I am inheriting a piece of property that includes maybe 20 acres of land that occasional floods. There are hardwood trees there now including a couple of walnuts I may harvest. I am considering planting the remainder in pines but am given to believe pines do not do well where they get flooded. So what does one do with the land? are there trees that thrive in these conditions and have investment potential? I suppose one answer is to look at what's there now and "improve" on it. What about some of the new hybrid chestnuts? the land is in Southside VA.
Around the yard of my cabin which is in the flood-plane of the Ouachita R that at times can be under water for a month or two at a time, there are some pines that are quite large.
Cypress and Tupelo are the two best for being along the edges of the creek. Others just up at about ten feet higher elevation, are Hickories, Holly, water and Willow Oaks, both of which are fast growing but short lived.
One of my favorite and best suited for this habitat is Swamp Chestnut Oak, which is in the white oak side of the family, and produces one of the largest and best acorns, which is good food for wildlife. Overcup is another good one.
I would encourage you to only plant indigenous trees to your area. Along with each plant species that evolved there is usually an insect or several that it is a host plant to. While these insects eat some of the leaves, songbirds need those insects to feed their young. So if you choose exotic trees shrubs and grasses, you are part of the problem of the declining bird population.
Keith is right. Indigenous trees support a whole host of insects, mosses, lichens and other flora and fauna that are part of the food chain or provide necessary cover, nest building materials and other things indigenous birds and animals require. Exotic trees may provide 10% - 15% of these things but not nearly enough to support the natural habitat for indigenous creatures. An "exotic" is any tree that is not indigenous go there area; it doesn't have to be from Bora Bora or the Hunan Valley to be an "exotic." Plant what does well in the natural forests in your area. Your wildlife will thank you.
S side VA not anything I'd have knowledge about, but here in mid lower Michigan I have some low, wet, seasonally flooded area in which I am having success with Swamp White Oak, Black Walnut, Bitternut Hickory, Sugar Maple and Sycamore. Also silver maple and aspen, but I wouldn't consider them choice. I do think that soil type will matter, too, however, so you might want to consult your soil conservation district people about soil maps and tree recommendations. And of course around here no tree is successful on wet soil or any other unless protected from deer, including up through antler scrape size (5-6" diameter?).
Out of my biome. Lots of great species have been suggested.
I wouldn't put in too many willows that might become large like weeping willow. Don't give them the space. There are species of willow that grow into single stem trees leaving space for more trees. Elms do well in floodplains too. Red and slippery elm are very disease resistant.
Get hold of your state or county dnr. They have foresters that can help you with a plan. In some states you can buy seedlings in the spring. Most nurseries have an order deadline so don't wait until after the holidays to contact them
Walking in river bottoms really shows how much even a two foot rise will allow a different tree to grow. Just that little less soil saturation.Flooded soils don't drown the trees like in mammals. Respiration takes place in the leaves. Flooded soils means no air...trees die from suffocation.
My first thought was American Sycamore. Look around the area and see if there are any there. They can usually be found along creeks and wet areas here in my part of VA (Hanover County). I have two in my back yard where the lot is graded for drainage to a nearby storm drain. At our River place I dug up and transplanted a small one into our front yard. A year later it's grown quite a bit, as they are fairly fast growing trees.
Flat sawn sycamore is worthless in my book but quarter sawn reveals a beautiful figure. In fact, I'm currently working on a rolling work island for the kitchen at our river cottage. I've incorporated cherry, maple, walnut, and quarter sawn sycamore. The sycamore is used for the panels in the frame and panel back to a cabinet and the two doors on the front. This cabinet goes just below the walnut aprons of the table-like structure, between the outer pairs of walnut legs. There is a drawer in the "table" and the top is a 1 1/8" thick lamination of cherry and maple. The sycamore plays well with the cherry and maple.
This is interesting. I fear I am about to become "Land Poor". The owner of almost a hundred acres of land as my father used to say "in the middle of the only part of the state predicted to remain strictly agricultural for the next 200 years." Taxes to pay and no profitable use for the land. The local farming has become hobby farming and subsistence farming. If I plant it in pines the first thinning come in 20 years and that usually pays enough to pay the taxes for a year or two. Then cut the timber in ten more years (30 total). At 70 years old that's some pretty long range planning, but it may fit in nicely with my sons' retirement. They are in their middle thirties.
I was hoping to turn the bottom land into something that would be good for the environment and potentially profitable to them. One of them is a wood worker so a few nice specimens for his retirement might be a nice surprise.
This land floods when the river leaves its banks which is only once every few years.
Plus 1 for contacting your state DNR. In Indiana, the forestry division operates a state nursery and sells packets of 100 native trees (whips) to landowners. They also can advise what will work best in your situation. I have been happy with various purchases from our nursery over the years.
Barry, FYI, Hardwoods are selling higher than pine
Keith Newton
At least here, even the junk for hardwood pulp.
Also, you can lease it to a hunting club that probably pay the taxes. Rather than clearcutting, you can have a select harvest about every 8 years which provides a nice cash windfall every now and then.
