Pacific Northwest: Re-educating misguided USFS about fire salvage harms
The publication’s lead author, David Peterson, a biological scientist with the Forest Service’s Pacific Northwest Research Station, says that after reading this report, managers will understand several principles pertaining to postfire timber harvest.
Get full text; support writer, producer of the words:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-03/ufsp-rss031909.php
“First,” explains Peterson, “each wildfire and management situation is different, and should be evaluated with respect to local soils, vegetation, hydrology, and wildlife—there is no standard formula. Second, if postfire logging is conducted, the sooner it can be done after the fire, the fewer the negative effects and the higher the value of the wood.
And finally, it’s critical to consider postfire logging in the context of the entire landscape of the wildfire to minimize the potential effects of logging.”
The authors define several principles about the effects of postfire timber harvest on most landscape:
* Logging can kill naturally regenerating trees if the soil is
disturbed after the trees have been established.
* Crown fire reduces the probability of future fire for years to decades.
* Fire and logging—separately or combined—affect soil properties.
* Severe, large, fires reduce water uptakes by vegetation, causing
streamflow to increase and water quality to decrease.
* Short-term effects of removing trees near aquatic systems are
mostly negative.
* Most cavity-nesting birds and other animals that live in
cavities are impacted by the harvesting of large standing dead trees.
“There has been a lot of controversy about salvage logging over the
past decade,” says Peterson. “We want to ensure that the most recent
scientific information is available for making decisions and
determining the value and effects of harvesting trees following
wildfire.”
Get full text; support writer, producer of the words:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-03/ufsp-rss031909.php