My parents own a farm here in Eastern Ontario, and they've decided to reforest a small 0.7 hectare (1.7 acres) piece of their property. The trees are being planted by the local Raisin River Conservation Authority, and the amount of trees goes along like this, for a total of 1400 trees:
800 White Pine
300 White Cedar
100 Red Maple
100 Bur Oak
50 Bitternut Hickory
50 Black Cherry
The composition of the trees, and their amount, were solely decided by the RRCA, and my parents had no control over the decision. What worries me is the lack of space that there will be in-between the trees once they're planted, and what effect it'll have in 4-5 years time. My parents calculated that there should be about 4-6 feet between each seedling, but I've heard that some of these trees actually require more space. Does this mean that there's a chance of most of the trees (50%) not reaching maturity? If some of the seedlings die, would it help other nearby trees when it comes to space?
Any help is very much appreciated
Natures way is to overseed. It would jam them every 8 inches and then the winners prune out the losers over time by shading them to death.
I'm not familiar with how that organization operates, but from a planting perspective, that's fairly conventional. Young trees need to be crowded for a bit in order to promote vertical growth. If they were spaced 30 feet apart, they'd grow horizontally like trees in a city park. In 15-20 years or so, the stems will be thinned to open up the best crowns. Then again a couple decades after that. So ultimately you won't be growing 2,000 trees per HA- there might be a couple hundred after intentional thinning and natural mortality, including early survival rates a few years after planting..
However, all of that only applies to a conventional softwood plantation, but less to the hardwood component, which I normally don't see in a plantation context. You'd really need to know the ultimate management objective in order to form a hard opinion. I.e. is the goal to grow an even aged forest where trees are grown to a certain target, then clearcut and replanted? Or are they intending to recreate an uneven/multi-aged forest, where some trees will grow in perpetuity, and you'll foster new generations to maintain a multi-level forest structure indefinitely?
At a scale of a hectare, it's all a bit academic, but the bottom line? No, that's not an unusually crowded start to a plantation! Enjoy watching your trees grow.
Quote from: VTDonn on January 22, 2021, 06:23:11 PM
I'm not familiar with how that organization operates, but from a planting perspective, that's fairly conventional. Young trees need to be crowded for a bit in order to promote vertical growth. If they were spaced 30 feet apart, they'd grow horizontally like trees in a city park. In 15-20 years or so, the stems will be thinned to open up the best crowns. Then again a couple decades after that. So ultimately you won't be growing 2,000 trees per HA- there might be a couple hundred after intentional thinning and natural mortality, including early survival rates a few years after planting..
However, all of that only applies to a conventional softwood plantation, but less to the hardwood component, which I normally don't see in a plantation context. You'd really need to know the ultimate management objective in order to form a hard opinion. I.e. is the goal to grow an even aged forest where trees are grown to a certain target, then clearcut and replanted? Or are they intending to recreate an uneven/multi-aged forest, where some trees will grow in perpetuity, and you'll foster new generations to maintain a multi-level forest structure indefinitely?
At a scale of a hectare, it's all a bit academic, but the bottom line? No, that's not an unusually crowded start to a plantation! Enjoy watching your trees grow.
Thanks for the note. And yes, I am very excited to see them grow! The land all around my parent's property has been clearcut by a local wealthy farmer who's bought it recently, so it'll be nice to have some greenery around, even if it's a rather small forest. It's going to be great to walk around in the woods without having to drive more than an hour away to some provincial or national park.
The ultimate goal is to have a multi-aged forest, where trees will grow in perpetuity. Are you saying that with the "natural selection" side of things, we should expect less than half of the seedlings to grow into maturity?
There will be natural mortality and like Mike said, the trees will sort themselves out. After four or five years, if they are too thick, you can thin them out. Likely, nature and natural mortality will do this for you.
Quote from: EWilson99 on January 22, 2021, 06:35:24 PM
The ultimate goal is to have a multi-aged forest, where trees will grow in perpetuity.
Not with a plantation alone. You would have to have multiple entries , say beginning in 20 years with the goal at first to thin to keep a healthy crown until trees mature. Once seed production begins, small openings need to be created for light to hit the ground to establish new trees. Multiple entries will be required to make some holes to promote new trees from the surrounding mature trees. What your beginning with is an even aged stand, multi-aged is going to require a bunch of work. Trees have to grow and mature some before you get seed. Then, since the site is small, there is a lot of ingress from the neighborhood, including birds and mammals bringing stuff and making deposits. ;D
Your spacing works out to almost 6 ft between trees, which is the predominant spacing in eastern Canada for reforestation.
Yellow birch planted around black cherry on an old orchard.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11009/SD_yellow_birch_Pl3.jpg)
same site
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11009/SD_yellow_birch_Pl1.jpg)
A few years back. Now these trees are producing seed. Planted in 2000 (date stamp is incorrect), thinned in 2012. Need new photo update, the understory is mostly bare except wild herbs like trout lily, purple trilium, false Solomon's seal, false lily of the valley, star flower. Even a couple butternuts in there I poked into the soil. Typical wild plants here under hardwoods in New Brunswick.
The multi-aged forest is going to happen eventually, providing it's not clear cut in ~50 years time.
But it's your Grandkids that are going to see that. A mixed age forest will have trees that are 50-100 years old, AND new saplings coming up to replace the older trees as they die. But it takes 100 years to grow a 100 year old tree. After maybe 10 years it might start to look like a "new" forest, but you have to start someplace, and it's interesting to see how things develop over time.
A planting plan like that is about the best option to get a mixed species forest started. Like other have said, not all the trees will survive, but you get "canopy closure" much sooner with the closer spacing. That both suppresses the weeds, and forces the trees to grow taller to reach the light. Over time some of the weaker ones will get suppressed and die off, or be removed by management.
