forestry to grass ?

Livestockmad

My question is can forestry ever be brought back to grass or tillage?? I hear of some land in meath and other good land being planted can it ever be brought back??

merryberry

I think the Forestry Act 1946 prohibits this.

Livestockmad

merryberry wrote: »

I think the Forestry Act 1946 prohibits this.

Oh jesus so if one generation makes a slip up.. the rest are goosed??

Greengrass1

Livestockmad wrote: »

Oh jesus so if one generation makes a slip up.. the rest are goosed??

Cut them down and tell no one.

merryberry

Livestockmad wrote: »

Oh jesus so if one generation makes a slip up.. the rest are goosed??

I think this is the case but i do remember a farmer who had a young plantation returned to grass...his grant and premium received were obviously revoked but he was aware that this would be the case and he paid back the Forest Service.

Sam Kade

Not too sure but I think you can swap land for forestry. If a plot is harvested you can switch it to another plot of the same size.

Livestockmad

Also is it physically possible to bring it back after cutting when all the stumps remain?

crackcrack30

Wasn't the whole country a forest only a few hundred years ago..

merryberry

Livestockmad wrote: »

Also is it physically possible to bring it back after cutting when all the stumps remain?

From looking at reafforestation, a track machine 'windrows' the brash and stumps are left. Saplings planted between windrows.

I'm sure a bulldozer would make light work of conifer stumps...the roots spread out below the surface rather than penetrating deeply.

merryberry

crackcrack30 wrote: »

Wasn't the whole country a forest only a few hundred years ago..

yeah and the spanish armada sank them:D

Farmer Pudsey

Yes you can return forestry to other agriculture use but you must replace the forestry land elsewhere. If you had land that a predecessor had planted you could but land and afforest it in the west of Ireland and restore the land in Meath or elsewhere. However you will get no planting grant etc.

I think they cannot stop you using the land for agri however it cannot be used for SFP. DA or you cannot use it for Nitrates or stocking levels unless you replace it in the forestry system

tomwaterford

only place I ever seen this done was 4 - 5 years ago...otherside of mountain to me!!
flatish land....took a lot of work reseeded and everything...last two years beginning to overgrow with rushes

it may have been planted for a reason OP

blue5000

Tom has a good point, between open drains and mounding the water table drops, also trees use a lot of water with transpiration. So land that was wet before planting can look quite dry after a few years in trees. There are some old threads on it here if you do a search.

As an old man around here says 'If you hate your relations, plant your land with trees'.

Reggie.

Imagine all the roots that would have to be pulled out. We did something like this to an acre of ground a few years ago and it took a 12 ton track machine a good week to Greg the land sorted

tomwaterford

Reggie. wrote: »

Imagine all the roots that would have to be pulled out. We did something like this to an acre of ground a few years ago and it took a 12 ton track machine a good week to Greg the land sorted

there is a crowd in wexford (advertised on donedeal)...I think will mulch the whole lot for e150 an acre...
wheather it would ever pay or not is another thing

Reggie.

tomwaterford wrote: »

there is a crowd in wexford (advertised on donedeal)...I think will mulch the whole lot for e150 an acre...
wheather it would ever pay or not is another thing

Still be lumps of roots about the place I bet. Seen that crowd before alright

tomwaterford

Reggie. wrote: »

Still be lumps of roots about the place I bet. Seen that crowd before alright

oh...that is a pity...the video on the add was very misleading :mad::mad:

gozunda

Livestockmad wrote: »

Oh jesus so if one generation makes a slip up.. the rest are goosed??

Livestockmad...
Look at it another way. Forestry can be an asset whether or land unusable for other things or otherwise. Trees are a crop like any other. You can havest the crop and achieve a return. Not everywhere here is suited to ranching ;-]

paddysdream

Neighbour returned(good) land to tillage from 10 year old plus plantations of christmas trees.

Large scale job(200 to 300 acres) and as far as I could see,it wasn't a simple job.Don't know the specifics as just saw what you do from looking over the ditch!
They tried cutting,dozer,track machine etc.Mulcher worked for a while chopping them up to draw away but the clay in the roots defeated it eventually.Even burning the heaps seemed to not be a sucess.

