+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Disaster Relief

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Center, Underhill Ctr, VT
    Posts
    6,391

    Default

    As noted, not trying to irritate anyone, but I've seen it many times. I'm NOT saying that as a criticism of anyone....it is quite possible that a particular site has some nutritional or stress-related issue, but in that case it is more likely that it is something to do with tree size or growth rates (so relating to stand history and management), which can be manipulated to some degree by amendments or thinning. It really only takes a few small things to bump down production, sometimes drastically. Tapping into too much stain, overdriving by just a little bit, using 1/4" spouts...and several other things. But in many cases (note I didn't say all), getting to 0.5 gpt is not impossible. It might take some time (especially if it is management related) and there can be a monstrous learning curve to surmount, but I really don't think it is a written-in-stone barrier that can't be achieved in many areas of maple production. I would agree that it is far easier to do in some places than others.

    Many of our trees are PMRC have been tapped for a long-time. All are woods trees. None of them are especially wonderous specimens...we're at a fairly high elevation in one of the windiest places in the state, so the crowns are pretty beaten up. The soils are shallow and not especially fertile. But they'll still produce well.

    As someone already noted...small trees are a (sizeable) factor in having lower yields. You get roughly 2 gal more sap per tap (and it is sweeter) with each 1" increase in average tree diameter.
    Dr. Tim Perkins
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Ctr
    http://www.uvm.edu/~pmrc
    https://mapleresearch.org
    Timothy.Perkins@uvm.edu

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eagle lake Maine
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrTimPerkins View Post
    As noted, not trying to irritate anyone, but I've seen it many times. I'm NOT saying that as a criticism of anyone....it is quite possible that a particular site has some nutritional or stress-related issue, but in that case it is more likely that it is something to do with tree size or growth rates (so relating to stand history and management), which can be manipulated to some degree by amendments or thinning. It really only takes a few small things to bump down production, sometimes drastically. Tapping into too much stain, overdriving by just a little bit, using 1/4" spouts...and several other things. But in many cases (note I didn't say all), getting to 0.5 gpt is not impossible. It might take some time (especially if it is management related) and there can be a monstrous learning curve to surmount, but I really don't think it is a written-in-stone barrier that can't be achieved in many areas of maple production. I would agree that it is far easier to do in some places than others.

    Many of our trees are PMRC have been tapped for a long-time. All are woods trees. None of them are especially wonderous specimens...we're at a fairly high elevation in one of the windiest places in the state, so the crowns are pretty beaten up. The soils are shallow and not especially fertile. But they'll still produce well.

    As someone already noted...small trees are a (sizeable) factor in having lower yields. You get roughly 2 gal more sap per tap (and it is sweeter) with each 1" increase in average tree diameter.
    Wow, 2 gallons more sap per inch, I didn't realize it was that much! My bush was a former woodlot and sugar maple was the firewood of choice, so there aren't many real large trees. I think you'd agree that a more northern, harsh climate would have some effect as well. Because of the research done by yourself and others, everyone has benefitted from the knowledge and we're all appreciative. Nobody in this area can consistently achieve those high yields in spite of the widely available information. Everyone uses high vacuum and there are some really nice sugar bushes with large trees. Anyhow, this post was originally about asking for public funds for private businesses. I've never been an advocate for this even when the business is mine. Some see it differently and they're entitled to their opinion as well.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    185

    Default

    I guess I have to ask a question on this topic. If there is no accountability for people to take on responsible debt why should the government be giving money out?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts