Poll

Do we keep the woods or cut them down?

Keep them!
10 (34.5%)
Timber!
19 (65.5%)

Total Members Voted: 29

Author Topic: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?  (Read 2992 times)

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« on: February 01, 2019, 03:59:37 PM »
My wife and I own a small (~20 acres) tract of farmland on the edge of a town we used to live in. We bought it thinking we'd one day build a house there. It is vacant land currently. This was before we began our FIRE journey. We no longer live in that state. It's doubtful we will return in the near future, and if we did it's very unlikely we would proceed with building a house on the land as we already own a townhouse in the same town. FIRE has reduced the appeal of a single family home for us dramatically because we expect to be gone more than we're home.

This farm property has about 5 acres of woods bordering an adjacent development. We have liability exposure to about 14 homes where our trees could fall on their property. We've had two different property owners ask us to cut down trees along the property line over the last couple years. The community's lots are small (1/4 acre) so the homes are within 50 feet of so of our property line. That makes it very expensive to cut trees along the property line down. The stand of forest isn't in the best health.

We're considering having the woods clear cut. A licensed and insured logging company will take everything right up to the property line down for free, in exchange for the wood. We may be able to find someone to pay us a little something but I'm not too optimistic because it was select cut about 10 years ago. Eliminating the entire stand of trees would take care of our liability, and any chance of hassle from the neighbors while we're travelling over the next few years. The last thing we want is to deal with someone asking us to spend thousands of dollars cutting a tree down while we're not even in the country.

A small part of me wants to keep the woods for sentimental reasons. We had a vision for that property at one time, and the once in a lifetime story of how we came to own it doesn't help with my pragmatism, but that was long before FIRE and freedom has changed everything for us.

I'm leaning toward having the trees taken down. Perhaps we would replant some saplings. I'm certainly not looking for anyone to make my mind up for me but I'm interested in what my fellow Mustachians would say. Would you cut the woods down, or keep them?

sailinlight

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 104
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2019, 04:07:08 PM »
If the trees are healthy and not in obvious and imminent danger of falling onto a house, you generally have no liability if a tree on your property falls and damages someone else's property. It is an 'act of god' and their insurance will not go after yours. Of course consult a lawyer, and it could still be a pain to have angry property owners attempt to sue you anyway, even if you win it could take mental energy and money to defend yourself. I would offer to allow the bordering property owner to pay for cutting down the trees near their property and you split the proceeds of selling the wood.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2019, 04:53:38 PM by sailinlight »

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13046
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2019, 04:13:57 PM »
If, as you said, the forest isn't in very good health, you may be best to have it clear cut, and then do some sort of reforestation project.  That could be part of the deal with the logging company.  And when/if you do replant, replace with species that are more likely to be healthy (unless the poor health is just because the tress were getting old).

terran

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2881
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2019, 04:17:51 PM »
Why are you keeping this land at all if you have no plans to build on it?

SweatingInAZ

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 57
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2019, 04:18:02 PM »
Take some pictures and list the property for sale!

Sailinlight's suggestion sounds great too, for the short term.

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2019, 05:05:06 PM »
The property will inevitably be developed as the town grows (desireable DC suburb) so it's worth holding on to. All of the ashe trees on our property are dying. They're dying all over the east coast because of an invasive species, the emerald ashe borer. They're not dead yet but within 5 years we'll have a number of trees close enough to the property line that we'll be liable if they're not cut down. Depending on how many they're are, the cost could be 5-figures to have all the dead trees cut down.

tralfamadorian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1218
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2019, 06:52:43 PM »
If the trees were healthy, I would keep them. Since you know they're dying and believe you can get someone to take them down at no cost to you (as opposed to in a few years when they start to rot and become worthless for the logging co), I would pull the trigger and have them taken down.

I understand the pull of wanting to keep them and the memories of your past goals but it sounds like your happy memories of what may have been could easily be spoiled by a lawyer-happy NoVa jerk when a tree falls on their garage.

