2017 Public Bid Results

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:03 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Quesnel

Contract: PL18DQU001
Client: MOFLNRO Quesnel
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 422,200

This is an interesting set of results. Quesnel doesn't release results normally, so when they share results, they give out all the dollar amounts for the bids, but with no information about which companies submitted each bid. However, the forester did confirm that if I wanted to submit a FOI request, I could get more information that way. For people who want more information about this, check out this link:

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/gover ... oi-request

For anyone who wants to actually follow through and submit such a request, here's the form:

https://extranet.gov.bc.ca/forms/iao/foiform/index.html

Anyway, the reason I say that this is interesting, aside from the temporary hidden information, is that someone told me that AKD won this job with a bid of $141,770. Since the numbers below came from the forester, I'm guessing that one of two things has happened:
1. The $124,057 bid was a typo; or
2. The company that submitted the $124,057 bid was disqualified for any of a large number of possible reasons; or
3. The company that submitted the $124,057 bid subsequently declined the work, and the bid went up to AKD.

Maybe someone will submit that FOI request, just to see how the process works, and will send me the rest of the information. Anyway, there you have it, those are the results for the MOF job in Quesnel.

01. $124,057 - 29.4 cents/tree - bidder identity not revealed
02. $141,770 - 33.6 cents/tree - AKD Reforestation
03. $171,493 - 40.6 cents/tree - bidder identity not revealed
04. $185,768 - 44.0 cents/tree - bidder identity not revealed
05. $198,229 - 47.0 cents/tree - bidder identity not revealed
06. $223,377 - 52.9 cents/tree - bidder identity not revealed
07. $268,587 - 63,6 cents/tree - bidder identity not revealed
08. $279,178 - 66.1 cents/tree - bidder identity not revealed

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:16 pm

Here are the results for another contract for Planting in Williams Lake

Contract: PL18DCC002
Client: MOFLNRO Williams Lake
Season: Summer 2017
# of Trees: 429,190

This contract had some tough ground. I didn't view any of the blocks, but if I recall things correctly, the forester said something along the lines of, "There's one block on this contract that we really recommend that you take a close look at. It's about 18km of brushed-in access that will have to be cleared out to get a quad in, and the block itself is steep and challenging, a fill plant that's nearly twenty years old, and with large stock being planted on it." It's nice to see a forester pointing out some of the especially challenging aspects of a job, so bidders can take a really close look. Many do, but not all.

01. $164,368 - 38.3 cents/tree - Coast Range
02. $179,724 - 41.9 cents/tree - Zanzibar
03. $188,390 - 43.9 cents/tree - Fieldstone
04. $206,806 - 48.2 cents/tree - Blue Collar
05. $208,396 - 48.6 cents/tree - Dynamic
06. $219,400 - 51.1 cents/tree - Seneca

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:25 pm

Here are the results for another contract for Planting in Quesnel

Contract: PL18TLH003
Client: BCTS Quesnel
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 3,445,792

This contract was tendered using the Contractor Rating System.

I've attached the three photos that I took while viewing this contract.

01. $ 800,609 - 23.2 cents/tree - Celtic
02. $ 926,092 - 26.9 cents/tree - Blue Collar
03. $ 974,652 - 28.3 cents/tree - Apex
04. $ 982,987 - 28.5 cents/tree - Folklore
05. $1,010,231 - 29.3 cents/tree - Seneca

fluffer · Post by **fluffer** » Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:56 pm

What would be a realistic course of action to check out a block that needs 18km of brush cleared merely to access it with a quad? Was it big enough to buy some helicopter time to check out?

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Nov 28, 2016 6:21 pm

I got the impression that you could beat a quad through the existing brush, and that the recommendation was more intended to facilitate easier access for multiple trips with trees and people.

I don't think it would be worth it to hire a helicopter, especially in light of the fact that there might not be anywhere that is cleared out enough to land it. If I had been bidding on it, I'd assume that I'd need helicopter access, then I'd probably brush the trail out this fall, after winning the job, and then take a close assessment of whether the road could be improved enough to get a haglund or beat-up old truck or side-by-side into the block. If not, then I'd look at brushing out helicopter landing areas. For bidding, I'd be pricing that block as if it was a typical two-decade old fill plant that was steep and ugly and had big stock. And I'd price it for helicopter, and hope that there might be a better way in that could save some money, with the expectation that a bunch of the money saved would go to the planters for access down-time.

Not the sort of block to try to save a few pennies on.

granola · Post by **granola** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:40 pm

Apex is shooting for the moon this year, it seems. Lots of bids at or near the top of the list.

TripleS · Post by **TripleS** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:32 pm

However, I think that in many cases, the Contractor Rating System won't be a problem for you. The reason I say this is because there's a bigger barrier to entry, which has been in place for many years. On a lot of BCTS contracts, there exist qualification criteria that must be met before someone is allowed to bid, and a type of qualification criteria that I've seen fairly often would be something along the lines of, "all bidders must prove successful completion within the past three years of at least one BCTS or MOF contract exceeding a size of 1 million seedlings." If you're a new entrant, it's not a case of a 7% disadvantage; you're simply not allowed to bid.

This is a rule which is either really good, or really bad, depending on your personal point of view. In your own case, as someone trying to break into the government market (always a questionable decision as BCTS work is usually priced so poorly), this system is bad. Yet for all other contractors, and even for 99.9% of the planters out there, it's a great system. If you didn't have barriers to entry, all kinds of companies would be putting bids in. And being a low-bid system, those companies would inevitably underbid existing contractors and win the work. Within 24 months, the industry would be destroyed and all existing companies would be driven out of work. Planter wages would drop to a market equilibrium - in this case, hovering around minimum wage. If you look through this thread even, you can see hints (within the saw work side of the bidding) where, when some clauses aren't put into place to help the more established companies, other small companies are coming in and bidding a fraction of the price. I'm pretty certain that if just anybody was allowed to bid on any government contract, you'd almost immediately see companies using outsourced labour, bidding 6 or 8 cents a tree. To the company.

