iDRY Vacuum Kilns

Sponsors:

MYTH # 3 — Are We Destroying Our Forests?

Started by Jeff, March 24, 2004, 12:23:32 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

crtreedude

Close planting of species like pine, etc can result in disease getting a foothold. We have an interesting problem in Costa Rica with Mahogany. If you grow Mahogany in as a monoculture, there is a particular moth whose caterpillar damages the tip of the trees when they are young, destroying the quality of the wood – unless you like burl.

If you plant the same trees among other trees, it will reduce the possibility of infestation.  If you plant some Spanish Cedar near by, they seem to prefer it. (Stronger smelling wood)

I just had someone write an article for our site who has been involved in reforestation in Costa Rica for I believe 30 years and is involved in Eco-tourism. He started off with mono-culture and then moved to natural stands. He makes much more on the tourism than he ever would just harvesting lumber – he has about ten thousand visitors a year.

I appreciated his article because he stated that in Costa Rica, since monocropping is preferable over pasture, it is an improvement in reforestation. However, cutting down a natural forest to replace it with a plantation is destroying diversity and replacing it with a crop – there is plenty of pasture land to plant trees on. Over 70% of Costa Rica is deforested, it seems to have slowed down or starting to reverse, but it required the intervention of the government to accomplish this. Quick money by cutting down rainforest was just too tempting, no matter how much you try and educate.

The problem with voluntary methods in my not so humble opinion is that there is always someone out there who doesn't care at all about the future, the stream nearby, etc. who in spite of what they know, will go for the quick buck. After they do it and nothing happens, there will be a flood of people who figure that it must not be wrong, since nothing bad happened to them.

One of the things it seems to me that is happening is that the value of the forest for recreation is becoming higher than the value of the wood. When you have a forest open for hiking, bird watching, etc., the value to the local economy may be much more than any potential income from a wood harvest. What would be the best of both worlds would be an education program for the public for them to realize that select harvesting of trees is as important as selective harvesting of deer. (Of course the environmental groups need to be educated about selective harvesting of deer.) Then the forest would server a dual purpose.


So, how did I end up here anyway?

SwampDonkey

Up this way its been a matter of survival for most folks that has resulted in clear cutting. In most cases to pay farm bills. If your livelihood, house and land in up for the auction block, what would you do for quick cash? Most folks do realize what is best for thier land , but it comes down to economics. I don't know about most folks on the forum, but I'm not one to try and enforce my ideals onto people trying to make a living. I can only participate in education and offering insight or alternatives. With a renewable resource such as wood I'm not so worried about tree species extinctions. I'm more concerned with animal extinctions. As far as growing quality wood, its mainly controlled by environmental factors and competition for resources that influence growth. Just because a tree has a crook in its trunk or is suppressed by over-topping trees doesn't make it genetically inferior. That's just non-scence.

Just my 2 cents worth  ;D
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

Ron Wenrich

The largest mill in our area will go out and cut any red oak 14" and up, and call it sustainable.  The remainder of the stand is whatever didn't make their quality list.  I think that falls outside the realm of environmental factors affecting quality.

The competition for resources has more to do with quality than it does for growth.  Stands don't get to the stagnation stages as often as in years past.  I find growth to fall when stands get too tight or overly surpressed trees are released.  Usually, they don't respond as well as a younger tree.
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

SwampDonkey

Ron:

Good call on the quality issue. I didn't explain that I meant stands that were not high-graded or slobber logged. Although, the remaining trees are not genetically inferior. ;)  But I don't agree with the competition for resources being controlled by quality. There's no correlation there, has more to do with age as you suggest. There has been $$Millions spent on tree improvement of softwoods and only a 4% genetic gain has been achieved. That's not much better than natural selection. And when I compare planted spruce to naturally occuring spruce on site, I see no significant difference. Government has to justify all the money spent to the public some how. But, I don't buy it. :)
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

Ron Wenrich

Slobber logged - I like that.   :D  Its right up there with timber pimps.  

I remember hearing somewhere that constant high grading was leading to inferior genetics in cherry.  It just wasn't as good as the old stuff.  I believe it was Norm Abrams on This Olde House.

Now, it could be a difference in growth rates.  I remember when you couldn't sell white oak veneer unless it had at least 8 growth rings per inch.  I also remember them telling me that ash had to have 11 growth rings per inch for hockey sticks.  You Canadians probably know more about that than me.   ;)

I've also seen discussions where old growth timber is supposedly better quality than new growth.  Old growth=slow growth.  But, I have never been able to substantiate that in print.
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

SwampDonkey

Ron:

I suggested adding 'slobber logged' to the forum dictionary in another thread but Jeff and Tom never picked up on it. I think its right up there with 'whack of logs'.  ;D

Here's a definition:

Slobber Logged- The use of harvest equipment in such a way as to injure residual trees so that they are of little or no economic value to future harvests. Trees may exhibit such mechanical injuries as scraping,  extreme bending, broken tops and uprooting.

