Poll: minimum tapping size

[wkies]

I have few untapped smaller trees that I may add to my gravity system. So the question is, what is minimum circumference you tap?

[Profirefighter]

12 inches at chest level.

[Thompson's Tree Farm]

On a healthy, fast growing tree, tapping with 5/16 spouts, I wil go down to 8" DBH.

[Thad Blaisdell]

8 inches is a good size to go with. But in the areas of mine that are over crowded I dont mind tapping 6 inch. I must have at least 300 tapped at that size and they heal faster than any other tree. Within 1.5 years you almost cant tell where the tap hole was in most cases.

[tuckermtn]

I'm with Doug and Thad. I will go down to a 8" healthy Sugar maple, but try to stay a little bigger on the reds since they cannot compartmentalize the tap wound as well. 9 or 10" on a good red.

[Russell Lampron]

I'm with Doug and Thad. I will go down to a 8" healthy Sugar maple, but try to stay a little bigger on the reds since they cannot compartmentalize the tap wound as well. 9 or 10" on a good red.

I agree but would add that that is only using 5/16" taps. If you use 7/16" taps I wouldn't tap anything smaller than 12". On gravity I wouldn't even bother tapping the reds.

[Cardigan99]

Yeah, 8" here. both reds and sugars. Eric what do you mean by 'compartmentalize' the wound as well? I always check my previous seasons tap holes and I find the reds tend to heal a bit quicker.

[DrTimPerkins]

...what do you mean by 'compartmentalize' the wound as well? I always check my previous seasons tap holes and I find the reds tend to heal a bit quicker.

Internal and external "healing" of the taphole wound are not the same. The external portion of the taphole "heals" by covering over the hole by cambial growth. Typically, when using a small spout, it may take only 1-2 years for a taphole to grow over the entire hole. Internally, the wound is not actually "healed", but instead is encapsulated in a sense. The tree "compartmentalizes" the wound by moving a number of metabolic substances into the affected area around the taphole. This is the taphole "stain" that you see when you cut trees down. This process renders the affected area of the wood no longer functional in terms of sap transport or carbohydrate (sugar and starch) storage, although it does retain its structural function. More importantly for the tree, this process of compartmentalization reduces the ability of pathogens (mainly wood rottting fungi) to grow in that area of the tree. In this way, the tree prevents pathogens that might enter the wound from spreading throughout the tree. Because wood vessels are long in the vertical direction, the compartmentalized area (the "wound") is typically longer vertically (maybe 6-12" above and below the taphole), but very small in terms of depth (into the tree) and horizontally (to each side of the taphole).

The goal of sustainable tapping is to never "remove" (make non-functional) a larger volume of wood than the tree can grow back in the following growing season. So essentially the size of the tree is somewhat less important (once it achieves a minimum tappable size) than its growth rate. A tree at 8" dbh (diameter breast height) that is growing well will be able to cope with the stress of being tapped better than a 12" tree that is in a very poor growing condition (supressed, shallow droughty, low nutrition soil). Finally, red maples are not nearly as good at compartmentalizing wounds as are sugar maple, hence they will tend to have a larger internal wound caused by tapping.

Best thing you can do on these smaller trees if you do choose to tap them.....don't tap too deep.

[markct]

i have some trees i have been tapping as small as 6 or 7 inch for a few years now, red maples, since they are in an area near a building and cant grow too big before they gota be removed, so figured why not even if it hurts the tree. i move the tap area up and down the tree a good distance and so far seem to be healing fine and growing great, but these are trees in a pretty open area so that helps the fast growth i suppose too

[DrTimPerkins]

i have some trees i have been tapping as small as 6 or 7 inch for a few years now, red maples, since they are in an area near a building and cant grow too big before they gota be removed, so figured why not even if it hurts the tree.

That's commonly referred to as "thinning with a tapping bit." Not a problem, but if you do this in a stand, leave the BEST small trees untapped. These will be your crop trees later when you do actually thin the stand.

