The Forestry Forum

Hi all.

Sorry about asking such a general question, but I may not have much time to do research before the logging company is available. My questions will be more focused in the future when I'm learning about maintaining our woods.

Things are moving pretty quickly with the contractor who is building two ponds on the property my girlfriend and I share. (She owns 80 acres and I own 2 ::)) We're each building ponds and hers will be about 6 acres and mine about 1/2 acre. The pond sites haven't had much logging done in many decades and are made up of Loblolly pine, Water Oaks,Tulip Poplar, Sweet gums, Black gums, and a few White Oaks.

The shoreline has been marked at 100 - 200 foot intervals with flags and tape. Actually there will be two different shorelines because we're having two different drain levels. At the high level there will be a little less than an acre where we'll leave the trees to be flooded. I assume we will take out the pines and any White Oaks and leave the Sweet Gums, Water Oaks, Black Gums, and maybe some Poplar. If the water stays up longer than a few months I'll open the lower drain and bring the pond down to about 4 acres giving the trees a chance to dry out. Does that sound OK?

My biggest concern at this time is working with the logging company. I'm not happy being so ignorant about the process. I've taken the time to learn something about the trees we have, but I'm sure there's a ton that I need to know about selling timber. Here's a few things I'm curious about:

At what point do you find out what your trees are worth?

What's the best way to mark the area you want clear cut?

If you could, would you spend every day in the woods observing the logging? That's my inclination.

Will most loggers put the roads back into good condition when they finish?

Is there a standard contract for this type of job?

I should mention that the logging company is in the small SW Georgia town we just moved to, and seems to have a good reputation. I don't have any reason to doubt their integrity, I'm just in the habit of knowing as much as I can in case questions come up.

Thanks for taking the time to read my noobie post. ;D

GW

best thing imo is you should make contact with some of that loggers previous customers at least 2-3 and dicuss with them the quality of work they did and any dislikes they may have had. a small town it should not be too tough to get that info. also in  small town if he has been in business for very long he probably knows how to treat folks right. country folks tend to starve the bad weeds out over time, when it comes to loggers, hay balers, and sawmillers.

Welcome to the Forum, GW!  Send me a PM with your location and the name of the logger.  I may be able to help you.

Quote from: GW on July 09, 2007, 04:49:50 PM   

leave the Sweet Gums, Water Oaks, Black Gums, and maybe some Poplar. If the water stays up longer than a few months I'll open the lower drain and bring the pond down to about 4 acres giving the trees a chance to dry out.   

I'm not familiar with Water Oak, but I think the water will eventually kill the other species listed.

Yup, extended flooding of those species would eventually kill them, especially in the growing season. You could get away with a couple weeks in the winter, they prefer a lower elevation, but you'd need Nuttall and overcup oak, bitter pecan, baldcypress and water tupelo for what you're thinking. The white oaks are going to like it the least.

Good questions to ask, GW, and the time to ask is when you are asking - before you sell the trees, not after.  That's usually when I get these type questions.  The landowner wants me to correct mistakes after he made them instead of keeping them from happening in the first place.

Logging road retirement is a standard logging contract provision. There may be certain laws on this in your State.  Check with your State Forester first. Beyond that, it's flexible.  If you want to split the work, spell it out in the contract.  For instance, you can have the logger do the heavy grading with his equipment and you could do the grass seeding yourself.  Or you could have him do it all.  Just be sure to state it clearly in the contract as to who will do what, and when.

For a clearcut, in my neck of the woods the perimeter is marked clearly with flagging or painting trees.  The instructions given to the logger is, cut every tree inside the perimeter marked in such-and-such way.

I'd spend some time every day when he first starts.  If he's doing what you want, then you might visit only every few days.  A good logger welcomes the landowner, especially at the start so he can adjust his operation to meet the landowners wishes, but some landowners become a pest and expect the logger to take time from his job to visit with them all the time.

Most loggers have developed their own contract.  Naturally they are written to meet his needs, not necessarily the landowners.  So don't use it if it strays too far from what you want, or is so short it doesn't answer your concerns.

As far as a standard contract, don't use one.  Just about every logging job is different. Your State Forester can give you advice on how to write one and what to include and not include.

A real important consideration is to work with a reputable logger.  No contract will relieve your pain and suffering if you get someone who takes advantage of you.  Any recourse on your part to a breech in the agreement will cost you in time and money in the legal system.  The best thing is to be sure you are dealing with someone with a good reputation and track record.  As previously advised by Ely, check around and get references. 

A concern that I have with your situation is that 6-7 acres is very small.  The logger will cut it and be gone in a couple of days unless you are adding other acreage to the sale.  That is not a problem in itself, but the best loggers will not be interested in such a small area.  That makes you more vulnerable to a part-time logger or someone who will be in a hurry to clear cut and clear out.  Don't make things complicated or come at them with a contract that would scare off a lawyer, otherwise the good loggers will steer clear of you.  Keep it simple, with your expectations clearly defined. 

All good advice. The way to get the best price is to get more than one bid. However as WDH said, you will have more trouble getting someone interested and then the cost of moving equipment in and site work may eat any returns for the logger.

Welcome to the Forum, GW. :)   Where in SW Ga, and who's your logger?  I know one logging outfit with a great reputation, but he just sold his business because of cancer. :'(  I don't know who bought it, or if they are honest.  I also know of one who is crooked as a snake. >:(  I have a sneaky suspicion that he may be the one who did the buying and kept the reputable name. ::)

Good point from WDH about the small size of the job.  Another point on selling timber, it may not happen "overnight".  Quite often loggers don't actually cut some jobs for several weeks or months  after signing the contract.  Being in a hurry to get timber cut as soon as possible also invites the cut-and-run, make-a-big-mess-and-leave  type operators.  Up my way, a standard pulpwood contract is for 6 months, with the understanding that one 6 month extension might be granted.    A sawtimber sale contract is a minimum of one year from the contract signing. 

With all that acreage being owned by your girlfriend, however, there could be much more timber that needs to be cut.  Beware, though, "needs to be cut' should be decided by a professional forester working for you, not someone who wants to buy your trees. 

If you can hold off on getting the pond sites cleared for a few months, I suspect you would be better served by getting a forester to do a forest management plan for the entire acreage before you sell any trees.  Quite likely you and she can get your forests in better health and value following a well thought out management plan.  Again, contact your State Forester for this.  Even if he/she doesn't do such a plan, they can put you in touch with consulting foresters who do.

I think the biggest concern has been over looked here.

Quote from: GW on July 09, 2007, 04:49:50 PM
Things are moving pretty quickly with the contractor who is building two ponds on the property my girlfriend and I share. (She owns 80 acres and I own 2 ::)) We're each building ponds and hers will be about 6 acres and mine about 1/2 acre.

YIKES! What happened here man!? :o :-\ ??? ;D

Excellent comment by Phoerster to do a management plan for the whole property.

Thanks for all the replies everybody, I would have responded sooner but I changed my email address and got locked out until this afternoon.

Sometime tomorrow I'll address your comments. Cindy and I really appreciate the help.

I'd like to start by commenting on the forester. He has lived here all of his life and his family is one of the oldest in this county. People here have good things to say about him and I doubt that he would cheat a new neighbor. My concern isn't about his honesty, but that his crew won't have the patience to deal with an uniformed landowner. Hopefully I can get up to speed with your help. We've talked with smaller loggers in the area and when a job gets too big for them they recommend this company as one that can handle any size job. Besides harvesting timber he also sells forestry related products including large machinery.

One reason he might be inclined to do a small job like this is to help out his cousin who is our pond contractor. The pond man has built ponds all of his life and learned from his father who also was a pond builder. I've done a lot of research about pond building and this man seems knowledgeable and honest. When he had doubts that we would keep a larger sized pond full he recommended a smaller pond which meant less money for him. Cindy and I are both comfortable with the logger and the pond builder.

Your advice to develop a forest management plan makes perfect sense, but there are a few reasons that we don't want to wait very long to start the ponds. The main reason is that the drought conditions we're having make the pond construction easier and could result in a pond that holds water better. I would rather see a contractor work under optimal conditions if possible and that's what we have now. Also if the pond man has to start other jobs there's no telling when he'll have a time slot to fit us in.

One thing I don't understand is what is the harm of having the clear cutting done now, and then having the logger come back when he can to thin the woods? He has already said that that is what he will do. Maybe he's willing to break up the job because he's wanting to help his cousin the pond builder. I'm sure they work together when they can.

When Cindy and I first moved here I contacted the State forestry dept and set up an appointment with a state forester. He came and we walked the woods, but I was surprised by how little he offered in the way of help or even advice. I asked questions about thinning and prescribed burning but he didn't seem very interested. He did give me some great pointers about photography and we tried to find a big Magnolia I had seen before. He said he would send us an outline, but we never heard from him and I lost interest in working with him. I suppose I could try again but I would like to think about some private help.

The area that would be flooded at times has mostly Water Tupelo which I've been calling Black Gum. Maybe the thing to do is to cut all but the Water Tupelo which I know live in standing water. I talked with Cindy about cutting everything and planting Cypress, but the Water Tupelo are common around here on land that floods periodically and if we left them we wouldn't have to wait 20 years to get some big trees. Here's some info about them:

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/silvics_manual/Volume_2/nyssa/aquatica.htm

http://mdc.mo.gov/conmag/2001/11/20.htm

Gw,
There is a major distinction to be made between a Logger and a Forester.  It is not just semantics.   

Foresters are educated at the college level to make decisions about the betterment of the forest and the individual trees.  They are schooled to provide information to landowners about the course of planning that will make their forest or woodlot a sustainable entity, providing income and recreation for generations. 

When recomendations are made to get a forester to help, the members aren't talking of the same level industry as a logger resides.  I'm not speaking out against loggers.  I'm just trying to get you to understand that these are two very different occupations.   Comparing a Logger to a Forester would be much like comparing a Farmer to a Veterinarian, or a mystic to a lawyer.

Any Logger worth his salt will tell you the same thing. 

Your first post ask questions that are fundamental to Forestry study.

While a consulting Forester may handle the contracts for harvest, planting and preparation for you, they don't have to do the whole thing.  To ignore that level of industry expertise when it is so readily available could be folly.  If it were me, I would run to my nearest consulting Forester as fast as my feet would carry me and ask for advice.  It may end up in a contract that will ultimately serve your family well.  It will, in the least, give you peace of mind and provide some direction.  :)

I would say that if you can get the logger to come back to thin your woods after he does the clearcuts, then that's good.  My concern was that he would not want to come back to do a thinning after doing the clearcut because of the reduced volume of trees he would have to come back for.  It might not be worth it for him to come back.  In other words, offering both at the same time would give you more timber volume to sell, making it more attractive to a buyer.

But....., you need to have the trees to be removed in a thinning chosen by a professional forester working for you.  In other words, not someone who wants to buy your trees. That would be a conflict of interest.   No disrespect to the logger, but a pro forester will be more knowledgeble about the biological aspects of choosing which trees to remove.  More to the point, choosing which trees to leave for the future based on good biology, and removing the ones that are inhibiting their growth.  And the logger has the knowledge to remove them without damaging the land or the trees left.

Since you have had bad luck with the State Forester (shame on him - since I'm one too, but maybe he can't offer as many services as we can in Virginia) you need to hire a consulting forester in your area to do this for you. Hopefully, the State forester could provide you with a list of those, or maybe somebody in this forum can.

Well put, TOM.

Well, I guess we're in the market for a forester. I can see that what's been bothering me is the idea of working only with a logger, even if they're a good logger. I just didn't have the words to go with it.

It sounds like finding and hiring a good forester should take care of most of our issues. I'll call the state tomorrow and see what they say. In defense of the state forester that came out to see us I remember he told me that he had to cover a huge territory, so maybe it's wasn't his fault he couldn't do more.

I hate being ignorant, thanks for helping.

Stay in touch here too, cause, we have Foresters floating around the corners to answer questions.  It's just that you will be better served by someone that can walk your property with you.  The interest will remain here.  We're a curious bunch and will want to know how things are going.  8)

Thanks Tom. You didn't get rid of me that easily. ;D

As time passes I would like to do more and more of maintenance myself. I've always enjoyed gardening and landscaping and I think caring for some pretty wooded land would be even better. At the least I will want to do the lighter work. This property we found is something special and any time I spend working on it is time well spent. I'll have plenty more questions.

There is more then one sad tale on the board because of the lack of a real forester involved in the sale or clearing. Six acres, that is pretty small and if you got paid anything at all, I would consider that 100% bonus.

> At what point do you find out what your trees are worth?

BEFORE they are cut. That is what the forester will do.

> What's the best way to mark the area you want clear cut?

It varies, what I would do is mark the outline/cut trees in orange paint and orange tape on the first branch head height branch if possible or wrap the tape around the tree at head height.

Then where they are not suppose to cut, mark with blue paint and tape, two trees deep. So, if they cut one blue tree by accident, they have no excuse for cutting the second. It does not hurt to clear out the brush, drive stakes, and have blue tape between the stakes as a "do not cross line".

> would you spend every day in the woods observing the logging?

Yes, especially out going trucks.

> Will most loggers put the roads back into good condition when they finish?

No.

> Is there a standard contract for this type of job?

No, but, there are some good ones in this forum.

Removing logs is 1/2 the job on a clearing. What are you going to be doing with the tops and branches? I have cleaned up lots where just a one acre clearing was insurmoutable for the lot owner because of the mess someone else left behind. Especially if they drop a junk tree on top of the tops which makes clearing it very dangerous for anyone that can't rig it and pull it off with equipment

If you have some very nice trees, you don't want them damaged by "barking" while skidding logs or practically destroyed by dropping another tree against it or a good tree gridled by a winch line.

If you are building a pond area, you probably want the stumps removed and not just ground.

> I'll open the lower drain and bring the pond down to about 4 acres giving the trees a chance to dry out.

Any tree (like the ones you listed) that will be in a flood area for an extended amount of time, should be removed as it will die. If the water doesn't kill it the carpenter ants or termites will.

Thanks rebocardo.

I think I understand everything with one exception. The area that I planned having some flooded trees has quite a few Water Tupelo. The links I posted in reply #13 of this thread led me to believe that WT would thrive submerged. One of them says that when they are found with Cypress that the Water Tupelo are usually in the deeper water. I'm going to want to be pretty sure of this before the timber gets cut.

Tomorrow I'm meeting with a state forester. I've also contacted a few private foresters and will meet with them soon. One person we trust very much has worked with what I believe would be called an industrial forester. Our friend explained that this person works for a mill, but that he's known him for many years and considers him to be a fair and honest man.  It goes against my instincts somewhat, but if this friend says he's honest I believe it.

I've convinced Cindy to slow down a bit and get some help setting up a management plan for her woodland. She understands now that it's better to have the woods thinned at the same time the pond site is cut. The friend I mentioned above has had several different parcels logged and he is helping us by sharing some of his mistakes with us. 

Thanks again.

I have been working on two ponds that are currently being built . My ponds are being constructed for flood control the construction is 90%paid by the federal government.I marked all of the trees in the basin with paint and got bids from three Loggers/small mill operators. The highest bidder paid in full and cut the trees.Clean up is not a issue all remaining trees,stumps and tops were cleared stacked and burned using large  track hoe and dozer. I would not make the process extra trouble unless the tree are of great value.   

