 |
 |
 |
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
Hellbender Journal Autumn 2002
Late one afternoon this past October I almost ran, literally, into a bowhunter at the Iroquois National Wildlife Refuge, a wetland preserve located east of Lockport, NY. The resulting conversation caused me to reflect on views that some members of the hunting community may share concerning native forest restoration and prompted me to put down some thoughts about even-aged logging, forest type conversion and deer overpopulation. An Interesting Encounter Against the hastening approach of winter weather, I had decided to take advantage of a brief shot of Indian summer to further evaluate a small tract of old growth forest that lies deep within this 11,000 acre refuge. These woods are more easily accessible by boat via Oak Orchard Creek, so I cartopped my 16 foot kayak to the bridge on Knowlesville Road and paddled in the few miles to a point near the woods, lifting over a recently constructed beaver dam. Although quite small in area these woods contain some very large and very old hemlocks and northern hardwoods - mainly beech, maple and oak - as well as a small stand of white pine. My plan was to take some measurements of individual trees and to assess whether the site met a vague rule-of-thumb of approximately 8 old growth trees per acre (parts of it certainly do). After only an hour of work, a marked dimming of daylight signalled the distant approach of a cold front squall line. Cutting short my work, I embarked on a shortcut back to the boat across an overgrown swale. As I tramped up the far slope, pulling stick-tights from my brown plaid shirt, I suddenly noticed the bowhunter, in full camo and face paint, standing lot more than 40 feet away watching me. Surprised, I hailed him and we approached each other. I hadn't expected to run into anyone this deep in the refuge. He asked me if I was lost. I laughed, said no, and briefly explained my work. He asked how I had gotten into this remote woods. I answered, pointing in the direction of the boat. He commented that was quite a way to come, while we both glanced skyward at the deteriorating weather. He pointed in a westerly direction and described his entry along an old roadbed unknown to me. As a woodlot owner he expressed an interest in my work and we were soon engaged in a discussion of logging and forestry management practices. Pointing at a 10 inch tree he scoffingly related how a firewood operator had recently offered him $10 per tree for his similarly sized trees. He pointed at a black cherry nearby and asked me to guess its value. I looked at the tree, and commented that cherry prices had tumbled recently to about $6 per board foot at retail so the tree might be worth a thousand dollars. He nodded in agreement; it seemed he knew various tree species and their market values. Then, to my surprise, he said he was personally managing his own woodlot to avoid high grading and to develop an old growth forest condition by limiting his cutting to infrequent, individual tree selective harvests. It's unfortunate that his approach either seems immediately uneconomic or too difficult to practice for most people, who either willingly or unwittingly acquiesce to the profit maximizing practices of most logging operators and commercial forestry consultants. I was glad to have come across this man of similar viewpoint, a kindred spirit who, while enjoying the beauty and biodiversity of our native climax forests, also understands their inherent health, balance, and sustainability. A human who places these values firmly above excessive, short term economic gain. A bowhunter. We bade each other good luck and headed off in different directions: I to consider the prospects of alliances with like-minded hunters in the pursuit of policies that someday might restore the native forests of the Allegheny; he to slip back into the ancient workings of the mind of a hunter. At that primal level it also occurred to me that I was perhaps fortunate to have stumbled upon such a sober and serious bowhunter. Even-Aged Logging, Forest Conversion and Deer Overpopulation It is a well-known fact that the extensive thicket of saplings - i.e., deer forage - that sprang up following the clearcutting of the original forests, combined with the extirpation of top predators, resulted in a large expansion of deer numbers above those previously present in the undisturbed native forests. The Forest Service's adoption of even-aged timber management as its predominant harvest practice in the Allegheny National Forest has effectively perpetuated this unnatural imbalance in deer numbers by keeping a significant percentage of the land area in such early successional states. More important, the original clearing and, more recently, decades of ongoing clearcut harvesting (even-aged management) - whether called shelterwood cut, seed tree removal, prep-cut, etc. - are causing an alarmingly rapid conversion of the native mixed mesophytic forests to the "Allegheny hardwood