• Project Objectives
• Forward and Managers Statement
  • Project Co-operators and Project Landowners
• Methodology
• Site Description and Site Operations
  • Site One
  • Site Two
  • Site Three
  • Site Four
• Three Year Cost Summary
• Growth and Survival
• Observations
• Conclusions and Recommendations

• Demonstrate and determine the potential of several management methods that appear to not currently be used or contemplated in demonstration or commercial plantations.
• Attempt to show the values of growing plantation fibre on land with a low opportunity cost (marginal land) and as part of an integrated agro-forest plantation.
• Determine the costs/benefits of these specific methods on these types of sites
• Assist the growers in developing economically and environmentally sustainable woodlots and agroforesty objectives.

Back to top

Carl Barber
Carl was raised on a mixed farm in south eastern Saskatchewan  Formal education includes environmental science and carpentry. His business background includes agricultural building construction and furniture manufacturing.  He is an active partner in Wildcat Wood Products Ltd. located at Mistatim, SK, owns Tiger Hills Outfitting centred at Birch Hills, co-manages the family farm with his brothers, and owns two woodlots, Birch Hills and Kelvington.  Carol is a board member of Parkland Agroforestry; a non profit corporation formed to assist members with private forest land and those with a desire to grow woody crops or conduct agroforesty practices to co-operatively and sustainably manage and market these resources.

Curtis Braaten
Curtis was raised n a mixed farm at Birch Hills.  Curtis' business background includes farming and owning/operating a gas-bar/cafe/confectionary operation.  Curtis is developing his 160 acres for intensive alternative agriculture.  Curtis is a member of Parkland Agroforestry.

Bruce Lebarre
Bruce was raised on a mixed farm at Naicam.  A desire to derive some economic benefit from extensive aspen stands on the family farm resulted in Bruce helping initiate the development of Parkland Agroforestry.  Bruce operates a family farm at Naicam, is a part time musician, and has a partnership interest in Wildcat Wood Products Ltd.  Bruce is a contact consultant for the Environmental Farm Planning initiative.  Bruce is a member and past president of Parkland Agroforestry.

Dave Halland
Dave continues to be an active part of Halland Farms, a third generation family farm, logging, saw-milling and value added wood processing.  Dave's extensive experience in small scale sawmill operations have enabled him to be on the board or advisory committees of organizations such as the Prince Albert Model Forest and the Saskatchewan Forest Center.  Dave is a member of Parkland Agroforestry.

We all have a desire to develop more intensive management of tree resources with the intent to provide a net economic benefit from those resources on private land.  The four of us recognized that long term success in agriculture in this province may not lie within what has been the currently accepted farm business model for larger extensive grain and livestock production.  We have all been educated through hard experience that long term growth, cost and revenue projections for any given initiative is rarely accurate.  We believe that generally these projections fail to take into account the "what if" extreme scenarios.  We believe that extreme circumstances are generally encountered in most long term ventures.  We also realize that knowledge is essential to successfully being able to weather these extreme circumstances.

There is extensive experience with hybrid poplar as well as a variety of other deciduous and coniferous trees in a variety of ecological and economic situations around the globe, including North America.  Most, if not all, of these plantations are situated where climates are more moderate, rainfall or irrigation is readily available, and soils are richer. Relying on borrowed methodology from more temperate areas may avoid repetition and failure but it is necessary to confirm the relative advantages of these methods within a local context as well as experiment with new methodology.

There is documented success of maximizing growth rates by utilizing cultivation for preparation of sites and maintenance of tree plantations, specifically hybrid poplar, in more moderate climates.  Many workshops, meetings, and written information suggest that these methods and growth expectations be somewhat projected from these circumstances onto Saskatchewan soil. We believe that a universal approach typically will not work in Saskatchewan due to climatic and soil variation. There also seemed to be a significant lack of information regarding the equipment, time, and costs that would be associated with the development and maintenance of tree plantations in the varied circumstances present in our region.

Utilizing our knowledge base, each of us developed an individual plantation plan that we thought would best fit the physical attributes of our chosen locations and our readily available resource base.  We believed that to have wide acceptance and success of a tree planting initiative some alternate methods would have to be tried to assess their relative success. Specifically we wanted to obtain some basic economic information that could be utilized to develop some reasonably accurate plantation budgets. We realize that a relatively small scale and hastily developed three year project leaves a lot of unanswered questions regarding the viability of  tree plantations and various management techniques. We acknowledge that our methodology may be flawed due to inexperience as well as lack of time and equipment but we hope and believe that the information derived from this project will be of value to those that have the opportunity to review our findings.