That's very similar to what we're doing. The pond man will clear and remove all stumps and tops after the clear cutting. The original idea was that the timber from the pond site plus the trees thinned from the other 50+ acres might pay for the pond. I walked the woods with a private forestry consultant yesterday and he said that's possible, but that almost every large tree would have to harvested to do it. That won't happen.

I made my girlfriend aware that the government would pay for part of the pond construction, but she didn't feel comfortable involving them to that extent so we didn't look into it. She's funny that way.


Edit: Anyone who is working on a pond would be wise to check out the Pond Boss website. I've learned a lot there.

Some links that might interest you

www.georgiawatercouncil.org

www.agr.georgia.gov

The above publishes the "Farmers and Consumers Market Bulletin" where you can advertise (for free) your firewood and lumber.  It would be a good place for a bid (people put ads in there for that).

Plus, I was thinking a good forester might be able to come up with a plan to allow you a constant supply of 4-6 cords of firewood a year on 80 acres. Most cut and split hardwoods sell in GA for $100-$150 a cord. Getting $600 from the land for free would go a long ways towards paying for the forester and ponds and probably would make it better woods.

I'll check those links out rebocardo, thanks. I appreciate looking at less conventional approaches.

That said, the ponds are very costly, relative to your firewood numbers. That income wouldn't pay for the pond in our lifetimes. I got worried for a minute that the pond construction was overpriced, but I've checked the numbers at Pond Boss and those guys weren't shocked. The one Forester I walked the woods with said that for Cindy to pay for the pond with timber money she would have to cut almost every marketable tree from the whole area. They spoke in terms of decades for the woods to regenerate and Cindy won't go for that. The way I presented it to Cindy she could take profit from the timber and wreck the woods, or she can surgically thin the woods and increase her real estate value. Also cleaning up the woods would give benefits from our own enjoyment of them. We have no plans on selling this land, but thinking in those terms might help make the decision easier.

I asked Cindy how important profit was in working out a management plan and she put it last. Basically other than clear cutting the pond site, she wants to do whatever results in a healthy beautiful wildlife habitat and only consider profit as a side benefit. The Forester suggested that Cindy hire a crew to thin unhealthy and (certain) small trees, and to harvest some marketable Loblollys in easy access locations. He said the loggers would chip the small trees and debris and sell the large ones and the result would be about break-even in terms of cost. He said that approach would result in a healthy and beautiful woodland similar to some large plantations his company manages. The down side is no help from timber in paying for the pond.

GW, sounds like that you need to go ahead and cut the trees for the pond.  As to the rest of the property, I would be glad to look at it for you this fall and offer some perspective on how to manage the timber consistent with maximizing wildlife on the property.  In fact, Dodgy Loner and I are planning to attend the Moutrie, GA Sunbelt Ag Exposition in October.  We are thinking about hooking up with DanG, Radar67, and DonK on the excursion.  If it is not too late, I would be happy to stop by your place.  Plus, Dodgy Loner has a passion for looking at trees (not that I don't  ::)), and it would be very convenient since I believe that you are not too far from Moultrie  ???.

Wow WDH, that's a very generous offer to make to a newbie. I'll forward your offer to Cindy and hopefully the timing will be good. 

I've been wanting to visit the Ag Expo myself. I was planning on asking my neighbor if he wanted to ride up there with me.  He's 85 years old and he's been farming next door for over 50 years counting this year's crop. He's been a great neighbor from the day we moved here.

Sounds like a plan GW ;D.

Ya have to pass right by GW's place to get from Moultrie to here. ;D  GW, you'd be silly to not go to the Moultrie show.  There'll be lots of ForestryForum members there, hanging around the sawmilling area.  We always have a blast. 8) 8) 8)

I can't imagine why I wouldn't go. I've heard they also have pond related stuff so I'm definitely going.

I've got an appointment with the 2nd Forester today. I first called him after seeing the company listed on the State Forestry site, then his name came up when I asked another good neighbor for advice. He said that person had done jobs for him and he was happy with the results. Someone else we trust mentioned a person at that same company.

When I spoke with this Forester on the phone he asked who was building the pond. I told him and he said we were working with the best. That's always nice to hear.

When I get a little time I'll be adding some photos of our place to my gallery.

> Also cleaning up the woods would give benefits from our own enjoyment of them.

Yes, that is why I am having mine done and why I spent a lot of time marking my borders. I want to put in a trail accessable to a ATV or small 4x4 and have a 1+ mile trail to walk around the property edge.  With all the brush cleared for 30+ feet on each side. Mostly so I do not get surprised by a bear or surprise one.

Since enjoyment is the main thing. One thing I might suggest is planning on putting in a screened gazebo with a fire place/pit in the middle of it (BBQ and heat in winter) from where you can watch a sunset over the ponds on higher ground. The firepit/stove/chimney should have a clear shot of sky directly above.

Under some good shade trees so you can enjoy the pond under cover even when the GA sun is beating down, but, hidden from view behind "leave" trees where the opening faces west and is surrounded by trees on the other sides with a possible view of the east.

Reason for mentioning this is for a good breeze you want to place it so it is not blocked by a hill either.

A bushy cedar makes a great shade tree because you can trim the lower branches on one side to fit the gazebo under it and you will always have lower branches directly over the roof unlike a pine. Both the pines and oaks tend to drop dead 3-4" branches that can put a hurting on the gazebo roof. The ideal cedars will probably be about 8-10" DBH and about 40-60 feet tall. Between a pair is ideal. Sweetgums and magnolias (probably no magnolias in your woods) make great ones too because the dead branches do not drop as much as the pine and oaks. Though the seedpods can be a hassle.

Just something to think about when doing the shore line and leave trees and having a rec area and access to it with a small 4x4 or ATV in case you have to drive yourself or someone else up that can't make the walk.

Here is a picture of a gazebo (this time in the pond) in Covington GA.

I imagine if you contacted the author, you could go there and sit there to get ideas about feel and look. It appears to be a public place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Duck_pond_with_gazebo.jpg

Great ideas rebocardo, the gazebo looks nice. We don't have cedar trees here, but there are Magnolias, thousands of them. They might almost outnumber the Sweet Gums and the Water Oaks. I have a few big Magnolias that I would like to leave within 15 feet of the shoreline but I'm not sure if they'll survive.

This last Forester I met with seems like a good man. We spent half a day looking at Cindy's woods plus 3 other properties he manages. Here's what I got from that meeting:

Like you all said, the property is borderline too small to get loggers interested. The only way to offset the cost of the pond would be to clear cut the whole property. As I said before that's out of the question.

Getting someone out to clear 6 acres for the pond would be difficult. At one point he even stated that we could have the pond man cut and burn the trees. I don't know how serious he was, he might of just been thinking out loud. As you probably know there isn't much high value timber in the pond site.

One option is to leave the wooded area like it is. There's a fair amount of undergrowth and saplings, but the canopy is pretty well developed so even in the summer you can get around alright. There is already a loop road so we can always get around that way easily. The woods are pretty in this natural state so I wouldn't mind just leaving them and having no maintenance.

The last option we talked about is a chipping operation and that is what had been done to the properties we looked at. He took me to one that they were just finishing, and to another one that was done 5 years ago. It was a little strange at first to see only larger trees, but it was nice to be able to see the topography of the land. The trees on that land were about 60 feet apart on average. I asked if you could leave more trees and he said maybe up to 50% more, but but wouldn't advise leaving more than that. I asked about allowing small and medium trees to grow back in and he explained that you would be going from a low maintenance situation to a high maintenance one. If we do this, the question is do we have enough material including the 6 acre clear cut to interest the chipper operators. I would want to leave a 100 foot buffer around the property line and there are several drains that would be left alone. If Cindy likes the idea the Forester will come out and GPS the property to calculate how many acres would be chipped. This would take him about an hour which he would bill for.

Depending on the estimated acreage to be cleared/chipped he might work on either a commission or an hourly basis. He thinks it would most likely be hourly. His company gets $100/hour. He said the chipping operation may pay for itself depending on many variables including oil and timber prices and the effects of weather. He said the goal would be break-even, including his fees, but that over the course of a year or two Cindy might profit a few thousand or spend a few. He said he tries to avoid building up expectations too high and that he would rather have people be pleasantly surprised by some extra profit than have them disappointed by an unexpected expense. I'm the same way.

this might be a dumb question... what is the pond going to be used for... why log it at all.. why not flood the area and turn it into a wonderful 6 acre fishery... all the flooded trees would make wonderful habitat for panfish, bass,  pearch and other species of fish and wildlife. just a thought

Blaze83

blaze83, the main reason is that the soils in the site aren't the best for pond building. To get a good seal they'll be taking out every tree and stump, then mixing the clay deposits with the sandy areas and compacting it with the dozers and scrapers. They're harvesting clay from Cindy's cultivated land to construct the core of the dam and they may even need to bring in some extra clay to line the pond basin. Another reason is that they'll be excavating down a few feet to make the pond deeper. Those are the reasons this pond is fairly expensive to build.

Not a dumb question in my opinion.

I'm trying to picture what the last Forester meant by chipper operation. I found this web page for a brushcutter-chipper and I'm wondering if that's what he meant. 2/3 of the way into the video they pan the camera through some chipped woodland with only large trees remaining and it looks very similar to what he showed me on the properties we drove through.

Can anyone offer any comparisons between leaving the woods as they are (with small trees and undergrowth), and clearing it like in the video?

Here's the page with the chipper and video: http://www.deniscimaf.com/a-dah100.html

EDIT: I was told that just after the thinning is done they would apply an herbicide to kill the cut trees so they don't regrow. Sweet Gums seemed to be the main focus of that problem. After that the maintenance would be some mowing (annual?) and burning, I think every 4 or 5 years. Of course I was told it depends on a lot of factors.

GW,
Chipper operation could encompass anything from a small brush chipper to a whole tree chipper to a clearing machine that has a grinder on its front that some call a tree eater.  Chips, if in volume, may be removed from the site and sold as fuel, or spread on the site to decompose.
http://www.banditchippers.com/index.php?option=com_models&itemId=15&lineId=3
http://www.morbark.com/

Chipping has evolved into a real science.  Clean chips of specific sizes can be produced to match the market that is available.

I know very little about chipping except what I rent for small jobs (usually a 6" Veermer) and what I saw on the History Channel where they use heavy equipment to feed a forest eater.

In the video it appears they leave the chipped stuff on the floor, I think I would want that removed. To me, that would be a hazard and fuel source. Though from experience, the chips do deter undergrowth for at least a few months.

After chipping do you seed the area with wild flowers and such to prevent run off?

It sounds like your property is probably 1" or less top soil and if you dig down with a shovel you can easily hit sand/loam. I would think if you removed all the plant cover with chipping, that is asking for top soil erosion you can't correct.  Though if there are lots in your area done like that I wouldn't worry much then.

I think you being in GA, if you had it chipped and didn't sell it in that big of a clearing (50+ acres), you would be leaving money a lot of the money on the floor too.

http://www.engr.uga.edu/service/outreach/Biofuel%20Directory/Georgia%20Biofuel%20Directory.pdf

> At one point he even stated that we could have the pond man cut and burn the trees.

They do that alot around here. Cut and push in a pile and burn it all. Rubs me 100% the wrong way. I didn't like dumpstering on my last lot clearing, but, they only gave me two weeks to clear the lot.   :-\

> As you probably know there isn't much high value timber in the pond site.

Nope, usually firewood material at best.

> Getting someone out to clear 6 acres for the pond would be difficult.

In GA??? Everyone has a chainsaw  :D  There has to be 500 tree services in the Yellow Pages for Atlanta alone. Getting them to clear it just for the lumber is the tough part.

If I were you and and -needed- only six acres cleared, here is how I would do it.

1) Buy the widest self driven brush cutter possible (Dr.Field's brush cutter with the locking diff and electric start) or rent one. Measure out a 218x218 plot and see how long it takes to clear one acre of all under brush and small trees and to knock it down into shreds and mulch. Just be careful of widow makers attached to vines.

2) Then have someone come in and drop the trees. Pull them to the side or front of the property, and cut into big firewood length piles. People will burn everything you mentioned except the pine. Give the firewood away for free or sell it cheap and find a local pulp mill for the pine. If the pulp mill is too much hassle, I would give the pine away free to a local sawyer even if I had to pay the tree company to drop it off.

It should only cost you about $1000-$1200 an acre to do it that way. Even less if you chip in with the labor on the minor clearing and such.  Then pay someone to come in with HD equipment and rip all the stumps up. Maybe the pond guy. I would burn the stumps though.

Just a few ideas to bounce off you.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to do the whole thing at once, the chipping with the forester supervising it sounds like the best and fastest solution for you and from your post I assume the chips are sold to offset the cost of the chipping.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do think leaving big healthy trees spaced 50-60 feet apart is a good idea. It will give you healthy trees and give you a chance to keep kudzu, vines, and ivy at bay. Also, it probably will reduce the amount of fuel for a fire and with the fires they have had so far in GA, that would be a good thing.

Keeping up anything over 5 acres is no small task in itself, especially if you leave a bunch of small stuff behind that makes it tough to drive though with an ATV/brush cutter combo. I think maybe this is what the forester meant?

Going by the links in that report, I guess pulp wood is only going to get $7-8 a ton.

Thanks men. I drank some coffee and remembered a few more details.

The Forester said that pulp wood was only going for around $3/ton.

He did say that the chippers would sell the chipped material, maybe to a pulp mill?

He mentioned at one point that the chipping machinery totaled around 1 million dollars in value, maybe similar to the Morbark... He said this as a way for me to imagine that it might not be worth their time to show up for only 30 or 40 acres of material. He said that the company they usually contract with had recently turned down a 40 acre job that wasn't very dense with trees.

----------

We just had a visit from a local man who has owned several wooded tracts in his day, and who we trust completely. We've only known him a few years, but if he's a BS'er I just plain give up! :) The thing is, he seems to think that the timber here is worth more than what either of these two Foresters has said. He isn't rigid about it, but he has sure planted doubt in my mind. Maybe he thinks there's more pine here than there is. He said if it was his land (he almost bought it before Cindy did, but had too much invested at the time), he would contract someone to clear as many pines as possible but unlike the Foresters recommendation he wouldn't cut any of the large hardwoods. Then he would hire this man he knows who runs some kind of riding chipper/mulcher machine to clear out all of the undergrowth and small trees up to 3 or 4 inches diameter. This rig has rubber tracks and can grind up to that size (those larger trees take a while longer to grind, but he can do it). He gets $100/hour with a 4 hour minimum. Then he would burn every other year and mow occasionally.

The more I learn the less I feel I know. :-[

You will find that the Foresters will give opinions and recommendations and then try to accomplish what you want.  If you have an opinion from a friend, tell the forester and see what he says. 

It just always amazed me that those types of recomendations, like that given by your friend, are so plentiful.  Cut the pines, leave the hardwoods.   The type of hardwoods never seems to enter into the equation, nor does the use of the land for the next 100 years.   If it were me, I would try to determine what I wanted to do with the land and get the forester to make management plan to accomplish that.   If you are going to subdivide and build houses, then a "real estate" cut like your friend reccomends might make sense.  If you are wanting to harvest from that land again one day, a mix of southern hardwoods at 50 foot intervals isn't going to be very attractive.

Three dollar a cord pulp sounds too cheap to me too.  Are you sure that the price wasn't for the hardwoods.  Are the pines only pulp size?  Don't you have any sawtimber?