As terrible as the existing low bid system is, it could be a lot worse. On a positive note, you only need a small contract for a single year to build your rating. And on another note, most companies out there don't have ratings that are that close to the full possible 7%. The average is closer to 3.5%.

It's been a while since I looked into the criteria for bidding on BCTS contracts, but the last time I checked it was only the completion of any old million tree contract. I guess I won't be able to bid on any of their contracts, which is ridiculous considering I can put more experience in one truck than most companies can in ten trucks. It would be nice to have the opportunity to bid on local work where I do have a slight competitive advantage, though.

I did a bunch of surveying this fall and the growth of larch was exceptional, four year old trees were over two meters tall. I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing more of it in the future. The I-wrap trees are a PIA though but I can see where it helps with preventing an early flush which makes the trees susceptible to frost bud kill. The Sx, Lw and Fdi were mangled by it in the southern interior this year. I don't buy the BS about j-root prevention since that should never be an issue with even halfway competent contractors.

Another thing with Lw is that you should wait until the trees have flushed to do any fill planting otherwise you tend to end up with double plants wherever Lw were planted.

Post by **Scooter** » Fri Dec 02, 2016 12:29 pm

From today's WSCA Rumour Mill Update newsletter:

BCTS Not Moving Away From Longer-Term Contracts in Spite of Rumours

Rumours from the field this fall that BCTS is getting out of offering multi-year and option-to-renew silviculture contracts are unfounded. (Aren’t rumours supposed to be unfounded by definition?) According to the BCTS executive we spoke with there is no directive from head office instructing regional business offices to get out of the business of tendering these kinds of contracts. Likewise no business office should be making any decision along these lines unilaterally. To do so would not only be out of step with policy, but also with the forest minister’s 2014 BCTS effectiveness review, which recommended the organization find ways to move away from low bid auctions, and create longer term relations with qualified silviculture contractors. Ironically perhaps, the confusion may arise from the ongoing pilot contractor rating system dedicated to just that. In order to un-complicate that process business offices were instructed not to allow the pilot on multi-year or option-to-renew contracts. Perhaps that got misunderstood. Or contractors are just really good at rumours. Either way, early this month the WSCA will meet with BCTS to bring the BCTS contract advisory committee (BCAC) back to life. It will be the contractor-BCTS forum where these confusions can be sorted and headed off.

When I do a big analysis of the stats from this year's viewing season, I'll try to do an analysis of multi-year/OTR contracts this year versus previous years. I thought that they were down significantly this year.

Post by **Scooter** » Fri Dec 02, 2016 12:31 pm

Also, here are estimated numbers for next year for the public stuff in BC:

It's Official, 250 Million Seedlings Sown for 2017 Planting in British Columbia

The 2016 sowing is slightly larger than the 250 million 2017 planting due trees sown for future years.
Final figures for next year’s planting based on sowing requests indicate 250 million seedlings will be planted in 2017 on Crown land in the province. This continues the trend for the third year of seedlings sown at or above 250 million annually. An estimated 230 million will be planted in the Interior with the balance on the coast. Last year the annual figure for the whole province was 260-million seedlings sown.

granola · Post by **granola** » Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:48 pm

jdtesluk wrote:
TripleS wrote: I did a bunch of surveying this fall and the growth of larch was exceptional, four year old trees were over two meters tall. I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing more of it in the future.
I have heard from foresters, that this growth really tapers off after the first few decades, and larch don't necessarily yield superior trees (i.e. caliper) in the long run. If this is true, one may wonder why they are increasingly selected.

Maybe the market is more favourable for larch? Unlike spruce/pine/fir, larch is waterproof, and is great for exterior applications and even boat construction.

TripleS · Post by **TripleS** » Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:34 am

This is a rule which is either really good, or really bad, depending on your personal point of view. In your own case, as someone trying to break into the government market (always a questionable decision as BCTS work is usually priced so poorly), this system is bad. Yet for all other contractors, and even for 99.9% of the planters out there, it's a great system. If you didn't have barriers to entry, all kinds of companies would be putting bids in. And being a low-bid system, those companies would inevitably underbid existing contractors and win the work. Within 24 months, the industry would be destroyed and all existing companies would be driven out of work. Planter wages would drop to a market equilibrium - in this case, hovering around minimum wage. If you look through this thread even, you can see hints (within the saw work side of the bidding) where, when some clauses aren't put into place to help the more established companies, other small companies are coming in and bidding a fraction of the price. I'm pretty certain that if just anybody was allowed to bid on any government contract, you'd almost immediately see companies using outsourced labour, bidding 6 or 8 cents a tree. To the company.

Really? I don't see how those numbers would work without breaking labour laws. 3 or 4 cents to the planter, so almost 4 k to make min. wage. Can't imagine too many people working that hard for that little. On top of that, the quality of management that would exist in such a scenario would make the jokers running rookie mills seem like geniuses. It would be entertaining to observe anyway. This outsourced labour tends to have difficulty with cold weather from my experience as well, so at least the early work would remain reasonable.

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:51 pm

I don't see how those numbers would work without breaking labour laws.

That doesn't seem to have stopped some contractors.

And in a separate region, yet related to this topic, I've seen trees bid out in the Maritimes in the past few years for as low as 11-12 cents to the contractor. Yet they also have minimum wage laws there. I'm not sure how they've managed to make those economics work.

