Saturday, October 31, 2026

Creating a KML Elevation Heatmap from a Georeferenced Overview Map

Not long ago, I made a post describing how to use AI to submit a georeferenced overview map in order to create a new KML file which contained boundary lines around each highlighted block.  That set of boundary lines could then be opened in Google Earth or ArcGIS Earth to be able to get a better understanding of the elevation/slope/aspect profiles of each block.  That post can be found here:

https://jonathan-scooter-clark.blogspot.com/2026/10/creating-kml-boundary-lines-around-cut.html

Let's take things a step further.  Let's create a sort of "elevation heat map" where the boundaries are shaded on a colour gradient, to represent relative elevations of various blocks.

 

For this exercise, I used OpenAI's "6.1 Terra" model on the extra-high setting, thinking that should be more than adequate.  I could have set it to the "ultra" setting, but why waste compute resources if not needed?  I uploaded the same "Williams_Lake_2016_Block_Boundaries" kml file that we generated in the post referenced above. This is the prompt that I used:

Are you able to change this KML for me? I'd like to create a sort of "elevation heat map" (for lack of a better term). Can you adjust the colours of the boundary line data throughout this kml, based upon elevation of each segment? Let's use a bright red colour for the very highest elevation of all the boundary line segments. Let's change to a bright green for the very lowest elevation of all the boundary line segments. Then, for every other segment in between, scale the elevation (from lowest boundary to highest) and change the colour of the segment to have an RGB colour value somewhere on a linear scale from bright green (low) to bright red (high). Ask me questions if this doesn't make sense to you.

 

Chat didn't have any questions for me, and got right to work.  It successfully generated the file that I wanted.  I should note that the first time I tried this, I asked it to scale from green (low elevation) to yellow (high elevation), and that didn't look very good, so I switched from yellow to red.  And to be honest, green/red makes a lot more sense.  Green means Go, and you can start lower elevation blocks earlier in the spring.  Red means wait, and the high elevation blocks will probably need to be planted last.

If you're curious what this new KML looked like when I opened it in ArcGIS Earth, here are two screenshots.  The first shows the entire contract (zoomed out to the maximum) and the second shows a close-up of a few of the blocks.

 



Here are some key findings, and things to think about:

1.  I could have fed it a chart listing all the blocks on the contract along with their low and high elevation points for each block.  Foresters often supply such charts in bid packages.  However, this data can only provide a mid-point in elevation of the block, and wouldn't give a true "weighted average" assessed across the entire block.

2.  I thought that Chat would probably average all of the elevations in a fixed interval around each boundary to come up with an average.  This would give a slightly better result, but still not perfect.  For example, what if the block was shaped like a bowl?  The boundary samples would be misleading; higher than expected.  And what if the block had a huge hill in the middle?  In that case, the boundary samples at the base of the hill would be biased to be lower than what the true block average was.

3.  Chat told me that the KML didn't contain any elevation data for any of the points on the boundaries.  Very interesting!  I thought that the KML's that it generated would have pulled elevation Z-data from the original georeferenced maps.  Apparently those maps didn't contain Z-data.  So Chat made the decision to find a terrain dataset that it could cross-reference against the positional data along each boundary, to determine elevations at each point.

4.  But then, this next point is what really impressed me:  Chat decided that using only the boundary as a proxy for block elevation was risky (as I pointed out above, in point 2).  So it decided to make an invisible grid across each block and sample elevation every 20m, then average all of those points, to get a true weighted average elevation across the block as a whole.  If you're curious, it pulled elevation data from Mapzen Terrain Tiles at registry.opendata.aws

5.  Some of the blocks in the KML that I used have "excluded areas," ie. separate boundaries for sections within blocks that weren't to be planted.  Chat ignored those excluded areas when calculating average elevation.  Again, this happened without me asking it to.

Pretty amazing, if you ask me.

 

I decided to wrap up this activity by asking Chat to generate an Excel spreadsheet for me which listed the blocks in elevation order (from low to high).  It did so, including the rank, license and block number (which were embedded in the boundary line attributes), average elevation of the block, and number of samples that it took in order to come up with that elevation (often using thousands of sample on a single block).  Here's [almost] what the spreadsheet looked like:

 


Note:  I did edit this spreadsheet just slightly to turn it from one-column to two-column format, so the screen-snip could show you the entire thing in more detail.  I also centre-justified instead of left-justified the data in most cells.

What's especially impressive in this step is that I didn't tell Chat much about what I wanted in the spreadsheet, I just said to list the blocks ranked low to high.  Also, changing the shading on the cell backgrounds for the elevation column, to match the shading on the KML, was a really nice touch that it thought of.

---

So what's left to do now?  I bet that it would be easy to feed our KML back into Chat and ask it to create coloured polygons instead of coloured boundary lines.  But wait, maybe this wouldn't be easy - it wouldn't be able to have multiple colour-gradients across a single block polygon.  Perhaps it would break the full block polygon up into its special 20m grid, and shade each new sub-polygon appropriately?  I'll leave that to you to figure out.  I'm not going to bother with that step though, because I prefer the boundary-line approach.  Boundary lines let me see what's visible in terms of satellite imagery within the block, if such a layer exists.

By the way, remember that all of this armchair analysis is helpful for getting a better understanding of the surface profile of each block.  But in the end, the only way to truly understand the block is to go out and stick a shovel into the ground.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thursday, October 29, 2026

Using AI as a Learning Companion

This tip about using AI isn't related to tree planting!  It's just a general tip:  You can talk to it and use it as a learning companion.

To be honest, I rarely have actual "conversations" with AI Chatbots.  I really enjoyed the movie "Her" about one person's fixation with an AI entity, but I'm not looking for a friend to talk to.  However, there are times when conversations with an AI can be very useful for learning.  And this is such basic functionality, and so easy!

This afternoon, I was driving back to Cache Creek after a day of viewing planting blocks north of Merritt.  A truck towing a trailer with a Cat 305.5E mini-excavator passed me on a hill.  I thought to myself, "This is a perfect time for a learning opportunity, since I'm driving for the next hour."

I pulled over then opened my OpenAI app on my cell, and navigated to my "Dot."  I guess I can explain my Dot as an "ongoing, proactive personal assistant" (and I wouldn't be surprised if Dots have a different name/title within six months).  Regular chats in the OpenAI app tend to be query/response, but the Dot will reach out proactively and ask me questions or offer information.  To be honest, I find this to be a bit annoying, so I asked my Dot to always stay on standby, and don't initiate any conversations unless I'm asking something.  So I'm really using it more like a chat window.

