Article by DK Knight
Executive Editor/Co-Publisher
According to Timber Harvesting’s recently completed Trucking Survey, trucking for many has turned into a grand way of getting nowhere fast, especially if you happen to do business between Richmond and Houston. I encourage all subscribers who are involved in or connected with forest-related trucking in any way to absorb the findings, beginning on page 10.
The survey drew 419 participants, 10% of those logging business and trucking contractor owner/subscribers for whom we have e-mail addresses, and I want to thank each of them for taking the time to respond. While gratified with this response percentage, which was heavily dominated by the South, I was nonetheless displeased with limited input from other significant forest industry regions. However, for several months now I have been told that log trucking problems are much more acute in the South than elsewhere, so the survey must have appealed strongly to southern subscribers who could have viewed it as an ideal opportunity to express themselves.
Possibly the most comprehensive survey ever conducted concerning log trucking, the study produced abundant and valuable information in that it documented many issues confronting the vital transportation link and to some extent measured their depth. Its findings also challenged conventional wisdom here and there. It is a project we plan to continue periodically going forward.
For many, trucking right now is a host to multiple parasites that are gradually sucking away its life.
Insurance availability and costs are paramount. One Alabama respondent reported his truck insurance premiums skyrocketed 350% in early 2016. In a private conversation, the co-owner of a large logging business in South Carolina told me that company’s annual truck insurance bill (20 highway trucks, one service truck) shot from less than $150,000 to $620,000 in about three years. He said this was driven largely by a rash of claims, only one of which placed his driver at fault. As it tries to stabilize from this, the company is paying the bill in part with funds from accumulated reserves. It has also moved from a reactive to a proactive stance by installing GPS and implementing a safety/performance bonus program for drivers.
Rates, of course, are another major issue. Trucking is not logging and logging is not trucking. They have few if any similarities, yet many who set mill policy treat them as one in the same. I understand that one company doing business in Virginia and North Carolina is paying about half what those in the know say it takes to keep trucking in the black. That’s as out of date as an 8-track tape. Are some fiber consuming companies out to see just how far they can push suppliers before they break them?
Then there is mill turn time, which for some is deplorable—two or more hours being reported at some locations. This situation is costing loggers and log truckers lost loads and making it more difficult for them to retain truck drivers.
Factor in federal regulations, DOT enforcement, the high cost of trucks and trailers and keeping them maintained to DOT standards, and so on, and you’ve got a deep, steep-sloped snake pit.
After spending hours talking with others about trucking, sifting through the survey results, reading what loggers and log truckers had to say, and writing the article, I believe that while ongoing efforts to encourage a more intense focus on safety and driver training are timely and good and hopefully will help, they are far from a remedy. The problem is much too complex for such a simple solution. As I pointed out in this space two issues ago, many parties contributed negatively to the tangle that has emerged, and now all those parties must contribute positively toward correcting trucking’s wobbly course.
Respondents’ Comments
At the end of the survey, participants were asked to ‘briefly sum up your present trucking situation and give your view as to possible solutions.’ Not all were gloomy, nor were all brief. Here are some select comments, many of which echo those appearing in the main article:
Wisconsin, Virginia, Alabama: “Sucks!”
West Virginia: “New trucks are in the shop all the time. It is more productive to continue running 500,000 miles or more trucks.”
Alaska: “Small, off-highway operation, so no weight limits or DOT issues.”
Texas: “Insurance should consider years with no losses and provide lower premiums; trucks should be allowed to use highways we pay heavy use taxes for.”
Virginia: “Fed up.”
California: “Need more trucks. Need more experience. Need more money, fewer regulations.”
Alabama: “We try to run things right. We try to use new equipment; we try not to haul heavy; we have purchased platform scales. We try to hire experienced drivers who have a good track record, but this is a real problem. We give bonuses for safety; we conduct regular safety meetings and we regularly inspect and service trucks on weekends. We are in the process of buying some dash cameras. We have recently hired a new man just work in the shop and maintain trucks and trailers.
