too late to plant?

crackcrack30

Awaiting grant approval for a small conifer and another broadleaf plantation, should be due anyday, should i put off planting until autumn?

cheers........

greenfingers89

no reason to unless the trees your getting are poor but if they're in cold storage should be no problem, i've another 150 acres to do and i reckon i'll be planting my last 40 in july

Oldtree

My beech his just started budbursting almost the last trees to do so. It is not reccomended to start planting trees after they have started functioning.

I worry that your trees will not be settled in when we get the spring winds. In addition if we get a good drop of rain at the same time the trees will shut down their root function to protect themselves, but the leaves will still transpire which can lead to the plant effectivly drying itself out.

While many keep planting at this time and beyond I would not do so and would wait till next year. The end of March is always my cut off point. Any benefit to a late planting will be offset by losses/damage.

The optimum time to have trees planted by is the end of Feburary, as after that point roots can grow.

greenfingers89

Oldtree wrote: »

It is not reccomended to start planting trees after they have started functioning.

Any benefit to a late planting will be offset by losses/damage.

plants in cold storage are not yet functioning.

a fairly strong statement that benefits WILL be offset,

i have to strongly disagree with this because it simply isnt true. for the last 20 years in particular there has been planting into early summer and very few problems in relation to losses have occured, problems are generally directly linked to site specifics more so than external factors in my experience. if i had a deep peat site to be planted i would wait until next year if it wasnt planted by now due to its vulnerbility to a dry spell

Oldtree

have a look here:

http://www.coford.ie/publications/cofordconnects/

Coford Reproductive Material Connects notes No. 6

Cold storage

Seedlings are sometimes placed in cold storage (Figure 4) to maintain the stock in a dormant state, and then dispatched for field planting when required. The advantages of cold storage are that the seedlings can be lifted when conditions in the nursery are favourable and used to extend the planting season when the planting of freshly lifted (nondormant) stock is not advised.

However, seedlings may deteriorate in cold storage, especially if lifted for storage at the wrong time or due to desiccation damage in the store (especially if storage bags are not properly sealed or have holes). Prolonged cold storage may also cause deterioration due to the depletion of food reserves. Some species, such as Douglas fir, noble fir (Abies procera Rehd.), beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and sycamore, are more sensitive to storage than others. Although cold storage may cause damage, sometimes killing the plants, the stock usually looks normal. The consequences of this damage will appear soon after planting. Physiological tests can be used to evaluate quality before planting (see below).

While it is preferable to use cold stored stock rather than freshly lifted stock for planting late in season (about mid- March to June), there are some drawbacks to planting at this time. Although usually dormant at the time of removal from cold storage, the plants will be released quickly from dormancy since ambient temperatures are likely to be higher then than earlier in the season. There may also be a higher probability of post-planting failures due to drought just after planting (dry weather frequently occurs during the April to June period). Newly planted stock may not have had sufficient time to initiate new roots (which absorb most water required) before the advent of the dry weather.

Finally, since cold stored stock is normally planted late in the season, this reduces the length of the growing season that the seedlings can exploit. Cold storage reduces first-year height growth in the field in larch more than in other species.

Also here for a concise newspaper article about the subject:

Especially popular, of course, with contractors, who can keep their planting teams working for many more months than was previously possible.

http://www.independent.ie/farming/planting-cold-stored-trees-in-dry-conditions-is-a-recipe-for-disaster-167627.html

imo you are doing a disservice to your clients by planting cold storage trees as late as July, whareas if it is a decision to plant your own trees at that time then that is up to you (or your client when fully informed).

greenfingers89

Oldtree wrote: »

imo you are doing a disservice to your clients by planting cold storage trees as late as July, whareas if it is a decision to plant your own trees at that time then that is up to you (or your client when fully informed).

i failed to find where it states that any benefits WILL be offset by losses in either of those links.

of course there are possibilites for things to go wrong, thats where using the head comes in.

the way the grant structure is set up doesnt allow for all trees to be planted in the space of 4 months. funding allocations simply dont allow that much flexibilty. i think the argument can be made that it would be a disservice to not plant if the conditions are right, delaying the planting for next year and potentially risking funding by waiting

of course there are massive financial issues for the landowner, more often than not the landowner will be pushing very hard to get a forestry payment as quickly as possible and they often are not willing to wait, it could mean they go to a different forester or company to do the job for them.

contractors also have to be considered, they cannot be expected to get all the work done in such a small period of time. so whats the solution? get them to buy twice as much machinery and take on staff with no forestry experience? then tell them they will have 4 months work instead of a more steady 7 or 8 months. machines lying idle for longer isnt very appetising for any man trying to keep up with payments.

should there be extra foresters taken on to oversee the extra work being done at the one time? and then lay these fellas off after 4 months? should the nurseries buy or lease extra lorries to keep up with extra deliveries?