This outsourced labour tends to have difficulty with cold weather from my experience as well

An interesting observation.

Treeppy · Post by **Treeppy** » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:02 am

How about a few more bid results?

Contract: PL18TJE005
Client: BCTS Vanderhoof
Season: Spring (Summer ?) 2017
# of Trees: unknown

I don't have the number of trees for this one, but I'm sure somebody does and could help with that. Also, note that the AKD and Integrity bids appear to be the exact same, I'm not sure if it is a typo or not.

1. Folklore Contracting Ltd - $159,846.84
2. Seneca Enterprises Ltd - $167,430.93
3. Dynamic Reforestation Ltd - $194,873.67
4. AKD Reforestation Ltd - $245,807.94
4. Seth Macdonald dba Integrity Contracting - $245,807.94
6. Celtic Reforestation Services Ltd - $256,392.20
7. Apex Reforestation Ltd - $271,345.47
8. Blue Collar Silviculture Ltd - $347,389.73
9. Brinkman & Associates Reforestation Ltd - $449,301.80

Contract: PL17THD421
Client: BCTS Port McNeill (Seaward South)
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 484,838

1. $292,972.79 - 60.4 cents/tree - Evergreen Forest Services Ltd.
2. $299,886.46 - 61.9 cents/tree - Brinkman & Associates Reforestation Ltd.
3. $343,420.74 - 70.8 cents/tree - Bivouac West Contracting
4. $349,024.01 - 72.0 cents/tree - Fieldstone Resources Ltd.
5. $478,930.03 - 98.8 cents/tree - Impact Reforestation Ltd.

Contract: PL17THD422
Client: BCTS Port McNeill (Seaward North)
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 357,451

1. $404,122.33 - 113.1 cents/tree - Evergreen Forest Services Ltd.
2. $423,694.06 - 118.5 cents/tree - Brinkman & Associates Reforestation Ltd.
3. $502,245.86 - 140.5 cents/tree - Rainforest Field Services Ltd.
4. $651,143.80 - 182.2 cents/tree - Fieldstone Resources Ltd.
5. $836,750.10 - 234.1 cents/tree - Impact Reforestation Ltd.

Contract: PL18DSE001
Client: MFLNRO Castlegar (Lindsay Lake)
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 187,800

1. $84,592.87 - 45.0 cents/tree - West Arm Silviculture
2. $91,826.00 - 48.9 cents/tree - A & G Reforestation Ltd.
3. $94,739.10 - 50.4 cents/tree - All-Stars Silviculture Ltd.
4. $111,309.90 - 59.3 cents/tree - Brinkman & Associates Reforestation Ltd.

There were also two results that appeared directly in the "Contrat Awards" section without any document attached, I guessed those were selected bids, not public bids. Does anyone have more info on these? (such as number of trees)

Contract: PL18THF002
Client: BCTS Cranbrook
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: unknown
Awarded to Zanzibar for $401,822.20

Contract: PL18THG002
Client: BCTS Nelson
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: unknown
Awarded to Greenpeaks for $585,806.64

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:29 am

Here's some additional information. Sorry for the delay, I've been driving across Canada for the past week, and I was going to try to catch up on all this stuff on the weekend, once I get to Nova Scotia. But I just got stuck in a highway closure in Sault Ste Marie half an hour ago, so I may as well take this opportunity to catch up.

Contract: PL18TJE005
Client: BCTS Vanderhoof
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 585,257

Treppy said: "I don't have the number of trees for this one, but I'm sure somebody does and could help with that. Also, note that the AKD and Integrity bids appear to be the exact same, I'm not sure if it is a typo or not."

I've adjusted the numbers below to reflect a price per tree.
I believe that the fact that AKD and Integrity have the same bids is actually just coincidence. I know, that seems incredibly unlikely, but this contract is only one block. If the two companies set exactly the same price per tree for the block, then the overall bids would come out the same. However, there's also a line for transportation of seedlings on the Tender Offer form, so I'm not positive. It could be a typo. Their bids each worked out to exactly 42.0 cents per tree. Maybe they each did a blind bid of 40 cents for the planting, and 2 cents for the shipping?

I'm quite surprised that Folklore got this one. Really didn't think that we would. I've been doing viewing for five years now, looked at over 125 contracts, and this is only the third time we won a contract that I looked at. Too bad that it's so small. It's one single block, just under 600,000 trees, and it was previously planted then burned in a fire. They're currently piling stuff to clean it up, but the ground itself is super-soft. I suspect that the apparent access issues scared people off from this one, since a few quad roads will have to be built to access it. However, the ground itself is pretty nice. I know the block fairly well, since I got my truck stuck there (first time I've needed someone to come pull me out of the mud in five years of viewing). I actually ended up spending about nineteen hours on the block. It's especially nice for us since one of our camps will have a camp set up right beside this block in the spring, working on a different contract. I'm guessing that since this came out late and I had to go through some winter conditions to get to it, most companies just read that it was an old fire from several years ago, and didn't actually visit the block. Thanks to the people from Brinkman, who helped pull my truck out. Brinkman had also just won that big job in Fort St James district, although that other job is a couple hours away from this block.

I don't have any photos of the block since they were on a phone that I dropped into a toilet. However, I did take a photo of my stuck truck with my good camera. I've attached it. It's a bit of a letdown, nothing too exciting. Kind of ridiculous that I needed help. If I'd had more time, I would have jacked up each wheel one at a time, and built about 30 meters of courderoy road with my chain saw, under the truck and around in a loop to get me back onto better ground. Of course, that probably would have taken a full day.

