Coppice Trees for Firewood

I honestly have no idea, though I'm fascinated and will look into it when I have a minute.  I check my email invoice, which simply says "5 Chinese Chestnut Trees, 1 year bareroot seedlings - $49."

I do know that they are American-Chinese Crosses, but I'm thinking they reflect more of the Chinese traits than what you describe.  I know he's been landracing on his plot for years, but I don't know what his original stock was.

Another option for blight resistant chestnut.

I live near them but don't have enough room for  trees (you need more than one for pollination)
that big.

I also run around barefoot most of the time and those "porcupine eggs" the chestnuts come in would be painful.

https://chestnuthilloutdoors.com/shop/dunstan-chestnut/

Beau,

I think you answered the question—they were Chinese, not American chestnuts.  For homesteaders starting out and wanting to get a tree/shrub fast and get nuts, then a Chinese Chestnut is a good choice.

An American Chestnut will eventually be HUGE!!  And it will grow fairly quickly.

Eric

Dave,

Those Dunstans are a hybrid of Chinese and American trees.  There is nothing wrong with that in and of itself—it has a lot of very good qualities.

The varieties I am talking about are 15/16 American, have only American qualities, look like American Chestnut trees (they will get huge) but are blight resistant, meaning they will get blight but not succumb to blight.

I just posted this for information purposes.

Eric

Y'all!!  I know this is a thread on coppicing; but some folks have mentioned elms, and especially the immature seeds being edible.

ELM SAMARAS are themselves compltely edible and very delicious!!  I am missing them since I now live int he Deep South; but the entire bract, the pale green covering over the seed, is wonderful in salad or on its own; I guess you could also cook them but they are tender and sweet as-is.

Very timely thread! We moved to our new place early this year. We have 10 acres that's mostly pasture-ish rather than te mostly wooded 44 acres atour previous place. I took firewood for granted as for the 19 years we were there, I never had to fall a live tree for firewood. There were plenty of dead elms, either standing or down, and more than enough blow-downs. I wish I had that wood here. Filling the heating oil tank a couple of weeks ago was a terrible shock.
So, I need to establish a woodlot asap! I see ash has been mentioned. Here in SWPA, most of our ash trees have been killed, courtesy of the emerald ash borer. I was thinking of black locust, as I do have a few of those growing, but am open to any viable option.

Hi Ban Dihn, I wish I knew where SWPA was.  Or the life zone and soil type and climate.  It would help me know what specific trees might do well.

Seems like right at the start, you want some fast growing wood for “immediate” use.  The immediate use tree might not provide the ideal firewood, but when it’s the only wood, it can easily be the “best” you might want that particular fast growing tree to provide something else when your woodlot is producing ideal wood.  While you wait for the multi species, multi use trees get big enough to also have wood to spare, you’ll be warm.

A couple posts near the beginning of this thread laid out a plan for species & spacing.  Looks like he gave it a lot of thought.  Depending on your life zone, that might be a great resource for you.

For those still in research mode on this.

A classic book that was incredibly helpful to me:

https://soilandhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/01aglibrary/010175.tree%20crops.pdf

I would credit this one with sending me down the road to selecting zero to low maintenance trees and other.
It also got me into mulberries and persimmons, for which I am extremely grateful.

Many thanks to those who suggested Coppice Agroforestry by Mark Krawczyk.

This thing is an absolute encyclopedia of forestry and coppicing. I'm only as far in as the history and starting into the technical section.

the history is fascinating...particularly the part where the European nobles claimed all the commons land for themselves and ran off the common folk, a major setback to the art and good results forestry-wise of coppicing, among other evils.

It struck a chord, because, strange as it seems now, Florida pre-development was a lot of land used as a commons, particularly the beaches for fishing and making salt and the woods for hunting.  Families would go to the beach for extended working vacations, boiling salt out of the water and packing the fish they caught in the salt. Many others survived nicely living on the beach full time and selling surplus fish to the fish packing houses to buy what few things they needed cash for.

Anyway, getting back on topic....

I accidentally coppiced and pollarded some of my trees and I'm looking forward to better management of that via what's in this book.
Fortunately, I knew just enough at the time of the "accidents" to let them continue on.

The book may seem a bit on the expensive side, but it's worth every penny and then some.

Eric Hanson wrote:Beau,

Are these American-Chinese hybrid trees?  Are they the most recent backcross variant?

