Don- Understood. I agree that resilience and disturbance will figure prominently in our discussions on this important topic.
Gary On Oct 25, 2009, at 12:07 AM, Don Bertolette wrote: > Gary- > While I am not in the business of coining words, I think our > thoughts on these matters 'son sympaticos'...words I would throw > into this mileau would (no surprise I am sure) be 'resilience' and > 'disturbace' (the role of...). > Mas tarde, > Don > > Sent from Don's iPhone 3GS... > > On Oct 24, 2009, at 8:21 PM, "Gary A. Beluzo" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Joe and Andrew: >> >> Here is a reply to an article (on creating old growth forests) >> that was published in an author's blog two years ago..It nicely >> outlines what I mean by the phrase "autopoietic forest". >> >> Gary A. Beluzo says: >> October 5, 2007 at 9:39 pm >> I coined the phrase “autopoietic forest” after thinking about what >> distinguishes natural forests (systems) from MANaged forests >> (systems). Over the past several years I have given several >> multimedia presentations to clarify my views. Autopoiesis refers to >> a living system at the level of cell, organism, ecossytem, or >> biosphere in which the system is created from within, that is, the >> system is "self created and self maintained". The autopoietic >> forest is an ecosystem that has resulted from the collective >> genetic wisdom of closely coupled biota interacting with the >> environment, co-evolving. Autopoietic forests are dynamic, complex >> systems wherein the processes of the system are controlled/ >> maintained primarily by many species interacting with their >> environment. A MANaged system on the other hand is one whose >> evolutionary trajectory has been disrupted and is now maintained >> consciously by a single species for the economic benefit of that >> species. These MAN-aged systems are greatly simplified (in both >> physical habitat and functional niche) and are managed according to >> linear cause and effect , understanding generally referred to as >> silviculture or "agriculture with trees". >> The problem with using the political (not scientific) term “old >> growth forest” to preserve natural systems is that an old growth >> forest is simply a temporal snapshot in a shifting mosaic of >> vegetation. IF preservation is based solely on the defintion of >> “old growth” then it is inevitable that ALL old growth forests will >> eventually be disturbed and return to earlier successive seres, >> disqualifying them for preservation. We need to focus more on the >> “autopoietic” nature of the forest; its degree of naturalness. >> There are folks in Europe that are working on developing criteria >> to assess degree of naturalness on a ontinuum that runs from >> natural (i.e. no human disturbance) to artificial (e.g. a tree >> plantation), in large part because their natural forests are nearly >> gone. >> IF the forest is not being MANaged and is therefore regulated by >> natural processes resulting from the interaction of many species >> and the environment then we can say the system is “natural”; >> unequivocably it is these "autopoietic forests" that should be set >> aside for preservation. >> Gary A. B eluzo >> Professor of Environmental Science >> Division of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics >> Holyoke Community College >> 303 Homestead Avenue >> Holyoke, MA 01040 >> [email protected] >> http://www.hcc.edu/forest >> Reply >> >> Gary >> >> Gary A. Beluzo >> Professor of Environmental Science >> Division of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics >> Holyoke Community College >> 303 Homestead Avenue >> Holyoke, MA 01040 >> >> [email protected] >> 413 552-2445 >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 17, 2009, at 7:07 AM, Joseph Zorzin wrote: >> >>> That's one of Gary Beluzo's favorite terms and he's one of the few >>> people who understands it and uses it (he may have coined the >>> term) so I'm sure he'll elaborate. I have a sense of the meaning >>> and I kinda like it- I believe for Gary, it's what happens in old >>> growth forests- to what extent it may be a useful principle in any >>> sort of managed forest is the 60 million dollar question. >>> >>> In particular, the question is interesting regarding forests >>> managed for old growth structures, as described in that brochure. >>> Joe >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Andrew Joslin >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 1:56 PM >>> Subject: [ENTS] Re: "Restoring Late-Successional Forest >>> Structure"??? >>> >>> >>> Joe, can you get me (us) up-to-speed on the term "autopoietic" as >>> applied to forest ecology? It sounds like you mean self- >>> regenerating or >>> self-maintaining, not sure though. >>> -AJ >>> >>> Joseph Zorzin wrote: >>> > check out >>> > http://www.masswoods.net/images/stories/pdf/forest_mgr_guide_ls_structure_web.pdf >>> > >>> > comments? >>> > >>> > Gary Beluzo? What say ye about this? Those restored pseudo semi >>> old >>> > growth forests won't be autopoietic? >>> > >>> > Joe >>> > >>> > > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
