Salvaging - A Closer Look

Page 3 of 4  
wrote:

Whew, staples.....you need to come in from the killing fields, put on some Joni, blow a couple bowls, get laid, and mellow out, man...
Charlie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<Charlie> wrote in message > wrote:

Hey, what I told yard mans bitch, fuck off, doper.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yes, you certainly do remind me of my FIL, republican. Same quick temper and mindless responses. Same lowlife language in labeling.
I wonder if you also harbor the same perverse sexual proclivities as my republican xian father-in-law? Funny thing it is, reading people's posts and poking them just a bit to see how they react. You didn't surprise me one bit, Killer.
Thanks for playing, moron. You may now go back to blowing keslick's every post.
Peace, Love and Dope Charlie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Charlie" wrote in message

Does that mean you are through, ass hole?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:24:27 -0500, "Don Staples"
Not likely, dope.
Charlie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think we have given this foul-mouthed, muddy booted, dark-under belly of a pretentious untermench too much space. Let's go back to the sunshine.
106F here yesterday. Emilie, up in our northern outpost of civilization here in California, beat me out at 109F. Temp is miserable for people but my mature tomatoes, squash, and cucumbers are loving it. I can practically watch the tomatoes turning red. My fringe pink (dianthus superbus) is in bloom and adds some color to the green of the hedges and ivy. I think I need more bio-mass before I start experimenting with it. The twig of an English hawthorn that I got last year is about three feet high and has four main branches. Hopefully, I can start harvesting it next year. The raccoon that ravaged the cabbage and the lettuce, seems to have moved on. No further incidents since I started relieving myself in his dining area.
Talk later. Time to button up the house again.
Shields up!
--

Billy
Bush and Pelosi Behind Bars
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

So, you and your other dopers are giving up trying to be foresters, how nice.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Dioclese" <NONE> wrote:

OK, so you're not recommending strip cutting. That was the question:-)
--

Billy
Bush and Pelosi Behind Bars
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don Staples. Let me make sure I have the question right. What treatment could there possibly be other than salvage and restore as stated on your website. http://www.livingston.net/dstaples/Services/salvage.htm Which means remove all substrate for the base of the food web. And you call me a fool?
From you Don, I see that's the only treatment know or understand to do, i.e., get the wood out. You call me a yardman. Not a bad thing to be especially having a background in tree biology. What a great place to apply what I have come to understanding with Tree Biology coming of age.
Research and publications suggest that Course woody debris help in the succession of plant life after a disturbance such as but not limited too, tornado's, waves of insects, fire, etc. Your salvaging does not address these issues.
To answer your question I would contact a few friends in the US FOREST SERVICE research department and come up with a treatment plan based on a thorough understanding of tree biology. I hope I addressed your question
BTW Don, Happy Fourth. I would stand by you if this country was ever invaded. Have a great day!
--
Do to the overwhelming amount a negative criticism by a few individuals on
this list, I am only willing to get into debate by way of email. I have a
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The US Forest Service recommends salvage, dumb ass.
When are you going to take your Arborist exam again, dumb ass?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 13:24:25 -0500, "Don Staples"

I just threw up in my mouth a little! Euuuuueeewww.
I think I'm done. He's in the bin. I just can't stand him any more.
Happy Independence Day! Me, I'd run the other way if this country was invaded. I am going to run before it happens. We're looking at Costa Rica and Belize...or the Pacific Northwest in Canada.
If we really can't stand even to be on this continent, Italy or France. All those formal Mediterranean gardens; his head would explode!
v
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Tornado's And Salvaging 2 of 16
Note: the Silviculture mentioned with restoration - I will use the definition for salvaging from a website from a recognized consulting forester in Texas (Don Staples), which I would assume is a forestry industry standard. "Salvage and restoration. There comes a time when nature just does not cooperate with the best of management efforts. At that time you may have to salvage whats left, and start anew. Salvage is a very different sales effort for forest products. Usually, the sales material is damaged, dead, or dying. Finding a market for this material can be tricky, and incomes low. But, best to move the material, get it out of the way for future work. Take what income you can from the salvage, and set it aside for planting the site."
I accept the definition, however, I disagree that you can plant a forest as well as the statement that you may have to remove what is left, which in this case would be the old growth conditions (Tionesta). I use the Tionesta Scenic Area in the Allegheny National Forest as a control. It had a tornado go through in around 1986 and most recently had a blow down. As far as I know nothing has been removed and all ecological stages of trees exist. I did soil sampling in that area in the rhizoplane.
What tornados do not do, verses doing the following after a tornado. In other words what would removing wood from a tornado swath achieve - I.e., not limited too but including -
I believe, Salvaging would alter the carbon to nitrogen ratio over time. Something to keep in mind - Reports from some countries indicate an abundance of soluble nitrogen compounds in runoff water and even in ground water. This is a strong indication that the carbon-nitrogen ratio has been disrupted in the soil. It is well established from studies of the physiology of fungal parasitism that the degree of parasitism is often determined by the carbon-nitrogen ratio. It is probably similar for other organisms (Shigo, 1996).
Salvaging would be removing a storehouse for moisture, which would have provided moisture for plants and animals during dry times such as summer drought, as it may be called (Page-Dumroese, Harvey, Jurgensen and Graham, 1991).
Salvaging would be removing present and future decayed logs, which act like a sponge to absorb water and retain much of the water throughout the following growing season. This water would be a survival feature during drought for members of the system (Page-Dumroese, Harvey, Jurgensen and Graham, 1991).
Too often "drought", what ever they mean, is used by the USFS to describe the cause of mortality to trees, most often in areas that have been Salvaged at one time or another. I would think that the tornado spot has great potential for moisture retention as those 400 increment old fallen hemlock and white pine, which are heartwood forming trees, become like a sponge. These nurse logs may be around for a long time. Does anybody guess how long a nurse log, from a 400 increment old Eastern Hemlock tree, would function let's say with soil contact. After tornado a flush of birch and cherry quickly grew and shaded the soil and nurse logs. I must return again. Last time we had to crawl on hands and knees to get in through the thickets of growth. A unique place to be - for sure. My son and I were in there doing pedology work. Has anyone on this list ever crawled back in to Tionesta?
Just for fun!
http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/temp2 /
Can someone offer suggestions on benefits of Salvaging and area with respect for the health of the system?
