Polish wood processors are pressing State Forests to revise timber measurement and classification rules introduced at the start of 2026, arguing that the changes effectively reduce the amount of usable raw material reaching industry. The sector estimates the impact at between 1 million and 2 million m\u00b3 per year at a time when domestic wood supply is already tight.<\/p>\n
The Coalition for Polish Wood and the Polish Chamber of Commerce of Furniture Manufacturers have submitted nine proposed changes to the Directorate General of State Forests (DGLP), covering timber measurement, conversion factors, quality classification, bark deductions and the settlement of wood sales contracts.<\/p>\n
The technical conditions have applied since January 1, 2026, following an order issued by State Forests in July 2025. They were preceded by consultations with ten wood industry organisations, forestry contractors and government representatives, but several technical issues remained unresolved.<\/p>\n
Processors put the impact at 1-2 million m\u00b3<\/strong><\/p>\n The central dispute is not over the nominal volume offered by State Forests, but over how much usable solid wood processors receive for the volume they purchase and pay for.<\/p>\n Industry organisations estimate that the combined effect of the new measurement and classification rules could remove the equivalent of 1-2 million m\u00b3 of usable raw material from the market each year. They already estimate Poland's wood raw-material deficit at more than 7 million m\u00b3 annually.<\/p>\n The scale is considerable. At the upper end of the estimate, the disputed 2 million m\u00b3 would correspond to almost 30% of the existing supply shortfall cited by the industry.<\/p>\n This is particularly important because State Forests remains the main source of domestic industrial roundwood in Poland. Changes in how timber volumes are calculated and settled therefore have a direct effect on the effective wood cost for sawmills, panel mills, furniture producers and other processors.<\/p>\n The industry argues that measurement cannot be separated from price: if the invoiced commercial volume increases while the amount of usable solid wood remains unchanged, processors are effectively paying more for the same quantity of raw material.<\/p>\n Stack measurement at the centre of the dispute<\/strong><\/p>\n One of the largest disagreements concerns stacked wood.<\/p>\n Under the previous system, stacks of assortments including S2 and S4 were built to approximately 1.05 metres and a 5% allowance was subsequently deducted when calculating the commercial quantity. For S3A, M1, M2 and wood residues, the allowance was 10%, reflecting greater settlement in irregular stacks.<\/p>\n The new rules removed this practice while leaving most conversion factors unchanged.<\/p>\n Processors argue that the combination results in a higher calculated commercial volume without an equivalent increase in solid wood. In their view, the conversion coefficients should have been recalculated when the stack-height allowance was removed.<\/p>\n State Forests disputes this. DGLP maintains that the additional stack height was not part of the volume sold and that eliminating it therefore does not reduce contractual timber volumes. It also says most conversion factors are based on long-established Polish standards and commercial practice.<\/p>\n There is currently no systematic comparative measurement showing the difference between volumes calculated under the former and current systems, which has become one of the main points of contention between suppliers and buyers.<\/p>\n Measurement tolerance adds to buyers' concerns<\/strong><\/p>\n The industry is also challenging the \u00b12% tolerance permitted for control measurements.<\/p>\n Under the new rules, a delivery registered at 100 m\u00b3 can still pass verification when a control measurement produces a result between 98 m\u00b3 and 102 m\u00b3.<\/p>\n State Forests argues that stacked timber is a bulk commodity for which exact measurement is difficult and says the tolerance is consistent with the accuracy achieved by photo-optical systems. According to DGLP, repeatability for such systems is generally within 1.5-3%.<\/p>\n Processors want the tolerance and the conversion coefficients tested independently rather than relying on existing assumptions.<\/p>\n Bark and quality rules affect effective wood costs<\/strong><\/p>\n Bark deductions are another source of disagreement.<\/p>\n Under the revised rules, deductions for oak and acacia have been reduced by 1 cm across diameter classes. Beech, hornbeam and maple have been standardised at 1 cm, while deductions for larch have increased.<\/p>\n State Forests says the revisions are based on research commissioned in 2017 and published in 2019. Buyers argue that bark deductions need to be considered together with the other changes because even relatively small differences become financially significant across millions of cubic metres of purchases.<\/p>\n Processors are also seeking more consistent quality grading between State Forests units. Their concern is that differences in the interpretation of defects can alter the usable yield and therefore the real raw-material cost of apparently comparable timber.<\/p>\n For a sawmill, the relevant calculation is ultimately not simply the invoiced price per cubic metre, but the cost per cubic metre of recoverable wood entering production.<\/p>\n Lower usable supply would tighten an already constrained market<\/strong><\/p>\n The dispute comes against a difficult raw-material background for Poland's wood-processing industry.<\/p>\n Processors have repeatedly argued that domestic harvesting volumes are insufficient for existing industrial capacity. Against an estimated structural deficit exceeding 7 million m\u00b3 per year, losing another 1-2 million m\u00b3 in effective usable volume through changes in measurement would represent a significant additional constraint.<\/p>\n The effect would also be uneven across the industry. Sawmills are particularly exposed to log quality, diameter and bark deductions, while panel and other fibre-based producers depend heavily on the measurement of smaller assortments and residues.<\/p>\n For downstream manufacturers, higher effective raw-material costs can subsequently feed into wood components, panels and furniture production.<\/p>\n The industry is therefore treating the new technical conditions as a supply and cost issue rather than simply a dispute over measurement methodology.<\/p>\n State Forests wants evidence before changing the system<\/strong><\/p>\n A working group is being prepared to review the technical conditions and measurement methods, although as of August 24 its final composition, timetable and deadline for recommendations had not been established.<\/p>\n State Forests has indicated that further amendments should be supported by independent research demonstrating significant differences in measured timber volumes.<\/p>\n Industry organisations want interim arrangements while that work is carried out. Their position is that measurement and classification risks should not fall predominantly on buyers while the accuracy of the new system remains disputed.<\/p>\n The eventual outcome could have consequences well beyond the technical wording of timber contracts. With State Forests supplying much of the country's industrial roundwood, even relatively small changes in conversion factors, deductions or measurement methodology can translate into substantial volumes at national level.<\/p>\n For Polish processors, the figure now attached to the dispute is up to 2 million m\u00b3 per year \u2014 enough to materially increase a raw-material shortage that the industry says is already limiting production and investment.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Polish wood processors are pressing State Forests to revise timber measurement and classification rules introduced at the start of 2026, arguing that the changes effectively reduce the amount of usable raw material reaching industry. The sector estimates the impact at … Continue reading