Also, the app asked me to name my Dot, so I named it "Pale Blue Dot" in reference to a photograph taken by Voyager 1 in 1990.  That craft turned and took a very famous photo of Earth (at the request of Carl Sagan) as it was getting close to the edge of the solar system, and Sagan later used that photo as the cover of his 1994 book called, "Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space."

Back to the app:  I clicked the Telephone icon on my screen, and started to speak with my Dot.  Be careful if you're doing this:  I haven't calculated the bandwidth required for an hour of conversation, but it could potentially impact your cellular data plan.  Luckily, I was running with a Starlink dish on the dashboard today, so I wasn't using any of my data plan.

I should also point out that you don't need to use a Dot for this sort of activity.  You can use regular chat windows, through ChatGPT Voice, Gemini Live, etc.

 


If you're trying to think of what kind of conversation to have with your AI app, think of something that you'd like to learn.  Ask it to teach you to speak Spanish, or to discuss how healthy various types of cooking oils are, or to explain the parts found in the frame and suspension of a car, or to explain why wombat poop is shaped like a cube.  Really, you can ask it anything.  A lot of planters like to learn things while listening to podcasts or audio books.  Imagine having a full-time conversational partner at your fingertips, who never gets tired of talking to you and teaching you, and who has immediate access to the entire encyclopedia of human knowledge (including lots of incorrect information).

There's nothing else that I can add to this suggestion, so that's it for this post.  But if you'd like to know what we talked about on my drive home today, here's a transcript:

  

Scooter:  I'm driving on the highway right now, and I just passed a vehicle with a cat 305 dot 5E on a trailer on the back. What can you tell me about that piece of equipment?

Pale Blue Dot: Oh, yeah — Cat equipment. Lemme check that quickly. Sounds like a Caterpillar three o' five point five E mini excavator. I'm pulling up its specs so I can give you the size and what it can do. It's about five and a half tons — around twelve thousand pounds — forty-four horsepower, digs to just under thirteen feet. Pretty capable for that size. Useful for digging trenches, drainage, landscaping — fits between buildings, but still packs some heft.

Scooter: So did you just say that was a 44 horsepower?

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, right around forty-four horsepower for that model.

Scooter: And so, roughly how much would a unit like that cost if I were to buy one somewhere in Eastern Canada, like New Brunswick or Nova Scotia?

Pale Blue Dot: Let's have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: I'll separate out prices for the older E-series from the newer models. Alright, for a used one in that range, I'd budget 50 to 70 thousand Canadian dollars pre-tax. There's a newer E2 listed in Moncton at sixty-six thousand seven hundred.

Scooter: Uh, when you say an E2, so is that the same sort of model? Is that like, is it a 305 E2? I don't know how the model numbers work. Maybe you could explain that for me.

Pale Blue Dot: Sure. Y-yeah, let me double-check how Cat labels those. Yes, it's a 305.5 E2 CR. The 305.5 is the model, the E2 means it's an updated version of the E series, and CR is Compact Radius — it doesn't swing out too far when it turns.

Scooter: Okay. Uh, in terms of equipment, are you able to determine how popular that model is, uh, or would people normally go with something with slightly smaller horsepower, like 30 to 35, or would a bigger horsepower like 65 to 70 be more common?

Pale Blue Dot: I'll compare what's common. Looking at size classes and what evidence there is for popularity. Excavators are usually... Smaller machines are more popular in general. That Cat is very mainstream though. It's popular too. Bigger ones have more digging depth and lifting ability, but they're harder to move around. You probably want to look at weight, digging depth, lifting capacity, not just horsepower.

Scooter: Okay, so for the 305 model, what uh, let's start with digging, what can it do for digging, what types of buckets does it have, and what kind of reach does it have?

Pale Blue Dot: Checking the digging and bucket specs. I'm using the 305.5 E we started with. Lemme check its reach and bucket options. Standard arm digs to about eleven feet four inches. The long arm, twelve feet eight inches. Reach along the ground is roughly eighteen and a half to nineteen and three-quarter feet. You can swap buckets for different jobs. Narrow toothed bucket for trenches, wider for moving soil, and a smooth-edged one for shaping slopes. You can also get ones that tilt sideways for slopes. It'll work through soil, gravel, clay. For solid rock you'd need a breaker attachment.

Scooter: And so for a breaker attachment, I think I've seen those before. Is that like a pin that faces down, a very thick metal pin? And if so, is it sort of a pneumatic like, does it, does it pound like a jackhammer? Or is it just the strength of the machine pushing down that does the work?

Pale Blue Dot: I think it's hydraulic. Let me check. Yep, that's the one. It's not pneumatic. Hydraulic pressure drives a piston inside, and that pounds the chisel over and over. You press it firmly against the rock, but it's really the repeated impacts that do the breaking, not just the machine's weight.

Scooter: Okay, and I assume does that machine have metal treads, tracks, I should say, or does it have rubber tracks?

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: It could be either. It came with rubber tracks as standard, but steel was an option. Rubber is gentler for pavement and lawns, steel is tougher for rock and demolition.

Scooter: So if I was working in the woods, uh, let's say I was working on a woodlot road and I was pulling out stumps and stuff like that, do you think the, the rubber track would be maybe be strong enough as long as I'm careful, or should I really just aim for a steel track right from the start?

Pale Blue Dot: Good question. Let me think through the trade-offs there. Rubber can handle woods, but I want to check the guidance on sharp debris. For occasional woods work, I'd favor steel, especially if you're building rocky roads or going over stumps all the time. But if you're only doing that sometimes, and you're also doing work around a house or driveway, then rubber could be a decent compromise. Being careful helps, but you can't eliminate hidden sharp objects. Steel won't give you more digging force, though. That's more about the machine's size and the soil conditions.

Scooter: How hard is it to change tracks from steel to rubber? Is that something that I could learn to do in my own shop, or is that something a professional has to do?

Pale Blue Dot: Let me check that.

Pale Blue Dot: Replacing like-for-like is one thing, converting between steel and rubber with this model is another. You could learn to do it if you're comfortable with the equipment, but it's not like changing a wheel. You'd need to make sure the machine can switch between them because some conversion kits need different rollers as well as tracks. You'll need to lift the machine securely, handle the weight of the track assembly, and get the tension right. I'd get a mechanic to show you the first time at least. I'd buy the tracks you expect to use most of the time, rather than switching back and forth. Rubber pads over steel might be a middle ground for occasional driveway work.

Scooter: Uh, how much does that particular machine weigh, the 305 E2?