If you look at how a forest naturally regenerates after a large tree falls (or is removed) there will be hundreds of seedlings sprouting in the new open space. Eventually only one or 2 are going to reach maturity.
Quote from: SwampDonkey on January 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
Quote from: EWilson99 on January 22, 2021, 06:35:24 PM
The ultimate goal is to have a multi-aged forest, where trees will grow in perpetuity.
Not with a plantation alone. You would have to have multiple entries , say beginning in 20 years with the goal at first to thin to keep a healthy crown until trees mature. Once seed production begins, small openings need to be created for light to hit the ground to establish new trees. Multiple entries will be required to make some holes to promote new trees from the surrounding mature trees. What your beginning with is an even aged stand, multi-aged is going to require a bunch of work. Trees have to grow and mature some before you get seed. Then, since the site is small, there is a lot of ingress from the neighborhood, including birds and mammals bringing stuff and making deposits. ;D
Thank you for reminding me of that- I was a bit worried that at the rate that White Pines grow, they'd quickly overshadow the White Cedars and other trees, and I'd be stuck with a White Pine-only forest in 20-30 years time. Is it better to trim the White Pine branches early on (around 5-10 year time frame), or should I wait for the 20 year mark?
As long as none of the small animals eat any of the seedlings, I'm happy ;) There's a couple of animals on the property already (raccoons, squirrels, fox and skunks), and I hope that as the forest starts to grow there's a lot more wildlife that can find refuge in our backyard.
Without knowing what your planting layout will be... Often times, the hardwoods are planted in rows between the faster growing pine rows. The competition will force them to go up instead of out. You'll probably end up thinning out the white pine before the others. Some additional competition control such as mowing any grass/ brush will aid in reducing mortality. If you have a lot of deer, you may want to consider some protection for the hardwoods and cedar at least. It's easy picking for them to just walk down a row and nip buds.
When pruning the pine, maintain at least a 50% crown ratio. That is the height of the live crown with needles divided by the total height of the tree. You can begin pruning them when they get about 10' to 15' tall.
Pruning the w. pine will also help deter rust disease. Up here we have severe rust and also severe weevil damage. So for me I have to grow white pine in a little shade to keep them from being dominant for awhile or the weevils will just hammer it. Your area may not be so difficult to grow w. pine. Pruning is most effective against the rust. The rust finds the right habitat in humid understory conditions, they inoculate needles and then grow to the stem and girdle it. They need a host plant to spread, that is any currant or gooseberry (ribies).
20 years is just a number I tossed out there. We often thin forest at 12-15 years here in NB. The lower limbs are dead and you can see under the canopy.
And then, there was the old forester who was asked "when is the best time to plant trees?"
reply: about 50 years ago
Deer can be hard on the White Cedar and Red Maple.
Quote from: Sod saw on February 15, 2021, 04:42:33 PM
And then, there was the old forester who was asked "when is the best time to plant trees?"
reply: about 50 years ago
Good point, although at the end of the day I'm happy to have the trees planted now, rather than wait a couple of more years. Unfortunately, the provincial government doesn't do a good job at advertising reforestation projects and subsidies; otherwise, the trees would have been planted years ago.
Quote from: KEC on February 15, 2021, 07:19:45 PM
Deer can be hard on the White Cedar and Red Maple.
Thanks for the heads up!
Quote from: EWilson99 on February 17, 2021, 10:45:36 PMUnfortunately, the provincial government doesn't do a good job at advertising reforestation projects and subsidies; otherwise, the trees would have been planted years ago.
One of the benefits of having woodlot owner organizations. DNR staff work with industry only these days. It's been up to woodlot owner organizations to carry the torch or no one will know about the silviculture programs. There's not single add on the television by anyone out there talking about silviculture. Sad state of affairs. Adds are even rare in local papers, except notifying everyone one of an annual meeting. Those meetings have value, but hardy anyone shows up unless you serve dinner to. :D
As temperatures rise and drought intensifies, fires grow larger and burn more severely. What happens to the landscape next is unknown. It's about Arizona and the millions of homeless and deceased animals who have lost their Trees of Life and their Forests of Life. That's todays headline. I realize most people on this forum are selling equipment to turn trees into something else. but with the thousands of members who log on. couldn't the moderators lead a team of volunteers to help accelerate the reforesting. Not for plantations. But for life. Arizona and California, could really use the help. It's heart breaking and deviating here. Hello Ontario?! And please indict the people who have decimated the monarch butterfly habitats!
popcorn_smiley popcorn_smiley popcorn_smiley
Quote from: Boreal et al on July 07, 2021, 06:02:29 PMAnd please indict the people who have decimated the monarch butterfly habitats!
This does seem like the most appropriate place to bring up such a topic!
Clark
Modern forest management practices result in good regeneration and these management practices also create habitat for wildlife as well as homes for families and the many other products that we all need and depend on. The forest is a renewable resource.
California in particular as well as other western states constrain and limit good forest management practices. There are millions of acres of dead standing, overgrown forests full of beetle killed pine. These areas are highly susceptible to fire. They are like dry gunpowder waiting to go off.
A lot of this is the result of well-intentioned, but mis-guided and under informed people and the politicians who pander to them. The forest product industry is very capable of managing these issues but the bad decisions regarding harvest, access, and regeneration are coming from the state legislatures, etc.
There are quite a few members here involved in fighting these fires and many more that care about good management of a renewable resource.
You're right. There are people people here "selling equipment to turn trees into something else". The "something else" is properly managed renewable forest that benefit all creatures - including humans. If only there were enough people who understood facts rather than feelings.
