Beginning design - Cut Spruce Trees?

We just bought an acre and a half on the south facing slope in zone 6A. We are planning our big changes to the land (earthworks and large tree removal). I am having a hard time deciding whether or not to remove a line of spruce trees on the south side of our property. They are HUGE (80+ feet tall?)and beautiful. They provide privacy from our only close neighbor BUT they also take up about a fourth of the footage north to south on the lot and shade out all of the northern parts of the lot in the winter. But cutting them down seems pretty extreme! Would you cut them down? What usefulness are spruce besides spruce tea and eating the new spring growth (which I can’t see my moderately large family doing unless we are starving)? What types of trees might you replace these with to provide privacy while allowing sun filtration?

Hi Sarah,

Welcome to Permies.

I would work very hard to find a way to keep the trees.

John F Dean wrote:Hi Sarah,

Welcome to Permies.

I would work very hard to find a way to keep the trees.

Thank you! I am trying very hard to justify keeping them (understanding how they could benefit the design) which is why I posted. I personally think thereare better trees to put in their place, but I am listening…

It would take decades to regenerate anything close to the ecological, hydrological, and windbreak benefits that would be lost by cutting old trees. It would help to know your general location for context about how to work with them.

Sarah Thicket wrote: I am concerned about the spruces not being particularly native here as this should be oak forest (most lawns here are predominantly all grass with a spruce hedge for privacy), shading out the fruit and nut trees, passing disease, or needing to be removed later, which would result in heavy damage to other plantings. I see that my first post on Permies is a bit of a disaster!

What part of the world are you in that the spruce is not a native tree?

I do not like to cut healthy  trees, especially those older than me, if at all feasible. Yet sometimes it does need to be considered. It they were fire fueling eucalyptus, I’d cut them down.  If these are Sitka Spruce anywhere outside the coastal PNW in the American West, they may well be dangerously fire prone and warrant being cut and used for the highest purpose possible (its wood is stronger than steel by weight), then replaced with long lived fire resistant trees. Sitka spruce have almost no fire resistance having evolved in the foggy rainforest of western coastal North America. Others spruce species are native to more fire prone areas and are better adapted. Most oak forests did have some native fire cycles keeping them from being overtaken by conifers, so it may be wise to assume fire will come back whether we want it or not. All the more reason to post a general location so we can have more context in our advice. It is still up to the OP of course, no matter what we say.

Anne Miller wrote:

Sarah Thicket wrote: I am concerned about the spruces not being particularly native here as this should be oak forest (most lawns here are predominantly all grass with a spruce hedge for privacy), shading out the fruit and nut trees, passing disease, or needing to be removed later, which would result in heavy damage to other plantings. I see that my first post on Permies is a bit of a disaster!

What part of the world are you in that the spruce is not a native tree?

Southwest Ohio. They grow well enough here which is why they are very commonly used in artificial landscaping (fast growing privacy screens), but it is unusual to find a conifer stand in the woodlands. I actually consider spruce to be part of the monoculture problem in our area. I am curious whether it gets cold enough here to properly stratify the seeds for natural reproduction?

Sarah Thicket wrote:I’m sorry you think we would be cutting down the trees “because”. I was unclear, as I thought it would be assumed that I am planning to use permaculture principles as I understand them into the design. Cutting the spruces would be to make way for a food forest we are planning. I am concerned about the spruces not being particularly native here as this should be oak forest (most lawns here are predominantly all grass with a spruce hedge for privacy), shading out the fruit and nut trees, passing disease, or needing to be removed later, which would result in heavy damage to other plantings. I see that my first post on Permies is a bit of a disaster!

I did not feel you were cutting down the trees "because".

I understand why you want to have a food forest.  There are shade-loving plants that could be planted where it is shady leaving the other area for annual plants.

I like to recommend hostas because they are so pretty, come in many varieties and love shade, and are edible.

Here are "10 Edible Plants That Grow In Shade You Must Know About!" from Redemption Permaculture:

https://redemptionpermaculture.com/10-edible-plants-that-grow-in-full-shade-you-must-know-about/

From the article: Daylilies, garlic, chives, ginger, parsley, cilantro, lettuce, pawpaws, mint, alpine strawberries, blueberries, and hostas.

Also, plants can be placed in planters and moved around to find sunny spots.

There are some great areas around most houses where edible plants can be planted.

This thread might give you or others some ideas about finding sunny spots:

https://permies.com/t/143914/Edible-Yard-Visited

Sarah Thicket wrote:

Anne Miller wrote:

Sarah Thicket wrote: I am concerned about the spruces not being particularly native here as this should be oak forest (most lawns here are predominantly all grass with a spruce hedge for privacy), shading out the fruit and nut trees, passing disease, or needing to be removed later, which would result in heavy damage to other plantings. I see that my first post on Permies is a bit of a disaster!