1. 27.3 cents/tree - Folklore Contracting Ltd - $159,846.84
2. 28.6 cents/tree - Seneca Enterprises Ltd - $167,430.93
3. 33.3 cents/tree - Dynamic Reforestation Ltd - $194,873.67
4. 42.0 cents/tree - AKD Reforestation Ltd - $245,807.94
4. 42.0 cents/tree - Seth Macdonald dba Integrity Contracting - $245,807.94
6. 43.8 cents/tree - Celtic Reforestation Services Ltd - $256,392.20
7. 46.4 cents/tree - Apex Reforestation Ltd - $271,345.47
8. 59.4 cents/tree - Blue Collar Silviculture Ltd - $347,389.73
9. 76.7 cents/tree - Brinkman & Associates Reforestation Ltd - $449,301.80

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:32 am

Here are some updates with tree numbers:

Contract: PL18THF002
Client: BCTS Cranbrook
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 1,121,400

Awarded to Zanzibar for $401,822.20, which is 35.8 cents per tree.

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:47 am

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Houston

Contract: PL18TAS100
Client: BCTS Houston
# of Trees: 370,836
Season: Spring 2017

This is pretty straightforward. Five blocks in two clusters (some near Burns Lake). Some straight planting and mostly fills. A few iWrap larch, but not in significant numbers.

01. $086,350 - 23.3 cents/tree - Windfirm
02. $100,520 - 27.1 cents/tree - Dynamic
03. $159,459 - 42.3 cents/tree - Integrity Contracting (Seth)

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:56 am

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Quesnel

Contract: PL18TOH004
Client: BCTS Quesnel
# of Trees: 2,734,130
Season: Spring and Summer 2017

Another big contract out of Quesnel. This one is a lot of summer work (almost half of the contract), and the blocks are in about seven different clusters on both sides of highway 97, from out past Nazko on the west, almost to Barkerville on the east.

01. $739,725 - 27.1 cents/tree - Seneca
02. $759,984 - 27.8 cents/tree - Blue Collar
03. $782,511 - 28.6 cents/tree - Apex

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:00 pm

Here are a few more thoughts for foresters who are preparing bid packages for contractors to bid upon, so I know that a lot of foresters read the comments in these public bid threads. If you want to have more diligent and knowledgeable bidding on your contract, you should provide as much information as possible. With that in mind, I recommend that when you generate block viewing maps, you make sure to include the following information:

1. An Accurate Scale. 1:10,000 or something like that. I'd hate to see this practice disappear slowly as we move into the geo-referenced age.
2. The Prescription is nice, although I realize that in many cases, the maps are generated before the final prescriptions are put together for the schedule B.
3. Elevation Range. It's great to know the high and low elevation for the block. This really helps with planning potential snow-free dates, especially with spring work.
4. Contour Lines. This lets us quickly determine, from looking at the map, just how steep certain sections are. Also good to determine south-facing ground, etc.
5. Harvest Dates. It's nice to know the age of the block, plus whether it was winter- or summer-harvested.

I find that the scale is already present on 98% of maps. Items 3-5 are only present on the block maps for about 30-40% of the contracts that I look at. Although these three items seem like they'd be less relevant for anyone who looks at the block, I know that from personal experience, I look at over 30 million trees worth of work each October/November, and sometimes, when looking at a map in the office, two weeks after I was actually standing on the block, this information really helps me remember the block.

Far be it from me to be so presumptuous as to tell you what to do, but ... yeah, treat these items as helpful suggestions.

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 6:58 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Castlegar

Contract: PL18DSE001
Client: MOFLNRO Castlegar
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 187,800

The number of trees for this contract is estimated, as five of the eight blocks are hectare-based bids. The estimate is based on a minimum planting density of 1400 stems/Ha. All of the trees on this contract have ferts.

01. $ 84,593 - 45.0 cents/tree - West Arm Silviculture
02. $ 91,826 - 48.9 cents/tree - A&G
03. $ 94,739 - 50.4 cents/tree - All-Stars
04. $111,310 - 59.3 cents/tree - Brinkman

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:18 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Surveys in Prince George

Contract: SU18TGC001
Client: BCTS Prince George
Season: 2017
# of Surveys: 2,697 Ha

This contract is a mix of stocking, regen, and FTG surveys. Although I'm providing an average cost per hectare, be aware that these three types of surveys involve different amounts of work, and therefore, any average per-hectare dollar amount is generally without a lot of value in terms of comparison with other similar contracts, due to the relative proportions of each type of survey. Details from one of the contract docs are as follows:

Overview of the Work/Service Required
The proposed contract requires silviculture surveys to be completed within the Prince George Natural Resource District as proposed below:
• 1843.0 Ha=Free Growing surveys
• 93.6 Ha= Regen Surveys.
• 760.3 Ha= Survival surveys
Plot Intensities by Standards Unit for Free Growing /Regen/Survival are as follows:
(Note: A minimum of 5 plots per stratum are required)
• 1 Plot/Hectare for S.U’s less than 40 Hectares
• 1 Plot/ 2 Hectares for S.U’s 40 to 80Hectares
• 1 Plot/ 3Hectares for S.U’s 80 Hectares and larger
• (Ex. 50Ha=25 plots, 80Ha=27 plots)

This is the first year that I've included survey contract results here. The reason that I decided to do this is because some planting contractors would be well-equipped to perform this sort of work. They have the vehicles and equipment, and they often have the personnel as a portion of the tree planting workforce are holders of tech diplomas. And some owners/management at certain planting companies are RPF's or RPFT's. One of the largest complaints about tree planting is that it isn't year-round work, so it's not a viable long-term career option. Survey work is one option that might be able to keep a small number of planters working through a much longer season than they have traditionally enjoyed, and opportunities such as this might eventually create additional interest in forestry work as a full-time, lifetime career.