Where did this Forester come from.  Is he a procurement forester for a pulpmill or a consulting forester?  Can you afford to wait for a better market?

I think you need to look down the road 50 or 100 years and tell the forester what you expect the place to look like.

GW,

Cutting all the pines and leaving all the hardwoods in that part of the country is not the way to go unless you are developing a subdivision.  The hardwoods will have low value, and unless you are setting up the land to sell for development, the future timber value of that timber will be nill.

In that part of the country, your timber management should focus on pine, which has a much higher commercial value than hardwood.  Build the pond as the pond should be built.  Focus on managing the remaining land to produce a viable economic return from managing the timber unless the goal is to sell the land.  It is OK to thin the property to promote the growth of the residual trees, but on the uplands, focus on the pine, not the hardwood.  The property has to produce future value, or the taxes alone will drain you. 

$7 to $9 per ton for pulpwood is about right for that area for normal pulpwood harvesting on a suitable area.  Not sure what the property looks like, but $3 is low unless the property only has very scattered pine.

You got a camera?  Some pics would help.

I'm sorry, but I'm not communicating very well. I think I'm going in too many directions at once.

First off, the Forester told me $3/ton for pulp when I asked about the value of the hardwoods. This is a private consulting Forester. There is a number of large healthy Loblollys here, I just can't give a solid figure on how many yet. I'll take some photos today.

I wrote "he (our friend) would contract someone to clear as many pines as possible but unlike the Foresters recommendation he wouldn't cut any of the large hardwoods."

I believe he was saying harvest all of the large pines that we could, and leave as many old hardwoods as is practical. I believe he meant we should leave the small/medium pines to mature for future harvest. He said that many of the pines had reached a good marketable size and that we might just as well cut them. He said that they don't enhance wildlife all that much, and that they are fairly susceptible to disease, lightning, etc, so why not make some money from them while they're in their prime. I think his feeling about the hardwoods is that often people cut too many of the large ones and then won't see them come back in their lifetimes. The picture he painted for us was something like a managed plantation I think, but maybe denser than usual. He said that every time he's had woods thinned he's let too many large (hardwood?) trees get harvested. I don't think he would clear all of the medium hardwoods either. Could he be referring to uneven aged Silviculture for mixed pine/hardwoods?

The goals for this property are; aesthetics, attracting wildlife, maintaining privacy, and good overall forest health. Income is not a primary goal, just a benefit if it happens.

Thanks for your help and patience. :)

That makes more sense to me.  Pines benefit squirrels and woodpeckers but nothing like most of the hardwoods do.  The concern with having a lot of hardwoods is that they canopy the forest floor and don't allow regrowth of pines or many of the understory species. If you aren't interested in growing pines in any density, then hardwoods make for a pretty piece of property, even if they have little market but esthetics.

Growing trees for profit isn't the only reason to have a management plan.  I have areas that are managed for recreation only.  I wouldn't have it any other way.  Regardless of the reason that you want the land to look like you want it to look, a forester is trained to put a silver lining around it for you.  That's the difference in using a forester rather than a real estate landscaper.  The Forester has the knowledge to see the Forest from all angles and still realize that you are the owner. If he is successful in making you happy, you may find him revisiting.  It will be his "garden" too.

I understand why images are limited to 35k, but how much of any idea can you get about 50 acres of woods with such small photos?

Is it against forum rules to put up a non-linked url so that people can copy and paste it in a different browser window?

GW,
The truth be known, bigger pictures don't necessarily tell better stories.  Some of the best stories on the forum have been told with small pictures.  The reason was because they were judiciously cropped to emphasize the subject matter and because they were in focus and sharp.

If you will email me some of your pictures in the same form and size that they came from the camera I will try to provide you with pictures that fit the forum frame.

look for an IM.

GW
We get photo's posted regularly on the forum that give us good images of the woods....just not 50 acres at one shot tho.  ;D

For example, look at some of Jeff's photo's of his land in the UP. Also, some of WDH's photo's of a timber stand.

Very interesting project you have going, and it's been fun reading the many comments and the information you've received.

Could you all hear me whining? Well, this morning I downloaded a program so that I could stitch several photos together into a panoramic view. I made one just for you. :'(

I sent links to you Tom, thanks.

Something to consider about the location in these photos; it's the first thing you see as you enter our property. It might have misled our friend who hasn't walked these woods in a long time because I think the pines are much denser here than on many parts of the place.

PS. I took a look at Tom's gallery. I couldn't see much in the photos, but I noticed he shot pictures of Santa fishing! Man! Those must be worth some $$$.

EDIT: My premature attempt to kid around with Tom reminds me of a story an old buddy related to me. He was stationed about 200 miles from the North Pole at a radio relay station or some such thing. It was a very small post and I imagine that it was fairly informal. When it was really extra cold they could throw hot liquid in the air and it would evaporate before it hit the ground. They showed this phenomenon to a new recruit who was duly impressed. Later the guys were relaxing and the commanding officer walked up. The new guy wanted to bond or something so he tossed his drink towards the CO. That would have been fine except that the older guys had forgotten to tell this new recruit the trick only worked with hot liquids. Naturally his was cold. My buddy said nobody laughed at all.


:)

Quote from: Tom on July 19, 2007, 12:08:05 PM
That makes more sense to me.  Pines benefit squirrels and woodpeckers but nothing like most of the hardwoods do.  The concern with having a lot of hardwoods is that they canopy the forest floor and don't allow regrowth of pines or many of the understory species. If you aren't interested in growing pines in any density, then hardwoods make for a pretty piece of property, even if they have little market but esthetics.

Growing trees for profit isn't the only reason to have a management plan.  I have areas that are managed for recreation only.  I wouldn't have it any other way.  Regardless of the reason that you want the land to look like you want it to look, a forester is trained to put a silver lining around it for you.  That's the difference in using a forester rather than a real estate landscaper.  The Forester has the knowledge to see the Forest from all angles and still realize that you are the owner. If he is successful in making you happy, you may find him revisiting.  It will be his "garden" too.

Tom makes some really good points.  If income is secondary, then by all means, favor the hardwoods for their aesthetic appeal and wildlife value.  However, you can do a reasonable job of both (not perfect) managing for some future income and wildlife by creating a mosaic of timber and habitat types. 

 Something to consider  ;). I'm working a property now where the land owner has many hiking /x country ski trails. We are leaving a heavy canopy over the trails to hold down raspberry bushes and opening other areas to sun light to get a better w/pine regeneration.

The property ranges from 250 ft to 300 ft in elevation. There is a high spot back in the wooded area where my neighbor grew corn about 35 years ago. There's a lot of volunteer Loblolly there now. There is also a nice little shed/cabin. This seems like a good place to thin fairly heavily and manage for pine, but I still wouldn't focus on timber value, I would want to plant the most interesting conifer, or mix of conifers.

There's a lot of Magnolia as I mentioned before. We didn't get many blooms this year probably due to the drought, but I saw thousands of cast off blooms on the ground from last year. I've read that Magnolias are losing ground in some areas and I would like to see them stay a dominant feature of these woods. There is also a ton of Wild Azalea.

There's a little creek that runs across the back of the place that has stopped flowing now. My neighbor said this is the second time in 50 years that he's seen it dry. It runs through a low flat sandy section and even in this dry time there are a lot of ferns. When it's wet it doesn't get muddy though, because it drains so well. I've seen the creek overflow it's banks by about a foot, and at that point it was 150 feet wide at one place. The flow broke 2 inch saplings and the next morning I walked along the normal bank without getting mud on my boots. Periodic flooding has kept this bottom pretty clear. There is a grandaddy pine probably not more than 30 feet from the creek that must be 3 feet in diameter. There's a loop road that runs just above that spot.

Man, I'm glad I woke up before letting someone come in here and carve up the place. I really appreciate the support you all are providing.

Magnolia Grandiflora is not only mighty pretty, but there is good market for potted seedlings.  It, and the other Magnolias, like sweetbay, make some mighty pretty lumber.  I have a friend who makes bedroom suites out of it.  He is specialized.  Flat sawn, it is very attractive.

Keep an eye out around your loblolly for Fox Squirrels and also watch hawks feed around the edges.  You will probaby have owls too. It's fun to call them up in the evening.  They are so stupid. :D

Wild Azaleas are something to show off too.  I love them.

BTW: I agree with WDH's post (not that I disagree with anyone else).

Now to be rather blunt about it. imo, Don't listen to friends, family, neighbors, or the guy at the local store (or me  :D )   .

Listen to one of the two foresters you are paying or will be paying. 

imo, Don't diverge into a side scheme bypassing the professionals for someone that knows someone that knows something about how to manage or clear a forest. This is how a spindly walnut tree with a 100 twisted knarly rotted board feet turns into a $10,000 nest egg   ;)

Take any advice here or elsewhere, pass it by the forester, but, don't bypass the forester.

I think this will contribute to long term happiness and a better plot of land.

BTW: The $3 a ton for hardwood sounds about right. Which is why I keep harping on the selling it as firewood angle.

A cord will be roughly 3 tons or $9.

You can easily sell it for $50 a cord if it is cut into firewood length.

What I have done in the past.

Advertise $20 a truck load or $15 a mini-truck and advertise it as much as they can fit into the bed. Or sell it by the cord/cubic foot for a trailer. I really don't care if someone thinks they are getting a sweet deal piling it to the top of the cab and dragging the bumper off the property.  I just made $20 for something (1/2 a cord), even if I could get paid from a mill, that I would have been paid $3 if I had delivered.

Though if I was having someone come in to clear the whole plot, I would have them chip and take it all and by pass all the hassles of dealing with people. Some of which might not be the type you want around on a property scoping it out for things to steal including trees.

Example: I was clearing a roughly 1 acre lot and while my back was turned for a few minutes the people there for firewood, that knew the owners (!), stole a 50 foot steel cable.   >:(  I have never had anyone steal anything from a job site, even when I forgot it at the end of the day and left it and had people from Craigslist come by for firewood and pay me on the honor system. Someone that knows the owners steals my cable while I am less then 100 feet away  :(

If there is going to be 30+ cords of medium/hardwood I might find a local firewood dealer and have him buy it in bulk. Though keep the forester in the loop and give him a percentage and avoid dealing piece meal if you can.

If you are having it chipped and someone is coming in with $500,000+ worth of equipment, I would keep it simple and chip it all.

The forester might be trying to have two people in the same area set up for chipping and might be pushing you that way because of it. That is okay, because that means two people get a job done that otherwise would not be able to afford it. As an example, I do this on my (6" chipper) chipping or stump grinding when a couple of people only have enough for 1-2 hours needed for the machine.  That way they all split the $200-$250 daily fee and I get paid my hourly fee and everyone is happy.

> There's a lot of volunteer Loblolly there now

What does the "volunteer" mean?   ???

Volunteers have seeded in naturally. They've "volunteered" to be there, unlike the seedlings that were forced into the ground!

>Keep an eye out around your loblolly for Fox Squirrels and also watch hawks feed around the edges.  You will probaby have owls too. It's fun to call them up in the evening.

-I've seen a few Fox Squirrels in the woods, and they're always in the pecans. They love teasing my dog Flop Ear Dog. We hear owls pretty often. 

>Don't listen to friends, family, neighbors, or the guy at the local store. Listen to one of the two foresters you are paying or will be paying. 

-I'd love to have the expertise of a forestry consultant, but I'm worried about the idea of having a large scale operation come in and cover the whole property in a few days. I don't want to find out after the trees are gone that the Forester didn't understand our goals, or that he couldn't control the loggers. The only reason to rush is to get the pond site cleared during dry weather, after that I think I'd like to take the time to learn more about what we have here to begin with. I heard one of the Foresters refer to a chipping operation as a "surgical" approach, but it seems pretty invasive to me. Don't get me wrong, I will always seek out the best advice possible, but I think I would feel better about working on a smaller, slower scale. There must be some other options to consider...

GW
No matter who is there, I'd be there as well, looking over their shoulder. I'd be supplying some refreshments, and talking with the guys whenever they had a 'free' minute (or just walking to and from their equipment). Let them know you are interested in what they are doing, and how they are doing it.

No way would I come back to a surprise after they were done and gone.  ;D ;D    Too many operators use the "do it and ask for forgiveness" routine, and cut too many corners in the meantime.

I added 5 images to my gallery of the woods just as you enter the property.

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Northofdriveway1a.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Northofdriveway2a.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Northofdriveway3a.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Northofdriveway4a.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Northofdriveway5a.jpg)

photos added to post by admin

A properly good thinning looks like it would be good for the woods.  I see a lot of potential there.

Nice pics, GW.  My offer to come by in October still stands.  With the pond and what you are talking about doing with the timber, that will be a beautiful place.

You're definitely welcome to come by WDH, and bring whoever you want to.

I'll upload some more photos soon so that you all can see the different areas.

I agree with OWW, it looks like you have some nice regeneration started there.

As ReCarbo say, as Tom says, as WDH says, as I say, as everybody else says....., put the most weight on the opinions and advice of the professional forester who actually walks through your woods, takes the info on tree ages, growth rates, soil types, knows the loggers and other contractors in your locality, who has talked face-to-face with you to determine what you want. 

Asking for advice and opinions here is great - it will give you some additional things to think about.  But it is not as good as the man on your ground in your woods. 

As far as a big company coming in and moving fast, you as the landowner have the last word. If the forester marks trees, check the marking to see if you like it before the loggers start.  When the logger starts, be there that day to see if you like the way he does it. 

Communicate, communicate, communicate.  You will get the desired results you want.  Just remember, it will look messy as heck while they are cutting and taking out the trees.  It will take a few years for this harsh distubance to soften with the addition of new growth of the vegetation. 

Phorester, I'll be talking with more Foresters soon, but I'm beginning to wonder if we really want to do much to these woods at all except for clearing the pond site. 

What I'm learning is that I don't want to see the hardwood canopy broken up too much. It would be great if someone could harvest some marketable pines without destroying the canopy, but is that possible? Also, what's the point if we're talking about a break-even situation anyway?

Any trees taken out willl change the visual appearence of the woods, just like weeding a garden will change the visual appearance of it.  See if you can find forests in your area that have been thinned 5, 10, 20 years ago and take a look at them.  I imagine they look pretty good now.  Most people are unaware that a thinning was done years ago in a woods they think are pretty, until I point out the stumps from the past harvesting.

It sounds like (and looks like, after seeing your pictures) there has been no management activities in this woods for a very long time, maybe never, in the entire life of this forest. By "management", I mean management practices done in this woods under the direction of a professional forester, not a past timber harvest done under the direction of a timber buyer.

A first thinning in such a woods is more to improve the future health and value, not necessarily to make money.  Again, what you have to do at this point is like weeding a garden.  You can't do anything with the weeds, but taking them out improves the garden in the future.  Maybe another analogy is like buying a rundown house.  You put money into it, to improve it, which is an expense, with the understanding that doing so will improve the future value of that house.  The purpose of a thinning as we and your forester are proposing is not to make money.  It's to improve the future health of the woods.  Making any money is just icing on the cake.

If it's going to be a break-even proposition from thinning the woods and building the ponds, good!!  Quite often I have dealt with landowners in the same situation, and little money is made, because the trees to be removed just aren't very valuable as a commodity themselves.  But this is not the time to think of a net profit.  Think future health and value.

The value of doing this now lies in the future growth of the forest after those trees are removed.  That's the point in doing it.