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: I'll check the E2's weight — and distinguish it from the 305.5 we were discussing. With an enclosed cab, the 305.5 E2 we priced in Moncton weighs just under twelve thousand pounds. The slightly smaller 305 E2 weighs about eleven thousand four hundred pounds with cab.

Scooter: Okay, so I have a flat deck trailer already. Uh, it's a double axle, but I think it's, it might only be rated for 12,000 pounds. Maybe it's a 16 foot long, 12,000 pound trailer. Um, does that make sense? Like, I'm just thinking about axle capacities. I thought axles usually come in some standard capacities such as 3500, 5300, 7000. So, if if it's two axles and they're 5300s, that's certainly not a 12,000 pound trailer. But if they're 7,000 pound axles each, then it should be able to carry 14,000 pounds. So, does that get labeled as a 12,000 pound trailer because it accounts for the weight of the trailer itself also? And gives a little bit of headroom?

Pale Blue Dot: That's worth checking carefully. It's the gross weight, versus the payload. I'll grab a manufacturer's example. Yes, a sixteen-foot trailer rated for twelve thousand pounds makes sense. Six thousand-pound axles are common, so it could have two of those. The big thing is gross weight versus carrying capacity. If the plate says twelve thousand pounds, that means the trailer plus whatever's loaded on it. If the empty trailer weighs three thousand pounds, you have nine thousand left for equipment. Same for a fourteen thousand-pound trailer. You have to subtract its own weight. Axle ratings alone aren't the whole story. Check the trailer's plate. If it's twelve thousand pounds gross, it won't carry that excavator. Even with fourteen thousand, you have to account for the trailer's own weight. You might be remembering the gross rating, or the payload - but the plate will settle that.

Scooter: Okay, so I feel like, to be really safe and conservative, I probably need a flat deck trailer that can handle 16,000 pounds to be able to carry a a machine like that around, because that would be four thousand pounds for the trailer, should be more than enough, plus the twelve-thousand almost for the machine itself.

Pale Blue Dot: Let's check the math on that. Your arithmetic is right, but sixteen thousand pounds gross would be close to the limit, not conservative. You want enough payload for the machine as equipped plus everything you're carrying. Don't assume the trailer is under four thousand pounds. And the truck needs to accommodate the loaded trailer and the tongue weight. So that's a useful starting point, but I wouldn't choose a trailer on that figure alone.

Scooter: So I probably need an eighteen thousand pound trailer.

Pale Blue Dot: Let's see what that buys you.

Pale Blue Dot: Eighteen thousand pounds gross sounds better. If the trailer weighs four thousand pounds, that leaves fourteen thousand pounds of payload, so two thousand pounds for attachments and gear. Confirm the trailer's empty weight and payload, plus your truck and hitch ratings. But with those numbers checked, that should be a comfortable fit.

Scooter: Okay, so if I have an eighteen-thousand pound capacity trailer, pulling a machine like that, uh, what kind of truck, pickup truck do I need to pull that? I assume I'm going to need an F-350 heavy duty, or a th- thirty-five hundred series diesel Ram, probably. Does that make sense?

Pale Blue Dot: Let's check typical tow ratings. Yes, that's the right class, but the hitch type matters. Looking at bumper-pull versus gooseneck. Yes, a properly-equipped F-350 or thirty-five hundred series truck. Diesel makes sense if you're hauling a lot. But an eighteen thousand-pound trailer doesn't necessarily weigh eighteen thousand pounds loaded. With our numbers, you're towing about sixteen thousand pounds plus extra gear. At that weight, a bumper-pull trailer can put roughly sixteen hundred to twenty-four hundred pounds on the hitch. That uses the truck's payload along with passengers, tools, everything in the bed. For regular hauling, I'd lean toward a diesel dually for the extra payload and stability. Some single-rear-wheel one-tons can handle it, but we'd need the exact year, configuration, and hitch type to be sure about a particular truck. What's your truck?

Scooter: I haven't bought the exact truck yet, uh, and I I didn't catch one thing that you said. You said a thirty-five hundred or a three-fifty series. Did you say dually?

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, dual rear wheels for extra payload and stability. I was thinking regular hauling.

Scooter: Yeah, that makes sense to me. Uh, okay, so I'm going to need a heavy duty truck, that's for sure. And I'm going to need a bigger trailer if I were to buy a unit like that. Now, in terms of that unit, uh, the 305, uh, E2. Uh, sorry. What's the distinction between the 305 5 EE and the 305 E2? I think that's the two different models we we might have been talking about.

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, I blurred that. There are two separate distinctions: size, and generation. The one you passed was a 305.5 E. The Moncton machine was a 305.5 E2. Same basic size, but the updated E2 generation. That's the roughly twelve thousand pound, forty-four horsepower one. A 305 E2 - that's without the point five - is a smaller model. About eleven thousand four hundred pounds with cab and forty horsepower. So for the machine we've mostly been discussing, look for 305.5 in the name. The E or E2 tells you its generation.

Scooter: Okay, three-oh-five point five E2, I've got it. Now, what's the normal height of the deck above the surface of the road for a trailer like an eighteen-thousand pound flat deck like we were talking about? What's typical?

Scooter: Okay, three-oh-five point five E2, I've got it. Now, what's the normal height of the deck above the surface of the road for a trailer like an eighteen-thousand pound flat deck like we were talking about? What's typical

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: I'm looking at dimensions for both 'between the wheels' and 'over the wheels'.

Pale Blue Dot: Around two to three feet above the road.

Scooter: Uh, I think that'd be

Pale Blue Dot: Yeah?

Scooter: Okay, three feet above the road. So, I guess the next question is, once I have this ex-mini excavator, um, also, okay, let me interrupt myself. Is this called a mini excavator or is this something like a medium or how do the names work

Pale Blue Dot: Checking how it's described.

Pale Blue Dot: The 305.5 E2 is a mini excavator. Mini sounds funny for something that large, but it's small by excavator standards. Mini generally goes up to around 6 to 10 tonnes, then you get into midi, then full-size. For clarity with a dealer, a five-and-a-half-tonne mini excavator describes it well.

Scooter: Okay, so for the 305, point E2. What uh, let's say it's sitting on top of a trailer, how tall is it? Skipping, skipping the three feet of the trailer above the road surface, for just the machine itself, if it's parked in a configuration as if it was being transported on a trailer, what is the max, what is the clearance needed? Like, what's the maxi-maximum height above ground

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: About eight feet four inches in its normal transport position. That's the machine height with boom and bucket lowered, not including the trailer. On a deck three feet above the road, you're at about eleven feet four inches overall. Before going through a doorway, measure the actual loaded setup and allow extra clearance.