Michael in ABQ

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 957
    • Military Saints
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2019, 06:53:40 PM »
If the trees were healthy, I would keep them. Since you know they're dying and believe you can get someone to take them down at no cost to you (as opposed to in a few years when they start to rot and become worthless for the logging co), I would pull the trigger and have them taken down.

I understand the pull of wanting to keep them and the memories of your past goals but it sounds like your happy memories of what may have been could easily be spoiled by a lawyer-happy NoVa jerk when a tree falls on their garage.

Ditto this. Dead trees, cut 'em down.

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13046
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2019, 06:54:51 PM »
The property will inevitably be developed as the town grows (desireable DC suburb) so it's worth holding on to. All of the ashe trees on our property are dying. They're dying all over the east coast because of an invasive species, the emerald ashe borer. They're not dead yet but within 5 years we'll have a number of trees close enough to the property line that we'll be liable if they're not cut down. Depending on how many they're are, the cost could be 5-figures to have all the dead trees cut down.

We are losing our ash trees too.  Given this information, getting the logging company in now, before the treas are weakened, would be sensible.  If you want some woods left, ask them to leave saplings of species that are OK.  Of course that is selective cutting, not clear-cutting, but maybe you could walk through with their forester and mark some trees to be saved? 

ShoulderThingThatGoesUp

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3056
  • Location: Emmaus, PA
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2019, 07:38:48 AM »
The property will inevitably be developed as the town grows (desireable DC suburb) so it's worth holding on to. All of the ashe trees on our property are dying. They're dying all over the east coast because of an invasive species, the emerald ashe borer. They're not dead yet but within 5 years we'll have a number of trees close enough to the property line that we'll be liable if they're not cut down. Depending on how many they're are, the cost could be 5-figures to have all the dead trees cut down.

It has a development right next door and you donít think you could sell it to a developer today?

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2019, 12:53:31 PM »
The property will inevitably be developed as the town grows (desireable DC suburb) so it's worth holding on to. All of the ashe trees on our property are dying. They're dying all over the east coast because of an invasive species, the emerald ashe borer. They're not dead yet but within 5 years we'll have a number of trees close enough to the property line that we'll be liable if they're not cut down. Depending on how many they're are, the cost could be 5-figures to have all the dead trees cut down.

It has a development right next door and you donít think you could sell it to a developer today?
We're actually under contract to sell, have been for the last 8 years, but a sale like this isn't simple. There's political angles  to deal with as well. It'll probably be another 5-10 years before the sale completes, but politics could change and it might not happen for 30 years. I've stopped guessing when it'll happen.

chasesfish

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3482
  • Age: 38
  • Location: South Carolina
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #11 on: February 03, 2019, 06:43:31 AM »
I would timber it and replant the pine saplings that can be harvested in a generation.   That was regardless of the sale you guarantee yourself or your family another round of cash flow in the future.

Omy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 591
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #12 on: February 03, 2019, 06:56:09 AM »
If you have been notified in writing by neighbors that they want you to remove dead/dying trees, I believe you ARE liable if one falls on their house. Clear cut for free sounds like a good plan (unless your current contract controls the lumber rights.)

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #13 on: February 03, 2019, 07:31:54 AM »
If you have been notified in writing by neighbors that they want you to remove dead/dying trees, I believe you ARE liable if one falls on their house. Clear cut for free sounds like a good plan (unless your current contract controls the lumber rights.)
I'm pretty confident as well that this is the case in my state. Now that we're not working my wife and I want to travel a lot, even internationally. I can imagine a scenario where we're out of the county and suddenly a notice comes in for a dead tree and we have to try and handle that, potentially paying thousands of dollars for a remediation we can't see. And it's 5 acres of mature timber so there's probably a hundred trees tall enough that could fall on a house.

Case

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 805
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2019, 08:45:26 AM »
My wife and I own a small (~20 acres) tract of farmland on the edge of a town we used to live in. We bought it thinking we'd one day build a house there. It is vacant land currently. This was before we began our FIRE journey. We no longer live in that state. It's doubtful we will return in the near future, and if we did it's very unlikely we would proceed with building a house on the land as we already own a townhouse in the same town. FIRE has reduced the appeal of a single family home for us dramatically because we expect to be gone more than we're home.

