Spruce Pirate

I think a lot of the Loch Lomond oak woods, certainly on the east side, date back a long while for charcoal making for tanning and then smelting. You can still see a lot of overgrown coppice stools if you wander through them. Ship builders of old seem to be either hailed as guardians of the forest, making sure enough was left to maintain their future needs or as total rapists, destroying everything in sight to build a navy. Depends who you speak to. Certainly changed days in terms of how woods are managed though. Sorry J, I'm really not trying to pick a fight. 😂 What you've said in the two posts above is very much the crux of the matter. If we want to protect the natural environment then we should be looking to native species. Oak, for example, as we're talking about it, support a huge variety of species in addition to producing timber - this is the trade off for growing slowly and being difficult to dry out. It's a problem of having a very limited number of native species, and probably why we've been introducing things since at least Roman times. I'm not disagreeing that a lot of Victorian introductions have been disastrous (although Doug fir is a bit of a success at least). Of course, if climate change really does bite then we have to look at the long term prospects for all species - oak could be out altogether and we could be growing gum trees? cedars? Corsican pine could make a big leap in the productive species league tables Again, out of curiosity, are there many non-natives in Swedish forestry? I always imagine it dominated by Scots, Norway and birch, but that could easily be wrong. What's the average rotation age?

Yes, approximately 3' spacing as I was saying earlier. That's a fair point Jon, BUT, remember we're dealing with a very long term product here. History suggests that good quality hardwood such as oak will always sell, and always fetch a good price. Good quality, not average, not poor, properly grown oaks of good quality. Such being the case there should always be a decent return on the investment in the future. Remember the planting costs are only one of the costs of growing quality hardwood. Formative pruning around year 3 -5 with regular pruning and high pruning up to thinnings stage all eat up the cash. Also remember that at high density nobody's tubing and staking, fencing becomes the only feasible option at these densities - if you take a square hectare and plant it at 1100/ha each tree is paying for 36cm of fencing, at 13400/ha each tree is only paying for less than 3cm of fencing, a significant economy of scale. It would have been correspondingly cheaper to plant at 3m spacing in the 1930's compared to planting at 3' spacing, just the same as it is now. The main difference seems to be that between the wars and immediately post war people valued timber production as it was a very necessary resource. We seem to have lost sight of the fact that unless we plant trees we won't have any timber, and if we continue to plant at ridiculously low densities all we'll end up with is a firewood crop. I'd imagine your days of sawmilling would give a fair insight into different planting regimes and their relative impacts on timber quality? Out of curiosity, what's the planting / restocking like in Sweden? I don't know much about it, but from what I've seen in pictures and videos I'd guess a fairly high density?

I don't know if there's much evidence or study on reds and damage to trees. But my money is with yours, I reckon almost as bad as greys if not as bad.

Going to have to disagree there. Those spacings are what the grant schemes dictate, not what is good for growing timber. Most of the old literature, I'm lead to believe, favours tight spacings. Anecdotally, I've seen this in practice and it works, but my experience is not wide enough to be considered scientifically robust. Locally, we have some hardwoods destroyed by squirrels, however, there has been a purge on greys to favour the reds which are moving back in. The result is that it is now years since I've seen a grey squirrel, which is a good thing, and timber damage has gone down too. The reds have, as yet not really moved back in to fill the vacuum, if and when they do it will be at least interesting to see if the damage to trees increases again.

3 meters is massively wide spacing for commercial oak, 3 feet is more like a commercial spacing. With that in mind I might be inclined to suggest high pruning as high as you can and a delayed thin. BUT, I don't know the wood, don't know what the soils are like, what aspect it has, whether it's sheltered or exposed or how well the trees are growing. Do you have any pictures? In the absence of visiting the site they might help people give a more informed opinion. As a slight aside, there is a long tradition of growing trees for someone else to harvest. I wouldn't consider looking after a future crop for your children, grandchildren or somebody else altogether as irrelevant at all.

I've got a couple of jobs through here. Had a few folk work for me through Arbtalk. Sold a few bits of wood through here. Got lots of ideas how to do things differently or more efficiently. Had some good laughs at the jokes thread or some of the general comments. Got frustrated at some of the less helpful contributions. Think I've been a member for 11 years now, still don't know how the badges work or what they mean, but I keep coming back. I'd definitely miss Arbtalk if it went up in smoke tomorrow, of all the tree websites it's the most useful to me - UK based and more helpful than a lot of the others which tend to be more pissing contests.

It's a long time since I was involved in Christmas trees in any serious way, but this is almost exactly my experience. There's money to be made, but you have to work for it -quite hard. Are there millions to be made? Not sure, possibly, if you're in the right part of the chain but it's not going to be easy money.

It certainly used to be the case when I worked for them that FC consulted with LPA on any applications, be it felling or planting. That's over 20 years ago, but I don't imagine it's changed. I don't think the reverse worked with LPA's consulting the FC.

I mostly work seven days, but to varying degrees. Some days not much, maybe a bit of computer stuff or maintenance, other days a lot. I too have very little work / life separation, been self-employed so long it's just pretty much who I am and what I do. Sometimes it is a bit much, but generally I'm pretty happy with it, I generally enjoy what I do, so that helps. Given the chance though, no I wouldn't work at all. I'd have a nice big pot of money, enough to see out my days with whatever whim I choose and keep myself busy indulging said whims. Unfortunately I'm constrained by the real world and so have to work, but ideally, no, I'd be a gentleman of leisure.

Not sure if you need a license for P. kernoviae or not, I think you might. Best to check with your local FC office.

