in 1880 to an estimated 15.4 billion board feet in 1920 (Williams, Pg. 238). New technology was immediately applied to southern sawmills; the use of steam engines and circular saws replaced the old waterwheel sawmills often working in unison with gristmills.
Alabama like most of the South was seeking industry and was lobbing to make the southern forests available to the lumber industry moving out of the Lake States. Richard Nassey writes “ In the 1880’s all the ingredients for a prosperous business seemed to be at hand – abundant natural resources, cheap and plentiful labor, and a rising demand for the product” (Nassey, Pg 174). The South’s land ownership patterns were also favorable to the lumber industry. The South allowed for the purchase and consolidation of millions of acres into private ownership (Williams). William explains how the South had allowed 925 people to own 336.3 billion board feet of timber or half of the existing timber in the South, that is 925 individuals owned 46.6 million acres (Williams). These factors combined to make the South the next big timber production center.
Early competition in the sawmilling industry kept prices down. Sawmills ranged from large to small “peckerwood” mills (Nassey). The investment in sawmills ranged from over one million dollars to a few thousand dollars, for the small portable sawmills (Nassey). Like in agriculture entry into the sawmilling industry was easy at this period in time, but the lack of education and money forced producers to sell their outputs immediately, regardless of price (Nassey). This like in agriculture forced an overproduction which, suppressed timber prices and kept competition and the rate of failure high (Nassey). This was the era of the small lumbermen; numerous markets and an endless timber resource in an undeveloped region favored the small producer. The success of these small operations would later suffer from further advances in technology, and the development of the region and the transportation systems.
The South reached its maximum timber production in 1920 at which time the Pacific Northwest became the leader (Williams). Timber production began in the Pacific North West in 1900 and by 1920 had almost matched the timber production of the South (Williams). The Pacific North West was estimated to contain roughly one half to two thirds of the remaining forests in the United States, making them the last frontier for unexploited timber production (Williams). However, the lumber industry exploited the Pacific North West like it had the East, Lake States, and the South. It was not until the 1940s that practices began to change and more care was taken to protect the environment (Williams). The industry remained concentrated in the West until the environmental movements of the 1970s began to force the industry to relocate.
The shifts in the locations of natural resources combined with the changes in technology continually changed the face of the lumber industry. The industry follows very closely with the initial settling and pioneer movements. Sawmills changed from small one to two man operations located in numbers of up to 25 per county in the early colonial America, to large highly industrial mills which have consolidated to a mere 4,403 in the entire United States in 1997(Census, 1997). The technological changes of sawmills were a key factor and an important part of the process of sawmill consolidation.
Changes in Sawmill technology
The early mills were primitive and logs were cut using two man teams who practiced the pit-sawing method (Williams). This method involved, first squaring the logs using axes and then placing the log over the pit, where two men one above and one below would laboriously hand saw boards (Nassey). A hard days work would yield anywhere from 100-200 board feet of sawn lumber (Nassey). This technique while being considered primitive was used in the south almost exclusively until the Civil War (Nassey). The relatively low demand for wood and the community markets allowed for this primitive method to succeed (Nassey). The method had a low site impact and was environmentally friendly, only selective trees were cut (Nassey, Williams).
The placement of mills near water became essential as the use of the water wheel became more common. This new system called a Muley saw consisted of a single saw attached to a waterwheel from which it derived its power (Nassey). The use of the waterwheel revolutionized sawmilling. This system was capable of sawing 8000 board feet a day (Williams), and was often used in conjunction with gristmills (Nassey). The use of this method required less labor, and was capable of supplying a greater amount of wood for growing communities demanding lumber. Additionally it created few pollutants and still cut a relatively limited amount of wood having a limited impact on forests.
The greatest improvement in technology for sawmills occurred with the introduction of the circular saw (Nassey). It was invented in England in the early 1800’s, but was not installed in Alabama mills until the 1880s, and was used extensively throughout the state (Nassey). The introduction of the steam engine into sawmilling operations in 1830 further increased output and timber production, although the steam engine did not replace the water wheel on a large scale until the 1880s (Williams). The new circular saws were capable of sawing 40,000 board feet of lumber in one day, far exceeding anything done before (Williams). The introduction of this new technology was immediately implemented in Alabama during the move of the lumber industry from the Lake States to the South (Nassey).
The circular saw was used in Alabama up to World War I, when the introduction of the band saw replaced it (Nassey). The band saw was more efficient and was introduced primarily to the larger sawmills in Alabama (Nassey). The band saw consists of a long ribbon like saw, which revolves around two large wheels, much like a belt. The band saw’s advantages over the circular saw were reduced saw kerf or wasted wood and higher sawing speed. Production with the band saw rose to 75,000 board feet (Williams, Pg. 261).
Additional technology has been added to modern sawmills to further improve their outputs and production. Most mills today still use variations of the band saw technology, and the larger mills have fully mechanized the production process, requiring less labor and higher output requirements to maintain production. Mills have strived to increase efficient output, while reducing maintenance and labor costs (Sternitzke, Pg. 9). The lumber industry in general has increased the efficiency of wood use by 41 percent between 1952 and 1998, which has in part reduced the timber output over the past few years (Prestemon, Abt, Pg. 305).