Bernstein, who is on youtube not on the forum, he is a woodlot owner as well. He cuts firewood and logs for lumber he uses for himself. He was just talking the other day about spraying leafy spurge (invasive from Europe), it's a menace to pasture ground in ND. He has to spray the stuff, so there are consequences. He notes that he does his best not to spray the 'wild' hemp ;D or the milk weed. Milk weed being used by the monarch, hemp being used as chinking (retted fibres) in his buildings mixed with clay for a binder. There is more going on than you have read from propaganda papers. ;)
Quote from: Boreal et al on July 07, 2021, 06:02:29 PM
As temperatures rise and drought intensifies, fires grow larger and burn more severely. What happens to the landscape next is unknown. It's about Arizona and the millions of homeless and deceased animals who have lost their Trees of Life and their Forests of Life. That's todays headline. I realize most people on this forum are selling equipment to turn trees into something else. but with the thousands of members who log on. couldn't the moderators lead a team of volunteers to help accelerate the reforesting. Not for plantations. But for life. Arizona and California, could really use the help. It's heart breaking and deviating here. Hello Ontario?! And please indict the people who have decimated the monarch butterfly habitats!
When I read your post last night I did not have the energy and was not in the right frame of mind to respond. however today is a new day. ;D
Not knowing anything about you that would indicate your perspective, experience, involvement, level of knowledge, or anything else that could help direct a meaningful response, I went and looked at your profile information. All I could glean from that is that you have been registered here for about 10 months, made only 2 posts, spent just 4 hours total in that 10 months reading other posts here, and are not quite able to make up your mind where you live. I also note that you do not engage in meaningful conversation regarding your posts, which is considered rude in the forum world. (Some might label you as a troll, but I am not ready to go that far yet. That depends on your next step.)
So all I am left with is that little bit of knowledge and your post. You have already gotten some thoughtful replies from other members here which are worth putting in some time to understand.
First, let me correct an assumption you wrote:" I realize most people on this forum are selling equipment to turn trees into something else."
Whereas we do not (that I know of) have a definitive demographic study of our membership, I think by just reading where the many many thousands of posts and discussions here focus will clearly indicate equipment sales is not what MOST of us do. Most of us are working to make a living and learning new things or getting help getting through our jobs from other like minded people with a vast array of experience to draw from. This forum was originally founded for sawyers, producers of lumber and has grown from there.
The overall tone of your note indicates you think 'we' are the problem and 'we' should organize and 'do something'. I don't think you have done much meaningful reading here at all if you have not seen the extensive posts and threads on habitat restoration, field regeneration, maintaining and restoring healthy tree growth, TSI work and forest health improvements, and reclaiming poorly managed lands for better habitat (for ALL species) while at the same time following a well designed plan to serve the needs of the landowner, wildlife, and the health of the natural lands in our care. In short I think, as Swampdonkey alluded to, you are just throwing out a bunch of assumptions and challenging folks to "mend their ways and do something."
Turnabout is fair play so I would like to ask you what YOU have been doing to make a difference with this problem? Tell us what you do, how you do it, where you do it, and what results you have seen. If you want to 'make a difference' it has to start with you. There are no excuses, you have to 'walk the walk' before you can 'talk the talk'. An old folk singer I had known for decades used to have a saying I stole from him when I was a teenager and have used in my daily life ever since. He said "Think globally, act locally". The man was an environmental activist of the highest caliber who gave his entire life to supporting and working with his hands toward the movements who held so dear. (His name was Pete Seeger.) I knew Pete well enough to know he would listen to what you have said and his first question would be "So what are YOU doing about it?"
I'd like to ask you the same question.
BRAVO Tom, Bravo!
I could have sworn there was another reply here I read early this morning or last night and came back to read again and reply. Now it appears to be gone. Am I imagining things? Maybe I should check my meds, oh wait, I don't take any meds. ;D
It's gone now. Only the NSA could have made it disappear like that.
This is a forum full of eco-activists, we all are really. Hang around and youll see that most of us prefer the woods and the natural world far more than the mass produced particle board and pavement mess that wall street and washington lobbying have led us into.
Where this crowd differs from the eco-warrior is we are people who value innocent human life above plant and animal life. "We" collectively have actually gone into the woods for generations...modified and observed it for changes toward its betterment. I take my 8yr old for walks in our experiments woods all the time.
The forestry profession has realized that humans, plants and animals can all reap abundance if forests are managed for continual vigorous regrowth of the best suited species mix for a given site. We work with nature rather than against it to maximize growth rates and reap bountiful harvests.
If forests stay in this rotation there is always suitable habitat available for the critters, from fresh regen to mature closed canopy. Species dont have to migrate very far in search of replacement habitat when harvest operations occur, if large forests are kept in productive rotation.
When privately owned forests are mismanaged, they stop producing a cash crop and economics usually cause them to be subdivided into residential space and sold. That is permanent habitat loss.
rather than saying "dont touch, mother nature or gaia knows best" like other forest enthusiats believe, we modify forests ahead of her schedule. Mother natures management plan is precisely what youre seeing; pests weakening trees and then huge, catostrophic fires clearing them out to make way for replacement with different species better suited to the site.
Mankind struggles with foreign pests today thanks in part to free-trade, but we have a very easy time preventing the fuel conditions that lead to horrible fires, if politics dont prevent these prudent management activities from being carried out properly.
Flora and fauna and birds and bees and rabbits and deer love the sound of a chainsaw. Thats the sound of a vigorous new edge habitat on the way. from rabbits to cervids to ruminants, the data shows critters concentrate grazing preference to the regen of burned sites rather than unburned if given free choice.