I don't have a problem with changing the looks of the woods for a few years. I guess what I need to do is understand the term "health" as you're using it. Cindy is a veterinarian so she can relate to doing procedures that look invasive initially, but result in better long term health.

It seems to me that if loggers target the larger pines they're going to have to cut a lot of trees that don't necessarily need to go to improve the health of the woods. What's the down side of leaving the pines? I know they might become diseased or get hit by lightning, but if we're not focusing on the value of the timber what's the issue? I've heard  "you might as well take them before they die anyway", but isn't that just a profit motivation?

Thanks everyone for the feedback. If I don't always say thanks that doesn't mean I'm not grateful.

Pines mature the same as you do.  The maturity allows disease and tissue death.  Animals use cavities for homes.  If you think the tree needs to come out to benefit other trees that you want to keep, take it out.  If you don't care, leave it and let the coons and woodpeckers have it.  It might last longer than you but just not be a "Marketable" item.  Marketing fiber isn't the only reason to farm trees or manage woods.  It boils down to what you want to do with your land.  Do you want to raise trees for market, have a place to watch wildlife, hunt, run dogs, fish, camp or just keep it as a garden for its looks.   They are all legitimate goals. But, you can't always have your cake and eat it too. Once those pines are cut, regeneration of pine might be difficult with the hardwoods canopied over.  Is the goal to "not" have pines?

I just have to insert something here that has nothing to do with anything but me.   I love pines.  I think that God knew what he was doing when he made a pine tree.  It's food for wildlife, shelter for birds and little animals, from its seedling stage to natural death and beyond. We build things out of, what we have found to be, one of the lightest, strongest, hardest, straightest, softwoods availabe that has rot resistance in the heart, and beauty in the sapwood. We use it to make paper, scraps to make OSB, boil it to use in paints and women's makeup and even use the fiber in ice cream and other food products.  It's a calming tree that whistles when the wind blows through it; and it's  strong enough to withstand hurricanes when other trees succumb.  It's reputation as a lightening rod is ill deserved.  Other trees are hit by lightening too.  Pines growing away from the house might even be considered a safety belt for the house in that they are the hightest point and will help keep lightening away from you.  Having land in the strongest pine growing area of the USA, I find it difficult to think badly about the pine tree.  It's what has put most of our youth through college and provided meat for the table. It has sailed the seas as a Keel and mast too. Our big shrimp boats, pilot boats and little row boats have all, at one time or another, been made from pine.

Now that I got that off of my chest, pine stores real good on the stump.  If you don't cut it down, it doesn't mean that you threw it away.  Folks around here with sawmills will be quick to tell you that it is mighty handy, when you have acreage, to have trees available to saw up for maintenance projects.  There is always the gate that needs repairing, not to mention the out buildings.  Pine makes some mighty pretty furniture too.  Have you a sawmill yet?  If not, it won't be long before you find yourself either in the market or looking for a neighbor who has one.


If you don't want to cut the pine trees down, you don't have to.  You might groom under the canopy by getting rid of little trees that are 6 inches in diameter and 40 feet tall, with no chance of getting any bigger.  You might want to open the floor up to allow burning now and again or just to get so that you can see through it.  Heavy understory and cluttered forest floor raises ticks too. Now, granted, they need to live somewhere.  But, them and chiggers I'd just as soon see somewhere else.

The good thing about forest maintenance is that you don't have to make up your mind right now.  You have plenty of time to change it.   In todays world, folks have gotten too use to chasing dollars around big buildings. It's easy to forget to look out of the window. We are led to believe that time is money and decisions have to be made on the run and if your wrong you lose your job, etc., etc.    When you find yourself being able to watch the trees grow, you will realize that the world doesn't have to move as fast as a guy on the floor of the stock market thinks.  You aren't having to do everything to your trees today to make everything perfect so that you don't have that job to do again and can get onto something else.  Your trees are family.  You even have to slow down to enjoy them.  Trees don't grow at our pace, we have to learn to work at their's.

That Forester who realizes your goals is trained to be able to allow the forest to follow guidelines that will have it at your goal years down the line.  He is as aware that "hands off" is a form of management as "clear cutting".  It's your job to make your goals clear so that he has something to work with. As you learn, you should make it a point of not putting him in a position of conflicting goals.  That gets you back to the place of trying to having your cake and eating it too.  Sometimes you can't do that and you must trust your Forester the same as you do your doctor.  You should also stick with your Forester the same as you stick with your doctor. Why train a new doctor every time you have an ailment?  You have to realize that a forester worth his salt who has been given the long term job of helping to manage your woods will take pride in his results and in his ability to satisfy your goals.  You will become a team that has the potential of lasting as long as you have the woods. 

A lot of your concerns have to do with Forestry related items when you should be  grooming your goals from your forester's recomendations.  Your job is setting the goals.  It's the Forester's job to have the knowledge to help you get there. It doesn't all have to be done before Five.

Yes, moving big equpment around to get a job done is expensive and you must provide enough work and potential profits to interest someone in doing it.  But also keep in mind that they are providing a service and have no work at all if they don't meet some landowner's schedules too.  There is more than one way to skin a cat and his equipment is only one way.  Finding someone to dig a pond isn't that difficult. There are many of them out there that are trying to make equipmenet payments.   So what if you don't get it done this week?  That's what happens when you get into tight schedules and fast living.  Somebody else ends up making your decisions to fit his schedule.  :)

Wow Tom, that's one heck of a post!

First, let me say that I love pine trees (and all trees) whether they're still in the ground or in lumber form. I still have a 2 X 4 that I salvaged from my first house 20 years ago. It's Dade County Pine and it's some of the darkest, densest pine I could imagine. I wouldn't call myself a carpenter exactly, but I've been tinkering with lumber since I was a kid.

I may have given the impression that we're in a hurry, but that isn't the case really. Like I said before, I'm tempted to just leave the woods alone for now until we've had plenty of time to figure out how to get what we want. We would like to get the pond site cleared as soon as is practical, but that's because we've been working on getting to this point for a year. The dry weather is perfect for the pond project and we don't need much of a plan for the clearcut, at least I don't know why we would. So I guess you were 1/2 right, we can wait for decades to start the bigger woodland, but we want to move steadily toward the pond building. I think that helps define part of our plan by separating the two phases. I understand that the 6 acres isn't much to a large operation, so maybe we need to find a small one.

Out of the uses you listed as possible landowner goals, "garden for it's looks" probably comes closest.

"You might groom under the canopy by getting rid of little trees that are 6 inches in diameter and 40 feet tall, with no chance of getting any bigger.  You might want to open the floor up to allow burning now and again or just to get so that you can see through it."

-I think we're getting real close to BINGO.

I told the both of the Foresters that I met with that profit was the least important issue and that aesthetics was the most important. I don't think I ever gave them conflicting goals, but they both still seemed to be leaning the direction of cutting too many trees. I'll talk to them again and try to define our goals better.

I don't doubt that there are many people who would build a pond for us, but in my opinion they don't often have much skill beyond digging a hole in the ground. As you pointed out there are all kinds of people looking for ways to keep their machines busy. Many of these people take pond jobs that they aren't qualified to do and end up leaving the landowners with poorly designed ponds that often don't even hold water. I put a lot of effort into finding the best pond builder around and I feel good about working with him. I'm not rushing the pond, I just don't want to wait unless there's a dang good reason. One other issue is that it wasn't easy to get the permit to build this pond. I don't know if or when the permit might expire, but the state is getting pretty picky about handing these out.

Your post was very helpful Tom, thanks.

BTW: Liked Tom's post too.

> I don't want to find out after the trees are gone that the
> Forester didn't understand our goals,

That is what the contract lays out.

How many cords of hardwood and softwood there are per acre now.

Leave ## number of cords and ## of trees per acre.

Take anything under ##" DBH and leave anything over ##".
Take all trees over ##'.

Leave all trees over ##" DBH in this area.

Leave all trees marked with (insert color here).

Etc.

Then mark off an acre, have the forester do a leave and take.
Have someone come out, cut the trees, remove everything as how
the contract would have it done.

Then stand back and decide if this is what you want done to the
other 79 acres in a thinning or chipping operation.

I think the thing to keep in mind, a pristine managed forest or
a wild untamed one is only 1 step away from a nature disaster
that can level the whole thing though storm or fire.

I had an ice storm do more damage to my woods then 10 ATV trails running through it ever could.

With ivy, kudzu, and vines taking over and killing southern forests
keeping it clean is the best thing for it -> imo <-

You can still see through your trees, I would work to keep
it that way.

> or that he couldn't control the loggers.

He better for $100 an hour :-D

Thanks rebocardo, those seem like excellent suggestions.

It might help that I just walked our woods with DanG. Maybe he'll help describe what we've got here.

If I had to guess, I would say that very little has been done to these woods in a long time. The good new is that we can see through the trees pretty well. Could it be that the canopy has limited undergrowth naturally? I haven't seen anything that looks like Kudzu or Ivy, and only small amounts of Virginia Creeper. I think the most common vine on the property is grape, but I don't think it's out of control. DanG did point out one very small area that had some type of invasive vine, but I haven't seen it anywhere else. The biggest problem that I know of is Chinese Privet which I will spray this winter. There is also a good amount of Poison Ivy that I would love to control.



EDIT: I re-read my previous post and I can't deny that I'm impatient to get the pond started.

POISON IVY? :o :o  NOW ya tell me. :D :D  I think the only way to avoid that is to move away and leave it. ;)

GW and I had a real good visit.  I didn't want to just sit around today, but my body was objecting to any real work after the week's activities.  So I got in touch with GW and arranged the visit.  It's only 45 miles from here. :)  I was a little late getting there, 'cause I dropped in on Brdmkr along the way.  I caught him taking a break from sawing some of the prettiest heart pine, vertical grain boards ya ever saw.  It was mighty hot, and Mike looked like he'd been through the car wash, without benefit of a car. :D :D

I got to GW's place about 4:30 and we went straight to the woods.  I must say, we had a large time visiting and looking at trees!  I took a bunch of pics and I think I got a pretty good idea what the goals are.  Too bad I ain't qualified to give much advice, eh? :-\    They sure have a pretty piece of land there, much of it in natural mixed forest.  I think he is right on in wanting to clear what he needs to for the ponds, right away.  The creek is dry for probably the first time in any of our lifetimes, and it will never be this easy to do the clearing again.  As far as the rest of it is concerned, it seems to be doing a great job of maintaining itself.  I ain't no Forester, but that looks like a healthy stand to me.  After spending several hours with GW, and looking the place over, my uneducated advice is to manage it for aesthetics and just enjoy it.  It is a treasure! :) :) :)

I must report that I found Jerry and Cindy to be down to earth, friendly and open folks.  They are ForestryForum kind of people!

Gotta run!  Thunderstorm coming and I'm unplugging.  Pics later.

Good stuff Tom, Rebocardo, Phorester, and DanG.  From what I hear, GW, separate the pond project from the land management project into two distinct objectives.  But, whatever you do, get that pond built :) ;D.

I think DanG has dibs on one dead Water Oak, but the rest of the 6 acres is up for bids!  :)

That's my take on it too, WDH.  There are quite a few good marketable trees in the area that will become pond.  A number of Swamp Chestnut Oaks, Water Oaks, Sweet Gums and Poplars.  Some are of good size and appear to be in good condition, so they are definitely not of the $3/ton pulp class.  A few would probably make veneer quality if the species and market were different.  I saw some really nice sticks in there, so I advised him to be careful how it gets marketed.  I know a couple of guys in the business around there, and they will steal him blind, given the chance.

We looked at some trees that will be right along the edge of the pond, and that they'd like to keep.  We were wondering if they'd do better with one wet foot, or if he should build up the area on the pond side of them to keep them dry.  I was concerned about the notion of covering the roots with too much soil that way.  I think all of the above species are represented in this category.  We did see some Water Oak in the area of the little pond that normally exist with one side in the water and the other dry, and they seem to be doing quite well.  The little pond is to be built in a swampy area that obviously holds water frequently in normal times.  The bigger pond will be formed by damming up a deep creek, and those woods are usually dry.

I got pics of all this, but can't get the DanG card reader to work! >:(  I'll try again in the morning.

DanG, the drain that feeds the pond site isn't the main creek that I showed you. That branch that is one of several small ones that flow into the main creek, when it rains that is. :-\ 

I learned from some Texas pond owners that you need to be careful when you constantly ask for rain....

Oh, ok.  But that is still more of a defined creek than the swampy area of the little pond, right?

I gotta go to bed.  My blinks are getting slower and slower.  zzzzzzzzzzzzz

One definition of a healthy forest:  One that has the trees growing at an acceptable rate of growth for their age and site conditions.

Sounds to me like you are afraid you are going to ruin your woods forever if you cut trees, and that you want to avoid that.  You know that once trees are cut, they cannot be put back up and you are concerned that the wrong ones might be cut.  Obviously a good thing to avoid.  You feel that the forester is recommending taking out too many trees.  But what are you basing this feeling on?  Emotion or science?  A first thinning in a woodland as old as this one looks from the pictures will usually necessitate taking out a lot of trees, actually 1/3 to 1/2 in order to give the remaining trees enough growing space to adequately improve their health.  This may sound radical, but remember, this forest has had no management for it's entire life. So if your forester is not taking out this many, he is doing a light cut for you in deference to your wish to not take out a lot of trees. This is where management recommendations are a compromise between pure science and what a landowner wants from his woods.  That's how foresters develop management plans.

A lot of landowners I work with have heard nothing but horror stories about people who have have their woods "ruined" by a logger, or know somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody that this happened to, blah, blah, blah.  ;D  But they will drive right be a woods that has been logged a few years before and not even realize it, because enough time has passed that it looks pretty again.

Working with a professional forester working for you will avoid having the "wrong" trees cut. Leaving pines, cutting pines, this needs to be decided by the soil type and landowner objectives. The worst thing to do is let a forest sit decade after decade and do nothing to it. If you think about it, that flys in the face of basic plant biology that we all learned in school;  that plants need water, sunlight, nutrients, and plant health can be improved by maximizing as many of these needs as we can.  In a forest, this is done by removing some trees to favor the growth of others.

The pond building and woodland management are indeed two separate activities.  They can be done at the same time, but they are separate projects.

Build the pond, thin your woods.  Pick a professional forester you feel comfortable with and trust his advice.

May I suggest looking into a horse or mule logger to thin the stand.
I'm a horse logger and I know that horses in the right hands are ideal for single tree selection. Also a horse job goes at a much slower pace than a mechanical harvest, so it is much easier for landowner and forester to monitor the cut and prevent mistakes.

That's interesting Rick. I'll ask around here and see if someone works that way.

DanG, yes, that little drain that feeds the big pond site has very well defined banks along it's entire path.

Phorester, I'm not afraid of cutting trees in general. I don't believe woods can be "ruined" exactly, because I understand that nature is a powerful force that always has a way to heal itself. To me, the wrong tree to take out is the one that is harvested because of it's market value alone, or only because it was in the path to a marketable tree.

I think I gave a good representation of our goals to the Foresters, but by now I think I can be even more specific thanks to the help I've gotten at this forum. My main concern in working with a consulting Forester is that they are human, and if 99% of their clients focus heavily on profit then they may tend to see our woods through the same filter. That's not a huge issue, it just means that we may need to do some extra work describing what we want.

