What is "select cutting"?

[John Mc]

The Massachusetts program just changed names maybe 8 or 10 years ago.

Each state seems to organize their program a little differently. Vermont and Connecticut were the first (and the guys who set it up worked in cooperation with each other). It has spread from there, and each state has a slightly different twist on it.  If I recall, isn't your land in NH? If so, there is a NH Coverts program - you may want to look in to that, since it might give you some good contacts closer to your land ??  New York also has an excellent program, which they call the "Master Forest Owner's" program (or something like that). You also may want to check out the Webinars the NY Extension forester puts on: you can see recorded versions on the http://www2.dnr.cornell.edu/ext/forestconnect/ web site.  I've done a few live, which has the advange of being able to type in questions for the presenter, but some of the recorded versions are very good as well.

continued in next post

[John Mc]

Vermont Coverts is organized a little differently. When I went through we didn't necessarily pick a special project (though I know they are getting back into that a bit more - part of the last day is devoted to mapping out what you are going to do next).  I did organize a couple of workshops: another "Cooperator" and I did a few wildlife demonstration projects in the town forest on a nearby town.  A patch cut in a stand of mature poplar, released & pruned some apple trees and released some white oak, along with a few other things. The guy I was working with was a forester who had gone through the training because he wanted to beef up his wildlife skills to match what more and more landowners were showing an interest in in our area.  We discussed a few ideas, then ran it past the town's forest guy, who was all for it.

For the workshop, we brought people through an discussed what we had done. We showed some "before" photos, and they could see the after. We also walked them through an untouched poplar stand so they could see the difference. It went fairly well, since we had 2 foresters and a wildlife biologist attending. The discussion of goals, and how the projects would have differed if the landowner had different goals was quite interesting (fortunately, we had 3 professionals who could discuss different approaches amiably - I got the sense they enjoyed it as much as the less well informed participants)

I also hosted a "walk in the woods" on my own land, where we spotted more apple trees to release, discovered a bunch of plant species I didn't know I had, and generally discussed options for coordinating managing for wildlife with managing for timber value and recreation. I served chili and cider at the house afterwards.

The last workshop I hosted we had the extension forester from the University of Vermont talk about working with forest professionals (loggers, foresters, etc.) A little bit about setting your own goals, selecting professionals with which to work, and an overview of things you might consider in a contract - terms you want to see, etc . We had an interesting discussion on methods of payment: percent of sale, lump sum, flat hourly rate, and other variations -- and how that might vary with the type of work being done, and what differing types of pay can (intentionally or unintentionally) set up for incentives. We closed up that day with a demonstration of some small scale, low impact equipment: I dropped a couple of trees showing folks some of what I'd recently seen in Game of Logging classes, skidded a couple in with my compact tractor and skidding winch, and a friend brought down a mini tracked vehicle designed for small scale logging (I forget the name, unfortunately) and demonstrated a bit with that.

I enjoyed Vermont Coverts so much, that I ended up on their board, and served as president for a couple of years (this group in Vermont was spun off from the VT Extension Forestry program years ago and is now an independent non-profit). I really like their approach. The focus is on wildlife & habitat, but there is a strong recognition that one of the best things you can do for wildlife is have a healthy, diverse forest. They also recognize that people have varying needs and interests, so it's not about managing JUST for wildlife, it's about coordinating managing for wildlife with other goals such as timber values, non-timber forest products, recreation, erosion control. In some situations these goals are complementary, in others there are trade-offs to be made. The discussion about how to manage these trade-offs with the landowner's goals in mind is always interesting.

Sorry for the long ramble.

John Mc

[Stephen Alford]

 Great project Piston and a very good discussion. Just a couple thoughts for what they are worth. Boundaries and topography are a good place to start. Most of the management and "select process" here is based on stand typing. Each stand on a property is given a reference number and an attribute file developed.  Species in the stand are identified and assigned a percentage.  Estimates on stand height and crown closure are determined. This is generally followed by stand origin or history. Based on  what you have posted some soil analysis could be very beneficial (ie nutrients,ph,drainage etc).  Good luck with your endeavors, do enjoy your posts. Take the time to stop and look around at the end of the day.   

 

[Piston]

John,
Thank you for taking the time to explain the history and your experience with the Vermont Coverts.  I read it with great interest and really enjoyed the stories about your "workshops" that you hosted. 
Your correct that my land is in NH.  I mistakenly went to the MA site that you linked to not realizing that it was only for....well....MA!  :D  (Hey, it was late, I was tired  ;D)  That would explain why when I put my zip code in for my NH land I didn't come up with any hits on local cooperators. 

