next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
> Also as an aside, one learns by making mistakes and I have learned much that way. For example in 1971 I bought a woodlot south of Wolfville with the view that the best way to protect woodland wa
Hi Larry & All, Jan 10, 2016
My reference to light thinning was directed to overstocked young trees;
especially conifers. It has been my sad experience that if young conifers
are not thinned sufficiently in time then all it takes is one dry spell and
patches +50' across die in a block. This open space will be replaced 5-20
years later by a thicket of Fir and so the cycle repeats itself.
Thinning young deciduous trees is another matter. I thinned a thicket of
small Ash in 1981. 35' later it is still a thicket of small Ash.
A patch of Spruce that shed needles in 2000, and soon clear cut by chain
saw with care to spare hardwood when possible, now has a good number of ~40'
Ash and an understory of Glossy Buckthorn which will help suppress further
Ash seedlings.
So sometimes things turn out as planned, but increasingly weather plays
a trump card. The forecast for tonight; 90 km/hr wind and 25 mm rain on wet
soil sounds like a rerun of Dec 13 2010.
Getting back to the forest environment. I hunted every year for 30+
years; Rabbit & Deer mostly and when possible hunted on snow so I could see
intensity of activity of all kinds. Those great stands of large attractive
hardwood were, so far as ground animals or anything which sometimes landed
to leave tracks, mostly barren of activity. Any deer tracks would be just a
bee line to the other side, and usually none, while thickets in the same
area near or on a bog, stream, 1-20 yr clearcut or tangle of 'scrub' would
be laced with activity of Rabbit, Bobcat, Deer, ... The same applies to
Moose; sparse bee lines in those great looking large hardwood and a lacework
of tracks in nearby ~10 yr old clearcut where there was feed and shelter.
Provided there are not too many towns and residential areas in their
path, wildlife will not need special passageways to travel anywhere in
mainland NS. The hazard to land-bound wildlife and low-flying birds is
highway traffic.
Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bogan" <larry@bogan.ca>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2016 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>I have not been following this thread very closely but I get the feeling
>that it is about trees in a forest not about a ecological living forest
>habitat. Aging and crowding of trees is not necessarily a bad thing when it
>provided dead trees for habitat for wildlife. Some wildlife can only live
>in old over-crowded slow growing forests . We have successfully destroyed
>most of that habitat in Nova Scotia.
>
> When will the forest managers start looking at all aspects of a forest
> ecology and not just the trees for future harvesting for human use? At
> the moment we have to set aside areas as wilderness or special places to
> preserve the forest ecology and that has lead to scattered islands of
> habitat. Surely, forests can be managed to provide healthy forest ecology
> with wildlife habitat and yield a fraction for human use. We have to give
> up the greed and gratification of harvesting everything and hope it grows
> back.
>
> Looking at the current state of Nova Scotia forest, they certainly have
> not been sustained by forest management practices in present use. We now
> have large areas of scrub growing back over clear cuts and completely
> different collection of species growing where a more rich ecology used to
> exist.
>
> I'll stop there.
>
> Larry
>
>
>
> ////// === ///////
> Larry Bogan
> Brooklyn Corner, Nova Scotia
> <larry@bogan.ca>
>
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 19:20:13 -0400
> "David & Alison Webster" <dwebster@glinx.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mary & All,
>> No surprise at all because I feel the same way. But when trees begin
>> to suffer from overcrowding then the prudent course of action is to thin
>> lightly before the canopy of the keepers has begun to shrink. Those
>> remaining trees appreciate their new lease on life and grow like weeds;
>> provided you thin soon enough.
>> Interesting that you used the term 'Occam's Razor' because in a way
>> it fits; the ideal final state being the minimum number of trees that
>> will collectively capture the maximum amount of sunlight.
>> Light and water are the coarse controls which define growth rate,
>> these two factors shape decisions when thinning and it is folly to fret
>> about other possible effects if these are out of kilter.
>> Yt, Dave Webster
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Mary Macaulay
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2016 5:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>>
>>
>> Good to hear David!
>> Then I'm sure you aren't truly surprised that most of us naturalists
>> would rather cut our forests with Occam's Razor than commercial logging
>> equipment.
>>
>>
>> With kindest regards
>>
>>
>> Mary (Macaulay), P.Eng.