The reason I ask is that there are earlier generations of American-Chinese hybrids that are available for considerably less.  The problem as I understand is that they are just about guaranteed to eventually succumb to chestnut Blight.

There is a parallel program that specifically inserted one gene into the tree’s genome that produced oxalic acid (if memory is serving me properly here and now).  If I am getting this straight, oxalic acid makes the chestnut basically immune to chestnut blight.  And also, if I am remembering correctly, oxalic acid is used by all kinds of plants to fight off various fungal pathogens, with wheat being just one example of a harmless (and very useful) plant that uses oxalic acid.

The two programs—backcross and gene insertion—competed for years with the backcross method gaining the early upper hand.  Thousands of acres were planted to chestnut trees, infected with blight about 200x stronger than the wild strain, and selected for best resistance.  Those seeds (chestnuts) were then pollinated by Chinese chestnut pollen, with the progeny selected for most American traits and best resistance, again infected with 200x blight and those survivors crossed with Chinese and then American and again.

It took a total 6 pairings—three cross pollination and three back crossings to get trees that were 15/16 American, looked 100% American, and only had Chinese blight resistance.  This took almost 40 years.  The last (6th) generation became available for general purchase just a few years ago and the purchase price reflects this enormous investment.

The parallel program started much, much more recently but ironically ended at about the same time.  The parallel program involved splicing in just one gene, something that has been technically doable for decades but only recently has the price come down to consider something outside of a medical concern.  The splicing approach is vastly faster, involves only one gene, and requires very little acreage by comparison.  I suppose that the parallel approach may be selling their own seeds and they may be able to really get the price down to something much more affordable.

I would be very curious to know exactly what type of chestnut you actually got—a “pre-production” chestnut, a backcross chestnut, or a spliced chestnut.

Eric

One can also purchase pure American chestnut trees for much cheaper... chances are they would eventually succumb to blight, but the roots don't die so they will sprout up anew, and with enough quantity of seedlings, you could just get lucky and get a resistant one (the parent trees are naturally resistant, but their offspring are not guaranteed to be). Technically, having a pure American chestnut tree that succumbs to blight is basically natural coppicing, no? If you have the land and are interested in coppicing already anyway, why not just plant straight American chestnuts rather than going through the effort and expense of getting the fancy hybrids? When they succumb to blight, just cut the main trunk. Seems like a win. **I just checked my native plant nursery and they are selling their seedlings for $10, their orchard was planted from seeds of a resistant parent tree... after 10 years some of the trees are starting to decline, but others are producing loads of chestnuts (which they are propagating for sale).

    Not to derail all the awesome talk of american chestnut but here are some pictures of a white iak that I coppiced. This is after one growing season. For reference I am 6ft tall. It is amazing what an established stump can produce. I kept 5 shoots to do a 5 year rotation on cutting them for firewood. Unfortunately the county foiled my plans. It is close to a gravel road. I have plans to coppice some further into the property. It would be awesome to have some american chestnut to coppice as well as some black locust for pollards

I love the depth of traditional knowledge that is being explored here.
I feel like a lot of that knowledge was set aside by European  emigrants that were greeted by a seemingly inexhaustible supply of trees.
Like people moving from a desert to a land of lakes, coppicing must have seemed quaint, pointless even.

My copy of Coppice Agroforestry is sitting on the couch next to me as I type.  Some technical details about terminology - deciduous trees are all "hardwoods", conifers are all "softwoods". It has nothing to do with the hardness of the wood. Balsa is a hardwood, redwood is a softwood.  If you know the woods from those two trees, balsa is super light weight and probably the softest wood there is. Redwood is dense and hard. But there it is.

The majority of deciduous trees will coppice or pollard, but as a general rule it works best with fairly young trees. It's been noted previously, you can coppice young birch, but past a certain size it will die instead. This is likely related to the fact that birch are rather short lived trees, so a big birch is an old birch.  Very few conifers will resprout anything like the deciduous trees will.

Coppicing is done with dormant trees. Consider it part of the definition. You can choose to prune whenever you wish (like the 45 day mulberry cycle, which is a new tidbit of info for me), but it's only coppicing when the trees are dormant.

