Clearcutting is a controversial silvicultural technique in which most or all trees are cut at a certain time of harvest. This technique is usually used or recommended to a landowner by a forester when a landowner is looking to grow shade intolerant species or trees that grow in large, even aged stands for a future timber crop. Cutting all of the timber at once causes many people to think negatively about clearcuts due to the property no longer being aesthetically pleasing and myths such as; clearcutting is the same as deforestation, clearcuts cause more erosion than thinning and partial cuts, clearcuts are the end of a forest both the local flora and fauna in the areas. Clearcutting is implemented in order to develop a better future stand.
These three statements are completely false, first off clearcutting is not the same as deforestation, deforestation is the removal of all of the trees and plants in a forest with purpose of reestablishing it, removing a forest and tilling the ground to create an agricultural field or for housing development would be a form of deforestation. Clearcutting is both the harvest of a stand and the regeneration of a stand.
Second is that there are no ties with the amount of wood that is removed that causes more erosion of a forest, but erosion is caused almost completely by how the trees are removed. With this being said clearcutting is not the cause of accelerated erosion most of the erosion from logging comes from the building of the road systems for access to and removal of logs. If the workers who are working on the roads are good at building roads, good with the use of culverts and other over water roadways and the worker follows BMPs there will be minimal sediment movement into nearby waterways. So looking at it as a big picture cutting trees causes no erosion, the cause of it is the removal of these logs by roadways is the cause of sediment erosion.
Third is that clearcuts are not the end of a forest both flora and fauna, in regards to flora studies have shown that forests usually come back with ample amounts of regeneration, this regeneration is usually of excellent quality and species composition. In our area, the great lakes region, after a clearcut is implemented pine is usually planted because the areas are well suited for growing high quality pine timber. When a plan is set to clearcut an area one of the first things that is set into place is whether natural regeneration or mechanical or regeneration by man will be done after clearcutting. On the fauna side of it, since there is a high amount of sun in the area because of no canopy cover sun loving species grow fast. These shrubs, forbs and grasses attract many different types of wildlife mostly deer, bear, grouse, young turkey and quail. As the clearcut grows it creates different forms of structure and protection of lots of species.
Clearcuts may look ugly but they are a viable silvicultural technique that if used correctly can be the perfect way for an owner of a stand to manage their property for shade intolerant species or an even aged stand.
2 comments:
I agree that clearcuts are a valuable management tool. I beleive that a lack of information is the root cause as to why people believe clearcuts are bad. And the regeneration that occurs after clearcutting is invaluable to wildlife. They provide fesh, new sources of food.
I agree with you in that most people believe clearcutting is bad. I am not forestry major but after taking some classes that covers topics surrounding forestry, I realized how beneficial it is for a stand to be clearcut. I disagree with the part about erosion. Trees are beneficial when it comes to holding soil. Their large root system can hold the soil in place. The tree itself can prevent soil from eroding.
Post a Comment