Hey Curtis & Richard

Thought I'd jump in... One of the most interesting things about timberframing in general and hewing in particular is that despite how small our little community is, the variations in methodology are vast. This was particularly evident at the hewing demos staged at Colonial Williamsburg back in '95 and reenforced as I've been lucky to practice with different folks over time.

For me hewing up high (just above waist high) always seemed the most natural choice in that it helps avoid prolonged periods of bending over and I still carry this over even to the scoring process. I've now practised this two man nordic tradition with four different partners, you simply are more efficient with far less wear and tear on the back.

I have to say I find It's a rare log which doesn't react to the process and have experimented with this on occasion, snapping parrallel lines and then streaching dry lines over them to gage change, with intent, failed to "box" the pith so as to allow the tension wood on one side to retract and minimize an unwanted curve, and have even snapped deviated lines to remove tension wood anticipating that those deviated lines would then straighten, almost always with excellent results. Curtis you may recall our doing this to that hybrid Oak you felled for the Malabarns' last Belly beam.

Most of the hewing I do anymore are the two curved faces on natural curves and usually remove the sapwood from the outside face first so no curve is lost.

I agree wholeheartedly that long stems are extremely "elastic" so much so they are hard to handle and I will break from the normal practice of working my way around a stick to hewing two opposite faces then snapping out both lines for the last two sides at the same time, before the stem becomes "wiggley". Nor do I hew to a line on the bottom face, but check with my visual plumb, rarely reaching for a bubble or a bob.