{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.039761431411530816, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009940357852882704, 'mean_word_length': 5.2139917695473255, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Productivity and Cost of Processors in Whole-Tree Harvesting Systems in Southern Pine Stands

Logging businesses in the US South have not adopted cut-to-length harvesting systems. Adding dangle head processors on the landing of whole-tree harvesting systems may allow southern loggers to achieve some of the advantages of cut-to-length systems (i.e., precise length and diameter measurements) while maintaining high productivity and low costs per ton characteristic of current whole-tree systems. We conducted a designed study of conventional (i.e., feller-buncher, grapple skidder, loader) and processor (i.e., feller-buncher, grapple skidder, processor, loader) systems. Four harvest sites were split, with half of each site harvested by a conventional system and the other half by a processor system. Harvesting productivity was estimated using time-and-motion studies, and costs were estimated using the machine rate method. Cut-and-load costs averaged US$13.57 and US$14.67 ton–1 on the processor and conventional harvests, respectively (P > .10). Cost per ton was elevated on several conventional harvest tracts because of long skidding distances, indicating harvest planning is more important than harvesting system in determining harvesting costs. Processing and loading costs were US$1.70 ton–1 higher on processor harvests, which, combined with restrictive mill quotas being more problematic for processor crews, suggests loggers will require a logging rate premium in order to invest in processors.