Stephen,
If I had a view like that from my woodlot, I would not only be taking the time to stop and look around at the end of the day, but would be stopping and looking around ALL day.  That is a very scenic spot there! 

I'm going to bring a copy of the survey with me when I meet the forester.  It lists the different soil types in different areas on the property and is a fairly detailed survey of elevations and of course property lines and features.  Since the stone walls are shown on it, we will have a pretty accurate way of determining exactly where we are on the property, so I can take some notes right on the survey. 

I don't know if it will be helpful to the forester or not, but I'll try taking a screen shot from Google Earth and overlaying it onto the survey as well.  It shouldn't be too difficult to get the scale correct with a little trial and error. 

This thread got me to start reading Tom Wessels book again, "Reading the Forested Landscape".  It's interesting as there is evidence of many types of "disturbances" that he points out in his book.  I see evidence of former pastures, former blowdowns, and former logging.  Every time I go back out into the woods, or look back at the hundreds of photo's I've taken, I notice something else I had never seen before.  I think that's what keeps it interesting. 

[DMcCoy]

I set up my management plan by making a rough map of my property.  I divided it into smaller areas with the borders defined by property lines, topography, streams, and roads.  I think I have 27 different pieces that vary greatly in size from as little as 1/2 to larger ones of several acres.  I then assigned a number 1-2-3, based on intensity of the work involved, to each area.  I pick a mixture a of high and low each year.  Taken as a whole it would be overwhelming and it is rewarding to get an area "done".

I would want to know what tree species are common in that area.  If it was me that would be my first step, find a good book and study it. 

In my part of western Oregon we have 5 dominate canopy forming species and a smattering of a few lessor know and non-commercial trees that I will save even at the expense of the big 5.  I am surrounded by 1000's of acres of industrial forest land that is stocked 100% with Douglas Fir.  If there ever was an uglier forest to walk in I would like to see it.  We also have a soil disease called laminated root rot that effects Doug fir and these industrial guys plant it back anyway and they are starting to die- this is not intelligent.  The lack of diversity may make short term financial sense but I'm not so positive about the longer term impacts on soil fertility.  Conifers store their nutrients in the main stem, deciduous trees store theirs in the branches <3".  I see long term problems with the mono-crop idea.

The link below is to an article by a Canadian forester that tested nutrients of various parts of both conifer and deciduous trees.  It is the most interesting paper I have read in over 35 yrs.  It deals with regenerating forest soils.  It is well worth the time to read it.

http://www.dirtdoctor.com/view_org_research.php?id=69

Looking at your pictures I understand completely why you would feel overwhelmed.  I would divide and conquer.   Begin with the end in mind- what do you want it to look like in 'x' years.  Do you want income and how often?  How involved do you want to be?  You have choices.

Some things are obvious to me.  Reducing tree numbers in most areas, cutting bent and deformed trees first.  What really stands out though, and this is based on my experience in Oregon where we don't have quite the centuries of farmed land is that your soil looks depleted.  I don't know what is normal growth rates for your area but if this was logged in the 70's that is @ 40 yrs. +/- worth of growth - wow!.  The trees near the rock walls look bigger than in the open field areas and this makes some sense as the rock walls would collect leaves, helping to build soil that wasn't then depleted again by farming. 

Someone mentioned soil testing and I would agree.  I would also look at soil carbon content.  There are ways to substantially improve soil carbon.
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/index.html

Hope this helps you,

[enigmaT120]

That was a good article on forest soil regeneration.  I don't have money for a chipper so I've been leaving my prunings and slash from pre-commercial thinning on the ground.  I keep it out of my trails but try not to pile it up too much, as I don't want a fire hazard.  No slash burning.  The piles are breaking down like they're supposed to, just not nearly as fast as chips would.  This works in Falls City and Banks, where it's wet much of the time.  It would probably be a fire hazard in much of our state, and chipping would be better there.

Do you also try to avoid soil compaction?  I have a network of skid roads and try not to drive anywhere else, especially if the ground is wet. 

[terry f]

    Wouldn't a chipper nice, I'm in Eastern Oregon, when something hits the ground, it stays there. Fire danger is always on my mind, either too hot or too much snow to work. We only have a couple months in the Fall and Spring where we can burn without worry.