Back to top

• Obtain four different demonstration sites in four distinct geographical areas
• Ensure that each of these sites has different site histories and soil types
• Obtain education material as required to facilitate practical decisions
• Get the landowners to plan the whole process to best fit location, soil type, current operations, time available, and equipment
• Place the responsibility of conducting all of the operational aspects of these sites with the landowners
• Attend workshops and read literature to expand the knowledge base for everyone involved with the project
• Collect information regarding timing of operations, equipment used and manpower required to conduct these operations
• Do a simple cost analysis for each of these operations using the collected data and combining that with recognized lease or custom rates for each activity or piece of equipment used. Use a competitive labor rate to determine manpower costs
• Provide a simple list of observations regarding successes, failures, difficulties and etc. for each site or for all the sites collectively
• Provide open and meaningful discussion and site access with researchers and any other interested individuals or groups
• Collect survival, growth and yield data on each site each year
• Summarize all of this information into yearly interim reports and final report at the end of the tree year project
• Present this information, observations and opinions as requested to agro-forestry focus groups, workshops and planning sessions

Back to top

Site One
Site Two
Site Three
Site Four

Back to top

• Site Location
  • Rural Municipality of Birch Hills #460 Saskatchewan
  • SW 29-46-23-W2  UTM 13 0479483 5871609
  • Two miles east of junction of highways #20 and #3 on the north side highway #3
  • Five acres on the east end of the north side, ten acres along the east
     
• Site Description
  • Boreal Transition Zone, G14 Prince Alberta Plain, Elevation 450 to 457 m
  • Productivity rating: 102, arable, open field
  • Minimum till history, canola stubble
  • Drainage class T1<4%
     
• Soil Classification
  • Vertic black chernozem and rego black chernozem with a clay texture
  • PH 6.06 to 7.21
  • Horizons Ah 0-40 cm; Bss 40-60 cm; Cca 60+ cm on lower slope pit
  • Horizons Ahe 0-5 cm; Ae 5-20 cm; Bt 20-40 cm; Cca 40+ cm on upper slope
     
• Site Layout
  • Twenty rows on the north side, twenty rows on the east side
  • Block planting is incorporated with additional plantings on the perimeter
  • Spacing is roughly three meters by three meters
     
• Site Preparation
  • North Side
    • Preparation in May 2003
    • Spring burn off with glyphosphate using a high clearance sprayer
    • Sub-soil to approximately eighteen inches in the planting row with a modified shank type field sub soil ripper pulled with a Case 1070 two wheel drive tractor
    • Rotary cultivation along the planting rows with a six foot, three point hitch cultivator mounted on a Ford 5000 tractor
       
  • East Side
    • One application of glyphosphate was applied in early May and one in August using a high clearance sprayer
    • This side was passed over in August with a Flexi Coil heavy harrow pulled by a Versatile 876 4WD tractor to gather up glyphosphate resistant canola
    • The east boundary was surveyed with a transit.  Row spacing was measured from there
    • Sub-soiling in October was completed with the Versatile 876 pulling the modified sub-soil ripper.
    • Rotary cultivation was completed in October with JD 3140 FWA tractor and 7 foot 3 point hitch heavy duty rotary cultivator
    • Orchard grass was planted in late October with JD 5659 tractor pulling a fifteen foot zero disturbance disc drill
       
• Plant Material
  • Walker poplar
  • Container stock, 4/15 containers
  • Planting material was picked up in May from storage
  • Plant material was thawed but kept cool and moist prior to planting.  Some of the material planted in 2003 was kept in cool storage for a couple weeks prior to planting
     
• Planting
  • 2003
    • Five acres was planted on the north side in conjunction with another five acres not included as part of this project, resulting in this projects block for 2003 being eighteen rows, each 370 meters long
    • Planting was accomplished with a sit on a field tree planter supplied by the RM of Birch Hills.  This planted was a double plow opener unit of the same style that PFRA utilizes
    • This planter was pulled by an Oliver 88 tractor, with two persons sitting on the planter
    • Row spacing was attempted utilizing a front mounted spacing bar on the tractor
       
  • 2004
    • Ten acres was planted along the east side in early May.  this block is 20 rows wide
    • Dave Hiebert, a semi retired professional tree planter, was hired to plant this block by hand
    • Row layout was done to facilitate sub-soiling and rotary cultivation.  There was enough settling of soil that Dave could follow the sub soil trench line
    • Spacing within the row was accomplished by measured pacing
       
  • 2005
    • Container stock for replanting was ordered based on fall survival estimates for the east side
    • This material was used to replant poplar that appeared to be dead on May 29
       
• Maintenance
  • 2003
    • Plastic mulch was applied to the north side plantings in May, June and October. Delayed mulch application occurred due to an inability to obtain manpower when the mulch applicator was available. Equipment used included an Oliver 88 tractor and a mulch applicator supplied by PFRA
    • Strong winds pulled a fair bit of plastic mulch loose on one side. This was repaired by hand or re-installed
    • Weed growth in tree rows that weren’t covered with plastic mulch in May or June was maintained with a Stihl grass trimmer and hand weeding
    • Weeds between the rows were mowed four times using a six foot three point hitch rotary finish mower installed on a Ford 2N tractor
       