[Cardigan99]

Internal and external "healing" of the taphole wound are not the same. The external portion of the taphole "heals" by covering over the hole by cambial growth. Typically, when using a small spout, it may take only 1-2 years for a taphole to grow over the entire hole. Internally, the wound is not actually "healed", but instead is encapsulated in a sense. The tree "compartmentalizes" the wound by moving a number of metabolic substances into the affected area around the taphole. This is the taphole "stain" that you see when you cut trees down. This process renders the affected area of the wood no longer functional in terms of sap transport or carbohydrate (sugar and starch) storage, although it does retain its structural function. More importantly for the tree, this process of compartmentalization reduces the ability of pathogens (mainly wood rottting fungi) to grow in that area of the tree. In this way, the tree prevents pathogens that might enter the wound from spreading throughout the tree. Because wood vessels are long in the vertical direction, the compartmentalized area (the "wound") is typically longer vertically (maybe 6-12" above and below the taphole), but very small in terms of depth (into the tree) and horizontally (to each side of the taphole).

The goal of sustainable tapping is to never "remove" (make non-functional) a larger volume of wood than the tree can grow back in the following growing season. So essentially the size of the tree is somewhat less important (once it achieves a minimum tappable size) than its growth rate. A tree at 8" dbh (diameter breast height) that is growing well will be able to cope with the stress of being tapped better than a 12" tree that is in a very poor growing condition (supressed, shallow droughty, low nutrition soil). Finally, red maples are not nearly as good at compartmentalizing wounds as are sugar maple, hence they will tend to have a larger internal wound caused by tapping.

Best thing you can do on these smaller trees if you do choose to tap them.....don't tap too deep.

Thanks Tim. Good information. That's the kind of thing that makes this site what it is.

[adk1]

I will go down to 7"dbh. I use 5/16" spouts on gravity. I dont expect great runs out of them though really do to them being woods trees with poor crowns

[red maples]

5/16 spouts 9-10" reds @ about 4ft or chest high I do have a few smaller thinning trees tapped. but good info on this thread!!!

[Tweegs]

10" is where I've been drawing the line to date.
Dropping the 7/16 taps for 5/16 next season, maybe I'll give some of those 8-inchers another look. Got some thinning to do, too.

[Sugar-me-Timbers]

So,
If a person were to "don't tap too deep." how deep is proper?, 6" diameter tree -spile drill depth? , 8"diameter tree -spile drill depth? 10"diameter tree -spile drill depth?

[Russell Lampron]

So,
If a person were to "don't tap too deep." how deep is proper?, 6" -_____?, 8" - ________ 10" - ________

I assume are talking tree diameter here. You shouldn't tap any deeper than 1.5".

[Sugar-me-Timbers]

So,
If a person were to "don't tap too deep." how deep is proper?, 6" diameter tree -spile drill depth? , 8"diameter tree -spile drill depth? 10"diameter tree -spile drill depth?

[DrTimPerkins]

So,
If a person were to "don't tap too deep." how deep is proper?, 6" diameter tree -spile drill depth? , 8"diameter tree -spile drill depth? 10"diameter tree -spile drill depth?

On vacuum, 1.5 inches (in the wood) is sufficient for any tree of tapping size. On gravity, you need to go deeper, perhaps up to 2.5". This, and the fact that you don't get much from a real small tree on gravity anyhow, is why tapping small trees on gravity isn't worth doing.

[adk1]

I am going to tap at 2" for all trees. That is what my depth foro the drill bit is set at.

[Tweegs]

On vacuum, 1.5 inches (in the wood) is sufficient for any tree of tapping size. On gravity, you need to go deeper, perhaps up to 2.5". This, and the fact that you don't get much from a real small tree on gravity anyhow, is why tapping small trees on gravity isn't worth doing.


Noted.

But I’ll bite, Dr. Tim.
Why the difference in depth?

I can hazard a guess as to why 2.5” is right for a gravity system, but why would it be wrong for vacuum?

[DrTimPerkins]

.. why 2.5” is right for a gravity system, but why would it be wrong for vacuum?

