|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 members (buzzard, BrandonClark, James, BamaGuitarDude, cullmanbamafan, odocoileus, RCHRR, BAR1225, 7short, TexasHuntress, WINMAG300, 4 invisible),
635
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,855 Likes: 42
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,855 Likes: 42 |
I have 8 acres in the center of our place that was clearcut in the 90s when my dad was alive. He didn't want to spend the money to replant and since it was surrounded by pines it grew back in very dense loblolly. Around 2010 I took a small dozer and cut lanes through it, then took a chainsaw and thinned it further, then started it on the burn rotation. It was 20 years old before I did the first thinning, and the only reason I was able to get it thinned was that I had a crew in to cut other places. Now that 8 acres looks about the same as the rest of it, without the cost of planting. As far as the future quality of the timber, there was a time when the mill at Thorsby didn't want sawlogs from planted timber, only from natural stands. I'm not sure that's still the case, but slower growing timber makes better lumber, so I don't think that will be a problem for you. Planted stuff will grow faster and should theoretically bring more income, but would it make enough extra to justify the $400 in planting cost? I doubt it, and it's sure to get harder to even get 40 acres cut at all. And with 3 sons you have a lot of future free labor to carry out the thinnings.  I would go this route if it were me. The only reason I wouldn't is if I could get NRCS funding to replant in longleaf. That's your tax dollars they are giving away; might as well get some if you can.
All the labor of man is for his mouth, and yet the appetite is not filled.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,815 Likes: 22
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,815 Likes: 22 |
I have 8 acres in the center of our place that was clearcut in the 90s when my dad was alive. He didn't want to spend the money to replant and since it was surrounded by pines it grew back in very dense loblolly. Around 2010 I took a small dozer and cut lanes through it, then took a chainsaw and thinned it further, then started it on the burn rotation. It was 20 years old before I did the first thinning, and the only reason I was able to get it thinned was that I had a crew in to cut other places. Now that 8 acres looks about the same as the rest of it, without the cost of planting. As far as the future quality of the timber, there was a time when the mill at Thorsby didn't want sawlogs from planted timber, only from natural stands. I'm not sure that's still the case, but slower growing timber makes better lumber, so I don't think that will be a problem for you. Planted stuff will grow faster and should theoretically bring more income, but would it make enough extra to justify the $400 in planting cost? I doubt it, and it's sure to get harder to even get 40 acres cut at all. And with 3 sons you have a lot of future free labor to carry out the thinnings.  I would go this route if it were me. The only reason I wouldn't is if I could get NRCS funding to replant in longleaf. That's your tax dollars they are giving away; might as well get some if you can. They are not completely giving it away, you’ll get a 1099 for the income in addition to having to deal with their requirements. I had thought about doing some EQUIP/CSP practices but have put that aside for now. I have a couple of tracts with gopher tortises so I think it would score pretty high.
"Cull" is just another four letter word...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,855 Likes: 42
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,855 Likes: 42 |
I have 8 acres in the center of our place that was clearcut in the 90s when my dad was alive. He didn't want to spend the money to replant and since it was surrounded by pines it grew back in very dense loblolly. Around 2010 I took a small dozer and cut lanes through it, then took a chainsaw and thinned it further, then started it on the burn rotation. It was 20 years old before I did the first thinning, and the only reason I was able to get it thinned was that I had a crew in to cut other places. Now that 8 acres looks about the same as the rest of it, without the cost of planting. As far as the future quality of the timber, there was a time when the mill at Thorsby didn't want sawlogs from planted timber, only from natural stands. I'm not sure that's still the case, but slower growing timber makes better lumber, so I don't think that will be a problem for you. Planted stuff will grow faster and should theoretically bring more income, but would it make enough extra to justify the $400 in planting cost? I doubt it, and it's sure to get harder to even get 40 acres cut at all. And with 3 sons you have a lot of future free labor to carry out the thinnings.  I would go this route if it were me. The only reason I wouldn't is if I could get NRCS funding to replant in longleaf. That's your tax dollars they are giving away; might as well get some if you can. They are not completely giving it away, you’ll get a 1099 for the income in addition to having to deal with their requirements. I had thought about doing some EQUIP/CSP practices but have put that aside for now. I have a couple of tracts with gopher tortises so I think it would score pretty high. Yeah, it comes with some strings attached, but with everything that went into a timber cut and replanting I don't think I paid any tax on the last project. I did some of the work myself on that one because it was only 35 acres. I've always done as much as possible myself on the government projects.
All the labor of man is for his mouth, and yet the appetite is not filled.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 29,071 Likes: 83
Dances With Weeds
|
|
Dances With Weeds
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 29,071 Likes: 83 |
I think I would sit down and put a “pen and calculator” to my management plan and if I couldn’t show a reasonable return on growing a volunteer stand of pines compared to the time/$$$/labor to produce them……then I would scratch the idea of pine management altogether and 100% roll with the plan that’s best for wildlife…….In other words, it pointless to sacrifice wildlife goals only to break even on pine…..If we have to tailor every burn rotation around lobblolly pines instead of wildlife then what did we get for doing such??......Nothing eats pine needles
Folks that know don't shoot old does........
|
|
|
|
|