Scooter: Okay, so I would need a garage door opening that's at least 12 feet tall, and to be honest, I should probably look for one that's 14 feet

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: For the excavator loaded on the trailer, a twelve-foot opening gives you about 8 inches to spare. Fourteen feet gives you more room to work with. That means the clear opening with the door open. And if the ground slopes, that'll change the clearance as the trailer enters. If you're driving in just the excavator without the trailer, you only need to accommodate the eight-foot-four height plus clearance.

Scooter: Well, I can't really drive the excavator in on its own because that would chew up the driveway and also that's with the boom lowered and I- I can't drive when the boom is lowered. So obviously when it comes in and out of the garage, it's always going to be on a trailer

Pale Blue Dot: Good point. Let me check that again with the trailer in mind. So fourteen feet looks more comfortable, but we need to check the loaded height before finalizing the garage. Small correction to what I said earlier - you can travel with the boom low, but the bucket clear of the ground. But keeping it on the trailer makes sense for your driveway.

Scooter: Okay, so I'm getting into quite an investment here. So far, I need to buy the machine, I need to buy a bigger trailer, I need to buy a bigger pickup truck, and I need to build a bigger garage. Hmm. Perhaps I'm being overly ambitious here. Maybe I need to get a smaller machine that will work on my existing trailer, and that has uh, a little more clearance so I can put it into a twelve-foot door of my garage. What's uh what's the next model down from the 305, point E2? What's something in the thirty-five ton, oh sorry, thirty-five uh 3.5 ton range, or wait a second I'm confusing horsepower and ton ratings, aren't I? What's something in the thirty-five horsepower range

Pale Blue Dot: Let's have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: That excavator has brought some expensive friends. Right, so: weight is the useful starting point for your current trailer. In that older Cat line, the 303.5 E CR is worth a look. It's about 8,100 pounds with a cab, around 32 horsepower, and eight feet two inches tall. On a three-foot deck, that's eleven feet two inches overall, so that could work for a twelve-foot doorway, although it only saves a couple of inches. The bigger saving is weight, which may let you keep more of your existing equipment.

Scooter: What's the relationship between horsepower and tons? For example, I think the first one, the 305 E2, we talked about was forty-four horsepower, and it was called a five and a half ton machine. And so, this more recent one that you mentioned, you said it's about 32 horsepower. Does that mean that's probably roughly a four-ton machine

Pale Blue Dot: Let's have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: Roughly, yes. That particular one is 3.7 tonnes with a cab. But there's no fixed relationship between horsepower and weight. Bigger machines generally have bigger engines, but the weight includes the frame, tracks, counterweight, and digging equipment. Horsepower tells you how quickly the engine can supply work for the hydraulics. It's not a size conversion. The 303.5 E has about 32 horsepower, the 303.5 E2 about 23 and a half, but they both weigh around 3.7 tonnes. Choose the weight class for transport and stability, then compare digging depth, reach, lifting capacity.

Scooter: So I think the uh, the 305 point E2 that I saw, I believe it had a blade on the back and s-two because you can drive and use it like a plow, like a bulldozer, uh, but also I assume you can clamp it to the ground or push it to the ground and use it to help with stability when you're using the excavator arm. Is that correct

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, that's right. That's a backfill blade. You can use it to push loose soil and do light grading. You can also lower it firmly to the ground to stabilize the machine. It supports it, rather than anchoring it. And the cab and arm rotate independently of the tracks, so the blade can be in front or behind you, depending on which way you're facing.

Scooter: And so this backfill blade that you speak of, is that standard on most mini excavators or is that an extra cost

Pale Blue Dot: I'll check that.

Pale Blue Dot: It's generally standard. On the Cat models, the standard blade raises and lowers hydraulically. You'd pay extra for one that angles left or right to push soil to one side.

Scooter: Okay, let's think of some applications that I might use this machine for. Uh, the first application I think would be very easy. Let's say that I had a twenty foot long metal culvert that I wanted to install in a ditch uh to be able to create a roadway into my woodlot, but but bypassing the water in the ditch. Uh, And let's say this is a fairly big culvert, let's say it's uh 24 inch diameter, twenty feet long. Uh, I don't know how much that weighs, but uh, is it safe to assume certainly the mini excavator is going to be able to dig my ditch a little bit deeper so I can place the culvert into place quite easily. But, what about the weight of the culvert? Can I wrap a chain around it and then use the arm of the excavator to lift the culvert off the trailer and then manoeuvre it into place

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: That's a typical job for that size of machine, but the lifting capacity depends on how far out you're reaching. That length of culvert might weigh four or five hundred pounds. You can potentially lift it and move it into place, but the lift chart has to cover the entire movement, especially over the side. I'd use lifting slings, not just a chain around it. So yes, this is a good example where the smaller machine could be sufficient, assuming the weight, reach, and ground conditions check out.

Scooter: So I assume the safe way to lift this, uh, with the sling that you mentioned, would be to just lift it, say, a foot up in the air above the trailer, make sure it's stable, and then drive the trailer away out from underneath it, and then lower the culvert so it's closer to the ground, maybe two feet off the ground, before I start swinging the excavator around and moving it into place. And I would assume that I want to have the culvert, uh, fairly close to the machine, so the arm is not very extended throughout this whole process. Does that physics check out

Pale Blue Dot: Let's have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: Yes — short reach and low height is good. Make a small test lift first, just enough to clear the trailer, to check balance. Then lower it to the minimum practical clearance, not a fixed two feet. Pulling the trailer away can work with a coordinated operator and driver, so long as everyone stays clear. But a good test lift doesn't prove the whole move is safe. You still need the lift chart to cover the weakest position along the route, especially when swinging over the side. Keep the excavator on firm, level ground with the blade positioned as the chart requires.

Scooter: Tell me about this lift chart. I kind of have a concept of what this probably means, but explain it to me as if I'm 10 years old

Pale Blue Dot: Let's have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: Imagine holding a heavy grocery bag against your chest. Pretty easy. Now hold it straight out with your arms out. Much harder, and it can pull you off balance. An excavator works the same way. The lift chart is its "how much can I hold now" table. You look up how far out, how high or low, and whether you're over the front or the side, and you get a weight limit. If your culvert's a thousand pounds beside the trailer, but only six hundred pounds when you swing toward the ditch, six hundred is your limit. Those are pretend numbers, just to explain it. And you count everything hanging from the lifting point, including slings or a bucket. It's a table of limits, not something you find by trial and error.

Scooter: That's a really good idea. I assume something like that is pasted inside the cab

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that quickly.