Salvaging this area would be removing materials, that when soil contact was made, would have played key roles with the cation exchange capacity, water - holding capacity, bulk density, essential element and nutrient budgets and erosion potential (Page-Dumroese, Harvey, Jurgensen and Graham, 1991).
Salvaging this area would be removing woody material that has been identified as playing several important roles in the functioning of the region's forests. In southwest Oregon, brown-cubical-rotted CWD acts as a perched water reservoir, the spongy decayed wood being able to hold over twice its own weight in water. This material thus would have otherwise been a major source of moisture for fungi and roots well into the summer drought that characterizes the region (Amaranthus, Trappe and Bednar, 1994). The same has been seen in the Allegheny Mountains in the Cook State Park Forest - Protected area, i.e., protected from Salvaging. Animals also utilize stored water.
Salvaging this area would stop the processes, which would take place between a fallen tree and its surroundings, which would have increased, as decomposition would have continued. E.g., the flow of plant and animal populations, air, water, and essential elements. (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 12). Salvaging kills this system processes by means of disruption and depletion causing dysfunction.
Salvaging this area would remove and reduce the forming of Large Stumps such as in old-growth trees, which are a finite resource, and their loss from the forest affects both soil shear strength and watershed hydrology (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-fig2.6).
Salvaging this area would remove CWD, and the associated epiphytic bryophytes, which act as both essential element and moisture buffers for the ecosystems (FEMAT 1993). This buffering would allow the slow release of water and essential elements to surrounding plants. In mature and old growth coastal forests, a large proportion of western hemlock and Sitka spruce seedlings germinate and grow on CWD substrates (Harmon and Franklin 1989; G. Davis, pers. comm., 1994).
Salvaging this area would remove CWD, which would affect temperature as well as moisture, which would have had the capacity to benefit certain beneficial fungi (Amaranthus, Trappe and Bednar, 1994).
Salvaging this area would remove large, fallen trees or trees, in various stages of decay. Salvaging is removing parent material, which would contribute much-needed diversity to terrestrial and aquatic habitats in forests. When most biological activity in soil is limited by low moisture availability in summer, the material removed, fallen tree-soil interface, would have offered a relatively cool, moist habitat for animals and a substrate for microbial and root activity. Intensified utilization and management can deprive future forests of large, fallen trees. The impact of this loss on habitat diversity and on long-term forest productivity must be determined because management needs sound information on which to base resource management decisions (Maser and Trappe, 1984, Abstract-par2).
Salvaging this area would remove wood and its moisture-holding capacity thus eliminating its internal processes and therefore the succession of plants and animals. This affects the biotic community (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg4-par3).
Salvaging this are would remove some snags, which may have accumulated moisture - carried essential elements and had a higher essential element capital when it fell than does a tree with symplast (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg19-par2). Figure that one out!
Salvaging this area would stop colonization of decomposing wood by animals which would have helped microbes to enter interior surfaces of the wood and create additional openings for entry of water and essential elements; and penetration of the wood by roots of trees, such as western hemlock (eastern hemlock in Tionesta and white pine), which in turn facilitates entry by mycorrhizal fungi (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg19-par4).
Salvaging this area would remove many readily available essential elements that support opportunistic colonizers as well as the remaining essential elements, which would be locked in the more decay resistant compounds of the wood. Ultimately, organisms, with more sophisticated enzyme systems would, have succeeded the rapidly growing opportunists. (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg37-par2)
- - - - - - - - People that like to use Webster -
Salvage -
property or goods saved from damage or destruction
save from ruin, destruction, or harm
the act of saving goods or property that were in danger of damage or destruction
- - - - - - - -
Salvaging this area would remove fallen tress or in some cases, future fallen trees that when oriented along the contour of a slope, the upslope side would be filled with humus and inorganic material which would have allowed invertebrates and small vertebrates to tunnel alongside. The down slope side would have provided protective cover for larger vertebrates. When under a closed canopy, such trees would have also been saturated with water and act as a reservoir during the dry part of the year (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg45-par3). Exactly the environment in the swath at Tionesta.
Salvaging this area of so called rotten wood or so called rotten wood to be would be removing something critical as substrate for ectomycorrhizal formation. E.g., in one forest which contained a coniferous stand of trees (Eastern Hemlock and White Pine are coniferous), over 95 percent of all active mycorrhizae were in organic matter of which 21 percent were in decayed wood. In another study in the northern Rocky Mountains, decayed wood in soil was important. In moist, mesic, and arid habitat types (Harvey et al. 1979), it was the most frequent substrate for active ectomycorrhizae on the dry site, probably because of high moisture levels in the wood. Mycorrhizal fungi can colonize logs, presumably using them as sources of water, essential elements and nutrients. (Franklin, Cromack, Kermit, et al. others, 1981).
Where we are. Endangered species. Salvaging this area would remove present and future available moist microhabitats, primarily because of a lack of large logs in intermediate and advanced stages of decay. Aubry et al. (1988) found that some species of salamander were most abundant around CWD. Dupuis (1993) concluded that salamander populations in Salvaged areas were limited by available moist microhabitats, primarily because of a lack of large logs in intermediate and advanced stages of decay (Voller and Harrison, 1998). Note: There are salamander species on T & E list.
Salvaging in both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, is removing present and future symplastless wood, which would have functioned as a reservoir of moisture, ameliorating drought conditions and providing a 'perched water table' (Triska and Cromack 1979) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
My conclusion about water: The capacity and ability, of CWD, to provide water / moisture for fauna and flora during dryer times too often goes unobserved, such as the case in this Painter Run Windthrow Salvage Project? Coarse woody debris / ecoart nurse logs play a key role in providing the requirements of water/moisture for survival of species of animals as well as plants, be they listed as threatened and endangered or not. This function it plays a key role during hot, drier times. To fully comprehend the importance one must consider time. This function must be thoroughly considered before making a decision to remove this function from the system or not.
References: http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/SOUND/whatitis/references.html
Case sensitive.
End of 2-16
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Same as above, you dumb ass.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

3 of 16
Tornado's And Salvaging
Note: the Silviculture mentioned with restoration - I will use the definition for salvaging from a website from a recognized consulting forester in Texas, which I would assume is a forestry industry standard.
"Salvage and restoration. There comes a time when nature just does not cooperate with the best of management efforts. At that time you may have to salvage whats left, and start anew. Salvage is a very different sales effort for forest products. Usually, the sales material is damaged, dead, or dying. Finding a market for this material can be tricky, and incomes low. But, best to move the material, get it out of the way for future work. Take what income you can from the salvage, and set it aside for planting the site."
