|
Post by crazyhorservn on Jul 27, 2008 8:14:56 GMT -4
In an article in the July 18 issue of PA Outdoor News (PON) by P.J. Reilly he quotes David Henry, PGC S.E. Regional Forester as saying because of the extensive damage on Game Lands #145 in Southern Lebanon County the agency will ..."Excep for a few oaks that are still living and some maples and tulip poplars left scattered throughout the tract, virtually all the vegetation will be cut down or killed over the next year. Then 1000 oaks seedlings will be planted to jump start regeneration of the forest."
Is this the PGC's example of what they consider "Habitat Improvement" for Game and Wildlife [/u]or is the agency simply pandering to the timber industry.
If the PGC were truly making an effort to improve the forest for Game and Wildlife wouldn't you think they could throw in a couple of Dogwoods? Wouldn't a few Persimmon trees be beneficial? Don't they know how to plant Aspen? Must the whole being of the forest be OAK?
I have to seriously wonder if any consideration at all was give toward improving this particular lot for Game and Wildlife, or was it just for the future timber industry?
|
|
|
Post by guru on Jul 27, 2008 19:57:52 GMT -4
He he he. typical pgc.
|
|
|
Post by mrlongbeard on Jul 27, 2008 20:56:51 GMT -4
why would they worry about that. i thought that was why we were killing all the deer.
|
|
|
Post by jakebird on Jul 28, 2008 4:56:37 GMT -4
In an article in the July 18 issue of PA Outdoor News (PON) by P.J. Reilly he quotes David Henry, PGC S.E. Regional Forester as saying because of the extensive damage on Game Lands #145 in Southern Lebanon County the agency will ..."Excep for a few oaks that are still living and some maples and tulip poplars left scattered throughout the tract, virtually all the vegetation will be cut down or killed over the next year. Then 1000 oaks seedlings will be planted to jump start regeneration of the forest." What "extensive damage " are they talking about? A forest fire? Did the deer eat everything? Did a tornado level the forest? What on earth are we talking about here? Would someone from the area please check in and let us know what the case is. Meanwhile I'll google it and see what comes up. Back....Gypsy moths! Looks like they really did a number on the trees. Isn't anyone spraying for them anymore? This sounds like an excuse for a mass logging operation. They did the same thing on Martinsburg MT years ago..let the gpys moths kill all the oaks, then log it, make their money and then worry about the forest. This year they were spraying Perry and Juniata counties...Why did they let SGL 145 die, I wonder? Maybe $$$$$$$?
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorservn on Jul 28, 2008 8:28:05 GMT -4
I'm sure that spraying is a very expensive detail. Being short of money the PGC certainly can't cover all the areas infested with the moth. But..., this could very well be "Mother Natures" punishment for not having controlled burns. Natural burns would occur in a pristine environment. In Pennsylvania we certainly have very few areas the meet that criteria, but we can simulate that with controlled burns. Such burns in Gypsy Moth infested areas would clearly have a negative effect on the moths.
In the long run the infestation could be a good thing for Game and Wildlife. On the other hand it's not at all good for the timber industry. They have to stop various operations and rush to harvest the damaged areas or lose potential profits.
So, I would imagine that a lot of smaller, private cuts will be delayed in order to accommodate the PGC's larger and more profitable moth damaged cuts.
One thing for sure, we need the Oak mast crop, but [glow=red,2,300]we certainly should not ignore other beneficial tree and shrub species entirely [/glow]as evidently is the case of the narrow minded, timber influenced Game Commission.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jul 28, 2008 14:47:43 GMT -4
Why does every cry foul every time oak is mentioned?Does anyone even realize how much the price of oak has gone down?Does anyone even realize how beneficial oak is to wildlife?
Please explain how this is pandering to the timber indistry.This is SGL's for crying out loud.How would the timber industry benefit?
|
|
|
Post by guru on Jul 29, 2008 14:59:43 GMT -4
Dougell, they didnt plant a solid oak stand to benefit wildlife. I know its value to wildlife. I also know the value of the timber. I also know planting other species along with oak would be even more beneficial to deer as well as other wildlife. The numbers of "other" trees planted on ANY gamelands is rediculously low. They can acquire seedlings at next to nothing and even sell them each spring.
Do you know how well thousands of persimmon, apple, crabapple, hawthorne, dogwood, pawpaw, etc. etc. etc. would be relished by wildlife??? They can plant 1000 oaks in one area, but cannot plant a few thousand of these others ACROSS THE STATES GAMELANDS??