The land seems to be back growing good crops of both winter and spring corn,oilseed rape etc.

But large areas(1 acre plus) covered in piled up heaps of roots,branches and general sh**e.

Livestockmad

If some one had land planted. . Could I buy it and remove the trees and plant on a different part of my farm?

Farmer Pudsey

Reggie. wrote: »

Still be lumps of roots about the place I bet. Seen that crowd before alright

I taught that this used to work. Are the wexford lads using it off the back of a tractor. I saw an article in the Farmers Journal 5+ years ago a contractor was using a 20ton track machine with a flail head it mulched down scrup(trees about 8'' in diameter stumps etc.). However he was charging 600/acre. land seemed perfect. I think land was tilled at that it was a case of in with grass seed. However you had to keep sprayed with a brushwood killer

gozunda wrote: »

Livestockmad...
Look at it another way. Forestry can be an asset whether or land unusable for other things or otherwise. Trees are a crop like any other. You can havest the crop and achieve a return. Not everywhere here is suited to ranching ;-]

I sometimes wonder about forrestry after first crop when you replant will second crop preform as well. Land will be at way lower P+K levels. In Ireland we seem to be getting first crop fully mature after 40-50 years. Accross Europe crops take 80-200 years. As we deplete land of P+K wil;l crop intervals increase???

paddysdream wrote: »

Neighbour returned(good) land to tillage from 10 year old plus plantations of christmas trees.

Large scale job(200 to 300 acres) and as far as I could see,it wasn't a simple job.Don't know the specifics as just saw what you do from looking over the ditch!
They tried cutting,dozer,track machine etc.Mulcher worked for a while chopping them up to draw away but the clay in the roots defeated it eventually.Even burning the heaps seemed to not be a sucess.

The land seems to be back growing good crops of both winter and spring corn,oilseed rape etc.

But large areas(1 acre plus) covered in piled up heaps of roots,branches and general sh**e.

Christmas tree are not treated as forestry they are a crop. No forestry premium can be drawn for them ergo no issue with returnig land to ordinary agriculture. One acre out of 2-300 is acceptable for waste. Over time it may be able to be burned down. Biggest issue I have with reclaimed land from scrub/forestry is depletion of P+K. I have seen a few places taht were reclaimed using a bull dozer and track machine. Scrub was heaped and burned. Land looks very hungry as if P+K is depleated. This is why I think thatmulching is a good option if it works you are more than likly returning 1-200 euro/acre of P+K into soil that will be released over years.

Livestockmad wrote: »

If some one had land planted. . Could I buy it and remove the trees and plant on a different part of my farm?

My understanding is yes you can

arctictree

Is this why land that is/was planted seems to change hands for very little?

Farmer Pudsey

arctictree wrote: »

Is this why land that is/was planted seems to change hands for very little?

Combination of reasons. First a lot of lads that most planted land were single eldery farmers with poorish land. If they died it may well be that with no will land has to be sold as those that inherit have little or no interest in retaining forestry and all have to agree to retain.

Next is that premium is at a high rate to farmers that non farmers. If Premiums have ran out or are nearly ran out. There is limited income from thois forest/land until clearfelling which may be 20 years away or more. So you have to be willing to tie money up longterm. While forestry income is tax free there is a tax limit of 80K. While this may seem substancial if you wanted to clearfell a large area you might have to do over 5+ years. You then have to replant lanf and wait 20+ years for any income and 40+ years to clerarfell again.

I think income is subject to PRSI not sure about USC.

If you bought 50 acres of 20 year old forestry at 5K/acre you have 250K tied up for 20 years. What will it be worth, I think replanting costs are 2-3K/acre. It is a really long term investment.

gozunda

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I sometimes wonder about forrestry after first crop when you replant will second crop preform as well. Land will be at way lower P+K levels. In Ireland we seem to be getting first crop fully mature after 40-50 years. Accross Europe crops take 80-200 years. As we deplete land of P+K wil;l crop intervals increase??

From my own experience there is a distinct difference between broadleaves and conifers plantations.