I accept the person's definition, however, I disagree that you can plant a forest as well as the statement that you may have to remove what is left, which in this case would be the old growth conditions (Tionesta). I use the Tionesta Scenic Area in the Allegheny National Forest as a control. It had a tornado go through in around 1986 and most recently had a blow down. As far as I know nothing has been removed and all ecological stages of trees exist. I did soil sampling in that area in the rhizoplane.
Elements, nutrients and food defined: Food is a substance that provides and energy source, mostly. Nutrient is a substance that provides an energy source, elements, and other substances essential for life, in types and amounts that can provide a healthy life. Fertilizer is a substance that provides elements, as salts mostly, or in bonded forms, that require microorganisms to alter to forms that can be absorbed by plants. We cannot and do not feed plants. We add essential elements at Keslick And Son. Trees manufacture their own food and they do not absorb a nutrient or food from the soil. We add essential elements.
If we could feed trees, we would take away the major job of the sun! People who say "plant food" are ignorant about photosynthesis.
In other words: Foods are substances that contain an energy source mostly, and may contain some elements, and other substances. The main part of food is the energy source. There are junk foods, fatty foods, and healthy foods. There are many diet books telling you about healthy foods. Animals can absorb an energy source. Plants cannot absorb an energy source. fertilizers are not plant foods. Fertilizers provide elements essential for growth of plants. The elements are part of salts, usually, that ionize in water. Ions are charged particles; anions, negative, and cations, positive. Plants "make" carbohydrates by trapping the light energy of the sun in a process called photosynthesis. Sad that so many people who work with plants do not know this. They call fertilizers plant food. Very sad.
What tornados do not do, verses doing the following after a tornado. In other words what would salvaging wood from a tornado swath achieve - I.e., not limited too but including -
Salvaging this area would alter the availability in the proper proportions of the right "STEW" - Space, Temperature, Elements and Water over time. It is hard for the energy of the sun to optimally make a tree into the most efficient system on earth when the right amount of essential elements and water has been removed.
Salvaging this area would remove required substrate for a decomposition process where fallen trees release essential elements for microbial and plant growth (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg37-par1). Thus, salvaging would remove essential elements for microbial and plant growth. Elements other than nitrogen such as calcium and magnesium also accumulate in decomposing woody substrate. (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 16-par2)
Salvaging this area would remove woody duff, which regardless of type or size, takes considerably longer to decompose than needle and leaf duff does. Needles, leaves, and small twigs decompose faster than larger woody material and essential elements are thereby recycled faster in the forest floor. About 140 years are required for essential elements to cycle in large, fallen trees and more than 400 years for such trees to become incorporated into the forest floor; they therefore would interact with the plants and animals of the forest floor and soil over a long period of forest and stand successional history (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988. pg37-par1).
Salvaging this area would remove the capacity of the system to accumulate nitrogen in decaying, fallen trees as well as other significant essential elements such as calcium and magnesium. Although nitrogen fixation in wood is modest compared with that occurring in other substrates in forests, the persistence of decaying wood allows small increments of nitrogen to accrue over many decades (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 16).
Salvaging this area would remove wood that would further decompose which would undergo changes in other chemical constituents and pH as well as physical structure. Very old, decayed wood can even become somewhat humified and leave long lasting substrate resistant to further decay (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 16-par 4).
Salvaging this area would remove trees, which would have been decaying trees. These trees would have comprised considerable accumulations of mass, nutrients and elements. (Maser and Trappe, 1984,pg16-par1).
Note: Some of the largest accumulations occur in the unmanaged forest of the Pacific Northwest. Coarse woody debris can range from 130 to 276 tons per acre in stands from 100 to more than 1,000 years old. Although here we are concerned with Douglas fir, neither decaying wood nor research data are unique to forests of the Pacific Northwest. McFee and Stone (1966) Observed that decaying wood persisted for more than 100 years in New York and others pointed out that substantial accumulations of CWD in old-growth forest in Poland. (Just as Tionesta) These observations evidence the long-term continuity of decaying trees as structural components in forest (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 16-par1).
Salvaging this area would remove present and future decaying logs on or which would become a part of the forest floor, which would have been a reservoir for nutrients as well as essential elements. (Page-Dumroese, Harvey, Jurgensen and Graham, 1991).
Salvaging this area would remove what would naturally reduce erosion and affect soil development, store nutrients and water, provide a source of energy and essential element flow, serve as seedbeds, and provide habitat for decomposers and heterotrophs (Harmon and Hua, 1991).
Salvaging this area would reduce the pool of stable nutrients. An important feature of woody debris is that nutrients are released at slower rates than from fine duff. This slow release allows essential elements to be retained within the ecosystem until tree production recovers. Timber harvest and salvage after disturbance reduces this pool of stable essential elements (Harmon and Hua, 1991).
Salvaging this area would stop the decomposition of logs and other forms of coarse woody debris which reduce erosion, affect soil development, store essential elements and water, are a potentially large source of energy (nutrients - food) and essential elements, serve as a seed bed for plants, and form an important habitat for fungi and arthropods. Note: Despite growing recognition that symplastless trees play major roles in ecosystem function, many aspects of the specific processes involved are poorly understood. Consider, for example, the importance of CWD in forest essential element cycles. Aside from nitrogen fixation, few studies have directly examined the processes responsible for the net changes in essential element content of decaying wood. The actual proportion of tree nutrition that is derived from CWD is not known (Kropp, 1982).
Thus, salvaging would increase soil erosion at the time and over time.
Salvaging this area would stop the processes, which would take place between a fallen tree and its surroundings, which would have increased, as decomposition would have continued. E.g., the flow of plant and animal populations, air, water, and essential elements. (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 12-par1). Salvaging kills this system processes by means of disruption and depletion causing dysfunction.
Salvaging this area would remove structural components of great importance for forest dynamics and forest biodiversity. The decomposition of trees removed would have provided an important link in cycling on nutrients and essential elements in the ecosystem. In addition, many species of plants, fungi and animals are dependent on symplastless trees for nutrients, essential elements, habitat or substrate and nesting (Kruys and Jonsson, 1999).
Salvaging this area would remove logs, which would have helped reduce erosion by forming "a barrier to creeping and raveling soils (Maser and Trappe, 1984 pg4-par1).