It isn't that 2.5" is wrong, just that it is not necessary. In short, with vacuum you can get about the same amount of sap with a 1.5" taphole as you can with a 2.5" taphole, so there is no good reason to drill tapholes that deep under vacuum, and lots of good reasons to not drill any deeper than necessary.

The sap flow mechanics under gravity and vacuum are similar in some ways, but different in others. Under gravity, the vast majority of the sap comes from above the taphole...from the long column of wood that extends from the taphole to the top of the tree. Basically you're severing some of the pipes that move sap upward. After those fill during the freeze phase, they empty by gravity and the sap (mostly) flows downward and out through the taphole. Once the sap has flowed out of those severed vessels, the run stops and won't start again until you have a freeze to recharge the system. So the amount of sap you get is related to the tree size (somewhat on diameter, but also somewhat on the height of the tree) AND on the number of vessels you've cut with your tapping bit. Therefore deeper tapholes (to a point) will yield more sap (it is also important to recognize that they create a larger internal wound). It is important to recognize though that the outermost rings of wood are the most highly conductive of sap, so drilling beyond about 3.5 inches has no added benefit. Drilling holes that deep however is very damaging (internally), and over time you'll end up hitting a lot of old stained area, resulting in lowered sap yields.

Under vacuum, while the same thing happens as under gravity at the beginning of the flow. In addition however, later in the flow period the negative pressure can move sap both laterally across the stem of the tree as well as upward (from wood below the taphole). Because of the strong gradient caused by vacuum, there is not a need to have a deep taphole AND also it is not as necessary to put in a second tap as early. Shallower tapholes result in less internal wounding and more sustainable tapping in the long-term.

[tuckermtn]

excellent information- thanks to the good doctor for his replies in this thread!

[Goggleeye]

On vacuum, 1.5 inches (in the wood) is sufficient for any tree of tapping size. On gravity, you need to go deeper, perhaps up to 2.5". This, and the fact that you don't get much from a real small tree on gravity anyhow, is why tapping small trees on gravity isn't worth doing.

Could you quantify "real small tree?" I use gravity tubing and tap down to 8" or so, depending on the crown, and seem to get adequate sap flow (about 2/3 of a mature tree) from those trees as well. I would consider any tree that would give me 10 or more gallons of sap worth tapping.

Mark

[adk1]

I thought the average sap per tap/tree was 10 gallons per year?

[Cake O' Maple]

I thought the average sap per tap/tree was 10 gallons per year?

My understanding is that forest trees, w/ a smaller crown because of crowding, average 10 gallons/year, and yard trees with their larger crown, average 20 gallons/year.

[DrTimPerkins]

Could you quantify "real small tree?"

Not easily. It is more of a guideline, not a hard and fast rule. In general, if the tree is growing well and is not suppressed (under the canopy of other trees), and has reached 10" in diameter, and you're using small (1/4", 5/16", or 19/64") spouts, it can be tapped. If smaller than that, don't tap it until it reaches 10" in diameter (at breast height, dbh) if it is eventually going to be a crop tree. If you're using 7/16" spouts, tapping isn't usually recommended until trees reach 12" dbh.

It's important to understand that tapping guidelines are based almost entirely upon how tapping affects the trees in terms of wounding. Very little has been done to examine the impacts of tapping from the perspective of carbohydrate (sugar) removal. The reason this is important is that given better tubing design/installation and improved vacuum pumps and good sanitary tap/tubing practices, we can now extract 30-40 gallons of sap per tree....whereas 10 years ago the average was more like 5-15 gallons. That is a LOT more sugar being taken from the tree. Although we "think" this is sustainable, we would like to establish this for certain. To that end, we are in the midst of several studies re-examining tapping guidelines from BOTH a wounding AND sugar removal perspectives.

[Amber Gold]

Interesting stuff. Thanks Dr. Perkins.

[Cardigan99]

I thought the average sap per tap/tree was 10 gallons per year?

adk1, I've averaged about 6 gallons of sap per tap on gravity and buckets over the last 4 yrs.