Broadleaves put a lot of biomas / nutrients back into the soil. Areas of rainforest for example are used primarily for this reason and ironically it is the type of agriculture use that follows that often tenders the soil nutrient poor. In Ireland soil in broadleaf forests is generally of good nutrient status.

Conifers tend to be planted in poorer areas with already acidic soils. It is recommended to have an ongoing programme of fertliser applications for such plantations. However conifers don't necessarily help the soil as the foliage tends to acidify the soil.

Where I see conifers planted - I generally expect that the soils were poor previously.

Crop intervals I believe are more to do with our temperate climate. We don't have the severe weather and growth checks that other European countries experience. I reckon as long as soil nutrient status is maintained in as much the way as any other crop, crop intervals will stay much the same. That is presuming we dont get more winters like this one.

Farmer Pudsey

Gozunda

Whay would the cost/acre of nutrients in a conifer plantation cost/year. I will not even go into the planting of Broad leaves on goo land economic suscide. Oak/Beech 100 years + before return and while ash is a quicker return, ash die back has put paid to that

gozunda

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Gozunda

Whay would the cost/acre of nutrients in a conifer plantation cost/year. I will not even go into the planting of Broad leaves on goo land economic suscide. Oak/Beech 100 years + before return and while ash is a quicker return, ash die back has put paid to that

Conifers

Without a soil test probably not accurate but average of 300kg /ha of compound fertiliser eg 18:6:12 or 10:1020 priced accordingly.

Though may not be needed on an annual basis depending on growth stage of planting. Whether just established, growing or closed canopy.

Rock phosphate and urea are recommended for certain soil types to ensue good growth rates. Again based on soil test.

Farmer Pudsey

gozunda wrote: »

Conifers

Without a soil test probably not accurate but average of 300kg /ha of compound fertiliser eg 18:6:12 or 10:1020 priced accordingly.

Though may not be needed on an annual basis depending on growth stage of planting. Whether just established, growing or closed canopy.

Rock phosphate and urea are recommended for certain soil types to ensue good growth rates. Again based on soil test.

120-150 euro/ acre

gozunda

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

120-150 euro/ acre

Yes that's about right at current prices but again go for soil test as some soils may be very nutrient poor.

Farmer Pudsey

gozunda wrote: »

Yes that's about right at current prices but again go for soil test as some soils may be very nutrient poor.

This could really slow down the growth of forestry on replanting. Even assuming only doing it every second year over a 40 year span it is 3K/acre. Really changes the economics of Forestry. Assuming a clear fell income of 8K/acre and replanting of 2.5K/acre any income from thining over the lifetime of a forest will be used up in fertlizer, thining and other costs. So real income is 5K over 40 years or 125/acre:eek:. And that is on average-good quality forestry type land.

gozunda

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

This could really slow down the growth of forestry on replanting. Even assuming only doing it every second year over a 40 year span it is 3K/acre. Really changes the economics of Forestry. Assuming a clear fell income of 8K/acre and replanting of 2.5K/acre any income from thining over the lifetime of a forest will be used up in fertlizer, thining and other costs. So real income is 5K over 40 years or 125/acre:eek:. And that is on average-good quality forestry type land.

Again back to soil testing. application is dependant on a number of factors including nutrient status and growth stage so not necessarily on a repeating cycle like every two years,

Of interest where the figure of 3K/acre?

Farmer Pudsey

gozunda wrote: »

Again back to soil testing. application is dependant on a number of factors including nutrient status and growth stage so not necessarily on a repeating cycle like every two years,

Of interest where the figure of 3K/acre?

I am assuming that you fertlizer ever second year over a 40 year growth period. So [EMAIL="20@6bags/acre"]20@6bags/acre[/EMAIL] is 150/year. I would presume that land that has a crop of trees taken will have a lower fertility level than virgin land. This would equate to 3k over a 40 year growth period.

gozunda

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I am assuming that you fertlizer ever second year over a 40 year growth period. So [EMAIL="20@6bags/acre"]20@6bags/acre[/EMAIL] is 150/year. I would presume that land that has a crop of trees taken will have a lower fertility level than virgin land. This would equate to 3k over a 40 year growth period.

