I passed on a 40-acre parcel years ago because the canopy looked thin from the road. Walked away thinking the timber was degraded. Bought a different place instead — one with a gorgeous closed canopy that looked like prime woodland from every angle.
Took me two full seasons to realize that dense canopy had shaded out almost every native understory plant. No ramps, no bloodroot, no spicebush. Previous owner had high-graded the timber decades back, and the secondary growth locked everything else out. It was ecologically dead at ground level.
The parcel I passed on? Neighbor bought it. Partial canopy meant dappled light. That place was loaded with goldenseal colonies, black cohosh, and more pawpaw patches than I've seen in one hollow. The apparent flaw was the actual asset.
Now I walk every parcel from the ground up before I form any opinion about canopy. A closed ceiling means nothing if the floor is empty.
Anyone else find that conventional timber assessments completely miss woodland health when you're evaluating for anything other than board feet?