  • 2004
    • No maintenance was conducted on the north side block
    • Small and weak container stock, wet weather, and timing of available manpower combined to prevent timely installation of plastic mulch prior to extensive weed growth on the east side
    • Extensive effort was necessary to locate and pull weeds in thick and high weed growth. This started in June and proceeded throughout the summer
    • Brush saws with triangular metal blades were used to mow the weeds within the rows
    • The Ford 2N with the finishing mower was used to mow between the rows
    • Installation of plastic mulch proceeded as soon as possible as each few rows were cleaned up. The nine most easterly rows were completed by mid July, the middle rows by the middle of August and the most westerly rows just prior to freeze up in October
       
  • 2005
    • Loose poly mulch was rolled up. This was a result of a severe windstorm in April. Most of this damage was on the mulch applied in October

Back to top

• Site Location
  • Rural Municipality of Birch Hills # 460 Saskatchewan
  • NW 04-46-23 W2. UTM 130480652 5865928
  • Access is limited. Access directions are: 2 mile east of Junction #20 and #3 east of Birch Hills, 2 miles south, 1 mile east, approximately 1-1/4 mile south, approximately ¼ mile east.
  • An irregularly shaped fifteen acres in the north east corner of the quarter section
     
• Site Description
  • Boreal transition zone, G15 Tiger hills Upland, Elevation 487 to 495 m
  • Productivity rating (not rated), marginal wasteland, open field surrounded by aspen, balsam, chokecherry and hazel
  • Untouched and ungrazed for at least 40 years, previously cultivated
  • Vegetated primarily by smooth brome with a mix of native fescue, snowberry, chokecherry, wild rose, Saskatoon, and other unidentified broadleaved plants
  • Drainage class T1<4%
     
• Soil Classification
  • Dark gray luvisol with textures of very fine sand for the Ahe, sandy loam for the Ae, a sandy clay loam for the Bt and silty clay loam for the Cca
  • Horizons Ahe 0-5 cm.; Ae 5-20 cm.; Bt 20-40 cm.; Cca 40+ cm
  • This site has variable soil, all variables weren’t tested but some of the Siberian larch and the Jack pine are planted into a sand ridge
     
• Site Layout
  • The rows are typically irregular in length to match the opening shape
  • The rows are angled in a WNW direction to maximize length
  • The PFRA genetic larch trial is located in a central square block that takes advantage of the most consistent elevation and soil type
  • Most of the Smoky Lake larch is planted on the upper slope on the west end. The remainder is planted on the sand ridge
  • The jack pine is interspersed with the larch on the sand ridge
  • The Walker poplar are planted on the remainder of the site with the exception of the most shaded areas and the irregular short rows along the south edge which are planted to white spruce
  • The rows are spaced at 3.66 m
  • Tree spacing within the rows was initially 2 m. About 1/2 of the walker poplar has been inter-planted with white spruce so that spacing is now 1 m. A few hundred of the Siberian larches have also been inter-planted with jack pine which has resulted in similar 1 m. spacing
     
• Site Preparation
  • 2003
    • Approximately ¾ of the site had an application of 2 liters of glyphosphate per acre in July 2003 using a three point hitch sprayer mounted on a ford 5000 tractor
    • Site was mapped and rows were laid out in July
    • Six foot wide strips in the row were mowed in early August with a three point hitch finishing mower mounted on a 2N Ford tractor
    • These six foot mowed strips extended into vegetation that had not been previously sprayed with glyphosphate
    • A second spot application of glyphosphate was applied in late August to missed strips and to complete burn-off
    • An application of glyphosphate was applied to the mowed strips only where the mowed rows extended into the area that had not been previously sprayed
       
  • 2004
    • A simple triangular marker was constructed and used to mark the appropriate spacing within the rows
       
  • 2005
    • All the rows were mowed with a lawnmower prior to replanting
       
• Plant Material
  • Walker poplar container stock grown by P.R.T. was obtained through S.E.
  • Genetic trial container larch was supplied by PFRA at Indian Head
  • Two year old bare root larch was obtained through C2C trees from Smoky Lake Nurseries
  • Bare root white spruce was supplied by Carl Barber. This spruce was originally PRT discard material and was nurtured in seedling beds at Birch Hills for 2 years
  • Walker poplar for replanting was obtained through SE from PRT as was some jack pine and white spruce container stock for inter-planting and replanting the failed Siberian larch in the genetic trial
  • All container stock was grown in 4/15 containers with the exception of the Lindquist larch from PFRA which was grown in the Sask. Power Shand greenhouse in Estevan
  • The plant material was thawed out just prior to planting with the exception of the larch which were shipped so arrived thawed.
     