The 2nd Forester spent more than 4 hours with me and focused on what he called a "managed plantation" or "quail plantation". We visited a woodland that he had thinned 5 years ago using that same approach and I took these photos:

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Quail%20Plantation%20sample%201.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Quail%20Plantation%20sample%202.jpg)

Here's a few sample pics from our woods. They were taken in the winter so maybe you can see more detail:

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/17.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/16.jpg)

I guess it's important to define terms. You might laugh, but I need to ask what you mean by tree? If a Sweet Gum sapling is a tree, then I feel fine about removing 1/3 to 1/2 of the trees. If you mean anything over 12 inches in dia. then I'm not so sure. I'm going to guess that you mean something in between.

Another subject that might be good for me to understand better is the forest canopy. At this point I like the idea of maintaining most of the canopy that we have now. It's my understanding that the canopy is what makes our woods relatively clear of undergrowth, which I like. I also think that the more canopy we remove the more maintenance will be required. That's not a problem in itself, but I would like to consider it while discussing the canopy.

Maybe a good reference for this discussion is the concept of uneven aged Silviculture for mixed pine/hardwoods. I assume this is a management strategy designed by Foresters, so if it suits our goals the rest should be fairly clear. Here is a document that I've been studying:

Forest Service Report (http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/gtr/gtr_so118.pdf)

Pages 38 and 39 address mixed hardwoods and pines. The report is geared towards growing marketable pines so I assume it would need to be adjusted for our goals, but it seems like a good starting point. There are some interesting ideas at the end of p.38 and the beginning of p.39 about favoring separate pine and hardwoods stands within the same management area. I would favor an plan that managed for stands of pines. I showed DanG a few acres that had been a corn field 35 years ago. I would love to see that be a healthy pine stand, again with the main goal being aesthetics.

"One definition of a healthy forest:  One that has the trees growing at an acceptable rate of growth for their age and site conditions."

I'm curious what constitutes an acceptable rate of growth, and how important that is to the health of the trees if we have no intention of harvesting them for profit. The image that comes to my mind is an old bonsai tree. Is it unhealthy because it's growth has been limited?

This one is 400 years old:
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/400%20year%20old%20bonsai.jpg)

I'm not trying to be a wise ass (it just comes natural).  :)

On a side note, when DanG and I were in the woods by Cindy's house he decided to "irrigate" one of the trees. That's the exact moment that Cindy decided to walk over and introduce herself to him.  :D

Quote from: GW on July 22, 2007, 12:04:11 PM
On a side note, when DanG and I were in the woods by Cindy's house he decided to "irrigate" one of the trees. That's the exact moment that Cindy decided to walk over and introduce herself to him.  :D

Now dat was a funny moment! :D :D :D  Talk about your strange beginnings!  At least things were out in the open. :D :D

GW, if you were trying to get WDH down there for a look, you couldn't do better than that pic of the bonsai.  That is, unless there was a slab of ribs in the pic, too. ::) :D

I'm really getting anxious for WDH to get a look at GW's place.  I have now walked the woods with both of them, and I feel that Danny would instantly know what Jerry and Cindy's goals are, and how to achieve them.  Here's what I mean.  This is the length WDH will go to to save one of his trees.  It would have been easy for that tree to be stacked and stickered on top of its own stump, but he would rather enjoy having to step around it in the shed.  I very much got the feeling that Jerry and Cindy would like to manage their's in the same manner.

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10074/hole01.jpg)

Here's Jerry standing by one of the trees I mentioned, that will be at the water's edge.  I've not seen many sticks of water oak nicer than this one.

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10074/cjtrees01.jpg)

This is the base of the same tree.  The near side has spent a lot of time in the water, but the far side has mostly been on dry land.

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10074/cjtrees02.jpg)

My tendency would be to leave it and try not to damage it fatally in the pond building.  It is located such that it would be an easy removal later, if it didn't survive, and that figures into my opinion.  What do y'all think?

I think that I started off trying to save every shrub and tree I came too.  I was of the mind that a 3 inch pine had a 1x4 in it somewhere and every shrub had an edible berry.   I soon found that I didn't know all of the plants on my place.  When I started learning what they were and found that many came from some other country, I wasn't as hard on myself about taking them down.  The  longer I live here, the less pain I feel when I take down a tree.  Water oaks were big burly rascals in the beginning.  Now I look at them as short-lived gnarley things that cook a good steak.

I've also noticed that, given a little time, I don't remember the ones I took down.   I've still got favorites.  I like American Holly, Swamp Chestnut Oak, wild azalea and Pine.   I don't think twice about taking down a black gum, sweet gum or Loblolly Bay.

Now, I don't take a tree down, unless I have a reason, but I don't let myself get carried away with saving every stick like I used to either.

My Forester told me one time.  "Don't worry about the Hardwoods.  You're going to have hardwoods no matter what you do".   He was right.  :)

Yabbut, GW ain't you, and his place is a little different from yours, and that's what makes this little game so much fun. :) :) :)  He and Cindy get to learn what they want over a period of time, if they don't jump the gun and change it too quickly.

This is a fun little forest to play in.  They even have their own version of the Holey Oak.

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10074/cjtrees04.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10074/cjtrees05.jpg)

Now we wouldn't be so presumptious as to declare these to be Holey Oak Club pics, but when His Holeyness, Tom, Grande Curmudgeon of the HOC sticks his mug down there and gets his pitcher took, he just might deem it worthy to be the Georgia branch of the club. ;D  I'm not sure if this tree is in the intended pond site, but if it is, I think it deserves its own little island. ;)  Wouldn't it be neat for visitors to go out there in a little boat to get their picture taken? 8) 8)

GW, I've been watching this thread since it started. You're getting a lot of great advice and it's obvious that you are listening, working on understanding it and appreciate it. Good for you! It has helped me also since we are in similar circumstances. I'll keep watching and learning, anything that you can share would be appreciated. There's so much that I'm struggling to put together and translate into a plan. I'd like to do a pond also but don't know if the acreage supporting it is large enough to keep it filled, similar to one of the comments you made in a post. I hope you can post some after pictures of the thinning since I still don't know what a properly thinned forest looks like.
Good luck!

Thanks idseeker, I'm grateful I found the forum and I'm glad if you can benefit from the advice I'm getting too.

I understand why you folks with forestry experience might think I was hesitating to cut trees for sentimental reasons. That's probably by far the most common attitude of people who don't know forestry (like me). I do believe that when aesthetics is the main goal that emotion is in fact a big part of the decision making process. I'm going to try to balance this out by applying the emotional side of managing our woods to the whole picture and not to individual trees. There will clearly be exceptions like our mini-holey oak and other unusual specimens, but I think I can manage to keep a clear head about cutting trees to get to our goal.

Cindy and I have already walked through a small section of the woods and marked trees that we thought looked questionable or overcrowded. I think Tom and DanG both make good points and I will apply both concepts in the most balanced way I can.

I talked again with the 2nd Forester and explained that we were going to hold off on the "quail plantation" idea, and that we would be focusing on clear cutting the pond site for now. He recommended that we work with the original logging company we talked with, the one that is located very near to us. He said he's seen them doing small clear cutting jobs before. They have a lot of equipment and employees so maybe they're less likely to turn down these small jobs.

I started marking cut trees along the proposed shoreline today. There is an area at one end of the dam where the pines are especially nice to my untrained eye. At first I thought that spot would be a great park-like area to enjoy the pond from, but the contractor told me that those pines need to go to make room for the dam. I could move the location of the dam, but I don't think its worth shrinking the pond that much for 12 or 15 pines.

Here's a shot from that area:
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pines%20in%20dam%20area.jpg)

There will still be a few nice pines that can be saved near the dam and a few big Magnolias too. Here's one big pine and a special Magnolia that we can keep:
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Magnolia%20lounge%20chair%202.jpg)

I might have to put a saddle on this filly.  ;D
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Magnolia%20lounge%20chair.jpg)

GW, is that your bonsai tree?  What a speciman 8).  Mine are definitely not anything like 400 years old :).

From the pics of your place (wow, very nice pics), it might be that less is better.  Taking out the more undesireable understory species that have little wildlife value will favor the overstory and it will create an even more beautiful landscape.  That would rule out a commercial harvesting operation and would favor removal of the undesireable understory species with a herdicide hack and squirt treatment for individual stems that warrant removal.  The resulting stand would be park-like and aesthetically beautiful.  You could make it a project of love and slowly work your way through the woods deciding on what would stay and what would be selected against. 

From what I see in the pics, the timber is far from being over-mature, so I believe that it has many years yet to live and flourish.  The mix of pine and hardwood is also very nice, creating a good blend of diversity.  There may be very little that you have to do besides take out the stems that are not contributing to the visual objective or not contributing from a wildlife enhancement standpoint.  That can be done a single stem at a time on your own time.  And, if you need to build a shed around any of them, I can advise you on that ;D :D.

DanG, I would take the bonsai over the ribs  ................................................................So, if you don't have bonsai, you better have ribs :D ;D.

WDH, as I suspected, you seem to be right in tune with GW and Cindy's thoughts about how they want this forest to look.  As Jerry was trying to convey this to me, I was thinking about your place, and how it looks just like what Jerry was describing. :)  Also, I can't help but imagine that it was mine and how I would want to use it.  What I saw was a woodlot that could sustain a man who had a small sawmill and a one-man woodworking shop, indefinitely.  There are enough trees that truly need to come down to keep a fellow going for a couple of years at least, then there would be the occasional die-off and blow-down, and plenty of usable trees to select from for many years.  There are hundreds of malformed trees in the understory that would just be $3 pulpwood to a logger, but solid gold to a folk-art furniture maker with some imagination.  I think I could make a living off that place for the rest of my days and you'd hardly know I had been there. ;)

Well WDH, not only is that not my bonsai, but I'll bet that if a stranger got within 20 feet of it ninjas would attack with deadly force. It's part of a Japanese museum.

Sadly, the only bonsai that Cindy and I have didn't survive our move to Georgia. It was a naturally occurring bonsai that was on the bank of a river near our house in Fort Lauderdale. Normally I wouldn't take a bonsai from it's natural setting, but in this case it was more likely to get crushed than appreciated. It was a sweet little Slash Pine that wasn't bigger than my finger in diameter. I have no idea how old it was when we found it, but we had it for about 6 years and it hardly changed during that time. Cindy is still watering it even though it's been dead for several months.  :'(

For it's size I get the impression that we have a lot of diversity here. There's the retired cornfield with mostly Loblolly. There's a good size area of bottom land around the creek and there's the 10 acres on the other side of the creek that I haven't spent much time on. Some of these spots I might want to leave wild and on others like the Loblolly stand I could see a heavy thinning.

If you and maybe DanG and some other members can stop by in October (or sooner) I'd be happy to do my best job smoking some ribs. I hope you like Pecan smoke.  :)

DanG, you're reminding me that it's been too long since I worked with wood for the pure pleasure of it and not just as part of a larger building project.

This little tree is close to the shoreline but maybe I'll try to keep it. I call it "Unholey Oak". All visiting forum members will be invited to pose with their heads in the hole  :D:
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/UnholeyOak.jpg)

This is our grandad pine down by the creek. It's not near the pond site:
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Cindy%20with%20a%20pine.jpg)

GW, I definitely want to see your trees place ::).  A day trip from Perry down there might be just the ticket. 

Name the day WDH!

You might want to bring some tools and a trailer....

It appears that there is someone else who needs to join. :)

Spare ribs, cole slaw, potato salad, corn on the cob, collards, sweet tea and pecan pie.  :) 8) :)

Look out now!  A fella could get trampled sayin' something like that! :o ;D 8)

OK, I know that all lay-people think their timber is worth more than it is. Well I'm wondering if our timber isn't worth more.  :)

Not all parts of the pond site have much pine, but some parts seem to have a good number of large straight ones. Just for reference I stood in one of the piney areas and took a series of pics in a 360 degree circle. Maybe this was just a waste of time, but at least you're looking at trees........

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.1.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.2.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.3.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.4.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.5.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.6.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.7.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.8.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20360.9.jpg)

I also have a question. Can anyone give just a rough idea about the current value of an 16" dbh Loblolly pine, with close to 3 boards of pretty straight trunk before the first branch? I mean just a ballpark.

As long as I'm asking ridiculous questions.... how much might an 80 foot tall, 16" dbh Tulip Poplar weigh?

I don't care if you laugh. :)

The worth of those trees, to me, is more relative to your using them, not selling them.  Got a surprise for you though.  Look to the left of the page here and click on that Red Forestry Forum Toolbox.

Well that's handy! Thanks.

Quote from: GW on July 24, 2007, 03:50:52 PM
I also have a question. Can anyone give just a rough idea about the current value of an 16" dbh Loblolly pine, with close to 3 boards of pretty straight trunk before the first branch? I mean just a ballpark.
I don't care if you laugh. :)

In round numbers a 14" 3-log loblolly is worth about $35 - $40

Thanks WDH, now I understand what Tom meant.

The old general rule of thumb around here, for as long as I can remember has been $30/ton to the landowner.  Of course, it vary's from day to day, and it can be a lot lower or a little higher, but that gives you a starting point.  Of course, that $30 price is for top quality saw logs, like what you're talking about.  It doesn't apply to that stuff up there by the cabin, which would go for a fraction of that.  Keep in mind that everyone that has any involvement with those logs has to be paid.  That means the Forester and any employees he might have, the logger and his folks, everybody at the sawmill, the truckers, and everybody, right down to the cashier at the box store, or the bookkeeper at the furniture store in Albequerque.  They're all gonna get their little slice of the pie.  There ain't but one fellow that can take the whole pie, and that fellow is YOU!  That's why I dropped that sly little hint about you getting a sawmill. ;D

DanG! You just missed my birthday, but Christmas isn't too far off. ;D

I think I've mentioned that I want to transition from the full woods down to medium and then to small trees along the pond's shoreline. I assume that this could be a problem for the logging crew if I don't mark a lot of trees.  Basically I'll be asking them to work past some small trees to access some of the largest trees we have. Most important will be a few dozen 4 to 10 inch dbh Sweetbay Magnolias, a few Southern Sugar Maples, and some small (White?) Oaks that will make up some of the mid level. I would also like to preserve some of the many Wild Azaleas that are in between the Sweetbays and the shoreline.

How realistic is this plan?

What can I do to protect the smaller trees? If the clear cutting is done by the local logging firm, I think they will be using feller-bunchers, but I'm not certain. I know that they have the equipment to harvest in very wet areas.

Since many of the leave trees will be relatively small should I also mark the smaller trees that will be cleared? I've already decided to mark both cut and leave trees. I'm assuming that in a normal clear cut that people don't usually bother marking 4 inch cut trees. I feel kind of foolish marking such small trees with orange tape, but I'm thinking I need to do whatever I can to avoid confusion. Like usual, I don't care if they find me odd or obsessive. (mostly because I'm odd and obsessive)

I'm guessing that the loggers will work from the center out when clearing the site. Is it practical for me to weave caution tape to help them see where to stop? If so, how wide of a path might they need to access 90 foot tall pines?

I need to mark the road into the pond site for clearing. How wide does it need to be? What if I curve it?

Do I ask too many questions?

Will I ever stop typing?

A "true clearcut" cuts everything, even the two inch stuff. Why not use tree marking paint, less time consuming.

10-12 feet is usually satisfactory for the woods road width. Curves are better for aesthetics, more edge affect for wildlife, etc. than a straight line route. Mark the curve radius wide enough for logging equipment to negotiate without skinning additional trees.