Ah ok get you. Not too sure about the 'email' :-) But not at every two years - again depends on nutrients and growth cycle to endure optimum growth. I know that there are several state plantations that have failed to achieve closed canopy growth due to pull backs on fertiliser applications.

paddysdream

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I taught that this used to work. Are the wexford lads using it off the back of a tractor. I saw an article in the Farmers Journal 5+ years ago a contractor was using a 20ton track machine with a flail head it mulched down scrup(trees about 8'' in diameter stumps etc.). However he was charging 600/acre. land seemed perfect. I think land was tilled at that it was a case of in with grass seed. However you had to keep sprayed with a brushwood killer



I sometimes wonder about forrestry after first crop when you replant will second crop preform as well. Land will be at way lower P+K levels. In Ireland we seem to be getting first crop fully mature after 40-50 years. Accross Europe crops take 80-200 years. As we deplete land of P+K wil;l crop intervals increase???



Christmas tree are not treated as forestry they are a crop. No forestry premium can be drawn for them ergo no issue with returnig land to ordinary agriculture. One acre out of 2-300 is acceptable for waste. Over time it may be able to be burned down. Biggest issue I have with reclaimed land from scrub/forestry is depletion of P+K. I have seen a few places taht were reclaimed using a bull dozer and track machine. Scrub was heaped and burned. Land looks very hungry as if P+K is depleated. This is why I think thatmulching is a good option if it works you are more than likly returning 1-200 euro/acre of P+K into soil that will be released over years.



My understanding is yes you can

Meant a number of piles throughout the farm of that size ,not just one.
To me the sheer amount of material seemed to be the biggest problem(apart from cost of course)

The mulching was for (I think) a power plant or something similar as there was a large mulching machine there for a while and artic's drawing away the end product but think the amount of soil contamination was an issue.

Farmer Pudsey

paddysdream wrote: »

Meant a number of piles throughout the farm of that size ,not just one.
To me the sheer amount of material seemed to be the biggest problem(apart from cost of course)

The mulching was for (I think) a power plant or something similar as there was a large mulching machine there for a while and artic's drawing away the end product but think the amount of soil contamination was an issue.

When them rooys dry out a match and a few gallons of diesel on bonfire night.

F.D

We have taken back around 50 acres of land planted with trees the trees were about 3 - 6 years planted, all premiums had to be paid back, youngest trees were flailed above ground and rotovated and land was ploughed and sowed
older trees were pulled out of it with a track machne, roots came up aswell and piled and burned, land took a lot of levelling due to the shores etc they cut into it when planting.
To us the land is of more value for cattle believe it or not, from the first year we inherited it the preimums dropped every year due to budget cuts then, the USC was added to it, what ever about beef/grain/milk dropping and been able to change your system,rent the land etc with trees you cannot, and like stated earlier, the sums just do not add up after the preimums stop coming

Trees have a place but the whole monoculture system been promoted and people just planting them and shutting the gate is going to be the biggest downfall of any crop making a return in the future

By the way once a plantation passes 9 years old the land is deemed as forestry forever and has to be replanted on clearfell

razor8

Is that the case even with conifers?

If forest that has just been clear felled changes hands/owners is their still an obligation to replant.

rangler1

razor8 wrote: »

Is that the case even with conifers?

If forest that has just been clear felled changes hands/owners is their still an obligation to replant.

Every clear fell has to be replaced, probably the original owners obligation to replant somewhere else......a person would be foolish to buy such a place without finding out who was responsible for replanting

Buford T. Justice XIX

razor8 wrote: »

Is that the case even with conifers?

If forest that has just been clear felled changes hands/owners is their still an obligation to replant.

Yeah, old forestry land has to be replanted, that was a condition of the forestry grants at the time.

New land planted these days doesn't have that obligation any more, I believe.

razor8

rangler1 wrote: »

Every clear fell has to be replaced, probably the original owners obligation to replant somewhere else......a person would be foolish to buy such a place without finding out who was responsible for replanting

no one seems to know!