The cut-out-and-get-out era of the lumber industry was the “hay day” for the sawmilling industry. Small operations remained common even throughout the technological advancements of the cut-out-and-get-out era. The advantages for small to medium size mills were greater during this time, for the amount of lumber wasted during sawing in using the primitive techniques, was great (Nassey). Even circular saws wasted a lot of wood, so it made sense to locate more, smaller mills closer to the wood supply to reduce freight (Nassey, Pg. 175). This helped many of the smaller sawmilling operations compete with the larger mills. However the improvements in technology allowed for higher efficiency and minimal losses of the product due to poor sawing techniques. The band saw for example allowed for less saw kerf while increasing the speed of production (Nassey, Williams).
Consolidation of the Sawmill Industry in Alabama
The consolidation of the sawmilling industry like the consolidation of agriculture began with changes in technology. Sawmills, like in agriculture where farming went from “…sticks as hoes to sharp steel plows and then to tractors.” changed from pit sawing to modern high production band saws (Browne, Pg. 40). The initial subsistence farming and the early years of sawmilling, as an integral part of subsistence communities, have both changed into capital intensive, production-maximizing industries. The impacts of technology have not only decreased the number of sawmills but have also replaced machines with manpower. Where labor was once an important asset and necessity in early sawmills, it has been replaced with the modern machine.
Sawmills in Alabama prior to the increased production experienced during the cut-out-and-get-out lumber operations were few, numbering 284 in 1870, and were primarily local operations (Manufacturing Census, 1870). In 1880 Alabama had 384 reporting sawmills that were sawing 251,851 thousand board feet (Manufacturing Census 1880). These mills were more than likely subsistence farmer community type mills with a few larger mills starting to move into the area. In Alabama employment and the number of sawmills have decreased, while boasting an overall constant timber production output, leading to the notion of consolidation. Employment in Alabama has decreased in sawmills from 16,034 in 1920 to only 5,055 in 1997 (See Figure 1) (Census of Manufacturing, 1920, 1997).
The number of sawmills has decreased in Alabama from an all time high in 1920 of 1,926 sawmills to 138 in 1997 (See Figure 2) (Census of Manufacturing, 1920, 1997). Output has not followed the declining trend, but has remained roughly constant from its estimated output in 1920 of 1.8 billion board feet to 1.9 billion board feet in 2002 (Census of Manufacturing, 1920; AL Forestry Commission). The consolidation of the lumber or sawmilling industry becomes evident as employment and sawmills continue to decline while larger more productive mills producing the same output with less labor, thrive. The significant changes in timber production are replicated across the timber producing regions of the Nation, lending significance across timber dependent regions of rural America.
Social Impacts
Timber dependent counties as described by Conner Bailey and John Bliss are counties in “which 25% or more of manufacturing employment is in forest-based industries” (Bliss, Bailey pg. 5). Counties such as these are found in many areas of Alabama, where the forest products industry provides one of the most important source of rural employment (Bliss, Bailey 2001). These counties suffer the most when forest industry consolidation leads to fewer opportunities, for there are few if any alternative industries to support declining jobs in these counties. Cottrell in “Death by Dieselization” raises the question of “just who pays” for the changes in the local economy, when technology replaces the need for the community or the labor? (Cottrell).
Initially the local communities pay; the merchants, bondholders, churches, and homeowners are often the segments of the community who suffer (Cottrell). Out migration of the younger and more mobile sector of the population abandon the declining communities and move to prospering urban centers (Cottrell; Bailey, Bliss 2001). However, the older population with extensive experience in a declining trade (i.e. mule logging, outdated sawmilling laborers) are less flexible and likely to move, and are often victims of persistent poverty in declining communities (Bliss, Bailey, 2001; Cottrell). As out migration becomes more evident, and money more scarce, the local merchants, churches and bondholders find limited business and are often forced to close (Bliss, Bailey 2001; Cottrell).
Additionally, community services such as education begin to decline with the out migration of the younger and more capable community members, adding to the problem of community growth and persistent poverty. These trends are not restricted to only timber dependent communities, but any community that depends on a single industry. Communities such as these become ghost towns, when the sawmill closes and the need for the community disappears, for there is nothing left to support the community (Bliss, Bailey 2001).
Land in many timber dependent counties of Alabama contrary to the nationwide phenomena of land parcelization or fragmentation has become consolidated (much like the sawmills) into larger blocks (Bliss, Sisock, Birch 1998). “The Share of Alabama’s private forestland held by the largest 1% of owners grew from 51% in 1978 to 58% in 1993” (Bliss, Sisock, Birch 1998 pg. 404). Most forest owners in Alabama own less than 10 acres each, while most of the timberland is in tracts greater than 100 acres (Bliss, Sisock, Birch 1998).