The harvest area needs to be planned out with suitable access allowed to the harvest trees so that the logging operation can perform in a satisfactory manner without causing unnecessary damage to leave trees. I assume that you have a suitable landing/decking area also allowed for.

If the road will see regular traffic, a little wider is better so the sunlight can hit the road surface to speed drying.  I would not hesitate to wide the road to 30' (including ditches) if that is the case.

Thanks Ron. The reason I'm using tape for now is that I'm learning about the topography as I go and I want to be able to "unmark" trees. Once I get the shoreline established to my liking I'll hit the rest with orange paint.

I'm hoping that the decking area can be within the pond site itself. There is also that 1/2 acre that's available by where the new road will enter the woods. The entrance to the pond site is in the corner of the peanut field, so if need be we can mess up a few peanuts. There might even be as much as one acre of room at the entrance without sacrificing any crops. The field is leased by a neighbor so I'd like to preserve the crop if possible.

WDH, the road will see regular use. As it reaches the pond it will continue on over the dam and meet up with the existing loop road. I've asked the pond contractor to build the dam wider for that reason.

I'm marking trees like a fool now. I ended up switching to spray paint now that I've got a good idea of what I want.

I'm concerned that if the loggers use feller-bunchers to harvest that the 4 to 10 inch Sweetbay Magnolias are going to take a beating. They'll have to maneuver between the Sweetbays to access good sized Loblolly and Poplar. The Magnolia are mostly growing bent over to some degree so they'll be difficult to miss.

Is there another type of operation I should favor? Could I find people to fell the large trees by another method and then let the big company drag them out while they use feller-bunchers on the center of the pond site?

I can accept the damage to the small and mid sized trees if I have to, but Cindy might be willing to deal with higher costs if it's possible to save more of them.

I'm assuming that even if the FB operators are capable of carefully backing out with the large trees that they won't have the patience to do it.

I don't know how old an 8 inch Sweetbay Magnolia is, but I prefer not to wait 10 or 20 years to replace them.

Do you have feller-bunchers operation in your locality?  Your consutant forester can tell you who in the local logging community has what type of logging equipment.  Favoring one harversting method over another only works if there are loggers in your locality who have equipment that differ from each other.  For instance, horse logging is low impact, but if there are no horse loggers in your area, then obviously it is not a viable option.

First find out what type of harvesting equipment is used by loggers in your area.  This is what your forester will have to choose from. 

I have to re-emphasize that any harvesting operation will make a temporary mess in your woods. Temporary meaning a few years.  Trees will be scraped, trees will be bent and broken.  It is unavoidable.  Timber harvesting is not a landscaping operation. Never has been, never will be. It is a messy operation, and a mess will be left. Temporarily.

Ask your forester about putting into the timber contract that all non-merchantable trees over 4 inches diameter that are damaged be cut down.  Example of a description of "damaged: all broken trees, all trees whose bark has been scraped off more that 20% of the circumfrence, all trees bent more than 30 degrees from vertical.  This will reduce the visual impact of such damage.

Another thing, GW.  On the trees you want to protect, like the small sweetbays, flag them with orange flagging tape and ask the logger to protect them to the extent possible.  I am sure they will do a better job of protecting them if the the fellerbuncher operator can see them and work around them.  I assume that the trees to be harvested will be marked with paint and not flags, otherwise, flagging the small leave trees might be confusing.  Bringing the fellerbuncher operator a cool glass of lemonade and asking him to take as much care as he can with the little trees will do more than 50 lawyers writing language in the contract.

Thanks fellers.  :)

The big logger in town has feller-bunchers. A Forester told me that for what we wanted we might be limited to that company for that reason. That and he thought they did small jobs usually.

I found out from the pond man that this logging company was not very interested in bringing their big guns for our little 5 or 6 acre clear cut. He suggested I call and talk to them directly, and that maybe they would send out a different type of crew.

Today I realized that I might be able to get a quick clear cut to allow the pond construction to get started, but delay the more sensitive felling of the trees near the Sweetbays.  I only need to clear the immediate pond site to just past the shoreline. I could leave the big trees among the Sweetbays to be removed at our convenience in the future. Maybe that will give us the time needed to find a horse logger or other less destructive operation.

GW,

99% of the loggers in GA have fellerbunchers.  It will be rare to find one who does not use a fellerbuncher.   They are not tools of destruction.  Good operators can thin an entire stand and not skin a tree.  As long as the operator plans how he will cut the trees to minimize damage to the residual trees, he can do an amazingly good job.

One good thing is that if some of the sweetbays get damaged, you can prune away the damaged parts, and with established roots, they will recover quickly.  Also, you are letting in new light with the removal of the larger trees, and they will respond to that as well.  Since the logger will already be there, think carefully about which trees you want to remove.  It might be better to do it all then unless you are planning for another harvest for the remainder of the property.

That all makes sense WDH, but the issue is finding the right operator. It seems our job isn't very lucrative so I worry about that.

We're starting to get more rain now. How will it effect the harvesting if the pond site gets saturated? That's the normal condition of much of it.

I understand.  Time is of the essence (very dry now).  I also understand that 6 acres is really too small for a commercial harvesting operation.  Are you getting paid anything for the trees? 

The first Forester I talked with said a few thousand $ at best. The second one called it a break even deal.

Having the trees cut will make the pond cheaper to build.  The alternative is pushing them up and burning them.  Hopefully, you can get someone to come and take out the trees, even if you do not receive much if anything for them. 

Here is the rub.......a skidder costs about $700/day to operate.  About the same for a fellerbuncher.  Add a large loader at $600/day.  Then there is overhead for other support equipment like service trucks, accounting fees, taxes, return on investment to the owner,etc.  That is about $600/day.  You are pushing $2600/day in cost to operate a small crew.  They might operate there for 2 days.  They have to make $5200 to break even.  Then, there is extra cost for having to move twice in 3 days, costing them a day in production.  Say that is another $2000 in lost production.  Now the cost is approaching $7200 to log your pond site.  Trucking will cost them about $175/load.

If there are 2 loads/acre for 6 acres, that is 12 loads.  Say half pulp and half logs.  With pulp about $25/ton delivered @ 25tons/load, that is $625 delivered per load.  For logs, say the price is $40/ton delivered at 25 tons/load, that is $1000 delivered per load.

Lets add it up:

Logging Cost  =  $7200
Hauling 12 loads @ $175/ load  =  $2100

Total Logging Cost  =  $9300

Logger Sales:

Pulp @ 6 loads x 25 tons/load x $25/ton = $3750
Logs @ 6 loads x 25 tons/load x $40/ton = $6000

Total Logger sales = $9750

Total Available to Pay Landowner Stumpage  =  Revenue $9750 - Cost $9300 =  Stumpage $450

That is assuming they don't run into any kind of problem or snag with access or too wet to operate in an area.  So, it is easy to see why that small of an area is very hard to get a logger interested.  Clearly, it is more important to build the pond for the least cost than to make money on the trees cut for the pond.  Offering the trees to the logger in return to remove them is a pretty good trade, all things considered.  Realize in my example that you might have more or less loads per acre and more or less pulp vs. logs.  The example is just to highlight the pertinent dynamics of this type of situation.  Your specifics may be different.

I hope this has not been confusing.

Wow, thanks WDH! No it wasn't confusing. Cindy has accepted that it's not likely she'll get anything out of the pond site timber.  Now I'm just hoping to get someone to take the trees soon.

I'm getting nervous now. The original logging company we were talking with has lost interest since we don't want to thin the woods, and the few others I've talked to aren't interested. I'm beginning to think in terms of how much it might cost to have the timber cut and piled up for burning. Cindy has gotten used to the idea that the timber won't pay for the pond, but paying someone to cut it is going to be a big pill to swallow.

Should I start calling loggers from the phone book? I'm not as worried about having a Forester involved for clear cutting the pond site. It would be nice, but I'm not seeing how they would pay for themselves in this situation.

There must be a way to sweeten the deal for a logger. What if they didn't have to cut and move the smaller trees? If they took only trees 10 inches and larger maybe I could cut and haul the small trees myself.

"Bringing the fellerbuncher operator a cool glass of lemonade and asking him to take as much care as he can with the little trees will do more than 50 lawyers writing language in the contract".   Correct.  Again, communication, communication, comunication.

"Should I start calling loggers from the phone book? I'm not as worried about having a Forester involved for clear cutting the pond site. It would be nice, but I'm not seeing how they would pay for themselves in this situation.

There must be a way to sweeten the deal for a logger. What if they didn't have to cut and move the smaller trees? If they took only trees 10 inches and larger maybe I could cut and haul the small trees myself. "

Forgive me, but with ideas like these you are getting farther and farther away from practicing good forest management in your woods.

A forester working for the landowner should be the person calling loggers and timber buyers, not the landowner.  Taking out only the larger trees is a practice called "highgrading", the worst way to thin a woods.  This is like weeding a vegetable garden by taking out the vegetables and leaving the weeds. 

What size trees are the "small" ones you would be cutting yourself?  When you stick a chainsaw into a tree, you have just become a logger yourself, one of the most dangerous occupations in North America. Even experienced loggers have killed themselves when felling trees, even small ones.

Did you hire a consulting forester to handle this sale for you?  Or are you working by yourself on it?  The decisions on which trees to be cut and which to be left should be made by a professional forester working for the landowner. 

Phorester, maybe you aren't aware of the recent developments with this project. I'm not planning on doing anything in the near future with the woods except I need to get the pond site cleared of all trees. The problem I'm having is that the timber in that 5 - 6 acres area isn't worth enough to interest logging companies. Loggers and Foresters all agree that it's not worth it for anyone to come out and clear for our pond. The idea of letting the loggers take the large trees was an attempt to come up with some way to make the job more attractive. I'm sure you're right about me not cutting trees, I'm open to suggestions.


Thanks.

"....I'm not planning on doing anything in the near future with the woods...."  But you then say that you are considering offering a logger the big trees in the woods...... at one point there is little interest in making money, but then the concern is expressed that it might only a break even proposition so why bother....   So I'm a little confused.   ;D  This is the problem in conversing on this Internet, and coming at a situation from two different directions of experience; yours as a landowner who is trying to sell timber and otherwise properly manage a forest, and mine as a forester who gives that advice, and works with timber buyers, consulting foresters, procurement foresters, loggers, all the time.

So, my suggestions at this time (not that I consider this to be the final word - I'm at a disadvantage in not being there looking at your woods and talking face-to-face);  Since there is no interest among timber buyers in your locality for the timber on this acreage at this time, I'd suggest you treat the pond project and the woodland projects separately.  Offer the trees in the pond area for nothing to a logger to get them cut. 

I'd be leery of also offering him the big trees in the remainder of the woods just to get the pond area cleared.  Again, that would be highgrading, the worst practice for future health and value that can be done in a forest.

If you can't even give away the trees in the pond area, then I'd suggest you have to consider it as part of the expense of the pond to pay to get them cleared.

Phorester, I sincerely appreciate the time you're putting into trying to help me on this.

I'm only concerned with the 6 acre area that will be the pond. Every other tree on this property will be left as it is until some point after the pond is constructed. My last several posts, including the one where I mentioned allowing a logger to take only large trees were only about the 6 acre pond site.

I believe you're right about having to pay to have the pond site cleared. I may end up handing this problem to the pond builder since he stands to gain the most in terms of dollars from this project.

You're right about the difficulties of communicating this way and I thank you for the effort.

Hang on GW.  We are coming on the best time of the year for logging.  This is gonna work out. 

WDH, I've been hoping that you could visit this fall and see the finished pond construction. 

"My last several posts, including the one where I mentioned allowing a logger to take only large trees were only about the 6 acre pond site."

Sorry, I didn't realize they were only about the pond site.

I think you're heading in the right direction on this. Logging is rarely a weeks-long endeavor.  It usually transpires over several months at least from signing the contract until trees are cut.

I occasionally get calls from developers who just bought wooded property and want a logger to pop in there in the next 2 weeks to cut and haul out dozens of truckloads of sawlogs so they can start building houses in 3 weeks.  Just doesn't happen that fast.

As WDH says, hang in there.

GW, I just sent the contract back to the loggers this week myself and had hopes that it would get started and finished soon. Just heard yesterday from my FIL that they haven't done the final walk through the forest yet and he doesn't know when it will get started. One month ago, the loggers were overly optimistic and thought they'd be done in a couple of weeks. It certainly got my hopes up, although why it matters when they get done, is beyond me....I guess I'm just anxious to get something done besides stringing barb wire and clearing understory.
It's good to read from some of the more experienced members that this logging process often goes slower than expected. Not having any experience with it, I was thinking that it would get done in a matter of weeks. Another lesson in patience, I suppose.

Since this is for a pond, I'm thinking that all the stumps will be pushed out of the ground. I'll be faced with a similar problem and the advice that I'm getting is to push them into a low spot and leave them. That doesn't work for me and so I'm looking for a solution that is more aggressive and final.
Any idea of what you will do with all those stumps?

Unfortunately I haven't even talked with any loggers, except when one of them told me he'd call me right back, 4 days ago...

As I said early in this thread there are a few reasons that I need to keep moving forward on building this pond. Weather is the main one because the drought conditions have made it easier to log the site. Normally it's a very wet area with ground water springs everywhere. Otherwise I'd be happy to slow the pace down.

You're right that the pond builder will be pulling stumps out. I plan on making a reef-like structure out of some of them. The rest might get buried in the pit where the builder is harvesting the clay for the dam. Many people like them for fish holding structure because I guess they don't rot very fast. Of course the shape is good for that. I've heard burning them is an option too.

Have you heard anything about "pond logs"? I use that term loosely because I don't know what else to call them. These are logs that are pulled out of ponds or bogs and used by landscapers for visual effects. The decomposition and bug activity supposedly makes them interesting and somewhat valuable. That is, if you can find a buyer. I was thinking that since I'm building my own pond, why not lay a couple of 10-14' logs in the bottom, rig em to pull em out later and see what develops. The question would be, what kind of logs would work best for this? I don't want to pull out some slimy rotted junk.

I like the idea of using the stumps for fish habitats. It would serve multiple purposes. From what I've been reading, burning the stumps is difficult due to all the dirt. I've thought about piling them up in low enough piles and running the dozer over them occasionally to knock the dirt off and help dry them out prior to burning them. It might take a while but I'm limited on options.

I understand that you all have been getting some wet weather. How's that pond area holding up? Still dry?

I don't know about ponds logs, but if you want to experiment with submerging some I'd find a way to keep them from floating.

I haven't been to the pond site since we got 2 inches of rain in 2 days last week. The drain that feeds the site isn't moving, but I saw puddles when I drove by it. My neighbor has a small pond for his cattle that's upstream of our pond site and I think it's finally filled up. I think the site will stay pretty dry until the water table comes up enough to get the springs flowing again and I think it will take a lot more rain for that, at least I hope so.

ibseeker
Best sink logs already bug-ridden and decayed, because when submerged, the lack of oxygen will stop any decay - and I suspect the bugs will cease their activity too.
Decomposition and bug activity might continue if you keep them as floaters right at the surface of the pond. But I also haven't heard of "pond logs" as a term for landscape timber.  ???