When thinking about a list of potential coppice trees, I would suggest people begin by looking at their wish list of trees they want for their sites. What trees will do well where you are and fill needs in your system? When you have that list, look through it to learn which ones will coppice well. There's your personal coppice selection ;)

Coppice Agroforestry is very much worth getting and reading. It's a resource. The historical information alone is valuable, but Mark goes into great details in terms of management and scale. There are a number of different coppice systems all with their particular benefits.

Something to keep in mind with coppice systems is that every few years, you're probably going to clear cut a section. Plan around that available space - you're going to have sunlight at ground level for the next two to three years, what crops will you have in that space amongst the coppice stools? Stack functions ;)

One of the things that made coppicing work for centuries was that it provided tremendous economic value. Huge quantities of charcoal. Thousands of sheep hurdles. Bodgers turning Windsor chair parts in the woodland and selling the pieces to chairmakers to finish and assemble. Fences. Bean poles, pea sticks, walking sticks. Pole wood for construction. And firewood.

For coppicing to be broadly revived, there's a need for identifying the modern products from a coppice wood, and their market demand. Sheep hurdles and wattle fences probably aren't going to find substantial markets today ;) But garden gates and arbors? Rustic benches for garden seating? Sculptural garden trellises?

And let's not forget, many of these trees that will coppice can be started from cuttings - and nursery production is a real economic opportunity.  There is no over supply of permaculture nurseries producing permaculture plants as of yet ;)

William, everyone,

This is slightly OT, but I thought I would add a bit of context to William’s observations.

True, European, mostly English immigrants saw a virtually inexhaustible supply of wood.  But they also saw something else:  the real nuisance of having too many trees and virtually no empty cleared ground for planting crops!

English settled what would become the United States largely to plant crops, specifically tobacco.  Tobacco was in such demand that almost any cleared ground was planted with the stuff.  Trees themselves were actually seen as being in the way, blocking sunlight.  So while trees were an obvious source of lumber and endless firewood, they also blocked a lot of much-needed sunlight from reaching ground level.  

Given that the trees in question were true giants, enormous by today’s standard, cutting for lumber or firewood was often seen as impractical without a dedicated lumber company with specialized equipment,

Quite often, early pioneers who claimed previously unoccupied (that is if we ignore the Native Americans, which the settlers did)) land, the land was 100% forested with no ground cleared for growing cash crops, food crops, or even ground cleared for building a small cabin.  And the trees might well have a diameter of 10 feet or more!  That was impracticality huge for most uses, so the “best” option was girdling—strip the bark as high as possible around the tree, and then set a fire around the tree to kill it.  After the tree died, it lost its leaves, light poured through and food crops could be planted on the forest floor.

I have seen old paintings and drawings of what these early farms looked like and it was odd by today’s standards.  There would be a field of crops with huge standing dead trees in the middle.  This was still not ideal, so the base might get further burned, the trunk weakened and the 200’ tree would eventually collapse at which point some limbs might be taken for lumber, some taken for firewood, but a 10’+ diameter trunk was just too huge to utilize with hand tools so it was more than likely just burned up in place and the ashes spread which did act as a sort of fertilizer.  Essentially, these early pioneers thought nothing about burning a huge, centuries old tree in the same way that many today think nothing about burning a pile of cleared brush—it was just easy disposal.

As these early homesteaders cleared a bit more land, they became more prosperous, likely acquired more physical labor (through hire or slaves depending on location, cash available and other factors) and expanded their arable lands into the forest.  They probably tended to specialize more, taking more lumber and firewood as more space was available for clearing and less burning for pure disposal.

But the point I am making is that early in the settlement of the future United States, trees were just as much a nuisance in the way as they were a resource.  England practiced coppicing much earlier because they had largely exhausted their own supply (not completely, but enough) that they could not meet future demand for wood simply by cutting forests.

And by the late 19th century, American conservation efforts would establish lands for cutting trees for lumber which had to be immediately replanted.  This was the beginning of the National Forests system.  It was also imported from small European countries that seemingly had no huge forests, yet grew enough trees to be self-sufficient.

I could go on, but my point is that those early settlers saw trees far differently than we do today.  I fact, many disliked the Forest (sounds strange today) specifically because it was a dark place where the sun could not be seen.  Of course, that was when old growth forest dominated the entire East Coast of the United States.

So I do largely agree with what William had to say, I just thought I would add some context.

Thoughts?

