Dust-up in MN over timber harvest on state land

[Peent]

5 minutes ago, co_setter said:

If you don't mind, what are those benefits?

 

I'll limit my response to 5 or so important features.  If you want to learn more you could use Google Scholar to search Green Tree Retention in Timber Harvesting.  

 

Song birds in particular have a much better chance at finding a mate and nesting if they can get up higher and broadcast their calls in Early Successional Habitat.  Particularly the Golden-winged Warbler.  The best management practices for this species highlights green tree retention. 

 

The trees left standing will add structure and diversity, future snag tree potential, course woody debris eventually, seed source (acorns, conifer seeds, other mast etc.)

Fisher have been found to prefer dens in aspen trees that are 20 plus inches in diameter.  Leaving some of these, or some that will eventually become this size makes sense.  

Drumming logs, cool shaded moist moss covered areas for invertebrates, etc the list goes on.  The sacrifice of growing space for saplings is not a good argument.  Tree density once the regenerating stand matures will be no different.  Once a leave tree dies and falls within the now surrounding mid rotation forest, that little canopy gap will give some shrubs and forbs needed sunlight to advance.  So, diversity, structure, habitat, soil enhancement, who can argue with that?  

 

[Swope]

On 11/26/2019 at 2:23 PM, Peent said:

There is no evidence or any study that shows leaving scattered leave trees standing in an open aspen cut has any detrimental effect on grouse or woodcock. 

Gordon Gullion would disagree with this point. He did extensive research into life cycle of the ruffed grouse and it’s habitat for the University of Minnesota.
 

You can make the argument that current practices may be better for the overall health of a forest even if it’s not optimized for the ruffed grouse,  but this assertion is false. 
 

Pick on me all you want. I can take it. This isn’t personal.