I find it amazing that many foresters in Ontario do not consider blueberries as important. I am a forester and I literally spend many hours per summer picking them while I am working in the Clearwater Forest District and everyone I know has a freezer stuffed with frozen huckleberries and blueberries and raspberries. No body but nobody tells anyone where their favourite patch is around here. But I know that it does not surprise anyone that people say silly things. I used to pick berries along the road sides near Wells Gray Park because there were so many berries then one day the Ministry of Highways sprayed all the vegetation with 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D and the good part was that my mother stopped picking there and complained to the Ministry of Highways and you know what she stopped them. They had to cut the brush and for the most part it did not do any damage anyway except near the power poles. Iquess the arquement at the time was similar - keep the Road rights of ways clear for along ways because this would prevent deer from jumping out. But this was very dumb because then you have to spray almost every year. It is better to actually have a closed canopy of trees along the right of way not a "temporary meadow". What is the solution. The UK forest commission has used to reflectors that shine like wolves eyes along the road right of way and the result is a 90 per cent reduction in road killed deer and less damaged autos. snip> >In talking to many industrial foresters I have often been told that >blueberry health shouldn't even be a concern in forests managed for timber >production. I totally disagree with this statement. To ignore the social, >aesthetic, ecological and economic contribution of non-timber species in >managed forests is silly. I can assure you that there are many silly statements that made. Here is one "Those who criticize herbicide usage in forestry and roadside applications don't readily understand the alternative: that young trees can't hope to compete against useless brush, or that roadside weeds and brush harbour deer, family pets, or children who are at risk from road traffic." January 7, 1991, Chemical & Engineering News. Will D. Carpenter, Monsanto company, Vice President and General Manager of the new products division. > >Production of berries by blueberry and other fruit producing species is >important to berry pickers and are of essential browse value to bears and >other wildlife. The traditional use of such plants contributes to the >income of aboriginal and non-aboriginal communities in rural Canada and >througout the boreal forest regions of the world. Not to mention, these >plants contribute to soil stability following clearcutting, due to their >dense network of roots and rhizomes (Vander Kloet and Hill 1981, Haeussler >et al. 1990). > >Herbicide application for vegetation managment purposes not only reduces >fruit yield by many understory species but also contaminates fruit for some >time. A paper by Roy et. al (1989) published in the Canadian Journal of >Forest Research documents this fact. Their research found that residues of >glyphosate on blueberry and raspberry fruit, remained above the maximum >permissible residue level (0.01 ppm) as established by the Health and >Welfare Canada, Food and Drug Regulation (1980) for 60 and 30 days, >respectively. > >In Ontario, Canada, there exists legislation (the Crown Forest >Sustainability Act 1994) that is suppossed to ensure that forestry practices >are consistent with the goal of protecting biodiversity and managing for the >sustainability of less economically important "forest values". The evidence >that we have gathered in our own research and that i have read elsewhere >convinces me that forest herbicide use is not consistent with the goals >of sustainable forestry. > >cheers > >Faizal Moola >Phd. Applicant >Biology, Dalhousie University > > > >[Settings] >LastSettingsCategory=0 > >
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0