loggers are coming to clear the land behind us

[smstonypoint]

An issue that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is use-value assessment for forestry. I have no idea whether this applies in the OP's state, but it is relevant in some (many/most?) states.

At least in NC, qualifying for forest-use property tax assessment requires the landowner to follow an approved forest management plan. My plans have been provided by the NC Forest Service (at no charge), although I could have paid a consulting forester to provide the plans.

My plans have recommended both clear-cutting and selective thinning on certain tracts of my farm. Although I have some flexibility in the plans, I would have to forgo the lower forestry-use property tax rate if I ignored the plans.

The upshot is that woodland utilization in some states depends on the states' property-tax policies.

Steve

 

[Tractor Seabee]

An issue that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is use-value assessment for forestry. I have no idea whether this applies in the OP's state, but it is relevant in some (many/most?) states.

At least in NC, qualifying for forest-use property tax assessment requires the landowner to follow an approved forest management plan. My plans have been provided by the NC Forest Service (at no charge), although I could have paid a consulting forester to provide the plans.

My plans have recommended both clear-cutting and selective thinning on certain tracts of my farm. Although I have some flexibility in the plans, I would have to forgo the lower forestry-use property tax rate if I ignored the plans.

The upshot is that woodland utilization in some states depends on the states' property-tax policies.

Steve

As my previous thread diatribe indicated; we have the same thing here in WA State. Hope they do not reject my application. Going to do the logging anyway with replanting in fir and cedar. Selective thinning only works here if you can get good access for cutting and hauling so that you do not cut so much that the trees no longer support each other in wind. Fir trees do not have tap roots. Roots spread out just below the surface; so unless you plant in the open the root structure does not support the tree that much. I have trees from 60-100' tall. That is a lot of sail effect. We are also re-planting several ACs in Christmas tree stock, they are real close to each other as you harvest in 5-7 years. We are also into cultivating and harvesting other species of forest plants such as salal, ferns (several varieties are native here), oregon grape, huckelberry, mistletoe, edible mushrooms, truffels, and holly. My wife makes and sells wreaths, swags, and conifer cones items at christmas time. We also grow and sell pumpkins and corn stalks for the fall market. Our forest has fir, cedar, alder, and maple as natural native stocks. All are very marketable and in demand with good price return.

Ron

 

[20 20]

I skimmed a lot of this but commonality noticed was "what a mess" of logged land. Well, no. Rather, I'd go with it is "visually unappealing to modern politically correct beliefs of city dwellers, recent rural settlers and those not familair with wildlife habitat and renewable resource management".

Of course I can only write of what I've seen in this area but I will disagree with the above 100%. I have been a country boy all of my life in the woods. I have seen loging that is horrible for the land and left things much much worse for wild life and regrowth. With that, I understand there are good loggers and my hat is off to them. I understand your comment along with others about "city dwellers" but there is more to it then blaming the city. There are just as many loons living in the woods. Simply put, place blame where it belongs not just on any old group. My comments about bad logging practice are based on my experience. I've even seen 40+"diameter trees cut 3/4 of the way through and left standing to come down later, probably on someones head. I've seen oil changes take place on the land, no catch basin, just drain replace plug refill and go.

We were larger landowners in Maine and, while we never logged it, noticed the lack of visible wildlife in older growth and the absolute abundance of life in logged areas. It was teeming with deer and birds, etc. Animals are "edge" dwellers in that they need new growth to survive. Old growth is pretty but not a lot in the way of creatures that wouldn't do equally wll with some logged area tossed in.

I have to ask if this is true then why was there so much more wildlife here before the white man came to make it modern? I'm not trying to start an arguement and agree with proper managment wild life can do fine. But your statement is not true, this is where I see a fine line believing man can do better then nature. We can do our best to live side by side with wildlife, but I doubt we could do a better job. If I were hiring someone for the job of nature management I'd feel better going with the one with billions of years of experience then the one with a thousand years of accidents

Sorry if this sounds blunt but when I see a wrong it does not mean I am a city dweller nor a tree hippy. I don't use the phrase "treehugger" because I do believe I am a "treehugger" I use the old dead stuff for heat and use other species for milling and see trees as a renewable very usefull source but it should be done correct.

