The principal methods of transporting logs are by rail, by motor truck
and by animal power. The last of these methods is, for obvious reasons,
impracticable in the Northwest, and so needs no further comment. While
it is impossible to give specific details in a general discussion of
this kind to show where the motor truck may be more economically suited
to the conditions at hand than the railroad, a comparison of the
fundamental principles involved should enable any operator familiar with
logging to determine whether or not to use the truck for his particular
chance.
In general the choice between railroad and motor truck logging depends,
fundamentally, upon two things: (1) comparative cost, and (2)
adaptability. Sufficient motive power and rolling stock can be obtained
much more cheaply for motor truck logging than for a railroad. There
are, of course, many situations where the locomotive and car costs, as
well as those of constructing a logging railroad, are obviously
prohibitive, and the question revolves entirely upon the adaptability of
the motor truck to existing conditions. There is no question at all that
the logging railroad is not adapted to small, isolated and scattering
tracts, and to certain portions of larger operations. There are almost
innumerable tracts situated close to public highways, or where temporary
roads can be built, which may be very serviceable during the summer
months, giving ample time to clean up the timber before wet weather sets
in. In such instances, road construction and maintenance costs are of
very minor importance. In the larger operations and in the use of the
motor truck as an auxiliary to railroad logging, there are many
opportunities for the reduction of logging costs. However, it is
impossible to discuss these problems specifically in a paper of this
kind. They will need to be worked out on the ground with each case as a
distinct problem. The fundamental problems covered in this paper will
serve as a basis for the more detailed problems that must be solved on
the ground.
Wherever the item of road construction is important, it may be stated in
general that the time required and the cost of building roads for motor
trucks are very much less than for a logging railroad. This is due to
the lesser importance of grades, curves, ballasting, bridges and other
construction work, all of which is much cheaper and takes less time. In
case a pole road is built the material found adjacent to the right of
way can be utilized for what it costs to fell it.
From the standpoint of adaptability the motor truck is very flexible. It
can operate on grades and curves that are impossible with the railroad.
The whole logging equipment, including the donkey engine, can be loaded
on the truck and trailer and easily moved from one setting to another.
By replacing the log bunk with a platform the truck can take out all the
smaller marketable material, such as shingle bolts, poles and cordwood.
The modern truck can also be provided with the necessary equipment for
use in snaking out the logs in stands of small timber and when used with
a winch and an "A" shaped boom, will load itself. If the truck becomes
mired in a mud hole, the winch may be used to pull it out. Finally, the
item of fire risk is practically negligible.