Minimum commercially viable area to plant, maintain & harvest

In the wind

So looking at the overhead or planting, maintaining & harvesting forestry in Ireland what is the minimally commercial viable area to plant?

I'm think that committing to planting, maintaining & harvesting forestry on, say, one acre is not worth while due to concentrated costs of overheads but I'd like to understand what is the tipping point in terms of acreage?

also including the wood type - not sure how to factor that in either.

I await your collective expertise - thanks.:)

tabby aspreme

Would you be interested in doing the planting, thinning etc, yourself, you only need a Forester for the paper work.

In the wind

tabby aspreme wrote: »

Would you be interested in doing the planting, thinning etc, yourself, you only need a Forester for the paper work.

Maybe the thinning only by myself. Outsourcing all the rest. I think.

$kilkenny

After clearfelling a couple of small sites in the last year, a 1 to 2 hectare site minimum. Just thinking from how attractive a clearfell is to timber buyers and contractors, and this is only if you choose spruce for example, the 1 to 2 hectare sites yield a reasonable amount of timber to justify moving machines to doing the job. I would imagine it would be the same with the cultivation work for the planting of it also. Unless you had neighbours who also want to plant and harvest at the same time as you then it would make sense, there would be no minimum.

victor8600

It is your responsibility to protect the growing forest if you got the official grant. You can get a fencing grant, but it probably won't be enough to cover the cost of 1 hectare site. A small site has a larger fence perimeter to unit area proportion than a larger site of same shape, so for larger sites the fencing grant may cover the full cost.

Also you cannot plant the forest closer than 60m from houses:
https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/forestry-regs/

This may affect your choice of available sites and what proportion of the site can be forested.

victor8600

In the wind wrote: »

also including the wood type - not sure how to factor that in either.

I am not in expert in this, but it seems that Sitka Spruce is the most profitable.

However, I personally do not like the look of dense Spruce plantations. If you are doing it for ecological reasons, a mix of broadleaves and conifers planted more sparsely would look better and provide a more varied wildlife habitat. You get more money from the grant as well, but the commercial value of the mixed forest is probably not great.

In the wind

Thanks for the above $kilkenny & victor8600. So at least 1 hectare then. The site I have in mind is already partially fenced on one long side for cattle & more than 60m from any residence.

Once planted & harvested would the land require substantial reinstatement work to go back to say pasture or is it a one way ticket & I'd just need to replant. Would the same answer apply to both Spruce or the Broadleaf, Conifer mix model?

I'm obviously very new to this topic.
Thank again for your expertise.

Donald Trump

In the wind wrote: »

Thanks for the above $kilkenny & victor8600. So at least 1 hectare then. The site I have in mind is already partially fenced on one long side for cattle & more than 60m from any residence.

Once planted & harvested would the land require substantial reinstatement work to go back to say pasture or is it a one way ticket & I'd just need to replant. Would the same answer apply to both Spruce or the Broadleaf, Conifer mix model?

I'm obviously very new to this topic.
Thank again for your expertise.

Not an expert by any means, but from the little research I did previously it's effectively a one-way ticket.




My understanding is that you will need a licence to cut down those trees. Under current rules, a condition will be attached to that licence which is that you must replant. Technically you might be able to request to plant a different hectare somewhere else, but whether that will be allowed is not guaranteed as far as I know and I don't know how often it has happened.


What the rules will be like by the time you go to cut them down is anyone's guess.

In the wind

Donald Trump wrote: »

Not an expert by any means, but from the little research I did previously it's effectively a one-way ticket.




My understanding is that you will need a licence to cut down those trees. Under current rules, a condition will be attached to that licence which is that you must replant. Technically you might be able to request to plant a different hectare somewhere else, but whether that will be allowed is not guaranteed as far as I know and I don't know how often it has happened.


What the rules will be like by the time you go to cut them down is anyone's guess.

Hmm, interesting considering that like any farming enterprise it's for profit. If it's a one way ticket regardless of the benefits/entitlements that coaxed farmers into the forestry sector in the first may no longer exist or may be significantly less attractive. I think I'll drop a line to Coillte.

thanks POTUS.

tabby aspreme

What type of ground were you thinking of planting, that's often a deciding factor in what type of tree you plant, what's it being used for currently. Take a look at the Teagasc forestry website, it may be of some help.

In the wind

tabby aspreme wrote: »

What type of ground were you thinking of planting, that's often a deciding factor in what type of tree you plant, what's it being used for currently. Take a look at the Teagasc forestry website, it may be of some help.

Currently in pasture, sub optimal damp ground. Not marsh.