 |
| ~Clear cut forest~ |
People often compare clear cutting and forest fires, and you can’t help but think-aren’t they the same thing? Masses of trees are destroyed in both cases, so are habitats. One is a natural disaster, while the other is just human needs. Clear cutting leaves large patches of barren land in between forests, it will take hundreds of years for it to reshape into its natural form but it will still never be the same because the ecosystem is much too disturbed. Clear cutting is the same thing as natural disasters/disturbances is the reason foresters give when asked if clear cutting is the right way of harvesting wood. Forest fires skim through a forest, because fire spreads fast so it doesn’t destroy a large section of a forest like clear cutting does. Of course forest fire still affect the environment negatively, but clear cutting more is not helping the cause.
 |
| ~After a forest fire~ |
No, the effects are not the same. Clearcutting is a physcial process, while fire is a chemical one. However, the clearcutting siliviculture system is an appropriate method for regenerating certain forests types, particularly in the boreal forest. Modern day clearcuts are not unnaturally shaped blocks, but have irregular shaped edge the follow the natural contours of the landscape, retain residual trees and patches of trees within the cut. Foresters do not claim to mimic fire exactly. The point is to create an open area to regenerate those species that need full sunlight to grow.
ReplyDeleteClearcutting is actually a beneficial way of regenerating a forest. Yes, it does take a while for trees and vegetation to grow back, but in the mean time, shrubs and bushes that provide fruit and habitats grow in place. For example, black cherry plants are ones that require heavy amounts of sunlight which they cannot receive when there are numerous amounts of dead trees and other overgrown plants towering over them. They are intolerant of shade. So overall, by clearcutting dead sections of the forest, we are actually allowing new and healthier vegetation to grow back which gives wildlife the habitat and the food they need.
DeletePrescribed fires are actually beneficial to forests in the long term. By burning the buildup of fuels on the forest floor it prevents out of control wildfires from happening, it also exposes nutrient soils and makes it more acidic and optimal for seedling growth, it allows canopies to open, allowing for biodiversity to flourish for an active ecosystem, it kills of eggs of pests and spores parasitic fungi, and while at first it releases a large amount of carbon, think about how much more carbon will be stored with a renewed forest? The reason why the Boreal forest looks how it does today is because of natural forest fires. The only reason why a forest fire is bad is because we live too close to forests-actually, prescribed burning would solve that problem so...
ReplyDelete