Oh thats right....These others have no timber value.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jul 30, 2008 8:17:13 GMT -4
I've seen them plant apple trees and I see them go in and maintain them every year.
|
|
|
Post by guru on Jul 30, 2008 14:53:55 GMT -4
I'll take your word for it as an exception.
I havent seen it. There are gamelands that have none at all planted. Others have perhaps 6 or 8 planted on an entire 15,000 acre gamelands....Unmaintained. I havent seen it ANYWHERE on a reasonably significant beneficial scale. Nor ANY of the other fruit bearing species I mentioned or any others I didnt mention.
How about persimmons?? Easy to grow, Pretty acid tolerant, produce lots of fruit and just about EVERYTHING in the woods (including me) loves them..... Would be something I would STRONGLY suggest pgc think about planting.
Theyd rather plant basically useless knee-high pheasant killing fields and money making timber trees than wildlife habitat. Though I dont think they regularly plant trees, including oak, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jul 30, 2008 15:13:10 GMT -4
I've help prune them so I know they've been planted.
The PGC routinely manages the game lands for game at the expense of timber production.I can show you example after example.In fact,i just saw some examples on SGL 34 today in Elk county.
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorservn on Jul 30, 2008 20:36:28 GMT -4
Well Doug, I'd sure like to know the location of where the PGC planted 1000apple trees.
As for Oak, are they planting white oaks or pin oaks? My guess would be that they will plant predominantly red (Saw Timber) oaks.
I'll also wager that the apples you pruned were on a food plot. Now food plots are great, but the terribly small acreage of food plots compared to the overall acreage of the Game lands leaves a great deal to be desired.
There's absolutely no excuse why a diversity of wildlife beneficial trees shouldn't be planted on major cuts. That should especially be the case where exclosures are performed. What better opportunity to create a game beneficial diversified forest.
Perhaps you could run this by one of your PGC forester friends, neighbors and clients? I'd love to hear their reasoning on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by tess on Jul 30, 2008 21:53:43 GMT -4
the PAGC sells Sawtooth Oak , Crabapple, Dwarf Chinquapin Oak, Scrub Oak/Bear Oak ,Chinese Chestnut why concentrate on just red and white oak. I have planted chestnut for years and deer love it the tree produces within 10 years, it produces every year, its not effected by frost thanks to its late blooming, our older treed produce a massive quantity (pounds) of nuts but then again all the species I have mentioned have little to no commercial value they only benefit wildlife and the benefit is within 10 years not 25+ that is required for red and white oak
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorservn on Jul 31, 2008 12:03:59 GMT -4
The PGC will not plant Chinese Chestnut because it's not a native plant. They do plant Sawtooth Oak even though it's a native of Manchuria. How ironic as Manchuria is part of China. I wonder if Doug can offer an explanation?
There is no logical reason why many or at least several different species are not planted in timber cuts and exclosures on Game lands. In fact, it's counter productive to good habitat improvement. A farmer plants single species crops. Plantations plant single species crops. Good habitat that will accommodate the 400+ wildlife species Pennsylvania has needs to be diversified if we are to really be in the wildlife and game business. As it stands now the current practice of single (oak) species planting and seeding is conducive to timber interests.
|
|
|
Post by guru on Jul 31, 2008 16:47:25 GMT -4
Exactly! Diversity has been preached and preached. I guess that only applies when trying to support deer herd slaughtering.
Just think of those Allegheny wood Rats....The northern flying squirrels.... Them dudes are almost SCREAMING for some PERSIMMONS! ;D
|
|
|
Post by jakebird on Aug 1, 2008 0:30:49 GMT -4
Some of the best deer habitat that I'm aware of in the state besides agricultural land, is regenerating, reclaimed strip mines. They leave tons of open areas, planted with fruit and hard mast bearing trees and cool season grasses and forbs.Kind of like one big food plot, and the deer that come from those areas prove it, as do the abundant turkey, bear, and small game of al kinds. An old co worker of mine was a member of a lease of old strip mine land. They are very conservative with their doe harvests in recent years,due to the effect HR has had on the region in general, but they take nice bucks and some fat bear from there every year.Open canopies and lots of edge habitat...good for everything worth hunting. ever seen the strip mine lands in OH? It's a game paradise. It's also not being managed at 12 dpsm, for commercial timber profits...it's managed for wildlife, and hunting.
|
|