|
Post by biggtrout on Feb 2, 2008 9:07:28 GMT -4
Much of PA's forest issues can be directly related to acid rain and the forestry practices promoted by DCNR and The PGC. Recently both have started to address the acid rain affects in regeneration areas - but both still advocate "even age" structure and do little to no thinning to the forests as they mature from a clear cut through the pole timber stage into the mature stage. Thus, the undergrowth DCNR and PGC claim the deer destroyed actually never did or could exist because the dense over-head canopy prevented this undergrowth from ever being established.
In my humble opinion, the best habitat improvement we could start employing here is PA is forest thinning - and the crop tree release method - this spaces the trees out so that only 60-70 mature trees exist per acre - and there is ample room between the tree crowns for sunlight to reach the forest floor - thus enabling the undergrowth to flourish.
I suggest we lobby DCNR and The PGC to enact the crop tree release method.
|
|
|
Post by skwirl on Feb 2, 2008 12:11:19 GMT -4
That is a very sound and ecology friendly approach Exactly the reason they will never be accepted practice here in Pa
|
|
|
Post by gitrdone07 on Feb 2, 2008 19:08:09 GMT -4
Sound great but dont think it will happen in the PGC plans at all .
|
|
|
Post by mrlongbeard on Feb 2, 2008 20:39:21 GMT -4
doesn't make money for the greedy s.o.bs. it's a great idea cut them down and plant the trees you want. but you'll have to keep the unwanted species from taking over.
|
|
|
Post by biggtrout on Feb 2, 2008 22:14:47 GMT -4
The crazy thing is, states like WV, Tennesee, Minnesota and many more use this method because its the most sustainable and financially lucrative, plus benefits wildlife the most. WV studied this and determined oaks produce 7 times more acorns with the crop tree release method. Here are some links. www.utextension.utk.edu/publications/spfiles/SP559.pdfwww.utextension.utk.edu/publications/pbfiles/PB1774.pdfPSU did a study on crop tree release and they too agreed - but DCNR and PGC turn a deaf ear to it because they want the closed-packed trees that grow real slow for their tight grain patterns. I can understand DCNR doing this - but The PGC...?!?!....one would think The SGL's should be managed in part for game, and NOT primarily timber!
|
|
|
Post by Twowithone on Feb 2, 2008 22:51:42 GMT -4
Its all $$$$$$ and that isnt gonna change. Both groups have been told about controlled burns and everything else under the sun and they dont listen plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by mrlongbeard on Feb 2, 2008 23:00:56 GMT -4
the pgc makes more money selling timber off our gamelands than they do having hunters there. makes you wonder if as hunters we should have a vote in if they timber or not.
|
|
|
Post by biggtrout on Feb 7, 2008 21:47:26 GMT -4
A vote in timbering - sure....I think The PGC commissioners should be elected and not appointed by the Governor too.....that would help!
|
|