I may be able to put the property into the ACUB Program. It's near a military base and Is suitable for the program. This is a program by the government to reduce complaints about noise from the neighbors of the bases. They buy an easement that means you can never complain about their activities again. But it also has a LOT f other restrictions, Including that you can only have one house per hundred acres. since I live thirty miles away the noise does not bother me, but it would be nice to have a nest egg to set aside to pay the taxes and maintenance with.
>>>I fear I am about to become "Land Poor". The owner of almost a hundred acres of land as my father used to say "in the middle of the only part of the state predicted to remain strictly agricultural for the next 200 years." Taxes to pay and no profitable use for the land.
I didn't see if someone mentioned this, but if not you might into a forestry greenbelt in your state.
A few years ago our farm qualified for a forestry greenbelt classification. We live on about 30 acres, a bit more than half in woods. Unlike the agriculture greenbelt, you don't have to show any profit - you just have develop a forestry plan. This can be letting existing trees grow, planting new trees, harvesting, whatever. It was inexpensive and painless to apply. A forester came and walked the property to help develop the plan.
The immediate impact of the being on the greenbelt program is our total property taxes were immediately slashed significantly, perhaps cut in half - I'd have to check. I wish I had applied 15 years ago.
If the forestry part of the land is developed or sold for development back taxes are due for the last few years.
Might be worth checking into. Here the Tennessee Department of Agriculture, Division of Forestry are the people to contact. The county tax assessor's office gave me the contact information.
I inherited something that size. It was the remnants of a stump farm my parents inherited but used as a rental property. It used to be out in the boonies. Over time they had split off acreage to sell to developers so it was now surrounded by houses and was within the town's expanded limits.
The piece I got was basically useless. Largely mucky poorly drained land with a steep hillside along one edge. I thought of not paying taxes to wait for the city to take it over for unpaid taxes.
Then I got a substantial offer from a buyer the broker wouldn't identify. Turns out a university was building a satellite campus and 'my' land now houses a gymnasium and part of the athletic facilities.
You begin by stating the land has little growth in value potential. You are conjuring up some scheme to pay the taxes so as to not loose money owning it. Hardly the place to be focusing economic thought. If you are not personally going to use the property, and there is no competitive alternative I have heard (a 50 year hardwood reforestation yielding $1000.acre in 50 years is folly), the optimum economic choice would be to sell it and invest the proceeds in something that provides a meaningful return on the land's value.
Not where this land is at. Thirty years would be a better assumption for hardwood, presuming hardwood timber grows well there and it is not pine country.
There have been articles recently about the collapse of the softwood timber market in the south. Landowners were encouraged to plant pine as part of some popular program about 30 years ago. These trees are reaching maturity, all at once, and the market is saturated with supply.
Land too wet to build houses on, too wet to grow anything of value, and advised it had no commercial value. There was no "scheme". I'd thought of simply abandoning it. It took someone with very deep pockets to want it.
Bill, You have hit upon the problem. This is part of the family farm. My family owned it when it was in the US, continued in the Confederacy, and now owns it when its back in the US. Due to some modern family gymnastics I am going to own 86 of the five hundred plus acres. My half Brother and half Sister will have the rest. This has come as a surprise, I expected nothing. Sadly, instead of being a boon, this may be an albatross. I suppose I could put it into the ACUB program which would generate about $60,000 and put that money into some sort of account to pay for planting pines and the taxes until the trees mature. My sons are in their middle thirties and should get to sell a crop in their retirement years and plant another for their children's retirement.
It's a sad situation. The farming in the area is subsistence farming. There is little demand for house sites. My step mother nibbled off a few house sites for carpetbaggers. The nibbling was not artful.
I have another farm with pines about to mature. Talked to the timber agent I have dealt with for over thirty years. Got the LONG speech about southerners planting pines thirty years ago and the housing bust and I joists and OSB and.... The net result was that I should wait several years but the property may generate a quarter of a million. Could have skipped the speech. I just hate being the last Irby to own the family farm. My question about what to plant in the low grounds was mostly to generate some desirable trees for my son who may be a woodworker.
There isn't any land in VA that would sell for less than $1000 acre. The point is that the land has a current value, likely in the range of "1-3000/acre as "farm land", farm land being loosely defined as something not attractive for development any time soon. For discussion lets say the land would sell for $1000. The pure economic analysis compares the expected appreciation of the land, +/- holding costs, vs selling the land and investing the $1000 in some other investment. Holding cost is any expected income from the property minus costs of holding-maintenance and taxes. Don't underestimate the "cost" of defending land you don't live on. If you don't "pee on your corners" regularly someone else will be. I find deer stands, firewood harvest and other encroachments on our timber land every year.
Barry is concerned about taxes so they must be significant. Nobody has come up with any means of generating significant income (it most certainly is not growing trees that are not already near harvest age).
One time payments for conservation reserve and the like are considered a partial sale that will adversely affect the marketability of the land in the future. They make no economic sense unless the goal is to preserve the land for some future family purpose. This choice needs validation from all concerned that the future family has a need for it. Otherwise this choice is "kicking the can" into the future and the future is left with even less marketable land. In most cases heirs prefer money.