• Planting
  • 2003
    • No planting in was done in 2003 as the site needed advance preparation
       
  • 2004
    • Approximately 13 acres was hand planted in May of 2004. The bare root larch, walker poplar and spruce were planted on May 7 and 8. The genetic trial larch was planted May 14 and May 15
    • Dave Hiebert, a semi retired professional tree planter was hired to plant this site. Dave spent some time training Chris and Carl Barber in proper planting techniques. They assisted with planting.
    • Particular care was taken to properly protect and hydrate the bare root larch and spruce. All of the plant material was protected from wind, sun, and heat by using tarps, shade and by using silvobags during planting.
    • All of the genetic trial larch was flagged immediately to ensure they didn’t get lost if competitive growth was excessive.
    • The walker poplar and spruce were flagged prior to year end due to their small size and as it appeared that weeds were invading the site and the grass was beginning to regenerate from seed.
       
  • 2005
    • Walker poplar, white spruce and jack pine container stock was used to replace seedlings lost to mortality and to interplant with the previously planted poplar and bare root larch.
    • Dave and Carl hand planted this material on May 28, 2005.
       
• Maintenance
  • 2004
    • A narrow strip of approximately 1 meter was mowed with a push type lawn mower along each row on an as needed basis. Some of the site was done once, some done twice.
    • A few weeds such as narrow leafed hawks beard and a climbing vetch were growing too close to the seedlings to be mowed effectively. Some casual labor was hired to hand pull these weeds.
    • No chemical was used on this site in 2004.
       
  • 2005
    • Mowing one width along each side with a push type lawnmower was done in May, in June, in July and in August where the grass had regenerated the most and twice at the top of the hill where the two year old larch was planted.
    • A Stihl brush saw with a triangular blade was used to cut the weeds close to each seedling to avoid stem damage from the lawnmower.
    • Students were hired in July to hand weed around each seedling.
    • The 3/4 of the site that had two complete applications of glyphosphate in 2003 was mowed in July with a rotary brush mower mounted on a Case 1845C skid steer.
    • No chemical was used on this site in 2005.

Back to top

• Site Location
  • Rural Municipality of Torch River.
  • NW 21-53-15 W2nd. UTM 13 5352000 5938200
  • Eight and a half miles north of highway #55 at Love on the west side of the road.
  • Approximately three acres triangular in shape with aspen, balsam polar and willow on the west and south sides, a primary gravel road on the east side and a single phase power line up the middle.
     
• Site Description
  • Mid boreal upland zone, E24 White Gull Plain, elevation 373 m.
  • Arable, formerly minimum till annual cropping, productivity rating?
  • Drainage class T1<4%. This site is flat.
     
• Soil Classification
  • It is estimated that the A horizon is dark gray silty clay loam, with a B horizon of sandy clay loam and a C horizon of sand. Soil analysis was done by Ken Van Rees as part of a nutrient study he is conducting on this site. This information is available in his report on this project.
     
• Site Layout
  • The rows run north and south and are irregular in length to fit the triangular shape of the opening.
  • Spacing between rows and in rows is 2.44 m.
  • This site is planted to Walker poplar.
     
• Site Preparation
  • 2003
    • Approximately four inches of pine and spruce sawdust was spread on this site in early May. This sawdust came from Dave’s sawmill located approximately five miles away.
    • The sawdust was loaded into grain tandem grain trucks and spread using a Ford New Holland front wheel assist tractor with a front mounted dozer blade.
    • Planting lines were set by pulling a power pole rigged up with iron markers and a hitch.
       
• Plant Material
  • Walker poplar container stock grown by P.R.T. was obtained through SE.
  • Ten inch cuttings were obtained from Parkland Agroforestry.
  • Container stock was grown in 4/15 containers.
  • Cuttings were #1 grade. 
  • Planting material was picked up from storage in May and was thawed out just prior to planting.
     
• Planting
  • 2003
    • Dave supervised his grandchildren and some of their buddies from a youth group to do the planting in late May.
    • The majority of the site was planted with container stock.
    • The south end was planted with cuttings.
    • Planting was completed in late May.
       
  • 2004
    • Dead stock was replanted with Walker container stock from SE.
    • Replanting was completed in mid May.
       
• Maintenance
  • 2003
    • Spot chemical control was done twice with a hand held weed wipe.
    • One trip of in row mowing was done in the summer with a small yard tractor c/w a 3ph mower.
       
  • 2004
    • Spot chemical control was done once with a and held weed wipe.
    • One trip of in row mowing was done in mid summer with a small tractor and 3ph mower.
       
  • 2005
    • Spot chemical control was done once with a hand held weed wipe.
    • The first whorl of branches was pruned off the trees over a couple meters in height.