[DMcCoy]

My little parcel is less than 25 ac. and I live on it. It has a few acres of flatter ground and some extremely steep ground.  It has one class 1 stream and the riparian buffer takes roughly 6 acres.  I'm allowed to cut "house wood" out of it but it is off limits for commercial logging.  It has 5 side streams so water and stream crossing is a big factor in any decisions I make.  My timber management I would call a hobby except it is hard dangerous work.  I have hired logging and logged myself it just depended on the area.  I have cut 3 times the dollar amount I paid for the property and still have 1/2 of the original trees left.  I'm starting to thin replanted areas making firewood as I go.  In a sea of industrial reprod I'm the odd one and l'm Ok with that.

I have a few dirt roads with reasonably good access to all areas.  I have tried to skid logs on snow but find that while the trees skid easier my equipment does too.  I generally winch logs to where I can drag them down the road, the ground is just too steep.  In general I stay off my ground and my roads when the soil is wet.  Wet ground makes everything that much harder, and I guess I have a choice.  I skid with a tractor winch and I have a small cat.

Fire season tends to bring greater focus to that very real primal fear.  What would I do?  We had lightening the other night and a couple of fires started over by Scapoose.  So every year I get to think about fire for a couple of months.  I have come to a couple of conclusions.  The industrial forest land adjacent to my property is a fire hazard.  It is @ 20 yr old reprod, heavily stocked, and the lower branches from the ground up are dead. Full of dead little baby tree branches I think fire would climb rapidly into the crowns.  I am adding to one of my sections a 30' buffer of well spaced hardwood.  In other areas I have limbed my trees to 12'.  I left the branches where they fell, they will eventually rot, and my thinking is that they are no worse a fire hazard on the ground than they are attached to the tree where fire could climb.

You guys on the east side have it bad imho.  Everyone seems to understand that decades of fire suppression have only compounded the problem to the point of catastrophe.  If I was allowed (?) I think I would burn my land every 3-6 years if I could do so safely.  That probably means thinning and burning piles of hand cut brush during the winter, which is a ton of work, probably completely unfeasible for a large land owner.  Maybe that guy who used to sit on the side of buildings in Portland needs some hard work, put his labor where his mouth is... yeah right like he wants to work.

[enigmaT120]

You can log in a riparian zone, it's just more hassle and you have to leave a lot of trees.  We went through it in the Master Woodland Manager program.  I have a Large Fish bearing stream cutting through my place but I don't have any plans to do much except admire it. 

I hear you on the "sea of industrial reprod" as Weyerhauser surrounds my place on 3 sides.  The Alpacalypse people were on the south side, but they got evicted. 

I like WH for a neighbor.  They leave me alone.

[Piston]

DMcCoy,
Thanks for some great information.  I read through the link about chipping wood.  Luckily, I do have a chipper, so perhaps that will come in very handy.  It mentions in the article some pretty specific terms about chipping wood, as well as the types of wood chipped.  I will keep in mind that the smaller hardwood branches are the best chipper material for my land 'humus' recipe  ;D

I currently have a large pile of brush/trees that I am planning on burning.  I've actually put it off though, thinking that perhaps I should leave that pile as shelter for the wildlife.  I"m sure some critters and birds are finding shelter from the weather in there!  I guess that is another way to go, make brush piles for wildlife rather than chip for soil enhancements.  As you said, my site does seem like it has rather "poor" soil.  I've actually always thought that, I've always said to myself that for as long as the trees have been growing undisturbed, I felt that they should look "healthier".  I'm interested to hear what the forester thinks after walking the property with me. 

Since I have so much thinning to do, I'm starting to wonder if I'd be able to do the logging myself, as in, bring the logs to a mill and get paid for them.  I'm not sure if there are any mills nearby, and I'm not sure if they even buy from "non" loggers, or even if it would be worth it financially. 

As far as hardwoods, I tend to guesstimate that the only value my hardwoods would have is cut and split for firewood.  I've been exploring the option of investing in a quality log splitter and making a bunch of firewood to sell.  Of course then, I run into the problem of delivery and lack of anything to deliver the firewood with  :D  I don't imagine I'd really make much money doing this, but perhaps it could offset the cost of my financial outlay. 

At least if nothing else, I'm pretty confident that I can take out all the bent, deformed, poor quality trees and go from there.  As it is, that will probably take me a lifetime in and of itself!   :D

Thanks for all the ideas and advice so far. 

