Old school vs. new school of forestry..

[chain]

An interesting management decision in our Forest Management Plan. In a cruise of our forest twenty years ago the forester recommended to take out most all hickory in our Oak-Pine timber. This past year another forester stressed the same management aimed  against the hickory, as in some areas hickory is becoming the dominant species.

Yet, as we were lining up some TSI work and I showed the young forester-in-charge the previous recs of heavy thinning of hickory, he said, "that's old school, our recs today is, "save any tree of saw-timber size."

So, any of you old school foresters run in to the new school wisdom?

[Ron Wenrich]

I must have been ahead of my times.  I always felt you grew the best tree suitable for the site.  A lot of the foresters from my era opted to manage for the current market.  I always felt that markets weren't a static thing, as I had been caught in an era where red oak was considered a junk tree, but 5 years later it was worth more than anything else in the woods.  I was a procurement forester at the time and was told not to buy red oak, only tulip poplar. 

There were several foresters of my ilk.  I would remove lower quality trees first from my thinnings.  These would be due to form.  I also did have a prejudice against certain species like black gum and beech.  There were quite a few consultants that used to manage for species.  The guys in the cherry belt, I really couldn't fault.  They were in the best cherry country in the world, it was a high end tree, and markets are well established for centuries.  I would say the same for good walnut sites in the Midwest.

But, those that managed for tulip poplar back in the '60s and '70s had some lean years when red oak became king in the area.  Much could be said the same about ash management.  I also know quite a bit of good maple was culled out because it was "junk".  Markets are cyclical and forests are a long term crop.

I'm not sure I would abide by the "if it makes a sawlog" philosophy.  Some species are best left as a minor component of the stand.  A mixed forests is often a better defense against disease and insects than relying on chemicals.

[Texas Ranger]

What Ron said, with the addition, go with species that have a history of selling in your region.  Hickory may be a historic secondary tree in Missouri, it was back when I was managing for mastodon forage.

[OlympicYJ]

I guess I would be classified as a new school forester. I am a young guy finishing up my 4yr but have my 2yr. Anyways I know exactly what you mean. Here in WA they pushed Doug-fir hard and when I say hard I mean they didn't pay attention to site and just planted Doug-fir and then 40yrs later you go back and you're supposed to have a DF stand but instead you have cedar, hemlock, and silver fir. This was especially true of the ownership I started working on in tech school. It's mostly good hemlock and cedar ground but they did get doug-fir to grow. Since doug-fir was pushed heavily and alder was considered a weed we have an abundance of doug-fir and a shortage of alder region wide. Alder is now worth more than the doug-fir. There seems to be enough hemlock to meet the demand now. I'm a fan of planting what will do the best on the site and to look at what grew there naturally. Cedar is kind of funny, there aren't many markets and the demand and price really don't fluctuate very much.

[chain]

All great answers to consider. Areas that may have been high-graded previously have left areas of secondary wood, like gum, maple, hickory. We were always careful not to high-grade but guess what? Mother Nature did her little hi-grading thing with Oak decline, droughts, the Asian invasion, and what we are now getting is more secondary species, mostly pallet grade.

We are having difficulty with regeneration of the major species except Short-leafed pine. The oaks we're truly worried about, so were my old foresters.

[KBforester]

There is a lot of historic data out there that could be considered to decide what a "good species mix" consists of. Up here in northern New England, Yellow birch was once looked at as a junk tree. If my memory serves me, in the early part of the 20th century the forest service sent people out into the white mountain national forest to girdle all the giant yellow birch, because they thought it was junk. Well not too long after a veneer market formed, and they have scene been looked at as highly valued. I have almost no familiarity with hickory, but today's junk can be tomorrows treasure. Diversifying your forest is like diversifying a stock portfolio. Just avoid the species with high probability of disease.

[mesquite buckeye]

My opinion is you better have a mix in your forest, or you won't have a forest to mix in when the next plague comes along. Many of the so called junk species were at one time prized, examples: hickory stands depleted for building vehicles, resulting in vehicles made of steel; redcedar stands depleted for pencils, resulting in the market seeking alternative species.

NRCS in Missouri considers redcedar and honey locust nuisance species, and won't allow their planting without some arm twisting even though they are native trees.

If we produce the highest quality trees possible from our forests, regardless of species, markets can be created. If you don't have a product worth seeking, no one will seek it.

[terry f]

    When thinning, my first two trees to go are lodgepole and white fir. White fir probably grows twice as fast as anything I have, but has always been $100 or more under the price of doug fir, larch and PP. The last price guide I got they were all equal. What KBforester said about disease is true, in that every "big" tree I've lost to bugs or root rot has been a white fir, so I'll keep favoring the big three. Even the spruce has come up in value, we'll see how long this lasts.