Introduction
The Woodland
Our present woodlands look as if they have been here "forever," when actually they are less than one hundred years old. Only our older residents have witnessed the dramatic change of open farmland of the early part of the 20th century to the dense, wooded growth we see today.
As our woodland becomes fractured with more housing developments, land management practices must change. Tree work has replaced field mowing, and although the arborist is quite knowledgeable in the care of trees around the home, little is known about the management of our woodlands. The relative youth of this woodland is providing the Arboretum with fertile ground for research and education.
For these reasons, Highstead has begun a long-term woodland demonstration, focusing on an appropriately sized wooded area, similar in size to the typical building lot of towns in the immediate area. In this way, the local landowner will be able to make an estimate on the viability of such a project on his/her own property.
Establishing Goals
The size of most properties in this area is insufficient for profitable timber or firewood production. Most landowners will be inspired to undertake such a project for aesthetic reasons, but as aesthetics are a personal determination, it is best to further define your objectives. Do you hope to attract a greater diversity of plants or wildlife? Would you like to remove or control invasive, non-native plants? Install a woodland path for contemplation, or simply take an active hand in the stewardship of your property? The more specifically you are able to define your goals, the easier it will be to determine the methods and resources to utilize. In advance of any action, two books worth reading are: Working with Your Woodland: A Landowner's Guide, by Mollie Beattie, Charles Thompson, and Lynn Levine, and The Woodlot Management Handbook, by Stewart Hills and Peter Mitchell.
Assessing the Site
Before beginning any property-based project, it is important to assess the site. First and foremost, know your boundaries. A good survey can go a long way in ensuring a peaceful coexistence with your neighbors. Transferring your site survey to graph paper, and locating major structures, will provide a basis for locating the most significant plant material. Be sure to walk the site in several seasons, in order to avoid inadvertently damaging or destroying any rare or unusual plants.
For the truly inspired, a complete stem map of the woody plants may be made, taking time to record the species, size, condition and location of each. Recording this information will be of great assistance when evaluating the site for removals or thinning, and for assessing the results of your management efforts.
The Demonstration
View a photo tour of the Highstead property
In preparing for this practical demonstration, the Arboretum contacted Harvard Forest in Petersham, Massachusetts. With the assistance of their foresters, a site was selected and a preliminary design for the demonstration was laid out. Two one-acre sites were chosen based on proximity to one another and the contrasting ages of plant material on each acre. Each has a uniform population in an undisturbed area on uniform soil. Each one-acre site was then divided in half for control purposes (managed v. unmanaged), and then all four of the resulting sites were bisected by deer fencing (see map). Plots A & B together represent an eighty year old woodland, while plots C & D are thirty years of age. This rough dating has been documented through aerial photographs on file at the State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Clues to the history of this area can be found in the stone walls which are still visible, suggesting that agricultural practices occurred on all four plots. More recently on C & D, which still show the presence of red cedar trees, an early successional plant. These visual clues to the history and age of your woodland can be of great assistance in the evaluation of your site.
In laying out the managed plots, a north to south axis was intentionally selected. With this orientation, any additional light received in a plot due to tree removals will benefit the plot from which the trees were removed. We expect this opening of the canopy to encourage both new seedlings and stump sprouts. This should occur to an even greater extent in the fenced areas, where the plant material will not be subjected to deer browsing.
The deer fence runs east to west in order to bisect all four plots, and is set on the south side of the site so as not to interfere with neighboring properties. The purpose of this fencing is to attempt to determine to what extent browsing by the exploding deer population is hindering the distribution of native plants.
Data was first recorded by staking out the plots, then mapping the individual trees and noting their size, species and general condition. Trees to be removed from the managed plots were selected from this information, ridding these plots of weak, injured and dead plant material. Of the more than sixty trees removed, many were multiple leader trees (a potential indicator of previous cutting). Inherently, these trees are structurally weaker than single leader trees. Due to the preponderance of red maple and ash, these species were taken first when there was a choice between either of those species and another. Keep in mind, some decisions were made for purely aesthetic reasons, including keeping the large red maple found in plot A. In addition to the trees, all invasive, non-native plants (bittersweet, barberry, and multiflora rose) were removed from the managed plots as well.
In order to delineate the borders not enclosed by fencing, straight logs from the selective removals were placed along the edge of the four plots. Stumps were flush-cut for appearance sake. Within the managed plots, plant litter is removed on a regular basis. This process of cleaning can be viewed as aesthetically pleasing, or as a removal of potential wildlife habitats and soil amendments. We have incorporated this as a purposeful part of our study in order to observe and measure the long term effects. The contrast between managed plot C and unmanaged plot D is dramatic. In this youthful state of overcrowding, where the competing plant material is actually bringing itself down, the contrast between managed and unmanaged is clearly evident. Making a similar comparison between plots A & B is not as clear, since the shakedown of weaker plants has already occurred, and also had sufficient time to break down and return to the soil. The most interesting comparison is between the unmanaged plots of A & D. This comparison shows how nature, over time, has accomplished the same clean up as we have effected in the managed areas.
Download the full pamphlet
Deer Exclosure at Highstead