[mesquite buckeye]

When you thin your hardwoods, especially, you will get an increase in growth rate of the remaining stand. Mostly the increase is from the gradual increase in canopy size since each tree has more space and more sun. What gets overlooked frequently is that there is also less competition at the bottom of the trees (roots) for water and nutrients. Also, if you let the thinnings rot, you will get a general improvement of soil fertility over time as the nutrients are released, also with increasing humus in the soil the ability to hold cationic soil nutrients (positively charged like ammonium, calcium, potassium, etc.) in the soil will increase and those nutrients will be more available to growing plants

Thinning is good. ;D 8) 8) 8)

[Piston]

How does burning brush come into play?  As in, nutrient wise, are you burning all the nutrients out of the pile? 

Sounds best to either leave the thinning a or chip them, scattering the wood chips.  I'm just curious if there is a benefit to burning also?

Would it be best to burn the pine thinning's and only chip the hardwoods?

[treeslayer2003]

happy birthday piston

[Ianab]

Burning leaves the mineral nutrients in the ash, but the organic material (mulch) is gone in the smoke. This is the part that composts down to form the rich black topsoil you usually want. That's the humus that Mesquite is talking about.

My preference would be to drag out the larger stuff that's useful firewood, and then cut up the tops so they lay on the ground and rot / recycle faster.

Of course fire risk may be a factor. Mulching or burning the slash in a controlled fire may be a better option if you have a fire risk locally.

Ian

[thecfarm]

I cut anything that I'm going to leave in the woods about 2-3 feet long,I try for more 2 than 3. When the limbs are on the trees I run my saw up and down the limbs,than I start to saw the 2-3 feet. Get the brush on the ground and not up in the air and it will be gone pretty quick. This way if I have to I can drive through the brush,it will break up in a few years. Even something 4-8 inches through gets the same treatment,if I leave it. I use to not bother with some of the bigger stuff,but found that I would have to  move it 2-3 times when it was in the way. Hard to have a good amount of wood on the 3 pt winch and than climb over somthing 4-8 inches across. A chipper is good,but need a good size one and I myself would not want to feed a chipper with limbs from a tree 2 feet across. Seems like the limbs has to be picked up in a certain order too. Hard to pick up a 8 foot long limb that is buried under 3-4 other 8 foot limbs.I can cut the brush up in 2-3 foot pieces and that solves the brush problem. Nothing a matter with brush piles.but I have a hard enough time to get around the wet holes,rough parts and big rocks.

[Piston]

happy birthday piston

Thanks treeslayer.  ;D

Burning leaves the mineral nutrients in the ash, but the organic material (mulch) is gone in the smoke. This is the part that composts down to form the rich black topsoil you usually want. That's the humus that Mesquite is talking about.

My preference would be to drag out the larger stuff that's useful firewood, and then cut up the tops so they lay on the ground and rot / recycle faster.

Of course fire risk may be a factor. Mulching or burning the slash in a controlled fire may be a better option if you have a fire risk locally.

Ian

Thanks for the explanation, that makes perfect sense that the part of the wood that burns is the part that becomes the "humus". 

Now what about pines???  What the heck do you do with a whole bunch of pines that aren't big enough to use as sawlogs?  I mean, I don't mind burning pine (as firewood), but good lord, I won't burn THAT much pine...

I cut anything that I'm going to leave in the woods about 2-3 feet long...

That's a good idea also Ray, probably a lot more "practical" than trying to chip everything that hits the ground as well. 

[thecfarm]

I've been feeding my OWB a steady diet of almost all white pine for 2 years, and before that alot went through it. I think I am just about done with pine. Now onto fir and cedar. Some of it was kinda soft on the outside,but the inside kept us nice and warm. That was one of the reason I wanted a OWB. I needed a way to get rid of my softwood. I tried to burn it,but it would burn for 5-6 days.

[Ianab]

Now what about pines???  What the heck do you do with a whole bunch of pines that aren't big enough to use as sawlogs?  I mean, I don't mind burning pine (as firewood), but good lord, I won't burn THAT much pine...

Locally we just thin pine to waste, it rots where it lays, and in a couple of years there's no trace of a small (all sapwood) tree. But we are pretty much rain forest environment. If you want it to rot faster, limb it and chop it into chunks like Cfarm suggests. If it's off the ground it will take much longer to rot down. Laying in the soil it stays damper and the fungus and bugs can get at it quicker.

If you haul out some of the best stuff for small sawlogs, and firewood the next size down, all that's going to be left is the tops, branches and smallest trees, the stuff that rots down the quickest anyway.

[mesquite buckeye]

How does burning brush come into play?  As in, nutrient wise, are you burning all the nutrients out of the pile? 