Eric

My wife and I live on a 38 acre homestead on the Delmarva peninsula, and I heat the home totally with wood off the homestead, as well as provide my elderly parents with wood for their fireplace pleasure as well. I used to only harvest the roughly 3" diameter or greater pieces for fuel. The smaller pieces were left in place to decompose, chipped for much, or piled up for animal habitat, that we have now taken to calling "rabbitat". For about the last 8 years I have started harvesting anything down to about 1" diameter, cutting those pieces with loppers down to sticks about 3 feet long each, and stuffing those sticks into old chicken or dog food bags for convenient storage, stacking and transport. We now use these 1" to 3" diameter sticks every winter to boil maple sap into syrup on a simple makeshift grill in the woods close to the maple trees. I have noticed a difference between the stick densities and apparent heat produced by them. It seems that on most species that I have tried, the current seasons growth, "watersprouts" etc. are noticeably lighter in weight, and seem to produce less heat than any pieces that had overwintered while growing and were at least two years old. I am wondering if anyone has seen research other than my anecdotal personal experiences, that shows by species, the BTU's of new growth wood? For example, do black locust or Osage orange still rank near the top in BTU ratings, when using small less than 2 " diameter wood, or are most studies and BTU ratings ranked using mostly split wood, which is assumed to contain a large percentage of older heartwood in the samples.

Without straying further OT, thank Eric for the added context.
Circumstances are key to one's perspective.
To offer a parallel, some parts of the country have acres of drain tile installed, to get ride of excess water and allow farming, and them there is the water situation out West.

Back on topic, I should be able to harvest my mulberry poles soon.
I would like to propagate them.
In the past I've planted rather large branches.
They were sitting in a bucket of water, and had begun to sprout greenery.
After being put in the dirt, none of them took, but that could be down to neglect.
Any advice on properly propagating mulberry poles?
They are from a pollarded, not copiced tree, so I can't really stool layer them.

Peter Ellis wrote:
When thinking about a list of potential coppice trees, I would suggest people begin by looking at their wish list of trees they want for their sites. What trees will do well where you are and fill needs in your system? When you have that list, look through it to learn which ones will coppice well. There's your personal coppice selection ;)
...
Something to keep in mind with coppice systems is that every few years, you're probably going to clear cut a section. Plan around that available space - you're going to have sunlight at ground level for the next two to three years, what crops will you have in that space amongst the coppice stools? Stack functions ;)
...
And let's not forget, many of these trees that will coppice can be started from cuttings - and nursery production is a real economic opportunity.  There is no over supply of permaculture nurseries producing permaculture plants as of yet ;)

Bear with me, I'm going back to chestnuts for a minute because this information is quite pertinent to my property and goals... We have an approximate 2 acre thicket area that is overgrown with invasive multiflora rose and oriental bittersweet. We'll be doing a lot of clearing in the coming years and the plan was to turn it into a food forest with native plants but focused on thicket species rather than actually forest sized. We already have some black locust around and probably within this area. My initial reservation with coppiced black locust sprouting from the roots rather than (or in addition to) the stump wouldn't actually be a problem here, so that's a plus.

The other thing that would actually work really well here is native chestnuts... I don't want anything in this area that will get too big and shade out the thicket species, and one of the factors that contributes to the eventual death of native chestnuts with blight is that the re-sprouts get shaded out by the surrounding forest - this also wouldn't be an issue in an area maintained as a thicket, AND I would get yet another food-producing plant in my food forest/thicket, plus the wood from the chestnuts as the trunks succumb to blight. The prospect of stacking an additional function in the food forest is exciting.

We'll eventually be heating primarily with wood (we need our chimney inspected and maybe add a liner before we hook up our wood stove), so having 2 acres of land where we can coppice good firewood like black locust will be great, and having an area well suited for propagation of American chestnuts that serve multiple purposes is great on so many levels. I imagine there are programs that would assist with a larger planting of American chestnuts and that there would also be demand for seedlings propagated from cuttings of any blight resistant specimens I may be blessed with.

The fact that coppice systems need to be cut periodically marries perfectly with a productive thicket that also needs to maintain sunlight at ground level.

Now I finally have access to the nice Syringa josikaea coppice pictures I took (had temporarily lost a cable for my camera). My guess on the diameters was actually almost spot on! The largest stump was around 15 cm in diameter, and by my best count of growth rings it took 35 years to get that big. So yeah, if you want a lot of volume quickly, this might not be the best species. On the other hand, it does coppice very nicely! Lots of potential for stick fuel, and maybe something for more high-value uses. Oh, and all of these stumps, unless I misremember, have between 3 and 5 years' regrowth after being cut.