I got a chuckle out of 'timber pimps' too.  ;)

I like ol' Norm, but he better stick to the workshop. All we have around here is poor black cherry trees, but you can saw some mighty fine lumber out of short pieces that don't have black knot. The wood is nice and pink like salmon. Too bad the finish turns the wood. :-/

Hmm never heard that about the ash, but it would be stronger with denser rings. White ash grows pretty fast up here too, not as fast as poplar though. If I had a choice, I'de take 100 acres of white ash over sugar maple. I do know that when you compare slow growth black spruce to plantation black spruce of the same age you will recover as much pulp from the smaller diameter slow growing black spruce. Too bad the mills don't pay more for the slower growing black spruce though. Latitude also influences wood properties more than elevation. There are many references in wood technology texts. As well as unpublished papers from paper mills.
There are lots of studied to compare strength and bending properties between slow growing wood and fast growing wood. I dought you'll find many on the web. You'll find articles in scientific journals though. But, I don't believe the differences you'll find within a species are earth shattering. I think a 5% difference is about it. But you'll find quite a difference in wood properties between different species. I wouldn't hazard a guess there.

Heck, I know one mill here that had a market in central america for its softwood lumber. But, they had to leave it out in the sun after being kilned to turn it yellow because they thought the lighter colored wood was inferior. :D :D Don't bust a stitch :D :D

cheers
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

Swing_blade_Andy

I find some of these ideas a little difficult to comprehend. As far as I was aware the difference between summer growth and winter growth is density mainly due to the rate of growth and the amount of water (bound).

Therefore the more winter growth per mm (inch) the denser the timber no matter what the species. SO slower gowing trees have more rings and therfore more proportion of winter growth, ergo density and better quality.

Or have I missed an important lecture that night when I had too many beers and found myself in a strange bed, in a stange city?

Anythings possible!!

Andrew

SwampDonkey

 :D :D

ermmm....winter growth?  ::)

You mean early wood and late wood probably Swing_Blad ;) We can't grow trees in winter up here in the temeperate. And latewood is denser wood, yes. Take oak and ash for instance, the early wood has larger vessels and gives the end grain the distinctive rings. In maple and beech, which are diffuse porous the larger vessels are dispersed throughout the grain but become tigher in the latewood. The slower the growth the denser and stronger the wood. As far as quality? Its a matter of application and mill specs. If its pulpwood, your not going to get more from the mill for slower growing trees with denser wood grain. On the other hand some markets prefer the northern pines to southern pine for lumber because of strength, but we are talking about different species there. ;)

cheers
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

Ianab

Only a 4% improvement in genetics despite a few millions being spent...  :o
Not a good investment for sure.
As much as Andy despises them, for Radiata pine in NZ the current figures are 30% improvement in volume and number of 'good form' trees increased from 45% to 80% over 'wild' stock. Now that basically means double the return at harvest time. Seedlings are also rated on disease resistance, branch internodal distance and timber density as seperate ratings.
You may look for fungus resistance in an area where this is a problem. If you aren't going to prune the trees the long internodal distance will increase the log value, but no good in a high wind area .. etc Of course you still get variation within a plantation, but the averages are WAY better.
This is choosing trees as a farmer would pick corn seed that best suited his land.
But if 8 growth rings a year puts buyers off.. imagine having One !

Ian
Weekend warrior, Peterson JP test pilot, Dolmar 7900 and Stihl MS310 saws and  the usual collection of power tools :)

SwampDonkey

IanAb:

Is that 30 % improvement from management interventions, selecting the most desireble trees from the population or actual genetic gain? If your going around collecting seed or cuttings from superior looking trees, that's nothing but culling trees from the existing wild population. And sure you can have a 30 % improvement over the average wild population. That does seem height though. Must have alot of variability in that species. But did you get a 30 % genetic gain from those new seedlings compared to their parents. errrmm I don't think so ;) With trees, a lot of times its nothing that man has done to improve the stock other than 'select' the seed from trees with desired characteristics from different locations. Its like me going around and buying up all the best looking holstein cows and pasturing them just to say mine are the best improved stock. But I didn't do the breeding. ;)  To say you have a 30 % gain, it has to come from in vitro breeding programs. Comparisons have to be made from one generation to the next or over several generations. :) Collecting seed from the wild, they still don't know which tree was the daddy. Alot of times they take cuttings instead, from mature trees and root them. Sometimes the growth characterics are not even genetics, just growing conditions. I'm wondering if they took the pine back and planted them on the sites they were taken from to see if its non genetic. I know that some areas in Europe where Scots pine were originally collected for Christmas tree growers here in Canada and parts of the US the form of the trees was terrible. This was definately genetics as it turns out. They since have found a better stock and the trees have much better form. But, we have some 50 year old Scots pine plantations that look like they came from mount Everest with a wind swept characteristics.

