On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 19:16:03 -0500, Tim Wescott wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 13:53:23 -0700, edhuntress2 wrote:
>> On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 4:30:47 PM UTC-4, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 12:36:38 -0700, edhuntress2 wrote:
>>> > On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 3:01:17 PM UTC-4, Ignoramus14657 wrote:
>>> > Notice that they're thinning that stand, cutting the pulpwood (6" -
>>> > 9" diameter) and leaving some larger pieces for timber (or
>>> > "chip-n-saw").
>>> > That rig is for high-efficiency cutting of pulpwood, which is a
>>> > low-margin product and has to be harvested efficiently to make a
>>> > buck.
>>>
>>> How low of a margin? I know that there are places where they're
>>> growing trees specifically for pulp -- they let the stand get up to
>>> about 6" diameter, mow it down, then repeat.
>>> I know it's done in Oregon, and IIRC in places in the Southeast.
...
>> There are pulpwood "farms" in the Southeast and in New England, where
>> they clear-cut pulpwood. And then there are a lot of conventional
>> logging operations, where they keep thinning out the pulpwood and let
>> the lumber trees grow.
...
> I do know that the pulpwood patches I've seen were on dead-flat patches
> amidst hay fields -- so, presumably, it's land that can't be more
> profitably put to raising lettuce or radishes or onions or whatever makes
> more $$ than hay.
The clearcut areas I saw when living in northern MN 30 years ago
weren't flat; mostly there were lots of small hills or mounds, a
consequence of glaciation in several ice ages. Some of that land
was farmed by early-1900's Swedish and Norwegian immigrants. But
with topsoil only a foot thick (it comes back about an inch per
millennium after the glaciers scrape it off) the farms couldn't
last, and went back to forest - birch, balsam, aspen, jackpine.
--
jiw