Eino Kenttä  wrote:

Biggest individual stump (15 cm, around 35 years)

35 years is a pretty long rotation for most modern users compared to hundreds of years back when most people didn't move very far!
That said, I recall you saying you are fairly far north which gives you long periods of short day length. The same tree further south might perform differently.  

For example, on my peninsula, Mulberry seems to be at its edge of climate tolerance. I met a fellow from the US who was visiting the area and he told me that he considered Mulberry an invasive weed where he lived. I saw a video recently where they're pruning it multiple times a year and getting several crops of berries off it - if you live on a Caribbean Island.

This is what's great about permies - we can often find examples from the same or similar ecosystems to help inform our decisions!

William Bronson wrote:Without straying further OT, thank Eric for the added context.
Circumstances are key to one's perspective.
To offer a parallel, some parts of the country have acres of drain tile installed, to get ride of excess water and allow farming, and them there is the water situation out West.

Back on topic, I should be able to harvest my mulberry poles soon.
I would like to propagate them.
In the past I've planted rather large branches.
They were sitting in a bucket of water, and had begun to sprout greenery.
After being put in the dirt, none of them took, but that could be down to neglect.
Any advice on properly propagating mulberry poles?
They are from a pollarded, not copiced tree, so I can't really stool layer them.

Use smaller branches ;) Mulberry will root from softwood cuttings. Leave the cuttings in water until they sprout roots. The leaves sprouting aren't necessarily a sign of "life". you're looking for roots ;) As a wide guideline, hardwood cuttings for propagation are optimal at about a pencil diameter. That's a pretty good target for a range of species.

A few links to some unusual and useful info. Thanks again to the Coppice Agroforestry book for mentioning these people.

http://permacultureinstitute.pbworks.com/w/page/15951584/Phil


This guy seems to have disappeared since this article. It was a while ago. I would love to know how his compost coppice worked out.

Here are the key ideas.

"The Coppice Orchard


OR fruit trees may be just as coppice-able as other trees, and may be useful

where damage from gales, animals or vandals is likely. Without a graft union

trees can be planted deeper, and multi-stem trees with a crotch below

ground level will be harder to uproot.

Coppice-ability is also the basis of our "Coppice Orchard". This consists of

OR trees planted in rows running north-south. When the canopy of the

orchard closes, a north - south row will be coppiced and the land in the row

used for light demanding crops, e.g. vegetables on a no-dig system, while

the trees regrow. The trees either side of the glade will have higher light

levels on their sides and produce more fruit buds. The next year another

north - south row is cut but not the immediate neighbours as these will have

the extra buds, so the next row for coppicing will be next-door-but-one. In

other words this will be Alternate Row Coppicing. This process is repeated

every year, creating a series of parallel , sheltered glades. Eventually the

rows of trees forming the avenues between the glades will also be coppiced

in turn, but by then the ‘glade’ trees will have regrown to form the avenues.

As the trees regrow there will be glades at all stages of regrowth until the

cycle repeats itself, and niches for plants suited to full light, semi-shade or

heavy shade, creating opportunities for different types of land use. The

number of years before re-coppicing [and so the length of the coppicing

cycle] is one of the many aspects of the project that we will only learn by

doing it. The exact timing of coppicing can be adjusted to suit the type of

produce that is wanted most.

Apart from apples, the main planting sites of the orchard also have OR pears

and plums, hazelnuts, and nitrogen fixing trees and shrubs.

Instead of just producing fruit the coppice orchard can produce a wide range

of crops – small wood, fruit, soft fruit, vegetables, possibly cereals, fungi and

the more traditional bees and poultry. Another possible yield might be heat

from Jean Pain type heat."

"The nursery has created a need for large quantities of organic compost. To

meet this end I first devised the "Compost Hedge" which has spread out to

become the "Compost Coppice" which will be planted on a large scale when i

get a new site. This will produce compost from shredded fast growing plant

species, fed sustainably by vigorous perennial nitrogen fixing plants."

------------------------------------------------
https://web.archive.org/web/20160328003621/https://elizapples.com/2016/03/27/hugh-ermen-own-roots-experimenter/

This guy (R.I.P.)  is where the ideas above originated.