cheers
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

Ianab

Swamp
I understand your doubts, but this isn't a single generation seed selection thing, it's been done for the last 70 or 80 years. A pine here will produce seed in about 10 years, so thats a few generations.
For the breeding programs the trees are selectively bred, the cones are wrapped in plastic bags on the selected trees, and pollen collected and blown into the bag... so yes, you can know who the 'father' is.
You are right, collecting seed from good trees will only give a small improvement... I can believe the 4% number. But after doing that for 5 or 6 generations you can get some real improvement. Same as you will get by selectively breeding those Fresian cows for a few generations.
The management of the trees is a whole other story, with planting densities, fungus and weed spraying, pruning, thinning etc.
But with better seedling stock you are a step ahead no matter what management you apply later.

Ian
Weekend warrior, Peterson JP test pilot, Dolmar 7900 and Stihl MS310 saws and  the usual collection of power tools :)

SwampDonkey

Ianab

I can see your talking about an actual breeding program now. Our tree improvement programs are only 60 years old here, which represents 2 or 3 generations. But they tell me if they try to collect seed from immature spruce cones, they are mostly infertile cones without seed. In our seed orchards they look like young trees but they are actually physiologically mature because they are established from grafting or rooted cuttings. I know in plantations you get spruce producing alot of cones after 8 years of age. I've achieved the same result by transplanting young wild seedlings. I have basswood, ironwood, white pine, red oak, and red pine collected from the wild that produce cones, acorns or catkins at 10 years of age. I'm trying to grow basswood, but they are only 2 % viable from mature trees so its almost impossible. Oh well, I get to smell their blossums in July. :) The emerging cotyledons of a basswood seedling are palmately compound, for interest sake. :)

I don't know how we got onto the tree breeding program. My original post was related to residual tree quality after harvesting and weather they were genetically inferior. And also tree species extinctions. But, I've enjoyed the diverse responses. :)  :D  ;D
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

slowzuki

The mention of growth rings is something I know about:

The Canadian span tables were adjusted about 15 years ago to account for the average poorer mechanical properties of fast grown, wide growth ring trees typical of plantations.

Ken

crtreedude

Teak, which has been plantation grown for 200+ years, is almost always selected.  First they grow a variety of seeds in an area, then they pick the best and use them for cloning.

Teak produces seed in about 9 years so it isn't very difficult to collect them. The key is to get a good start from a local plantation (easy) and then handpick your clones after.

You don't want to get too narrow though, usually you pick the best 1,000 or some large number so that you have diversity. Picking your top 10 would probably be a bad idea.

The convential wisdom is that Teak needs about a three month dry season or they grow too fast. They definitely do not like their "feet" wet. There is some discussion about teak from old growth being better than plantation grown. It is become a moot point, there is very little old growth teak left. In fact, India is actually importing teak now. The physical characteristics for the same age wood has been shown to be the same.

Not that I think any of you are planning to grow teak in the anytime soon.  ;) You can only go so far in breeding!

So, how did I end up here anyway?

jrdwyer

I find various types of forest management, or lack of management in my area (southern IN, IL, and western KY).

As an example, I just finished marking a light selective marking on 200 acres for a family ownership. I marked about 2,500 bf/acre and left about 3,000 bf/acre standing. The average tree volume I marked was 270 bf/tree (Doyle); 100-200 bf for the junk removals and 400-500 bf for financially mature trees (70-80 years old). Mostly red oak, yellow poplar, white oak, hard maple, hickory, etc. The number of trees/acre marked was 9.7. This woods was also seclectively marked  20 years ago by another consultant and the current stand shows he and the loggers did a good job. TSI was done on the whole property right after the harvest and many of the girdled black locust are still dead and standing. Following this harvest TSI is planned again and the next harvest will be in 2024. So selective logging can work if the owners can forgo the immeditate $$$ and the forester can control his or her paint gun and the logger can control the felling and skidding.

Another large job I cruised and then marked several years ago was just the opposite of this one. The sole owner had passed away and the bank trust account objective was to sell almost all of the merchantable timber and then divide and sell the land. So I marked and measured all trees 14"DBH and up (left the pulpwood sized to attract more money at the land sale). On the upland tract this equaled 21.6 trees/acre with an average size of 118 board feet/tree and 2551 bf/acre cut. Mostly white oak, black oak, hickory with 70 years being about the average age (lots of rocky south slopes). On the bottomland tract of  this property I marked 28.3 trees/acre with an average size of 203 bf/tree and a total of 5,700 bf/acre cut. Mostly sweetgum, cherrybark oak, silver maple, and swamp chestnut oak with trees ages of 50-80 years. Following the harvest, the upland tract was divided up into 20-40 acre parcels and sold at auction. The bottomland tract with much swampland and poor access was sold in larger tracts geared toward the cropland.