This farm property has about 5 acres of woods bordering an adjacent development. We have liability exposure to about 14 homes where our trees could fall on their property. We've had two different property owners ask us to cut down trees along the property line over the last couple years. The community's lots are small (1/4 acre) so the homes are within 50 feet of so of our property line. That makes it very expensive to cut trees along the property line down. The stand of forest isn't in the best health.

We're considering having the woods clear cut. A licensed and insured logging company will take everything right up to the property line down for free, in exchange for the wood. We may be able to find someone to pay us a little something but I'm not too optimistic because it was select cut about 10 years ago. Eliminating the entire stand of trees would take care of our liability, and any chance of hassle from the neighbors while we're travelling over the next few years. The last thing we want is to deal with someone asking us to spend thousands of dollars cutting a tree down while we're not even in the country.

A small part of me wants to keep the woods for sentimental reasons. We had a vision for that property at one time, and the once in a lifetime story of how we came to own it doesn't help with my pragmatism, but that was long before FIRE and freedom has changed everything for us.

I'm leaning toward having the trees taken down. Perhaps we would replant some saplings. I'm certainly not looking for anyone to make my mind up for me but I'm interested in what my fellow Mustachians would say. Would you cut the woods down, or keep them?

I have a somewhat different response, though it depends on your financial status.  If you are already FIREd or are well on the way, you might consider the following:

You are in a unique position to resist suburban expansion.  If you are financially independent or close to it, you might consider getting a contractor to bid on clearing the trees on the perimeter only, to eliminate your liability risk.  And then leave the majority of the land alone.  Although many trees in there might be dying, your choice here will impact whether the land becomes yet another developed McMansion plot, or a small preserve of wooded land which will eventually regrow new trees.  Maybe you could even donate it to become a park some day.

You can always change your mind and sell it later; the value of land in that area of the country is only increasing.

Whether or not this would be appeal to you depends on your personal preferences.  The "inevitability of development" is entirely dependent on land owners (unless the govt intervenes, which seems unlikely).

I don't know what I would do in your shoes; I intend not to pressure you or imply any morals/ethics.  I simply bring this up for consideration.

Mississippi Mudstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2160
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Danielsville, GA
    • A Riving Home - Ramblings of a Recusant Woodworker
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2019, 10:10:12 AM »
If you had a healthy woodlot, I'd suggest leaving the trees be. As others noted, a healthy tree that falls on a house is typically considered to be an "act of God" under the law. Your risk of liability would be pretty low. But given that you mention a significant presence of ash trees on the lot, my instinct would be to go ahead and get them removed. The EAB can't really be stopped, and it's much easier (so, cheaper) to remove a live tree vs. a dead one. Plus, the wood will actually be used, rather than rotting back into the earth just in time for the bulldozers to scrape off the topsoil whenever the lot gets developed.

Fishindude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #16 on: February 04, 2019, 10:53:00 AM »
Knock down the dead and dying stuff near the perimeter and leave the rest alone.   A clear cut woods will never return to being a woods in your lifetime.

BicycleB

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2276
  • Location: Live Music Capital of the World
  • Older than the internet, but not wiser... yet
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #17 on: February 04, 2019, 01:02:42 PM »
No wisdom from me, just a guess to go ahead and clear cut on the idea that clear cut saves money for the developer you're trying to sell to.

Really just posting to say: Good luck on your eventual sale!

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13046
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #18 on: February 04, 2019, 01:25:51 PM »
Just thinking about the clearcut part - how clearcut?  What would the logger do with all the slash?  If it is left it could be a fire hazard, not to mention an eyesore.  Also if in nice piles some great wildlife habitat. Something to ask.
Also, what proportion of the woodlot is ash?  If there are lots of other species, could you get someone to come in and just take out the ash trees?  Would that leave a nice diverse woodlot?  It might be more expensive since it is selective cutting, but worth exploring.

