Might've been Eric B who wrote on another post,"With 35 acres of woods, you should not have to cut down any trees for decades. It will be hard enough keeping up with the trees that Mother Nature knocks down. Years ago I was told that one can expect a half cord of wood per acre for sustainable firewood harvest. Hope you are not planning on burning more than 17 cords per year!" = Any idea how that sustainable project would work? Only harvesting wind-blown and trees that died or, cutting live trees, and, if so, how many live trees could one cut? I've always wondered about this and how one would go about it. I read something recently where a guy was saying on this woodlot (I forget the size) he could clear cut x-acres every year (or maybe it was five years) and in x-years, he would be back to the same original clearcut tract and it would ready to go again. Might've been a 40-year period, don't recall. Something like, a 40-acre tract, which would mean eight 5-acre tracts. Every five years, he could clearcut a 5-acre tract and in 40 years, the original 5-acre tract would be ready to clearcut again. If so, maybe you could clearcut 1-acre tracts every year for 40 years. I wonder how much wood I have per acre, lol. I have a nice woodlot of hardwoods. Interesting!
Far too many variables to provide a comprehensive answer here. But something to consider is how quickly trees add mass. If one does a complete clear cut, the amount of biomass added in the first year following the cut is minimal. The second year there is more, however some of it also starts dying as dominant stems grow faster and overtop weaker ones. If you clear cut at 40 years without harvesting the trees that died over that 40 year period, you’re giving quite a bit of biomass back to Mother Nature. If instead you divide the 40 acre parcel into 5 eight acre parcels, you could visit each of the parcels every 5 years to harvest the fallen and dead standing trees. In addition, you could take down crooked, hazard and less desirable trees. Doing this allows the trees that are left to grow more rapidly. You could also promote the growth of high quality trees that could be used as saw logs. Small clear cuts that you are talking about are, however, good for wildlife, so while your production of wood may decline, you’d be promoting habitat diversity.
I don't remember where I heard about the half cord of firewood per acre per year. I have my doubts on it being scientific. I have around 7 acres of wood and I am using 4-5 cords per year. I have been burning for at least 35 years on this property and I do not see any end in sight of wood to cut for firewood. I would guess that 95% of my firewood comes from trees that mother nature drops for me or are standing dead, like elm.
It is probably more a “rule of thumb” than a scientific truth. For someone, buying a wood lot for the purpose of supplying firewood, counting on 1/2 cord per acre per year is a conservative estimate of how much one can expect to harvest and never run out. If you can harvest more due to better site index, great, you’ll never run out. I had heard that in New England one could cut as much as a cord per acre per year sustainably, but I don’t have the data to prove it and trying to count on a full cord per acre per year one could end up short due to a less productive site, or losses from weather, pests or disease.
I imagine it's hard to say definitively X cords per acre...I know it would be for my property. We've got 40 acres but within that 40 acres I have such diversity, some very thick areas and some very thin areas. My property also has areas that are so difficult to access I'll probably never end up pulling wood off of it. In 6 years here so far I doubt I've even cut a single cord worth...I procured such a massive amount from a tree service company I haven't had to pull any off my own property yet. I'd love to manage the dead wood better instead of just letting it rot but it's hard to justify spending a day pulling a log out of the woods when I've got so many logs still sitting in a pile waiting to be cut.
An excellent website here. Books | Center for Northern Woodlands Education overall but if you click on the shop link, then "books" you may find some great inspiration.
I’ve got 60+ acres of woods, but can only get to the front half (or even less than half) due to steep terrain. I’ve been cutting 8 to 10 cord each year the past 15 years, working to improve what stays behind. I’m falling behind, and am bringing in a logging crew to do “crop tree release”, even on the area I’ve had access to. It was overstocked to begin with. I did the math once on dry matter accumulation of the woods versus farm fields, and the half cord per acre was conservative on a good site if it were to produce similar to a decent, but not exceptional, hayfield.