What part of the world are you in that the spruce is not a native tree?

Southwest Ohio. They grow well enough here which is why they are very commonly used in artificial landscaping (fast growing privacy screens), but it is unusual to find a conifer stand in the woodlands. I actually consider spruce to be part of the monoculture problem in our area. I am curious whether it gets cold enough here to properly stratify the seeds for natural reproduction?

Here is some additional information about natural forests/spruce in Ohio.

One approach you might consider is to selectively remove a tree or two that are the most problematic (for whatever reason) then see how the ecosystem behaves. If you remove these big trees all at once, it will be a shock to the area, with direct sun on soil and plants that haven't seen the sun in decades.

I'm not a fan of removing healthy, mature trees, but we've done it for various reasons that I won't get into here. I don't think it has to be an all or nothing approach, or an all at once approach. Just consider that once you do it, you can't undo it, and there may be changes to the land that you didn't anticipate.

Hi, Sarah!! Welcome to permies! The struggle is real! While I understand everyone's urging to keep them - I'm a tree-hugger, too - sometimes weighing out a decision like this one is far more complicated than just whether to save the trees. Even the Big Guy here, Paul Wheaton, is often looking to take down trees.

My questions are along the lines of:
1 - does it have to be an 'all or nothing' situation? Looking at your plat, it seems like how many you'd need to remove would be dependent on how you want to place your food forest. If the food forest is placed either forward or back, a bit, could you possibly get away with only taking out part of them? Maybe incorporating the rest into your guilds? Or choosing your food forest plantings to work with at least a portion of the protection the trees offer? Many plants prefer or even need the more acidic soils evergreens tend to promote.

2 - Will your food forest, as planned, be capable of supporting the existing wildlife, or do those critters depend solely on the spruce? Or will you be starting your food forest from mostly tiny plantings, that will take too long to grow? Do you have/ are you willing to make plans to help those critters, in the meantime? (These few questions are largely born of my current issues with folks nearby displacing hundreds of acres worth of critters that are now over-running or place and all those near us)

3 - Is there any other placement you can devise, that would allow all or most of the trees to stay put?

4 - If you decide to cut them, it's there maybe a way you can honor those beautiful trees, in your plans? Maybe leaving a good size trunk in the ground, with a relief-carved 'picture' of them in it, as a memorial?

In the end, it's your decision. I'm not generally an all-or-nothing kind of gal. You're only on an acre and a half, so something within your control, that is making 1/3 of your land unusable would definitely make it difficult to keep them. I hope you can find a solution that doesn't leave you sad.

Something else to think about: are the trees healthy? How old are they and are they near the end of their natural lives? I live in a place where we have conifers that live about 60-90 years and then give up the ghost and get blown over in storms, on a regular basis. You may find that these trees may have to go for other reasons. Maybe call out an expert to have a look if you're not sure. Spruce is an exotic where I live and I frankly don't know about their life cycles, but I know a few of us here have dealt with trees getting old/sick and having to get taken down to avoid major disaster.

Sarah, thank you for posting the info on the natural forests and the non-native spruce. So often plants are chosen because they're the "in" thing, or "cheap" or many other reasons that have nothing to do with "useful" and "yummy".

I wonder if a hedge-row approach might work in your design. If it is possible to take out part of the row in stages, you could build the hedge-row in stages also. Hedge rows can provide privacy, food, and support wildlife.

It seems from the picture as if your property is quite narrow. About how wide is it?

My parents moved into a neighborhood that was built 45-50 years ago and are having some similar issues with the life cycle and needed replacement of non-native "landscaper's choice" trees in their yard and surroundings. They'll have a row of trees that were planted and maybe struggling because of their faulty placement, but deciding how to actively plan for the future of the property in a way that isn't counterproductive, while also not waiting for the trees to fall over before acting is the question.

Their city has a lot of tree protection measures as well, which adds a layer of complexity. There is, however, a native trees organization that emphasizes conserving native trees and replacing  culled non-natives with more appropriate plants. My dad has gotten a lot of information from the educational side of that organization to help with his decisions.

He has ended up falling along the same lines Jay and Tereza suggested, with a kind of case-by-case individual approach to the trees as age, weather, and pests etc dictate. The long term goal is likely beyond his lifetime, but he has wanted to make the incremental positive changes he is able to with a measured step. It sounds like this is the question you're asking yourself- how many changes and how fast for the best overall result.