[PapaSmiff]

All the documents I read suggested NOT to tap anything smaller than 10", some documents suggest 12".

[DrTimPerkins]

Again, these are generally guidelines, not rules or laws, so some variation is to be expected. I believe that NOFA (the organic certification agency in Vermont) rules specify a 9" minimum limit. Your mileage may vary depending upon where you look.

[Sugarbear]

About 10 inches for me, which is the width of the spread of my hand.I am now in the process of converting to tubing and i may go alittle smaller with the 5/16 taps.

[Cake O' Maple]

Dang, Sugarbear, you have a big paw!

[Cardigan99]

From what I can tell 10" is the minimum 'guideline' in literature that precedes the use of 5/16 taps. Has there been any studies re: tree size and the 5/16 tap?

[DrTimPerkins]

From what I can tell 10" is the minimum 'guideline' in literature that precedes the use of 5/16 taps. Has there been any studies re: tree size and the 5/16 tap?

Yes, and the concensus of the research and extension folks was to not revise the guidelines based upon tap size.

[spud]

Again, these are generally guidelines, not rules or laws, so some variation is to be expected. I believe that NOFA (the organic certification agency in Vermont) rules specify a 9" minimum limit. Your mileage may vary depending upon where you look.

I know this question has been asked before but I cannot find an answer anywhere. How many years does it take for a 6 inch sugar maple to get to 10inch in a sugar woods with good soil? Has any studies been done on this? Thanks

Spud

[GeneralStark]

I know this question has been asked before but I cannot find an answer anywhere. How many years does it take for a 6 inch sugar maple to get to 10inch in a sugar woods with good soil? Has any studies been done on this? Thanks

Spud

This has been studied extensively and is one of the key components of silvicultural practices. Typically tree growth(DBH and height) is greatest in the first 40-60 years of a tree's life and then decreases as the tree ages. The general rule of thumb for Sugar Maple is about .2" per year for diameter increase.

So, if you have a 6" maple it is likely about 30 years old and if you are hoping for that tree to get to 10", you will likely see it reach that DBH in about 20 years for a total age of about 50 years. That said this general rule of thumb can be affected by many factors such as soils, overcrowding, shading, etc... This is where the silvicultural practices come in as the general goal is to grow healthy sawtimber in the shortest period of time. So, through crop tree selection and choosing the proper species to favor on a given site you can theoretically increase that growth rate through thinning and favoring certain species in certain areas.

If these 6" sugar maples are overcrowded, it is probably worth selecting the crop trees and thinning, and perhaps thinning slowly over time and tapping the cull trees as you thin them. If the area has already been thinned you can probably expect a higher growth rate like .25-.5" per year on a good site. In my study area, I have observed sugar maple growth of .25-.5" after thinning.

Rapid and aggressive thinning can be problematic, due to windthrow and other potential issues. Some Cornell studies suggest that aggressive thinning may slow growth rates in some cases.

I assume your question is related to future tapping of these 6" maples, so let's assume a growth rate of .25"/year as you will probably do some thinning if you haven't already. Therefore, if you are using 10" as the guideline for crop tree tapping DBH, you should be able to tap those trees in about 16 years and maybe sooner if your site is ideal and your silviculture is timed optimally.

[spud]

General Stark,

Thank you for the information. This is very helpful to all who are thinning their woods for future tapping. It's also very helpful for anyone that is about 50 years old or more. If a 50 year old man waits for his 6 inch trees to reach 10 inches before he taps them he may never live to see that day. It gives me something to think about. Do I tap them now and make money doing it or do I save them for someone else to tap later? 1000 six inch trees will give me on average of 20 gallons of sap per year with high vac. Lets say the sap test at 2% that will give you 465 gallons of syrup per season. If the bulk price on average is $32.50 a gallon for the next 15 years that gives me $15,112 per year or $226,680 over the next 15 years. I know everyones situation is different but it appears there is two ways of looking at this. What do other Traders think?

