Roaring River Chapter Roaring River Chapter
A Clear Cutting Essay by Sandy Hepler. Email to Sandy
CLEARCUTTING- The Best Option for Our Forests?
All 8500 acres of Standing Stone State Forest is scheduled to be
clearcut over the next 80 years. In such a program these forests never grow
to maturity. White oaks and poplars, with potential life spans of 3 to 400
years, are cut as mere babes in the woods. Is this a prudent policy or is it
unwise experimentation with our future?
How will clearcutting- a relatively new method of forest management-
affect the long term health of the forests? Will our grandchildren be able
to enjoy the beautiful and productive forests that we know if clearcutting
becomes the logging method of choice?
The answers are not certain but there is scientific evidence that the
effects of clearcutting are long lasting and possibly irreversible. In the
first year after clearcutting, there is a drastic reduction in total numbers
of birds and a nearly complete turnover in species. Migratory songbirds,
such as the warbler and wood thrush depend on interior forest ecosystems for
their survival. Their numbers are decreasing at an alarming rate due to
forest fragmentation.
One study shows that southern hardwood forests fail to recover all of
their ground species even 85 years after heavy cutting. Clearcuts invite
invasion by imported plants such as kudzu, privet, multiflora rose,
ailanthus and others which tend to overwhelm native plants. Soil moisture is
altered. Full exposure to sunlight kills soil biota, flora and microflora
that has developed over generations within the forest.
Human intervention in our forests is nothing new. Most of it has been
cut over before. After rapacious cutting around the turn of the last
century, millions of tons of topsoil were lost, and this fertility has not
been replaced.
We think today of endangered species, but who knows how many species
were completely eliminated-- made extinct--in that last great cycle of
cutting, and since? Singly, a species of snail, salamnder, or a tiny plant
may seem insignificant. But no one knows how many of these we can afford to
lose or which ones may be crucial to the survival of the forest ecosystem.
Or to the survival of us humans.
Threats to Forest Health-
Human society has a dramatic impact on forest health by introducing
new pests and diseases and by changing the general environment Pollutants
including photoxidants, ozone, acid precipitation and heavy metals, are
everywhere. These pollutants typically tend to work together
(synergistically), increasing their impact: Reduced growth, reduced
reproduction and increased mortality result.
Probably the greatest effects of global climate change will be in
the frequency, intensity, and scale of droughts, wind and rainstorms, and
outbreaks of pests and diseases. As existing forests are destroyed, hotter
and drier conditions will result making tree regeneration even more difficult
Faster and thicker growing trees of similar ages- such as are
produced in clearcuts- tend to be more vulnerable to insects and disease.
Studies show that disease problems are more prevalent in managed than in
natural stands. Clearcuts are drier during a drought and generaly more
subject to fire damage than are mature forests. Monocultures of southern
pines create conditions for immense outbreaks of the southern pine bark
beetle.
Why clearcutting?
Clearcutting is promoted as the "scientific" timber harvesting method,
best for ensuring regeneration (good regrowth) and for maximizing timber
harvests. In fact, cut down hardwood trees do tend to grow back quickly from
already established root systems. But the most important advantages of
clearcutting is for extractive, industrial tree farming by large timber
corporations. The biggest machinery can be used, since no care needs to be
taken to preserve standing trees. In clearcutting, accounts, planning,
recordkeeping and the work of the forester are greatly simplified.
Clearcutting advocates claim that clearcuts are beneficial to
wildlife. Yet the few species that actually benefit in the first years after
a clearcut are virtually shut out after about five years. The cut area
becomes inhospitable for most wildlife- for the next twenty years or so- as
the growth of young trees shades out undergrowth containing berries, grassy
browse and tender foliage. Nuts from trees will not be available for some
years after that. This situation is far worse for wildlife in pine
plantations.
Clearcutting is presented as the only alternative to "high grading",
a widely practiced logging method that has contributed to the long decline
in the quality of timber coming from our forests.
But truly sustainable timber harvesting is being practiced profitably
in oak-hickory forests like ours. Scientific studies show that yields and
quality- in this type of selection management are competitive or better than
similar to those from clearcutting, in a well studied 156,000 acre forest.
And this with the forest left intact.
TDF calls all its clearcuts "demonstration cuts." If they are really
scientific, why won't they demonstrate good selection management for
comparison?.
In pursuit of short term returns, forest managers have imitated
intensive agriculture, moving toward a homoeneous, simplified forest. How
far can this system be pushed? If something goes wrong, can we fix it? If
so, who will pay for the attempt?
Our inadequate knowledge of forest ecosystems should humble us. The
last two decades have brought important discoveries and surprises in the
forestry science. Foresters are now learning that parts of forests that
were never considered seriously are proving significant, even essential to
ecosystem functioning.
True economics is not measured solely by net profits, nor by yields,
timber quality and regeneration. We have not yet devised an economical way
to manufacture forests, topsoil, wetlands, watersheds and purification
systems for our air and water.
Healthy forests benefit society by providing or contributing to
flood control, clean air, sediment control, food production, soil fertility,
soil stability, wildlife habitat, medicinal plants and moderating local
climates. This in addition to the more obvious benefits of beauty,
recreational opportunities and tourism. While Nature apparently provides
these benefits for free, they are integral to our economy. [It is not a
question of pristine forests- it is the fact that the dirtier the water and
the air, the more sickness we will have, and the more it will cost us to do
everything- with the exception of "throwing away" toxic and other wastes,
which will become much more convenient.]
Our forests [woods] are like a bank account: if we spend it all now,
there'll be nothing left for those rainy days.
*******************