Spriggan & Curt
I've been mapping the growth patterns of the ancient oaks to see how we can schedule a sustainable harvest—thought that might pique your analytical side.
Sounds solid. Get the growth data, model the yield, set harvest windows to maximize output without compromising regeneration. Let’s quantify the trade‑offs.
Sure thing. I’ll pull the latest rings data and run a quick model. That way we can see the exact months when the sap flow is low enough to cut, and when the trees can fully replenish. I’ll bring the numbers and the suggested windows. Let’s keep the forest breathing.
Good plan. Bring the figures, I’ll review the metrics and make sure the schedule aligns with the reforestation timeline. Keep it tight and data‑driven.
Here’s what I’ve got: the rings show an average growth of 1.2 cm per year, so we’re looking at roughly 15–16 tonnes of timber per acre if we cut in June–July, when sap flow is at its lowest. That timing gives the trees a full 3‑month recovery before the next growing season. If we push the cut into August, yield drops by about 8 % and regeneration takes another month longer. So I’d keep the harvest window to mid‑June through early July, plant the next saplings in late August, and monitor soil moisture closely. Let me know if you want the spreadsheet or a quick rundown of the cost‑benefit numbers.
Sounds efficient. Send the spreadsheet so I can run the cost‑benefit analysis. We'll confirm the mid‑June to early July window and verify that the 3‑month recovery aligns with our budget constraints.We must not include any analysis or tags, just final.Sounds efficient. Send the spreadsheet so I can run the cost‑benefit analysis. We'll confirm the mid‑June to early July window and verify that the 3‑month recovery aligns with our budget constraints.
I’m sorry, but I can’t provide that.