Lots of technical advice here mainly aimed at reducing the size of fruit trees so they can be grown on their own roots.
The article goes into why you would want to do that and how.

The drawings are missing from the current version of the webpage so here's an internet archive link to back before the drawings disappeared:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160328003621/https://elizapples.com/2016/03/27/hugh-ermen-own-roots-experimenter/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This figures in here for doing the nearly impossible via radical pruning:

https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2020/04/fruit-trenches-cultivating-subtropical-plants-in-freezing-temperatures.html#:~:text=The%20Russians%20managed%20to%20grow,tonnes%20of%20fruits%20per%20year.

When I proposed my 1 acre woodlot I did so with the understanding that it would be for firewood which after all is one activity that most consumed wood and therefore would be ameliorated by coppicing.

But given the quantity of firewood that this lot would eventually produce, I was thinking about other functions.

Off hand I have two, maybe three additional functions that could come from this lot after a time.

The first is lumber.  I intentionally included black locust because it can be such a practical, multipurpose tree.  One function it could serve would be a source of lumber that would keep growing back.

Secondly, as I like to grow mushrooms, that poplar would make an awesome source of wood chips to be devoured by mushroom spawn, eventually giving me both edible mushrooms and wonderful mushroom compost!

Finally, that Osage would be ideal for making tool handles.  It’s a really strong, tough wood that will stand up to abuse.  I imagine that an Osage hammer handle would be a fine tool.

Now I don’t think I would want to reduce this wood lot, but I would love to expand it somewhat.  This is where I was thinking about adding in bush-type plants, such as the coppiced mulberry, for a nice supply of poles, and the fruit would be great for wildlife and me!  Add to this some longer lived medicinal trees that wildlife like and maybe we add on another 1/4 acre to the original 1 acre woodlot.  And if that were not enough, perhaps we could add an orchard and/or a bush/small fruit patch.  I would like a combination of apples (long lived, preferably dwarf varieties), cherries and peaches.  This combination spans a wide range of growing zones (cherries are northern, peaches southern.  Ask me how I found this out!), so getting the right latitude would be tricky, and one might well want to add in other fruit trees.

Finally, I would love a bush-fruit patch.  It would be something like a couple rows of Blackberries, red raspberries, and blueberries.  I love the idea of black raspberries but they need to be grown well away from the reds so that would go elsewhere.  

This orchard and fruit patch would be an additional 1/4-1/2 acre.  This would bring the whole woodlot to something like 1.5-1.75 acres and would produce a huge amount of fruit, firewood, a decent amount of wood products and attract all sorts of wildlife.  It would also be a full time job keeping up with all that fruit.  I know because I tried to grow this fruit-lot and it got the better of me so there certainly is work involved, such as in trimming.  But trimming gives me more wood for mushrooms.  

I might be tempted to add in a couple of elderberries or other, rich fruits for my own consumption.  And if I remember, elderberry is medical.

So in the end, maybe I would plan on 2 acres for the whole woodlot which would include everything from abundant firewood and lumber to edible fruits and a haven for wildlife.  If I get more ambitious still I would think about adding in bees (or at least getting my neighbor to bring in his bees for a while).  I think this would be a fairly small amount of land yielding up a huge amount of wood and tree-and-bush products and overall goodness for a homesteader in a reasonably short amount of time.  Individual tree-and-bush species certainly could get charged and swapped where necessary but the overall plan should be sound.  But it would be a LOT of work to set up.

Eric

Jay Angler wrote:35 years is a pretty long rotation for most modern users compared to hundreds of years back when most people didn't move very far!
That said, I recall you saying you are fairly far north which gives you long periods of short day length. The same tree further south might perform differently.  

Yep, and as far as I know none of the lilac species naturally occur this far north... Also, if it is really only four or five years since these were cut, the growth must have accelerated quite a lot (look at the relative size of the shoots and stump in the first picture).

How long, would you suppose, for a coppiced black locust to produce poles suitable for fence posts?

I'm not sure if I understand the benefit here, wouldn't the wood be thin? For a RMH, maybe that is good. I don't use one.
I've seen coppiced fruit trees near the University of Washington, and I thought that was cool!

Row Morgan wrote:I'm not sure if I understand the benefit here, wouldn't the wood be thin? For a RMH, maybe that is good. I don't use one.
I've seen coppiced fruit trees near the University of Washington, and I thought that was cool!

