🚀 go-pugleaf

Joseph Zorzin <redoak@forestmeister.com> wrote in article
<33BA3DC5.730C@forestmeister.com>...

> Injuries can come from insects, birds like sapsuckers and woodpeckers,
> gunshots, logging equipment, broken branches, etc. A little wound can
> allow infections to start and many years later it may turn into a large
> hollow. Usually by the time trees are very large, most will have decay
> in the core. But this susceptability to decay is species specific. Most
> large red oak do not have decay (but there may be discoleration at the
> core) and I've read that other species like redwood and cedar are also
> very resistant. I'm most familiar with the species I see every day in
> western Massachusetts, which is a northern Appalachian type of forest. I
> mentioned the other day Alex Shigo who I think is the world authority on
> this subject.

Twp other obvious causes of injury are weather and fire.  Ice storms can
rip off a lot of limbs, lightning can split trees open, extreme cold can
burst trees, wind can cause shake and limb breakage.  A ground fire will
usually burn hotter on the uphill side and cause cambial damage.  This will
eventually become heartrot.  

I have found wood discoloration to be more site specific than caused by
logging damage.   Tulip poplar will turn purple around wounds, but I have
seen entire hearts streaked with blue.  Sap streaks in cherry is site
specific.  Unfortunately, it is difficult to tell tree quality from the
outside, although certain bark patterns can give a clue, to the trained
eye.
 
> The people who really know what's in the trees are the mill sawyers.
> They spend all day sawing up logs and the more they can predict the
> patterns of decay the better job they do sawing up the log. All forester
> should spend sometime doing mill sawing or at least cutting the trees
> themselves, because at least then they'll see what the bottom of the
> bottom log looks like.

Foresters should spend about 6 months in a mill.  They need not saw, since
it takes about 3-5 years to make a good sawyer.  Stacking lumber would be
just fine.  It would be best if they could scale and grade logs before they
mark timber and watch logs go through the mill.  I learned more about trees
and lumber by sawing than by marking timber.  It also improved management
skills in the woods.  

> But, a short answer to your question is that most damage to the trees in
> my area is caused by BAD logging in the past. Logging equipment can
> easily rip the bark off the trees and run over exposed roots. This
> damage results in millions of dollars of damage over the long term. This
> damage is far more destructive to forests than erosion, and habitat
> damage. The ground vegetation and the fauna seem to adjust fine to the
> most violent and hideous logging. But the dollar value of the future
> forests can be damage to the extent of 90%.

Even good logging causes some damage, particularly in the spring.  Log
length skidding would reduce damages, but few loggers will take the effort
required.  Grapple skidders have caused more damage, especially to
saplings.  The higher the mechanization, the more the damage.  Of course,
since most stands are not let go to maturity, a lower logging cost is
needed to justify the lower product value, hence more mechanization and
less care.

RDW