Pale Blue Dot: There usually is a lift chart decal inside the cab. The operator's manual also has the charts. On a used machine, I'd check it's there, readable, and matches the machine's configuration, especially the arm length.

Scooter: Let's talk about the cab of the machine for a few minutes. What uh, so this particular model, the 305 E2, it looked like it had a full enclosed cab for comfort. So I assume that's partly for rain or for cold weather, for hot weather. You know, does it have a heater inside? I must assume it must have a heater. Does it have air conditioning

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, with an enclosed cab, you get a heater and windshield defroster. Air conditioning varies. The Moncton one does. That enclosed cab keeps rain and wind out, which helps in any season. In the summer, AC's useful because you're sitting inside a little glass room and it gets warm quickly.

Scooter: Okay, going back to the uh capabilities of the machine, we talked about putting a culvert in, what about uh, so I've got a road on a wood lot, which I cut all the trees off the road, uh, it's about 18 feet wide and I don't know, it's pretty long, it's several thousand feet long. Um, but I cut the trees off about s-five years ago, and I wanted to give it some time for those stumps to rot out somewhat, uh, in the meantime I've gone in there twice with a brush saw and just nipped off all the uh, the new growth, the suckers that were starting to come up in the road. Considering the condition that those stumps are probably in right now, uh, I'm thinking an excavator might be useful to go through that road and kind of claw out the stumps, turn them upside down. Uh, I don't know if they'll rot as quickly if they're exposed to the air, but, you know, maybe I can pull some of the bigger ones out and actually lift them and scoop them and just put them off to the sides of the road, and then from that point on, I'll have a road which really doesn't have as much in the roadbed, and so maybe I could use, do you think I could use the backfill blade on the excavator to smooth it out partly? Or would I probably be better off to use the excavator to clean out the stumps, and then afterwards come in with a light bulldozer to smooth everything off

Pale Blue Dot: Let me have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: Removing the stumps makes sense, but how much grading and drainage will the road need afterward? I'd lean toward the second approach. Excavator for the stumps, then a small dozer for shaping the road. Five years may soften some stumps, but some will still be hard. The excavator could loosen them, but big ones could be slow. A thumb would help move the stumps after loosening. It's not just smoothing though — you're filling stump holes with suitable mineral fill and compacting it, plus drainage. Turned-over stumps won't necessarily decay faster, but moving them out of the roadbed is useful. For a rough ATV trail, the excavator might be enough. For a dependable pickup access road, the excavator followed by a dozer is stronger. What diameter were most of those trees?

Scooter: I don't think they were very many at all that were greater than maybe, 10 inch diameter. So, they're not huge stumps. Let's say there's five or six big ones that were, uh, s- fourteen inch across. I still think that's a small enough stump that the excavator could probably pull it out at this point

Pale Blue Dot: Let's see.

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, that sounds more approachable for the smaller excavator. Mostly ten-inch stumps, only a few at fourteen. I expect you'd need to dig around each one, break some roots, and then roll it out. How quickly that goes depends on species and soil. Those sizes alone wouldn't rule out the smaller machine.

Scooter: Fuel is expensive these days, uh, and I assume this is a diesel machine. So, I guess the question is, if I'm using the machine for that kind of road work, uh, pulling stumps out, digging a little bit, uh, let's say I'm using it for eight hours per day. What do you think the fuel consumption in those eight hours would be if I ran non-stop

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that with the machines we've discussed,

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, it's diesel. I'm estimating for an eight-hour day with the smaller machine.

Pale Blue Dot: For the smaller 32 horsepower machine, I'd budget roughly thirty to forty-five litres for eight hours of stump removal. A hard day could be more like 46 litres. As a simple budget example, forty litres at two dollars a litre is eighty dollars — the price is just an illustration. The larger 305.5 E2 could use roughly thirty-two to sixty-four litres over eight hours, depending on how hard the work is.

Scooter: Oh, that's not bad at all. What's the uh, capacity of the tank on the machine? Because obviously I'm going to have to be uh, aware of how to keep it full. So maybe I need a portable tidy tank in the back of my truck

Pale Blue Dot: Let's see.

Pale Blue Dot: The smaller one has a forty-six-litre diesel tank. That could cover much of an eight-hour day, but you might need fuel before the end on a heavy day. A truck-mounted tank would be convenient if you're going up to the woodlot often. For occasional jobs, approved diesel cans could be enough. You might not need a whole other big purchase straight away.

Scooter: Going back to the truck and trailer, all of my trailers right now are bumper hitches. Uh, I assume a gooseneck, uh, because of the position at which it hooks on to the truck, a gooseneck's going to be a much, much better option for pulling around a heavy machine like this. Um, can you give-fill me in, teach me about gooseneck trailers, and the things I need to be aware of

Pale Blue Dot: Let's take that from the top.

Pale Blue Dot: A gooseneck can feel more stable with a heavy trailer, but it also puts more weight on the truck. For regular heavy hauling, yes, it's a better setup. The hitch sits over the rear axle instead of behind it, which gives the trailer less leverage over the truck. But more of the trailer's weight rests on the truck, so it's harder on the payload. A few differences matter. You need a truck-specific, frame-mounted hitch, and the bed space becomes more restricted. A fuel tank or toolbox has to clear the trailer neck when you turn. The trailer may weigh more empty, so compare the actual payload rather than the gross ratings. For the larger excavator and frequent hauling, I'd seriously consider it. For the smaller machine, a bumper-pull might be reasonable and let you keep your current setup.

Scooter: For the gooseneck attachment in the back of the truck, how much, how wide is it typically, and how much clearance is it above the bed of the truck? Because I'm just thinking sometimes I use a water tote inside the -Sometimes I use a water tote inside the back of the truck for watering trees. Um, I assume, that would be very difficult. I wouldn't be able to put the water tote on top of the gooseneck, uh, because the bottom of the water tote has no real gap where the gooseneck, uh, receiver would fit into. So, thinking about that, there is another, uh, reason why a bumper hitch would be a little bit better

Pale Blue Dot: Let's have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: Many gooseneck hitches are removable, so you can get a flat bed for your water tote. You can choose one that leaves the bed flat when you're not towing, so the tote's not necessarily a problem. The hitch ball's only about two and five-sixteenths-inch in diameter, and only sticks up a few inches. On models like the B and W Turnoverball, you remove or invert it when it's not needed. Check the installation for any support requirements under the tote, but swapping between watering days and hauling days can work well.

