Coppicing hazel.

[coppice cutter]

Accepted practice with hazel coppicing is to cut the entire bush and use all the various thicknesses of stems harvested as a result for different purposes.

 

Recently I came across a video of a guy who questioned the relevance of this in present times as he was only interested in thicker stems for firewood. Therefore that's all he cut out of the bush, leaving the other thin poles to grow, which should give him more firewood from the same bush much sooner than cutting it all (a lot of which he would have no use for anyway) and waiting for the regrowth to bulk up.

 

It seemed entirely sensible and very relevant to myself as I have a lot of new hazel to coppice and many of them have stems varying from pencil thickness up to 2in+ from the same root and it would be very useful to just take out the thick bits and leave the thinner stuff to grow on.

 

Can anyone see any issues with doing this?

 

Thanks. 

[Khriss]

Not at all. Bar any constraints like access or nuisance. Plus hazel don't mind a few chain scars,  good charcoaling wood also. K

[ESS]

No issues.

I have done the same practice on an estate where i cut the bigger stems out of clumps , which were then processed through a harvester for firewood, the brash for bio.

[Khriss]

Now you have got me thinking abt this - the eco side of partial cut should be far higher as yr maintaing som canopy cover for small birds and mammals compared to a clear cut. Plus insect activity will be higher fr yr Bat population. Stick that into yr management plan fr extra brownie points. K

[agg221]

I have done this with some hazel at my place, mainly because it is was very overstood and I wanted to make sure it didn't die.

 

It has worked well but what I have found is that you do need to cut enough out to encourage regrowth. If you leave too much then it remains heavily shaded at the stool and does not regenerate. Leaving the inch thickness and below stems seems to be enough.

 

Alec

[openspaceman]

1 hour ago, coppice cutter said:

Accepted practice with hazel coppicing is to cut the entire bush and use all the various thicknesses of stems harvested as a result for different purposes.

 

Recently I came across a video of a guy who questioned the relevance of this in present times as he was only interested in thicker stems for firewood.

It makes sense but I wonder what the long term effect will be.

 

Hazel coppice  became dominant  fairly late on and the 7ish year cycle actually seems to fit well with the rotation end maximising  mean annual increment. It also gave the size of stems that were needed for traditional stuff, like wattle, hurdles, thatching spars etc. but more importantly for crate making as exports of crockery took off and stoked the industrial revolution.

 

Given that forest cover was very low by then  it had the effect of re creating forest glades every 7 years  as well as denuding surface fertility. This allowed the gap living species, like bluebells, to flower and seed in light conditions  before the canopy overshadowed them again, the lesser surface fertility reduced competition for them from grasses. Having economic value  they were protected from grazing animals.

[Rough Hewn]

Accepted practice with hazel coppicing is to cut the entire bush and use all the various thicknesses of stems harvested as a result for different purposes.
 
Recently I came across a video of a guy who questioned the relevance of this in present times as he was only interested in thicker stems for firewood. Therefore that's all he cut out of the bush, leaving the other thin poles to grow, which should give him more firewood from the same bush much sooner than cutting it all (a lot of which he would have no use for anyway) and waiting for the regrowth to bulk up.
 
It seemed entirely sensible and very relevant to myself as I have a lot of new hazel to coppice and many of them have stems varying from pencil thickness up to 2in+ from the same root and it would be very useful to just take out the thick bits and leave the thinner stuff to grow on.
 
Can anyone see any issues with doing this?
 
Thanks. 

Yes.
Traditionally you would clearfell the intended area like with sweet chestnut.
Otherwise the growth goes at all angles to reach the light.
Straight vertical wands,poles,rods and staves were the desired products.
You’d have to clear a large area traditionally because of the deer damage too.
[emoji106]

[openspaceman]

1 hour ago, Rough Hewn said:

You’d have to clear a large area

coup

[coppice cutter]

Thanks for all replies so far, all useful and relevant.

 

Rather than reply individually I'll just do one post addressing all points raised.

 

Yes I understand why coppicing was traditionally clearing an area. The ones I would be thinking of doing this with are generally singles planted randomly throughout the area or along edges therefore their neighbours will be remaining anyway, however as these are mostly oaks the hazels will probably be able to be thinned and overtake them again anyway! I have a couple of areas of hazel only which I probably will cut in it's entirety when the time comes, although even then there's always one or two lagging behind and they might just get left to get a head start on the new growth. I also have a couple of areas of alder ready to cut but don't have time to do them in their entirety this year so they'll wait until autumn/winter.

 

That having been said I will be mindful of the issue of shade within the one plant itself as Alec has mentioned, and not leave so much that it chokes out the new growth. That's relevant irrespective of what else is around it and something which I may not have considered.

 

Finally, as this is my own wood and I'm cutting it just for my own use, I'd most likely be cutting by hand so no chain scars. :) 

[Rough Hewn]

coup

Coup?