With federal wetland laws abound, how do you guys build ponds in 'wetland' ??  I thought they were pretty strict...in fact, too strict, IMO.  :)

beenthere, I doubt that our pond site would be considered a wetland. Like with most drains or small creeks the land slopes up as you go to either side so there isn't much if any standing water. Like I mentioned there are several small springs, but these just flow into the main drain.

Also, Georgia is still fairly lax about this type of thing. Florida is the opposite, and I doubt that many people are able to build ponds there. Georgia is getting more strict as time passes though, and it's difficult to get a permit for a purely recreational pond at this time. I should mention that our pond is primarily an irrigation pond to serve 20 acres of orchard and row crops. That's the exemption that most people get around here to build ponds.

The other day I called every logging company I could find within a 50 mile radius. By the time I was done I had 3 appointments on our property for that same day and 2 or them made it out. Both of these guys seemed like good people and both spent a fair amount of time checking the site. I should say that I talked with each of them about also thinning a 5 acre area that is mostly self-seeded Loblolly, and cutting a fire break around 3 sides of a 10 acre square that comes out from the back of the property. One of these men is a licensed Forester, and I'm guessing that he's an industrial Forester.

The other guy gave me some prices per ton his company would be willing to pay:

Pine logs: $37/ton
Pine pulp: $5/ton
Pine topwood: $3/ton
Hardwood logs (soft species like poplar): $15/ton
Hardwood pulp: $1/ton

I understand that the size of the job and accessability and other things effect the stumpage price, but how do these prices compare to the average stumpage prices in the southeast for the first quarter of 07:

Pine sawtimber: $38.64/ton
Pine chip-n-saw: $21.58
Pine pulp: $7.89
Hardwood sawtimber: $21.50
Hardwood pulp: $6.51

My uneducated guess is that the vast majority of the wood from the pond site will be hardwood pulp so the $1/ton offer concerns me. Still, at one point I was hoping just to break even.... The man that gave the prices per ton is coming back out with a logger to walk the site so he can give us an estimate of what the total price for the job might be.

I'm thinking that we'll use the contract from the Georgia Forestry Commission website - CONTRACT (http://www.gfc.state.ga.us/ForestManagement/documents/TimberSaleContract.pdf)

That contract only has one blank for the price that will be paid to the seller, so I'm wondering if buyers normally give a flat rate for a tract or if it's common to pay per ton. If you get paid by the ton how do you monitor that you're getting proper weights?

EDIT:

I was referred to a logger by a crate manufacturer and he came out today. He's one of a three man company and I think they all work at the job site. They cut with chainsaws and use a cable skidder and they say they do a lot of pond sites. This guy said that because they run a small operation he will get the most money out of the timber by sorting it differently. His price/ton has a slot that is pallet wood which he said most companies would only pay pulpwood price for. Here's what he gave me:

Pine sawtimber: $35/ton
Clear Hardwood logs: $20/ton
Pallet wood: $13/ton
Pine and Hardwood pulp: $2/ton

I wouldn't be concerned about the stumpage prices for the whole Southeast.  They are a combination of several States.  Prices will vary within your State, maybe even in the next county over.  You have to go with what the local buyers are willing to pay for your timber at a particular time.  You can't even compare it to timber right next to yours.  Size, quality, access, etc., can vary enough from one property to another right across the road that the timber prices are very much different.  Getting more than one bid is the way to go, and you're doing that.  That's the only way you will know if you're getting paid fairly.

The contract looks good to me.  But I don't know about a performance bond for this small of a job.  Buyers might balk at this.  A Georgia Forester will have a better feel for this.

One other thing to think about - do you not want logging activities on the weekends, Saturdays okay but not Sundays, not at night, not during hunting season, etc.?  You can also include these stipulations in a contract.

     Pine Pulpwood     $6.46 
     Pine Topwood    $6.42    
     Pine Sawpulp    $10.73    
     Pine Chip n Saw (Large Sort) $23.08    
     Pine Sawtimber    $37.87    
     Large Pine Pole $59.14    
     Pine Plylog $42.36    
     Hardwood Pulpwood $5.93    
     Mixed Hardwood Sawtimber $22.40    
     Soft Hardwood Sawtimber $23.08    
     Select Hardwood Sawtimber $36.40    

GW, above are the per ton stumpage prices in your area for this YTD from what I consider the premier stumpage price reporting service.  These are for normal timber sales and would not be representative for a 6 acre pond site, which is a very very small timber sale.  The prices for an area as small as yours would be less as I explained in a prior post because of the logistical inefficiency of moving equipment to harvest such a small area.

The prices you were quoted look real good to me, excepting the hardwood pulpwood price, which is low.  If you could get a couple of dollars more for the hardwood pulp, I would think the prices for such a small area would be excellent.  However, if push comes to shove, and if you can get the pond site harvested and get some income from the sale of the timber, I would go for it.  That low price for the hardwood pulp, which like you said is much of what they will harvest, may be a reflection of the small area and logistical inefficiencies that the logger will experience.  Remember, your alternative is to pay someone thousands of dollars to push the trees up and pile them for burning...............

The GFC contract is probably for a lump sum sale.  If it is a pay-as-cut, they should provide you with a scale ticket or settlement with the gross, tare, and net weight of each weight of load.  They are required by law to do that.

Thanks guys.

Should we be concerned about monitoring a pay-as-cut operation? What stops loggers from under-reporting the yield?

Do you all have an opinion about the chain saw/cable skidder operation? They said they would be cutting about 2 loads per day (one double trailer). I like the idea of the work going more slowly so that I can have a little more control.

Would the absence of large track machines be better for the areas that will be thinned?

What about the $13/ton pallet wood? Do you agree that most companies would pay pulpwood stumpage for the same timber?

:P

You definitely need to pay attention to what is leaving the site.  Most loggers are honest and will pay for all the wood.  But as in all endeavors, there are thieves, and you have to pay attention. 

For a small job like yours, a small logger might be the best way to go.  You can not afford to operate a grapple skidder and a feller buncher on two loads per day.  So, the chainsaw/cable skidder option is more in line with the scale of your job.  Also, as you say, it will be easier to keep up with what is going on.

The stumpage numbers that I posted previously do not refer to low grade palletwood.  The $13/ton stumapge is about right.  However, palletwood is larger but lower grade hardwood logs.  It is a size thing.  The palletwood buyers set a small end diameter limit, and the low grade stuff that meets that limit is palletwood.   What does not meet this size limit becomes pulpwood.

Cindy likes the idea of the smaller slower operation and I think we'll end up going that route.

Is it true that what the one logger will sell for pallets would be used for pulp by most other loggers? By selling for pallets they will be able to net more money for us?  I'm not basing my choice of loggers on the highest profit, but lately I've talked with several companies and I like a few of them. If everything else is equal then we'd go with the one that pays the most.

I'm curious about what stops a logger from saying that a particular load is pulpwood, and then selling it as saw timber?

If someone knows that I can't tell a nickel from a quarter what is stopping them from telling me they're all nickels? I've been around too long to feel confident about the "honor system", even with an upstanding group like loggers. :)

edit: As I think about it this morning I'm tempted to just take bids on the lump sum. We may net less, but we wouldn't have to wonder if we were being taken advantage of. Doesn't that make more sense for people who don't know timber? Also we haven't lived here long so we don't know that many people yet.

Two thoughts, GW.  The specifications determine which product is which.  Here in Mid-GA, the spec for palletwood is 7" top minimum, 12" butt minimum, and a minimum length of 25 feet.  The price delivered to the mill is $28.00/ton.  With normal logging, that leaves about $10.00 - $12.00 for stumpage depending on the haul distance.  Also, the loads are limited to 3 hickory logs or less.  I am not sure of the markets in your area, but I expect they are similiar for palletwood.  Anything smaller would be pulpwood.

You could get the logger to point out to you the palletwood logs and the pulpwood logs to get an idea of where he will make the split.  Also, you could ask for a copy of the mill specifications so you could discuss how it will be merchandised with the logger.  Hardwood pulpwood stumpage prices are about half of what the palletwood prices are on normal harvest settings.  However, the hardwood pulpwood price is more volatile than most, higher when it is wet and the mills are scrambling, and sometimes impossible to move if it is high and dry and they are full of wood. 

Taking bids is definitely an OK way to go.  On clearcuts, I think that it is the preferred way to go.  Your tract size may make it difficult for someone to commit to a lump sum price, but it is hard to say.  Definitely pursue that as an option.  I would expect that you would have a fair amount of palletwood.  However, the kicker is in being able to get the value for such a small harvest.  If you had 50 acres, it would not be a problem.  Enticing someone to cut such a small are may require you to discount the price. 

You are smart, as you have done, to research the going rates for stumpage prices.  That way, you can know to what extent you will have to discount the price to get someone to move in and cut it on your terms.

I would like to come down and cruise it for you.  I definitely will if the timing works out.  But, don't wait on me.  If you can stike a deal that suits you while it is dry, go for it.  Time is of the essence to some degree.

Well WDH, if the pond site is cleared by the time you're able to visit that will just leave more time for identifying oaks (and eating bbq). :)

I just got off the phone with one of the guys that I walked the woods with on Monday. He's the licensed Forester who works for a timber buying company that runs their own crew. He was very generous with his time and insights about our woods, even when we were in the scrubby Loblolly stand where there wasn't much profit motivation. I called him because I liked the small chainsaw logger crew that I met yesterday, but I didn't want to rule out working with this Forester yet. I told the Forester I had met with a small local crew that I liked and he immediately named the people I was talking about. He said they had a very good reputation and that they sell to some small specialty mills that depend on them for certain types/sizes of hardwoods. The Forester confirmed that they would be a good choice because of the size of the job and the amount of hardwood.

I asked if the Forester might be available to work with this small crew as a consultant and he said he could. In my mind the combination of this Forester and the local logging team looks like the best we could do. I'm thinking that by hiring the Forester we could go ahead with selling the timber by the ton, and maybe gross more money which would help pay for the consulting work.

I just read through this whole thread again. :P  It was interesting to see how much I've learned in only a few weeks and it makes me wonder how ignorant I still am about this process.   At least I feel like I have you all watching my back. :)

Thanks.

One good thing about lump sum sales - for a clearcut it encourages the logger to take as many trees as he can because doing so will increase his income from the job above what he pays the landowner. 

Especially in your situation with wanting to clearcut for building a pond.  With such a small logging job, You might be at the point where it's better to get paid "x" dollars and the logger takes it all versus having to pay "y" dollars to get the trees left pushed up and burned or hauled away.

GW, I've been wanting to find out the name of that small crew from my friend in Cairo, but he's pretty sick and I haven't been inclined to bother him with it.  I'll bet it is the same bunch.

When you're negotiating your deal, ask them about the possibility of me buying a few logs on site.  We could just set up a place for them to be left, and I could do the hauling myself.  I had thought about approaching you and Cindy about just cutting some myself before the loggers get in there, but I'm afraid that would queer the deal with the loggers.  Doing it this way would be more up&up, and I don't mind paying a fair price for some good logs.  I'd be most interested in some of the White Oak, and I can always use some nice clear pine logs like the ones you have. ;)

I'll try to call ya this evening and we can kick it around.

Phorester, that seems like something worth consideration.

DanG, it'll be a few weeks before any contract gets signed so something could be worked out. I've already talked to Cindy about trading off a few trees to people who help advise us about forestry and she's fine with it. If you've got a sawmill then you've got something to barter with. Her biggest concern with the matter is about liability. I said that if you got hurt we could drug you and leave you for the coyotes, but she said too many people know that you've been here... ;D

Give me a call.

We've decided on the small logging company that cuts with chainsaws and uses a cable skidder. We got several good reviews from neighbors and other loggers/foresters. At some point in the future we may start thinning the other areas but for now it's all about the pond site. Because this phase is a simple clearcut we aren't working with a third party Forester (One of the guys in the logging co. has a forestry license). 

How do sellers usually get paid in a pay-as-cut situation?

GW
I'd think you would want the third party Forester involved, as he would answer your question and keep track of such things for you (those things you don't know the first go-around).
As this thread unwinds, I am puzzled that the good suggestions seem to go by the wayside.  I should read it all again, to be sure, but doubt I will. Good luck to you however.  I do wish you the best.  :) :)

Thanks beenthere. I don't know where, but I think I read that sometimes an industrial forester can be a good way to go in certain situations and that's what I'm doing here. I will still be talking with an independent forester that I like, but I think I'll be alright with the clearcut. At one point I told this third party forester that I was thinking about using a small chainsaw crew with a good reputation. He immediately named this company and said that they are skilled and reputable.

These are neighbors who have been doing this work for decades so I'm looking at it as an opportunity to make social contacts also. I realize that there is some risk in handling it this way, but my own impressions and the references are all positive. The good references include both of my closest neighbors (old timers) . If things don't progress the way I want them to, then I can always say the job is done regardless of how much they've cleared.

I wouldn't consider handling it this way if I wasn't going to be on the property. I won't make myself a pest, but I will be sure to provide cold drinks every day. ;) Also you might want to keep in mind that I now have dozens of helpful friends who have never met me. (except I did meet DanG). Your post is a good example. :)

In a pay-as-cut sale, the seller's usually gets paid after the wood is scaled on the landing or after it has been hauled to the mill which is known as "mill scale". For a mill scale arrangement, you should have a system of truck tickets to account for each load that leaves your landing to varify your volumes and payments. Truck loads have been know to disappear sometimes in route to the designated mill.

It depends upon what your contract says as to when and how payment is made. Will it be weekly, monthly or whatever.

It is also good to have a deposit up front to cover an estimated amount of wood that may be harvested in a week or so, just so the logger doesn't "get into you too far" and not be able to pay in a timely manner. It is also good to have a performance bond for the job.

Be sure that there is good wood utilization and that the logger removes all products as intended, otherwise you might come up short in your expected sale value due to marketable wood left in the woods. This often happens during periods of poor markets.

That is why I only do "lump sum" sales. It makes the logger chase the wood for better utilization and any possible overrun. It also usually makes for a "cleaner job" with utiliaztion not being a problem.

A forester handling a landowner's timber harvest usually earns their pay when the logging begins.  ;)   

Ron, everything in your post sounds like good sense proven by experience.

I don't want you all to feel that you've wasted your time giving me all of this great advice, however I'm going to break or at least bend some of these rules of common sense. I'm going to do a dangerous thing and trust someone I don't know well.

Let me describe this logging company. It's made up of 3 men who have been cutting timber together for decades. They don't hire additional help. They do everything themselves so the only people who will be on site are the owners themselves. The leader of this crew is in his early 60's and the other two owners are brothers who are in their 50's. They have a cable skidder, a semi with a 45 foot long trailer, and chainsaws.

I got one good reference that I didn't mention in my last post. That was from the owner of probably the biggest excavating contractor in the county, and it's the company that would build our pond if our current man couldn't. He said that we couldn't do better than to hire these loggers who he described as "some of the best people you could hope to have working on your property".

I know that I could still ask this logger to work with the 3rd party Forester so I'll explain why I didn't pursue it. I did talk with the logger about doing that and he didn't object but he told me that one of his partners is a licensed Forester and that there was no need to give up the extra money. He knows the other Forester personally and said he was a fine person, but that he'd been doing this all of his life and knew more about it. The other man is about half the age of our logger and I think it's a pride thing. Maybe that's not a good reason to trust this man with our timber, but that's a big part of why I am. I still might use this other Forester later on for advice about thinning, but I don't think I will for the clearcut.