Salvaging this area would increase the loss nutrients and essential elements from the site. Such spots would have been excellent for the establishment and growth of vegetation, including tree seedlings. Vegetation would have been established on and help stabilize this "new soil", and as invertebrates and small vertebrates would have begun to burrow into the new soil, they would not only have nutritionally enriched it with their feces and urine but also constantly mixed it by their burrowing activities (Maser and Trappe, 1984 pg 4-par1-2).
Salvaging this area would remove the habitat, i.e., the would be creations, of inner space within a log, as it would decompose, which many organisms such as plant roots, mites, collembolans, amphibians, and small mammals, must await to enter. The flow of plant and animal populations, air, water, and nutrients as well as essential elements between fallen tree and its surrounding would have increased if aging process continued and the area was not salvaged. (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 12).
Salvaging this area would remove the sponge like mass, which would gather and store moisture and essential elements. Duff fall and throughfall are major pathways for the flow of essential elements and energy within forests, they contribute essential elements, nutrients and water to so called rotten wood. The larger a fallen tree, the more duff it accumulates on its surface and the more essential element rich moisture it intercepts from the canopy. The moisture gathers essential elements as it passes through the accumulated duff and soaks into the fallen tree (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 19-par 2).
Salvaging this area would remove CWD, which the associated epiphytic bryophytes would have acted as both essential element and moisture buffers for the ecosystems (FEMAT 1993). This buffering would have allowed the slow release of water and essential elements to surrounding plants. In mature and old growth coastal forests, a large proportion of western hemlock and Sitka spruce seedlings germinate and grow on CWD substrates (Harmon and Franklin 1989; G. Davis, pers. comm., 1994).
Salvaging this area would alter the chemistry of the system. The main chemical differences among substrates are: (1) nitrogen content; (2) mineral or ash content-phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium; (3) the carbon matrix-cellulose, lignin, pentosans and (4) the content of other organic compounds-waxes, pigments, carbohydrates, fats, resins, phenolic compounds (Maser and Trappe, 1984 pg11 par 2).
Salvaging this area would alter the amount of nitrogen, however, besides Nitrogen, Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium, and Phosphorus and other essential elements play key roles in soil, plant and tree health as well as the other associated living organisms (Page-Dumroese, Harvey, Jurgensen and Graham, 1991).
Salvaging this area would remove initial, optimal and final stages of fallen trees. Plant - nutrient / essential elements - and the succession of plants on fallen trees is mediated by changes in essential element availability and physical properties over time. Three broad phases can be defined: initial, optimal, final. Early invaders prepare the tree for later colonization by altering its physical and chemical properties during the initial phase. The altered tree provides the best substrate for a wide array of organisms during the optimal phase. Ultimately, the depletion of essential elements and physical deterioration of the wood during the optimal phase diminish its value for many organisms, so fewer species inhabit the final phase (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 25-par 5).
Salvaging this area would remove CWD, which has the potential to store a large amount of carbon in the ecosystem. The role of coarse woody debris in storing carbon is often overlooked, with only living plants or soil carbon being considered. Relatively little is known about the formation and rate of decay of coarse woody debris or the factors controlling these processes, despite the relevance of this information to the global carbon cycle (Harmon and Hua, 1991).
Salvaging this area would remove future savings accounts of essential elements and organic material in the forest soil. The decomposing wood of a fallen tree serves as the latter (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 16-par1). Elements other than nitrogen such as calcium and magnesium, also accumulate in decomposing woody substrate. (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 16-par2)
Salvaging this area would remove the interactions of fallen trees which interact with essential element cycling processes in a forest through such mechanisms as duff fall (freshly fallen or slightly decomposed plant material from the canopy), throughfall (rain or dew that picks up elements as it falls through the canopy), nitrogen fixation, and essential element uptake by plants associated with the fallen trees (Maser and Trappe, 1984, 19-par2).
Salvaging this area would remove opportunities that ground contact by fallen trees creates for various interactions with the biotic components of soil and duff. Fungi, for instance, would translocate essential elements within the soil- system, as both decomposers and root symbionts. Fungi would also immobilize translocated essential elements and thereby enrich the decomposing wood substrates they inhabit. In addition, the colonization of decomposing fallen trees by nitrogen-fixing bacteria permits additional nitrogen accretion within the decaying wood (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 19-par 3).
Salvaging this area would remove the external succession processes and benefits of CWD, which is related to the changes that take place in the plant community surrounding a fallen tree (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 38-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove connectors. A fallen tree is a connector between the successional stages of a community; it would have provided continuity of habitat from the previous forest through subsequent successional stages (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 38-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove large, would be, fallen or already fallen tree, which would have provided a physical link - an essential element savings account - through time and across successional stages. Because of its persistence, the log or logs would have provided a long- term, stable structure on which some animal (both invertebrate and vertebrate) populations appear to depend on for survival (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 38-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove humus forming materials, which would have been important in regulating the incorporation of nitrogen into humic materials. Because of its high cation exchange capacity and slow decomposition, so called rotten wood, or chemically altered wood, if you please, can retain available mineral nitrogen from throughfall and decomposition as well as organic nitrogen compounds mineralized within the wood chemical matrix (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg40-par2).
Salvaging this area would remove materials, which roots and mycorrhizae, of plant species that colonize decaying wood, use for its available nitrogen (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg40-par2).
Salvaging this area would alter humic acids, which slow decomposition reactions in soils. (Shigo, 1999, pg110-#666)
Salvaging this area would remove materials downed, which would have had a long-term input of nitrogen fixation.
Salvaging this area would alter a positive attempt of balance of nitrogen in the ecosystem. Salvaging is removing the long term input by nitrogen fixation in falling trees as they are being chemically altered by the succession of microorganisms as well as organisms, which is a highly ordered arrangement. And by canopy inhibiting lichens, which maintain such input (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg40-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove of materials that would have had long-term potential for contributing nitrogen for tree growth as residual lignin and humus are decomposed (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg41-par1).
Salvaging this area would remove what would be equal to slow release fertilizer for once fertile forest (Many salts of essential elements over time). With respect to tree maturity, habitats, both external and internal, are influenced by tree size - maturity (Internal Regulating System - Dynamic to Static Mass). An uninterrupted supply of new, immature wood in young forests decomposes and recycles essential elements and energy rapidly. Habitats provided by the death of the symplast of young trees are short-lived and rapidly changing. (E.g., specifically speaking, species of young trees, which produce protection wood such as heartwood, would have not formed heartwood). In contrast, the less frequent, more irregular mortality of the symplast of large trees in old forests is analogous to slow-release fertilization. (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988,pg44-par2). Salvaging reduces the amount and quality of humus like materials.
Salvaging this area would remove materials that in time would be decaying and would have contributed to long-term accumulation of soil organic matter, partly because the carbon constituents of the future well-decayed wood would have 80-90 percent residual lignin and humus (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would be incorporated in the soil and would have aided the establishment of conifer seedlings and mycorrhizal fungi on dry sites. (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material that in time would have added to spatial, chemical, and biotic diversity of forest soils, and to the processes that maintain long-term forest productivity (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988. pg44-par3).
I did not intend to address methods or other components of salvaging processes in this paper, just what is being removed and its chemistry. As is salvaging within the ANF, machine is used for several treatments (sorry). Machine entry on an area, which contains trees, reduces diversity because heavy equipment fragments and scatters class IV and V so called rotten wood. Habitat diversity declines to a fraction of what had been available, probably fewer kinds of organisms can thrive. Further, because woody substrates serve as long-term soil organic material and essential element reservoirs, increasingly intensive timber management, coupled with shorter rotations, could significantly alter the role of decaying wood in the essential element cycling processes (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 48-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove critical material, which would have served for mycorrhizal fungi, which can colonize logs, presumably using them as sources of water and essential elements. (Franklin, Cromack, Kermit, et al. others, 1981).
Salvaging this area would remove a significant factor in essential element cycling processes (Harmon et al. 1986; Caza 1993). Although the relative concentration of essential elements in wood and bark is low, much of the essential elements capital and carbon are stored here because of the large biomass involved (Harmon et al. 1986; Caza 1993) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Salvaging this area would remove symplastless wood, which would have facilitated a slow release of essential elements, ameliorated leaching, and provided a growing substrate for bryophytes (Harmon et al. 1986; FEMAT 1993; Samuelsson et al. 1994) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would buffer water and essential element release from duff and aboveground processes, especially processes such as nitrogen fixation in aboveground plants such as hepatics (Harmon et al. 1986; FEMAT 1993; Samuelsson et al. 1994) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Bacteria are very small. They do big things (Shigo, 1999, #216 pg34)
Salvaging this area would remove habitat for free-living bacteria, which in woody residues and soil wood fix 30-60% of the nitrogen in the forest soil. In addition, 20% of soil nitrogen is stored in these components (Harvey et al. 1987). Harmon et al. (1986) reported that CWD accounted for as much as 45% of aboveground stores of organic matter. Symplastless wood in terrestrial ecosystems is a primary location for fungal colonization and often acts as refugia for mycorrhizal fungi during ecosystem disturbance (Triska and Cromack 1979; Harmon et al. 1986; Caza 1993) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Salvaging this area would remove one of the suspected, most important stages in essential element cycling by the colonization of symplastless wood by fungi and microbes (Caza 1993); however, these processes are still relatively poorly understood. In fact soil wood contains a disproportionate amount of the coniferous non-woody roots or ectomycorrhizae in forests (Harvey et al. 1987). As one of the dominant sources of organic matter, salvaging removes symplastless wood, which would have had an important determinant in soil formation and composition (Caza 1993) (Voller and Harrison, 1998)
Salvaging this area would remove symplastless wood which would have provided physical structure to the ecosystem and filled such roles as sediment storage (Wilford 1984), protecting the forest floor from mineral soil erosion and mechanical disturbance during harvesting activities (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would ameliorate the affects of cold air drainage on plants, helps stabilize slopes, and minimizes soil erosion (Maser et al. 1988) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Salvaging this area would remove symplastless wood, which would provide elevated germination platforms with reduced duff fall accumulation and relatively consistent moisture regimes (Harmon et al. 1986; Maser et al. 1988; Caza 1993; D.F. Fraser, pers. comm., 1995) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Conclusion: The capacity and ability, of CWD, to function as a nutrient and essential element storehouse, too often goes unobserved such as in salvaging. Technical reports clearly point out that the long term continuity of decaying trees are structural components of forests. CWD are reservoirs for nutrients as well as essential elements for long periods of time. CWD provides a source of energy and essential element flow. Timber harvest and salvage after disturbances reduces pool of stable nutrients and essential elements. Symplastless trees are structural components of great importance for forest dynamics and forest biodiversity. Many species of plants, fungi and animals are dependent on symplastless trees for nutrients, essential elements, habitat or substrate and nesting. The benefits and their persistence, in the cycling of essential elements and providing nutrients is a function which contributes to system health and a obligatory function to operate at a high quality state, i.e., operating about the means in which is was designed. Therefore the removal of such materials that would provide a physical link - an essential element savings account - through time and across successional stages is not indicative or technically published to be, a treatment, which would protect or increase forest health. In all honestly, it will reduce protection thus forest health as well.
End 3 of 16 More to come.
--
Sincerely,
John A. Keslick, Jr.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Same as above, you dumb ass.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Out of curiosity Don, are you a member of the Forest Stewardship Council? Do you use their services often? How would you characterize them? Please respond when you get a chance.
--

Billy
Bush and Pelosi Behind Bars
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
First thing you will have to do is define what a forest is, then define what a consulting forester is. Then you will have to explain with data backup, just how removing all the wood from a once fertile forest increases forest health.
CHOW
--
Sincerely,
John A. Keslick, Jr.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hey, dumb ass, you want me to give you a college degree in forestry on this board? Show us your education so I know where to start. Right now it looks like some where around the fifth grade.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
A good foundation for

My thinking is in terms of an ecosystem, not just the forest and its trees. In the hill country of central Texas, there are 2 predominant trees. One is the juniper ashe (cedar), and the other is the live oak. No sooner folks buy their 5, 10, or 20 acre plot of land; they are out there clearing out all the "cedars", and undergrowth. There's no more hiding places for the white-tailed deer, the jackrabbits, the "coons", and possums. Before clearing, the white-tailed deer have regular routes in foraging. As a consequence, they (deer) either change their route, or, disappear from the area completely. Yet, the same people, if asked why they moved out here, say they love seeing the deer among other reasons. I shake my head in disgust of their ignorance. Basically, it looks like a mild open desert with trees (live oaks) here and there when done. Automobiles have pretty much decimated the armadillo in Texas. Another Texas native, the roadrunner, is slowly dying away.