Scooter: Let's look into pricing of trailers. Uh, can you look into a website, a specific website for me? Check out, check out Down East Trailers dot com. That's for a company called Down East Trailers, which is located in Sackville, New Brunswick, and a friend of mine, Justin, owns that. So are there any gooseneck trailers that you can see listed on his website right now? And if so, what kind of towing, what kind of weight capacities do they have? And what are the corresponding listed prices for those trailers

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: I found an in-stock gooseneck with three 7,000-pound axles. It's nineteen thousand four hundred ninety-five dollars. They don't give the empty weight or payload, though, just the axle capacity. That's the only one listed as a gooseneck in stock. It's a twenty-foot plus two, or maybe twenty-foot plus five trailer. They say both. About nineteen and a half thousand dollars, but the exact payload is still to be confirmed. It has electric brakes on all three axles.

Scooter: Okay, but if the axles are each seven-thousand pounds, that's a good sign that the carrying capacity is probably close to twenty thousand pounds

Pale Blue Dot: Let's check that carefully.

Pale Blue Dot: It's a good sign that it's substantial, yes, but it won't be twenty thousand pounds of payload. If the gross rating were twenty-one thousand pounds and the trailer weighed five thousand, that would leave sixteen thousand for equipment. Those are example numbers. The manufacturer's gross rating can differ from the combined axle ratings because a gooseneck transfers some weight to the truck. So we need the plate and empty weight. It sounds promising for a twelve-thousand-pound excavator, but it's not twenty thousand pounds of carrying capacity.

Scooter: Either way, it should still be more than enough headroom for a twelve-thousand pound machine, I would hope

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that.

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, it looks promising. I'd just have Justin confirm the rated payload and ramp capacity for the excavator with its attachments, then we'll have a real number instead of "I would hope."

Scooter: I guess the next concern for me is that if I buy a pickup that's heavy enough to pull this, I'll be doing it through my business, so it's going to be registered commercially. In addition, it's going to be registered the-the pickup is going to be registered for more than 4,500 kilograms. I'm pretty sure. So because of that, that means I'm going to have to stop at scales, scale houses. So I think this means that I'm going to have to start logs, compliance when I go through a scale. Does that make sense

Pale Blue Dot: Let's have a look.

Pale Blue Dot: That could bring commercial carrier rules into play. Scale stops and driver logs are separate. I'm checking New Brunswick's thresholds and local work exemptions.

Pale Blue Dot: Yes, you're right to think about this before you buy, but logs and scales are separate requirements. There's a local work exemption in New Brunswick that may let you use business time records instead of a daily log or electronic logger if you're always within a hundred miles of your home terminal and you return there each day. You'd still need to keep certain records for six months. I haven't confirmed the scale threshold for your proposed trailer, so I wouldn't rely too much on the ten thousand-pound figure. Would this mainly be local woodlot hauling with daily returns home, or longer trips across provincial boundaries? That affects the exemptions.

Scooter: So you're saying that if I return home each night, and as long as I'm working within one- hundred miles, is that correct, or is that kilometers? One hundred miles of my home base, then I may be partially exempt from driver logs, um, but does that have to relate to certain hours of the day or does that mean I could go out at 5:00 in the morning and come back at 9:00 at night

Pale Blue Dot: I'll check that carefully.

Pale Blue Dot: It's a hundred miles as a radius from your home terminal. That's a hundred and sixty kilometres. The log exemption is about the paperwork, not the hours. There's no particular start or finish time you have to stick to, but you still have to keep within the driving and working hour limits. Generally, you can't drive after thirteen hours of driving, fourteen hours on duty, or sixteen hours since your qualifying rest, whichever comes first. So if you start at five in the morning and work throughout, including excavator work and loading, you'd reach fourteen hours on duty at seven in the evening. So you couldn't then drive the truck home at nine. Genuine off-duty breaks can change that, but just spending the day off the highway doesn't stop the clock. Returning home each night is one condition of the exemption, but on its own it doesn't make a sixteen-hour day permissible.

Scooter: Okay, and will these rules be changed if I cross over into Nova Scotia? Because Nova Scotia is a different province. It's very close to my home, so it would still be within the hundred mile radius, but because it's a different province, I'm concerned that different rules might pick in at that point

Pale Blue Dot: Let's check that.

Pale Blue Dot: Crossing the border doesn't necessarily end the exemption, but it does change who's regulating it. The federal hours-of-service framework also has a radius-based exemption, so the border doesn't automatically trigger the electronic log. You still need to meet all the conditions and keep the time records. So a local trip from Sackville into nearby Nova Scotia could still qualify. Carrier registration, inspections, and scale reporting may differ, though, so we need to check those separately for cross-border hauling.

Scooter: Are we allowed to do paper logs in both provinces? I thought electronic logging devices were required in the truck in at least one of the two provinces, but I don't really know

Pale Blue Dot: Checking that. 

 

I pulled into the motel at this point, and ended the conversation.

For my next AI blog post, I'll go back to something more directly related to tree planting.

 

Saturday, October 24, 2026

Using AI to create Polygons & Caches before Planting a Block

If you're a crew leader, you're probably very accustomed to the tedious task of creating a number of polygons on a block before planting, then calculating how many trees are needed for each polygon, then creating pins for caches with data attached to the pins to show the size of the piece and the predicted number of trees.  It's a fun task, until you've done a few hundred blocks.  Then it gets to be tedious and boring.

What if you could automate this task?  And even better, have KML files generated for you that match your traditional style for cutting up blocks?

This is my suggestion (I haven't tried this yet):

1.  First, collect block maps from about two dozen different sources.  Don't collect them all from a single contract/source, because having a variety of underlying map designs will help improve the skill of your model when running into new designs.

2.  Next, decide on your "parameters" or preferences & limits.  For example, I might decide:  (a) No polygons smaller than 1200 trees; (b) No polygons larger than 4600 trees; (c) Make sure that 60% of polygons are between 1800 and 3600 trees, with 20% between 1200 and 1800 and 20% between 3600 and 4600; (d) If the map has a prescription that indicates multiple species, ignore that and simply calculate the number of trees for each piece, based upon the size of the polygon in hectares multiplied by the target density in stems/hectare.

3.  Spend a few hours creating sets of polygons which roughly follow the above rules, going through one block map at a time and manually creating polygons.

4.  Create caches based on where you think the best locations are.  Use some sort of standard naming convention for cache pins, ie. the Aviation alphabet, a numbering system, etc.  For each pin, include the metadata in the label which includes the size of the piece (polygon), the target density, and the trees required for the piece.

