Joe, et al:
Good for central Europe. Maybe there is hope. It is time that forestry began returning to its roots. Basically, I look at clear-cut silviculture as just the easy and short term way out - a method for minimizing costs and maximizing fiber - in the short term. As you have pointed out many times, big industry tries to hold their costs down by passing many of them to the public. Clear-cut silviculture may work well for limited purposes, but it is not natural or a substitute for fire, as many once claimed. Bob - Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Zorzin" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 11:06:24 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: change of subject- forestry in finland **** was:Re: [ENTS] Re: Up North I just never can understand why foresters like clearcutting. They claim it's necessary. But I don't agree it's necessary, hardly ever. When I go into a forest to mark it selectively for a harvest- I find it very challenging (and very exciting) to look at ever tree and decide it's fate. Here in western New England the forests are a complex mix of several forest types, northern hardwood, central hardwood and "spruce-fir + hardwood" and we have very complex geology and soils with slopes from gentle to steep facing all directions. I have concluded that removing only about a third of the volume works in almost all cases. To do this well takes far more skill and knowledge than clearcutting. I often see up to 16 species in a stand. see my slideshow: http://www.maforests.org/rulethum.pdf I read somewhere that in central Europe, uneven age multi species silviculture is now getting popular again. Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: Kouta Räsänen To: ENTSTrees Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:04 AM Subject: Re: change of subject- forestry in finland **** was:Re: [ENTS] Re: Up North Kirk, Only clearcutting is used in Finland. But clearcutted areas are quite small, the mean being below 2 hectares (< 5 acres). The current forest certifying (95% of the forest area excluding protected areas) requires that 5 trees are left standing in every hectare (2 trees / acre) for insects, birds, fungi etc. Nature conservation organizations claim the number is too small, and I have noticed myself, that the weakest trees (which may be damaged by logging operation) are left and after couple of years they are often not anymore standing. If natural regeneration is used for the Scots Pine, 50-150 trees / hectare (120-370 trees / acre) are left for 5-10 years. A newer method is to grow mixed forest of the Norway Spruce and the Silver Birch. The birch grows in Finland much faster than the spruce and birch leaf debris ameliorates soil too. The spruce is quite shade tolerant and its early growth is even better under taller birches because of the protection from late winter wind. Birches reach cutting age earlier and spruces are left growing. - Kouta On Oct 27, 6:11 pm, Kirk Johnson < [email protected] > wrote: > Thank you for this information Kouta, that is interesting. > > It sounds like timbering in Scandinavia maybe isn't quite as benign or > "light on the land" that it is sometimes made out to be. In terms of carving > up roadless tracts with roads anyway. > > Is clearcutting or other other forms of even-aged harvest used, or is it > primarily selective or uneven-aged harvest? > > Kirk Johnson --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
