Forest list archive: msg00013

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Environmental Call to Arms



<html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><p><font size=3D2 =
color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial">Geza Vamos writes:<br><br>&gt; From a =
community perspective we must reduce overcutting, so a forest<br>&gt; =
canopy is always manintained on a site ie the rate of cut does not =
exceed<br>&gt; the growth rate of the trees. &nbsp;This has been the law =
in several European<br>&gt; countries for 100 years. &nbsp;To some it =
just makes sense, if you cut too fast<br>&gt; you have lower harvest in =
the future as your stocks are depleted, others<br>&gt; (South Sweden) =
learnt from the experience of destroying their forests with<br>&gt; =
overcutting. &nbsp;Secondly we replace clearcuts with single tree =
selection,<br>&gt; group selection, and strip cut shelterwoods because =
of soil erosion, loss<br>&gt; of soil microorganisms essential to =
healthy tree growth, and to maintain<br>&gt; timber quality trees =
growing in a small opening grow tall, and not at an<br>&gt; excessive =
rate which deminishes timber quality, in exchage for sheer<br>&gt; =
voulume.<br><br>There is a big difference between whether you are =
&quot;overcutting&quot; and the type of silviculture that is used. Most =
countries have laws that required sustainable management, that is, not =
overcutting on a volume basis. All European countries, and all other =
countries harvesting coniferous species, employ some form of =
clearfelling (clearcutting) as the best way to both harvest and =
regenerate most of these forest types. Single tree selection is seldom =
suitable for conifers, while it is often suitable for broadleaf species. =
The argument that it is better to grow trees slowly, in the shade, to =
improve wood quality, is seldom valid. Trees grow tall when they come up =
as an even-aged stand, as they are competing among each other. I believe =
it is more important to focus on biodiversity both at the stand and =
landscape level, rather than insisting that a certain silvicultural =
system is always better than another. I am in Australia now, where I =
have seen examples of selective logging that leave 30% of the stand =
behind and it is called &quot;shelterwood&quot;. The trouble is, the =
species of eucalypts that are desirable for timber are shade intolerant =
and do not require shelter, it just stunts their growth. This results is =
shift to non-desirable, shade tolerant species and a forest that is =
nothing like the original one. The real reason 30% of the canopy is =
retained is for aesthetic i.e. visual, purposes, yet it is rationalized =
as shelterwood.<br>By all means we must harvest on a sustainable basis, =
but this should not be confused with the method of harvest, or the =
visual aesthetic which often has nothing to do with ecology or science. =
&nbsp;<br><br>Cheers<br><br>Patrick Moore, GREENSPIRIT<br><font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>http://www.greenspirit.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000"><br>May the Forest be with you!<br><br>snail =
mail<br>4068 West 32nd Avenue<br>Vancouver BC, CANADA &nbsp;V6S =
1Z6<br>(604) 221-1990 phone/fax<br>e-mail <font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>pmoore@rogers.wave.ca</u><font =
color=3D"#000000"><br><br><br><br></p>
</font></font></font></font></font></body></html>

Follow-Ups:

[Metla] [Main Index] [Thread Index]

Mail converted by MHonArc 1.1.0