The technology used for harvesting timber is increasingly becoming too costly to operate on tracts under 50 acres and impossible on tracks under 20 acres (Greene, Harris, 1997). The options available to small land owners have largely disappeared with the loss of shortwooders, mule loggers, and small more manual labor oriented operations needed to make these smaller tracks profitable (Greene, Harrris 1997; Toms, 2001). These types of operations existed at one time, when smaller sawmills were more prevalent.
A large portion of timberland owners in timber dependent counties where land consolidation is most evident have a limited or declining market. The 8% of Forest owners who own 80% (Bliss, Sisock, Birch 1998) of forestland are the representative population that succeed in timber dependent counties in Alabama, while the vast majority or 92% of small landowners derive no benefits. The impacts of the lumber industry’s consolidation have affected communities by consolidating timberland into larger blocks. Small landowners find few opportunities to sell timber as scale-appropriate loggers and secondary industries continue to decline. However, the consolidating timberland continues to provide lumber to mills, the need for high production loggers, and income to a small select population. The persistence of poverty in these timber dependent communities continus as not only jobs, and small sawmilling operations disappear, but the opportunities for timberland owners as well.
Timber dependent communities and counties have paid the price for technology, and forest industry consolidation, but as Cottrell asks, “who benefits?” (Cottrell). According to Cottrell “Defense of our traditional system of assessing the costs of technological change is made on the theory that the costs of such change are more than offset by the benefits to “society as a whole”” (Cottrell, pg. 363). The advancement in sawmills has had many positive impacts on society as a whole. The changes in technology from sawpits to band saws, and the development of transportation systems and wholesale centers has allowed lumber to be readily available to American consumers. The subsistence system or the underdeveloped sawmilling techniques of the previous century could not have provided the lumber needed for the overall booming American economy. To allow for the success of the “whole” portions of American society paid the price of success (Cottrell). While employment has declined, sawmills continue to provide some of the only sources of employment in some rural timber dependent counties (Bailey, Bliss 2001). Additionally worker safety has increased, and the environments the modern sawmill workers labor under are far beyond that of mill workers of the previous century (Nassey).
Conclusion
Specifically the impacts of sawmill consolidation on rural communities affect not only the laborers, the loggers and small sawmill owners, who are left behind, but also the landowners or timber growers. The need for management options for landowners, especially small landowners are growing. As the timber industry continues to grow and the economic constraints of not only sawmills but of loggers increase, landowners are forced into clearcuts or limited types of selective cuttings increasingly becoming rare (Greene, Harris, 1997). The developments of a forestry market with applicable scale-appropriate systems have not been largely developed (DeCoster 1998) since the decline of such systems during the consolidation of sawmills.
The fragmentation of private property and the growing size and production constraints of logging crews and sawmills have left many landowners without a market. The need for scale appropriate logging equipment and processing mechanisms along with a viable market are needed. As was illustrated in this paper sawmills in Alabama have experienced a consolidation process, which has reduced employment and scale appropriate mechanisms. The introduction of capital intensive technology has industrialized the process of timber production to the point of excluding many small-scale producers and small non-industrial private landowners. The need today is to reverse the process of sawmill consolidation and look back at the large segment of the population that has been left behind and create not only scale-appropriate systems but a market for local producers.
What is Work like for Women in Forestry?
Results of an IFBWW questionnaire on women in forestry
Jill Bowling and Isabelle Faugerre, May 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authors would like to thank Virginia Kapembeza (Zimbabwe), Sarah Sam (Ghana) and Andre de Freitas (Panama) and Paula Robinson (Geneva) for their help in preparing and distributing the questionnaire that was used for this study.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Federation of Building and Wood Workers (IFBWW)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background
Although women are important in forestry operations around the world, their work is often overlooked. Few figures exist on how many women work in forestry, what they do and what their working conditions are like. Because of this it is often difficult to identify what has to be done to improve the situation of women.
While women and men face many of the same problems we also know that women have special needs. Information from around the world from many women suggests that women in forestry face special problems that are different to those faced by men.
In 1992-93 the IFBWW conducted a study on women workers. This study pointed specifically to the lack of information concerning women workers in forestry and
the need to target this sector for further work. This idea was then incorporated into the mandate of the Global Forestry Programme. As a result, in late 1998 the IFBWW Global Forestry Programme and the IFBWW Women's Programme jointly conducted a pilot questionnaire for women in forestry in Brazil, Ghana and Zimbabwe. The aim of the questionnaire was to provide some preliminary information on issues affecting women and to use this as the basis for conducting further work.
Main Findings
The study points to some of the special problems that face women forestry workers. Understanding these problems is critical for improving the conditions of women.
The results of this survey underscore the importance of the IFBWW Women's Education Programme and the vital need for the Women's Committee and the Regional Women's Committees to continue monitoring the situation of women workers in our industries. It is very important that the IFBWW continue to provide resources to assist women.
Who participated?
A total of forty-one women from 14 companies participated in the questionnaire. In addition, eight men also answered the questionnaire in Brazil. For the purposes of this survey we assumed that forestry included both forest mill operations as well as field forestry operations.
