Oak Plantation Value?

locky76

Is an oak plantation worth anything, i looked at a small forest with 2 acres of oak planted 12 years ago.
What value does the oak add to the whole package?
It was inter planted with scots pine, the scots pine has a high failure rate for this plantation (90%).
Anyway given that oak won't be harvested for another 90-100 years what do ye think it's worth?
It'll only be worth eight years of grant and an odd bit of thinning to me and maybe interplanting with spruce as well.
All help/advice etc. greatly appreciated.

blue5000

locky76 wrote: »

Is an oak plantation worth anything, i looked at a small forest with 2 acres of oak planted 12 years ago.
What value does the oak add to the whole package?
It was inter planted with scots pine, the scots pine has a high failure rate for this plantation (90%).
Anyway given that oak won't be harvested for another 90-100 years what do ye think it's worth?
It'll only be worth eight years of grant and an odd bit of thinning to me and maybe interplanting with spruce as well.
All help/advice etc. greatly appreciated.

Don't mean to be a smart arze but I think you've answered this already, I suppose you could ad 5k/acre for the land for someone's grandchild. The only other future value it might have is as recreation or carbon credits.

greenfingers89

not claiming to be an expert but the going rate for a few of the investment companies is usually around €1200-1500/acre

i def wouldnt underplant with spruce, maybe ash or birch

F.D

I wouldnt say it will be worth a whole lot, We have 6 acres planted with a mix of Oak and japaneese larch, planted 4-5 years ago before we got the land, was thinking of getting rid of it and paying back the grant for the exact reason stated earlier, 80-100 yrs to get a crop off it plus the grant only lasting 20 yrs, but lately i was thinking if nothing else between the larch and the oak thinnings it would probably keep the family housholds going in firewood in the future and any any sales of bigger thinnings would bring in a few pound, but i cant see it ever making a fortune in my father or my own lifetime, but if it saves buying oil and turf that cost can be factored in aswell, also i think it will help in the sfp in years to come by having a green area so to speak

Oldtree

It is a pity that we here in ireland are only set up to think in the short term for financial results from our forests, rather than for the benifit of our own future generations.

greenfingers89

Oldtree wrote: »

It is a pity that we here in ireland are only set up to think in the short term for financial results from our forests, rather than for the benifit of our own future generations.

thats all well BUT if you are planting good quality land (which oak requires) then you need to think long and hard if its going to mean less productive ground on a farm.....i think its 100% correct to properly scrutinise the financial implications otherwise future generations could have a lot more worries and debts left to them as well as a few acres of oak, they mightnt be so thankful afterall

in an ideal world the grant payments for oak should be far more generous to reflect the quality of ground being used for its establishment

Oldtree

Thats kinda what I'm talking about.

If worries and debt are the current issue and what will be left over after the current manager has passed on, then that manager has failed and then like any business it will go to the wall and be sold off to cover that debt. If the linage is important then so should planting for the future. I really dont see much money being made in cattle or sheep and see no future in it, nor do I see a future in the short term planting of sitka for immediate results.

It takes 300 years to farm oak properly and that is the timeframe that we should be thinking of, not just 1 or 2 but many generations ahead. If the english can do it why cant we? It is an investment in the future of that land.

yes grant aid can kick start programmes but imo grant aid is not a sustainable way forward, nor the sort of mind set we need for generational planting.

F.D

no one can afford to leave land locked for 300 years for any reason, productive land is going to have to be farmed to feed the world, and trees have ther place in unproductive areas, totally agree with you on the stika as for oaks i think more insentive should have been given for planting 0.5 - 1 acre in every farm rather than trying to persue people to commit to planting bigger acerages, which is harder to do, i think every one would have planted a small area with native trees even if the money for doing so was not massive, proplem with reps was all the ones planted in the hedge rows and middle of the field have been dug up or cut out since the scheme stopped, where as if there had to be a scheme for 20 yrs for a small cluster somewhere it would have had longer term results

dipper.meath16

@ F.D trees have there place in productive land to, thats a pretty silly statment.. if its money your after in trees, prob best of with a commerical species, like sitka, or you could plant willow, its harvested every couple of years for wood chip, or ash, it coppices well!
To get good value out of oak, it will need to skip a generation of family, and need good pruning in the meantime to ensure a high quality crop, with very little branching on stem to be worth money!

F.D

Its not a silly statment at all people who own land want to make it earn money, and if timber was that profitable every one would have there field planted, even the original question and answers proves this, if the same ground was green grass it would be 7-10 k in value per acre, locky if you do happen to get a proper value please let us know,
I agree willow could be an option and if it does not work out the system can be changed to something else, anyway i'm not going to get into an argument and steer it away from the question asked

dipper.meath16

Neither do i, a plantation is an investment, where as a field is a living to a farmer, thats why the value would be so high, I just think "productive land is going to have to be farmed to feed the world, and trees have ther place in unproductive areas" was a little old fashioned! if you want trees to do well and be worth something, they to need good land!

