# To log or not to log?



## Dustan Grieshop (Oct 29, 2019)

My property has a bunch of thorny locust, black walnuts mulberry and cottonwood trees. The black walnuts seem to prevail. I was told last year by someone last year who has a lot of knowledge of habitat management that I should have every black walnut removed. The problem is that the black walnut trees are only 12-14” diameter on average (not vernier) and I was told by a logger last year that having them logged would not yield any cash at this point. He even thought it may cost me a bit. My goal is better deer bedding cover but I want to make sure this will give me the results I seek before cutting down trees that could potentially yield some decent cash in 10-15 years. Had a state forester out last year and he told me that cutting the walnuts was a bad idea but was not convincing on the reasons why other then saying I “will not get the desired results”. Does the forester kind of have to say that? Just looking for some input or ideas?


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

How many acres?
Walnuts have value. In your case in time.
If having some in the future is not interesting to you , cut them.
I'd be delighted with a few. But a solid stand of older (or any age really) walnut is not ideal habitat for deer by a long stretch...

Some of your walnuts downed with attempt to keep trunks off the ground during a dropping or thinning operation could add structure.
A half acre (lets say you have ten acres of them) Jack-strawed would add a lot of structure...
In the right location they might temp deer to bed.


----------



## Tilden Hunter (Jun 14, 2018)

To me the question seems to be cash in 10 - 15 years, or better deer hunting in 5. Only you can make that call.


----------



## Dustan Grieshop (Oct 29, 2019)

My 80 is the center block....not a lot of trees in general but I am working on adding as many as possible. The trees along the creeks range from 50 to 75% walnuts depending on the area. The 5 acre wood lot in the center has some oaks which I would definitely keep. It is probably closer to 50% walnuts. Before I log anything it will probably be best to get rid of any bush honeysuckle correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

It's your place....Honeysuckle is no enemy of deer.

I really like all the edges (edge habitat with inner and outer pinch points along the many edges too) in your aerial view.


----------



## Thirty pointer (Jan 1, 2015)

Dam leave the walnut let them get 16 - 18 in lease some land and retire young .


----------



## grapestomper (Jan 9, 2012)

You could cut a few small areas and plant a whole bunch of new trees. 
Or you could cut one small area and plant it and then in 5 years cut another, plant it etc.
I would let the walnut grow.


----------



## smith34 (Feb 2, 2009)

Tilden Hunter said:


> To me the question seems to be cash in 10 - 15 years, or better deer hunting in 5. Only you can make that call.


This one nails it! They are worth money now. They will likely be worth more money later (depending on markets, storm damage, pests or diseases, etc). Only you can decide on the compromise of financial value vs habitat and hunting value. If you are 100% habitat driven, then cut to save you lost time. If you like the thought of more money in the pocket at the expense of bettering your habitat, then wait. There is no black and white answer, that’s something only you can weigh out.
Ps, if someone is telling you it may cost you money to remove them now, and you have what you say you do, I would suggest talking to another person. If you can produce 50-14” clean walnuts, it will more than cover logging and trucking expenses.


----------



## Joel/AK (Jan 12, 2013)

The hardwood cutters that did our property last year said walnut is the hottest thing. Best money. 

To bad we didn't have any...lol


----------



## swampstalker (Jan 4, 2005)

Like others said it’s your property. I wouldn’t cut them though. We have 20 acres that has 4 acres of walnuts and they are around 70-80’ tall and all under them is 6-8’ tall brush that you can’t see 20’ through. They bed an there and travel between properties. I would do like you said and plant lots more trees for wildlife. But I’d be out there trimming those walnuts up to make them more profitable when the time comes to log them.


----------



## 2stix-and-a-string (Feb 11, 2020)

Dustan Grieshop said:


> My property has a bunch of thorny locust, black walnuts mulberry and cottonwood trees. The black walnuts seem to prevail. I was told last year by someone last year who has a lot of knowledge of habitat management that I should have every black walnut removed. The problem is that the black walnut trees are only 12-14” diameter on average (not vernier) and I was told by a logger last year that having them logged would not yield any cash at this point. He even thought it may cost me a bit. My goal is better deer bedding cover but I want to make sure this will give me the results I seek before cutting down trees that could potentially yield some decent cash in 10-15 years. Had a state forester out last year and he told me that cutting the walnuts was a bad idea but was not convincing on the reasons why other then saying I “will not get the desired results”. Does the forester kind of have to say that? Just looking for some input or ideas?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


Leave the walnut.....don’t be foolish!
Cut everything else down.
2 years and it will be awesome, plus walnuts will grow faster.
Black locust will be so thick and thorny after 5 years that you will not dare to walk through it....... but deer do.


----------



## Tilden Hunter (Jun 14, 2018)

Jeff Sturgis recommend against managing for timber in one breath, then advocates for managing for woody browse in the next. Maples managed for timber will have numerous seedlings that give the woody browse. I have to suspect this will happen for most hardwoods.


----------



## 2stix-and-a-string (Feb 11, 2020)

Tilden Hunter said:


> Jeff Sturgis recommend against managing for timber in one breath, then advocates for managing for woody browse in the next. Maples managed for timber will have numerous seedlings that give the woody browse. I have to suspect this will happen for most hardwoods.


Do what you want, it’s your land & $$$.
Seems logical to give it a 2 year try (cut everything but walnut), if after 2 years your not getting regeneration you want, then start thinning walnuts out. (Sunshine is the key)
Just saying it seems a bit risky to dive right into an opinion and wipe out “all” your $$$ trees and hope the opinion you followed is actually 100% true (cutting “all” walnut).
I guarantee you the black locust will come back thick and thorny though because I have done it (20” diameter monsters on my land I cut 5 years ago).
That big black locust is worth $$$ too. Makes great decking boards. It will last forever and looks awesome!! Don’t let anyone tell you different!
Big black locust that is straight is actually very rare.


----------