Back to top

• Site Location
  • Rural Municipality of Lake Lenore
  • SE 1 – 42 – 19 – W 2
  • 3-1/2 miles west of  #3 highway from the Pleasantdale junction, north side of road
  • 2 acres
     
• Site Description
  • Boreal Transition Zone, G15 Tiger Hills Upland. Elevation 540 m.
  • Productivity rating: arable, open field, aspen border on south and west.
  • Traditional cultivation, 1 year in wheat, previously alfalfa.
  • Drainage class T1< 4%
     
• Soil Classification
  • Loam
  • Ph not confirmed
  • Classification not confirmed A horizon 10- 15 cm, gravelly to stony B and C horizon, boulders evident on surface
     
• Site Layout
  • 20 rows on the south side of the quarter, adjacent to aspen bluff.
  • Approximately 1 acre of Siberian larch and one acre of walker poplar.
  • Spacing is three meters by three meters.
     
• Site Preparation
  • One trip with a tandem disc in the fall of 2003 after harvest.
  • Spot application of glyphosphate using garden sprayer.
  • Three trips with a tandem disc in May, prior to planting.
     
• Plant Material
  • 4/15 container stock was obtained through SE.
  • Two year old bare root Siberian larch was obtained from C2C trees in Alberta.
     
• Planting
  • 2004
    • Two acres was planted in early June 2004, 1/2 to larch and 1/2 to poplar.
    • Two inexperienced  students were hired on a casual basis to plant by hand.
    • Row and space marking was accomplished by hand measuring.
       
  • 2005
    • Walker poplar container stock was used to replace mortality losses.
    • Replanting was done by Dave Hiebert.
       
• Maintenance
  • 2004
    • The site was cross cultivated with a farm tractor 10 times throughout the growing season as required.
       
  • 2005
    • The site was cross cultivated with a farm tractor and a shank type cultivator eight times throughout the growing season.
    • Hand weeding around each plant was done in the early summer.

Back to top

Click on the small graphs to enlarge them.  They will open into a new window.

Back to top

Click on the small graphs to enlarge them.  They will open into a new window.

Back to top

There were some modifications to our plans for launching this project in 2003 as notification of our successful application for funding was not received until late spring. Our demonstration efforts have been subjected to climatic conditions that must be considered extreme to the point of being outside of the previously normal range of expectations. These conditions included the hottest summer on record in 2003, record breaking cold in 2004 that included a killing frost in mid August (minimum temperatures of below -10C were recorded in the vicinity), and an exceptionally early spring in 2005 followed by a week of hard frost and a very wet summer with very low sun and heat units. Extreme weather conditions appear to be more frequent than in the past so should be considered in any long term cropping initiative

Site Location, Description, Soils, Objectives

Each site is considered a suitable or highly suitable planting location based on the PFRA site suitability maps. Three of these sites have additional objectives stated by the landowners in addition to the primary objective of providing a platform for demonstration and basic research. For this reason the level of continued maintenance and care will depend on financial and time constraints that the landowners may be subject to.

• Site One:
  • The primary landowner objective on Curtis’s site is to not only grow a fiber plantation but to utilize this as a forest belt to develop a mini-climate for the interior of his 160 acres for the eventual development of fruit orchards, market gardens, nutraceuticals and free range livestock.
     
  • The net benefits of this modified climate would be difficult to assess but could be significant in the future. This site is situated along a major highway so very visible to the public. 
     
  • Some of the low spots on this gently undulating site pooled frost in 2004 and 2005. Extremely wet conditions also resulted in water pooling in 2005 in areas that had been successfully farmed for over 20 years. There is no protection on this site from chemical drift or wind.
     
  • A history of careful minimum tillage was perceived to be a benefit as was the quality soil. 
     
• Site Two:
  • The landowner objective here is to attempt to grow plantation fiber as a part of a long term woodlot management strategy on non-cultivated land that is generally considered to be marginally arable because of soil type, subsurface stones, and topography. The project focus on this site was to experiment with methods that may be more cost effective and environmentally beneficial within these parameters.
     
  • Previous assessment of this site identified potential competition from residual vegetation, partial shading from neighboring trees, sloping topography, inconsistent and relatively poor soil structure, visibility and access on the negative side of the equation. Risk of wildlife damage was also considered and unfortunately proved to be the major factor in the failure to demonstrate alternative methods for the development of Hybrid poplar plantations. 
     
  • Positive factors included shelter from wind, a higher elevation to avoid early and late frosts, minimal or zero risk of chemical drift from neighboring fields, an easterly aspect, and the inclusion into a larger woodlot management plan.
     
• Site Three:
  • This site is located beside a main farm access road so is visible to the public. The landowner objective on this site is to grow high value hybrid poplar on a triangular corner of a field that was impractical to farm annually as well as to experiment with some alternative methods for plantation site management.
     
  • Positive factors on this site include flat topography, good soil structure for hybrid poplar, proximity to a source of sawdust to be used in weed and moisture management, and a location far enough north to be within the boreal zone. A suspected advantage may be ground water within the root zone but the existence of ground water has not been confirmed. 
     
  • Negative factors include a power line intersecting the plantation, shading and competition from neighboring aspen, balsam poplar and willow, and winter damage from deer and moose.
     