It is 50 years of starry eyed earth firsters chaining themselves to equipment and lobbying government to block forest operations that shoulder an awful lot of blame for the mess theyre in out west. We here dont waste food and dont waste trees. If loggers and forestors werent locked out by eco warriors, standing dead timber would have been harvested and utilized by humanity long before it could contribute to wildfire. Small controlled fires would have been conducted all along, denying the wildfires their birthrights.
Eco-warriors have been blaming loggers for everything forever and still arent taking credit for what they prevented us from preventing.. so its a real sore spot around here, the pot calling the kettle black. There are a number of professional wildland firefighters on this site that can tell you precisely how politics has caused them to be laying down their lives to save the public from a mess the public insists upon out of their ignorance.
Indictments for those who ruined a butterfly habitat? Avenge the butterflies first and the dead men women and children after? That prioritization doesnt really jive on this forum.
@charles mann (https://forestryforum.com/board/index.php?action=profile;u=41365)
@RPF2509 (https://forestryforum.com/board/index.php?action=profile;u=13409)
@Skeans1 (https://forestryforum.com/board/index.php?action=profile;u=37446)
@DMcCoy (https://forestryforum.com/board/index.php?action=profile;u=26370)
The guy is an (fill in the blank) he just ordered the admins to remove a post that offended him. Yea, Ill get right on that. He aint banned yet, but his attitude and the unknown agenda he is carrying is about to get him beotch slapped. I got no time for (fill in the blank)
As for monarchs, I took this picture and some video this last week. Seems my parts of Michigan is doing okay.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/20210628_184319.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1625842195)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/20210628_184347.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1625842189)
Quote from: Old Greenhorn on July 09, 2021, 09:20:36 AM
I could have sworn there was another reply here I read early this morning or last night and came back to read again and reply. Now it appears to be gone. Am I imagining things? Maybe I should check my meds, oh wait, I don't take any meds. ;D
It was removed because of all the political content. Ill not waste my time with (fill in the blank)s
Yeah, I pretty much figured that, but expected to see the removal noted as it is with moved threads. He was pretty good at making claims of intense work on international levels that came at extreme personal sacrifice of unknown forms. Lots of mystery with that fella that left his comments with a very dubious taste in my brain.
OH golly I would love to know who wrote the post that offended him! :D ;D We should give that person a prize. My money is on Mike, simply because of his eloquent verbosity. :)
OK, lets move on, shall we? ;D
Quote from: Jeff on July 09, 2021, 10:50:34 AM
The guy is an (fill in the blank) he just ordered the admins to remove a post that offended him. Yea, Ill get right on that. He aint banned yet, but his attitude and the unknown agenda he is carrying is about to get him beotch slapped. I got no time for (fill in the blank)
As for monarchs, I took this picture and some video this last week. Seems my parts of Michigan is doing okay.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/20210628_184319.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1625842195)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/20210628_184347.jpg?easyrotate_cache=1625842189)
Sort of related I find it funny how you have these eco nuts that come on the radio going on about letting your lawn grow to weeds and wild flower or the bees will die??? Okay lol . Do they not know Nova Scotia is mostly uninhabited woods? The bees are fine. They have plenty of habitat. And I like bees too but I just don't buy it or understand their reasoning.
That reasoning is designed to be effective on the uneducated or the overeducated with no actual knowledge. Unfortunately, too often it works really well. I have a logger/arborist buddy who just LOVES when he is on a job and a nosey neighbor comes over to try and 'educate him' or just complain. He uses basic facts and knowledge to overwhelm them without mercy and asks them a lot of questions about how much of their 'arguments' they had actually thought through. Either they walk away with new knowledge, or they walk away in disgust. Either way, they walk away. ;D
Ecowarriors are humans too. Id rather convert them to timber fellers than offend them.
Back on topic.
A 1.7 acre reforestation with 1400 trees and a mix of 6-8 species seems very appropriate to me. I expect the conservation authority has done their homework and evaluated the site to ensure they are not planting on sanddunes or the shield. The species seem appropriate to me. (I note there are no ash on the list ::))
The landowner needs to recognize that the planting is only the first step in the process. The first 5 years are critical. Grass and weed control. Remove self seeded invasives and other pests (prickly ash, grape vine, dog strangling vine). Deer or rodent protection if needed.
For the next 5-10 years at least, there will need to be active weed control for the seedlings (mulch or mechanical preferred over chemical ) annually, and there will be some loss. It is going to look very "sparse" at 4-6 feet between plants. But once the saplings are established, there is going to be competition between the survivors, which will drive them all to reach upwards. At 15-20 years, you should start to see canopy closure with trees in the 20-30' range. Depending on the objectives of the owner, thinning may be advised.
At 20-25 years, the original trees should start to self seed into openings and surrounding land. Come back then and we can help you with ways to help them along. :) At that time, you might even consider planting shade tolerant trees (sugar maple, hemlock) under the canopy.
Quote from: Old Greenhorn on July 09, 2021, 11:13:00 AM
OH golly I would love to know who wrote the post that offended him! :D ;D We should give that person a prize.
Take a bow, it was your's he reported with a demand to remove. :D
:D 8) That's really rich. So he was offended by my attempt to engage him in meaningful discussion? oh well, not my problem, is it? ;D
I am more interested to read about these 1400 trees going in the ground and how it turns out. That is something worth talking about.
[edit to add:] Sorry Jeff I didn't mean to cause you any grief. I re-read my post and don't really see anything offensive in there. I thought I asked him fair questions. Guess he felt pushed too far.
Tom some people can't take being engaged critically. Funny thing I have "Monarch" safe areas in my tree fields where I leave Milkweed plants just in case a caterpillar needs a snack.. The Milkweed that grows in my hay patches, well it doesn't get to finish.... I wonder sometimes as others have mentioned... just how many of those folks use toilet paper..
Same here, even though they can infest my pastures I leave milk weed around the edges or spots I can't mechanically control, ya know since we use zero chemicals at all on the farm side of our environmental destruction business.
Quote from: HemlockKing on July 09, 2021, 11:25:33 AM
Sort of related I find it funny how you have these eco nuts that come on the radio going on about letting your lawn grow to weeds and wild flower or the bees will die??? Okay lol . Do they not know Nova Scotia is mostly uninhabited woods? The bees are fine. They have plenty of habitat. And I like bees too but I just don't buy it or understand their reasoning.
Actually, it's a problem here in VT and other places. There has been a significant die off bees. It's referred to as "Colony Collapse Disorder". Some of the bee keepers in our area have noticed the problem. It's not necessarily habitat loss that causes it, but improving pollinator habitat is one way of supporting bees so that surviving colonies are healthier and can help make up for the losses.
There is a whole lot more to colony collapse than the media has reported on. A lot has to do with the USDA insurance payment and the commodity use of bees in Almond plantations and such. Basically it pays more to abuse your hive and let it die than to actually take care of it for the big guys.
We have a small quantity of hives and it doesn't scare me at all.
Quote from: John Mc on July 09, 2021, 09:07:59 PM
Quote from: HemlockKing on July 09, 2021, 11:25:33 AM
Sort of related I find it funny how you have these eco nuts that come on the radio going on about letting your lawn grow to weeds and wild flower or the bees will die??? Okay lol . Do they not know Nova Scotia is mostly uninhabited woods? The bees are fine. They have plenty of habitat. And I like bees too but I just don't buy it or understand their reasoning.
Actually, it's a problem here in VT and other places. There has been a significant die off bees. It's referred to as "Colony Collapse Disorder". Some of the bee keepers in our area have noticed the problem. It's not necessarily habitat loss that causes it, but improving pollinator habitat is one way of supporting bees so that surviving colonies are healthier and can help make up for the losses.
What difference will it make if my small patch of lawn had a few wild flowers on it though? I think something like 94% of NS is unoccupied woodland? If they can't fare well there then how will a few people inside a town or city not mowing their lawn really help? To be honest though, I see a lot of bees around my area.
Quote from: Southside on July 10, 2021, 12:05:57 AM
There is a whole lot more to colony collapse than the media has reported on. A lot has to do with the USDA insurance payment and the commodity use of bees in Almond plantations and such. Basically it pays more to abuse your hive and let it die than to actually take care of it for the big guys.
We have a small quantity of hives and it doesn't scare me at all.
Yup thats how it goes with the news part truth or out of context, baitclicking, trendy sounding headlines etc. They'll try to tell you what to think or feel but won't just go "here's the facts, here's what's happening, do what you will with this information"
Interesting that my initial post on a small reforestation project, has led to such fascinating discussion ;D!
An update on the reforestation project: not going as well as planned, but it's been improving since the month of May. There wasn't any rainfall at all in May, so that meant that a lot of the newly planted seedlings died. I would say that out of the 800 white pines, more than 60% have died, only 3-4 of the white cedars have survived, 4-5 bitternut hickories are shooting out leaves, and there's only about 5 bur oak seedlings with leaves. None of the black cherry seedlings grew any leaves. The good news, however, is that the red maples have been doing extremely well, and other than deers eating some of the leaves, 95 of the 100 red maple seedlings are healthy and doing well. The American Elms, located at the boundary of the old hayfield and which were planted around 20 years ago, seem to be shooting up some new seedlings as well!
Thankfully, due to the rain in June and July, the rest of the seedlings are doing quite well. I'm excited to see how the rest of the trees will grow in 4-5 years time, and we'll consider planting more drought resistant trees such as red pines and red cedars within the next year or two.
Consider setting up water collection nearby. Rope a tarp at the corners into nearby trees loosely, with a rock in the center and a pinhole to make a funnel. Walmart kiddie pool under it. Old pot and a bucket makes it a piece of cake.
Thick Strawbail mulch around seedlings will dramatically help them retain soil moisture in the beating sun.
Quote from: mike_belben on July 13, 2021, 09:08:58 PM
Consider setting up water collection nearby. Rope a tarp at the corners into nearby trees loosely, with a rock in the center and a pinhole to make a funnel. Walmart kiddie pool under it. Old pot and a bucket makes it a piece of cake.
Thick Strawbail mulch around seedlings will dramatically help them retain soil moisture in the beating sun.
Since June we've had very good rainfall, so I'm not sure that would be necessary this year- we might take it into account for next year, if spring ends up being the same hot dry season as it was this year.
Can strawbail be bought in bulk for a cheap price?
If you find a winter wheat patch stop and ask. I buy 2 square bales to dial in the bow in fall then the next spring mulch the garden with it. Think 4 bucks a bale at the co-op who obviously has to mark up.
You could just as easily use leaves or pine needles.. Any organic degradeable fluff to act as a sunscreen will slow evaporation and retain moisture. Thats why the earthworms are always under a leaf pile. Even sawdust if you have to. Coarse chips or planer noodles would be better than fine dust imo.
Cardboard works great too, holds moisture, the earthworms will be under it, and it does break down.
Completely true. But then im cursing amazon tape the next season hoe-ing it all up. :D
Old wool carpet is also used as a "mulch / weed mat" locally. Keeps the water in and the weeds out, and still breaks down after a year or 3. Seedling is big enough to look after itself by then.
Don't use synthetic of course.