forest type". This is an artificial, man-made forest (some call it a tree farm) chiefly composed of black cherry. In the early 1800s, black cherry composed less than one percent of the Allegheny's forests. Today it averages 28 percent of the overstory and 47 percent of the understory. The shade tolerant climax species of the native forests - hemlock, beech, and maple - are being replaced by the faster growing, shade intolerant (early successional) species, foremost being black cherry, and to a much lesser degree red oak which has been decimated by the heavy depredation of the alien gypsy moth. The extent and speed of such conversion are further augmented by the application of powerful herbicides to subdue growth of the "undesirable" (i.e. currently commercially undesirable) climax species, followed by fertilizer to stimulate the faster growing cherry. Meanwhile, the large, roaming deer herds induced by the even-aged practices are synergistically hampering regrowth of the slower growing shade tolerant species, especially the maples and hemlock which are the deer's preferred forage. At times, deer browsing is even hindering regrowth of some of the black cherry crop areas. The Forest Service describes the regeneration (regrowth of trees) in Uneven-Aged Management (UEAM) areas as "marginal" and in Even-Aged Management (EAM) areas as "adequate". In the East Side Project EIS, the Forest Service acknowledged that underlying many other, mostly man-made, problems - e.g., acid precipitation or the depredations of alien species such as the gypsy moth, beech bark disease and the wooly adelgid - heavy deer browsing is the key factor responsible for the escalating difficulties and failures in forest regeneration. Yet the Forest Service continues to apply essentially the same even-aged timber management practices that were, at the turn of the century, and continue to be the major cause of deer overpopulation. The East Side review failed to provide any analysis of the relative contribution, or lack thereof, of each of the full range of timber management methods to this fundamental deer overpopulation/forest regeneration problem, despite the fact that during scoping, commenters had requested a thorough analysis of this issue. Of course, discontinuance of EAM in favor of UEAM practices and other recovery actions designed to restore the species diversity and vertical structure of the native forests would go a long way toward reversing this problem. The mitigation measures the Forest Service has employed - primarily fencing, supplemental re-seeding and plantings with tubes, and fertilization - have met limited success. And, they are all very expensive. Yet the East Side review failed to distinguish differences in need for these measures among the various timber management alternatives (or "vegetative treatments") and the corresponding differences in economic investments required. Instead, seemingly ignoring a decline in hunter numbers in recent years and a corresponding reduction in numbers of deer taken, in its East Side decision the Forest Service irresponsibly lays the issue of deer numbers at the door of the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Native Forest Restoration and Hunting It is disturbing that the Forest Service has cultivated alliances with some members of the hunting community that singlemindedly seek more deer in order to gain their support for the very EAM practices that are the underlying cause of this major forest regeneration problem. It is troubling that a large part of the Forest Service actions that contribute to this problem are slickly promoted by the FS as "wildlife work" in order to garner additional hunter support and non-critical public acceptance. The conditions necessary to "maintain desired levels" of "demand" (game) species are much different from the conditions present in mature native forests on a landscape that has attained sustainable ecosystem integrity. Most true hunter-conservationists do not support large-scale manipulation of our native forests to create unnaturally high levels of game species. Hopefully ADP and other forest restoration advocates will be able to engage in constructive dialogue with conservationist sportsmen, after the examples of Aldo Leopold, Bob Marshall, Theodore Roosevelt and Howard Zahniser, to develop a mutual vision that will facilitate a landscape level restoration of intact native climax forests to the Allegheny. It is important to realize that achieving this goal may be greatly assisted by the formation of alliances with hunters, such as the bowhunter described above, who voluntarily accept the lower deer numbers supported by our native climax forests. It is also important for native forest restoration advocates to consider the possibility that increased deer hunting for a period of time - or other means, such as expensive, experimental immunocontraceptive techniques - may be necessary to bring deer numbers down to the natural carrying capacity of the redeveloping native climax forests. |
|
|
|||
|