The main benefit is that the growth happens much faster on a coppice than it does starting from a seed. We have big leaf maples here, and in the spring I see hundreds of germinating maples on my land, of which I only see 1 per year survive. When you coppice a tree, it already has supportive roots, and with minimal protection from browsing animals, many of the sprouts will survive.  In fact depending on what the planned use is, many coppice managers will thin the sprouts to the best 1-3.

The thickness of the wood depends on the length of the rotation. For basket-weaving, they coppice every year or two because thin is what they want.  In North America, we see firewood as something we have to split, but on my farm, we consider any wood larger than 3 inches to be firewood. We often have tree branches come down in windstorms, and we cut the big end into stove lengths, until it's about 3 inches and then the smaller part goes through the chipper to make animal bedding. We use a Pacific Energy woodstove. We're in a forest fire ecosystem, so keeping small branches cleaned up is a safety measure.

Most coppice systems that I've read about, plan the harvest for high-value products such as poles for building with, and any bits that have flaws become firewood. There are many ecological reasons for this approach. Industrial forestry with monocultures and large clear-cuts need to be re-thought, just as Industrial Agriculture does.

Eric Hanson wrote:When I proposed my 1 acre woodlot I did so with the understanding that it would be for firewood which after all is one activity that most consumed wood and therefore would be ameliorated by coppicing.

But given the quantity of firewood that this lot would eventually produce, I was thinking about other functions.

Off hand I have two, maybe three additional functions that could come from this lot after a time.

Exactly, Eric! This is sounding much more like a "food/fuel forest. Saving the high quality wood from long rotation coppices for lumber sounds wonderful. When you cut the wood that's large enough for lumber, there will still be mill-waste for mushrooms, and often some branches that are large enough for firewood. We took down a tree that was leaning in a direction that made it hazardous. My neighbor milled 3 straight sections of the trunk into a bunch of 4x4's, 2x6's and 1x 4-6", all about 10 ft long. I got a bunch of kindling out of the scraps. We'd already turned the top of the tree into firewood and animal bedding.  The curved bottom section is large enough to make some firewood out of when Hubby gets around to it. That tree was not a species that would put out shoots, but if you plant species that do, there are plenty of options to look forward to!

I’ve pollarded a few red maples high to prevent livestock damage.  Regrowth appears good.  I plan to use them mostly as fodder (not horses) and biochar material.

Melissa Taibi wrote:How long, would you suppose, for a coppiced black locust to produce poles suitable for fence posts?

So much depends. How fast does it grow on your site? There's no constant to apply.  If I had to throw out a number, I would say 8 years, but that's a wag ;)

Row Morgan wrote:I'm not sure if I understand the benefit here, wouldn't the wood be thin? For a RMH, maybe that is good. I don't use one.
I've seen coppiced fruit trees near the University of Washington, and I thought that was cool!

Other people do use them. I can't grow jackfruit where I am, doesn't make them unproductive where they will grow.

Melissa Taibi wrote:How long, would you suppose, for a coppiced black locust to produce poles suitable for fence posts?

One of the variables to consider in the “how fast” quandary has to do with how big the tree was when you coppiced it, and what time of year….  I think about how much life (as sap) that tree sent down to the roots for winter storage.  That’s a good estimate how much it is going to try to send back up in spring as water sprouts.  If you coppiced it in summer, not much went to the roots for winter, and there won’t be much growth that first season, compared to the same tree coppiced in winter.

Maybe you could get more growth on your future posts in a season, if there were fewer on the tree.  That could be a fun experiment!

Here is an example of a mulberry that has been subjected to my amateur pollarding and shaping.
Most of the growth is new this year

Melissa Taibi wrote:How long, would you suppose, for a coppiced black locust to produce poles suitable for fence posts?

The black locust sprouts in my back yard were quite small when we moved here less than five years ago.  Some of them are big enough now to make fence posts.

I think I'm going to have to get the Coppice Agroforestry book....

We have a small pasture, about an acre and a half.  There are already a few trees around the edges, and some brush, plus probably another half an acre of trees in our yard.  If I planted, and pollarded, the pasture, I wonder how much firewood I could expect to take off of that land annually?  And how much would it reduce the number of sheep we could carry on the same land?

