# 2nd growth redwood



## forestryworks (Sep 27, 2009)

is it me or does this thing "fall slow?" maybe it's cause the cam moves with the tree as it falls...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbHpeSfSURo

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lbHpeSfSURo&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lbHpeSfSURo&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


----------



## 2dogs (Sep 27, 2009)

Nailed that stump!

Hard to tell with a moving camera.


----------



## RRSsawshop (Sep 27, 2009)

Yea, it looked slow... Take it that it had no lean what so ever????
I hate it when they sit there and balance....


----------



## Meadow Beaver (Sep 27, 2009)

It definetly fell quite slow.


----------



## bullbuck (Sep 27, 2009)

that redwood looks pretty tough,hit that stump pretty hard,i bet that stump is 2 inches lower now


----------



## Gologit (Sep 27, 2009)

Looked okay to me. Watch the tip and not the whole tree. The camera angle makes it seem slow but the tip speed looked pretty normal.

And bullbuck is right...you can slam dunk a second growth like that but an old growth would have gone to pieces on you.


----------



## 2dogs (Sep 27, 2009)

Most of the second growth I'm working in has heart rot and would have slabbed or exploded when it hit that stump. I am not too impressed with any second growth redwood. It rots too easily and gets buggy fast. Doesn't last in the ground like old growth.


----------



## Backwoods (Sep 28, 2009)

From a saw miller’s point of view, hitting that stump done more damage then what it appeared to have done. Cracks = chips, not lumber. Either shorten the stump or lay it down beside the stump, and allow the tree to fall nice and slow. With all of the cedars, including redwood, you know as well as I do how prone they are to cracking. Therefore, extra care has to be taken in all aspects of handling of them to avoid ruining a nice log. If it is just going to get trashed before it gets made into a usable product it may as well be left standing.


----------



## 056 kid (Sep 28, 2009)

Man he nailed that stump!

that would have enielated a poplar of that stature,(east coast).

it sucks that the second growth dosent have the amazing properties that the old stuff has.

Grandpa & I chipped abunch of old redwood siding of an old homestead that he said was built in the late 1800's.

It had been sitting in the vacant lot next to my Great g-parents house in the elements since the 40's, besides alittle bleaching it was sound as cement.

THAT STUFF IS T,T,TOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## 2dogs (Sep 28, 2009)

056 kid said:


> Man he nailed that stump!
> 
> that would have enielated a poplar of that stature,(east coast).
> 
> ...



Next time put it on ebay or CL. Old growth has dollar value!


----------



## Greystoke (Sep 28, 2009)

Worked in Humboldt for four years, and fell a lot of timber like that, and I thought that was a dang good save Imho, second growth redwood is actually quite brittle, as is old growth; I think the difference is that old growth is a LOT more dense, and therefor heavier, so it hits the ground harder. I think he was actually trying to go for that stump to get the butt up in the air. If you look, that stump has been cut off at an angle so that it would glance off once the butt of the redwood was in the air. It looked like he scarfed his undercut to hold the butt on it's stump until it hit the other stump. The reason being for this it is that redwoods carry most of their weight in the butts so if that butt would have came off the stump it would have surely broke because the ground is so low directly in front of the stump, but he kept it on the stump and if he would not of used that other stump for some elevation the redwood might have had belly, which is BAD for a redwood...Belly=big ripped up slabs, and getting your :censored: chewed by the bullbuck. At least that is what I see in the vid? That guy has skills imao


----------



## RandyMac (Sep 28, 2009)

Second growth Redwoods are by volume, about half sticks, yep a pole covered with small limbs. Beat you black and blue, from the elbows down. In certain seasons, infested with ticks. Blah


----------



## 056 kid (Sep 28, 2009)

RandyMac said:


> Second growth Redwoods are by volume, about half sticks, yep a pole covered with small limbs. Beat you black and blue, from the elbows down. In certain seasons, infested with ticks. Blah



you make it sound like it aint fun...