Spud

[Thompson's Tree Farm]

I think the future matters whether I am here to enjoy it or not. Short term gain is not my goal.

[GeneralStark]

General Stark,

Thank you for the information. This is very helpful to all who are thinning their woods for future tapping. It's also very helpful for anyone that is about 50 years old or more. If a 50 year old man waits for his 6 inch trees to reach 10 inches before he taps them he may never live to see that day. It gives me something to think about. Do I tap them now and make money doing it or do I save them for someone else to tap later? 1000 six inch trees will give me on average of 20 gallons of sap per year with high vac. Lets say the sap test at 2% that will give you 465 gallons of syrup per season. If the bulk price on average is $32.50 a gallon for the next 15 years that gives me $15,112 per year or $226,680 over the next 15 years. I know everyones situation is different but it appears there is two ways of looking at this. What do other Traders think?

Spud

The information I provided is a rough guideline and growth rates obviously depend on a variety of factors that will be different for everyone. Clearly, determining the growth rate of your woods and considering various management options is critical to anyone looking to generate income from the property whether it is for timber, sugar, recreation, wildlife, etc... There are many philosophical, ecological, and personal reasons for making the decisions that we do, and I'm sure there are many perspectives represented here on the trader. Personally, this is perhaps one of my favorite aspects of sugaring and agriculture; using science and generations of knowledge to get the most from your land while also preserving it for future generations' needs.

In terms of the scenario you provide, I would suggest that it depends on your personal goals and income needs, though I do think your estimations may be a bit high in terms of the productivity of your 6" trees. (mine don't give that much sap at that sugar content)

It may also be possible to generate more income by tapping the cull trees over time and allowing your crop trees to mature as you progressively thin the stand. Perhaps there could be some income from firewood sales, or perhaps your site could produce good mushroom crops on the cull trees to generate other income. Without knowing the specifics of your property, it is difficult to say what exactly is possible, but I do believe that tapping 6" trees now and hoping that they will produce 20 gallons/tap/year at 2% for the next 20 years is probably unrealistic.

Are the two ways of looking at this, as you mention, short term profit vs. long term profit? What about your children? Will they end up tapping these woods? So many things to consider.

[DrTimPerkins]

We will have some very interesting results available within the next 6 months from several ongoing research studies that will address this question.

[spud]

First of all I want to thank you General Stark, Dr Tim and Thompson tree farm for your comments. It's this kind of feedback that helps me and others learn how to manage our woods the best way. I look forward to hearing your results Dr. Tim as you know I read everything Proctor prints. I do remember Dr. Tim saying one time that the growth rate of a small maple will slow down if tapped at a young age. There was a fellow Trader from Essex that has tapped 8 inch trees for the last 6-8 years and he gets 25-30 gallons of sap from each tap with high vac. I don't know if he keeps track of his growth rate per year but it would be interesting to see. At that kind of production what's the point in waiting for the tree to get bigger? Yea I don't want to kill my trees but if I don't plan on putting in a second tap until the tree is 18 inches that could be 48 years. It's pretty safe to say I am going to be graveyard dead in 48 years. Because of this some sugar maker's might want to tap the small trees knowing they will never see the tree big enough for two taps. I do know for a fact that there are some large producers in Canada that tap 5 inch trees. If any are reading this post I would love to hear how it is working for you. How much sap do you get and how is the health and growth rate of your trees? I may be one of only a few that really is interested in knowing this kind of stuff. Maybe I'm just a maple geek.:lol:

Spud

[DrTimPerkins]

1. Tapping guidelines are just recommendations. In some instances, there are rules (for organic certification, tap leases, etc). However in general, people are free to do whatever they wish as long as they own the trees.
2. It is important to realize that there are reasons for the guidelines. Generally these are to prevent impacting the health/growth/survival of the trees.
3. Tapping of small trees with slow growth rates (suppressed trees) can, over time, cause excess staining (compartmentalization) inside the stem and eventually will impact the health of the tree. If the growth rate is too low, or tapping intensity too high, then the practice is unsustainable in the long-term.
4. Removal of high quantities of sugar for those same small trees with slow growth rates could also result in reduced growth.
5. By impacting the health and growth, and by increasing compartmentalization in the stem, you WILL eventually reduce the amount of sap you can harvest from those trees over time.
6. IF you are going to tap small trees, it should ONLY be done in conjunction after proper thinning to allow those trees to grow rapidly to avoid excess staining.

I've frequently heard people say that in young dense stands they "thin with a tapping bit." While again this may seem reasonable (especially if some small young trees are left untapped), the better practice is to thin first (with a chainsaw) to allow good growth to occur in the remaining trees, which will result in good growth rates, good crown development, and better sugar production. Even better if you do this in conjunction with testing of sap sugar content and selection of high sugar individuals.

There have been recommendations to not tap small, slow-growing trees in some regions of Quebec, and to reduce the use of a 2nd tap due to excess compartmentalization that is only now becoming a problem after 25-40 years of tapping.

[GeneralStark]

First of all I want to thank you General Stark, Dr Tim and Thompson tree farm for your comments. It's this kind of feedback that helps me and others learn how to manage our woods the best way. I look forward to hearing your results Dr. Tim as you know I read everything Proctor prints. I do remember Dr. Tim saying one time that the growth rate of a small maple will slow down if tapped at a young age. There was a fellow Trader from Essex that has tapped 8 inch trees for the last 6-8 years and he gets 25-30 gallons of sap from each tap with high vac. I don't know if he keeps track of his growth rate per year but it would be interesting to see. At that kind of production what's the point in waiting for the tree to get bigger? Yea I don't want to kill my trees but if I don't plan on putting in a second tap until the tree is 18 inches that could be 48 years. It's pretty safe to say I am going to be graveyard dead in 48 years. Because of this some sugar maker's might want to tap the small trees knowing they will never see the tree big enough for two taps. I do know for a fact that there are some large producers in Canada that tap 5 inch trees. If any are reading this post I would love to hear how it is working for you. How much sap do you get and how is the health and growth rate of your trees? I may be one of only a few that really is interested in knowing this kind of stuff. Maybe I'm just a maple geek.:lol:

Spud

I think several of us here suffer from being maple geeks. I am keeping track of the growth rate of the trees in one area that I am tapping and thinning and have about 150 trees that I am keeping track of. I am using 10" as my minimum tapping size and have identified the crop trees in this area and am also tapping some cull trees as I go. Instead of one aggressive thinning, I am doing one moderate thinning where I remove the obviously suppressed trees, and then 2-3 years later I thin again. In the mean time I tap the obvious future cull trees that will be removed during the 2nd thinning. These cull trees are generally anywhere from 3-8" in diameter. I have tapped a few of these cull trees with buckets and their production does not compare to 10"+ DBH trees.

I annually measure the DBH of the trees in the study area, and test sugar content. It is my hope that I will be able to examine growth rates of trees tapped with buckets (ie gravity) and high vacuum, and not tapped at all to see if there is any difference over time. I have measured DBH for two years now and it is quite impressive to see how quickly some of the trees have responded.

In regards to producers that claim 25-30 gallons per tap, I don't question that possibility as I have seen the same from my woods on high vacuum (not last season though) but I do question that production level from 6-8" trees. Unless they are using some system to actually quantify the production from individual trees, I won't believe it until I see it. The trees are just too small to produce that much sap. Sure, you can pull groundwater with high vacuum, but is the sap from that 8" tree really adding much to your overall production?

Spud, Perhaps you should tap those 1000 6" trees and see what their production would be on high vacuum. That could be an interesting study.

Also, not sure if you guys have checked out this Cornell webinar on thinning, but I found it quite interesting: http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/web/schedule.htm

[spud]

Thanks guys for the very helpful info. Now my simple little mind is racing with many questions so here goes.

1- If I do tap small trees ( 6 inch ) with weak growth rate how long before the tree shuts down and dies?