The women who participated in the survey worked in forest nursery operations, sawmills, veneer mills, inspection bureaux, timber mills, furniture factories, and government forestry departments. Jobs included: nursery attendant (weeding, planting, applying fertiliser), packing seedlings, pruning, clerical work, secretary, computer operator, machine operator, typist, receptionist, finishing products, wood classifiers, and wood processing. http://homepage.iprolink.ch/fitbb/Industrial_Dept/Forestry_women.html
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=296-78&full=true
Effective Until December 1, 2006.)
Chapter 296-78 WAC
Safety standards for sawmills and woodworking operations Last Update: 7/24/06
296-78-520
Employee's responsibility.
(1) Employees shall coordinate and cooperate with all other employees in an attempt to eliminate accidents.
(2) Employees shall study and observe all safe practices governing their work.
(3) Employees should offer safety suggestions, wherein such suggestions may contribute to a safer work environment.
(4) Employees shall apply the principles of accident prevention in their daily work and shall use proper safety devices and protective equipment as required by their employment or employer.
(5) Employees shall properly care for all personal protective equipment.
(6) Employees shall make a prompt report to their immediate supervisor, of each industrial injury or occupational illness, regardless of the degree of severity.
(7) Employees shall not wear torn or loose clothing while working around machinery.
[Statutory Authority: RCW 49.17.040, 49.17.050 and 49.17.240. 81-18-029 (Order 81-21), § 296-78-520, filed 8/27/81.]
WAC Sections
296-78-500 Foreword.
296-78-505 Definitions applicable to this chapter.
296-78-510 Education and first-aid standards.
296-78-515 Management's responsibility.
296-78-520 Employee's responsibility.
296-78-525 Accident-prevention programs.
296-78-530 Safety and health committee plan.
296-78-535 Safety bulletin board.
296-78-540 First-aid training and certification.
296-78-545 First-aid supplies.
296-78-550 First-aid station.
296-78-560 Safe place standards.
296-78-565 Log dumps and ponds -- Headmills.
296-78-56501 Log dumps and ponds.
296-78-56503 Log hauls.
296-78-56505 Boats and mechanical devices on waters.
296-78-56507 Log decks.
296-78-56509 Mechanical barkers.
296-78-56511 Head rigs and feed works.
296-78-56513 Log carriages.
296-78-570 Band saws -- Saws.
296-78-575 Circular saws.
296-78-580 Edgers.
296-78-585 Equalizer saws.
296-78-590 Gang saws and re-saws.
296-78-595 Jump saws.
296-78-600 Trimmer and slasher saws.
296-78-605 Swing saws.
296-78-610 Circular saws, speeds, repairs.
296-78-615 Saw filing and grinding rooms and equipment.
296-78-620 Miscellaneous woodworking machines -- Planers, stickers, molders, matchers.
296-78-625 Planers (stave and headings).
296-78-630 Stave croziers.
296-78-635 Jointers.
296-78-640 Jointers (stave and heading).
296-78-645 Wood shapers.
296-78-650 Boring and mortising machines.
296-78-655 Tenoning machines.
296-78-660 Lathe (pail and barrel).
296-78-665 Sanding machines.
296-78-670 Glue machines.
296-78-675 Lath mills.
296-78-680 Veneer and plywood plants -- Peeling and barking.
296-78-685 Veneer lathe.
296-78-690 Veneer slicer and cutter.
296-78-695 Veneer clipper.
296-78-700 Veneer wringer (swede).
296-78-705 The shake and shingle industry.
296-78-70501 Definitions -- Terms, general.
296-78-70503 Shake and shingle machinery -- General.
296-78-70505 Shake machinery.
296-78-70507 Upright shingle machine.
296-78-70509 Related shake and shingle sawing machinery.
296-78-70511 Safety rules.
296-78-710 Construction and isolated equipment.
296-78-71001 General.
296-78-71003 Floor and wall openings.
296-78-71005 Floors, docks, platforms and runways.
296-78-71007 Footwalks and passageways.
296-78-71009 Stairways and ladders.
296-78-71011 Egress and exit.
296-78-71013 Cableways.
296-78-71015 Tanks and chemicals.
296-78-71017 Dry kilns.
296-78-71019 Exhaust systems.
296-78-71021 Spray painting.
296-78-71023 Lighting.
296-78-71025 Gas piping and appliances.
296-78-715 Mechanical, steam and electrical equipment.
296-78-71501 General provisions.
296-78-71503 Lock out -- Tag out.
296-78-71505 Mechanical power transmission apparatus.
296-78-720 Boiler and pressure vessels.
296-78-725 Nonionizing radiation.
296-78-730 Electrical service and equipment.
296-78-735 Elevators, moving walks.
296-78-740 Transportation -- Lumber handling equipment -- Cranes -- Construction.
296-78-745 Electrical equipment.
296-78-750 Chains, wire rope, cables and fiber rope.
296-78-755 Natural and synthetic fiber rope slings.
296-78-760 Synthetic web slings.
296-78-765 Floor operated cranes.
296-78-770 Operators.
296-78-775 Signalpersons.
296-78-780 Repairpersons.
296-78-785 Construction requirements.
296-78-790 Crane platforms and footwalks.
296-78-795 Crane cages.