• Site Four:
  • This site is located beside a main farm access road but visibility is blocked by a stand of native aspen. The objective on this site was to demonstrate the viability and costs of traditional plantation methodology.
     
  • Unfortunately this region has been subject to the wet and cold conditions that made it difficult to complete timely preparation and planting procedures. The soil on this site is similar to site two.
     
  • Negative factors on this site include partial shading and competition from native aspen and balsam poplar and extensive browsing damage from deer.

Site Preparation

• Site One:
  • Careful consideration was given to preparation procedures recommended by PFRA, CFS and SFC.  This included using a previously cultivated site, sub-soiling, rotary cultivation and the application of glyphosphate. The recommendation to prepare the previous year for planting could not be followed in 2003 due to time constraints. Pre emergent chemical was not used due to the plan to plant grass between the rows at a later date. This did not happen.
     
  • The ten acres planted in 2004 had the benefit of a full season of time which allowed two applications of glyphosphate as well as sub-soiling, rotary cultivation and the planting of between row grass prior to the planting of the trees. Pre-emergent herbicides were not used because of the grass. This ability to prepare the previous year resulted in better moisture and soil conditions and provided a wider window for planting in the spring.  Heavy harrowing and rotary cultivation was accomplished late in the fall after the second application of chemical in late August.
     
  • The benefit of this second application of chemical appeared to be minimal. The timing of these procedures should probably have been reversed.
     
• Site Two:
  • As the focus on this site was to attempt alternative methods on uncultivated land it was deemed necessary to allow one season for chemical and mechanical preparation. This site is also irregular in shape which required some mapping to determine size. The application of glyphosphate in July appeared to be very effective at removing the existing competition that was primarily smooth brome grass but included wild fescues, clovers, snowberry, wild rose, chokecherry and other native plants.
     
  • Row layout on this treated section was completed and it became evident that there was not enough prepared area so row layout was extended up the clearing through previously untreated vegetation. These rows were then mowed in strips, leaving the standing vegetation between the rows to catch snow and minimize the presence of wind at ground level. This procedure was followed in the fall with another application of chemical to clean up missed strips in the previously treated area and to apply chemical to the mowed strips in the previously untreated area.
     
  • It has become very evident in the following two years that there is much less re-growth of grasses in the section that was mowed prior to the chemical application. In addition there is very little evidence of invasive weeds in this area. Conversely the area that had an early blanket application of chemical has shown almost no regeneration of native shrubby species but now has a very healthy regeneration of brome grass and/or fescue and white clover. There is also an increasing spectrum and density of invasive weeds not previously observed or observed in minor amounts on this portion of the site.
     
• Site Three:
  • The preparation of this site was primarily focused around the utilization of the landowners waste sawdust from the sawmill that the family operates close by. This is a simple process which involves loading and moving sawdust out of the mill (a necessary project in any case) hauling the sawdust to the growing site, dumping and then spreading the material to a thickness of about four inches. This is relatively efficient with existing farm trucks, tractors and loaders with the appropriate attachments. Transportation and spreading efficiencies could be improved by utilizing live bottom chip trucks.
     
  • There was little evidence of competition following this procedure other than some suckering from neighboring trees and a bit of grass. The grasses and weeds were easily controlled by spot application of glyphosphate using a hand held weed wipe. This tool allows the application of chemical without risk to the trees.
     
  • The sawdust mulch allows penetration of moisture, protection of the soil surface, and a reasonably close duplication of the natural duff layer that is typically found in existing treed areas.
     
• Site Four:
  • Although this was a previously cropped site there was residual alfalfa, brome and quack-grass from its prior use as a hayfield.
     
  • A combination of mechanical and chemical procedures was utilized to establish a “black earth” site as recommended by PFRA, CFS and SE. These methods resulted in initial control but not elimination of these species.
     
  • It is not known what impact timing of cultivation and chemical application had on this result but it is assumed that results would have been better without the unusual weather constraints.

Planting

• Site One:
  • The five acres planted in 2003 were planted with a pull type planter originally of PFRA origin in late May.  The ten acres and replanting was done by hand by a professional tree planter. This was done in early May in an attempt to take advantage of an early and warm spring. Unfortunately the weather turned from being exceptionally warm to cold immediately prior to planting. Hand planting appeared to be more cost effective and precise as well as more flexible in terms of various soil and weather conditions. 
     
• Site Two:
  • This site was hand planted by a professional tree planter with the assistance of the landowner. It was generally cold when this site was planted in early to mid May. Planting into undisturbed dead sod was relatively easy except for the two year old bare root larch. A significant amount of additional time was spent sorting, marking, handling and precisely planting the genetic trial larch as well as accurately spacing the remainder of the trees within the rows. Replanting was also done by Dave and Carl with a significant amount of time spent trying to determine if the existing trees were surviving due to a very recent series of hard frosts.
     
