The following is a request for proposals that you or some of your
colleagues may be interested in. The RFP will also appear in the
NCASI Forestry Environmental Program Newsletter on the week of January
9th.
=======================================================================
REQUEST FOR RESEARCH PROPOSALS ON
COMPARISON OF EVEN-AGED VS UNEVEN-AGED MANAGEMENT
The National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement (NCASI) is soliciting proposals for scientific research on
topics related to comparing even-aged vs. uneven-aged management of
loblolly pine (P. Taeda). Much of the environmental controversy
surrounding forest management concerns effects of clearcutting and
other even- aged management techniques on wildlife and biodiversity.
Comparisons between management systems will assist in broadening the
practice of sustainable forestry, and the following 2 areas are of
particular interest: 1) What are the relative biodiversity values and
environmental tradeoffs. 2) What are the expected yields and economic
returns over several even-aged rotations.
More specifically, we expect to fund proposals that offer to make
simulated comparisons of the 2 systems over a long period of time (at
least 100 years). Initial conditions should be clearly described for
both the uneven and even-aged forests. The comparisons should be made
for several site classes (low, medium, and high). The specific
management actions taken within each system should also be varied so
that their impact on the results can be ascertained, e.g. the timing
of thinnings or fertilization could vary. Other factors that should
be considered include management costs, rotation length, site quality,
pulpwood/sawtimber prices, and relative risk of loss due to fire,
wind, insects, etc. Management options can be proposed for the
even-aged forest that would not be feasible for an uneven-aged forest,
e.g. the use of genetically improved stock. Economic comparisons
should be made in terms of either net present value or land
expectation value.
Environmental tradeoffs should be specified on the basis of the
simulation results and from relevant literature. Wildlife information
might include comparisons of: habitat values over time, amounts of
late successional versus early successional species, and potential
effects on alpha, beta, or gamma diversity.
Proposals will be funded through NCASI's Forest Management/Forest
Health Program, which is expected to continue for several years.
Maximum funding per proposal in 1995 will be $20,000, including
indirect cost charges of up to 20%. Proposals for multi-year projects
will be considered, with funding for second and subsequent years
contingent upon satisfactory progress and availability of funds to the
Forest Management/Forest Health Program. Cost-share and co-funding
arrangements are strongly encouraged.
Proposed projects should make full use of existing scientific
information and resources, including long-term monitoring and
measurement sites, and simulation programs where appropriate.
Proposals should include a clear statement of project objectives and
hypotheses; complete descriptions of methods, databases, and
simulators to be used; anticipated deliverables; and a timetable for
completion. Deadline for receipt of proposals is February 3, 1995.
Three copies should be sent to Dr. Paul Van Deusen, NCASI, Anderson
Hall, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.; 617-628-5000, ext. 2228.;
email: pvandeus@emerald.tufts.edu.
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0