Printable View
I watched with much interest the playlist of videos Tim Perkins linked in his post from the other day "Sugarbush Management Videos Available" in the Proctor forum. Learned a lot.
It brought me to a question. What if your sugarbush is partly, mostly, or entirely red maple? Do you manage it in the ways these videos suggest, inserting "red maple" wherever it says "sugar maple"? Or do you, over time, attempt to convert the sugarbush in the direction of sugar maple?
Andy
I tap about 600 sugars, 50 reds and 150 silvers. Sap gets mixed in and all boiled the same. Throughout the season, the sap % is all about the same. My reds & sugars are in the hillside competing with other hardwoods, my silvers are on the creek bank and have huge canopies. Sugars and reds are on steep hillsides, 3/16 gravity, they average 1.5 gpt/day, silvers are level, on 3/16 pulled by shurflos, average 2 gpt/day.
So as you manage regeneration, do you basically embrace that one area is silver, and regenerate it as such, and another is red, and regenerate that as red? (Sorry I probably didn't make it clear that I was essentially asking a regeneration question and maybe releasing, etc)
Most of my trees are red maple and I recently picked up a copy of CDLs magazine called "CDL's Way" Summer Edition 2022 at my local dealer. In it is an article by Abby van den Berg called "Total Yields from Red Maples" where she compares reds with sugar maple. Our Dr. Tim is listed as a collaborator.
Also, Vermont Proctor Research has an hour-long presentation given at the NY Winter Classic Conference last Jan. It's titled "Total Syrup Yields from Red Maples." Very interesting presentation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncnl...bk9c86w-H_5IBv
My main bush has around 3400 trees that are about 50/50 sugars and reds. The other bush of 1000 trees is probably 90% sugar maples. Late in the season last year I tested the sap from each bush and surprisingly, the main bush had higher sugar content by .2% The 1000 tap bush does out produce the main bush, but mostly because the average tree size is larger.
Eagle Lake Sugar, that is cool. I hear that a lot, about sugar content. Certain trees are supposed to be sweeter than others, but may not be. The producers manual does mention that... at least measure sugar content before discounting a tree's potential. So, I'll bet as you manage regeneration, you're not actively trying to force things in the direction of sugar maple versus red, and probably not vice versa.
Not lost on me is that there might be a locational reason such as soil, sun, moisture, and more that one species has become established in a certain spot, and it may pay not to fight that.
I manage for healthy well spaced trees and if "all things being equal" I'll cut a red and leave a sugar but if all things aren't equal the better tree stays.
Oh yeah I got ya, I'm just gettin started. last two years, ice storms have thinned for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy VT
The response from the producers of those videos (Dr. Tony D'Amato, UVM Forestry and Mark Isselhardt, UVM Extension Maple) is:
If a site is tending more towards red maple, it is probably not a site that would support sugar maple dominance without a lot of effort. My inclination would be to manage for red maple, if the goal was perpetuating species that could be used for sugaring.
and...
Since red maple is a different species with a different mix of site on which it competes well the producer should work with what’s thriving now and not try to make significant shifts in the species composition. You can share the very real benefit of red maple being unattractive to forest tent caterpillar and this nice article Abby did recently: https://blog.uvm.edu/farmvia/files/2...production.pdf
Thanks for the replies everyone! Neat discussion.
I haven't read Dr Abby's article yet but I have finally started reading the new producers manual.
When I got the red maple section in the maple resource chapter it had some other nice things to say about red maple, such as that red maple mixed with sugar maple counts toward forest diversity.
Now if only my sugarbush was more than a quarter-acre :lol:
But hey, its still a sugarbush!
Currently it contains one thriving 27" diameter sugar maple and 4 accidental Norways coming of age that are not big enough to tap yet. No room to plant anything else, but thinking 40 years ahead... :lol:
The study on total yield of red vs sugar when under vacuum was excellent. Short answer.... no measurable difference in yield. Tap all the reds you have under vacuum (that is the key).
What grades are made with the reds
I Have access to a 100 or so acres beside one bush we own and have been thinking about renting it but one hesitation is the grade of syrup they produce
We currently have 11500 hard maple and make a good amount of golden and thinking on trying to process the red maple sap separately
Andy - If you are thinking 40 years ahead, get rid of those invasive norways! Then plant some sugars instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy VT
You are right! The reality is that this proves I'm really only thinking 5 years ahead... and I'm actually still conflicted about letting the norways continue.Quote:
Originally Posted by therealtreehugger
They do make good syrup though.
This year for me was the "year of the Norways" (sounds pretty scary huh?). Scientific test between sugars and norways for syrup making. Need to do it two more years to be sure of results.
(I am spreading the word around the neighborhood to at least not let new norways establish themselves).
Sugars win the contest obviously... but Norway had a few good surprises. Well, mainly two good surprises. Grade (lighter than sugar for most of the season) and sugar content (barely behind sugar).
My experience has been very similar in grades. Some years here on 95% reds yielded predominantly Golden. Some years Amber. I believe handling and overall processing has more influence on grade than tree species alone. I believe Dr. Tim said the results of a large study on this topic is forthcoming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Hanna