• Site Three:
  • This site was hand planted in May by the landowner, his grandchildren, and members of their church youth group.  No problems were encountered. The small amount of replanting was accomplished the same way.
     
• Site Four:
  • This site was planted by a couple of local students with supervision by the landowner. Progress was relatively slow but no problems were encountered.

Plant Material

Generally the container stock walker poplar received in 2003 had good caliper and root structure and appeared to be very healthy. This made handling and planting easy and allowed early maintenance procedures, which reduced ongoing costs, and has resulted a high survival rate and good to excellent growth.

Walker container stock received in 2004 was small to extremely small with poor root structure. Most of this material would have been rejected if we had felt there was any choice. This resulted in high mortality and delayed maintenance procedures which significantly impacted the cost and overall viability of this portion of the project.

The replant poplar received in 2005 was better than but not as good as that received in 2003. The small amount of cuttings planted in 2003 was good but showed very poor survival. The bare root larch was very nice, consistent in size and root structure. The container genetic trial larch ranged from good to poor as could be expected. This material appeared to be handled poorly prior to being received for planting. The Lindquist larch had been grown in very small containers Most of these did not survive.

All of the material provided by PFRA was supplied in bags and were tied with twine which is not considered by professional re-foresters to be the best way to minimize plant stress prior to planting. The spruce seedlings supplied in 2004 by the landowner were inconsistent in size but showed good survival. The spruce received in 2005 had been thawed prior to us receiving them so showed significant evidence of mould, which resulted in high mortality. They ranged significantly in size. Root structure ranged from good to poor.

The jack pine had nice caliper, growth and root structure and exhibited excellent survival and vigor. All of the container stock other than the PFRA material was supplied with plugs wrapped in groups of six with cellophane, and then packed in poly bag lined waxed silvo boxes. The bare root stock was also supplied in bag lined boxes.

Maintenance

• Site One:
  • The installation of plastic mulch was the primary method planned to control weed growth within the rows.  Soil preparation, soil moisture and timely operations are all essential for this procedure to work well. If the soil is too wet or too hard this procedure become more time consuming and may be impossible to complete prior to the growth of a crop of weeds.
     
  • The planted trees also need to be of sufficient size that they can be seen as a bump under the freshly laid poly to facilitate the cutting of a slit to pull them through. A three or four person crew is also required when the poly is being installed. The weather, soil conditions, manpower availability and vigor of the planted poplar were all conducive to the completion of most of this process early in 2003.
     
  • This was not the case in 2004. Most of the poplars planted in 2004 were too small to see under the plastic mulch so the application was delayed to allow the new trees to grow. This did not happen; the weeds overtook the trees instead. The trees then had to be located in the weeds, weeds had to be hand pulled from around each tree, and the rest of the vegetation in the row had to be mowed to allow the application of the poly mulch.
     
  • Continued wet weather prevented this procedure from being completed until late fall at which time the soil had become too compacted to easily bury the edges of the poly with the applicator. The result was extensive hand maintenance to avoid losing that section of the plantation altogether. About 50% of the poly applied late in 2004 ripped loose in an extreme wind storm in the early spring of 2005. This occurred at a time when the soil covering the edges was mushy from spring snow melt.
     
  • Timing with this whole situation was made more difficult as the PFRA mulch applicator could be used on weekends only due to work commitments by the landowner.
     
  • Mowing weeds and the planted grass completed the maintenance on this site. Expensive and time consuming equipment breakdowns, wet weather on available weekends, potholes throughout the plantation rows and general discouragement by the landowner eliminated any maintenance mowing in 2005.
     
• Site Two:
  • The growth of weeds and the regeneration of native plant species was minimal in 2004. There was a general but light growth of narrow leafed hawks beard on a portion of the site. All of the standing vegetation between the rows, alive or dead, was left to minimize the desiccation effect of the wind, to assist in snow retention, and to improve the “micro site” growing conditions within the row. It was hoped that this vegetation may also divert the attention of the deer away from the poplar.
     
  • Hand weeding was done primarily to remove a small amount of constricting climbing vetch and hawks beard from around the trees. Mowing with a push type lawnmower seemed to be a cost effective method to maintain the small amount of in row vegetation in 2004. Competitive plant growth on most of this site exploded in 2005, aided no doubt by lots of rainfall. The glyphosphate applied in July of 2003 may have eliminated most of the existing competition and it was hoped that without disturbance nothing new would grow but the unusually wet summer promoted unrestricted growth of a vast storehouse of seed.
     
  • Tall and heavy growth of grass between the rows in this section precipitated mowing in July. This seemed quite effective in minimizing growth between the rows for the remainder of the season. It was felt that the small stature of most of the trees combined with a complicated array of competitive vegetation made chemical maintenance risky and relatively impractical. Mowing and hand weeding within the rows kept the growth down with the hope that tree growth and new chemical registrations will allow chemical maintenance in the near future.  The bare root larch now is of sufficient size to allow easier maintenance.
     
