ignorant flatlander question of the month...

Paul Morgan t2r6 at worldnet.att.net
Tue Oct 14 21:33:25 EST 1997

Don Staples wrote in article <3443BAC0.5B3C at livingston.net>...

>Joseph Zorzin wrote:
>> Paul Morgan wrote:
>> >
>> >  Ok, so I've got a pole pruner that allows me to trim up to 18' or so.
>> > problem is that I've got absolutely gorgeous pines 30-40' tall about 1'
>> > diameter with live and dead branches that I won't be able to reach with
>> > pole pruner.  But is seems a shame to get only one 17' clear log what I
>> > could get two 17' clear logs at harvest time if I could only reach up
>> > another 18 feet or so.
>> >
>> > Is there any equipment (other than cherry pickers) or methods that
>> > trimming higher than 18'?
>> >
>> > Paul
>> I'm sure you'll figure out some way to do it. But if you factor in the
>> cost of your time to do that extra height (because the second log will
>> take a lot longer)- then this extra work is questionable economics. I
>> suspect that after you do a few of these you'll get tired of that extra
>> work.
>One heck of a lot longer.  Let's see, he wants to prune two 17' log
>lengths out of trees "30-40' tall", not much  crown left for that
>growth.  If he is in the south, no pruning may be necessary, just time
>to grow.
>Don Staples

Actually, I've thinking about the increased value of the second 17' log in
relation to the annual increase in the value of the tree.   I'm on a small
enough scale that I can measure dbh annually and harvest individual trees
when their annual increase in value drops below what a replacement would
yield.  If pruning the second log can push back the "retirement" date
substantially, then the extra work required to prune the top log would be
offset to some extent by the reduction in frequency of harvest.

Of course, I've also thought of pruning them after they have been felled,
but there aren't many southern foresters in the log buying business up here


More information about the Ag-forst mailing list