01. $ 57,924 - $21.48/Ha - Pathocon Consulting
02. $ 62,932 - $23.33/Ha - IFS
03. $ 68,173 - $25.28/Ha - Van Dolah
04. $ 69,395 - $25.73/Ha - Paramount Forestry
05. $ 79,502 - $29.48/Ha - Silvicon
06. $109,814 - $40.72/Ha - Forsite

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:51 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Arrow/Boundary (Kootenay)

Contract: PL18THG002
Client: BCTS Nelson
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 1,276,281

This contract included some ferts, 160K of fill plants, some day rate work, & a lot of access issues. It's pretty spread out.

01. $585,807 - 45.9 cents/tree - Greenpeaks
02. $634,499 - 49.7 cents/tree - Evergreen
03. $655,324 - 51.4 cents/tree - A&G

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:12 pm

Here is a contract for Planting in Clearwater

Contract: PL18TEE001
Client: BCTS Clearwater
Season: Summer 2017
# of Trees: 201,690

This contract includes fertilizer tea-bags for every tree. There is also a large component of cost for shipping trees from Medicine Hat & Nelson.

The foresters put a PDF on BC Bid for this contract that includes the maps and a number of photos, etc. It was in PowerPoint format, then they printed it to PDF. I haven't attached that here since it's about 5 Mb (too large for a post attachment), but if you're curious, you can find it on BC Bid. Incidentally, that reminds me of a project that I meant to add to my long to-do list: a quick PDF or video showing exactly how to bring up old contract information from BC Bid. Stay tuned.

If you go to BC Bid, there's also a KML file in the tender information folder. If you have Google Earth installed on your computer, and you try to open the KML file, it will show the blocks in Google Earth. I should include a demonstration of that if I make a quick video about navigation in BC Bid.

01. $110,372 - 54.7 cents/tree - A&G
02. $112,946 - 56.0 cents/tree - Integrity
03. $114,287 - 56.7 cents/tree - All Stars
04. $123,392 - 61.2 cents/tree - Dynamic
05. $140,488 - 69.7 cents/tree - Evergreen

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:29 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Port Alberni

Contract: PL17TCD028
Client: BCTS Port Alberni
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 136,571

This contract also included 7,165 sinocast cones. If you want to figure out the tree place isolated from the cones, my guess would be to drop the per-tree prices below by about eight cents, roughly.

01. $ 62,837 - 46.0 cents/tree - Osprey
02. $ 68,825 - 50.4 cents/tree - Leader
03. $ 78,352 - 57.4 cents/tree - Fieldstone
04. $117,791 - 86.2 cents/tree - Impact

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:37 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting on the Sunshine Coast

Contract: PL17TBP004
Client: BCTS
Season: Spring & Fall 2017
# of Trees: 667,825

This contact includes 490k spring and 177k fall trees. Lots of boat commute work.

01. $416,392 - 62.4 cents/tree - Evergreen
02. $471,488 - 70.6 cents/tree - Fieldstone
03. $490,393 - 73.4 cents/tree - Rainforest
04. $505,007 - 75.6 cents/tree - Osprey
05. $539,122 - 80.7 cents/tree - Bivouac
06. $543,927 - 81.4 cents/tree - Impact
07. $615,405 - 92.2 cents/tree - Leader
08. $698,001 - $1.05 per tree - Brinkman

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:58 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Tree Planting in Haida Gwaii

Contract: PL18TBJ002
Client: BCTS Haida Gwaii
Season: 2017

This contract includes Tree Planting, Browse Barrier Installation, Browse Barrier Removal, and Manual Brushing in Haida Gwaii. The various components of the tender make it quite confusing, so I didn't give a per tree breakdown.

This one, surprisingly, may be the most dollars left on the table of any contract this year. Yet Stephan is unquestionably one of the top employers in the business. Of course, they also have certain financial advantages, being local.

01. $ 550,951 - Stephan Contracting
02. $ 689,524 - Osprey
03. $1,071,073 - Fieldstone

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:11 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Chilliwack & Sea-To-Sky

Contract: PL18TBB001
Client: BCTS Chilliwack
Season: Spring/Fall 2017
# of Trees: 317,143

Here are some notes from the documentation:

Overview of the Work/Service Required

The BCTS project will have both a spring and fall plant with 90% or roughly 283,000 trees (62 blocks) in the spring, and 34,000 (2 blocks) in the fall. Of the 64 blocks, 46 blocks are in the Chilliwack district and 18 are in the Sea to Sky district. 25 out of the 64 blocks are for planting burn piles estimating to take about 5000 trees. There are 3 fill plants and 1 replant all located in the Chilliwack district. One of the Squamish blocks (71-72) was burned in a 2015 wildfire with F&B and only partial yarding is completed. 2 blocks with an estimated 15,000 trees are to have Plantskydd applied at the time of planting. At the moment, no re-application work has been identified but some could be added in the fall pending survey results. There are currently 4 overflow blocks for the spring planned in the tender. Additional overflow blocks may be added later pending harvest completion on other sales. For the spring plant, all the blocks are currently logged and ready to plant except for MR104 which is expected to be completed harvesting this winter (weather depending). There is no final confirmation on the debris pile burns, but expect most of them to be ready to plant. For the fall plant, both blocks are ready to plant. Depending on final lift figures for both the spring and fall planting program, the contractor can expect some adjustments to unit stock allocations or possible density adjustments to use up any surplus stock. Shortfalls may be covered off with seedling purchases or adjustments to planned planting density.