Once you have all of these set up, go into your AI (such as Work if you're subscribed to OpenAI, Co-Work if you're subscribed to Claude, or Spark if you're subscribed to Gemini).  Tell it that you want it to learn your preferences for generating polygon and cache pin data from block maps, and that you're going to feed it a few dozen examples of KML files that you created based upon studying specific block maps.  Tell the AI that you don't want it to analyze yet, but you're going to feed in all the maps and KML's first.  Make sure that the file names are designed in a way to ensure that the AI correlates them properly, ie. "Block 01 map.pdf" and "Block 01 layout.kml"

 


 

After Work has all of the files, ask it to correlate all block maps with the relevant KML's that you created, and analyze your patterns in creating polygon layers, because you want it to be able to do the same thing in the future.

Once it has analyzed all of your files, give it a fresh map and ask it to create a block layout kml for that block, with a specific set of preferences for that exact block (which may vary slightly from what you were mentally aiming for above).  As an example, use this prompt:

Now that you see the patterns that I use when creating Planting Piece Layout KML's, I want to give you a new block map and have you create a layout for me.  Keep the following rules and preferences in mind:

1.  Rule - polygons must cover the entire block, and must not overlap each other.

2.  Rule - the target density for this block is XXXX stems per hectare. 

3.  Rule - no pieces/polygons can be smaller in size than that which would create a 1200-tree piece, based upon the target density that I just provided.

4.  Rule - no pieces/polygons can be larger in size than that which would create a 4400-tree piece, based upon the target density that I just provided.

5.  Rule - for each polygon that you create, name the polygon according to a series starting with "Piece 01," then "Piece 02" and so on.  In addition, the size of the piece (in hectares) and the number of trees required (at the target density) should be included in the name of each polygon.

6.  Rule - for each Cache that you create, add a name using the aviation alphabet going through in sequence, ie. the first cache should be called Alpha, the second cache should be called Bravo, etc.  In addition to the Cache name, the name of the pin should include which polygons it services, and the total number of trees required, ie. "Alpha, services pieces 07 and 11, needs 7,941 trees."

7.  Rule - cache pins can only be created along the border of a piece.  In addition, cache pieces should always be located on a road or trail.

8.  Preference - I'd like approximately 20% of the polygons to range between 1200 and 1800 trees in size, approximately 60% of the polygons to range between 1801 and 3600 trees in size, and approximately 20% of the polygons to range between 3601 and 4400 trees in size.

Now this is starting to get complicated.  I'm approaching this concept theoretically, without having tried it yet.

Hold these thoughts.  I'm going to have to create a set of block maps and piece layers myself, and see how the AI model responds.  I'll do all the layers on my next cross-country flight in early November.

I'll revisit this post as soon as I get this done.  I'm also thinking that instead of turning this into a Skill, maybe I can take this even further and develop a standalone app that lets a user submit a map, and then the app creates a suggested block layout.

 

 

 

Friday, October 23, 2026

Initial AI Analysis of Seedling Box Delivery via Drone

For several years, I've watched the development of drone technology.  For a while, I thought that planting "trees" by drone might eventually become feasible, although there were a lot of logistical challenges to overcome.  For instance, a drone can't plant trees, but it could drop seeds.

My two biggest perceived challenges with drone planting/seeding are:

1.  Supply chain shortages of available seed.  Seed quantities are limited in Canada, and if a drone needs to disperse multiple seeds in order to germinate one tree, that's a lot of wasted seed.

2.  Gravity.  The biggest effective constraint on drone operations is flight time and battery costs.  Why fight against gravity?  In my mind, that's a lot of wasted energy.  Perhaps a better solution is the use of robots, which would require much more processor power and advanced electronics and skeleton, but which wouldn't be wasting energy trying to stay aloft.  But that's a discussion for another post.

One area that I think holds a lot more promise is the use of drones for delivering boxes of seedlings to difficult-to-reach areas.


 

To be clear, I think that delivering boxes of seedlings by drone is a really small niche opportunity.  ATV's are obviously the best option for delivering trees, in terms of pure economics.  There are safety costs, and mechanical costs, and there is some terrain that is not accessible by ATV.  But generally, tree delivery by ATV is a great choice on most projects where you don't have truck-to-edge access.

I also use helicopters constantly, and I like helicopters.  Helicopters can deliver large numbers of seedlings very efficiently.  Helicopters are great for moving trees into areas that ATV's can't reach.  Of course, a drawback is that helicopters are very expensive.  A good medium such as an A-Star or a 407 is probably around three thousand dollars per hour, depending on the exact machine/company/location and whether that's a wet or dry rate.  Many companies also have a four-hour minimum rule on billing (unless you're a regular client), which means that you want to use the machine for more than four hours per day or else your per-hour costs suddenly start to skyrocket artificially.  So if you're going to bring in a helicopter, you need to be mentally prepared to sign invoices for at least twelve thousand dollars per day, and sometimes double that.

Drones that can move tree boxes are not cheap, and the cost of the drone airframe is a fraction of overall operating costs.  You can pretty quickly get into a six-figure cost for a robust industrial drone setup for tree delivery.  So you'd need to move a lot of boxes with that drone in order to justify the costs.  Using very rough numbers, if a drone system costs $100,000 then you need to figure out "how many boxes can I move with a helicopter for $100,000?"  Let's say that you have thirty hours of heli time for that price, and the machine can move at least 200 boxes per hour to the block (depending on distance, sling size, box weight, etc.).  That means that your drone system would have to be able to move six thousand boxes to be competitive with helicopter pricing.  And that's just not happening with a drone.  Helicopters are better.

Back to the niche opportunity for drone delivery:  What is the niche?  Well, you need to think about blocks where an ATV simply can't move the trees (perhaps there's a river in the way, or the block is full of muskeg).  And on top of that, the block would need to be small enough that a helicopter isn't efficient.  You wouldn't want to pay for four hours of flight time to bring a helicopter into a block, just to fly 18 boxes and then go home.  And voila, that's where the opportunity for drone delivery might come into play.

I was thinking about all of this a few days ago.  I decided to throw a query at ChatGPT (on medium effort) to try to learn more about the issues involved.  I told Chat that I wanted to know what drone systems currently exist that would be capable of delivering boxes of trees, and their costs.  I gave it a few parameters, such as the typical range of average box weights (thirty to fifty pounds), the hypothetical distance from roadside to drop-off point (I said that 500m might be common, but to also think about longer flights such as 1200m).  I mentioned elevation gain (no more than 150m across the 500m horizontal distance) and the fact that there would be cargo going out, but the drone wouldn't have to carry anything when returning to the home point.