2- If I tap 6 inch trees with good growth rate in a well thinned woods will I still lose production each year from that tree? If so how much?

3-Am I impacting the growth rate on good trees in a well thinned woods if I tap 6 inch trees?

4- With Quebec now having problems after 25-40 years does that mean it took that long to figure out there was a production problem by tapping small trees way back?

5- How much sap on average do you feel I could get from a 6 inch tree in a well thinned woods using 27-28 inches of vac?

6- What should my average sugar be on the same trees?

I plan to keep track of the growth rate on some of my small tapped/untapped trees. The reason I ask questions about tapping small trees is because I may have the opportunity to tap a small 1000 tap woods made up of all 6-8 inch trees. I in no way want to cause long term harm to the trees but if there was a safe way of tapping these trees and making some money from them I would be very interested. Also I like to think my Pipeline will be good for about 10 years so I don't want the trees dying after 5 years. General Stark you said that on some of your cull trees you tap as small as 3-8 inches. I have never heard of a 3-4 inch tree being tapped. How much sap does a 3-4 inch tree give? How many years can a person tap a 3 inch tree before it dies? Is a tree that small worth a drop and spout? Thanks again for all your help guy's although this may seem silly to some asking these question can only help me and others to be better sugar makers.

Spud

[DrTimPerkins]

Thanks guys for the very helpful info. Now my simple little mind is racing with many questions so here goes.

1- If I do tap small trees ( 6 inch ) with weak growth rate how long before the tree shuts down and dies?......

All EXCELLENT questions, and exactly the type of thing we're studying. Unfortunately there are no really simple answers without generalizing a good amount. As I said however, we're nearing the finish line, and are about 6-12 months from releasing results of some of our studies, so you'll have to wait.

[spud]

Thanks Doc I look forward to reading the results of this research.

Spud

[GeneralStark]

All good questions, but I guess we will have to wait for more research to better understand the long-term health effects of tapping small trees.

In terms of sap production of small trees, all my evidence to date is generally anecdotal, so I can't really say for sure what to expect from a woods. But, I have observed a wide range of variation in production from small trees when using buckets on 6-8" trees. Some have produced quite well (10-15 gallons) while others not so much. Sugar content seems to vary quite a bit as well. Generally I have done this to get a sense of the sugar content of a tree to help with thinning.

All the smaller cull trees (3-6") I have tapped with vacuum tubing so I can't say how they produce. When I have done it it was in areas where there was already tubing and adding a drop didn't seem like much of a loss. I also have a bunch of runs of tubing that I use for cull trees that I move around as I thin the trees and just reuse/rebuild those lines seasonally. Also, my girlfriend is a rather conservative forester that doesn't like the idea of tapping small trees so it is kind of fun to mess with her by tapping them. They usually get cut within a year or two of tapping.

If you own the 1000tap woods you are speaking of, I would say it could be worth setting it up after an initial thinning. I personally wouldn't tap every 6 " tree, but would begin thinking about some long term management, and work tapping cull trees into the plan. If it is a possible lease situation it may be possible to work out a long-term management plan with the owners that includes tapping of cull trees. It would depend on what they are open to and the potential benefits to them.

[spud]

Thanks General Stark for the information and advice. One other question that I forgot to ask you and Doc is how deep of a tap hole should a person go when tapping a 6 inch tree? Is one inch enough to get the same amount of sap out of the tree without getting to close to the heart of the tree? Thanks again.

Spud

[GeneralStark]

Thanks General Stark for the information and advice. One other question that I forgot to ask you and Doc is how deep of a tap hole should a person go when tapping a 6 inch tree? Is one inch enough to get the same amount of sap out of the tree without getting to close to the heart of the tree? Thanks again.

Spud

From what I have read here on the trader and elsewhere, and based on my observations, I would suggest tapping 1" with 5/16 taps. Vigorous small trees in a thinned woods (especially red maple) will heal and grow quite quickly, but limiting the amount of scarring/staining should be the ultimate goal I would think.