Neither forest was destroyed in either of these examples, just harvested with different objectives. Both will naturally regenerate with many new hardwood seedlings. The light cut is going toward hard maple and beech and the heavy cut will be silver maple and gum (bottoms) and white and black oak (uplands). Obviously, the heavily cut tract will be growing small diameter, low value trees for the next 40 years while the light cut will be growing older, larger, and more valuable trees right away.

This is an important difference. As I observe what is going on with the finished wood products market, I see lots of low quality wood and some  high quality wood coming from everywhere. Home Depot is now selling finger jointed moulding and finish boards from spruce/pine plantations in Sweden and New Zealand and Chile instead of the traditional white or ponderosa pine or yellow poplar. Many stores are selling low to medium end furniture made from non-producing rubber plantation trees (rubberwood). Large diameter tropical hardwood trees of very good quality (Ipe, cumaru, and cambara) are being substituted for lower quality treated southern pines for outdoor decking. And finally, plantations thourghout the world are growing a bunch of  limby, rapid growth softwoods that will all be available for harvest in the next 20 years. F&W Forestry Services predicts a glut of chip-n-saw material in the south in 10 or so years due to all of the pine plantings in the late 80's and early 90's.
  
Of course, forest management of any type becomes secondary if land is divided up for 5-20 acre home sites, which seem to be happening even in very rural locations.

crtreedude

Interesting that you would bring up Ipe, this is a wood that the environmentalist are trying to stop places like the Jersey shore from using. The reason? The only way to get it is to rip apart rainforest. You see, unlike northern forest, tropical hardwoods don't cluster - there tends to only be one or two per acre, if that.  The average rainforest will have more than 200+ species of trees.

So, to extract a single Ipe, you end up destroying an acre of rainforest. What really destroys it is the roads, and then it is turned into pasture by the locals. (Who often burn the rest of the forest).

So far, very few people are planting Ipe in plantations - it is very slow growing.

Fred
So, how did I end up here anyway?

Frank_Pender

If we little folk could get the same sort of incentives passed to us as the big folk receive, then perhaps there would be some differences appearing on some of our bleak horizons.    Some such items: inheritance tax issues,  simple property tax issues, broader and more precise incentives for planting, vegitation control etc. put in place for growth inhancement.

   Amongest the statments being made here in this thread are the answers.  For each of us has our own unique site issues that need attention given.   There are also very commone thread needed to help all of us on a global basis to inhance our forests, mixed as well as plantation.  
  
   Many learned doctors once said that man could never runthe 4 min. miles as his heart would not be able to handle the strain.   Well, Roger Banister (sp) proved them incorrect.  Once he succeeded by only a second or two, more runners began to pass over the finishline in less than 4 minutes.  It even gave me hope in the late 50s and early 60s of being able to do the same.   I never reached to 4 min. mile and opted to specialeze in the 1/4 mile.  I could see the light at the end of the run quicker.  Running a 440 yd. run in 41 seconds was a successful run for me.   But, I still admired those that could stand the gaff and reach to 4 min. mile.

   The long and short of it is, perhaps we need most all of the formations that we are using to produce wood fiber.   In my immediate neighborhood I am a rebel.   I have uneven stands of mixed species as well and selected stands of only Douglas Fir ranging in ages from 75 years on one 5 acres site to 20 years on another, with Oak, Big Leaf Maple, Western Wild Cherry, Hybred Popular, to Western Red Cedar as understory to 50 year old Western Red Alder and Western Big Leaf Maple.
   Had Measure 64 passed here in Oregon a few years ago, I would never been able to harvest any of my 75 year old stand, as any tree over 24" dbh was not going to be allowed to be harvested.

         Will my Tree Farm be maintained after I am gone?  It is a good question.  Probable not, as the land is zoned AR 5, which means it can be divided into 5 acres parcels.   There are plans to have place a 10 acre lake within just yards of my property of which the lake would be totaly visable if you removed all of the trees on my place.   :'(

    
Frank Pender

crtreedude

Interesting that you would mention advantages to the little folk. The reason my plantation is in Costa Rica is the following:

1. No property tax on land used for reforestation
2. No capital gains tax on wood harvested from a reforestation project.  8)
3. The government actually acts like they like me. ( IRS acts like they like my money... )
4. Trees grow faster in the tropics - a 75 year old tree would probably be 4 to 6 feet in diameter, and over 100 feet tall.
5. It sure is warmer than North America!

So, how did I end up here anyway?

Thank You Sponsors!