RyanAtTanagra

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Location: SF Bay, CA
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #19 on: February 04, 2019, 03:33:37 PM »
You are in a unique position to resist suburban expansion.  If you are financially independent or close to it, you might consider getting a contractor to bid on clearing the trees on the perimeter only, to eliminate your liability risk.  And then leave the majority of the land alone.  Although many trees in there might be dying, your choice here will impact whether the land becomes yet another developed McMansion plot, or a small preserve of wooded land which will eventually regrow new trees.  Maybe you could even donate it to become a park some day.

I agree with this sentiment.  Setting it up as a park (under an LLC?  not sure how that works) would be a fun project, if you're not dependent on the sale.

For the trees themselves, since you don't need the land any time soon I would just fell the suspect ones back onto the property into the woods and leave them there to keep contributing to the ecosystem.

JoJo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #20 on: February 04, 2019, 04:58:26 PM »
My former boss had a tree fall on his house.  Lucky his daughter wasn't in her room or she would likely be dead.   House was pretty much totaled - will take 9 months to rebuild.


Linea_Norway

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6764
  • Location: Norway
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2019, 03:52:59 AM »
As you are planning to sell it for city expansion later on, I would cut down the whole patch now to stop worrying about it. Cutting the whole patch at once to save cost of cutting. Unless you risk that the soil will wash away in heavy rainfall when the trees are gone.

I personally love trees. So maybe leave a few trees to make the patch of land look more attractive.

As long as you leave the trees there, you need to keep an eye out and remove the ones that are at risk for falling over other houses. Or remove only those on the outside.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1178
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #22 on: February 05, 2019, 04:03:26 AM »
The stand of forest isn't in the best health.
Get it into better health.

We have a responsibility to grow things. And I don't just mean our share portfolios.

Car Jack

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1634
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #23 on: February 05, 2019, 06:57:27 AM »
It sure sounds like the best plan is to sell it and be done with it.  Don't even care who buys it.  A developer, a neighbor, a nature lover, a lumber company.  Who cares?  You could certainly look into the law, but I would be surprised if you're responsible for a tree coming down into a neighbor's house.  I have a smaller lot with my house on it (13 acres) that I forest manage to take firewood that I personally use.  One of my neighbors was concerned about a tree on my property that looked sketchy.  He asked me if he could have it taken down at his expense and give me the firewood from it.  I said sure and let him keep the firewood.  Cost me nothing and I didn't even have to fire up a chainsaw.

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2019, 01:15:18 PM »
Just thinking about the clearcut part - how clearcut?  What would the logger do with all the slash?  If it is left it could be a fire hazard, not to mention an eyesore.  Also if in nice piles some great wildlife habitat. Something to ask.
Also, what proportion of the woodlot is ash?  If there are lots of other species, could you get someone to come in and just take out the ash trees?  Would that leave a nice diverse woodlot?  It might be more expensive since it is selective cutting, but worth exploring.
The logger wouldn't take anything under 4-6", as that has no value for firewood. So it's not a total clear-cut but it eliminates everything big enough that I have to worry about liability. I may replant some trees as well but they would be small and take a long time to reach the point where I have to be concerned with liability. The logger would pile any of the leftover sticks and limbs in a pile(s). A farmer friend told me I could probably have the local fire department come out and burn it off or if they're not too much of an eyesore they can be left as habitat for wildlife.

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13046
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2019, 06:35:33 PM »
Just thinking about the clearcut part - how clearcut?  What would the logger do with all the slash?  If it is left it could be a fire hazard, not to mention an eyesore.  Also if in nice piles some great wildlife habitat. Something to ask.
Also, what proportion of the woodlot is ash?  If there are lots of other species, could you get someone to come in and just take out the ash trees?  Would that leave a nice diverse woodlot?  It might be more expensive since it is selective cutting, but worth exploring.
The logger wouldn't take anything under 4-6", as that has no value for firewood. So it's not a total clear-cut but it eliminates everything big enough that I have to worry about liability. I may replant some trees as well but they would be small and take a long time to reach the point where I have to be concerned with liability. The logger would pile any of the leftover sticks and limbs in a pile(s). A farmer friend told me I could probably have the local fire department come out and burn it off or if they're not too much of an eyesore they can be left as habitat for wildlife.