We have steep glacial terrain here, mostly maple, oak and birch but there's a lot of other species in smaller quantities. Basically bluestone/shale outcrops underlying a shallow mineral soil with a lot of clay and silt. My father and I both cut off of about 25 acres of woodland, he needs about 5 cords of wood and I need 8-10 per year. With that in mind, I cannot imagine harvesting more than 5-6 cords a year from the property (approximately 25 acres of woods) without overharvesting and starting to eliminate desirable trees. The density and growth rate just isn't there. We do have a couple sections that are predominately white birch, and I could pull a cord of that off every year for a long time, but that's about a 3-acre chunk of the land. The rest just won't sustain it. For that reason, a lot of my firewood comes from junk trees that my dad won't burn (pine, poplar, spruce, white birch) and I also get a lot from off-site, such as contractors and tree services.
This is an excellent thread for those of us lucky enough to have a wood lot. Thanks for bringing it up Yawner Like many above, access to parts of the property limits full use. For a few reasons I search the blowdowns or the opportune standing dead. Last resort are live trees, and with those I look for twins or other multiples. We recently built a bridge over a brook and that has opened up access to another 60 acres that I started working this season. And it’s thick with laurel and I need to cut trail to really have access. I’m not concerned I’ll run out of wood. I do however want to harvest what’s best for the property. Great responses and really interesting
Yes, both the ag land and the woodland. I have no intention of ever planting houses, so appreciate not having to pay the higher taxes. My barns are not in the program, but my future sugarhouse will likely be in it.
From: Working with Your WoodLand. A Landowner's Guide. 1993. Beattie. Thompson, and Levine. "Typically an unmanaged New England forest acre contain from 5 to 15 cords of potential fuelwood that have accumulated as the stand grew, and that should be removed to space the remaining trees for efficient wood production. For a house that consumes 5 cords of wood annually, each acre initially represents roughly two winters' heat. However, if the land has been under management, or for some other is at the point where the initial supply of "excess" trees is exhausted, an acre can be expected to grow between a half cord and a cord of wood per year. This annual production can be harvested without decreasing the forest's productive base; for a sustainable yield of fuel-wood, the same five-cord house will need a minimum of 5 to 10 acres of woodlot." We had an inventory done as part of a forest management plan, in part for participation in the state's tax abatement program. My section of woodlot that I can reach with my farm tractor was determined to need 4 cord per acre of firewood removed and 2 MBF of saw timber, and the other sections were similar {edit: the Red Oak had been cut in the 1970's, I think, and the previous farmer had burned wood up until the early 90's. My plan was written in 2003}. In some places they were recommending I girdle some poorer quality trees, because it would have been uneconomical to do a commercial harvest where the primary product was firewood. I noticed on Thursday while walking the woods that a bunch of the 10"-12" Hophornbeam has died and fallen over as the Red Oak and Sugar Maple have over-topped it and stolen its sunlight.
This is a great thread, probably so much info to be learned on this subject. "Woodlot Management" would actually be an awesome sub-forum on FHC!
Very cool! We have friends who sugar. It's a fascinating operation. They've got a few pumps to help with the collection and they use a reverse osmosis system which which had decreased their wood use.
I have 40 acres of forest land left. Feed three homes with wood. Some, 8 acres or so, being pasture 40 years ago was planted with various pines to create forest land for tax purposes. There’s about three acres of wetlands that was once open and is filled with maples now. Healthy, not that big, of little use. Another ten years and some major thinning could happen there. So many variables. Some years the standing dead is nearly non existent. Was about 5 years ago I started cutting live leaners. Tress that just decided to grow crooked. Mostly the root ball had moved a bit in a storm. Now there’s a plethora of dead trees waiting for me. Gypsy moths and other diseases. Mother Nature is fickle.
When I read about various members who have a woodlot I get a little jealous. But then I start thinking that I would need a bigger chainsaw. Next comes a tractor with a skidder attachment and maybe an ATV with a winch to tow a dump trailer. Then of course a larger woodshed to store all the extra wood and a sawmill to produce lumber to build it. When I truly analyze that woodlot and then all the extras I would have to buy and build, I realize...There is no downside!
What I’m seeing here with the Alder forest. We were required to leave about 4 acres of standing trees due to slide hazard. The remaining trees, now unsheltered due to the logging are being decimated by the wind. Just something to be expected if you partially clear cut. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