296-78-800 Crane rail stops, bumpers and fenders.
296-78-805 Crawler locomotive and truck cranes.
296-78-810 Chain and electric hoists.
296-78-815 Monorail hoists.
296-78-820 Air hoists.
296-78-825 Jib, pillar, and portable floor cranes, crabs, and winches.
296-78-830 Standard crane hand signals -- Illustrations.
296-78-835 Vehicles.
296-78-840 Loading, piling, storage and conveying.
296-78-84001 Loading, piling, storage and conveying -- General.
296-78-84003 Conveyors.
296-78-84005 Dry kilns.
296-78-84007 Chippers and hogs.
296-78-84009 Bins and bunkers.
296-78-84011 Burners.
This is a list of woods, in particular those commonly used in the timber and lumber trade.
Softwoods (conifers)
Araucaria
Hoop Pine (Aus.) Araucaria cunninghamii
Parana Pine (Brazil) Araucaria angustifolia
Pehuén or Chile Pine Araucaria araucana
Cedar (Cedrus); also applied to a number of woods from trees in the Cypress family mainly in North America, see Redcedar, Whitecedar and Yellow-Cedar in Softwoods, and to woods from some relatives of the mahogany, see Spanish-cedar and Redcedar in Hardwoods
Cypress (Chamaecyparis, Cupressus, Taxodium)
Arizona Cypress (Cupressus arizonica)
Bald Cypress or Southern cypress (Taxodium distichum)
Hinoki Cypress (Chamaecyparis obtusa)
Lawson's Cypress (Chamaecyparis lawsoniana)
Mediterranean Cypress (Cupressus sempervirens)
Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga) (sometimes "Oregon Pine")
Coast Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii)
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca)
European Yew (Taxus baccata)
Fir (Abies)
Balsam Fir (Abies balsamea)
Silver Fir (Abies alba)
Noble Fir (Abies procera)
Pacific Silver Fir (Abies amabilis)
Hemlock (Tsuga)
Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis)
Mountain Hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana)
Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla)
Kauri (New Zealand) (Agathis australis)
Kaya (Torreya nucifera)
Larch (Larix)
European Larch (Larix decidua)
Japanese Larch (Larix kaempferi)
Tamarack Larch or Tamarack (Larix laricina)
Western Larch (Larix occidentalis)
Pine (Pinus; Many woods are incorrectly called "Pine". See Auracaria and Douglas-fir above)
Corsican pine (Pinus nigra)
Jack Pine (Pinus banksiana)
Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta subsp latifolia)
Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata)
Ponderosa Pine (Pinus ponderosa)
Red Pine (N.Am.) (Pinus resinosa)
Scots Pine, Red pine (UK), Red deal (UK), Redwood (UK, obsolete) (Pinus sylvestris)
White Pine in (N.Am.), Yellow or Weymouth pine (UK, obsolete)
Eastern White Pine (Pinus strobus)
Western White Pine (Pinus monticola)
Sugar Pine (Pinus lambertiana)
Southern Yellow pine (US)
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda)
Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris)
Pitch Pine (Pinus rigida)
Shortleaf Pine (Pinus echinata)
"Redcedar"
Eastern Redcedar, (Juniperus virginiana)
Western redcedar (Thuja plicata)
Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens)
Rimu (New Zealand) (Dacrydium cupressinum)
Spruce (Picea)
Norway Spruce (Picea abies)
Black Spruce (Picea mariana)
Red Spruce (Picea rubens)
Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis)
White Spruce (Picea glauca)
Sugi (Cryptomeria japonica)
"Whitecedar"
Northern Whitecedar (Thuja occidentalis)
Southern Whitecedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)
"Yellow-cedar" (Nootka Cypress Callitropsis nootkatensis, formerly Chamaecyparis nootkatensis)
[edit]
Hardwoods (angiosperms)
Afzelia (Afzelia)
Agba
Albizia (Albizia)
Alder (Alnus)
Black alder (Alnus glutinosa)
Red alder (Alnus rubra)
Applewood or wild apple (Malus)
Ash (Fraxinus)
Black ash (Fraxinus nigra)
Blue ash (Fraxinus quadrangulata)
Common ash (Fraxinus excelsior)
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica lanceolata)
White ash (Fraxinus americana)
Aspen (Populus)
American aspen (Populus tremuloides)
Bigtooth aspen (Populus grandidentata)
European aspen (Populus tremula)
Ayan (Distemonanthus benthamianus)
Balsa (Ochroma pyramidale)
Basswood (Tilia americana)
Beech (Fagus)
European Beech (Fagus sylvatica)
American Beech (Fagus grandifolia)
Birch (Betula)
American birches
Gray birch (Betula populifolia)
Paper birch (Betula papyrifera)
Sweet birch (Betula lenta)
Yellow birch (B. alleghaniensis syn Betula lutea) - most common birch wood sold in N.Am.
European birches, also Baltic birch (N.Am.)
