My mother's property in NC is a managed forest. When loggers came in, they cleared out middle sized trees. The thinking was that larger trees would seed future trees and smaller trees would grow larger to be available for future harvests. A dense forest requires trees to reach for the sun and in turn they can become tall, spindly and weak. Thinning out the forest encourages strong growth with less competition.

In the state forest where I do volunteer work, downed trees are left in place to rot and recycle their nutrients. Dead trees often provide shelter for critters. You can work on dropping your trees to the ground for safety reasons but unless they are in the way I wouldn't bother with removal.

Thanks!

I do not know what the condition of the trees were before the land was logged (maybe the largest trees were completely blocking light), but the trees that were taken in our case were clearly the largest ones, as the remaining stumps (which were not ground down) have larger diameters than those of all but maybe three remaining trees I have seen on the property. I believe they were old growth trees. I had not really thought about this, but we do seem to be having problems with re-seeding in one large area in particular. There's no growth of anything other than fungus. In other areas we do have small trees which have sprung right up - some pines and a huge stand of beech (the pines are near some relatively-large pines which were left, and the beech are in an area which was completely cleared to make way for the logging equipment, and are next to mature beech which remain in an area which was not logged at all.) My thinking is that they did not follow best practices - this was a spec house and quite frankly the workmanship has turned out to be very shoddy and I think the logging was done purely for money while the land was still in the builder's possession.

But I digress.... It will be a lot of work to get everything on the ground, as the majority of the damaged trees are resting on other trees. It just seems like the number of these "problem trees" is so high that it can't possibly be normal for people to do anything about this sort of situation. At the same time, they will not decompose quickly if they're not on the ground, and I have never seen other wooded areas with this level of "damage". Then again, I haven't spent time in completely "wild" forest - I've done a lot of hiking, even in remote areas, but always on maintained trails. So I don't have a sense of what might be typical.

I think maybe we will follow your advice and only cut down trees which seem to pose safety issues.

Lizzie, I would recommend removing all the downed trees.
Reason is that your 9 acres is not a large forest and while there may be some benefit to leaving downed trees in large forests those impacts are very long term.
As one way of approaching this problem you might consider having some of the limbs on the larger trees and any smaller trees ran through a shredder to produce mulch that you could add to the exposed areas of the forest floor.
You may want to google Woodlot management for more info. Check link below for one such site.

Here is a link that might be useful: Woodlot management

Sounds like you may be in upper New England? If not, let us know, because sometimes location matters.

I tend to agree with theresa2 on this one. I would look hard at dealing with the safety issues.

The snapped-off trees shouldn't be a big problem as long as the configuration looks stable.

The leaning trees *are* a problem. Their support tree won't hold forever, especially in the environment you describe. The trees may be tall, but someone who knows what he's doing can plan out a way to 'drop' the clusters safely. Not *perfectly*. Just safely. This takes a real pro. Shop around carefully. Sounds expensive, but it can be done with a very small crew, and a really knowledgeable person, and a day or so.

A Joe-Know-It-All tree-guy will bring a much larger crew, take a lot more time, cost more because of this, and do more damage in the process.

Getting the trees off the walls is also important. The stone walls won't grow back....

"I have never seen other wooded areas with this level of "damage". Then again, I haven't spent time in completely "wild" forest -"

The removal of the largest trees probably made a big difference here, but this level of downed trees, uprooted trees, broken trees, etc, is not unusual in an area prone to storms, wind and heavy snow. That's the way forests are. And in colder areas, downed logs and snags are even more important for wildlife than in warmer areas.

"...we do seem to be having problems with re-seeding in one large area in particular. There's no growth of anything other than fungus."

Does this seem to be around one of the old, large stumps? Or is it still in very deep shade? Or is the soil really shallow there, overlying rock sheet? Ask the tree pro, when you can get him there to advise. This spot is odd.

One thing to consider in your "woodlot management" is what trees you have and what you may want to add, especially but not limited to natives. By dropping and segmenting the leaning trees, you will probably create pockets with more sun. That's where you can add specimens or just trees/shrubs you want to see.

Also, are your trees, especially those that have come down, covered in vines? Vines can create a more solid canopy and make trees more vulnerable to being wind.

I agree with the other posters, I'd start with clearing the safety issues and getting the trees off the walls first.

The forests of North America got along fine for thousands of years before settlers arrived - I would say it would be best to do nothing. Go into any patch of woods, and you'll notice the fallen logs, some completely rotted into the ground, others freshly fallen. This is what builds the soil in woodlands - decaying vegetation. The fallen logs provide rich soil for other plants to sprout on, and overall enrichen the soil. On thin, rocky soil, the decaying of trees is what eventually builds the soil. Bear in mind, it is a long process (Unless you live in an area with high moisture, such as the Northeast). Forests don't have to be perfect, with straight-as-arrow trees perfectly spaced and no undergrowth. Leaving the woods to naturally do as they will is a great way to encourage wildlife, especially birds.

Drop the leaning trees to the ground and leave them.

I've now had 2 different houses in virgin forest, and what you notice there is how OPEN the interior of the forest usually is. (In one area that's naturally managed by wildfires, my loppers replaced regular wildfires!) You shouldn't have tons and tons of seedlings once the trees get decent-sized. You should have a healthy space between each tree. This is usually a function of the height of the canopy--in areas where the canopy height is 25' or less, the distance could be 5-10' between trunks, while where I now live, where the canopy height is well over 60', the natural spacing in old growth forest should average 15' or more.

The edges of the forest and the breaks in the canopy are more crowded, but they thin out as the forest matures. And in addition, there's an understory layer that, on the east coast, really isn't all that dense.

Excessive competition because of a too-large loss of the forest canopy, such as happens when an area is clear-cut then allowed to grow in, and result in a densely undergrown forest full of overcrowded, stunted trees. This can last for up to a century. You can choose to go in and deliberately favor the stronger trees to get a mature forest considerably faster, but you're dealing with the growth rates of trees, here.

In your situation, I wouldn't worry about there not being enough seedlings. If there are a lot of saplings in dense concentration, you can thin out the smaller ones of the same type to give the stronger ones a boost.

Forests get damaged. I only have two acres here, but I get many, many limbs on the ground the size of my arm or larger. Starting with the week before we moved in, we've lost AT LEAST 4 mature trees in as many years. (Tons more if you count our elderly peaches slowly giving up the ghost and the trees we deliberately removed because they were struggling so badly in the cultivated part of our property.) Some of these trees have been massive--the "little" one was about 18" in diameter at its base, and the largest was far too big for my arms to go around.

I'd worry if the trees are vine-covered. There are a number of invasive varieties that can take out large swaths of trees. Otherwise, it's just happens.

Jimbobfeeny nailed it. Let Mother Nature reuse those dead trees. When in doubt, do as little as possible!

Many helpful resources for forest/woodland owners in the Pacific Northwest are available at the Washington State's Dept. of Natural Resources Small Forest Landowner Office (see link below).

I have especially enjoyed the Forest Stewardship services through this office: Forest Owner Field Days, a newsletter, classes. I am not harvesting timber on my forest; I just want to understand and keep it healthy, and the info from this office has been very helpful...and could have relevance for woodland management elsewhere in the country, too.

Here is a link that might be useful: Washington State Small Forest Landowner Office