Low Impact Forestry ?

[IronMike]

Some very valid points raised here gents. I think for me, low impact is all about the state of the site after you’ve finished. But as Eddie said, where do you stop? There are so many variables to it, and so many opinions on what a tidy job is or how it’s defined! In an ideal world (and to satisfy my OCD and my arb based background) I’d go through all my sites with a tracked chipper or a mulcher to remove the brash and make the place look neat and tidy. But nobody is every really going to want that!

 

My machine is very good at what it does, i.e moving timber in tight, awkward spaces with minimal ground disruption for the most part. It can do other things to like leading out fencing materials on replanting sites, shifting gravel and aggregates with its clamshell inserts, process firewood in a yard (by holding lengths of timber whilst two people cut) etc etc. Having versatile kit or a brain that can see other opportunities is key. 
 

There are hundred of solutions to the issues/quandaries we face in arb and forestry. Nearly all of them have pros and cons, it’s making the best decision you can for the client, yourself from a business perspective and for the site going into the future. 

[Tommy A]

I’ve been lucky enough to work alongside Eddie and operate and see the tracked dumper with the timber crane is a great idea plenty of power and manoeuvrability can pick them up for around 15k the price of a decent quad and timber trailer with some modifications and a crane you can extract some serious timber. With less ground pressure than a human foot!


Tom

[Stephen Blair]

This 1 by any chance?

[Tommy A]

This 1 by any chance?http://dcn6x9s7fzj11.cloudfront.net/monthly_2020_01/E89114C5-9D15-4F3E-99B8-3B48A7A11D65.thumb.jpeg.4885ef325744ab16842db4c83a239cfd.jpeg' alt='E89114C5-9D15-4F3E-99B8-3B48A7A11D65.thumb.jpeg.4885ef325744ab16842db4c83a239cfd.jpeg'>

It was indeed your old machine. Having operated numerous forwarders it was an eye opener for me at how productive it can be with such little impact.

Tom

[drinksloe]

Must admit the smaller u go the cost goes throu the roof.

 

There wll likely be no ideal answer or ideal machne as Eddie already said which means having machines sitting in the yard not turning wheels/making money. If u want the ideal machine for every job

 

So ur looking at a compromise, really depends where ur market is and if any bodies already in it.

And the compromise will be different for everyone on different ground and wanting different work.

 

For value for money and versatility a compact tractor and timber trailer takes a lot off beating, esp if running twins over flotation tyres ( again more versatile, choice between narrow for access or twins for LGP) 

 

Must admit over summer was doing quite a bit off fencing on estates where small compartments off diseased larch trees were felled/extracted, the 1 thing in common was the mess left behind.

A lower impact approach would have been similar money esp if no low loader transport, by time shift a harvester in/out and then forwarder for jobs with only a few hundred T's other options could be vaible.

[Big J]

A small forwarder really is the way to go. The speed with which you can move, position, lift timber and move again is in another league compared to a tractor trailer set up. Additionally, you have far more traction. 

 

If moving a decent amount of timber is what you want to do, then get a small forwarder. They aren't expensive, and not much more than a decent tractor/trailer set up. I found loads of work really quickly with mine and it paid for itself on the first three jobs.

[Khriss]

The eternal question in Forestry. 

Big kit moves lots of wood can be huge mess. 

Small kit moves bits of wood can be tedious. 

Is always site dependent and skill of the man. Guys on here make their money cos they know exactly what / how to do it. K

 

(i might be one of them) 

 

 

[Stere]

Is  low impact more about the owners opinion of leaving a tidy looking site than the actual possible negative ecological impact?

 

Some times a messy site could be  not be any worse for nature, brash everywhere.... frog spawn in ruts etc....., churned up ground can be good for certain plant and animal  species, as its a  is a new habitat to colonize.......

 

 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by Stere

[Big J]

7 hours ago, Stere said:

Is  low impact more about the owners opinion of leaving a tidy looking site than the actual possible negative ecological impact?

 

Some times a messy site could be  not be any worse for nature, brash everywhere.... frog spawn in ruts etc....., churned up ground can be good for certain plant and animal  species, as its a  is a new habitat to colonize.......

 

 

 

 

Not quite.

 

Whilst pools of water in ruts might be OK ecologically, rutting to that extent means significant root damage most likely, thus compromising the long term health of the trees. 

 

The site we're on at the moment has certain areas we can use large machines and other areas we cannot. I've pulled about 200t off a boggy bit with the little machine, running along an access track that was put in years ago for a landrover. For the couple of months since we started, the track has remained fine for a 2wd van. The first time the harvester went along it, it squashed the opening to a pipe under the track, causing the ditch to back up. The only full day we've done with the big forwarder has completely knackered the track and now that 2wd van cannot go down it at all. Big machines means potentially big damage and always means big reinstatement. You can regularly get away without that with the smaller kit.

[Lfservices]

Thanks everyone for their thoughts/views, much appreciated. 

 

I'm now possibly thinking that on the Ash dieback site I'm doing, that I hire in a friend's tractor and timber trailer to shift the timber. The only issue is that access isn't great, several ditches etc. 

 

I'm thinking try and get some of it moved with the quad and trailer to near roadside where the tractor/trailer can then grab it. 

 

The Copse Is only about 0.5 hectare.