Hi Mr. Rossi,
thanks for your reply to my post. You bring up some points that need clarification, lest readers get the wrong impression. I see that by providing too little information I was misunderstood.
DEC is accepting public comment on the draft Tug Hill North Unit Management Plan that pertains to 8 State Forest parcels and 1 Wildlife Management Area on the Tug Hill Plateau. There is much to like about the proposal as it relates to the State Forest parcels, particularly in the northern portion of the unit -- both even-age and uneven-age forest management will be employed on the State Forest properties, and should result in significant habitat benefit to a wide array of species including grouse, woodcock, hare, and deer (and many others). It's a really balanced approach.
Now let me back up one step, as I used two forestry terms that may need explaining as not everyone is versed in forestry: even-age and uneven-age forest management.
Even-age forest practices are designed to produce a new crop of trees that are all nearly the same age (5 yrs plus or minus) and often results in a fairly dense (10-20,000 stems/acre) stand of saplings that provide excellent escape cover and food for prey species such as grouse, woodcock, rabbits and hares, as well as deer, bear, and moose, and of course a prey base for predators such as bobcat, goshawk, and Cooper's hawk, and is important habitat for a great many other species of wildlife (see www.youngforest.org for more info); the young, dense stands provide this type of habitat for up to about 20 yrs (depending on the wildlife species of interest), and thereafter the stand becomes more suitable for wildlife that prefer more mature forest such as grey squirrels, flying squirrels, marten, and some songbirds. Species such as ruffed grouse use all these different age classes of forest, but the young stage (5-20 yrs) is essential. Even-age practices include clear cutting, shelterwood harvests, and seed-tree harvests, all of which remove a substantial proportion of the canopy and allow sunlight to the forest floor to stimulate natural regeneration of trees (from stump and root sprouts as well as from seed).
Uneven-age management is designed to maintain a forest composed of trees of all ages from saplings to very large trees. Timber harvests are less intense, with small canopy gaps resulting from removing single (single tree selection) or small groups of trees (group selection). Saplings of shade-tolerant trees (e.g. hemlock, beech, sugar maple) will regenerate in these gaps, but the gap size is too small to benefit the majority of the wildlife that require the dense young stands (early successional habitat) mentioned above. This type of management benefits wildlife that prefer or need mature forest.
These 2 categories of management are applied at the Forest Stand level (e.g. 5-30 acres) not at the landscape level (e.g. 10,000 acres of single age forest). We can use even-age management of stands to produce a forest of multiple age classes (sapling to sawtimber). The two types of management can complement each other, and a combination of even-age and uneven-age management will conserve the greatest diversity of wildlife relative to all of one type of management or the other. If only one type of management were practiced, well-planned even-age management would be more beneficial to a greater diversity of species, particularly the species indicated by DEC as being of greatest conservation concern, than would uneven-age management.
In the Tug Hill Unit Management Plan, what is proposed for the northern portion of the unit on state forests seems to be a balanced approach, whereas what is proposed for the Tug Hill Wildlife Management Area in the southern part of the region (uneven-age management) will make the Tug Hill WMA less suitable for grouse, woodcock, hares, and many other species.
Now, back to what RGS is or isn't suggesting in regards to the Tug Hill Wildlife Management Area, which encompasses 5,111 acres in the southern portion of the Tug Hill planning unit: we are proposing that a major portion of this Wildlife Management Area (which was purchased largely using sportsman/woman-generated P-R Wildlife Restoration funds) be managed using even-age forestry practices to improve habitat for ruffed grouse, American woodcock, snowshoe hare, and other wildlife, and make Tug Hill WMA the premier publicly-owned property in the region for sportsmen and sportswomen seeking these species.
That doesn't seem like too much to ask.
What I did NOT say is that DEC should put in a 5,000 acre clear cut (RGS would oppose that!). Remember that grouse need all stages of forest growth from brushy & herbaceous openings and dense sapling stands all the way up through mature trees for winter food (e.g. buds of birches, aspen, black cherry), and this bird's homerange is only about 10-40 ac, so it needs these different stages of forest growth all in fairly close proximity -- something that a 5,000 ac clear cut will not provide.
Let me sketch out a long term plan for grouse/wildlife diversity on a 1,000 ac planning unit of northern hardwood forest (dominated by beech-birch-maple): we'll assume a 100 year rotation (any particular stand will be harvested once every 100 years), with a cutting cycle of 10 years so there's always some 1-10 and 10-20 yr old stands available as essential grouse habitat. The typical harvest prescription for northern hardwoods would be shelterwood in which the overstory of crop trees would be harvested in 2 (or more) cuttings, the final removal being after sufficient seedlings/saplins have regenerated. So, every 10 years, 10 acres would be harvested, and the cutting would be planned so that new stands to be cut would be in close proximity to stands cut 10 or 20 years prior (you can imagine how the young forest habitat shifts across the 1,000 ac planning unit over time). This type of management is self-sustaining in that it generates revenues from timber sales to pay for the management, and also it provides habitat for a broad array of species from young forest specialists to those needing mature forest.
I hope I've cleared things up.
I'd be happy to try to answer any questions about habitat, habitat management, or the birds.
Andy
