 |
Protect Our
Woods
Working to preserve our rural heritage and quality of life in southern Indiana since 1985 |
Home Site Map Contact Us |
Home News & ALERTS Issues Forum Archives Conservationist's Alternative Klawitter Memorial Downloads Join Us About Us Contact Us Site Map Links |
ALERT - December 4, 2006: Protect Our Woods joins allies to submit a response to the Draft Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the German Ridge Restoration Project in Hoosier National Forest8a. Are Logging and Fire the Right Tools to Restore Oak Hickory?“Prescribed burning in treatment stands is an effective disturbance techniqueaimed at restoration of oak-hickory communities. Without this disturbance, the composition of these stands will eventually shift to beech and maple.” P. 23 FEIS As the previous paragraph shows, clearly the Forest Service has jumped from inconclusive evidence to a definite management prescription without any real evidence that it will work. As far as German Ridge is concerned, Forest Service documents have stated that Oak-Hickory is supposed to come back in pine plantations from Oak seed trees that are in the vicinity or interspersed with the pines. Looking more closely at the literature reveals that we are not the only ones who are doubting the agency’s theories and claims that Oak Hickory Forests can be successfully “restored” by logging, and subsequent burning. From Clark, F. Bryan. 1993. An historical perspective of oak regeneration. In: Loftis, David L.; McGee, Charles E., eds. Oak regeneration: Serious problems, practical recommendations: Symposium proceedings; 1992 September 8-10; Knoxville, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-84. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 3-13. [23055] “The question raised at the beginning, “How did oaks become established on good sites, and how do we keep them there?” are not finally answered. In particular, northern red oak, because of its overall value, poses quite a dilemma. While ecological requirements for northern red oak and other oaks are generally well known, no one has as yet been able to provide the environment necessary for sustained development. Many feel that fire must have played an important role in oak establishment, but the role of fire is not yet clear. Only time will tell whether oak will continue to decline or whether methods will be developed to favor its development.” And from THE FIRE AND OAK HYPOTHESIS: INCORPORATING THE INFLUENCE OFDEER BROWSING AND CANOPY GAPS, Rachel J. Collins and Walter P. Carson Van Sambeek, J.W.; Dawson, J.O.; Ponder, F., Jr.; Loewenstein, E.F.; Fralish, J.S., eds. 2003. Proceedings, 13th Central Hardwood Forest conference; 2002 April 1-3; Urbana, IL. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-234. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station. 565 p. [Peer-reviewed paper from oral presentation]. “Guyette and Dey (1996) and Abrams (1992) argued that logging, circa 1900, and subsequent fires expanded the dominance of oak into areas (e.g., Ontario and Wisconsin) that were formerly dominated by more mesic species such as beech and maple. In the last 50 years, more mesic and putatively fire intolerant species have invaded the understory of mature oak forests, where fires have been largely suppressed for a hundred years (Lorimer 1984). Although these studies provide strong support for a role of fire in oak forest dynamics, the evidence remains circumstantial and correlative.” “Because site-specific factors likely interact with the effects of surface fire on tree species survival, it is not surprising that little consensus about the effects of fire on oak has emerged from a handful of prescribed fire experiments.” “For example, deer browsing and canopy gaps strongly favor some species over others and the degree to which these factors operate varies greatly across forest types and landscapes (Ehrenfeld 1980, Marquis 1981, Runkle 1990, Castleberry and others 2000). How these two factors interact with fire remains little more than speculation but may be central to an understanding of forest dynamics in the eastern USA.” Is the Forest Plan theory that suggests we must log and burn the Hoosier to bring back Oak Hickory then, based upon “little more than speculation,” and “circumstantial and correlative evidence?” And what about the role of deer? According to the Forest Plan, “By maintaining the oak-hickory component on the Hoosier, hard mast of these tree species would still be available for wildlife species, including game animals that depend on this important seasonal food. These species include deer, squirrels, and wild turkeys, as well as nongame species such as the tufted titmouse, blue jay, red-bellied woodpecker, and numerous small mammals that rely heavily on acorns for fall and winter diets.” Cut Oak trees don’t produce much mast , we’d suppose…what are the animals going to do in the time between cutting and trees growing so tall that they start producing mast? So, the new, growing oak trees are good for deer and other wildlife. They even go on to say that even through the deer will eat the new trees, they won’t hurt their growth: “A study examining herbivore pressure on white oak seedlings in onceburned, twice-burned, and unburned plots found no significant difference in arthropod and mammalian herbivory levels on seedlings (Adams and Rieske 2001). The findings from this study indicate that herbivory, at least in the short term, does not impact oak seedling vigor, while single- and multiple-year fires increase oak seedling growth.” Click here for Are Logging and Fire the Right Tools to Restore Oak Hickory? Part 2 of 3Protect Our Woods
PO Box 352 Paoli, Indiana 47454 |