[NatureNS] Cornell Article

From: "John and Nhung" <nhungjohn@eastlink.ca>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
References: <71ca145d-2145-1d41-59ad-e3f29b221ac6@bellaliant.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 11:00:41 -0300
Thread-index: AQLlfPmE6rods32dsDNznkeEwb9HxgKXsjMfAWIYm5oBhRdGLAKi71fhAflVaeqkhMWR0A==
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects
This is a multipart message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001E_01D55034.046E32F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

And somehow, the politicians and other decision-makers need to realize =
that when folks like you and Nick make the sorts of points you are =
making, you shouldn=E2=80=99t be dismissed as =E2=80=9Cspecial =
interests.=E2=80=9D  Ecologists are probably the most important early =
warning system we have.  This isn=E2=80=99t just a matter of aesthetics. =
 Your concerns matter to the well-being of our grandkids.

=20

One of my most- (too-) frequently-used quickies is that there is no =
difference between environmental issues and long-term economic ones.  A =
lot more folks oughta think about that and a lot more.

=20

There have to be better ways of dealing with the provincial debt than =
mining (semi-mining?) the forests, especially with the summers getting =
hotter and drier =E2=80=A6  oh, yeah, that, too!

=20

From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca =
[mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] On Behalf Of David Patriquin
Sent: August 11, 2019 9:34 AM
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Cornell Article

=20

And just as significant, pretty well all Old Growth in NS is =
characterized by a Pit and Mound topography, really that should be =
amongst the criteria for calling a stand Old Growth (but is not =
mentioned in the Old Forest Policy). The mounds preserve the old =
microbial processes, and the mounds are favoured habitat for seedlings - =
most of the Big Trees in the Old Growth occurs on the mounds, the mounds =
formed when a very big tree is blown over. That process also produces =
vernal pools and  shelter for wildlife. When the mounds erode over time, =
the tops of the roots are exposed, and cavities formed which are again =
used by wildlife.So when we "salvage" blowdowns, we are also =
interrupting a natural process.  How much attention is being given to =
such processes in L&F's Retention Guidelines...?

=20

On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 9:11 AM Nick Hill <fernhillns@gmail.com> wrote:

A key difference between a known old growth area (eg Abraham's lake, =
sporting lake and Cape chignecto) is , yes, the big trees uneven aged =
snags and downed logs, but as much, the depth of humus.

=20

Our observations were spotty it was long ago but we went into old =
growths and then "working" landscapes which had been cut over repeatedly =
and collected soils for microbial characterization. The hypothesis was =
the old forests might have stress tolerant actinomycetes that could have =
useful antibiotics in their long term struggles against fungi and other =
microbes.

=20

We never unfortunately got that far but the working landscapes had =
virtually no organic covering over he mineral soil while the old growths =
had deep humus.

=20

With forestry, that humus layer will e reduced but it should be valued =
because of it is enriched in many forest nutrients..N P Ca..that are =
deficient in the mineral layer. The humus is also the seat of the =
mycorrhizae and other microbes we may not understand. Forests are said =
to have u undergone a shift in my original types in response to the =
break up of this humus root layer. We could do ecological forestry and =
that would mean working with the key ecological processes..decomposition =
mineralization  mycorrhizal associations.. and doing our best to =
conserve the humus layer.

=20

Ecological forestry means no Amazonia like burn piles, no glyphosate =
which wipes out early regen and amphibians and plant biodiversity, and =
attention to mimicking forest processes. It would be excitng to be =
involved in this post Lahey planning.=20

=20

Stay tuned and stay vigilant

=20

Nick

=20

On Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 10:55 PM David Webster, <dwebster@glinx.com> =
wrote:

Hi Donna & All,

Here I am being the devil's advocate again--- but I have problems with=20
the following passage.

"Most of our forests presently require centuries of recovery just to=20
nurse depleted soils back to health from fires, acid rain, and=20
clearcutting.  One thing each of us can do is encourage hardwood growth, =

with deep rooting structures that help improve soil conditions."

First of all have most of our forests been burned ? If not then they=20
don't need centuries to recover from fires,.

     Acid rain is a different story entirely. The LRT hype has been=20
tucked into a back room somewhere but acid rain is ongoing and, even if=20
it had stopped, recovery of naturally acidic soils in a podsol region,=20
from the effects of acid rain is a pipe dream.

     Failure of government to act has been a great disappointment.=20
Salmon and Trout have taken a hit and there is no excuse for this other=20
than irresponsible government and perhaps the notion that with time=20
everything will be nice again. High soil acidity and exchangeable Al go=20
hand in hand. Consequently one may expect the Al concentration of=20
groundwater, entering natural waterways from acidic uplands to increase=20
as soil acidity increases; unless the soils are derived from and=20
underlain by basic rocks such as limestone or Basalt so the acidity of=20
leachates can be moderated in transit.

     In my view it should be standard practice to apply agricultural=20
grade limestone to all clearcut areas at a rate of 20 tons per acre. To=20
clearcuts because application of limestone using soil based equipment is =

prohibitive by air and clearcuts make application by ground equipment=20
possible.

     Apart from perhaps physical damage when soils are puddled by=20
traffic when the soil is too wet or eroded along wheel tracks (In the=20
70's I saw the impact hauling wood out with narrow tires on wet soil;=20
ruts eroded more than 3'deep down long slopes. That would be much less=20
likely to happen now. And I have subsequently not seen it.) what is the=20
evidence that clearcutting  damages soils ?

     In one area which I had clearcut, except for scattered deciduous=20
trees, when all Spruce shed needles in June there was breast high rank=20
growth by late summer of Goldenrods etc (perhaps due to a tree-free area =

to the west which acted as a seed source ). But I understand from=20
contact with those who thin regrowth on clearcuts that ground cover is=20
typically complete within a year. In case of doubt it would make sense=20
to sow something which would take root rapidly. This is why I am fond of =

Buckthorn. If seeds are present they establish within a year thereby=20
decreasing leaching loss.

     With regard to Hardwoods, I understand these are currently=20
suppressed or killed in regrowth after cutting. I think this is unwise=20
and consequently wrong. In diversity there is strength. But I am not=20
clear how "each of us" can encourage hardwood growth.

     It is easy enough if you own woods and cut your firewood but I=20
think relatively few on Naturens are that fortunate. But getting bac