Once I got an answer to the query above, I fed that answer back into Chat on the Pro heavy-thinking setting, and asked it to fully analyze the feasibility of delivering boxes by drone using the systems that Chat itself had suggested to me.  I told it that I wanted a full research report with budgeting, no more than sixty pages in length.  I came back a while later, and Chat had produced this spreadsheet and this PDF research report for me:  (click to download)

www.replant.ca/docs/Drones_-_Seedling_Drone_Operational_Financial_Model.xlsx

www.replant.ca/docs/Drones_-_Heavy_Lift_Seedling_Delivery_Feasibility_Report.pdf 

 

The spreadsheet has a lot of weaknesses.  I was both impressed by it, and simultaneously not impressed.  The level of depth is interesting.  However, some of the numbers don't make a lot of sense.  Compared to watching Chat version 4 struggling with spreadsheets 18 months ago, the current models are at least 100x more capable now.  But they still have a way to go.  I think by the time a Chat 7.0 is released (if such a model is shared with the public) then we'd see a fully polished and accurate spreadsheet.

The PDF report is better.  It still has weaknesses.  For example, to touch on a very minor flaw, it made reference to "the existing Honda generator."  That makes no sense for most people.  But Chat remembers that I own a Honda EB10000C generator on the east coast, and assumed that the reader of the report would have access to that.  And to touch on a very major flaw, Chat assumed that I was trying to replace ATV's with drones, and recognized that this was not economically feasible.  It didn't realize that I was questioning whether drone delivery could be an effective complement to ATV delivery in a limited number of certain special cases.

 

Overall, the biggest value in this exercise, for me, was that the Feasibility Report gave me a lot of food for thought.  It has errors, but it has a lot of material that made me consider a lot of other questions.  The report was enough to kick-start my quest to learn whether drones might really work for delivering boxes in the future.

Six months from now, maybe I'll know enough to be able to write a proper prompt to give me a much better document outlining the current capabilities of drones in tree planting.  And by then, the AI models will also be a lot smarter and give better information.

 

Thursday, October 22, 2026

Simple Transcription of Block Viewing Notes while using AI

This next tip for using AI is a pretty simple one.  You can use it to transcribe notes.

Everyone is accustomed to the idea of buying a small voice recorder to carry around and make notes to yourself (I used to have one that used mini-cassette tapes).  More recently, cell phones have all kinds of free apps on them which work as basic digital voice recorders, ie. apps such as Parrot, Easy Voice, Google Recorder, etc.

Up until around 2019, these apps worked purely as recorders, until Google Recorder introduced transcription services.  But that capability was not well-known for years, and it was really only around 2024 that transcription started to explode (possibly mostly due to the massive popularity of Samsung Voice Recorder).

You're probably wondering why I'm saying that the use of AI to transcribe spoken recordings is notable?  Well, it's not that notable.  But you can step things up a notch.  Keep reading below.

 


 

Let's pretend that I'm out looking at a contract, and I need to visit a few dozen blocks and make notes.  I can start a new AI chat (using the lowest-power Instant setting) with the following prompt:

I'm starting the viewing of a tree planting contract.  The contract number is PL26CCF001.  I'm going to be visiting hopefully all of the blocks on this contract over the next day or two.  As I get to each block, I'm going to give you the unit number first, then my stream-of-consciousness thoughts about the block.  I don't want you to do anything except save my notes - no analysis, no rewriting, no editing please.  Once I'm done, I'll probably ask you some specific questions at a later date.

Now, as I visit each block, I can enter notes for that block.  At this point, keep in mind that I'm sending my queries and notes as spoken prompts, not entering text on the phone.  For example:

I just looked at unit CCF 050.  The schedule B says that this one is three species, with an elevation range from 1100-1390 meters.  It calls for 70,560 trees.  The target density is two thousand stems per hectare but they’re expecting us to achieve about eighteen hundred stems, so they’ve noted a tiny bit of regen.  I agree with this assessment.  This is standard burned mature forest, but it’s a bit ugly.  I drove the truck to this. I shouldn’t have. I got trapped in a spot that was either going to need hours of chain saw to get ahead to a turnaround, or a 12-point turn on the side of a cliff. The proper play here is to park 400m before the tiny north piece and then walk/ATV in. A couple trucks can park where they would turn from the blue road showing on the block map. We might might be able to clear out the brown road on the overview for side-by-sides with one day of work for two people. However, the side-by-side trailer would probably need to be turned around by hand up at the top.  Anything past unit CCF 054 is 350’s only.  The small crews will have to do this block, because 550’s shouldn’t come to this one.  Only plant this block when the roads are dry.  It’s a sketchy road, unless you come in by side-by-side for the last four kilometers.  This will be one of the last blocks on the contract due to the elevation. Maybe we’ll run out of trees before getting to it though.  Mental note – try to run out of trees before getting to this one.  The bottom of this block is very steep.  This one is pretty tricky.  Better make sure the planters get twenty-six cents per tree on this one.

Then I'll enter that, and Chat responds with something like, "I've received and saved your notes for CCF 050.  I have not done any analysis.  I'm ready for your next block."  At this point, I move to the next block.

A day or two later, once I'm done the same thing with every block, I'll start with a simple query like this:

Help me preserve my original notes by combining all of my comments to date in this Chat and formatting them into a single large text box that I can cut and paste into a Word document.

At this point, I don't even ask Chat to create the Word document, simply because at the moment, that's currently better accomplished in Work than in Chat.  But if I wanted to go that route, I'd prompt with "Let's move this to Work, and please create a Word document for me ..."

At this point, we still haven't accomplished anything other than a fairly fancy transcription of notes, moved into a Word document.  No big deal.  But at this point, Chat has all my thoughts about the contract.  Let's up the game slightly now, with this prompt:

Can you move all of these notes to Work please.  I'm also attaching the Schedule B1 from the forester.  I'd like you to perform the following tasks:

1.  Take my planter prices from my viewing notes and insert them into the Bid Price column (column L) in the Schedule B1.  Do the math for the block sub-totals too (column M).  Do not alter anything else on the sheet.  Do not edit or change any existing cells on the spreadsheet other than in columns L and M.  Give me a link to download the edited spreadsheet.

2.  Create a short one-page summary report detailing all recommended helicopter needs for the job, as per my notes.

3.  Create a short one-page summary report detailing all of my trail-cutting needs for the job, as per my notes.

4.  Create a short one-page summary report detailing where we're going to need side-by-sides for the job, as per my notes.  Ensure that this report identifies how many trees are related to these needs.

Now you can see why using AI for transcription really speeds up your eventual work flow.

 - Scooter

 

PS:  Send me an email at scooter@replant.ca with your suggestions on how you use AI in tree planting, and I might incorporate them into this series of blog posts.  I'd love to get some good private discussions happening too.