Should I cut these trees?

[Matthew]

My property was logged with skidders about 13 years ago before I bought the land. It was a typical cut it off then sell the land deal. My question is really three questions.

(1) The trees I have in the photos are just a example of what is on all the skid roads they were bumper trees and took a real beating. Do you think that they should be cut because the rot will just continue to go higher up the tree or does it just rot the bottom and the log a few feet up will still be good. I have at least a truck load of just these skidder scarred trees.

(2) When I hear the term cut the worst first what exactly does it mean worst first, does worst mean rotting, over mature, low value, low grade?

(3) I burn alot of firewood (outdoor woodboiler) about 9 cords a year I have 57 acers wich about 50 is wooded for in the past I have cut mostly fallen trees or stading dead ones a no brainer to figure they had to go I now want to start culling some live hardwoods but am not shure witch to cut. Do I want to cut anything that is crooked and will never be a straight log, or do I cut straight trees that are worth less money as logs. A example would be if I have a straight hickory next to a less straight red oak do I take the oak or the hickory figuring you can some day get a log out of both trees.

[Traveling Woodsman]

@Matthew 16643 wrote:

My property was logged with skidders about 13 years ago before I bought the land. It was a typical cut it off then sell the land deal. My question is really three questions.

(1) The trees I have in the photos are just a example of what is on all the skid roads they were bumper trees and took a real beating. Do you think that they should be cut because the rot will just continue to go higher up the tree or does it just rot the bottom and the log a few feet up will still be good. I have at least a truck load of just these skidder scarred trees.

(2) When I hear the term cut the worst first what exactly does it mean worst first, does worst mean rotting, over mature, low value, low grade?

(3) I burn alot of firewood (outdoor woodboiler) about 9 cords a year I have 57 acers wich about 50 is wooded for in the past I have cut mostly fallen trees or stading dead ones a no brainer to figure they had to go I now want to start culling some live hardwoods but am not shure witch to cut. Do I want to cut anything that is crooked and will never be a straight log, or do I cut straight trees that are worth less money as logs. A example would be if I have a straight hickory next to a less straight red oak do I take the oak or the hickory figuring you can some day get a log out of both trees.

I don’t claim to be an expert, but I will throw out some of my thoughts and hopefully others can expand some.

1) You should cut the rub trees. Trees that have been damaged like the ones in your pictures spend a large quantity of their resources covering those rubs, resources that would otherwise go to growing lumber. This classifies them as “worst”. Hopefully there are good younger trees close to the ones you’d be taking that would be released, but even if there aren’t it could possibly send some sunlight to the forest floor that could help regenerate some shade intolerant species.

2) My view on “worst” is that it relates to potential future value. So yes, worst means rotting, over mature and low grade. There are 3 categories of indicators that determine whether a certain specimen is “worst”: damaged, diseased, or inferior. “Damaged” is self-explanatory, skidder rub, lightning strike, frost crack (wind shake), wind damage and such. “Diseased” is also self explanatory. “Inferior” is not so self explanatory, but includes such considerations as soil type, slope, aspect, topography, moisture level and forest type when determining if a certain specimen is optimized for the site it’s on, which is what we’re trying to achieve. And growing clear defect-free lumber from that optimized specimen. For instance, you wouldn’t want to grow white pine in a mountain cove with lots of moisture and deep soil, because other, more valuable trees do well on those sites.

So to address question 3, the answer about whether to cut the oak or the hickory would include considerations such as what the specific site is optimized for growing. And too, what your specific goals are. If your goals are to provide a sustainable supply of firewood and grow the largest amount of clear, defect-free, high-value lumber that you can, I would consider leaving the red oak (barring major defects) and taking the hickory for firewood. This would do two things: one, it would free the red oak to grow (assuming they are next to each other like you said), and two, it would provide you with good hickory firewood. The red oak is generally worth much more than hickory, in fact one local mill here pays more for the lowest grade of red oak than the highest grade of hickory. And hickory has more BTU’s per cord than red oak, and I believe more than any other species, at least around here. So there’s my initial thoughts

The discussion about worst-first selection is really a rather large-scale one, involving silvicultural systems, silvics, and other factors related to forest management.

Some of the ideas I mentioned are brought out in the article “Nature’s Tree Marking Paint” found on http://healingharvestforestfoundation.org/. Look under “HHFF Documents”. This says a little more about these concepts, and there are plenty of good books out there related to this too, if you’re interested.

[Author]

Posts