JonnoR

Same experience for me, further south. I gave up trying to get French distributors of two-wheeled tractors to quote me - beyond some dodgy guy who obviously works for the French distributor but seemed to be trying to sell me his demo model - 'we don't usually sell direct to customers, but in this instance etc etc'. The Dutch are way more proactive

Hi Big J Thanks so much for chiming in! Really interesting observations, as were the other contributions 👍. The Lennartsfors should be really useful in my random, quite densely planted hardwood forestry (especially for the first major (overdue) thinning exercise - so for my own use, I doubt I'd need to expand my kit to the next level in terms of productivity, expense etc. I had considered that as it could be so easily loaded, it might earn some money for similar use cases as my own - and sufficiently retard proof to allow for standard equipment rental. The forwarders like the log bullet look great for sure but they are quite expensive and to my brain seem to occupy an awkward middle ground in terms of expense and utility that I can't quite fit with my own thinking. Spending incrementally more on the next step up, in terms of capability, does not seem to compromise much with regards to lower impact operability, while opening up more demanding higher volumet work. With regards to expanding my plant to the point where I can earn money from an owner/operator model, I had considered spider excavators setup for skyline, and then in the summer using the equipment on building, drilling and other non-forestry work. With an 18t dumper and the spider, I can see some potential for longer term contracts, but I'm still looking about to survey the market in these other sectors. In any case, I really appreciate the advice and observations - it really helps to clarify things! Jonno

Ah, another man of culture I see!

Out of all the people in the world who I'd like to see punched in the face by Tyson, Jake is up there. I've been shot at a few times, and those buggers are nowhere near that wanker.

You make really valid points. For my personal use I think the Logbullet poses issues of access and storage, but I did take a hard look at one, before settling on something with a smaller footprint. Adding a tipper bucket or auger expands the functionality beyond purely forwarding use, and helps me out with other tasks. I nearly pushed the button on their remote control 'Essence' model, which lets you attach a mulching mower, but that's silly bloody money. Thanks for the feedback!

In that case, I've not spent as much time studying as I thought!

You make a compelling argument! I actually studied Swedish at uni, as a second language on my course - despite having never been there and my only exposure to the language was grainy VHS videos 😄

I'm not moving to Sweden to explore this idea 😄

Hi All, This might not be the right section at all for this question, because it involves equipment that is by definition not 'Large equipment'! I finally pushed the button on a Lennartsfors Ironhorse (the flex2), plus trailer, crane arm etc. I'm tiring of hand hauling lumber up a sodding hill in my woodland, but it also got me thinking that other smaller scale woodland owners might also be feeling like me. In the view of the great and good on here, do you think there could be a niche for a smaller scale equipment rental enterprise, to support limited scope thinning operations for the group of lower scale private landowners trying to manage their stands? I'm thinking of one of the smaller Menzi Muck machines (probably rented out on a plant+operator basis when I'm not using it), a low impact small forwarder like the lennartsfors with hydraulically equipped trailer/crane, or even some sort of compact skyline setup to help rip out thinnings in smaller forestry parcels. I think it should be super easy to trailer to hard to reach sites, and with additions like augers and dump buckets it could be useful beyond the forestry work I envisage. One of the things I'm assessing is whether there's a 'Goldilocks' midrange of potential customers, who probably don't have the tonnage of lumber to justify higher costs associated with renting and moving heavier machinery (HGV costs, higher personnel hours to run more complex plant etc.,) but might also require an efficient way of extracting timber for personal use or smallscale firewood production. Might there be sufficient business to be made to at least offset ownership costs for my own use? I'm looking at some additional bits of land in France and the UK, so would likely need some proper equipment mysefl, as I manage more land. Speaking with Mick D he suggested that maybe @Big J might be someone who could expand on the utility of smaller plant to support sensitive site extraction. Grateful to all for feedback! Jonno

That's great. I guarantee I won't be sorted by then, so I'll be in touch!

Your collection is scarily similar to mine! Yes, those narrow tall bodies seem to match my own. When I have them in front of me I can check, but I put money on those dimensions matching my own. Thanks for taking the trouble to post the pics mate.

