Logging Slash

[Does’ Leap]

At what height do folks like to cut down their slash? I have always cut my slash pretty tight to the ground (<4") as ground contact expedites decomposition. However, this is quite different from what would happen naturally. Any benefits from leaving more slash at a higher level from an ecological point of view?

George

[Carl Russell]

I tend to cut my slash down low, mostly to facilitate swamping trails if the need arises. When I know I am not going in an area I will drop a bunch of trees into the same place, and can pile it up pretty high.

Ecologically, high brush actually prevents browsing animals from reducing regeneration, particularly in hardwoods. There also are some beetles and other insect decomposers that take advantage of dry wood, but they generally can get enough material within a season to take advantage of wood on the ground as well.

Probably the greatest ecological value in high brush is cover for all sorts of fowl and fauna.

Strike a balance between leaving your woods in a functional state for regular harvest, and mimicking what it looks like after a wind storm, or when tops break out of standing trees.

Just leaving brush and coarse woody debris is important as a medium for fungus and invertibrates that interact at the soil level which in turn faciltate many other interactions throughout the web of forest life.

Carl

[Tim Harrigan]

Depends on where it is. Usually I will cut tops down somewhat, but not with the goal of maximizing ground contact. In some areas I will cut it up and make larger piles for animal habitat. Keeps things interesting for the rabbits, hawks and owls.

[Scott G]

My short answer, most contracts I deal with/write are 12″-16″. In addition to a slash residual, I’m a firm believer of more coarse woody debris than less for a variety of ecological reasons. If fuels mitigation/restoration is the primary objective, however, we’ll broadcast burn ,pile burn, chip, or masticate.

[Mark Cowdrey]

Masticate? Yum! May I please have another plateful of CWD?:o
Mark

[Michel Boulay]

Like Tim depends were it is. Could be large piles, small piles, burn piles….. Don’t masticate though.:) Scott what is masticate?

Mike

[Does’ Leap]

Thanks for the responses. I took a tape to the slash I cut off some hemlock yesterday and it is more like 8″-10″ in the coarse spots. Scott mentioned 12-16″ in the contracts he writes out West, what is common in the northeast? Carl, I like your idea of mimicking what would happen in a wind storm in certain locations, I will give it a try.

George

[Carl Russell]

@Does’ Leap 38395 wrote:

…. Scott mentioned 12-16″ in the contracts he writes out West, what is common in the northeast? …..

Common contractual language calls for 4 feet or less….. except that now some foresters are specifically asking that tops be left uncut so that hardwood regen can survive deer browse.

When I started logging professionally in 1983, we had USFS contracts that called for all material left in the woods to be cut to the ground and no pieces longer than 3 feet. That was a lot of work, but it is an old habit that dies hard. I find myself very often working right to the end of the tree slashing and lopping. Of course it has it’s operational advantages, but when I can save time by not doing that, I leave the tops uncut.

George, you may find that leaving uncut hemlock tops during winter logging will be a good way to provide browse fro deer.

Carl

[Scott G]

The biggest difference between slash management back east and out here is that your slash rots without ground contact. If we left tops without slashing them down they would stand like skeletons for decades. We do, and I spec, large diameter coarse woody debris (aka logs); usually expressed as linear feet per acre. Where fuels management isn’t a primary concern and ecological function is, I cannot stress enough how important it is to leave some big stuff on the ground.

Deer/elk/moose browsing out here isn’t an issue for conifer regen. Where it is a problem is in my aspen restoration cuts. Unfortunately, excessive slash cover inhibits aspen regen because of the shading and barrrier to radiant heat from the sun. So the only viable solution, in my mind, is to pack the freezer with elk… :p

Mastication is the process of utilizing a tracked or wheeled carrier with a high-flow hydraulic circuit powering a head that has several large carbide teeth, mounted on a drum for horizontal shaft machines and on what is basically a hot-saw disc for vertical shaft heads. Horizontal shafts produce much finer material, and a more aesthetic result, than vertical shaft heads.

[PhilG]

Mastication seams to be the trend in CO for sure, only now they seam to be masticating perfectly usable fiber, I loose every job i bid against a masticating operation, it is sad to me that there is not more biomass heating and electric development in a state with millions of dead acres of wood so close to populated areas. I managed to lowball a 16 acre mistletoe ponderosa job because it was 8 miles from my yard, the slash was 2′ tall, 4′ long min. many of the trees were as bushy as a tumbleweed- some took a hole tank to slash ! i would cut the limbs into fire wood and get a cord+- per tree that are now going to heat local homes instead of sitting as a pile of chips on the ground, a lot of work for sure but i figure if i can load and unload 1 1/2 cords every day on my pickup for a drive i have to do anyway the extra hour it added was worth it, there were also some very nice saw logs mixed in, hoping to get at least 20 mbf maybe more and 50 cords+ of firewood , i need to start keeping good records like Carl, Scott and others who so generously share info to us lacking their experience

[Author]

Posts