If you want a project, suggest researching the ecosystem of Central Texas. In particular, the relationship between juniper ashe, the live oak, and various sundry undergrowth with wildlife. Texas A&M, the common source of tree, and other plant life knowledge here, is more concerned with how stuff affects people's lives and targets single species, not the ecosystem during their research projects. As you advertise being a professional, I thought would be appropriate for you.
Texas is basically divided into a few general areas regarding natively growing trees. East, the piney woods. Coastal, generally mesquite and a few oaks. Told you about Central Texas. North is generally a plains area. West, generally desert. So, you have to be more specific when targeting Texas regarding "forest".
--
Dave

New drilling sites for oil offshore and other
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Start 4 of 16
Tornado's And Salvaging
Note: the Silviculture mentioned with restoration - I will use the definition for salvaging from a website from a recognized consulting forester in Texas, which I would assume is a forestry industry standard.
"Salvage and restoration. There comes a time when nature just does not cooperate with the best of management efforts. At that time you may have to salvage whats left, and start anew. Salvage is a very different sales effort for forest products. Usually, the sales material is damaged, dead, or dying. Finding a market for this material can be tricky, and incomes low. But, best to move the material, get it out of the way for future work. Take what income you can from the salvage, and set it aside for planting the site."
I accept the person's definition, however, I disagree that you can plant a forest as well as the statement that you may have to remove what is left, which in this case would be the old growth conditions (Tionesta). I use the Tionesta Scenic Area in the Allegheny National Forest as a control. It had a tornado go through in around 1986 and most recently had a blow down. As far as I know nothing has been removed and all ecological stages of trees exist. I did soil sampling in that area in the rhizoplane.
What tornados do not do, verses doing the following after a tornado. In other words what would salvaging wood from a tornado swath achieve - I.e., not limited too but including -
As pertaining too: Browsing and Sensitive Plants
A quick note: Salvaging has been noted to be the primary cause linked to reforestation problems where studies on Salvaging were done (NOT DEER). NATIONAL WOOD FIBER NEEDS indicate substantial increases in demand for wood fiber - based products. This demand has resulted in increased efforts to remove all available fiber at harvesting sites. Intensive fiber removal or intense wildfire potentially reduces the parent materials (duff and wood residues) available for the production of organic reserves in forest soils. This reserve, primarily in the form of humus, decayed wood, and charcoal, has been shown critical to the support of both nonsymbiotic nitrogen fixing and ectomycorrhizal activities in forest soils of western Montana. Harvest and fire-caused reductions of organic materials on and in northern forest soils have been linked to reforestation problems. This study was undertaken to provide a preliminary estimate of the impact of varying amounts and kinds of soil organic matter on ectomycorrhizal development in mature western Montana forests (Harvey, Jurgensen and Larsen, 1981).
Salvaging this area of symplast maintaining, would remove ectomycorrhizal tree hosts which would remove the energy source of ectomycorrhizal fungi, which will not fruit without their host plants. Preservation of a threatened or endangered species involves preservation of its habitat and the diversity that habitat entails. When such becomes a goal of forest management, managers need information not only on owls or small mammals, but also on the mycorrhizal fungi that form the base of the food web (Amaranthus, Trappe and Bednar, 1994).
Salvaging this area would remove the host for fungi such as Ganoderma Tsuga (symplastless hemlock and pine). Fungi feeders, E.g., In the Northwest - California red-backed voles to black tailed deer, may obtain some of their protein nitrogen from decaying trees by feeding on fungal fruiting bodies, such as what some call truffles and mushrooms (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 36-par 3). Salvaging this area may increase browsing on other plants. Also some other plants may be eaten for moisture during dryer times where moisture reservoirs are few or non.
Salvaging this area would be removal of mature and maturing trees which conserve essential elements, whereas the area containing new very young planted trees following salvaging are susceptible to erosion and essential element loss (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg5-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove deeper, multi layered canopies, larger accumulations, of coarse woody debris (any symplastless standing or fallen tree stem at least 4 inches in diameter at breast height (D.B.H.) on snags and at the large end on fallen trees), and removes chances of more specialized plants and animals (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg5-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material and removing its ability to interact with the plants and animals of the forest floor and soil over a long period of forest successional history. Large fallen trees can take more than 400 years to become incorporated into the forest floor (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988,pg37-last par). Without this massive part of an organism, how do the associates function?
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have greatly influenced subsequent diversity of both external and internal plant and animal habitats (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg41-par4).
Salvaging this area would remove materials that would have provided a changing spectrum of habitats over many decades, even centuries (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg41-par4).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have provided diversity within a given successional stage and forms a physical-chemical link through the many successional stages of a forest (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg41-par4).
Salvaging this area would remove the processes CWD would have with its environment through internal surface areas.
Salvaging this area would remove the needed material that certain organisms have the job to enter and gain entrance to the interior, which they consume and break down wood cells and fibers. (Hey, this is why they were created) Which the larger organisms - mites, collembolans, spiders, millipedes, centipedes, amphibians, and small mammals must await the creation of internal spaces before they can enter (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg42-par2).
Salvaging alters the flow of plant and animal populations, air, water, and essential elements which would have proceeded if salvaging was not done and would have increased as decomposition continued. (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg42-par2). The point, if you please, is that when you remove the masses of CWD you disrupt, deplete thus causing dysfunction (leading to Death by means of Killing) the designed essential environmental health needs of plant, animal populations, air, water and essential elements. Than man claims that the system is not returning to the conditions prior Salvaging (given many fancy names), then points the finger to deer claiming they are responsible for the problem. The problem is that things big and small are leaving this planet. As latter statements mention, much needed material for health is removed in salvaging which would have benefited the deer and system. Why not call the forest a deer system (heart - lungs - liver - kidneys - feet = parts of system) Man is the only known organism that makes decisions regarding trees out of the ignorance of tree biology and than adds insult to injury.
Salvaging this area would remove tree parts that would have created and maintained diversity in forest communities (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have resided on the once fertile forest floor for long periods, would have added to spatial, chemical, and biotic diversity of forest soils, and to the processes that maintain long-term forest productivity (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-par3).