  • Most of this larch is planted in the area that had glyphosphate application in the rows only and after mowing in August of 2003. There continues to be very little grass competition here and very little evidence of invasive plant species. It is possible that existing shrubby species, while not appearing to present significant competition to the planted trees, is preventing grasses and invasive species from growing.
     
  • The spread of Canada thistle, thistle, dandelion and woody absinth is the most worrisome on this site. Smooth brome is probably the most competitive but can be controlled. Climbing vetch may become the most damaging due to its ability to cling and climb.  
     
• Site Three:
  • The layer of sawdust mulch applied prior to planting proved to be very effective at minimizing competitive plant growth. The utilization of a hand held weed wipe to apply chemical also proved to be very effective. There is a fair amount of competition on the west and south sides of this small demonstration plantation from balsam poplar roots and suckers that is more difficult to manage.
     
  • This combined with extensive shade from the same native trees is having a significant impact on the growth of the poplar along these edges. The use of the sawdust has made this site eco-friendly and has practically eliminated ongoing maintenance issues. This method also seems to provide very favorable growing conditions.
     
  • Researchers have suggested that using this method may reduce the amount of nitrogen available to the trees in the short run. If this is the case there appears to be no cumulative negative impact at this stage.
     
• Site Four:
  • The use of traditional cross cultivation on this site is relatively effective in terms of minimizing plant growth between the rows. Maintaining an adequate cultivation regime becomes difficult due to wet weather and time constraints. It has also proven difficult to prevent mortality due to cultivator drift.
     
  • The newly planted trees were not flagged so when grass and weeds grew close to the new small trees they quickly became buried somewhere in a small patch of vegetation. Students were hired in 2005 to hand weed around each tree. This helped locate and release the trees but did not eliminate this competition and proved to be relatively costly.
     
  • Chemical or mulch control is needed to be effective in the long term. A lot of this residual competition may have been effectively removed with timely applications of glyphosphate in 2003 and then again prior to planting.

Back to top

• Walker hybrid poplar is sensitive to temperature, soil moisture, competition and most farm chemicals currently in use in western Canada.
   
• Poplar breeding efforts should focus on clones that are: more able to withstand our climate, are more competitive, have reduced susceptibility to disease, and are not as palatable to deer. 
   
• Walker poplar will grow very fast in the right circumstances.
   
• Walker poplar is somewhat susceptible to some canker and leaf diseases, particularly if the trees are stressed in any way.
   
• Very few of the walker poplar viewed during fall assessments exhibited spring growth from the previous fall’s primary tip. In a lot of cases this has resulted in crooked stems and entry points for disease.
   
• Frost appears to have less negative impact on vigorous trees.
   
• Walker poplar seems to sometimes initially hide stress damage only to have it show up the next year (die back from frost for example).
   
• Using plastic mulch for weed control is effective if procedures can be conducted in a timely manner. It is not cost or time efficient and should not be seriously considered for large scale plantings.
   
• It was not possible to assess the impact of sub-soiling. Naturally loose soil structures and those loosened mechanically appear to have a positive impact on rooting and growth providing they do not dry out.
   
• Using herbicides to remove unwanted vegetation cover one year prior to planting has a positive impact on soil moisture and consistency. Removal of vegetative residue through cultivation can minimize this positive effect.
   
• Chopping of residual vegetation to maximize a ground mulch layer is a simple and cost effective way to reduce soil moisture losses due to evaporation, reduce the chance of soil erosion, and minimize soil temperature fluctuations. 
   
• Seeding appropriate grasses between the tree rows can be a cost effective way to control competition resulting from the spread of unwanted vegetation. This method could successfully be used for “intercropping” if there is adequate row spacing to allow for such things as forage harvesting equipment.  
   
• No conclusions could be reached regarding the success of zero till methods on somewhat marginal soil due to extensive browsing damage to the poplar by deer.
   
• The possibility and likelihood of nutrient deficiencies in previously grassed areas is recognized but it seems possible that there are natural chemical inhibitors given off by some competitive species such as grasses that minimizes the viability of hybrid poplar.
   
• Registration of herbicides, pesticides and fungicides currently used in tree plantations in other countries would significantly reduce the risk, time and money required to successfully grow tree plantations in most circumstances here.
   
• Sawdust mulch as a means to control competition appears to be more cost effective than other existing methods, including traditional cultivation. 
   
• Sawdust mulch appears very effective at controlling competition of most kinds and is eco-friendly if available within a practical hauling distance of the planting site.
   
• Minimal and zero tillage preparation and maintenance shows some significant promise for certain soil types and climatic conditions.
   
• Registration and usage of a wider spectrum of herbicides will probably be necessary to increase the economic viability of tree plantations in Saskatchewan and western Canada.
   
• Siberian larch is a relatively fast growing tree and appears to be much less sensitive to soil, climatic conditions and competition than hybrid poplar and has the added benefit of having a longer life expectancy.