🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <michaec.743068540@sfu.ca> michaec@beaufort.sfu.ca (Michael Coyle) writes:
>
>	So are we natural when we clear a forest out? We are
>responsible for far more dammage than bugs and fire. In fact, by
>replanting genetically identical trees we increase the chance that one
>bug or disease will wipe out a forest. By preventing forest fires for
>years, we have let some stands become far more dangerous than 'natural'.
______________
It can be well argued that everything man does is "natural" because man is
but one part of the living things that evolved on this planet.  Every
living thing interacts with it's environment, including man, often to the
detriment or extinction of other species, and sometimes to it's own
detriment.  This is another lengthy debate in the making.  What I will
argue here is that logging induced disturbance, although sometimes more
severe than non-man made causes, is not necessarily more restrictive to
ecosystem recovery.  Man also possesses an option other disturbance agents
do not: conciousness.  Foresters no longer slashburn sites with thin soils
because the fires reduce organic matter too severely for these sites. 
Foresters actively attempt to control brush on prone sites as brush,
although containing invasive species normally associated with forest
succession on the coast, tends to restrict early growth of seedlings.  In
fact, on some sites brush can slow reestablishment of seedlings for many
decades.

Genetically identical trees are not planted en masse in B.C.  Seed is
commonly collected from natural stands in areas close to the ones being
harvested.  In other regions of the world where forestry is managed on
shorter and more intensive rotations than in B.C., sometimes using
non-native species of tree, genetically similar trees are more prevalent. 
These forests are likely closer to "farms" than B.C. forests.  The
intensive nature of these stands may allow for better management of
disease and pests due to access, etc which more than compensates for
negative effects of genetic similarity.  In New Zealand, for example,
intensive timber management in some areas has freed up others for
recreation uses instead.

Preventing/Fighting forest fires has negative effects that are now
becoming evident to forest managers.  Simple emotional reactions resulted
in the common belief that fires should be stopped, while research in
forest ecology has shown this to not necessarily be the case.  This
research was done by foresters, by the way.

Some forests have adapted to frequent low-intensity fires which consume
leaf litter and branch debris with minor damage to trees.  Fire prevention
has resulted in an accumulation of this debris and with the consequence
that when a fire does occur damage to the trees is much more severe due to
the increased heat and duration of the fire.  Some forest ecosystems
cannot be renewed unless catastrophic fires occur, such as coastal BC
Douglas-fir forests and interior Lodgepole Pine forests.  Without fire,
these forests will largely dissipear.  This knowledge was accumulated by
foresters, by the way.

>         />	Michael (Strider) Coyle
>        /< 	mcoyle@sfu.ca     michaec@sfu.ca     coyle@mcf.ucs.sfu.ca
>[\\\\\\(O):::<=================================- 
>        \<      Distributed Computing Support Group,                     
>         \>



-- 
Robert Froese  VE7MOQ
taganov biogeocoenose approach                  "Clearcutting is not a Crime"
taganov@unixg.ubc.ca