Salvaging then is reducing spatial, chemical, and biotic diversity of forest soils, and the processes that maintain long-term forest productivity (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material that that partly would have maintain the once fertile forest floors diversity which is partly maintained by windthrown trees that create a pit-and-mound topography as they are uprooted (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg45-fig2.7).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have functioned seedbeds or nurse logs for some trees species and many species of bryophytes, fungi, and lichens, and some flowering plants (Table 7.6) (Samuelsson et al. 1994; D.F. Fraser, pers. comm., 1995; E.C. Lea, pers. comm., 1995) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Conclusion: Without a doubt, the removal of CWD is the primary agent, which alters the system in which problems are blamed on secondary agents such as deer. Although there is a serious case of denial such as unobserved with the Painter Run Windthrow Salvage Project? We know many animals such as deer and bear use CWD for food supply. "Harvest and fire-caused reductions of organic materials on and in northern forest soils have been linked to reforestation problems (Harvey, Jurgensen and Larsen, 1981).
End of 4 of 16
Start 5 of 16
Tornado's And Salvaging
Note: the Silviculture mentioned with restoration - I will use the definition for salvaging from a website from a recognized consulting forester in Texas, which I would assume is a forestry industry standard.
"Salvage and restoration. There comes a time when nature just does not cooperate with the best of management efforts. At that time you may have to salvage whats left, and start anew. Salvage is a very different sales effort for forest products. Usually, the sales material is damaged, dead, or dying. Finding a market for this material can be tricky, and incomes low. But, best to move the material, get it out of the way for future work. Take what income you can from the salvage, and set it aside for planting the site."
I accept the person's definition, however, I disagree that you can plant a forest as well as the statement that you may have to remove what is left, which in this case would be the old growth conditions (Tionesta). I use the Tionesta Scenic Area in the Allegheny National Forest as a control. It had a tornado go through in around 1986 and most recently had a blow down. As far as I know nothing has been removed and all ecological stages of trees exist. I did soil sampling in that area in the rhizoplane.
What tornados do not do, verses doing the following after a tornado. In other words what would salvaging wood from a tornado swath achieve - I.e., not limited too but including -
I do repeat at times. I believe it to be of interest.
As pertaining too: Plant Bio-Diversity / Threatened and Endangered Species
Salvaging this area of ectomycorrhizal tree hosts would remove the energy source of ectomycorrhizal fungi which will not fruit without their host plants Preservation of a threatened or endangered species involves preservation of its habitat and the diversity that habitat entails. When such becomes a goal of forest management, managers need information not only on owls or small mammals, but also on the mycorrhizal fungi that form the base of the food web (Amaranthus, Trappe and Bednar, 1994).
Salvaging this area would remove essentials for plants. E.g., We know some plants are likely, obligate CWD user such as Red Hackberry (Vaccinium parvifolium) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Salvaging this area would remove what would result in windthrown trees. Forest floor diversity is partly maintained by windthrown trees that create a pit-and-mound topography as they are uprooted (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg34-par2).
Salvaging this area would remove parts and processes of decomposition of fallen trees which releases essential elements for microbial and plant growth (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg36-par1).
Salvaging this area would remove , regardless of size - materials that would take a considerably longer time to decompose than would needle and leaf duff. Needles, leaves, and small twigs decompose faster than larger woody material and essential elements are thereby recycled faster in the forest floor (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg37-last par).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would, as it falls, be cycling essential elements for more than 400 years until such trees would become incorporated into the forest floor (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg37-last par). And then, still plays key roles in rainbows of humic acids and horizons.
Salvaging, therefore, this area, would remove the interaction of CWD with the plants and animals of the forest floor and soil over a long period of forest and stand successional history (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg37-last par).
Certainly our knowledge of biological processes and their interactions within forest is incomplete, and we know too little about the cumulative effect of a wide range of stresses on the ecosystem (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg1-par2).
Salvaging this area would break connections. Integrative research at the ecosystem level shows clearly that the many processes operating within forest inter-connect in important ways. Further, diversity of microscopic and macroscopic plant and animal species is a key factor in maintaining these processes (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988,pg1-par2).
Salvaging this area would remove dying and symplastless wood, which would have provided one of the two or three greatest resources for animal species in a natural forest. If fallen timber and slightly decayed trees are removed the whole system is gravely impoverished of perhaps more than a fifth of its fauna (Maser and Trappe, 1984,pg1-par1). (These treatments (salvaging), plus several other treatments, are done on the Allegheny National Forest routinely by the USFS and called "reforestation"???)
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have offered multitudes of both external and internal habitats that would have changed and yet persisted through the decades. One needs an understanding of the synergistic effects of constant small changes within a persistent large structure to appreciate the dynamics of a fallen tree and its function in an ecosystem (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 17-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove present and future symplastless storehouses for moisture, especially when soil contact is made, which were designed and would have provided moisture, for plants and animals during dry times such as summer, so called, drought. (Page-Dumroese, Harvey, Jurgensen and Graham, 1991). Lack of water, during dry times, can be the limiting factor for plant, animal and entire species survival (STEW - Space, Temp, Elements and Water). If you would like me to describe the functions of STEW with respect to stress and strain [ please ask ].
Salvaging increases soil erosion. Salvaging effects soil development in an unhealthy fashion. Salvaging this area would remove designed storehouses for essential elements and water for soil, animals and plants. Salvaging would remove a potentially large source of energy (nutrients) and essential elements. Salvaging this area would remove seedbeds for plants. Salvaging this area would remove important habitat for fungi and arthropods. We know, During decomposition, logs and other forms of coarse woody debris (CWD) reduce erosion, affect soil development, store essential elements and water, are a potentially large source of energy (nutrients) and essential elements, serve as a seed bed for plants, and form an important habitat for fungi and arthropods (Kropp, 1982).
Salvaging this area would stop the processes, which would take place between a fallen tree and its surroundings, which would have increased, as decomposition would have continued. E.g., The flow of plant and animal populations, air, water, and essential elements. (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 12-par1). Salvaging kills this system processes by means of disruption and depletion causing dysfunction.
Salvaging this area would remove symplastless trees that were designed to be structural components of great importance for forest dynamics and forest biodiversity. Salvaging is removing the processes of decomposition of trees, which were designed to provide an important link in cycling of nutrients and essential elements in ecosystems (Kruys and Jonsson, 1999).
Salvaging this area would remove the needs of many species of plants, fungi, and animals. Many are dependent on symplastless trees for nutrients, essential elements habitat or substrate and nesting (Kruys and Jonsson, 1999).
Salvaging this area would remove or stop the formation of "new soil".