Oldtree

There are not that many trees bounding fields here in south mayo and little left to grow other than the odd hawthorn. I have discussed this with local farmers and they were of the view that trees take up nutrients and space that could be put to grass thus decreasing the productivity of the field. This is not an uncommon view and has not been challanged till recently.

the recent studies from the UK (last 10 years or so that I cannot pin down at the moment) give a different result. The shelter from the additional trees increases the weight of the animals thus increasing profit. As well as leaf litter improving the structure of the soil.

As regards the sustainability of farming at the moment, ear to the ground said the other day that the grant payments represented the profit for many/most (cant remember the exact word) farms. Where are these businesses going to be soon when the EU level paymenta across the EU. These farms are just breaking even, if the payments are reduced what then?

Perhaps there is a future in payments (non grants) for carbon sequestering combined with biomass production and anerobic digesters, even a field that is let go sequesters 3 tonnes of carbon per acre a year

greenfingers89

had an offer on 27 acres of hardwood today,
-all in one block with good access, 12 years old,
-consists of 22 acre ash (YC 12)...3 acres oak(YC 6)...2 acres sycamore (YC 10)....all pure not mixed,
-all have been pruned once and are doing well

€30,000 + approx 60% of remaining grants (€22,000)

total offer .....€52,000

blue5000

Oldtree wrote: »

Thats kinda what I'm talking about.

If worries and debt are the current issue and what will be left over after the current manager has passed on, then that manager has failed and then like any business it will go to the wall and be sold off to cover that debt. If the linage is important then so should planting for the future. I really dont see much money being made in cattle or sheep and see no future in it, nor do I see a future in the short term planting of sitka for immediate results.

It takes 300 years to farm oak properly and that is the timeframe that we should be thinking of, not just 1 or 2 but many generations ahead. If the english can do it why cant we? It is an investment in the future of that land.

yes grant aid can kick start programmes but imo grant aid is not a sustainable way forward, nor the sort of mind set we need for generational planting.

Ahhheemm Are these the same english who cleared all the decent oak in Ireland to build warships?:(

Birdnuts

On the subject of timeframes for oak - I know of an oak plantation near here growing at 800ft surrounded by a shelterbelt of mixed Larch and Spruce. This plantation is about 15 years old now and the trees are roughly 13-15ft high. Given what I hear about this species I was suprised at how advanced the trees were with a decent girth of trunk too. I'm not a forestry expert(just have an interest in the area) so I'm wondering is this an impressive rate of growth for this species??

PS: I'm also wondering is the fact that forestry in this country is still seen as something to do with sites with sub-standard soils, exposures etc. account for the perception about growth rates of species like oak??

PMU

greenfingers89 wrote: »

had an offer on 27 acres of hardwood today,
-all in one block with good access, 12 years old,
-consists of 22 acre ash (YC 12)...3 acres oak(YC 6)...2 acres sycamore (YC 10)....all pure not mixed,
-all have been pruned once and are doing well

€30,000 + approx 60% of remaining grants (€22,000)

total offer .....€52,000

what part of the country are you in?

Oldtree

blue5000 wrote: »

Ahhheemm Are these the same english who cleared all the decent oak in Ireland to build warships?:(

very helpful comment although after I typed the words "english" i guessed that would get a reply of that sort, its easy to forget that the landlords agents were irish if you are that way inclined! It was an example of a successful method, i could well have mentioned other nationalaties but this is the one i am most familier with. :rolleyes:

greenfingers89

PMU wrote: »

what part of the country are you in?

i made a point of not saying where abouts, i provided yield class so it could be compared if anyone on boards wants...
i wouldnt dream of saying the location (its not my forest)

NancyG

Just wondering if you do (or did) take up that offer - what are you planning to do with the land after all the trees are harvested? Can I assume that you are confined to reafforestation of some sort or is it possible to revert/return the land to 'mainstream farming'. ie., grazing or tillage??

greenfingers89 wrote: »

had an offer on 27 acres of hardwood today,
-all in one block with good access, 12 years old,
-consists of 22 acre ash (YC 12)...3 acres oak(YC 6)...2 acres sycamore (YC 10)....all pure not mixed,
-all have been pruned once and are doing well

€30,000 + approx 60% of remaining grants (€22,000)

total offer .....€52,000

greenfingers89

NancyG wrote: »

Just wondering if you do (or did) take up that offer - what are you planning to do with the land after all the trees are harvested? Can I assume that you are confined to reafforestation of some sort or is it possible to revert/return the land to 'mainstream farming'. ie., grazing or tillage??

no it wasn't sold after, not solely down to price though.
the land has to be replanted, and even if it didnt it would be doubtful whether it would make sense to reclaim it. a large amount of decent hardwood sites wont be cleared like conifers are in the future, in my opinion. i think they will mostly be managed as continuous cover forests, basically taking a regular but relatively small amount out whilst replanting or simply allowing coppicing or natural regeneration. thus providing a far more regular, predictable and sustainable income