So basically saplings would be left, and brush piles for habitat.  Burning is always an issue, nutrient loss, loss of organic material, increased risk of erosion, plus what if the fire gets out of control.  It would also help erosion if some of the sticks and branches were chipped and spread on the ground - erosion and nutrient loss from rainfall are a big potential issue.  If there are lots of saplings that are not ash, this would actually be an OK regeneration for the woodlot.

kimmarg

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 749
  • Location: Northern New England
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2019, 07:08:23 PM »
I would only cut the perimeter as it gives you options later. Clear cuts are ugly.

Also why would the logger leave the slash lying around? bring in a chipper. Hardwood chips can go to a wood fired power plant or paper mill.  would not burn it as then you have burn scar runoff issues which would be worse.

I've also never heard of/considered trees on my property being a liability for my neighbors... I guess their trees are a liability for me too!

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #27 on: February 06, 2019, 12:11:25 PM »
Well I suppose the answer has been made for me. My mom walked a logger around the property today to get another opinion. It's been a few years since she's been there and she said she was shocked how much of the woods is Ash, probably 80% of it. She's a Horticulturalist so she's pretty good at identifying tree species. I guess it's unusual for a forest to be dominated by one species like that. She said it's all dead and has to come down. Fortunately it has just died so the wood is still valuable from a timber standpoint. We'll be getting a proposal from the logger in the next week or so that will give me a better picture of what we could be paid for the wood.

I'm kinda happy it turned out this way. For one, I don't have to feel bad about taking all the trees down. Plus, the explanation that the majority of the trees are dead or dying should eliminate any bitching from the neighbors, which I was dreading a little bit. It also clears the land for the developer, if the sale ever happens. If I can accomplish all that and put a little money in my pocket I'm happy!

BicycleB

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2276
  • Location: Live Music Capital of the World
  • Older than the internet, but not wiser... yet
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #28 on: February 06, 2019, 12:45:05 PM »
Mom saves the day! Thumbs up.

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13046
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #29 on: February 06, 2019, 03:00:56 PM »
80% ash when you have EAB - easy decision.  What are the small trees the logger mentioned. Also mostly ash?   

Come to think of it, if I stopped cutting my grass, in 5 years I would have a mixed stand of red osier dogwood and white ash, with an under-story of goldenrod and wild parsnip.  Those are the most vigorous volunteers here.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2019, 03:02:51 PM by RetiredAt63 »

Fishindude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #30 on: February 06, 2019, 03:26:57 PM »
Well I suppose the answer has been made for me. My mom walked a logger around the property today to get another opinion. It's been a few years since she's been there and she said she was shocked how much of the woods is Ash, probably 80% of it. She's a Horticulturalist so she's pretty good at identifying tree species. I guess it's unusual for a forest to be dominated by one species like that. She said it's all dead and has to come down. Fortunately it has just died so the wood is still valuable from a timber standpoint. We'll be getting a proposal from the logger in the next week or so that will give me a better picture of what we could be paid for the wood.

I'm kinda happy it turned out this way. For one, I don't have to feel bad about taking all the trees down. Plus, the explanation that the majority of the trees are dead or dying should eliminate any bitching from the neighbors, which I was dreading a little bit. It also clears the land for the developer, if the sale ever happens. If I can accomplish all that and put a little money in my pocket I'm happy!

I manage several woodlots on my properties and ran into a very similar scenario two years ago when all of the ash trees were killed off, so you could either bring a logger in and get a little $$ out of them, or just let mother nature knock them down over time.   We hired a forester to mark and measure all of the marketable Ash trees.   They only wanted 14" diameter and up so many of the small ones remained but we took out around 100 trees and probably averaged only $40-50 each.   Plus had to pay the forester several hundred dollars.

Knocking those Ash down will open up the canopy and all of your smaller immature trees remaining will take off fast.   I'll bet you'd be surprised how many different species of timber you have? 