Good old RInglink! I just had a look at the NPTC website and it seems you're right Dave. Individual Windblown Trees and then Interwoven Stems & Part Blown Trees. It's a couple of years since I've known anyone do it, but it was definitely only one ticket at that time.

Think they've put these back into one ticket again, back how it used to be (CS 15?), but don't know the new numbers.

I'm pretty sure this says something about tree work, I'm just not totally sure what.

You can buy yourself a lot of wine for the price of a timber lorry!

Rates for woodcutters is a very difficult subject. I'd agree with a lot of what's been said here before about difficult to get cutters and even more difficult to get good cutters. Part of the problem is that cutters are self-employed and providing A LOT of kit, saws - probably small, medium and large, wedges, hammers, jacks, first aid kit, PPE, tapes, breaking bars, fuel, oil, bars, chains, chainsaw training, refresher training, log books, first aid training, vehicle to and from work - often miles up rough forest roads which eat vehicles. Then they're expected to put plenty of timber on the ground, presented well for either the harvester or the forwarder, realistically low stumps, properly sned, cleanly cut to the right lengths. Start comparing this to other industries and I'd say there's no way a decent cutter should be on any less than £300 a day. The trouble is the industry won't stand it. Too many people saying £150 a day is all they'll pay and putting up with folk who can't really do the job where if they'd pay more they'd get more done. Too many "cutters" turning up on site with several things on my list above missing and without the skills to do the job thinking they're worth mega-bucks, which leads to contractors thinking cutters aren't worth the money. Too many contractors think a cutter just costs them money, seemingly blind to the fact that the cutter is putting timber on the deck which earns money. Too many jobs costed where the cutting element isn't properly costed, if the industry can stand the fact that an unproductive welfare unit is going to cost a certain amount per ton, or per week or whatever then we should start to think that maybe the cutting element might start to cost as well and enable decent rates to be paid. Sometimes the timber just isn't there too allow a cutter to produce properly, I did a job in the summer where I was lucky to be getting 60m3 on the deck in a day, small trees, all leaning the wrong way and just a ball ache to fell and be anywhere near productive. There's more jobs going to have to fall into this category if rates are going to improve. Sawlogs were over £100 a ton a short while ago and cutters and contractors saw basically nothing in return, yet as soon as rates drop we're too expensive. There needs to be a more equal share of the pie. We also need to get some realistic system of bringing on people who want to do the work, be it young ones entering the industry or tree surgeons looking to diversify. Again, the costs of these people being un-productive needs to be covered somehow, simply moaning that someone is useless and can't get the job done is very unlikely to get them to progress. None of us were born knowing how to do everything but the current system, touched on by others in earlier posts breeds cutters who have tickets but not full skills and think they're worth what is currently top-end money. I think they should be paid that money, but while they're being mentored to become properly skilled cutters and earn proper money for doing so. Then again, I quite like living in Fantasy-Land..........

We're generally very rural so a lot of the time everything stays on site, logs for use client's use or habitat piled, branches either habitat piled or chipped, either for use as mulch or broadcast on site. If we do remove from site logs generally either goes for sale as lengths for biomass, get processed for firewood or milled for our own use or signs, benches etc. If chip needs removed it mostly goes to one of the neighbours farms for mixing in with the dung heap, bedding or whatever they see fit. We don't have a lot of arisings due to the nature of our business being more forestry than arb so it's easier to give away a wee bit of chip than to try and sell. If we did more arb and had more to get rid of it might be a different story.

Started working in forestry, the guy I worked for did a bit of arb work on the side, I've carried on doing a bit of arb here and there. Mostly removals, not so keen on reductions, don't do hedge trimming. Depending what contracts I've got I do more arb or less, currently not doing much, mostly forestry but it comes and goes.

For what it's worth, my understanding of things: Pavement - the tarred (normally) bit next to a road you walk on as a pedestrian. Footpath - a path through fields/woods/anywhere else which isn't beside a road. Footway - antiquated term to describe either of the above. Spelling things with z's - American, very annoying when children and young people do it, worth fighting the fight of the just over to preserve the use of the s. Having your photo used without permission on someone else's website - very, very annoying but probably a minefield of legalities and way more hassle than it is worth to do anything about other than previously mentioned threats of physical violence.

Nevermind all this swimming and fishing and quality of life nonsense, what's the timber going for? Small diameter? Random lengths? Pulp? Is it all birch or are you getting Norway and pine too? Ground can't be that hard if you've got the tracks on?

I'd say there's a fundamental lack of understanding of how gravity works if that's a gob! 😂 I've never met a farmer who understood this. They all think it's some sort of magical power to be able to cross-cut anything remotely big without getting pinched.

If it faces due west would it not be in the shade in the morning when the milk is delivered?

I think I watched a video of Hotsaws101 a while back where he described that as a Humbolt notch and the upside down gub that we'd now normally call a Humbolt he was referring to as a modified Humbolt. Can't remember the exact reasons for the modifiaction, but I think it might have been something to do with people with clipboards and safety. 🙄 I like the "modified Humbolt" for felling downhill, but have never tried the square cut, never seen the need. It's not something I know a lot about.

I missed the thread resurrection, but I was going to guess 375kg for the pine and 1.557 ton for the syc - honest!!!

I do it this way, but normally also try and leave a tapered hinge, thick on the holding side, rather than going Dutch on the side with the lean. I find it works more times than not, but I'll definitely be trying your vertical cut for a bit of comparison. I like a Sizwell cut and find it works a treat, but I also always follow the golden rule!

Rhizophagus grandis. It does seem to work a treat.