Silver birch (Betula pendula)
White Birch (Betula pubescens)
Blackbean (Castanospermum australe)
Blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon)
Bocote (Cordia alliodora)
Boxwood or Box (Buxus sempervirens)
Brazilwood (Caesalpinia echinata)
Bubinga (Guibourtia)
Buckeye (Aesculus)
Common Horse-chestnut (Aesculus hippocastanum)
Yellow Buckeye (Aesculus flava)
Butternut (Juglans cinerea)
Carapa (or Andiroba, Carap, Crappo, Crabwood and Santa Maria) (Carapa guianensis) .
Catalpa (Catalpa)
Cherry (Prunus)
Black cherry (Prunus serotina)
Red cherry (Prunus pennsylvanica)
Wild cherry (Prunus avium)
"Brazilian Cherry" Not a Cherry See Jatoba below
Chestnut (Castanea dentata)
Coachwood (Ceratopetalum apetalum)
Cocobolo (Dalbergia retusa)
Corkwood (Leitneria floridana)
Cottonwood, eastern (Populus deltoides)
Dogwood (Cornus spp.)
Ebony (Diospyros)
Andaman marble-wood (India) (Diospyros kurzii)
Ebène marbre (Maritius, E. Africa) (Diospyros melanida)
Elm
American elm (Ulmus americana)
English elm (Ulmus procera)
Rock elm (Ulmus thomasii)
Slippery elm (Ulmus rubra)
Wych elm (Ulmus glabra)
Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus)
Lyptus
Karri (W. Australia) (Eucalyptus diversicolor)
Mahogany eucalyptus, (New South Wales) (Eucalyptus)
Jarrah or West Australian eucalyptus (Eucalyptus marginata)
Tasmanian oak or Mountain ash, (Eucalyptus regnans)
Greenheart (Guyana) (Chlorocardium rodiei)
Grenadilla (Mpingo) (Dalbergia melanoxylon)
Gum
Blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica)
Blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus)
Redgum or Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua)
Tupelo gum (Nyssa aquatica)
Hickory (Carya)
Mockernut hickory (Carya alba)
Pignut hickory (Carya glabra)
Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata)
Shellbark hickory (Carya laciniosa)
Hornbeam (Carpinus species)
Hophornbeam, Eastern (Ostrya virginiana)
Ipe (Tabebuia impetiginosa)
Iroko (Milicia excelsa syn Chlorophora excelsa)
Ironwood refers to the wood of many tree species noted for the hardness of their wood. Trees commonly known as ironwoods include:
Carpinus caroliniana — also known as American hornbeam
Casuarina equisetifolia — Common Ironwood from Australia
Choricarpia subargentea
Copaifera spp.
Eusideroxylon zwageri
Guajacum officinale and Guajacum sanctum — Lignum vitae
Hopea odorata
Krugiodendron ferreum — Black Ironwood
Lyonothamnus lyonii (L. floribundus) — Catalina Ironwood
Mesua ferrea — also known as Rose Chestnut or Ceylon Ironwood, from Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia
Olea spp. — various olive trees
Olneya tesota — Desert Ironwood
Ostrya virginiana — Hop hornbeam
Parrotia persica — Persian Ironwood
Tabebuia serratifolia — Ipe
Jacarandá, Brazilian rosewood (Dalbergia nigra)
Jatobá (Hymenaea courbaril)
Lacewood from the Sycamore(N.Am.) or Plane(UK) trees (Platanus species)
In N.Am. also refers to Australian Silky oak
Lauan or Luan (Shorea spp.)
Laurel, California (Umbellularia californica)
Limba (Terminalia superba)
Lignum vitae (Guaiacum officinale and Guaiacum sanctum)
Locust
Black locust or Yellow locust (Robinia pseudacacia)
Honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos)
Magnolia, cucumber (Magnolia acuminata)
Mahogany
Mahogany (African) (Khaya spp.)
Mahogany (West Indies or Cuban) (Swietenia mahagoni)
Mahogany (Honduras, Central and South America) (Swietenia macrophylla)
Mahogany (Philippine), Not a mahogany, see Lauan.
Maple (Acer)
Hard Maple (N.Am.)
Sugar maple (Acer saccharum)
Black maple (Acer nigrum)
Soft Maple (N.Am.)
Manitoba maple (Acer negundo)
Red maple (Acer rubrum)
Silver maple (Acer saccharinum)
European Maples
Sycamore maple (Acer pseudoplatanus)
Norway maple (Acer platanoides)
Field maple (Acer campestre)
Meranti (Shorea spp.)