>> Queen Bee, Insect Recovery Project
>> Owner, Remember Adventures
>> Pedal Buggy & snowshoe rentals, picnics, great bird friendly coffee,
>> breakfast & pasta, pollinator meadow, games & more!!
>> (Open Wed to Sunday: 8:30 am)
>> 365 Main Street & Station Road
>> Trans-Canada Trail
>> Tatamagouche
>> RememberAdventures.ca & InsectRecovery.org
>> 1-902-657-0054
>> Twitter @RememberTata & @InsectRecovery
>>
>> On Jan 9, 2016, at 10:31 AM, David & Alison Webster
>> <dwebster@glinx.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Mary & All, Jan 9, 2016
>> Poor management to some degree perhaps but today's problems, and
>> the aftermath, are the consequences of greed, waste and excessively large
>> environmental footprints.
>>
>> I adopted a frugal lifestyle early in life, for the above reason,
>> and have records of power, water, oil and motor vehicle milage going back
>> to1967 or thereabouts.
>>
>> Although it would take time to tabulate them I pledge $500 to
>> Feed NS if anyone who has lived in a house during this period has lower
>> verifiable values. Contenders must also pledge $500 to Feed NS.
>>
>> Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Mary Macaulay
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 5:48 AM
>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>>
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> Step back a minute and remember it is our very interference and
>> "managing" that is upsetting the delicate balance of Nature.
>> Thoreau would remind you "In Wildness is the preservation of the
>> World".
>>
>> With kindest regards
>>
>>
>>
>> Mary (Macaulay), P.Eng.
>> Queen Bee, Insect Recovery Project
>> Owner, Remember Adventures
>> Pedal Buggy & snowshoe rentals, picnics, great bird friendly
>> coffee, breakfast & pasta, pollinator meadow, games & more!!
>> (Open Wed to Sunday: 8:30 am)
>> 365 Main Street & Station Road
>> Trans-Canada Trail
>> Tatamagouche
>> RememberAdventures.ca & InsectRecovery.org
>> 1-902-657-0054
>> Twitter @RememberTata & @InsectRecovery
>>
>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 8:44 PM, David & Alison Webster
>> <dwebster@glinx.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Mary, Jim & All, Jan 7,
>> 2016
>> By biomass I meant cutting trees (but clear cutting only in
>> very exceptional circumstances), mowing Miscanthus,.... and ultimately
>> burning for power.
>>
>> It is a grave mistake to imagine that carbon accumulation in
>> a forest continues for all time. David Suzuki preached this for a while
>> but retracted about 20 years ago. After few decades or many, depending
>> upon initial state, a point is reached whereby release of carbon dioxide
>> by forest litter and soil equals the carbon fixed in any one year. This
>> steady state neither gains nor loses CO2. Consult a copy of The Soil
>> Resource Hans Jenny Ecological Studies 37 1980, 377 pp; fluff free so
>> about 400 hrs would be a good start.
>>
>> A steady state forest does store carbon until a dry period
>> hits, as it has out west for several years, and one has huge forest
>> fires. And dry or not there are some forest fires every year. And on the
>> heels of a forest fire, unless there is very rapid regeneration, there
>> will be large losses of CO2 from soil, as in clear cuts.
>>
>> As an aside, I have been selectively cutting trees for
>> firewood, off and on, for 72 years and I am confident that most cuts
>> quickly led to greater growth rates of the remaining trees and greater
>> rates of carbon capture. I don't want to put words in Jamie's mouth or
>> actions in his hands but, unless I have wires crossed, he also cuts trees
>> selectively for firewood and I suspect that given the same setting we
>> would very often make similar choices.
>>
>> Also as an aside, one learns by making mistakes and I have
>> learned much that way. For example in 1971 I bought a woodlot south of
>> Wolfville with the view that the best way to protect woodland was to buy
>> and not cut it. For 10 years I spent many weekends thinning perhaps 5% of
>> the area and keeping the lines clear and in 1981 got a nearby lot and
>> neglected the first. At the time of the cutting craze (high prices) I
>> received many phone calls from those wanting to buy stumpage and refused
>> all. I was called all kinds of names, most having something to do with
>> fool and was warned that many would die if I did not have the larger
>> trees removed. It turns out they were correct. Many did die or perhaps
>> even worse survive and crowd nearby trees. In the wind of Dec 2010 many
>> more went over and in much of those woods one would be unwise to walk
>> without a chainsaw; land in a tangle of 10' Fir thickets and cross piled
>> windfalls is just plain dangerous to walk across without a saw to cut a
>> path if need be. With the objective of making matters easier for my
>> executors I put it up for sale and the only serious offer was from a
>> logger, about my age, who had cut some there when he was young. He has
>> two (?) sons and I am sure they will do a better job of managing it than
>> I did.