----------



## Greystoke (Sep 28, 2009)

RandyMac said:


> Second growth Redwoods are by volume, about half sticks,
> 
> 
> > yep a pole covered with small limbs
> ...



Or poisen oak! :jawdrop: ...Just saying it makes my skin crawl. :censored:


----------



## Danger Cat (Sep 29, 2009)

*???*

Someone should ask the guy doing the work.


----------



## Gologit (Sep 29, 2009)

Danger Cat said:


> Someone should ask the guy doing the work.



Yup.


----------



## slowp (Sep 29, 2009)

tarzanstree said:


> Or poisen oak! :jawdrop: ...Just saying it makes my skin crawl. :censored:



Carry Technu. I think that's what it is.


----------



## Greystoke (Sep 29, 2009)

slowp said:


> Carry Technu. I think that's what it is.



I used tons of that stuff. It helped with the severity, but I still got poisen oak pretty bad. Of course all I have to do is look at a vine and I start itching!:jawdrop:


----------



## 2dogs (Sep 29, 2009)

tarzanstree said:


> Worked in Humboldt for four years, and fell a lot of timber like that, and I thought that was a dang good save Imho, second growth redwood is actually quite brittle, as is old growth; I think the difference is that old growth is a LOT more dense, and therefor heavier, so it hits the ground harder. I think he was actually trying to go for that stump to get the butt up in the air. If you look, that stump has been cut off at an angle so that it would glance off once the butt of the redwood was in the air. It looked like he scarfed his undercut to hold the butt on it's stump until it hit the other stump. The reason being for this it is that redwoods carry most of their weight in the butts so if that butt would have came off the stump it would have surely broke because the ground is so low directly in front of the stump, but he kept it on the stump and if he would not of used that other stump for some elevation the redwood might have had belly, which is BAD for a redwood...Belly=big ripped up slabs, and getting your :censored: chewed by the bullbuck. At least that is what I see in the vid? That guy has skills imao




I never would have thought of that. Just shows what me skill level is!


----------



## Greystoke (Sep 29, 2009)

2dogs said:


> I never would have thought of that. Just shows what me skill level is!



I could be way off from what the guy falling that tree was thinking.


----------



## bullbuck (Oct 3, 2009)

i was impressed he got that big tall tree to fall uphill with just wedges!that was a nice fall


----------



## hammerlogging (Oct 3, 2009)

forestryworks said:


> is it me or does this thing "fall slow?" maybe it's cause the cam moves with the tree as it falls...QUOTE]
> 
> Falling into a headwind can make it fall slower.


----------



## Danger Cat (Dec 9, 2011)

*Follow Up*

If you check the clock, @ ~ :13 the tree is actually moving forward - off the stump and up the hill - and hits pretty much flat across the sawed off stump up the hill aways. This is partially why the tree did not self-distruct upon impact. It is a timing thing. Was lucky enough to fell some larger old growth reds back in the day. They will take a lot, IF, you get the timing right! 
Was surprised that nary a ? was asked though....
Hope all is well and Christmas finds you blessed.
DC


----------



## RandyMac (Dec 9, 2011)

I'm hoping you were busy all this time and not considering your reply.


----------



## Metals406 (Dec 9, 2011)

Danger Cat said:


> If you check the clock, @ ~ :13 the tree is actually moving forward - off the stump and up the hill - and hits pretty much flat across the sawed off stump up the hill aways. This is partially why the tree did not self-distruct upon impact. It is a timing thing. Was lucky enough to fell some larger old growth reds back in the day. They will take a lot, IF, you get the timing right!
> Was surprised that nary a ? was asked though....
> Hope all is well and Christmas finds you blessed.
> DC



Howdy Jack! Hope you're busy making trees horizontal. 

Ya been slacking on your videos lately though, so howz an armchair timberfaller like me supposed to get anything done vicariously through you? 

Have a great Christmas brother!


----------



## bitzer (Dec 9, 2011)

Hey Danger Cat, I've always liked your videos. Good stuff and good explainations! I've stolen a few of your tricks as well. Always fun to watch. You're a hell of a timber faller!


----------