Mpingo (Grenadilla) (Dalbergia melanoxylon)
Oak (Quercus)
American White Oak includes wood from any of the following species of trees:
Bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa)
White oak (Quercus alba)
Post oak (Quercus stellata)
Swamp white oak (Quercus bicolor)
Southern live oak (Quercus virginiana)
Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii
Chestnut oak (Quercus prinus or Q. montana))
Chinkapin oak (Quercus muhlenbergii)
Canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis)
Overcup oak (Quercus lyrata)
English oak, also French and Slovenian oak barrels (Quercus robur and sometimes Quercus petraea)
Red Oak includes wood from any of the following species of trees:
Red oak (Quercus rubra)
Black oak (Quercus velutina)
Pin oak (Quercus pallustris)
Scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea)
Laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia))
Southern red oak (Quercus falcata)
Water oak (Quercus nigra)
Willow oak {Quercus phellos)
Nuttall's oak (Quercus texana or Q. nuttallii)
Willow oak (Quercus phellos)
"Tasmanian oak"; Not an oak see Eucalyptus above
Australian "Silky oak"; Not an oak see Silky Oak below
Okoumé or "Gaboon" (Aucoumea klaineana)
Oregon Myrtle or California Bay Laurel (Umbellularia californica)
Pear (Pyrus communis)
Pernambuco is an other name for Brazilwood (Caesalpinia echinata)
Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana)
Poplar (Populus; in N.Am., wood sold as poplar is usually Yellow-poplar — see below)
Balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera)
Black poplar (Populus nigra)
Hybrid poplar (Populus × canadensis)
Ramin
Redcedar (Toona ciliata)
Rosewood (Dalbergia spp.)
Sal (Shorea robusta)
Sandalwood (Santalum album)
Sassafras (Sassafras albidum)
Sassafras (Australia) (Atherosperma moschatum)
Satinwood (Ceylon) (Chloroxylon swietenia)
Silky Oak; (Grevillea robusta); Sold as Lacewood in North America
Snakewood
Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum)
Spanish-cedar (Cedrela odorata)
American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
Teak (Tectona grandis)
Utile (Entandrophragma utile)
Walnut (Juglans)
Black Walnut (Juglans nigra)
Persian Walnut (Juglans regia)
Brazilian walnut; Not a walnut see Ipe above.
Willow (Salix)
Black willow (Salix nigra)
Cricket-bat willow (Salix alba 'Coerulea')
White willow (Salix alba)
Yellow-poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
[edit]
Hardwoods (monocotyledons)
Bamboo (a number of species in Tribe: Bambuseae)
Palmwood (Cocos nucifera) is 'new' wood source that is increasingly being used as an ecologically-sound alternative to endangered hardwoods.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & ECONOMIC GROWTH DIRECTOR'S OFFICE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH STANDARDS Filed with the Secretary of State on January 1, 1975 These rules take effect 15 days after filing with the Secretary of State Visit our web site at: www.michigan.gov/mioshastandards RULES 3503 - 3506. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT IN PULP, PAPER AND PAPERBOARD MILLS; TEXTILE OPERATIONS; SAWMILLS; AND PULPWOOD LOGGING Rule 3503 Personal Protective Equipment in Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Mills [1910.261] (1) General requirements (a) Application. This rule applies to those establishments covered by Rule 5001 and supplements the general requirements of rules 3501 and 3502. (b) Standards incorporated by reference. Standards covering issues of occupational safety and health which have general application without regard to any specific industry are incorporated by reference in subsections (2) through (3) of this rule and in paragraph (c) of this subsection and made applicable under this rule. Such standards shall be construed according to the rules set forth in Rule 1106(3). [1910.261(a)(2)] (c) General incorporation of standards. Establishments subject to this rule shall comply with the following standards of the American National Standards Institute: [1910.261(a)(3)] (i) Identification of Gas-Mask Canisters, K13.1-1967. [1910.261(a)(3)(xvi)] (ii) Safety Code for Ventilation and Operation of Open-Surface Tanks, Z9.1-1951. [1910.261(a)(3)(xix)] (iii) Method of Measurement of Real-Ear Attenuation of Ear Protectors at Threshold, Z24.22-1957. [1910.261(a)(3)(xxii)] (iv) Practices for Respiratory Protection, Z88.2-1969. [1910.261(a)(3)(xxvi)] (2) Safe practices (a) Personal protective clothing and equipment. Foot protection, shin-guards, hard hats, noise attenuation devices, or other personal protective clothing and equipment shall be worn when the extent of the hazard is such as to warrant their use. Such equipment shall be worn whenever specifically required by other paragraphs of this rule and the MIOSHA Occupational Safety Standards for General Industry. All equipment shall be maintained in accordance with applicable American National Standards. Respirators, goggles, and protective masks, rubber gloves, rubber boots, and other such equipment shall be cleaned and disinfected before being used by another employee. Eye, head, respiratory, and ear protection, where specified, shall conform to American National Standards Z24.22-1957, Z87.1-1968, Z88.2-1969, and Z89.1-1969. [1910.261(b)(2)] (b) Vessel entering. See Part III of this Chapter, especially Rule 3303(3). (3) Handling and storage of pulpwood and pulp chips. [1910.261(c)] Handling pulp chips from railway cars, trucks and trailers. Personal protective equipment for such uses as foot, head, and eye protection shall be provided, and employees shall wear the equipment when working in the woodyard. Ear protection shall be provided when the noise level may be harmful (see Rule 2401). [1910.261(c)(6)(ii) and 1910.261(c)(7)(ii)] (4) Handling and storage of raw materials other than pulpwood or pulp chips. Whenever possible, all