“Our main problems are finding drivers who have good attitudes and have a good worth ethic, and getting rid of those who don’t. Most of our hires who have any work ethic at all are in the 40s or older. So many of the drivers we hire may have clean MVRs and be drug-free, but all they want is a job, and they spend most of their energy and time figuring out how to get out of work and coming up with lies to cover up their past lies on why they can’t produce.
“Other major issues include being harassed by the DOT, skyrocketing costs associated with maintaining trucks to DOT standards, and turn around time at mills, not to mention insurers getting out of the state and not wanting to insure log trucks due to frivolous lawsuits…
“We don’t mind regulations that (help) prevent accidents and promote safety, but some of the regulations are ridiculous and will, if left unchecked, put many small businesses like ours out of business.”
Maine: “Trucking is not a problem. We have newer trucks and trailers and reliable drivers. You must invest in good equipment and personnel in order to have trucking work smoothly.”
Georgia: “More pay would help. We can’t pass along increases; we have to suck it up.”
Georgia: “I own three crews, all with platform scales to manage weight. I have a business partner and we lease 12 trucks—new units with automatic transmissions and GPS. We have 21 log trailers and own two trucks for lowboys. We decided two years ago we had a trucking problem and put all these investments in place to resolve that problem.
“We fixed that problem, only to uncover more.
“I believe to make log hauling profitable, legal weights must be increased or rates have to be adjusted up. Mill turnaround times must be improved, and if insurance costs continue to rise and we get no rate increases, WE WILL FAIL. My company now has complete control from stump to mill, and it takes logging money to cover trucking expenses every week. We keep very good records and know where each truck is financially at all times. This data could be used to improve many problems, but (our pleas) always seem to fall on deaf ears!!!”
Idaho: “…Mills think we should put more axles on and haul for the same money. I’m just downright getting discouraged. It would be nice to just get paid for what we haul and not have to work 16 hours a day.”
Maryland: “We are pleased with it right now.”
Michigan: “We have heavily invested in new trucks and trailers to help control our costs and production. The mill will not pay anything for trucking distances and most hauling is 100 miles-plus one way.”
Arkansas: “Looks bleak for the near- and long-term.”
Michigan: “…In Michigan we haul very heavy, and our typical log truck setup is a self-loader with truck and pup. You need to be a good driver and operator. We are moving away from that type of system to crib trailers. This is more efficient, with woods crews loading trailers; the drivers just swap trailers all day.”
Minnesota: “I run a small operation with one truck and one contractor. The contract trucking payout is our largest annual cost, with 50% of our deliveries being over 150 miles away.”
Minnesota: “Sad.”
Mississippi: “In Mississippi our roads and bridges are falling apart and that makes for big problems. The legislature and Lt. Gov. need to quit playing politics and fund MDOT to fix them!”
North Carolina: “We need driver training schools that relate more to the logging industry.”
Tennessee: “Good.”
Mississippi: “Our only way to retain drivers is to pay more, and our only way to do that is to reduce stumpage value in order to maintain a profitable operation.”
Virginia: “The constant battle is the distance from the job to the mill. I can always find enough trucking close to the mill; far away, not so much.”
Montana: “We used to make a decent living before 85 sawmills around the state closed. Now most of the log truckers left are just changing dollars and pissing in the wind.”
North Carolina: “Mine is good. We pay above average and are keeping the same drivers.”
Ohio: “Overall cost of trucking is up, pay is down.”
Tennessee: “It’s all right, but traffic seems worse and the public is more impatient.”
Oklahoma: “A necessary evil.”
Oregon: “Adequate.”
Pennsylvania: “Over regulation from federal, state and local governments.”
South Carolina: “It’s pretty good right now but I see a problem getting younger drivers a CDL because of limited DMV testing locations and have to have three years of experience to get insured.”
Tennessee: “I run trucks I buy new, not because it’s that profitable but because they are safer and require less maintenance. The EPA has driven up the price of new trucks but they are still cheaper than glider kits. We need less EPA, more blockage of money-hungry lawyers, more severe punishment for distracted drivers, and tougher driving tests for the public.”
Texas: “We are surviving.”