# Pacific Northwest Wood Burners



## WoodMan33 (Jul 18, 2013)

What is the type of wood you guys here in the Pacific Northwest use in your stoves, and what kind of burn times you get with your woodstoves?


----------



## privatejoker75 (Jul 18, 2013)

inland northwest here, i burn whatever i find which is like 99% ponderosa pine

just bought a new stove so no clue on how long i'll get.  Hoping for at least 8 hours on it (they claim 8-20+).  Anything will be better than our old one that managed about 45 minutes on a full load


----------



## Kevin* (Jul 18, 2013)

Alder, pine and doug fir. Doug fir I can get well over 24 hours burn easy.


----------



## jeramy (Jul 18, 2013)

im close to you Washington state boys.Likewise I burn about half doug fir and half ponderosa pine.I would preffer to get larch which is around but the others are so much more plentiful.That being said I can load her up with fir and have about 8 hrs of burn.My stove isn't the greatest though.With the pine by itself not as long but I like the way the pine coals and the way it burns better than the fir.I usually cant get the fire hot as I like it with straight fir.I know people knock pine but I love it when its dry and I know a lot of guys who say that's all they burn


----------



## Kevin* (Jul 19, 2013)

I love pine, its easyirr on the back through all stages. Cedar is nice for aroma and starts but wa won't let us take it from the forest.


----------



## WoodMan33 (Jul 19, 2013)

I will burn anything but Cottonwood. Burn times about 8-10 hours. Kevin do you own a Blaze King? Would love burn times like that!​


----------



## Kevin* (Jul 19, 2013)

Yeah, love it never going back.


----------



## privatejoker75 (Jul 19, 2013)

My new one is a blaze king, can't wait to fire it up


----------



## Sprinter (Jul 19, 2013)

I mostly have alder with some fir and some big leaf maple.  Alder is by far the easiest to get here.  It isn't the highest BTU content, but I like it because it's cheap to buy, very easy to split, dries quickly (first year) and burns well. 10 hours is pretty easy with the alder but I don't try for long times anyway. I'd probably prefer doug fir overall because it burns hotter, but most of the fir around here goes to the lumber mills.  The big leaf maple I have is taking forever to dry and haven't burned any yet.

Woodman33, are you on the wet side or dry side of the state?


----------



## StihlHead (Jul 19, 2013)

Lemesee... in Oregon I typically burn and have burned (more or less in order of high to low heat value, blue indicates they are in my wood stacks right now): madrone, while oak, black locust, larch, apple, juniper, hawthorn, Doug fir, hemlock, Japanese maple, cherry/plum, liquid amber, bigleaf maple, birch, cypress, silver fir, red cedar, red alder, an assortment of pine. I no longer burn stinky black cottonwood (the last of that is gone now), willow, grand fir or sycamore. I pass on Tree of Heaven (never burned it). I also will pass on birch, as it tends to rot, but I have them on my property so I burn what I cut.

In Northern California I burned: live oak, madrone, manzanita, tanoak, eucalyptus, white oak, black oak, apple, Doug fir, black and white walnut, cherry, sycamore, various type of maple, and Monterey/bishop/knobcone pine.

Burn times depend on the weather, split size and wood type. I do not stuff my stoves, as that leads to making charcoal and lower efficiency. I get 8 hours of burn and heat easy so I adjust to the conditions. In really cold weather I go for the oak, apple and black locust. Milder cold weather I burn mostly fir. Shoulder season I burn the lighter alder, pine, cedar and cherry.


----------



## WoodMan33 (Jul 19, 2013)

Good to hear everyones difference in wood burning, and burn times. I like big leaf maple when the colder weather hits here. I am on the wet side of the state. Those Blaze King stoves really just kick arse when it comes to killer burn times.


----------



## byQ (Jul 19, 2013)

I'm in the Inland Pacific Northwest - Southern Idaho. Most of the wood I've gathered is lodgepole pine from the national forest. I drive 30 miles up into the mountains. This wood is really easy to work with,
* it is dead and usually already pretty dry
* the best parts of the trees (rounds in the 20"-32") have very few limbs
* it splits easilly

For the first time I gathered a couple of cords from a forest fire burn area. I didn't know what to expect. It went well. I was able to pull up close to downed large trees, chainsaw, sledge/metal wedges, and then load quartered rounds onto truck and trailer. I was worried that wood wouldn't be any good. but only the bark was burned.




The wood pieces split really easily. Next time I will knock the burned bark off before loading, ash is messy.




And I've been getting some elm here and there.
Big elm rounds can be intimidating. But using chainsaw, wedges, and splitter eventually they can be busted down.


----------



## StihlHead (Jul 19, 2013)

For pine, lodgepole is sold at a premium on this side of the Cascades. It is certainly one of the better pines to burn, and is closely related to the shore pine that I have growing on my property.


----------



## Seanm (Jul 20, 2013)

We burn lots of Lodgepole here in the Elk Valley, one of the higher btu pines for sure and easy to work with. I would take a lodgepole any day over Ponderosa.


----------



## tomahawk (Jul 22, 2013)

Mainly Alder, Big Leaf Maple and Birch for me. Alder is what I run during the day mostly and then throw in some Birch and Maple at night. The Alder does tend to leave more ash and build up but I just keep her clean.


----------



## WoodMan33 (Jul 23, 2013)

I agree Alder does leave a lot of ash. You guys have any pictures of your wood stoves or wood stacked? Picture of Lennox Grandview 230 wood stove, and some Alder and the rest is Big Leaf Maple. I think probably about 2.5-3 cords but I am not a good judge.


----------



## WoodMan33 (Jul 23, 2013)

I love how quick pine dries. To bad it does not give out more heat though.


----------



## Blue2ndaries (Jul 23, 2013)

For the first year or two, all I could scrounge was Doug Fir.  12 years later I think I've become a wood snob and just have white oak, ash, madrone and maple CSS--4yrs worth/ahead.  Our Quad 7100FP can go a solid 8hrs overnight burn w/enough coals in the am to restart w/some kindling.


----------



## toqua (Aug 28, 2013)

90 percent of what I burn is black locust.I get some lodge pole pine for early and late season fires.I can get overnite fires with both but there is a lot of coals with the locust and all I do is put a few logs in the morning and it starts within a short time.


----------



## privatejoker75 (Aug 28, 2013)

WoodMan33 said:


> I love how quick pine dries. To bad it does not give out more heat though.


 

Not sure how different pine can be but the Ponderosa stuff that we have here burns HOT...almost too hot


----------



## jeramy (Aug 28, 2013)

Yep I agree you gotta watch it with p pine.My stoves been hot a few times and has that too hot smell.


----------



## NW Walker (Aug 28, 2013)

Way out West here.  My stacks are mostly Doug Fir, but I'm working quite a bit of BL Maple into the stacks currently, and am trying to stock up some more on Alder as well.  I've got about 1/4 cord of Madrone, wish it was easier to get but I'm just a bit too high off the water to have too many of those on my property.  I've got lots of cedar on the land as well, but I try to save that for roundwood building projects like woodsheds and such, rather than burn it.


----------



## MrWhoopee (Aug 28, 2013)

In the southern PNW, in order of preference, black oak (Quercus kellogii), doug fir and lodgepole pine. If it's easy, I'll take white fir (Abies concolor) and incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens). I generally avoid Ponderosa pine, even though readily available, because of the pitch. That doesn't mean I won't burn it, I just don't seek it.
Since I modified the air control on my Buck 81, I have no problem getting overnight burns. I just have to be careful not to put the fire out completely.


----------



## Sprinter (Aug 28, 2013)

privatejoker75 said:


> Not sure how different pine can be but the Ponderosa stuff that we have here burns HOT...almost too hot


Hot and fast.  The biggest problem with pine is that just doesn't last too long.  I call it flashy.  I suppose that's why some people say that it's unsafe to burn pine, but not if you're halfway careful.


----------



## MrWhoopee (Aug 28, 2013)

privatejoker75 said:


> Not sure how different pine can be but the Ponderosa stuff that we have here burns HOT...almost too hot


Lodgepole pine is different. Very little pitch, decent burn times, quite controllable. It also dies and drys standing, making it perfect same year wood. No need to season.


----------



## Sprinter (Aug 28, 2013)

NW Walker said:


> and am trying to stock up some more on Alder


Nothing wrong with alder. Although I'm in Fir country, alder is what is most available around here for firewood, so I reluctantly bought a few cords to get started with last year. But I've grown to like it for it's fast drying, easy splitting and handling. It's btu content is not the highest, but it's reasonably good, burns nicely and it's not pitchy like fir is. I still like fir, though. Oak is too expensive here. Maple is good too, but my small supply of maple (big leaf) is taking forever to dry.


----------



## NW Walker (Aug 28, 2013)

I'm becoming more of an Alder fan all the time as well. It sure is easy to process and handle, and it reproduces unbelievably quickly. I'm quite sure I can count on never needing to go off property for fire wood by using coppice techniques on the BL Maple and harvesting it and the naturally reproducing Alder in rotation. I need to look up some numbers, but I think the alders on my property are doing 10' a year or some such.

Edited to add: I did just look it up, I was exaggerating a bit. 30' tall @ 5 years. As a landowner I appreciate that it's a nitrogen fixer as well. A useful pioneer species for sure.

http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/usda/amwood/215alder.pdf


----------



## Sprinter (Aug 28, 2013)

NW Walker said:


> http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/usda/amwood/215alder.pdf


From that link :


> *The species is an aggressive pioneer on avalanche paths, road cuts, log landings, skid trails, and other areas where mineral soil has been freshly exposed. Clearcutting and large group selection are the most reasonable regeneration systems*.


 
And that's why it is so ubiquitous around here. The clearcutting. What used to be huge fir growths have become huge alder growths. I guess that's progress. But at least the alder makes good firewood...


----------



## NW Walker (Aug 28, 2013)

Sprinter said:


> And that's why it is so ubiquitous around here. The clearcutting. What used to be huge fir growths have become huge alder growths. I guess that's progress. But at least the alder makes good firewood...


 
Oh man, I back up to DNR land, on a hillside that goes up to around 2000'. Every morning for the last month I wake up to the fellers and the talky tooter, and go have my coffee on the lawn watching and listening to the operation. I can walk up the little access road in the evening and watch the chokers setting and tooting as the logs go up the hill. The rigging is something to see, giant firs with cables strung 1000' up the hill. Anyway, sorry for the drift, but yeah, lots of alder headed my way in the coming years for sure.


----------



## Sprinter (Aug 28, 2013)

NW Walker said:


> Oh man, I back up to DNR land, on a hillside that goes up to around 2000'. Every morning for the last month I wake up to the fellers and the talky tooter, and go have my coffee on the lawn watching and listening to the operation. I can walk up the little access road in the evening and watch the chokers setting and tooting as the logs go up the hill. The rigging is something to see, giant firs with cables strung 1000' up the hill. Anyway, sorry for the drift, but yeah, lots of alder headed my way in the coming years for sure.


Like it or not, you can't do anything about it. May as well look at the bright side


----------



## Seanm (Aug 29, 2013)

MrWhoopee said:


> Lodgepole pine is different. Very little pitch, decent burn times, quite controllable. It also dies and drys standing, making it perfect same year wood. No need to season.


 Yup and the ash is minimal. I use it for my day burns and then switch to Larch for over night. I don't have the room to go three years ahead and its not needed in soft wood land. Like you said if its dead standing you can burn it with under 20% mc that year. Ive bucked up Lodgepole pines in the bush in the middle of winter and had it ready to go!


----------



## Highbeam (Aug 30, 2013)

I burn mostly junk wood like willow, alder, cottonwood, etc. Burn what falls down naturally first. I own a woodlot, 30 years since clearcut, with low areas and trees in those areas don't live more than 30 years.

With that low btu wood I easily get 24 hour burn cycles in the BK loaded full nomatter what the wood type.

The next four years of wood are now stacked. I removed a pile of trees from my house lot and that included many big doug firs and a whole grove of overgrown leyland cypress which is like a juniper/cedar thing.

My favorite NW wood is red alder. Easy to split, thin bark, no slivers, high btu, fast growing and straight stacking. The ash is important since it hides the coals and allows a longer burn. With dough fir, the lack of ash means shorter burn times (but higher heat) in my experience.


----------



## Highbeam (Aug 30, 2013)

Kevin* said:


> Cedar is nice for aroma and starts but wa won't let us take it from the forest.


 
Who told you this? Cedar is taken from the forest all the time. Where do you think the cedar fences and decks come from?


----------



## Sprinter (Aug 30, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> My favorite NW wood is red alder. Easy to split, thin bark, no slivers, high btu, fast growing and straight stacking. *The ash is important since it hides the coals and allows a longer burn*. With dough fir, the lack of ash means shorter burn times (but higher heat) in my experience.


I'll be able to test that for myself this next season and see which I like overall.  I'll have about half and half dry fir and alder.  One thing I've noticed is that large Doug fir has such thick bark, that I'm thinking that can really detract from the btu/cord figures because the bark can take up a lot of space.  Most of mine is from young xmas tree trunks from the tree farm across from me, so the bark is very thin, but the rounds are still a nice size.  I think it's going to make nice fuel.


----------



## Lumber-Jack (Aug 30, 2013)

I'm a Lodgepole Pine fan too. I like it because the beetle kill stuff is plentiful around here and very dry. As others have said, you don't need to season it, if you choose the right trees to cut. It splits pretty easy, no big branches, so no big knots. Also there is virtually no pitch, if you select trees that are dry.
On the other hand, Douglas fir, which is pretty plentiful around here as well, never seems to be as dry as the lodgepole pine, even if it's been dead standing for much longer. Douglas fir also has lots of big branches and can be a real pain to split by hand. But the thing I hate the worst about DF is the pitch! It seems to ooze pitch forever, even if it's a few years old and you bring some in the house and let it sit by the warm stove it will start oozing. It oozes and drips on the floor and the next thing you know you're walking around the house with some sticky stuff sticking to your socks and leaving sticky spots on the floor in every room. I stopped cutting the stuff because of that. Lodgepole pine seems to burn just as well as DF, but without the pitch.


----------



## Sprinter (Aug 30, 2013)

Lumber-Jack said:


> I'm a Lodgepole Pine fan too


Wow, I guess so! Nice stacks...




Lumber-Jack said:


> . It oozes and drips on the floor and the next thing you know you're walking around the house with some sticky stuff sticking to your socks and leaving sticky spots on the floor in every room


----------



## privatejoker75 (Aug 30, 2013)

Lumber-Jack said:


> I'm a Lodgepole Pine fan too. I like it because the beetle kill stuff is plentiful around here and very dry. As others have said, you don't need to season it, if you choose the right trees to cut. It splits pretty easy, no big branches, so no big knots. Also there is virtually no pitch, if you select trees that are dry.
> On the other hand, Douglas fir, which is pretty plentiful around here as well, never seems to be as dry as the lodgepole pine, even if it's been dead standing for much longer. Douglas fir also has lots of big branches and can be a real pain to split by hand. But the thing I hate the worst about DF is the pitch! It seems to ooze pitch forever, even if it's a few years old and you bring some in the house and let it sit by the warm stove it will start oozing. It oozes and drips on the floor and the next thing you know you're walking around the house with some sticky stuff sticking to your socks and leaving sticky spots on the floor in every room. I stopped cutting the stuff because of that. Lodgepole pine seems to burn just as well as DF, but without the pitch.


----------



## StihlHead (Aug 31, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> Who told you this? Cedar is taken from the forest all the time. Where do you think the cedar fences and decks come from?


 
Collecting cedar for firewood (or for other reasons) here in Oregon is a not allowed in many places, like BLM and several state forest areas. Several reasons, depending on the area. Around Coos Bay in Southern Oregon there is a big problem with Port Orford cedar root disease and they to not want you cutting/collecting/transporting it or spreading it around. They also close a lot of roads down there in winter months to keep people from spreading it around on their tires. In all the BLM firewood cutting areas I have been to they have it posted that they do not allow any cedar cutting or collecting of any type. In several state forests that I have gotten firewood permits for in Oregon they do not allow any cedar wood product collecting, as it is listed a special forest product by Oregon state law (and requires a specific/separate permit).

Cutting trees and harvesting cedar logs is a different story and red cedar logs command a good price up and down the west coast. Incense and Port Orford cedar is also commonly logged here. Logging is done by permit though. Oregon logging limits do not apply on BLM land, and so you see massive moonscape clearcuts on a lot of BLM land in Southern Oregon that cannot be done on that scale anyplace else in the state.


----------



## MrWhoopee (Aug 31, 2013)

Sprinter said:


> One thing I've noticed is that large Doug fir has such thick bark, that I'm thinking that can really detract from the btu/cord figures because the bark can take up a lot of space.


 
I had quite a large pile of Doug fir bark accumulating this year, so I decided to try burning it in my chiminea. I noticed that it left a REALLY HOT bed of coals. Now I use it exclusively for barbeques. I had to adapt to the high heat, it's much hotter than briquettes, which I don't have to buy anymore. Try it, you'll like it.
I don't think the bark detracts from the btu/cord, and it leaves very little ash.


----------



## Bigg_Redd (Aug 31, 2013)

WoodMan33 said:


> What is the type of wood you guys here in the Pacific Northwest use in your stoves, and what kind of burn times you get with your woodstoves?


 

I burn free wood.  This year my free wood was 100% bigleaf maple.  About 7 cord (of which I will burn 3-4).  Last year my free wood was mostly alder.  The year before was mostly Doug Fir.  The year before that was 50/50 hemlock/Doug Fir.  _Ad nauseum_. _Ad infinitum_

"Burn time" is an elusive, elastic and ultimately irrelevant  term.  I can bank my PE Spectrum Classic and 12 hours later scrape enough coals together to kick off a fresh pile.


----------



## Bigg_Redd (Aug 31, 2013)

Sprinter said:


> I'll be able to test that for myself this next season and see which I like overall. I'll have about half and half dry fir and alder.* One thing I've noticed is that large Doug fir has such thick bark, that I'm thinking that can really detract from the btu/cord figures because the bark can take up a lot of space.* Most of mine is from young xmas tree trunks from the tree farm across from me, so the bark is very thin, but the rounds are still a nice size. I think it's going to make nice fuel.


 
The bark burns good, very good.  And hot.


----------



## Highbeam (Aug 31, 2013)

StihlHead said:


> . In all the BLM firewood cutting areas I have been to they have it posted that they do not allow any cedar cutting or collecting of any type. In several state forests that I have gotten firewood permits for in Oregon they do not allow any cedar wood product collecting, as it is listed a special forest product by Oregon state law (and requires a specific/separate permit).


 
Thanks for taking the time. It sounds like an owner thing and not a cedar thing. Our western red cedar tends to grow in wetter areas so when the big wind storms blow through they can be toppled. I am not about to let that wood go to waste so I have hauled many cords of red cedar home for firewood from my personal wood lot.

If you get the chance, in a modern stove, western red cedar burns about as well as the red alder or doug fir. Easy to split, no slivers, no pitch, thin bark, and that nice smell. I don't notice the sparking in the firewood like you do in the branchwood.

A lot of the traditions and wive's tales about the best wood will be changing as more people learn from experiences burning modern non-cat and cat stoves. I never would have dreamed that our low btu cottonwood would be such a good fuel source after listening to the stories of gopher wood. Cottonwood is actually a good wood if you don't mind hauling all the extra water weight when it is green.


----------



## Highbeam (Aug 31, 2013)

Bigg_Redd said:


> The bark burns good, very good. And hot.


 
If the bark is dry and once it gets going, that thick doug fir bark is really hot burning. Made for a really nice bonfire when I burnt the splitter trash.


----------



## MrWhoopee (Aug 31, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> A lot of the traditions and wive's tales about the best wood will be changing as more people learn from experiences burning modern non-cat and cat stoves. I never would have dreamed that our low btu cottonwood would be such a good fuel source after listening to the stories of gopher wood. Cottonwood is actually a good wood if you don't mind hauling all the extra water weight when it is green.


 
+1

I have found the same to be true of white fir (Abies concolor). Many people speak disrespectfully of it, but I have found that it provides nice, long burn times. I think many of the traditional tales are based on experiences with the old stoves, which were not truly air-tight. Being able to fully control the air makes all the difference.


----------



## bogydave (Aug 31, 2013)

Birch & spruce.
I try to get mostly birch.
Shed now is now full of 100% birch , & I have 1.5 cords of spruce not under cover by the fire pit.


----------



## StihlHead (Aug 31, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> Thanks for taking the time. It sounds like an owner thing and not a cedar thing. Our western red cedar tends to grow in wetter areas so when the big wind storms blow through they can be toppled. I am not about to let that wood go to waste so I have hauled many cords of red cedar home for firewood from my personal wood lot.
> 
> If you get the chance, in a modern stove, western red cedar burns about as well as the red alder or doug fir. Easy to split, no slivers, no pitch, thin bark, and that nice smell. I don't notice the sparking in the firewood like you do in the branchwood.
> 
> A lot of the traditions and wive's tales about the best wood will be changing as more people learn from experiences burning modern non-cat and cat stoves. I never would have dreamed that our low btu cottonwood would be such a good fuel source after listening to the stories of gopher wood. Cottonwood is actually a good wood if you don't mind hauling all the extra water weight when it is green.


 
Cedar firewood collecting is restricted or limited on BLM and Oregon state land, and in some national forest areas, but not for private landowners or for logging. I have about a cord of western red cedar my racks this year that I got back in April. We will see how it burns. I also have a cord+ of cypress that is a little heavier that I got in February. As for black cottonwood, there is a lot of that around here and I have burned a lot of that, but it stinks when burned (literally, smells like cat pee) no matter how dry it is. I burned the last of it this spring and I am not going to get any more of it. You can get all the black cottonwood that you want for free in the Portland and Seattle areas on CL. No thanks.


----------



## StihlHead (Aug 31, 2013)

Sprinter said:


> IOne thing I've noticed is that large Doug fir has such thick bark, that I'm thinking that can really detract from the btu/cord figures because the bark can take up a lot of space.


 
I used to sluff off the bark from Doug fir before burning it, but then I read several firewood fuel heating studies that show that the bark has about the same BTUs as the wood does. So I have been burning the logs and splits with the bark on them for the last 6 years or so. Good heat...


----------



## StihlHead (Aug 31, 2013)

MrWhoopee said:


> I had quite a large pile of Doug fir bark accumulating this year, so I decided to try burning it in my chiminea. I noticed that it left a REALLY HOT bed of coals. Now I use it exclusively for barbeques. I had to adapt to the high heat, it's much hotter than briquettes, which I don't have to buy anymore. Try it, you'll like it.
> I don't think the bark detracts from the btu/cord, and it leaves very little ash.


 
True about the bark, and DF has low ash (which is why is makes superior high grade pellets).

I do not use any conifer species for BBQ, as they tend to create soot and can add toxins to the food. Seriously. For pellet and wood smokers you only want to use hardwoods. For coal grilling it is not such a big issue, as the wood gasses and soot will all be cooked off by the time they are coals. Though I have found that DF does not coal up that much, as compared to hardwoods.

I use alder, cherry, maple, pecan and apple for smoking, BBQ and for all my grilling. A 50:50 mix of alder and apple is my all around favorite for smoking with in my Traeger.


----------



## Sprinter (Aug 31, 2013)

StihlHead said:


> ...but then I read several firewood fuel heating studies that show that the bark has about the same BTUs as the wood does. So I have been burning the logs and splits with the bark on them for the last 6 years or so. Good heat...


Surprising, but good to know.

Good point about using the right and wrong woods for smoking.  The local Natives are famous for their alder smoked salmon. Mmm.


----------



## firecracker_77 (Aug 31, 2013)

Lumber-Jack said:


> I'm a Lodgepole Pine fan too. I like it because the beetle kill stuff is plentiful around here and very dry. As others have said, you don't need to season it, if you choose the right trees to cut. It splits pretty easy, no big branches, so no big knots. Also there is virtually no pitch, if you select trees that are dry.
> On the other hand, Douglas fir, which is pretty plentiful around here as well, never seems to be as dry as the lodgepole pine, even if it's been dead standing for much longer. Douglas fir also has lots of big branches and can be a real pain to split by hand. But the thing I hate the worst about DF is the pitch! It seems to ooze pitch forever, even if it's a few years old and you bring some in the house and let it sit by the warm stove it will start oozing. It oozes and drips on the floor and the next thing you know you're walking around the house with some sticky stuff sticking to your socks and leaving sticky spots on the floor in every room. I stopped cutting the stuff because of that. Lodgepole pine seems to burn just as well as DF, but without the pitch.


 
Yours is my favorite woodshed.


----------



## StihlHead (Aug 31, 2013)

I wood have to get a mechanical permit to build a woodshed that big here.


----------



## Seanm (Sep 1, 2013)

Lumber-Jack said:


> I'm a Lodgepole Pine fan too. I like it because the beetle kill stuff is plentiful around here and very dry. As others have said, you don't need to season it, if you choose the right trees to cut. It splits pretty easy, no big branches, so no big knots. Also there is virtually no pitch, if you select trees that are dry.
> On the other hand, Douglas fir, which is pretty plentiful around here as well, never seems to be as dry as the lodgepole pine, even if it's been dead standing for much longer. Douglas fir also has lots of big branches and can be a real pain to split by hand. But the thing I hate the worst about DF is the pitch! It seems to ooze pitch forever, even if it's a few years old and you bring some in the house and let it sit by the warm stove it will start oozing. It oozes and drips on the floor and the next thing you know you're walking around the house with some sticky stuff sticking to your socks and leaving sticky spots on the floor in every room. I stopped cutting the stuff because of that. Lodgepole pine seems to burn just as well as DF, but without the pitch.


 Very nice wood shed. Are you seeing a drop in pine beetle kill? I went from the Elk Valley to Vancouver to visit family last week and noticed (at least through my eyes) that there were less fresh cut stumps and red trees in the Kamloops area then in past years. Also in the Elk valley I have seen a drop in the number of beetle trees, still there but not sure why they have dropped off as we haven't had the -40 c that they need to get killed off.  Interested in your opinion....


----------



## Lumber-Jack (Sep 1, 2013)

Thanks for the compliments on the shed guys.
Fortunately or unfortunately? I live in an area where building permits are not necessary, so I'm able to build pretty much what I want. My woodshed is incorporated into the fence between my property and my neighbors, and I did discuss and get the neighbors permission before building the fence and shed. From his side all he really sees is a tall fence, and it gives us both a lot of privacy. It only holds a maximum of 5 cords, so in relation to a lot of other guys stacks and woodsheds in this forum, it's pretty small.

Seanm I have noticed less red (orange) trees around, at least in the huge groves they once were. I understand the really large areas of beetle kill are a little further North of Kamloops, and I haven't been up that way in while, so I don't know if what we are seeing is indicative of an overall beetle die off or what. I know they have been trying to harvest the beetle kill trees as fast as they can, so that might explain it to some degree? Also I know when I seek out the beetle kill trees I'm actually looking for ones that are no longer orange and have dried to the point where the needles have turned gray and started to fall off. I found that when the needles are still orange the trees still have a lot of moisture in them, and since I usually burn what I cut in the fall I try to get the driest trees I can.
Of course the biggest problem I have in selecting the trees to cut for firewood is getting direct access to the trees. Plenty of dead trees 50 or 100 yards off the road, but in most cases getting the truck to the trees is impossible because of the terrain.


----------