They don't have enough meat on them to fully fill the head vertically, sadly!

I've got Sager Chemical, Tru Temper, Collins and a load of others - either proper felling axes, or the cruiser style. They have a very high, deep but narrow holes (I'm sure I've misdescribed that and murdered the terminology - apologies). Once I've got myself sorted I'll send some pics. I've got a whole pile of NOS SA Wetterlings in various patterns too. Basically a forest worth of handle needs!!!!

Thanks! I'll check them out and post pics once I get these axes ready for hanging!

They're great yeah, but sadly they didn't have anything to suit my deep axe heads. The search continues, and thanks for the replies gents!

I folks, I have some lovely double bit US axe heads, but struggle to find hickory handles for them. Any UK/EU source you know of? Thanks in advance! Jonno

I did that with an overstood hazel, essentially creating a brush fence with some uprights to stabilise it and it worked perfect - pushing up some great straight rods from the stool

I think I'd have to invest in some fencing, or improvise with branches to give the stools chance to re-establish growth, given the deer population I have at the moment.

To my inexperienced eyes, the crowns are terrible, given the height of the trees. I'm not too sure that I'm being a bit overly killy in my selection for planned thinning. Would you take a couple winters to get rid of those marked trees to be sure not to shock the ecosystem?

I think Hornbeam is slightly more tolerant of being pollarded or coppiced at an older age, but they really are pushing the limits I'd say. The explosive growth in the stumps of trees selectively thinned over the last three years is pretty nuts

Thanks Stere, for both your response and the link! The hornbeam nurse trees, and the self-seeded understory trees seems to have done a pretty good job of keeping the oak straight and minimised the epicormic growth. The crowns are pretty poor though, and I'd assess it's a good decade overdue for some thinning. Once thinned, I did wonder if hornbeam pollards (or coppices) would be in sufficient dappled light to make a go of it, if only for shrub like ground cover for deer and weed suppression. From what I've read, the hornbeams that remain don't occlude the light in the lower story to the same degree as other species. My main concern now is not rushing the thinning and either stressing them with a sudden environmental change, or expose them to excessive risk of windblow. The canopy is super anorexic but if I rush I imagine I'll overly stress the trees that have had a pretty hard time of it with 2 years of hotter weather.

Hi folks, Forgive the attempted resurrection of this fossilised thread, but I thought it might be better to keep the topic in one place. I have several stands (ash and hornbeam as nurse trees with oak standards) needing thinning. Whenever I've felled the hornbeam, during the proceeding year they've erupted with growth from the stump, which has got me thinking that pollarding might be the way to ensure regrowth and a more diverse stock for wildlife. There are deer and wild boar around, so I'm not convinced the coppiced stumps will ultimately lead to much - hence the pollarding idea. The stands are about 40 years old, rod straight and very little branches until you hit the canopy. So, question is, have I left it too long for this to be viable? Is the single trunk non-viable for this technique? Given the amount of growth, and their apparent tolerance for slightly shaded understory, I'd really like to give it a bash. As ever, grateful for your insights and suggestions! Jonno

Mostly hornbeam and oak here - only very very few ash in the forest as a whole. This lot is a hornbeam with some self-seeded oak.

I finally got round to getting some of those cramped hornbeams thinned out today. Just opened the canopy up a little and got rid of the thinnest crowned trees where they were clearly starting to be dominated by their neighbours. I finished off the fuel in the Stihl ms261, then got out my new HUSQVARNA 540i XP, which is a little ripper in this sort of timber. For this sort of work it's perfect and as much as I love my ms261 I'll be reaching for the Husky more often I think. Anyway, thanks once again for the tips and comments 🙂 Jonno

Spent the morning cutting, sorting and stacking logs and getting them off the ground. Beyond the obvious benefits of keeping the base dry, I've noticed that neighbours are commenting on how smart the woodland looks. There's literally zero visual impact on the woodland, because all this stuff is windfall or dead standing, but by putting a few deliberately stacked woodpiles in open view, it's having an overall positive influence on the perceived care being taken.