Timber prices in 2026: use the right date and comparison

What the 2026 indicator actually means

On 6 July 2026, France Bois Forêt published its announcement of the indicator covering 2025 standing-timber prices in private forests. The publication year does not turn those observations into October 2026 transaction prices. Keep the two dates separate in your notes.

Use an annual reference to understand context. To inform a current asking price, also look for evidence closer to the planned sale date and relevant supply area. A report title alone does not establish when the timber changed hands or whether the comparison matches your location.

An actual sale observed in June 2026

The CNPF note on the Meymac sale of 4 June 2026 reports these results for homogeneous Douglas fir lots:

These are categories within one sale, not a national tariff. The note defines homogeneous lots using at least 80% of the main species.

The same currency does not make prices comparable

As a separate land-market reference, Safer reports an average forest price of €4,950/ha for 2025. This does not measure a timber price. It cannot convert a timber volume directly into a woodland property valuation.

Why ranking species by price can mislead

Even where a table compares species, check whether the trees have comparable sizes, quality, origin and sale conditions. A mean based on large trees is not a price for young thinning material. The number of lots also helps establish how much weight to place on an observation.

Do not use those figures to rank whole woodland properties of equal area. Actual composition, volume, access and future expenditure still need examination. A useful comparison starts with the product being sold, then considers the price. The species name alone does not define the transaction.

Build a comparison sheet with seven columns

For each reference, record sale date, area, species, product or quality, individual tree volume, delivery stage and price. Add the source and any missing information. Set aside comparisons whose material differences cannot be explained. This preserves the context when you return to the figures later.

Consider a hypothetical comparison between large roadside logs and a standing thinning lot. Different prices do not demonstrate a market rise or fall. First reconcile the products and operations included. Transport, processing and work already completed cannot be ignored simply because both quotations use cubic metres.

Move from a market reference to your own offers

Describe your lot and volume assumptions before seeking comparable bids. Require the same scope, measurement basis and clear allocation of costs. Ask each prospective buyer to identify assumptions that affect its price rather than leaving them implicit in a headline amount.

A published sale result does not guarantee what your timber will achieve. It helps identify differences and ask useful questions about quality, access cost, timing, lot size and outlets. A properly documented enquiry produces evidence tied more directly to your woodland than applying a national mean to an uncertain volume.

Keep a dated dossier rather than a permanent price

Save the references consulted, access dates, transaction periods and characteristics that made them relevant. Update them as the project progresses, especially if tree condition, access or the selling timetable changes. A one-off observation is not an annual forecast.

When considering a harvest, assess market evidence alongside the management programme, stand condition and expected costs. When buying a French woodland property, add the land and rights analysis. The same market data can inform both decisions without determining either one. Keep the unresolved questions visible instead of hiding them behind a single estimated figure.