I know that it's possible these men will steal some wood or do low quality work, but I'm willing to give it a shot. 

If we end regretting this I will let you all line up and smack my behind with the told-you-so stick.  :o :'(

Thanks.

Can you get the topwood chipped for a cleaner pond site?

$1 a ton for hardwood pulp sounds right.  What can I say other then firewood, firewood, firewood   ;)  It will pay 15-20x more sold green.

Though if I had 40+ trucks of hardwood pulp going out I might not be too anxious to try selling all that firewood at once. I would take the $1000+ instead.

I do think it is better to get pallet then pulp prices.

> What stops loggers from under-reporting the yield?

Scale tickets at the mill and the trucks being scaled (where a forester can earns his pay, imo) before they leave. A truck shouldn't lose 6 tons between your place (estimated volume) and the mill (actually weight).

The question is if you have them leave the hardwood pulp behind, since it isn't making much if anything for anyone ($40 a load max. when the driver earns more then that delivering it plus mileage charge) will more hardwood become pallet wood.

I'm not sure what you mean Ron. People have only mentioned burning the tops in the clearing.

rebocardo are you saying have them leave the hardwood pulp and me use it as firewood? Did you see that I'm getting a new chainsaw? Hmmm.... :)

Rather than burning the biomass wood on site, I was wondering if there was any opportunity for the logger or excavating company to chip the tops and unmerchantable wood for a fuel wood market. If that is possible, you might get a few extra dollars for the topwood and waste wood in chips rather than burn it.

There might not be enough to fool with, however, due to the small area involved. It just depends upon how "clean" the logger's utilization is.

Thanks Ron, I'll ask about it.

I'm not sure you can get 40 tons on a truck rebo as that's the total weight limit for big rigs in your area last I heard.
So it's more like 20-24 tons per load.
We can do better then 40 tons per load here in MI though.

rebocardo, there can be a VAST difference between estimated weight and actual weight. Did I say VAST?

Here is a disclaimer from the weight calc we did years back.

   This calculator is useful in providing approximate weights for species, but the user should be careful in how the product is used. Wood varies considerably in weight per constant volume (density) on a regional level and at the local level. That is, the weight of a piece of wood from one area or tree will differ from the same species in the another area. The growth rate is the most significant factor in determining density, with slower growing trees having a higher density (therefore greater weight), than faster growing trees. This is due to the late wood cells (the dark ring seen when a tree is cut) having thicker walls and being closer together than the early wood (lighter wood between the rings).

     Where the board is cut from the tree is another factor, the heartwood portion of the tree (the center portion, often characterized by a change in colour) is composed of dead cells and will be lighter than the sap wood, where the cells are still living. Wood that is cut from the portion of the stem that still has live branches on it will be lighter due to hormones produced by the foliage.

     In different areas, genetics will play a factor in wood density, along with the growing site (moisture and nutrient characteristics of the soil). Where the tree grows on the hillside, eg south facing versus north facing slope, high elevation versus low elevation, areas of heavy snowpack versus light snowpack, constant winds versus sheltered locations all have an influence on the density of wood.

GW, I think that you are ok.  What you are doing sounds reasonable.  It is not practicle to chip the topwood/waste on such a small job.  Get the site cleared and build the pond :).

> rebocardo are you saying have them leave the hardwood pulp

Depending on how much they estimate will be left behind. I think from 5 acres it will not be much and you could handle it. Especially with a small tractor. Finding a seller that will come pick it up is the best. I think CL in Atlanta farther north is the way to start.

Selling it as BBQ or packaged firewood (tons of rules on that though) would make the most profit. There are many local BBQ places that look for clean hardwoods to smoke and burn and they will pay a good price for it green. They do not want seasoned.

re:tops and chipping

I certainly wouldn't do it with a small 6" chipper, most pines take 30 minutes to an hour to chip that way. The worse is when it gets piled six feet high. It gets to be an insurmountable mess to deal with by hand, because you can't pull stuff out and then the snakes and varmints get in the middle after a few weeks.  Then you need heavy equipment to feed it into the throat of a big chipper.

Once I cleared an acre and left all the tops to the side, neatly cut, to be chipped at the end, because the owner asked. Big mistake not to chip it every six trees or so. In the end it all went in a dumpster. What was unexpected was the vines. They basically nailed everything to the ground in one big mess, kudzu, that wild rose stuff, and poison ivy.

I would probably burn it, for 5 acres, if I couldn't get it chipped by big equipment.

> We can do better then 40 tons per load here in MI though.

Just a general figure, nothing more, to point out how poorly the hardwood pulp pays.

>there can be a VAST difference between estimated weight and actual weight. Did I say VAST?

Yes, there CAN be. imo, An experienced forester will be able to spot people shorting tickets or loads when someone does it on a regular basis and pattern to skim profit. That is where the experienced local forester comes into play.

I know I couldn't estimate a load like some do and figure board feet in a load either. Just like I can't look at a bunch of of one type of species and then figure out where I might find a different species of tree that usually grows around that group. I do not have the experience and education a forester has.

Same as I can't separate a hickory from all the white oaks 300+ feet away while looking at the crowns, while it is as clear as the nose on their face to others, when all I see are pretty green blobs.

Which is why I prefer blue tape instead of "don't cut that hickory over there". If you know what I mean.

Repocardo, the differences can be vast from one day to the next. No forester is going to predict those changes.  We have had mill chips weight in several tons different from one day to the next. in fully loaded vans. You simply cannot estimate weight very accuratly from load to load.  I've not posted much in this thread as my knowledge is limited on the subjects and besides we have degreed foresters that can give a much better assessment them I could. I consider my knowledge limited and I've been in the wood biz my entire working life.

I sincerely appreciate the advice given to me in this thread. I think the most often repeated suggestion was to work with a licensed Forester. I just want to point out that the logging crew we've hired has a Forester on staff. I understand the risks of working with an industrial Forester, but I've gotten numerous good references from neighbors and local contractors about these men. I also have an appointment next week with a third party Forester and I will be trying to hire him to work up a management plan for the rest of the woods (non-pond).

I may choose to do things a little differently than some of you recommend. That isn't because I don't think the advice is good, it's because I see this as an opportunity to learn. To me the ultimate goal is to get the most enjoyment possible out of our woods. The way I do that is by educating myself, buying tools, cutting trees, spraying herbicides, getting sweaty, getting wasp stings, stepping on copper headed rattlemoccasins, etc. I want a relationship with these woods and the more hands on I am the more intimate the relationship will be.  I may do too much and make some mistakes, but they'll be my mistakes and I'll learn from them. :P

Thanks again for the great forum and the generous advice. :)

I am not being defensive, but there are self serving consulting foresters and self serving industrial foresters.  I don't think industrial foresters (those that work for large timber companies) are unscrupulous or inherently bad, nor do I believe thhat most give bad advice to further their own jobs.  They are doing a job buying timber and managing timber for a company, and most do the job very well with high principles.  I object to the notion that the only good forester is a consulting forester, and that you cannot trust an industrial forester to give good advice.  I would have to class myself as an industrial forester, but I find the pigeon hole too limiting, so I reject it.  I am just a forester.

I hope I used the term correctly. One of the 3 owners of the logging company is a Georgia forester and they sell directly to local mills.

WDH, I'm wondering if you took me the wrong way. I made the decision to work with an industrial forester.

I don't see any misunderstanding here.  The quality, or integrity of a Forester is like any other profession.  It is within the individual, and not within the segment of the industry that the person works in.

GW, you're gonna come out just fine on this project if you get it done before the big rains come.  You've already said that a "break even" is considered success, so anything else is gravy.  I think there will be a pretty good puddle of gravy. ;)

I'd still like to get my hands on some, or all, of that white oak, if the logger isn't already committed to someone else.  If he is, then that's just the breaks.  If not, I'll buy the lot of it.  That's some pretty stuff. :)

DanG, I'll probably want to keep a log or two for myself but I would be happy to ask them for a price to set it aside for you. They're starting Monday I think.

Quote from: GW on August 16, 2007, 09:31:28 PM
WDH, I'm wondering if you took me the wrong way. I made the decision to work with an industrial forester.

GW, I did not take it wrong at all.  I just wanted to say that foresters that work for Companies in the Forest Products Industry are no different than the foresters that sell to them.  People with questionable principles are questionable no matter their ilk.  There should be no broad brush on either side.  All foresters should be judged with an equal set of standards.  A person with questionable standards should be avoided no matter which side of the negotiation that they are on ::).

Cool WDH. :)

The third party forester I mentioned works for a timber buyer and also does some consulting. He called today to confirm our appointment for next week and that's when I told him that I hired the local crew to start clearing the pond site on Monday. He said that was a good thing because of the dry weather. He's going to give us a price to mark trees for thinning in some other areas and he told me that the crew we hired would be the best people to do the cutting there as well.

Monday 8).

Jeff, I will take your word on the weight, you probably sell more wood in a week then I cut all year.

>stepping on copper headed rattlemoccasins, etc.

Sportsman Guide has a few nice zippered snake boots. I have been meaning to pick up a pair, except I can't find any with steel toes.

GW,

Did the logger move in and begin cutting the pond site?  Or did you decide to do it yourself with that new saw :) ;D.

It's a funny thing WDH, I started cutting a few trees here and there to try out the new saw and by the time I got tired the entire pond site was cleared.  :D

Actually the loggers were asked to take more trees down at their previous job so they had to postpone our job for a week or two.

Today I introduced Cindy to the forester that I liked the best out of all of those I've met with. We all talked for about two hours, half of which was business and the other half social. He seems like a great person and he'll be working with us on an hourly basis. He will help me plan the new roads, mark the pond site, and mark the other areas that we want to thin. He reviewed the contract that I drew up for this job and made a few recommendations. He has a lot of respect for the logging crew we chose and he will be contacting them soon. I was prepared to work with the loggers myself but I'm happy we could work something out with this forester.

Based on what several people have told us I believe we have a top notch team of loggers, forester, and pond contractor. :)

 8) 8) 8)

I've just read this thread beginning to end and from the pics I've seen  ya'll own some beautiful forestland. I would love to own some like that and can picture what you want from it as that would be my wishes also. I own a small sawmill and like to work with wood, so I would be happy as a duck in a puddle with that property. I hope that you will come to Moultrie as you will enjoy yourself and maybe as a horde (mentioned in a earlier post as I hope that a visit with Dang at his place is still open. I understand your place is on the way.)  we might invade your holdings for a look see.  :D :D

You have gotten a ton of great advice from these people and I'm sure it has helped you along the way. That's why it is so easy to feel at home here. We are one big family. I look forward to meeting you and Cindy one day hopefully. Good luck with your pond.

Oh and in my opinion, these older gentlemen loggers would not still be in business if they were crooks or did a sloppy job. My grandaddy was a old school logger with a very good reputation. Most of the ones I knew growing up that did uncool things got weeded out pretty fast.

Don

Thanks for the kind words Don. It's true that I was greatly influenced by the advice I got here. In fact it was so helpful that I made a donation to the site. I encourage anyone else who benefits like we have to do the same. 

You sure are welcome to come by and take a look at our woods. I would be more than happy to have Forestry Forum friends visit and maybe we can get a small group together before or after the expo. Cindy and I got very lucky in finding this property. Not only is it a nice mix of pasture, orchard, and woods, but we also have great neighbors.

Our forester described the logging crew as the last of the old time loggers in this area. I've probably mentioned their names to over a dozen people and they have all said without hesitation how good and honest these men are. I'm very glad that I will get to see this type of operation in action.

:)

It has begun.

2 of the 3 man crew started work today. These guys are brothers and one runs the saw, the other runs the skidder. They didn't mind the idea of my being around while they worked so that's what I did. I spent the whole day in the woods with the saw man. I really like these guys, they're good people. They started on the far side of the pond site from the ramp so the saw man had extra time while the logs got hauled. We had great conversations while waiting for the skidder. Saw guy is 56 and his brother is 59. Both have had open heart surgery. They work steady, but they aren't in a rush.

In case you're wondering I made very sure I wasn't being a pest. The saw man encouraged me to hang around and I think he enjoyed having some company. I was careful not to distract him while he was working, but he started the conversation back up during each break.

Here's the skidder:

1975 JD 440 B
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/Cable%20skidder.jpg)

They like to run vintage machines.  :)

Way to go, GW.  This is exciting to see a vision begin to come true.  Keep us posted ;D.

Way cool, GW! 8) 8) 8)  Sounds like you did a great job in screening and selecting your crew.  That ol' JD is a sweet looking machine.  Got your message today.  I'll try to get up there in the early part of next week

Little tip for ya...look over that saw-guy's shoulder while he's sharpening his saw chain.  I bet he can put ya on the right track in that department. ;D  I might watch him when I come up, too. ;)

Roger that DanG, I didn't miss a sharpening.  :)  I also noticed the chips he was throwing and they were long and perdy. 

1979 555

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/1979%20ford%20555.jpg)

Nice loader for a small operation. If you get a chance, please get a few more pics of their operation.

Don

It's good to see things starting to happen.Seems odd to see a skidder with no chains on it.I realize the chains are not needed as much as around here in my neck of the woods.I am driving by a logging site now and the logger is not running chains on a grapple skidder.Most all logger equipment has chains on them.I do hope every thing turns out the way you want it.Those cable skidders are getting to be a rare thing around here.

Thanks thecfarm. The forester we're working with said this is the last crew he knows of that works on this scale. They aren't averaging more than 2 loads/day. There isn't much more to show of their operation, a chainsaw and a tractor trailer are the only other tools they're using. It may not be much to cut in a day, but these 3 guys don't have any payroll, they just split the money between themselves. 

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/harvesting%20pine%20pulp.jpg)

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/loading%20saw%20timber.jpg)

Now that's a low impact skid trail. Not much bigger than a mid size tractor, unlike what most of these big high production grapple skidders do to the land. You made a good decision in my book GW in the overall scheme of things you want for ya'lls land.

Looks like a nice load of plylogs going on that truck.

Don

Thanks Don K,  at the end of the first week of logging I think I can say that these guys are humble hard working people. They are going out of their way to make sure they understand exactly what I want. At some points we consulted on a tree by tree basis.

I like the way the skidder trail enters the pond site and I'll just have to widen it a little and give it some curve to make the permanent road. 

It looks like we'll get 6 or 7 loads of pine saw timber and maybe that much in hardwood saw logs. I have Cindy prepared to net around $3000 but I'm thinking it will be 3 or 4 times that amount. Sure beats paying someone to cut it down and burn it!

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/pond%20site%20saw%20log.jpg)

GW,

You have done a good job.  Every thing seems very congenial; even the pine trees wear hats :D.

Most of the big pines have been harvested. I'm guessing that this is a load of hardwood saw timber. :P

(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16089/load%20of%20hardwoods.jpg)

GW
No offence meant, but not my idea of sawlogs on that load.  Wonder what others think? 
At best, pulp wood or something for the chipper.

If ya put a straight saw line through those logs, ya end up with two slabs, and that's about all.  ;D ;D ::) ::)

Chopsticks! I meant chopsticks.  :-\

No offense at all beenthere, I know I'm ignant about trees.

Could it be pallet wood?

I am thinking pulpwood too, BT.

Looks like more than one log is hollow, at least the butts.  Mabye it's a load of hardwood culverts.  ;D  We grow some of those up here too.

Confirmed as pulp. :)

I envy you your time in the woods with those "old hands", can't think of a better way to spend a day.