Depending on winter snow pack, planting can start up in March with the majority of the ground planted in April. The spring planting blocks are mostly lower elevation units except for the burn piles in CT212, CT213, SP095A and RO006, and blocks EM211, EM219, NK018, NK102,SP023A, SP0709A, and 62-58H. Depending on lingering snow pack, those blocks may not be open until later in May or even early June. The fall plant typically can start up in mid to late September, depending on the drought conditions from the summer. Fall planting needs to be completed before the end of October.

Pre-planting flights will be used to assess blocks prior to developing the work plan and identifying any significant changes to access for both the spring and fall planting blocks.

Unit costs are to be all found based on the estimated volume of work. All expenses are to be factored in to the bid price.

Browse Protection

Plantskydd repellent will be used for all browse protection treatments (deer, elk). Time of plant applications will require dipping and/or spraying of stock prior to planting. Follow up applications will require back pack or hand pump sprayers. Expect the number of blocks, tree species and total trees to change depending on survey information prior to anticipated spring or fall treatment timeframe. Purchase of the supplies needed for the work is the responsibility of the contractor and is to be included in the bid rate.

Boat/Barge Contact Information

The contact for the barge company that moves equipment up to the top of Stave Lake is [attached]. The contractor will be required to arrange travel requirements. Logging has been completed on all of the Stave/Winslow blocks.

Known Field Safety Hazards on this Contract

Ministry staff and contractors, in the course of planning and developing this project, have identified the following known field safety hazards associated with this project. Note this list does not identify routine safety hazards associated with forestry operations.

As new information becomes available, identified hazards and information will be shared with all parties involved. Typically over the winter months, access routes can become blocked and/or damaged and access may change from drive to ATV, Walk or Heli. Bidders should expect changes.

Here are the bid results:

01. $203,724 - 64.2 cents/tree - Zanzibar
02. $211,625 - 66.7 cents/tree - Leader
03. $269,096 - 84.8 cents/tree - Osprey

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:17 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Brushing/Weeding/Juvenile Spacing in Terrace

Contract: BR18TIF101
Client: BCTS Terrace
Season: 2017

Due to the disparity between different types of work in this contract, I didn't give a per-unit-area breakdown.

01. $120,514 - Stephan Contracting
02. $141,924 - Anspayaxw Development
03. $185,410 - Little Trees
04. $253,200 - CAS Ventures

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:26 pm

Here are the results for a contract for MPB & Spruce Beetle work in Smithers

Contract: FH17DSS002
Client: MOFLNRO Smithers
Season: 2017

This contract includes day rates for 15 days for a two-person team, 60 waypoints, and 80 trees to fall & burn.

01. $ 45,750 - Silvicon
02. $ 47,200 - Nazca Consulting
03. $ 56,500 - Chin-neeh Services
04. $ 60,000 - Seneca
05. $121,000 - Spectrum

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:33 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in 100 Mile House

Contract: PL18DMH001
Client: MOFLNRO 100 Mile House
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 976,600

01. $343,570 - 35.2 cents/tree - Dynamic
02. $366,660 - 37.5 cents/tree - Blue Collar
03. $390,960 - 40.0 cents/tree - Integrity Contracting (Seth)
04. $443,408 - 45.4 cents/tree - Apex
05. $447,624 - 45.8 cents/tree - Folklore
06. $450,495 - 46.1 cents/tree - All Stars

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:34 pm

Phew. I think that's the first time I've ever posted results from eight jobs in a single day. That's what happens when I don't pay attention to BC Bid for a couple weeks.

Post by **Scooter** » Thu Jan 19, 2017 3:16 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Mackenzie

Contract: PL18DMK005
Client: MOFLNRO Mackenzie
Season: Summer 2017
# of Trees: 1.03 million

This contract is broken into two areas. The southern area has a pair of fresh blocks, and approximately half a dozen fill plants that appear to be about five years old. Tons of existing stock, but flat ground. This area is about 60-80 kilometers up the Finlay FSR, if I remember correctly.

The other half of the contract is about ten old fill plants which need to be replanted due to fires. These were originally planted between 10-20 years ago, if I remember correctly. The drawback with these is that several of the blocks don't have good access. The access will need to be brushed out, and some of that access does not seem particularly suitable for a quad. I think these blocks ranged from about 200 to 240km up the Finlay FSR (you can find the maps on BC Bid to confirm). I'm not sure if the crew would stay in a bush camp or at Meselinka or Osilinka logging camps.

I'll attach a few photos.

For some reason, the MOFLNRO is not posting the bid results on their site. I believe that five companies submitted bids. However, they did post the contract award to show the company that took the contract:

01. $381,719 - 37.1 cents/tree - Dynamic

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:19 am

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in the Peace-Liard region

Contract: PL18TDE001
Client: BCTS Dawson Creek
Season: Summer 2017
# of Trees: 401,812

This one includes some potential heli work. Study the Tender Offer Form (attached) for better clarification. BCTS must be thanking Blue Collar for this break to the taxpayers. This is the biggest % amount left on the table this year, although not the largest dollar amount. But then again, Blue Collar has been quite restrained in their bidding up until the very end of this viewing season.

01. $132,142 - 32.9 cents/tree - Blue Collar
02. $189,498 - 47.2 cents/tree - Dynamic
03. $199,759 - 49.7 cents/tree - Celtic
04. $204,859 - 51.0 cents/tree - Apex

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:24 am

Here are the results for a second contract for Planting in the Peace-Liard region

Contract: PL18TDE002
Client: BCTS Dawson Creek
Season: Summer 2017
# of Trees: 2,292,352

I'll have the number of trees shortly. Blue Collar got lucky on this one, putting in a last-minute amendment so they only left about $66,000 on the table, instead of $112,000.

