Encourage forest treatments that emulate natural disturbance through small openings
Here is a possible mitigation option suggested by technical experts for Mesophytic Cove Sites:
Encourage forest treatments that emulate natural disturbance through small openings
1 comment0 replies
0
Nick Biemiller
Jul 18, 2018
One of the compatible management options identified in the two-page HCV description states to "maintain the diversity of the overstory without losing oak or moving toward monocultures of maple or poplar". The evidence suggests that this is a challenge for practitioners, given the competitive advantage of red maple and poplar on rich sites. I believe that some of this relates to ongoing debates regarding historic fire extent on the landscape, and it's influence on oak recruitment across different sites. It seems that whatever mitigation option developed through this process should acknowledge this challenge.
Certificate holders can develop and implement tract level setup process that include the use of gps coordinates and other site specific information to help the CH determine if they agree harvesting on a particular tract is the best outcome.
Here is a possible mitigation option suggested by technical experts for Mesophytic Cove Sites: Establishment of a fund that will help to defray the cost of conservation easements
Here is a possible mitigation option suggested by technical experts for Mesophytic Cove Sites: Improve information flow (when available) with those planning/managing cove sites
Participate in the discussion forum to share ideas and provide feedback about practical actions that companies can take to promote positive impacts on forest management, and reduce the risk of procuring wood from forests where important ecological values are threatened.
The forum is organized by each Regional Meeting with each Specified Risk Topic listed under each meeting:
Asheville (Appalachian Region)
Atlanta (Southeast/Mississippi Alluvial Valley Regions)
Portland (Pacific Coast/Rocky Mountain Regions)
Please post your comments and mitigation ideas under the correct topic. Example: To suggest a mitigation idea for Houston Toad, go into "Atlanta Meeting", find "Houston Toad" and add your comment within that section.
Please keep all comments as succinct as possible, and be respectful of others and their ideas. Moderators will remove any inappropriate content.
If you have any general questions, please fill out the contact form, or email standardsforum@us.fsc.org.
Want to post anonymously? Send your comments with the specific topic to standardsforum@us.fsc.org to be posted.
One of the compatible management options identified in the two-page HCV description states to "maintain the diversity of the overstory without losing oak or moving toward monocultures of maple or poplar". The evidence suggests that this is a challenge for practitioners, given the competitive advantage of red maple and poplar on rich sites. I believe that some of this relates to ongoing debates regarding historic fire extent on the landscape, and it's influence on oak recruitment across different sites. It seems that whatever mitigation option developed through this process should acknowledge this challenge.