Worth my time CSS'ing? Seems like I've burned a few pieces and if I remember it burned up fast. My father in law swears that it's good wood to burn. If it's not I'm not even going to waste my time with it.
Yeah I thought so. Normally I get oak, and black locust. And use sass as filler between the small spaces.I find it burns very hot and fast if the splits are slim... hard to control. I split it thick, leave it in rounds, and/or chunk it to tame it a bit.
And the other is??Maple is tough, I believe there is 142 varieties and 2 of them good long fire wood. Sugar is 1 of the 2.
And the other is??
Norway, perhaps? Not as dense as Sugar but significantly more so than silver or red.
I've got plenty of it. Too much of it maybe. I hate cleaning the tops when I drop them. Conservation came out and ringed a bunch of them for felling for undergrowth to come up.
I find it burns very hot and fast if the splits are slim... hard to control. I split it thick, leave it in rounds, and/or chunk it to tame it a bit. It may depend on your stove.
Yeah I thought so. Normally I get oak, and black locust. And use sass as filler between the small spaces.
It's on CRP registered ground. I can't just cut down every oak I see. But the stipend at the end of the year is quite nice.Sugar maple is hard maple. It is great firewood.
No way would I allow them to do that on our land. If you want undergrowth, simply cut the trees down.
That sounds more like soft maple rather than hard maple.
If you like oak and BL, you'll also like hard maple.
That right there is why I never look at chimneysweep BTU.Chimneysweep puts Sugar maple and Black locust in the same BTU output range.
1) Were not Canada.All the tree farms and plantations out west WISHED they could grow sugar maples!!
Canada didnt stick the tree on its flag for nothing...
Cant understand why they would be tagged for cutting.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.