I have never worked in Ontario, just paddled the southern part of it.
But I have planted plenty of trees in the West. One of the advantages of planting instead of natural regen is we can control the spacing and species composition.
Your plan has plenty of diversity. In a climate like Ontario you are likely to have minimal mortality. Your planned density seems high by modern standards. 700-800 seedlings per acre. It would be more typical now around 600 or less. Less work and less thinning, less competition.
Quote from: ppine on September 16, 2021, 01:24:03 PM
I have never worked in Ontario, just paddled the southern part of it.
But I have planted plenty of trees in the West. One of the advantages of planting instead of natural regen is we can control the spacing and species composition.
Your plan has plenty of diversity. In a climate like Ontario you are likely to have minimal mortality. Your planned density seems high by modern standards. 700-800 seedlings per acre. It would be more typical now around 600 or less. Less work and less thinning, less competition.
I think though that drought is the bigger problem here: in previous years I didn't care, but now that we're trying to grow some seedlings then it means that many of these are dying or have already died. It wasn't a problem in previous years, because older trees located at the perimeter, such as Bur Oak and American Elm, are quite drought tolerant.
Considering how many seedlings have already died, I don't think that thinning will be a necessity on some parts of the field. Nevertheless, considering that the land around us have been clearcut for agricultural purposes, I think that you're right in saying that the trees won't be susceptible to disease; hopefully in 20-30, once the trees make a dense canopy, we can start noticing the benefits.
If youve got the dedication, you can get through drought with rainwater totes and an air pump. Garden hose on the bottom and air coupler to a C02 tank or air source on top. Put a few psi in the tote and itll spray like a garden hose. Put it high on a trailer and the gravity alone will get it some psi. Its how i water the garden.
i guarantee you can save a lot of seedlings per tote. I fill mine off the gutter during wet season.
So the local conservation authority came to do a "check-up" back in October, and we seem to be at a 60% survival rate in total, which is still better than I had expected. Deer browsing has unfortunately hurt a couple of the red maple seedlings, as they didn't put in any tree protectors until late in the summer, but otherwise not much has changed since July.
They've offered a re-fill for the trees that have died, and while I was hoping for some more drought resistant trees to be planted, the arborist on contract is still insisting on re-planting white pine and white cedar- this would just be repeating the cycle all over again and quite frankly, a waste of money. We're thinking of just ordering trees in bulk by choosing them ourselves, and later just planting them on our own.
Not sure you will find it a waste to work with recommended species once again. A one-time rough start is no indication of where things might end up. I'm also not sure I'd welcome lots of eastern red cedar onto any land I owned here in the mixed-wood region. Weed and invasive in many places. It won't do any better than anything else if it has to start with no rain. Drought tolerance is a non-issue in a seedling with essentially no root system. And FWIW, white-cedar is actually highly drought-tolerant once established.
Planting seedlings take a bit of faith. Man, when we did the 6000 back on a 2013 weekend, and then when all the ragweed came up and completely hid every single tree from view-I literally could not find a seedling!-things seemed bleak. Those trees are now 20 feet tall for pine and spruce, and 35 feet tall for hybrid larch! I call it painting the land with vegetation.
Do you happen to know if white pine weevil is active in your area? I can recommend an excellent treatment regimen if you're interested, and which would be feasible on your small acreage.
Quote from: wisconsitom on December 08, 2021, 10:28:11 AM
Not sure you will find it a waste to work with recommended species once again. A one-time rough start is no indication of where things might end up. I'm also not sure I'd welcome lots of eastern red cedar onto any land I owned here in the mixed-wood region. Weed and invasive in many places. It won't do any better than anything else if it has to start with no rain. Drought tolerance is a non-issue in a seedling with essentially no root system. And FWIW, white-cedar is actually highly drought-tolerant once established.
Planting seedlings take a bit of faith. Man, when we did the 6000 back on a 2013 weekend, and then when all the ragweed came up and completely hid every single tree from view-I literally could not find a seedling!-things seemed bleak. Those trees are now 20 feet tall for pine and spruce, and 35 feet tall for hybrid larch! I call it painting the land with vegetation.
Do you happen to know if white pine weevil is active in your area? I can recommend an excellent treatment regimen if you're interested, and which would be feasible on your small acreage.
Not sure about white pine weevil, but there are a minimal amount of gooseberry plants along the property, so we're keeping an eye on those.
Yes, white cedar can be drought tolerant, but it has to be established first and foremost. Seedlings that are planted during an extremely dry spring don't even stand a chance, I think we're quite frankly lucky that we have any plants at all, after having had no rain in May. I just don't want to plant trees that are more susceptible to drought stress.
I'm just saying no seedling, regardless of species, is drought tolerant, so I would not personally make my species selections based on a characteristic that actually pertains to an established tree. Other Mays will be wet.
A rather extensive look at Reforestation Practices (asof 2020 from a West Coast perspective )- methods and practices (chapter 3 on-wards) maybe useful for reference. A FVMC publication
https://f3839a3d-9851-4def-b527-fb0ceab9a570.filesusr.com/ugd/80da86_0c050def8968415189aa2dbb19fe5222.pdf
"Planted forests simply are our best hope for meeting societal demands for wood while preserving the
condition of natural forests" (Powers, 2000).
Yup, lock up the "natural forests" so they are non-productive and become uncontrollable fire hazards. Been doing that for the last 40-50 years. Results are evident.
Quote from: wisconsitom on December 10, 2021, 05:29:26 PM
I'm just saying no seedling, regardless of species, is drought tolerant, so I would not personally make my species selections based on a characteristic that actually pertains to an established tree. Other Mays will be wet.