i completely understand the landowner has to be top of the list of concerns BUT im sure you'll agree the extra costs involved in the above mentioned changes required to get all planting done in 4 months cannot be absorbed and therefore money becomes a big issue once again. i doubt the establishment grants are going to be increased any time soon (in fact they were cut drastically planting season before this)

unfortunately we dont live in a perfect world oldtree

its mentioned in 1 of your links about beech dying following late planting, now thats a prime example of the forester co cking it up. beech is a different kettle of fish and most half clever foresters wouldnt even consider planting it late as well as broadleaves in general apart from suitable sites. thats the key word, suitable.

it also mentioned that if trees do die in say a dryer patch then more often than not they arnt replaced until the 2nd or 3rd year. id seriously question this statement as well, maybe 10 years ago on tops of mountains this was done in a few sites but i dont think any forest service inspector would pass a form 3 on time if this was the practice. if the form 3 isnt paid on time that has obvious inplications for the forester or company. the responsibilty to have the site in good condition means high risks wont be taken by many people and these people wont be in business for long at this practice.

Oldtree

Thank you for your considered reply. There is much more information there now for the op to be able to make a decision, especially now with the specifics of your experience.

also see: "The Effects of Late Planting on Survival, Height Growth, and Vigor of Eastern White Pine"
for their notes on an actual experiment. From here:

http://www.rngr.net/publications/tpn/32-3

with the summary:

Summary

Two-year-old white pine seedlings were planted at 2-week intervals throughout the growing season on an old field in northern West Virginia. Cold storage of seedlings until the day of planting gave satisfactory survival for plantings made as late as mid-June. Late June, July, and early August plantings had significantly lower survival percentages. All seedlings went through a period of height growth regardless of how late in the season they were planted. Late July and August plantings, however, resulted in new growth that did not harden off sufficiently before the first fall frost. There was a consistent decrease in needle length with later planting dates. This was attributed to the lesser soil moisture and cooler weather during their period of growth. There was also a consistent and significant decrease in number of buds set for the later planting dates.

and lots more to study here:

http://www.rngr.net/search?SearchableText=cold+storage

greenfingers89

Oldtree wrote: »

Any benefit to a late planting will be offset by losses/damage.

extra links to do with other countries still dont back this up.

have no interest in disagreeing endlessly with you oldtree, you make valid points, i just thought they were a little misleading so i gave a different view. hopefully OP wont be too concerned if they trust their forester

Oldtree

IMO it is misleading to pretend that planting in July from cold storage is comparable to planting between November and February, and carrries no risk.

Your initial post implied no problem or risk to the op, whereas there clearly is, as stated on both the Irish COFORD site and by the actual experiment carried out in the US. I fail to see how you can find an appropiate experiment carried out in the US as invallid here.

from here:

http://www.coford.ie/publications/cofordconnects/

Reproductive Material No 2:

"Effect of Physiological Condition at Time of Lifting on Cold Storage Tolerance and Field Performance of Important Conifer and Broadleaf Species"

While the use of cold storage allows flexibility in scheduling lifting and planting operations, the physiological condition of seedlings may deteriorate during storage. This has been implicated in some plantation failures.

Much field planting in operational forestry in Ireland is undertaken from about March onward, which is outside the period recommended for most species (Figure 1). This may be a major contributing factor to the poor field performance of many species, leading to plantation failures in some cases (especially in beech and Douglas fir).

greenfingers89

responsibility lies with the company thats why i didnt raise concerns, but yes maybe i am being presumptious, not every company has a proven track record so better safe than sorry. would hate to think there are qualified foresters out there who dont spot unsuitable sites.

then again there are many "sales men" in the various companies acting as foresters but just not signing off on paperwork

still wouldnt get carried away with all these trials, whoever spent money proving beech wasnt suitable for late planting should have been fired ...waste of time and money. commercial plantations all over the country are perfect proof to me of late planting not causing any problems on suitable sites

Oldtree

greenfingers89 wrote: »

still wouldnt get carried away with all these trials, whoever spent money proving beech wasnt suitable for late planting should have been fired ...waste of time and money. commercial plantations all over the country are perfect proof to me of late planting not causing any problems on suitable sites

Agreed, I wouldnt get carried away either as your experience is just as valuable to me in the decision making process for the op or your customers to late plant from cold storage.

However these trials do serve as a warning of "if it goes wrong this is what can go wrong". Is there a liability issue built into contracts to replace losses in the first few years?

Also very valuable is informing the op of the "suitable sites" issue, which was not broached in your first post.

greenfingers89

Oldtree wrote: »

Is there a liability issue built into contracts to replace losses in the first few years?

Also very valuable is informing the op of the "suitable sites" issue, which was not broached in your first post.

grant is split 75% to 25%. the 25% is paid following satisfactory establishment after 4 years. basically at least 90% stocking spread throughout the site with good growth and healthy trees, along with various other requirements but they are the main ones. ...so if trees arnt replaced the comnpany risks not satisfying the 4 year requirements

regarding suitable sites im sure you've seen enough on this forum and your aware that most descriptions given about sites are "boggy" or "a bit wet but not bad" or "fairly good" etc so i would dive into a description here. without naming names i think OP should ensure they have chosen the right forestry company, hard to know the difference but one main thing which people dont pay enough attention to is the length of time they are in business instead of who talks more shi te to them and drinks more cups of tea with them