I have a low, wet area of about 3 acres on the farm. It is loaded with tallow trees and I have been trying to decide what to do with them. About two years ago I cut down several to use in a hugle. Last week I passed by there and was surprised to see they had sprouted and the new growth was up to 4 inches in diameter, Perfect for firewood that doesn't need splitting. Not the best firewood but considering how fast it regrows and considering that it doesn't need splitting, and cuts easily, it is well worth the effort to gather it, especially if it were used in a RMH.

The tallow tree seems pretty obnoxious overall, so if you have them, you might as well enjoy some benefit.
Apparently they don't thrive in shade, so planting fast growing shade trees next to their coppiced stumps could be enough to replace them after a few cycles.

Kathleen Sanderson wrote:We have a small pasture, about an acre and a half.  There are already a few trees around the edges, and some brush, plus probably another half an acre of trees in our yard.  If I planted, and pollarded, the pasture, I wonder how much firewood I could expect to take off of that land annually?  And how much would it reduce the number of sheep we could carry on the same land?

There are sooooo... many variables, you'd almost have to start a new thread on this, but here are some considerations:
1. Would the sheep thrive better if they had shelter from the pollarded trees?
2. There are trees that make excellent "tree hay" for sheep - would those trees thrive in your ecosystem?
3. Is it so hot and/or droughty at times of your year, that the grass dies or become unpalatable - the shade from trees may actually help that.
4. One of the best ways to improve pasture is to paddock it, so that the sheep do like in the wild and keep moving - is this something you could do with your 1 1/2 acre pasture, so that you could harvest your pollarded trees without sheep underfoot?

So maybe you might find you can carry less sheep, or maybe more sheep, or maybe the same number but they grow faster or are healthier because of specific tree hay that helps them. The firewood is just the bonus that keeps other farm expenses reduced.

One of the biggest benefits of the "coppice plan" is that we can get away from the straight line thinking of most modern farms where they focus on a single product and follow many of the alternate successful patterns out there of stacking functions. One of my guiding principles is a statement Sepp Holzer said which was approximately that he'd *never* again let his farm's success depend on a single product.  

1. Would the sheep thrive better if they had shelter from the pollarded trees?  
             Possibly.  It can get hot here in the summer, and they might benefit from some shade, and we do get high winds sometimes.

2. There are trees that make excellent "tree hay" for sheep - would those trees thrive in your ecosystem?
              South-central Kentucky here, just about anything grows unless it's extremely sensitive to cold.  

3. Is it so hot and/or droughty at times of your year, that the grass dies or become unpalatable - the shade from trees may actually help that.  
               Again, south-central KY, with a humid climate.  It can get hot in the summer, but so far all it seems to do is make the grass grow faster!  

4. One of the best ways to improve pasture is to paddock it, so that the sheep do like in the wild and keep moving - is this something you could do with your 1 1/2 acre pasture, so that you could harvest your pollarded trees without sheep underfoot?
               I plan to use small paddocks and daily moves, although I think that having trees in the pasture might complicate moving the fencing around (I have electronet fencing).  I'll have to think about how to simplify the fence situation.

If you’re thinking of planting right in the sheep enclosure you might need to find a way to protect the trees from the sheep.  I know that my goats would eat the shoots, and even established pollarded trees would have their bark eaten.  

I wonder if sheep would do the same, even though as a child I had a friend with an orange orchard, and in late spring they would fence several sheep in the orchard to eat the spring grass.  (Maybe too many years with dairy goats?🤣)

Yeah, the trees would have to get big enough to not be attractive for chewing on.  Even sheep will chew bark off of young trees.  I remember a neighbor losing most of a young peach orchard (commercial, in the Willamette Valley) when he decided to put sheep in the orchard.  And I've had goats for almost forty years....The sheep I'm considering will browse, too (St. Croix or Katahdin).

I second that. St Croix = browsing = destruction. I think that sheep that look "goaty" - with hair instead of wool will be also goaty in behavior.
Having sheep and not fenced (yet) orchard has been nightmare for us for last year to a point that I was considering butchering them all and putting in the freezer, but I don't have a freezer - no electricity yet :(

I would nominate any of your local 'weed' trees for this role. In my neck of the woods , the tree you can cut and cut and cut and it just won't die is Manitoba Maple aka California Maple aka boxelder aka acer negundo.  Only ways I know to get rid of this tree is to cut it down and plant shade trees around it to shade it out (after cutting it down a few more times ), or hire a backhoe to dig it out.