Sounds best to either leave the thinning a or chip them, scattering the wood chips.  I'm just curious if there is a benefit to burning also?

Would it be best to burn the pine thinning's and only chip the hardwoods?

And happy birthday also. ;D

It is, of course more complicated than all this.

Burning results in the instant release of the mineral nutrients. This can be good or bad depending upon the local ecosystem's ability to  incorporate most of this material. A big squasher rain can wash most of it away.

Also you lose all the fixed nitrogen to the atmosphere when you burn, but at the same time you won't have nitrogen tied up temporarily as the material rots which could reduce available nitrogen for a while. Also, even if you burn the tops, the roots are still going to be there to decay.

Nothing in life is simple. Most of the time we do the best we can.

Material that is a fire hazard and hangs around for a long time can be a problem if you are in a high risk area for fire. That is not the case for eastern North America most of the time. Way different story in the dry or seasonally dry West. Fire is much more important in the West and the vegetation is in general better adapted to it.

So there. ;D 8) 8) 8)

[Piston]

It is, of course more complicated than all this.

Seems like that's always the case  :D

[Southside]

Depending on the final spacing you are going after you could look at running a bog harrow over your brush / tops to break them up and get them in contact with the soil to decompose more quickly, in this way you get the nutrients returning to the soil and benefit of a cleaner floor with less labor. 

[DMcCoy]

From that Canadian forester's article I understand the value of chipped hardwood branches, and it makes sense that the fertility of valley floors came from the slopes of forests.  But that's a heck of a lot of chipping!  I do like others have mentioned, get the stuff down low to the ground and let the bugs and mushrooms eat it, same effect just a little slower and that's ok too.  Around my house I don't want a bunch of limbs for fire reasons.  I keep my skid roads clear of fallen branches.
Someone mentioned thinning not only allows selected trees more room for a canopy but it also frees up soil moisture and nutrients that competitors would take and that advice is spot on.  Thinning to me is making a decision about which trees live or die that might be made naturally over time,  and I add to that my own values.  I like the diversity I remember from when I was a kid, the woods were fascinating to me and still are.  I save dogwood, cherry, yew, cascara, and mountain hemlock.  I intentionally plant cedar, alder, hemlock, cascara but mostly Douglas fir.  But this is what is important to me and I don't expect others to follow or agree.  I would encourage you to think about what you want your forest to look like 30-40 years from now and then make moves toward that end.
Clear cutting has become equated with corporate evil.  I have left a few big trees in an area I 'clear cut' and replanted figuring I could pull them out later.  I even left a narrow space to fall them.  This was a mistake.  What happened is the big trees I left "mushroomed" so to speak and the canopy went sideways as it had 100% access to sunlight.  Some 15 years later when I went to fall them the damage they would do the the tops of the shorter trees would be horrible.  I was barely able to get them out a different direction.  Never again. Any big trees I leave now must stay put until the next harvest or I cut them.
For me I now favor small clear cuts.  I have tried to selective harvest inside a stand and find that falling trees without damaging others and winching 32' logs is an inexact process using cable.  I can't do it to my satisfaction so I quit.  How big a cut I make is determined by the trees themselves.  I cut until there are no trees leaning into the clear cut I'm making.  I want enough sunlight for the species of trees I plant to grow well. If I'm against any kind of boundary I want to make sure that anything I leave standing can be fell and removed at a later date without damaging the 'new' trees. 
My property is not manicured, but I have decided on a plan that meets my goals and that really helps.  It really is a process not so much a destination.  Some areas I'm happy with, some still need attention, some I haven't touched yet.  I think you have a nice place there and who doesn't like rock walls?  Well I do anyway, and there is plenty to keep you busy for many years and that's ok.  Best of luck in your adventure.
   

[Piston]

Best of luck in your adventure.
   

Thanks again for your input!

[John Mc]

Material that is a fire hazard and hangs around for a long time can be a problem if you are in a high risk area for fire. That is not the case for eastern North America most of the time. Way different story in the dry or seasonally dry West. Fire is much more important in the West and the vegetation is in general better adapted to it.

Folks often joke around here in Vermont that our forests are made of asbestos. We just don't get the fires that happen out west.  I've seen a couple of cases where someone was burning a field or ditch and it got away from them. The fire would burn up to the dge of the forest, maybe go a couple of feet into it, then die out.

That's not to say that our firefighters don't occasionally get a tough workout by a brush or forest fire, but nothing on the scale of what I hear of out west.

[terry f]

   Why is that?