Thank you to everyone who attended the expo this year. The weather gave us a brief hiccup with rain but compared with the forecast it turned out very well. I enjoyed meeting so many new people and catching up with friends I already knew. The expo showcases the latest and greatest technology in the forest industry, but for me it’s primarily about building relationships.
One highlight for me was spending a few hours touring with the Casperson’s. They shared their logging history and how they became involved with Mead. One thing that stood out was how piece cutting used to work. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems that when a mill needed more wood, producers would hire extra labor to meet demand. With low capital costs and high labor input, it was easier to adjust production to what the mill wanted. Today the situation is reversed. We produce a lot more wood with far less labor, but high capital costs make it difficult for loggers to quickly expand or reduce production as mills require. Even though we have substantially reduced labor since the piece-cutting days, we still face a labor shortage.
There is debate about why the labor shortage exists. Some say younger generations are less inclined to work long hours, while others point out that younger workers expect better pay and improved positions right away. One way to address this could be logger training. I understand Treehaven in Tomahawk is up and running and graduating operators, but it required a large grant to get started. Is there a more affordable way to produce quality operators?
A major hurdle to finding quality operators is pay. Unfortunately, younger workers can choose other trades where they work fewer hours and earn more than loggers. If students had to pay tuition, the logging industry would struggle to compete for workers against other trades.
I recently attended the Forest Technology Session of Michigan State University Institute of Agricultural Technology at Bay College Advisory Board meeting. The program currently offers a two-year degree in forestry. During the meeting, a logger raised the need for regional training. It sounds like the Institute of Agricultural Technology (IAT) has discussed this before, but funding remains a barrier for things like simulators.
That got me thinking: what if loggers partnered with programs such as IAT that already offer forestry classes? Logger training is not just about operating and repairing equipment; operators also need basic forestry knowledge such as tree identification, silviculture, best management practices, and map reading. Colleges can teach these fundamentals while students get exposure to the industry and decide whether a logging career suits them. Once the basics are covered and a student remains interested, loggers could step in and provide hands-on equipment training. I believe this approach would increase employee retention because students would already be familiar with the forest industry. It would also let loggers tailor training to the needs of their individual companies.
This is a practical path forward with stronger partnerships between loggers and existing forestry programs. Colleges can deliver the forestry fundamentals while loggers provide hands-on equipment training, creating a pipeline of better-prepared, more committed operators. I welcome others’ opinions on this approach and whether you think it is possible.
Thank you again for coming to the expo, for sharing stories and ideas, and for being part of a community willing to invest in training and partnerships that will keep our industry thriving.
Mike Elenz
GLTPA President