01. $ 632,687 - 27.6 cents/tree - Blue Collar
02. $ 698,199 - 30.4 cents/tree - Coast Range
03. $ 712,985 - 31.1 cents/tree - Celtic
04. $ 881,447 - 38.5 cents/tree - Dynamic
05. $1,147,912 - 49.8 cents/tree - Apex

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:28 am

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Mackenzie

Contract: PL18DMK004
Client: MOFLNRO Mackenzie
Season: Summer 2017
# of Trees: 1,176,000

I don't have full results on this contract. I believe that there were four other bidders besides Spectrum. This one needs a camp up at the east side of Williston, north of Mackenzie, and planters need to be flown north across the lake. It's a very tricky job for the area that will require aircraft and boats, hence the high bid price.

01. $716,124 - 60.9 cents/tree - Spectrum

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:33 am

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in 100 Mile House

Contract: PL18TEG001
Client: BCTS 100 Mile House
Season: Spring 2017
# of Trees: 839,012

And Blue Collar comes through with a late season vengeance. This contract includes 44k of fill plants, 483k of old grassy excavator mounds, and 312k of raw ground. A significant portion of the stock (515,646 trees) is 512A's, so fairly large stock. The bid also includes about $10k of helicopter time (7 hours).

01. $295,412 - 35.2 cents/tree - Blue Collar
02. $316,282 - 37.7 cents/tree - Apex
03. $318,707 - 38.0 cents/tree - Dewan
04. $357,778 - 42.6 cents/tree - Zanzibar
05. $387,769 - 46.2 cents/tree - All-Stars
06. $415,157 - 49.5 cents/tree - Folklore

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:27 pm

Updated, Monday afternoon, January 23rd. Includes results from new bids that I posted earlier this afternoon.

I am currently working on a study of the bid results from this past fall. I hope to be posting a full report here later tonight, or possibly tomorrow.

In the meantime, here are a number of spreadsheets for anyone who is curious. I'll explain the methodology that I've used for analysis in full detail in the upcoming report. For example, one has to be careful when comparing some companies to other companies, by virtue of the fact that the geographic regions that companies are bidding in will significantly skew the ability to compare certain companies side-by-side. Comparing coastal numbers to Interior numbers is like comparing apples to oranges. Before anyone gets in a tizzy about methodology or statistical significance, wait for my full report. These are just some charts to whet the appetite.

There are seven spreadsheets in total that I've been working with so far. The seven PDF's that are attached to this post are just copies of the spreadsheets, printed to PDF form. I didn't attach the original spreadsheets because the board won't permit the attachment of excel files, but I'll create a workaround later so anyone that wants copies of the original spreadsheets can get them.

The graphics that you're about to see within this post are visual copies of two of the seven spreadsheets.

Here's a list of low bidders ranked by number of trees won:

And here is a list of low bidders ranked by dollar volume of work won:

Stay tuned ...

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:03 pm

Here's a link to the report that I put together about the Fall/Winter 2016/2017 Bidding season:

http://www.replant.ca/docs/2017_Bidding_Report.pdf

Click on that link above, not on the graphic.

mwainwright · Post by **mwainwright** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:34 pm

Really well done scooter, thanks for taking the time to put that together. I hope your report is being shared as widely as possible

Post by **Scooter** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:51 pm

Thanks Mike, I appreciate the feedback.

jdtesluk · Post by **jdtesluk** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:19 am

Echo Mike's comment. This is really interesting data! Thanks for putting it together.

Rainman · Post by **Rainman** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:32 pm

Great job Scooter! Though it must be taken in proper context, this info is a powerful summary of the public tenders.

You are truly a shining star of the planting community and are inspirational. My feeling is that people should spend less time on facebook and more time here, the best forum in the industry.

Thanks!

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:08 pm

# of Trees: 350,000 ---------- 01. $102,900 - 29.4 cents per tree - Paramount

Scooter, doing the work that should be done.

Also, I'm surprised nobody pointed to this and floated the idea that it might be 3-4 local guys + a pick up truck. If your overhead is gas + mileage, that's $25000-$33000 per person for 90-120k per person. I haven't planted Hazelton but I've heard it's pseudo-coastal - so say, 2k a day for well experienced planters? That's 45-60 days of work depending on 3 or 4 people at an assumed ~$600/day. Not bad.

ChinRoll · Post by **ChinRoll** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:17 pm

Yup, incredible work here Scooter! I also have to second Rainman by saying that the planting community needs to spend less time on that other forum over there in Facebook-la-la-land and spend more time over here... Guess people are just more interested in watching other people's dramas unfold than partaking in truly informative discussions on planting.

Again, bravo to you for keeping things real!

Post by **Scooter** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:38 pm

Thanks all.

If I find any mistakes, I'll try to continue to provide updates. I don't think I'll likely change the numbers if another bid comes in. At this point, there's enough data to give everyone a good idea, and to be honest, the cascading effects of all the spreadsheets means, at this point, that adding another bid would take about three hours of work and reformatting.

However, when I do make corrections or additions, I'll put them here. I've already made three updates in the past 24 hours, as follows:

v1.01:

- Added "public" in one sentence, fixing a typo (cut-throating).

v1.02:

- Changed the example using Apex to say "Company ABC.' But Apex gets to keep their Gold Star in their own company analysis section.

