|
| |
Hardwood Forest Management - Two
Examples
Click on the Pictures to get a Larger Image
Note: All pictures taken on the same day
Property 1 - Good |
Property 2 - Bad |
Introduction: Both of these properties are located within 1/2
mile of each other and were harvested early in 2004. Property 1 was
harvested in the winter with cutting being halted mid March - before
spring breakup. Harvesting on property 2 was begun in late winter and
continued through spring breakup.
Property 1: This property is owned by a local landowner. It was
last logged about 30+ years ago at which time most of the valuable
yellow birch and hard maple were cut, leaving a stand heavy to soft
maple. The timber in the stand was almost exclusively pole size (<12"
diameter) with some smaller sawlog size trees. After checking
references, the landowner hired a
consulting forester to administer the timber sale. The consulting
forester bid the sale out on a "pay as you cut" basis to reputable
loggers in the area. From these loggers, the highest bidder was
selected. All trees to be cut were marked with tree marking paint on two
sides and on the stump. The cutting was limited to winter months due to
soil conditions on adjacent stands (lowland conifers)
that are also part of the timber sale. If the hardwoods were the only
stand being cut, a summer harvest (mid July to late September) may have
also been feasible. The stand was marked to a residual density optimal
for good hardwood growth. Marking was
done using the "Crop Tree Release" method where good quality, future
high value trees are identified. Low quality/value trees around these
crop trees are marked for cutting in order to allow the crop trees to
obtain more sunlight and grow at a faster rate. Marking also favored the
retention of hard maple, yellow birch and hemlock while reducing the
soft maple component. This was done to increase diversity and maximize
long term timber value (soft maple
is worth little compared to hard maple and yellow birch). Tree tops and
branches too small to be used for sawlogs or pulpwood were lopped down
to a maximum of 4 feet high to improve aesthetics following the harvest.
The landowner was paid for all the wood that was cut and another
harvest can be performed in 15 years, with the landowner realizing a
much greater financial return due to the improved quality of the trees
on the property.
Property 2: Property 2 is owned by an out of town landowner who
is going to be selling the land. It was a good quality hardwood stand
with many sawlog size trees and a good hemlock component.
It appears to have been well managed prior to the last harvest. The
logger/forester conducting the harvest was hired by a local realtor who
either neglected to check references or did not care. The
logger/forester had a known poor reputation. Payment, as with property
1, was "Pay as you cut". The logger/forester cut all the large, quality
trees and left small and poor quality trees standing.
In many areas too many trees were cut and the trees that were not cut
have begun to blow over due to too much open space (windthrow). Due to
the fact that logging continued through
spring breakup, deep ruts are common throughout the property. The ruts
not only look unappealing, but result in damage to roots of nearby trees
thus creating a pathway for disease to enter the trees. Soil compaction
and the associated inability of roots to penetrate compacted soil will
also lead to reduced regeneration of trees and the inability of nearby
trees to expand their root systems.
Other problems include: garbage left in the woods, probable oil and
hydraulic fluid leaked or drained onto the property, lower quality logs
and lots of pulpwood left in the woods, and tops of trees NOT cut down
to a reasonable height.
In addition, the landowner did not get paid for all the wood removed
from the property and the wood he did get paid for was paid at a rate
below market value. The future of this stand is not good. Many of the
remaining trees will blow over due to over-cutting. Other trees will
experience crown dieback and eventual death from damage to their root
systems. Another timber harvest on this stand before 50 years have
passed is unlikely.
|
|
