Above: The CFA runs a forest thinning workshop.
By Ryan Trapani
If you haven’t heard of our organization – Catskill Forest Association (CFA) – then you’re probably unaware of how much we profess about cutting “the right trees” in order to create a healthier Catskills forest. CFA works mostly with private landowners in the Catskill Region since they own the majority of its forested acreage. One of CFA’s services it provides is an On-Site Visit whereupon a landowner is inquiring about their woodland and how it can be improved. After this initial consultation, a landowner is often amazed at how many trees require cutting in order to meet a variety of potential management goals – wildlife habitat enhancement; biodiversity; health; timber; maple sugaring; and more. “I had no idea how much cutting is required,” said one landowner. “I thought you guys were supposed to be tree huggers,” said another. I often reply using an analogy to their vegetable garden, “Have you ever tried growing tomatoes in the shade?” At CFA, we like growing all types of woodland plant species – old, young, and species that also require plenty of sunlight. In order to provide the added sunlight, a human hand is often required.
This is where the chainsaw enters the conversation.
Although most conversations during and after a consultation include cutting more trees, not all do. Sometimes, CFA stretches its arms out widely and fulfills its presumed role as tree-hugger. Part of CFA’s mission is to improve the health of the forest, and prevent threats to the forest ecosystem – especially “high-grading.” "High-grading" is the practice of removing most of the largest and fastest growing trees of the most valuable commercial species in order to meet short-term economic goals. This results in total disregard for the long-term viability of the forest stand or providing for future income and regeneration.
Recently, CFA performed an On-Site Visit at a member’s property in Ulster County. The landowner had hired a private Consulting Forester to mark the trees on over 300 acres for a timber harvest. Fortunately, the landowner wanted another opinion and called CFA. After walking the marked area, it was clear that the majority of trees marked for harvest were those that were the fastest growing, highest quality, and most economically valuable.
There were a few significant problems with the marking CFA witnessed that day. First, many of these trees had not reached economic maturity. Think back to the vegetable garden; a tomato is picked when one usually believes it is at its greatest size and where quality is not compromised. If these trees were cut presently, they would be picked too early and the opportunity cost would be the foregone economic value they could have gained had they grown in diameter. A larger tree is simply worth a lot more than a smaller one, assuming good quality and of a desirable species.
Second, the trees left behind were mostly the same age as the trees being cut. The difference was that the unmarked ones were the poorest quality trees. Adding sunlight to these trees would provide little benefit and would be akin to picking your best tomatoes (too early) in order to provide more sunlight for the runty ones as well as the weeds. In this way, overall forest health would be reduced by this cutting, instead of enhanced.
Third, the “weeds” that would be left behind would also happen to provide far less benefit for wildlife. High quality oak trees were being marked for cutting, while trees like red maple which provide few food resources were left untouched. Oak trees provide an extremely valuable food resource for a plethora of wildlife in the form of acorns. Acorns serve as an extremely important nutrient storage for wildlife overwintering.
Fourth was that removing the marked trees paid little attention to future forest regeneration and diversity. Oak trees are already becoming scarcer in the Catskills. Like tomatoes, they require more sunlight than the surrounding “weeds” to gain a competitive advantage. Removing the best quality oaks obviously reduces the oak population. However, what really is reducing the overall oak population throughout the Catskills is the general manner in which some of our woodlands are being cut. This is where we once again pick up the chainsaw and get ready to add sunlight. The aforementioned marking did not cut heavily enough to perpetuate oak into the next generation. Even if all trees that had been marked were removed, sunlight conditions would not be sunny enough for younger oak trees to compete with shade-tolerant species like maple and hemlock. Therefore, high-grading not only removes the best quality oak trees, but also reduces the chances of oak seedlings from establishment into the future forest.
The underlying theme is that cutting trees can be a good or a bad thing, but there can be many shades of gray in between. CFA can help make a decision for the landowner who ultimately is the chief decision-maker since they own the land and pay the taxes. It is our responsibility and within our mission to make the landowner aware of which trees should be cut, and which should be left behind, which will greatly influence the track their woodland takes into the present and future. In this case, the landowner did not choose a track where immediate income would have been realized, at the expense of the health of their woodland for decades. Instead they decided to forego cutting for now and allow for more growth. CFA further recommends that most of the marked trees be saved, while most of the “weeds” cut. The forest will be healthier, and future income should be greater as well. But, just like any business, investments must be made for future growth. Ultimately, it is the landowner who decides which action should be taken. If you got questions, contact CFA. www.catskillforest.org