I doubt you have near enough timber to pay for a total clearing job.

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #31 on: February 06, 2019, 08:33:26 PM »
Well I suppose the answer has been made for me. My mom walked a logger around the property today to get another opinion. It's been a few years since she's been there and she said she was shocked how much of the woods is Ash, probably 80% of it. She's a Horticulturalist so she's pretty good at identifying tree species. I guess it's unusual for a forest to be dominated by one species like that. She said it's all dead and has to come down. Fortunately it has just died so the wood is still valuable from a timber standpoint. We'll be getting a proposal from the logger in the next week or so that will give me a better picture of what we could be paid for the wood.

I'm kinda happy it turned out this way. For one, I don't have to feel bad about taking all the trees down. Plus, the explanation that the majority of the trees are dead or dying should eliminate any bitching from the neighbors, which I was dreading a little bit. It also clears the land for the developer, if the sale ever happens. If I can accomplish all that and put a little money in my pocket I'm happy!

I manage several woodlots on my properties and ran into a very similar scenario two years ago when all of the ash trees were killed off, so you could either bring a logger in and get a little $$ out of them, or just let mother nature knock them down over time.   We hired a forester to mark and measure all of the marketable Ash trees.   They only wanted 14" diameter and up so many of the small ones remained but we took out around 100 trees and probably averaged only $40-50 each.   Plus had to pay the forester several hundred dollars.

Knocking those Ash down will open up the canopy and all of your smaller immature trees remaining will take off fast.   I'll bet you'd be surprised how many different species of timber you have? 

I doubt you have near enough timber to pay for a total clearing job.
Besides Ash, Oak and Cherry are probably most of the wood there. There's Gum trees too.

Case

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 805
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #32 on: February 07, 2019, 05:10:47 AM »
Well I suppose the answer has been made for me. My mom walked a logger around the property today to get another opinion. It's been a few years since she's been there and she said she was shocked how much of the woods is Ash, probably 80% of it. She's a Horticulturalist so she's pretty good at identifying tree species. I guess it's unusual for a forest to be dominated by one species like that. She said it's all dead and has to come down. Fortunately it has just died so the wood is still valuable from a timber standpoint. We'll be getting a proposal from the logger in the next week or so that will give me a better picture of what we could be paid for the wood.

I'm kinda happy it turned out this way. For one, I don't have to feel bad about taking all the trees down. Plus, the explanation that the majority of the trees are dead or dying should eliminate any bitching from the neighbors, which I was dreading a little bit. It also clears the land for the developer, if the sale ever happens. If I can accomplish all that and put a little money in my pocket I'm happy!

Doesnt meant the idea of replanting non-Ash trees isnít a possibility!

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2280
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #33 on: February 07, 2019, 05:47:48 AM »
Well I suppose the answer has been made for me. My mom walked a logger around the property today to get another opinion. It's been a few years since she's been there and she said she was shocked how much of the woods is Ash, probably 80% of it. She's a Horticulturalist so she's pretty good at identifying tree species. I guess it's unusual for a forest to be dominated by one species like that. She said it's all dead and has to come down. Fortunately it has just died so the wood is still valuable from a timber standpoint. We'll be getting a proposal from the logger in the next week or so that will give me a better picture of what we could be paid for the wood.

I'm kinda happy it turned out this way. For one, I don't have to feel bad about taking all the trees down. Plus, the explanation that the majority of the trees are dead or dying should eliminate any bitching from the neighbors, which I was dreading a little bit. It also clears the land for the developer, if the sale ever happens. If I can accomplish all that and put a little money in my pocket I'm happy!

Doesnt meant the idea of replanting non-Ash trees isnít a possibility!
True. We could even replant some evergreens if we wanted faster forest growth.

Lulee

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 253
  • Location: NH
  • "We'll jump off that bridge when we come to it."
Re: Keep the Woods or Cut 'Em Down?
« Reply #34 on: February 07, 2019, 10:03:21 AM »
True. We could even replant some evergreens if we wanted faster forest growth.

New side hustle - Christmas tree farm!