I've lived in Eastern Ontario for the last 15 years, and I don't think that we've had a wet spring in the last 5. Unfortunately, I think that this will be the norm from now on, we'll just have to adapt to it :(
You are correct, no seedling is inherently drought tolerant, but the red maples and bitternut hickory seedlings did much better than their pine and cedar counterparts. I don't see the harm in planting more of these red maples.
Quote from: Boreal et al on July 07, 2021, 06:02:29 PM
As temperatures rise and drought intensifies, fires grow larger and burn more severely. What happens to the landscape next is unknown. It's about Arizona and the millions of homeless and deceased animals who have lost their Trees of Life and their Forests of Life. That's todays headline. I realize most people on this forum are selling equipment to turn trees into something else. but with the thousands of members who log on. couldn't the moderators lead a team of volunteers to help accelerate the reforesting. Not for plantations. But for life. Arizona and California, could really use the help. It's heart breaking and deviating here. Hello Ontario?! And please indict the people who have decimated the monarch butterfly habitats!
Holy Mackerel! Best calm down ... relax.
And as for the monarch butterfly decimators, you can point a finger at the silly corn-sourced ethanol industry. More than anything else it is responsible for converting hundreds of thousands of acres of milkweed land (old pastures) into cornfields. And every greenie I ever met assured me that the world needed more ethanol.
Too many trees per acre. Your woodlot will need a lot of thinning.
Haven't posted in this forum in several years now, but getting to the 4 year mark now I think that it's time to give a little update on it all. apologies for the necro!
Drought has been very bad. it's improved a lot since the first year, but still a lot of the trees are struggling due to the heat and lack of rain. stunted growth has affected all but a few of the white pines and white cedars*. all of the red maples have fallen victim to deer browsing and the bitternut hickories and bur oaks are nearly invisible at this point. for the long term I'm not expecting anything more than cedars and pines, and even then what's left is very spotty. I'm not worried about long term growth, as I know that a lot of cedars and pines will make it through, but man so much for a diversified forest smiley_thumbsdown
*the tallest cedar is at about 5 feet tall, whereas the tallest pine is at about 3 feet tall at the 4 year mark
Quote from: ppine on March 08, 2023, 01:52:39 PMToo many trees per acre. Your woodlot will need a lot of thinning.
don't think that there's enough left to warrant thinning smiley_crying
Sometimes the site selects the forest that is best suited. Also, what grows now, and what may grow in the future, with more shade and shelter is different.
At least locally you simply cannot plant a "mature forest" mix in open ground. The "mature forest" species are the ones that need the shelter of a younger forest (or an existing forest) to grow. If you go out and plant rimu and tawa in open ground, they shrivel up and die. Sunburn / wind / frost does them in. But plant them in gaps of an established nurse crop of hardier short lived trees they have the sheltered spot they need to grow. Then they grow up and out of the canopy and become the dominant forest trees, shading out the shorter lived / smaller first colonizers. Probably 3 generations and ~100 years with the local species, but you can cut it down to 2 and 20 years with intensive management.
And of course browsing animals is a whole other spanner in the works. ANY browsing mammal here in NZ is considered a pest (shoot on sight). Deer and goats will eventually destroy an established forest canopy by eating any regeneration. Not sure how you deal with that if deer are your local native wildlife?
Quote from: Boreal et al on July 07, 2021, 06:02:29 PMAs temperatures rise and drought intensifies, fires grow larger and burn more severely. What happens to the landscape next is unknown. It's about Arizona and the millions of homeless and deceased animals who have lost their Trees of Life and their Forests of Life. That's todays headline. I realize most people on this forum are selling equipment to turn trees into something else. but with the thousands of members who log on. couldn't the moderators lead a team of volunteers to help accelerate the reforesting. Not for plantations. But for life. Arizona and California, could really use the help. It's heart breaking and deviating here. Hello Ontario?! And please indict the people who have decimated the monarch butterfly habitats!
The issue in much of the west is that a lack of management, including harvest and prescribed burning has put so much fuel in the forests that when a fire starts it expands rapidly into monster fires. There are several places where thinned tracts adjoin unthinned tracts. The "natural" tracts burned down to mineral soil and in some cases so hot it fused the soil. The thinned tracts still have living trees.
But thinning costs money unless there's an adequate market for the thinned trees. Unfortunately, the shut down of harvest has caused many sawmills to shut down so there's no market for thinned trees which typically are small diameter trees anyway.
The awareness of the issue of just letting it all grow is slowly building but politicians and the public knowledge lag behind the science. It will take decades to fireproof the millions of acres that are ripe for megafires.
As to the honeybees earlier in the discussion.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/11009/bees-log-Aug-2024.jpg) (https://forestryforum.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=354913)
A thunderstorm took this sugar maple tree down in the yard. This was home to a colony of honeybees for 12 years. A bee keeper came over and salvaged as many as possible to add to her own hives. I did not think they had survived last winter, which was not a severe winter at all. But around early July I heard the sound of swarming bees in the yard, looked out and they were at the 'bee' tree. Bee keepers told me that I have had better luck with keeping bees alive than most keepers. And I didn't lift a finger, other than clean up the fallen tree branch for firewood. :D My grandfather talked of honeybees in old rotten elm logs along the river, which was common to see in his day, which was probably 1920's-1940's era, before hydro dams in the area.
Quote from: Ianab on November 15, 2024, 04:08:22 AMSometimes the site selects the forest that is best suited. Also, what grows now, and what may grow in the future, with more shade and shelter is different.
