Greg Gilbert's Thoughts on Thinning Trees at Hurricane Creek: "If the goal is to maximize the amount of usable timber available for harvest then thinning would be a good idea. If the goal is to allow natural succession to occur and to minimize the biological collateral damage due to thinning I think letting nature take its course is the best idea. The beetles are one agent of natural thinning. Dead trees are very valuable to wildlife. A woodland without dead trees is usually called a pine plantation and Georgia probably has sufficient for study purposes already." Former Curator of Hurricane Creek Dr. James Parker's Thoughts on thinning trees at Hurricane Creek: "I am opposed to any timber operations because I don't think it can be done without damaging the environment and the culvert. I believe nature should be left to take its course. The pine trees will ultimately die out, if left alone, and eventually be taken over by hardwoods. A "thinning operation" is ploy to allow the remaining timber to grow so that it can eventually be harvested. I certainly don't want to see harvesting on the area. Of all the timber operations, including "thinning", that I have observed, there is always an unacceptable degree of damage done to the area, including areas along the access routes. About 2/3 of the area is in the flood plane and any heavy equipment used there will severely compact the soil. This is especially detrimental to the wetland areas." I think the area would be a good place for doing a long-term study of plant succession, to see how long it takes to go from a pine forest to a mixed hardwood forest." Mike Rund's Thoughts on thinning at Hurricane Creek: "I agree with Dr. Parker, nearly completely. As you know, I have background in ecology and worked at the USGS Water Resources Div. regional H.Q. Thinning and cutting of that area's woods will damage the fragile riverine and ( possibly extant ) wetland-like soils. Cutting programs would damage fragile plant communities Dr. Parker has noted previously extant in that area. I suppose, that highly selective and carefully managed cutting practices could harvest a few hundred trees that are supposedly now crowding, without much damage, but this would be very expensive and impractical to do well. In my experience, timber contractors are TERRIBLE at conservation, and it is like, "GUYS GONE CRAZY" the moment they enter one's land, they take off in all directions and only see $ signs, no matter how explicit the instructions are. Actually, ALL of the Hurricane Creek area is in the 50 yr. flood plain as shown to us by the Dahlonega GIS manager. Recall, he showed us federally funded studies prognosticating a future flood over 15 feet high at the site of the present bath houses and classroom area. So YES, the area is fragile and should be protected from any heavy equipment. I am also concerned as Dr. Parker is, that the thinning could be a entry to future growing and harvesting of the area. When I was last present on site, the Ga. Forestry Dept. argued that thinning was necessary to prevent fire hazard: that the trees would crowd out and die and the evergreen canopies susceptible to fire. However, I don't agree with this argument. The area is not a fire risk: it is off limits to campers and only frequented by North Georgia personnel and directed students. Further, the area is not on a ridge, so lightning strikes would be rare. Hence, I don't see this area in danger of fire if natural succession is allowed. Mike Rund" |
Thinning Trees at Hurricane Creek? |