dust, fumes, and gases incident to handling materials shall be controlled at the source, in accordance with American National Standard Z9.2-1960. Where control at the source is not possible, respirators with goggles or protective masks shall be provided, and employees shall wear them when handling alum, clay, soda, ash, lime, bleach powder, sulfur, chlorine, and similar materials, and when opening rag bales. [1910.261(d)(1)(i)] (5) Preparing pulpwood. Chipper spout. The feed system to the chipper spout shall be arranged in such a way that the operator does not stand in a direct line with the chipper spout. All chipper spouts shall be enclosed to a height of at least 42 inches from the floor or operator's platform. If practical, a mirror should be installed to enable the chipper feeder to see the chute. When other protection is not sufficient, the operator shall wear a safety belt line. The safety belt line shall be fastened in such a manner as to make it impossible for the operator to fall into the throat of the chipper. Ear protection equipment shall be worn by the operator and others in the immediate area if there is any possibility that the noise level may be harmful (see Rule 2401). [1910.261(e)(18)] (6) Chemical processes of making pulp. (a) Protection for employees (acid plants). (i) Gas masks, fitted with canisters containing 2 adsorbents for the particular acids, gases, or mists involved, shall be provided for employees of the acid department. [1910.261(g)(2)(i)]
2
(ii) Supplied-air respirators shall be strategically located for emergency and rescue use. [1910.261(g)(2)(ii)] (b) Gas masks (digester building). Gas masks shall be available. These masks shall furnish adequate protection against sulfurous acid and chlorine gases, and shall be inspected and tested at frequent intervals, not to exceed 1 month, in accordance with American National Standards Z87.1-1968, and Z88.2-1969. [1910.261(g)(10)] (c) Miscellaneous. Insofar as the processes of the sulfate and soda operations are similar to those of the sulfite processes, the standard of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection shall apply. [1910.261(g)(18)] (7) Bleaching. (a) Bleach-mixing rooms. (i) Gas masks shall be provided for emergency use, in accordance with American National Standards K13.1- 1967 and Z88.2-1969. [1910.261(h)(2)(iii)] (ii) For emergency and rescue work, independent self-contained oxygen masks or supplied-air equipment shall be pro-vided. (See American National Standards Z88.2- 1969.) [1910.261(h)(2)(iv)] (b) Liquid chlorine. (i) Gas masks capable of absorbing chlorine shall be supplied, conveniently placed, and regularly inspected, and workers who may be exposed to chlorine gas shall be instructed in their use. [1910.261(h)(3)(ii)] (ii) For emergency and rescue work, independent self-contained oxygen-type masks or supplied-air equipment shall be provided. [1910.261(h)(3)(iii)] Rule 3504 Personal Protective Equipment in Textile Operations (1) Application. This rule applies only to textile establishments and operations covered by Rule 5002 and supplements the general requirements of Rules 3501 and 3502. (2) Personal protective equipment. Workers engaged in handling acids or caustics in bulk, repairing pipe lines containing acids or caustics, etc., shall be provided with protective occupational (safety) equipment to conform to the requirements of Rules 3302, 3501 and 3502. [1910.262(qq)(1)] (3) Respirators, gas masks, and such appliances, for emergency use only, shall be of a type required by Rules 3302 and 3502. [1910.262(qq)(2)] Rule 3505 Personal Protective Equipment in Sawmills (1) Application. This rule applies to those sawmill operations subject to Rule 5005. (2) The requirements for personal protective equipment specified in Rules 3501 and 3502 shall be complied with. [1910.265(g)] Rule 3506 Personal Protective Equipment in Pulpwood Logging (1) Applicability. This rule applies to all operations subject to Rule 5006 and supplements the general industry requirements for personal protective equipment set forth in Rules 3501 and 3502. (2) Dust masks in accordance with American National Standard Practices for Respiratory Protection Z88.2-1969 shall be provided for use where conditions warrant. [1910.266(c)(1)(v)] (3) Protection against the effects of noise exposure shall be provided when the sound levels exceed those shown in Table G-16 of Rule 2401 when measured on the A scale of a standard sound level meter at slow response. [1910.266(c)(1)(vi)] Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration PO Box 30643 Lansing, Michigan 48909-8143 Ph: 517.322.1814 Fx: 517.322.1775 The Department of Labor & Economic Growth will not discriminate against any individual or group because of race, sex, religion, age, national origin, color, marital status, disability, or political beliefs. If you need assistance with reading, writing, hearing, etc., under the Americans with Disabilities Act, you may make your needs known to this agency. Total Units Printed: Total Printing Cost: Cost Per Unit:
I hope this helsp.. I am not for sure if this was what you were looking for.
Dayna
Twelfth Census of the United States, Taken in the Year 1900. Vol. 9. Manufactures Part
III Special Reports on Selected Industries. Washington D.C.: Washington United States Census Office 1902.
Bureau of the Census. Manufactures 1905 Part III Special Reports on the Selected
Industries. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1908.
Department of the Interior Census Office. Report on Manufacturing Industries in the
United States at the Eleventh Census: 1890. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office. 1895.
Sargen, Charles S. Department of the Interior Census Office. Report on the Forests of
North America (Exclusive of Mexico): Special Agent Tenth Census. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Press.