At least locally you simply cannot plant a "mature forest" mix in open ground. The "mature forest" species are the ones that need the shelter of a younger forest (or an existing forest) to grow. If you go out and plant rimu and tawa in open ground, they shrivel up and die. Sunburn / wind / frost does them in. But plant them in gaps of an established nurse crop of hardier short lived trees they have the sheltered spot they need to grow. Then they grow up and out of the canopy and become the dominant forest trees, shading out the shorter lived / smaller first colonizers. Probably 3 generations and ~100 years with the local species, but you can cut it down to 2 and 20 years with intensive management.
And of course browsing animals is a whole other spanner in the works. ANY browsing mammal here in NZ is considered a pest (shoot on sight). Deer and goats will eventually destroy an established forest canopy by eating any regeneration. Not sure how you deal with that if deer are your local native wildlife?
I am aware that cedars and pines are usually the "junior species" after which hardwoods like maples and oaks can grow. But yea, there was at least some hope that with the original format, that we could get at least some form of variety early on. Depending on how it progresses in future years we may decide to just let the trees outgrow all of the old hay and hogweed
unfortunately due to the forum's limitations, I cannot include a higher detailed image. However the picture that I've attached here should show at least a few green trees popping out of the field. The bigger trees as those that delimit the edge of the property
I'm taking my PAL and RPAL next month, but with that being said neither myself or my dad hunts. Quite frankly, I don't think that my parents would be comfortable if myself or someone else shot a gun on their property, and they'd prefer a different approach.
Ewilson99
Give it a 100 years or so, and it will develop into a forest (or brush field) that can be thinned to release the trees you (or someone) want(s).
Or plant and protect those trees that you want to see sooner.
I established a northern red oak forest 26 years ago that desperately now needs much more release from the Norway spruce and thinning of the red oak.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10180/red_oak_field.jpg) (https://forestryforum.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=356826)
Quote from: beenthere on November 16, 2024, 10:20:42 PMEwilson99
Give it a 100 years or so, and it will develop into a forest (or brush field) that can be thinned to release the trees you (or someone) want(s).
Or plant and protect those trees that you want to see sooner.
I established a northern red oak forest 26 years ago that desperately now needs much more release from the Norway spruce and thinning of the red oak.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10180/red_oak_field.jpg) (https://forestryforum.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=356826)
ooh nice! Do you have to trim underneath the trees every year? Or do you find that the red oak does well as killing off the grass and other plants underneath?
I don't know about red oak, but an overstory of balsam fir with a crown closure will ensure their is nothing growing under it. I have been cutting in mine to get other stuff to grow. A deer or a moose would starve to death in most of my woods. They get browse by going to the edges in blow downs or open meadows of wetter land.
Quote from: EWilson99 on November 16, 2024, 10:46:31 PMDo you have to trim underneath the trees every year? Or do you find that the red oak does well as killing off the grass and other plants underneath?
Once you have that sort of crown density, very little light reaches the ground once the trees leaf out. Only really shade tolerant stuff, that's usually no problem. Unless it's some sort of creeper that will grow up and smother whole trees. But you can take care of those with a hand saw and some paint on death applied to the stump.
Quote from: EWilson99 on January 22, 2021, 05:43:35 PMMy parents own a farm here in Eastern Ontario, and they've decided to reforest a small 0.7 hectare (1.7 acres) piece of their property. The trees are being planted by the local Raisin River Conservation Authority, and the amount of trees goes along like this, for a total of 1400 trees:
800 White Pine
300 White Cedar
100 Red Maple
100 Bur Oak
50 Bitternut Hickory
50 Black Cherry
The composition of the trees, and their amount, were solely decided by the RRCA, and my parents had no control over the decision. What worries me is the lack of space that there will be in-between the trees once they're planted, and what effect it'll have in 4-5 years time. My parents calculated that there should be about 4-6 feet between each seedling, but I've heard that some of these trees actually require more space. Does this mean that there's a chance of most of the trees (50%) not reaching maturity? If some of the seedlings die, would it help other nearby trees when it comes to space?
Any help is very much appreciated
I'm a retired forester in Wisconsin. The mix of trees looks like some of the plantings done under a federal program such as the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The number of trees totaling 1400 works out to roughly 9' x6' spacing. It's best to have a wider space between tree rows to allow for maintenance and future management, such as grass control or thinning at some point. If you will be hand planting your trees you could plant 4 evergreens and then a hardwood to evenly distribute the hardwoods. If machine planting you could mix the hardwoods in occasionally as you are planting the evergreens, what we called a "bucket mix" to try to get the hardwoods scattered throughout. I would ask your Conservation Authority for clarification of the planting plan, or your local service forester for guidance, so it gets done the way it should. You should have plans for site preparation and follow-up weed control until the trees are established, especially if you have heavy soil.
I planted Northern red oak between Norway spruce year '98 in rows about 10-12' apart. Within the rows, distance between trees about 6-8'.
The spruce grew faster in height than the oak, and I should have started removing the spruce earlier than I did. Would have been much easier than waiting for them to be so tall and large in diameter, but I'm taking the 5 acres as is. Many spruce have been removed. Now the red oak need some thinning.
Surprised the spruce out grew the oak in height. Up here the hardwoods out grow the softwoods in height, especially red oak, birch and maple. I get 2 or 3 feet, sometimes 4 feet on maple, yellow birch and oak out in the open. Maybe 12-18" on spruce. My acre of yellow birch in an old orchard are twice as tall as white spruce planted in open grass. Both 24 years old now, the birch have been making seed for 4 years. Perhaps the height difference it's due to compaction. Red oak is deep rooted, white spruce roots grow just under the sod and soon come to the surface. White spruce is a terrible lawn tree because of them roots on top. Blue spruce don't seem to do that.
Treefarm1
You may know the Forester I worked with, Steve Holaday before he retired. Good man.