Salvaging this area would increases the loss of nutrients and essential elements from the site. Such spots would have excellent for the establishment and growth of vegetation, including tree seedlings. Vegetation would have been established on and help stabilize this "new soil", and as invertebrates and small vertebrates would have begun to burrow into the new soil, they would not only have nutritionally enriched it with their feces and urine but also constantly mix it by their burrowing activities (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 4-par1&2).
Salvaging this area would remove initial, optimal and final stages of fallen trees. Plant - nutrient / essential elements - and the succession of plants on fallen trees is mediated by changes in essential element availability and physical properties over time. Three broad phases can be defined: initial, optimal, final. Early invaders prepare the tree for later colonization by altering its physical and chemical properties during the initial phase. The altered tree provides the best substrate for a wide array of organisms during the optimal phase. Ultimately, the depletion of essential elements and physical deterioration of the wood during the optimal phase diminish its value for many organisms, so fewer species inhabit the final phase (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 25-par 5).
Salvaging this area would have an negative effect on essential elements besides Nitrogen, Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium, and Phosphorus and other essential elements which play key roles in soil, plant and tree health as well as the other associated living organisms (Page-Dumroese, Harvey, Jurgensen and Graham, 1991).
Salvaging this area would remove what would be large fallen trees in various stages of decay which would have contributed to the much needed diversity to terrestrial and aquatic habitats (Maser and Trappe, 1984, abstract-par2).
material, that when most, biological activity in soil, is limited by low moisture availability in summer, would have provided a fallen tree-soil interface and would have offered a relatively cool, moist habitat for animals and a substrate for microbial and root activity (Maser and Trappe, 1984, Abstract-par2). Similar to taking peoples fans and air conditioners during summer.
Salvaging this area would deprive forest of large, fallen trees. The impact of this loss on habitat diversity and on long-term forest productivity must be determined because management need sound, information on which to base resource management decisions (Maser and Trappe, 1984, Abstract-par1).
Salvaging this area would remove the wood and the moisture-holding capacity of the wood, which in turn effects succession of plants and animals (Maser and Trappe, 1984,pg4-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove the formation of class IV stage of a fallen tree, which would have presented the most diversified habitat and hence supported the greatest array of inhabitants. The decayed heartwood, of heartwood forming trees, would have been relatively stable - so plants that would have become established upon it would have had time to grow substantial root systems (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 17-par 3).
Salvaging this area would remove the ecological stage of trees where essential element cycling processes takes place in a forest through such mechanisms as duff fall (freshly fallen or slightly decomposed plant material from the canopy), throughfall (rain or dew that picks up elements as it falls through the canopy), nitrogen fixation, and essential element uptake by plants associated with the fallen trees (Maser and Trappe, 1984,pag 19-par2).
Salvaging this area would remove a gradually changing myriad of internal and external habitats. Plant and animal communities within a fallen tree are very different from those outside, but both progress through a series of orderly changes (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 36-par7).
Salvaging this area would remove the structure, which would have eventually had a community surrounding it that would have been complex (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 38-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove a connector between the successional stages of a community. The connector would have provided continuity of habitat from the previous forest through subsequent successional stages (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 38-par 1).
Therefore, salvaging this area would remove physical links - an essential element savings account - through time and across successional stages (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 38-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove a persistent long-term, stable structure on which some animal (both invertebrate and vertebrate) populations appear to depend on for survival (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 38-par 1).
Salvaging this area would remove Certainly our knowledge of biological processes and their interactions within forest is incomplete, and we know too little about the cumulative effect of a wide range of stresses on the ecosystem (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg1-par2).
Salvaging this area would remove materials that would play key roles in the conservation of essential elements. Salvaged areas are susceptible to erosion and essential element loss (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg5-par4).
Salvaging this area would reduce if not eliminates multi-layered canopies, removes and stops accumulation of larger accumulations of coarse woody debris (any symplastless standing or fallen tree stem at least 4 inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) on snags and at the large end on fallen trees) (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg5-par3).
Salvaging this area would reduce and remove connections for survival of specialized plants and animals, which do survive in unlogged areas (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988,pg5-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have greatly influences subsequent diversity of both external and internal plant and animal habitats (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg41-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove materials that would have provided a changing spectrum of habitats over many decades' even centuries (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg41-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have provided diversity within a given successional stage and forms a physical-chemical link through the many successional stages of a forest (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg41-par3).
Salvaging this area would remove material that would have resided on the forest floor for long periods and would have added to spatial, chemical, and biotic diversity of forest soils, and to the processes that maintain long-term forest productivity (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-par3).
Salvaging this area would reduce diversity in forest communities by depletion. Fallen trees do create and maintain diversity in forest communities (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg44-par3).
Salvaging this area would reduce decaying wood that would have positively enhanced environment for mycorrhizae. In other words, salvaging reduces good conditions for mycorrhizae (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe, and Franklin, 1988, pg120-par4).
Salvaging this area would remove future sites that would have served for reproduction of tree species (Franklin, Cromack, Kermit, et al. others, 1981).
Salvaging this area would remove a clearly important function of a system containing trees (Franklin, Cromack, Kermit, et al. others, 1981).
Note: The phenomenon of nurse logs is widespread in the forest types of the Pacific North- west. Minore (1972) found that seedlings of both Sitka spruce and western hemlocks were more numerous and taller on so called rotten logs than on the adjacent forest floor at Cascade Head Experimental Forest (Franklin, Cromack, Kermit, et al. others, 1981).
Salvaging this area would remove CWD that would have functioned as seedbeds or nurse logs for some trees species and many species of bryophytes, fungi, and lichens, and some flowering plants (Table 7.6) (Samuelsson et al. 1994; D.F. Fraser, pers. comm., 1995; E.C. Lea, pers. comm., 1995) (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Note: In the Crowsnest Forest, 40-70% of natural seedlings were rooted in decayed wood in old growth and 24% were rooted in decayed wood in cutblocks (S. Berch, pers. comm., 1995). CWD may be important to the establishment of vascular plants around wet sites such as ponds and bogs (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
NOTE: Page 203 has a list of some vascular plants closely associated with CWD in BC (Voller and Harrison, 1998).
Conclusion: The capacity and ability, of CWD, to enhance the health of threatened and endangered species too often goes unobserved such as in the Painter Run Windthrow Salvage Project.
End of 5 of 16
--
Sincerely,
John A. Keslick, Jr.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.