 

[foreman Etexas]

You need my neighbor I would rather see them log my forest,atleast you dont have to listen to her loud mouth:laughing: You may be able to pay land owner what they are going to get for ton,to ask for them to leave some trees ajoining your property.

 

[JeremyL]

Bigballer, you have my sympathy. I think you posted this because you wanted to share your anxiety. Usually tractorbyneters are more supportive and empathetic. While many of the comments contain suggestions and harsh-reality points, I hope they are not discouraging.

My wife and I have for many years been at odds about how to manage our woodlands. There are so many variables to consider, and we have gotten many contradictory suggestions from both professional foresters and the general public.

We want to get some $ out of the woods, protect the trees that remain, protect the soil & water, promote wildlife, reduce fire hazard, promote oak regeneration vs. having opportunistic maples and poplars take over, retain some of the beauty of the mature stand, etc. If that isn't enough, we want the logger to be respectful of our property, and use draft animals.

It is mind-boggling to try to balance all these factors and make a plan. I think many loggers approach the job simplistically and take the easiest and most profitable approach, much to the detriment of the land and land-owners.

Anyone know good horse-loggers in So. Central Kentucky?

 

[DANOCHEESE]

EARTH FIRST



We will Log Th Other Planets Later

Send me the name of the logging company so I can send them a donation to help fight you in court.

 

[20 20]

EARTH FIRST



We will Log Th Other Planets Later

Send me the name of the logging company so I can send them a donation to help fight you in court.

while your at it send some to the politicians too :laughing:

 

[ustmd]

Wow--the beating will continue until morale improves.

Bigballer--if you want to swing the posts to your side, maybe you should say that the other landowner is an Obama supportor.:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

 

[impdaddy]

speaking of Obama...

 

[Pilot]

Ron,

Your comments about wind are only partially correct. In 1983 I was called in to lead the planning for dealing with over 6000 acres of blowdown, so I learned a little about wind and trees.

The basics:

The most important factors in keeping trees upright are the strength of the wind, the density of the stand over the life of the trees and the soil conditions. Species is also important, but the importance of it varies.

Cedar is very wind firm, but often grows in risky areas. DF is also windfirm, but not as firm as cedar in those risky places. Yes, DF doesn't grow much of a tap root, but the experts say, and the physics say that a tap root isn't that big a deal in holding a tree against the wind. The importance of a strong tap root is a fallacy that is commonly accepted by foresters and others, so you are not alone. So you have a 20 inch tree, 90 ft. tall with a 12" diameter tap root. What's going to break first? The 12" tap root. How widely the root system spreads is actually more important than a tap root.

The most important factor is the density of the stand over the life of the tree. Trees grown in the open develop wind firmness and hold up better than those in a tight stand. Closely spaced trees will be at risk until thinning and for about 3-5 years after thinning. Look at individual trees growing in a pasture and you'll see the effect of being exposed all the tree's life. Ever drive thru the Columbia Gorge? The wind howls thru there. With all that frequent wind, strong wind, the trees have adapted to it over their life and rarely blow down or break off. The rule of thumb is that to maintain wind firmness, you need a ratio of diameter to height of greater than 1:100, i.e., more than 12" diameter for a 120 foot tree. That's just a rule of thumb and in my opinion, it's too optimistic, I would go for a larger diameter.

Those trees in a pasture also have large crowns, the "sail effect" you mention. Not important if the trees are adapted to the wind. Again, look at the Gorge.

I have heard the comment before about trees supporting each other in the wind. How do you suppose they do that? The strongest part of the wind either blows over the top of the stand or between the trees depending on density and what is upwind of the stand. When a gust hits a stand, they all bend the same way, in sequence as the wind strikes them. They don't support each other, and in fact if one leans against another, it puts more stress on the second tree, increasing the likelihood of that tree going down.

If wind is a concern, space the trees wide and thin often and gradually.