- After explaining which companies were included, I added the following paragraph: "A number of BC Planting Contractors did not bid on any public work, or bid only on jobs for which I don’t have data. That list includes, at a minimum, Artisan, Big Sky, Cottonwood, Cyberforest, Hawkeye, Integrity Industrial, Nata, Nature’s Treasures, Nootka, Quatsuco, Sitka, Stephan Contracting, Waterside, and Wagner. There may be others that I can’t think of, off the top of my head." Obviously, being a report about BC, I omitted mention of companies such as Legacy, Northern, Shakti, etc.

- After the "low bidder is not always the one who plants the contract" section, I added the following paragraph: "There is a new rule that BCTS has, which states that a contractor can drop a bid within 24 hours of the opening, due to having too much work at the time. If a contractor does this, they aren’t allowed to bid on any more BCTS contracts for the remainder of the season. I think this is a great rule. Very fair, and ultimately best for all parties involved. Work for MOFLNRO is treated differently, and if you drop a job there, the Ministry can seize the contractor’s bid deposit. For FFT work, if the job is administered by BCTS, it follows BCTS rules, and if it is administered by MOFLNRO, it follows their rules."

- After the mention of the Contractor Rating System, I added the following sentence: "I believe that only bid award was actually affected by this new system this year, namely PL18TKJ001, for BCTS Vernon."

- Although I had tried to keep the bias out of the report for the most part, so people could come to their own conclusions, I added the following paragraph to the conclusions: "To win a contract, you must bid too low. Supply and demand dictates this. This is my opinion, and only opinion, but I feel that there are too many planting contractors. Or perhaps too many general silvicultural contractors that use low bids on tree planting to supply a workforce for their other activities (herbicide work, fire-fighting, surveying, etc.)." Go ahead, release the hounds.

v1.03:

- Fixed another typo, and added a line at the end suggesting that people share this report to as many planters as possible.

TripleS · Post by **TripleS** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:40 pm

# of Trees: 350,000 ---------- 01. $102,900 - 29.4 cents per tree - Paramount

Scooter, doing the work that should be done.

Also, I'm surprised nobody pointed to this and floated the idea that it might be 3-4 local guys + a pick up truck. If your overhead is gas + mileage, that's $25000-$33000 per person for 90-120k per person. I haven't planted Hazelton but I've heard it's pseudo-coastal - so say, 2k a day for well experienced planters? That's 45-60 days of work depending on 3 or 4 people at an assumed ~$600/day. Not bad.

More overhead than you think with payroll taxes, worksafe, insurance.... I doubt you would get a big enough window from the forester to have a 45-60 day season either. I haven't seen the ground but it seems like a brutal bid from what I know about the area.

Thanks for taking the time to put this together Scooter, it will be interesting to see how bids and volumes won per company change through the years.

Post by **Scooter** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:44 pm

I doubt you would get a big enough window from the forester to have a 45-60 day season either.

Good point. I can think of one recent private job where the foresters said that doing two million trees in four weeks wasn't good enough, so they want two camps to do a million each simultaneously, to get them in the ground faster.

Hopefully whoever runs Paramount knows the forester and has a good working rapport, and can do the job with a fairly small team.

Treeppy · Post by **Treeppy** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:56 pm

Thanks for putting all of that together Scooter!!
This is a great resource, even with its unavoidable limitations.

You really got me curious there: I spent a bit of time this winter looking at bid results from 2010 (when you started posted some of them) and making spreadsheets (mostly looking at winning bids and tree prices by region), just for the sake of wrapping my head around the whole process. But now, I kind of want to go back to it and look at company bidding strategies over the years... I might get to it if it starts raining again over here

TripleS · Post by **TripleS** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:31 pm

Good point. I can think of one recent private job where the foresters said that doing two million trees in four weeks wasn't good enough, so they want two camps to do a million each simultaneously, to get them in the ground faster.

Hopefully whoever runs Paramount knows the forester and has a good working rapport, and can do the job with a fairly small team.

Seems like a big rush in lots of places these days, which is a shame because it eliminates the small guys. I had to turn down 500k this Spring because the forester wanted it done in 2 weeks. Just don't want to get that big.

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:19 pm

Here are the results for a contract for Planting in Cranbrook

Contract: PL17TFH001
Client: BCTS Cranbrook
# of Trees: 1,121,400

01. $401,822 - 35.8 cents/tree - Zanzibar
02. $408,944 - 35.4 cents/tree - Brinkman
03. $412,466 - 36.8 cents/tree - Evergreen
04. $421,646 - 37.6 cents/tree - NGR
05. $446,257 - 39.8 cents/tree - Fieldstone
06. $456,062 - 40.7 cents/tree - Celtic
07. $495,852 - 44.2 cents/tree - A&G

Post by **Scooter** » Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:32 pm

A few more minor corrects to the bid report:

v1.04
- Fixing the wording at the top of the chart on page 7, and added a short list at the bottom of that page to list how many low bids each company had.
- Corrected my notes about "dropping bids," after receiving some corrections from a reader, as listed below.

From the Standard 01 Information to Bidders pdf:

Withdrawal of Bid (Capacity)

Contractors are allowed a 48 hour grace period from the time of tender close to assess their capacity. During this time a contractor may withdraw any bid that exceeds the contractor’s capacity and this withdrawal must be submitted in writing to the Business Area’s Timber Sales Manager.

After 48 hours, the withdrawal of a bid will result in forfeiture of their standard bid deposit or from their continuous bid deposit.

To be eligible to bid after a bid withdrawal, a contractor must provide a rationale to the Timber Sale Manager that identifies how their capacity issues have been resolved.

Forfeiture

For contractors utilizing the Continuous Bid Deposit process, where a contractor withdraws a bid after the 48 hour grace period the forfeiture will be in the following amounts:
• $5,000 will be forfeited for a contract less than $250,000;
• $10,000 will be forfeited for a contract greater than or equal to $250,000.