gobbler,

You know I am fan of habitat management.....especially longleaf and burning!

But, what can we, the Public, do to promote it with the land/timber companies here in SE AL?
From what I understand, the pulp mills do not want timber that has been burned and is scarred with carbon deposits. That really puts a quietus on the burning! Heck, the market will barely sustain plantation thinning!

We were in Gatlinburg this weekend and I stumbled on a piece of trivia related (Appalachians is still in the SE). The Great Smoky Mountains National Park was established about 80 years ago, following the almost complete logging of the entire area. There are only a few small pockets of old growth forest in the park. That means that the oldest trees you see there are around 80-90 years old.

Yep, I think it was owned by one person or company, might have been the Vanderbilt's. The big timber in the hard to get to areas was left because they couldn't handle it. Up until about 50 years ago after hill folks cut their timber they didn't think the land was worth paying taxes on so they sold it at a give away price or let it be sold for taxes.

Wow , that's amazing to think about just gave it away basically

be amazed then
I'm getting more into small game than deer, it's a lot less drama!

I'm seeing first hand how easy it is to bring quail back once quail habitat management is done. I also see first hand how deer and turkey populations are also responding positively.

It happened. Was a tract of several hundred acres on Bice Mt. ( eastern Madison Co.) that a fellow moved away and let it sell for taxes. It had some fine timber on it , he cut it and moved to Texas , so the story goes. Don't know the year prolly around WW II. Mountain land in our area was selling for less than $20 an acre as recently as the early 70's. Then came the deer and the rest is history. My father told me when he started working at age 20 or so he could buy an acre of mountain land a day with his pay and have $ left.

Sure would be nice if all hunters had this oppurtinuty. Why dont timber companies do controlled burning ? I don't see what it would hurt ?

Liability is one of the reasons, plus cost per acre to burn, potential of bugs in timber following the burn, char in diseased spots, and probably some more reasons. Easier to spray.

So the biggest reason liability , cost and bugs ? In this order ?

Char would be minimal though correct ?

I do hunt quail but was a wildlife researcher for my first 10 years of my career and quail was my primary species. I also manage a bunch of properties that have quail as one of their management objectives. The decline was slow and continues to this day, a few percent per year, same as all the grassland birds that need the same habitat - shrikes, kestrels, some sparrows, towhees, etc.



We have never had any issues selling timber of any sort with butt charring. And most of the timber we sell (pulp to sawlogs, hardwood and pine) has been burned recently

I have talked to some of the timber companies and like said above, they don't want the liability and risk of damage. Join the Alabama Prescribed Fire Council and try to promote burning in ay way you can is all I can say!

I guarantee if a char piece of wood goes into a pulp or sawmill yard and it is seen it will be either put back on the truck or the load will be turned around. A piece of char as big as a charcoal briquette will ruin a run of pulp. Most good loggers will leave it in the woods.

Well I have been selling burned wood for at least 20 years and have yet to have a load turned around!