>>
>> In the North Alton woodlot about 2003 my neighbor had a
>> harvester on his lot and offered to selectively cut about 20 acres of
>> mine which he claimed would soon die if not thinned; the offer was (?)
>> $40,000 guaranteed and half of any remaining profit. I agreed to this,
>> slept on it and backed out. Once again he was correct; probably 80% of
>> these trees did die and there are large patches bare of live trees.
>>
>> The discussion about woodland, from my perspective, is
>> whether and how the desirable features of selective cutting for firewood
>> can be effected by machinery for biomass and therefore be cost-effective,
>> improve the forest and decrease net CO2 emissions. We have strayed into
>> several side issues but this is a necessary step so all or most can agree
>> on what is known or can be known.
>>
>> For nearly a year now I have intended to make some comments
>> about possible futures for NS forests and this current discussion may
>> lead into that subject eventually. It is a topic which I think needs to
>> be carefully reconsidered in all respects.
>>
>> My time and energy is largely taken up in 24/7 home care so
>> time is usually limited to fragments of time between chores. But I do
>> generally have ~3 hrs free when Alison has a nap between 12:30 and 3:30.
>> So Jim (and Mary if business takes you this way) I would be delighted to
>> show you a Pine stand which has been cut much and in need again of
>> thinning (the 2010 wind thinned some and my Nephews thankfully extracted
>> the logs) and some of the consequences of not thinning soon enough as
>> viewed in North Alton.
>>
>> The average age of NS forests, so I understand, is about 40
>> years. Non-commercial thinning costs, and the forestry outlook has been
>> depressed, so I suspect many are overstocked. By cutting intelligently
>> one could, using mechanical harvesters, clear cut 1/5 of the area for 9'
>> wide travel ways and then thin the remaining 80% to overcome suppression
>> and come away with biomass for burning.
>>
>> And depending upon the state of the forest, there may be
>> great net release of CO2 in an unthinned forest if e.g. the trees are
>> overstocked such that nearly all die after a long period of poor CO2
>> fixation of ongoing release from the litter & soil.
>> And so to bed,
>> Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Jim Wolford
>> To: naturens
>> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 5:10 PM
>> Subject: Fwd: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>>
>>
>> I fear Mary is reading into “biomass” its harvesting and
>> burning, which I’m sure was not intended by David W. And yes to Mary’s
>> second sentence. from Jim in Wolfville.
>>
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>
>> From: Mary Macaulay <marymacaulay@hotmail.com>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
>>
>> Date: January 7, 2016 at 3:50:03 PM AST
>>
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>>
>> Reply-To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> You lost me at:
>> "Biomass, from forest or otherwise, is one potential way to
>> reduce carbon footprint so I think every effort should be made to foster
>> and expand this as quickly as possible."
>>
>> I'm hoping you meant storing Carbon in biomass by leaving
>> forests intact rather than burning them...?
>>
>> But I fear not.
>>
>> With kindest regards
>>
>> Mary (Macaulay), P.Eng.
>> Queen Bee, Insect Recovery Project
>> Owner, Remember Adventures
>> Pedal Buggy & snowshoe rentals, picnics, great bird friendly
>> coffee, breakfast & pasta, pollinator meadow, games & more!!
>> (Open Wed to Sunday: 8:30 am)
>> 365 Main Street & Station Road
>> Trans-Canada Trail
>> Tatamagouche
>> RememberAdventures.ca & InsectRecovery.org
>> 1-902-657-0054
>> Twitter @RememberTata & @InsectRecovery
>>
>>
>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 2:54 PM, David & Alison Webster
>> <dwebster@glinx.com> wrote:
>>
>> Biomass, from forest or otherwise, is one potential way to
>> reduce carbon footprint so I think every effort should be made to foster
>> and expand this as quickly as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11336 - Release
>> Date: 01/06/16
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11336 - Release Date:
>> 01/06/16
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11362 - Release Date:
>> 01/09/16
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11362 - Release Date: 01/09/16
>
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects