Conifer encroachment in aspen stands

semi ancient natural woodlands [ oak, birch, yew ] were underplanted with conifers 50 years ago, the idea behind this was to utilise the space between the hardwoods and it also would give a cash return down the road. This system did not work for alot of reasons, the conifers were planted too close together leaving no light on to the forest floor and in turn there was no regen from the oak or birch. The forestry divison decided in the early 1990s to remove all conifer from hardwood stands. They never gave much thought as how to extract these conifers, harvesters / processors were no good, sky line would be too awkward and end up doing too much damage so they decided to try a skidder and horses. we worked alongside this skidder for one week and extracted double what they did, the skidder crew packed it in the following week, they said that it was frustrating to watch horses nip in and out between trees and put timber at the landing, they had to follow the load out from the back of the wood, stop and readjust so as not to damage any hardwoods which took time. Comments like horses are too slow, you should be in a museum were well and truly gone out the door. The satisfaction gained at that time was immense, now here we have a harvesting system where horses are not only the best method but also the fastest and most economic. We ended up extracting over 5000 tonnes of conifers for this company alone. The best method is to cut the timber to length in the wood, skid the sawlogs with swingletree and load the smaller produce on to a sledge and extract to track side for secondary extraction with horse drawn forwarder. I know this does not relate exactly to conifers and aspen but i am sure the same system could work very well indeed.
simon lenihan

scott, There was no report carried out on the said work and for a very good reason too, most foresters are not interested in using draft animals and the idea that a combination of both draft animal and mechanised forwarder being more competitive would not go down well. The state forestry now give grants for the purchace of smaller machines, they have the cheek to say these are more enviromentaly friendly, they burn less fuel and do not compact the ground as much, i have never heard so much s_ _ t in my life but it gives the public the idea that the forestry divison are a real eco group.
simon

I second Carl’s suggestion to study production/ residual damage/ silviculture / and I’ll add , aesthetics/ water quality/ wildlife/ etc.

I have quite a few sites scattered around Coos County that a researcher would be welcome to visit and talk to foresters/LO. There are also plenty of conventional sites around for comparison.

I agree whole hartedly Joel.

I know of a few guys with skidders who are really good at what they do leaving little impact at all while I have been to one place that used horses and oxen that really made a mess.

I think there is to much generalization on what happens when X type of crew goes in. I do know that there are real good people in both fields and some that crossover between the two on hybrid jobs.

Just my .02 worth

Joshua

Tim, Joshua, Joel I’ve done a fair share of skidder logging and a fair share of horse logging.

To me it comes down to the silvicutural prescription and the economics. Simon’s post covers this well. There are things that skidders do best such as final harvests, and there are things that horses do best such as careful thinning. The operator or teamster may or may not be effective with the tool they are using.

Woody biomass harvesting in New England is not an appropriate use of horsepower. The last roundwood biomass I twitched to a chipper brought 5$ a ton in the yard – 28$ chipped and delivered.

Horsepower is appropriate on woodland managed for multiple interventions, and an ever increasing residual stand quality. I have done work with this type of prescription, and I can point you to the foresters who managed the job.

Joel I just need to reply to clarify for others who may be reading this.

I don’t have “the opportunity” to do anything. I make it all happen. I am a self-employed private forestry consultant. I have a couple of thousand acres of forest land that I manage for several dozen clients. I decide whether I am going to work with machines or horses based on the operators and not based on the sites.

There are always aspects of every site that are challenging. I have not found a site yet that I didn’t see how it could be done with horses. In fact in our area, they all were done at least once already with horses. I have found a few mechanical operators who have sensibilities and skills that they can apply to the type of forestry I want to practice, so in some cases I actually use them.

As far as the European forestry, for someone who has a hard time with people generalizing….

My approach to forestry is not based on any style that I picked up from any cultural or educational sources. I practice silviculture based on 30 years of experience working in the forest with an eye toward ecological factors. The reason why my approach is not commonly found in USA is because of the industrial support for research that is the underpinning for silvicultural stocking guides. The practices that are based on these guides are mostly developed to facilitate what are typically thought of as modern harvesting systems. This has led to widespread mismanagement of our forests. And this is not just my generalized opinion. There is broad consensus on this.

I see draft-animals playing an extremely important role in the practice of silviculture that focuses on forest ecology, silvics, and the improvement of growing stock. Using draft animals allows for those objectives to be paramount, rather than becoming compromised by the logistical requirements for large scale mechanical harvesting.

I feel like the time is right that we develop some studies that could sort out some of these factors, so that we don’t have to continually debate apples and oranges.

Carl

Good discussion, friends.