![]() |
Rules | Membership | Donations and Online Store | Adkhighpeaks Foundation | ADKhighpeaks Forums | ADKhighpeaks Wiki | Disclaimer |
![]() |
#21 | |
Backcountry Wanderer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Pocono Mts, Pa. and Adirondacks
Posts: 805
|
Quote:
__________________
Ahh............Wilderness....... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Standing in a stream waving a stick
Posts: 1,009
|
Quote:
__________________
Izaak Walton a great writer? He can't even spell COMPLETE. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Gloversville, NY
Posts: 1,203
|
We no longer allow fires to burn in the backwoods either, or at least attempt to snuff them out as soon as they get started. Before settlers came to the Adirondacks, I believe forest fires provided much habitat diversity and undergrowth beneficial to wildlife. Logging does much the same but the forever wild aspect of the park means a more mature forest and less wildlife methinks. I read a book (forgot the name) of a market hunter in the Paul Smith's area before it was settled. The tons of venison they brought to market was astounding to me and occurred for a number of years running.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
ɹǝqɯǝɯ
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,404
|
Quote:
I found a map a few years ago that listed the fire regimes of the native ecosystems of the entire US, and it stated that in the Adirondacks, natural fires only occurred on average with a frequency of once every 200+ years. I'll see if I can find it again. EDIT: Here it is: http://www.fws.gov/invasives/staffTr...up_intro1.html |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 559
|
Quote:
The Adirondacks to me, sadly, seem like wilderness void of wildlife. I've been in VERY remote areas, I have been VERY quiet, I have been in areas in which I could see for a mile all around - if I scared something you would think I would see it running off in the distance at least. I don't want to start an argument here but I think we have to start thinking about MANY things in COMPLETELY different ways. Things that people find acceptable need to be REJECTED. When I open a trapping magazine and some guy from the Adirondacks has 40 red fox pelts hanging and drying or whatever... I've seen ONE red fox in the Adirondacks in my 25 years of going there. Why is trapping permitted? Why is hunting of animals that you cannot eat permitted? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 511
|
Quote:
As to adk's post about lack of wildlife there are a bunch of reasons that make the Adirondacks tough habitat for wildlife to thrive in. Lack of food is probably the first, caused in part by overmature forests. Say what you want about logging but there is no question that you'll see more wildlife in areas that have been logged. Long cold winters with deep snow and lots of coyotes are other factors that keep deer and small game numbers low. If humans are to blame for the lack of wildlife in the Adirondacks could someone please explain why NJ, CT, MA, southern NY, and other suburban areas are overrun with deer, bears, and other critters? And hunting isn't the answer as those areas have far more hunting pressure per square mile than the Adirondacks.
__________________
"Let me say it as simply as I can: transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency." |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 | |
Backcountry Wanderer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Pocono Mts, Pa. and Adirondacks
Posts: 805
|
Quote:
Pennsylvania has milder winters but more people per square mile than ADKs and yet has more wildlife. Reason: even on state lands, logging is permitted on a rotating 100 year basis. Vermont and NH also allow some logging in National Forest areas and have far more moose than ADKs.
__________________
Ahh............Wilderness....... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Moss Hopper
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 231
|
What about the incredible biodiversity of the Amazon where most of the forest has never been touched by logging or are there other factors at play there?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: follow my tracks.
Posts: 211
|
The Amazon is a completely different ecosystem then the Adirondacks. The habitat is almost too diffrent to compare.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 559
|
Sorry, I don't buy the more logging the better theory with regards to wildlife - it implies that wildlife need humans to impact the environment (negatively) for them to thrive. If that is the case how did wildlife do perfectly fine back when humans, native Americans in particular, left the forests pretty much alone?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#31 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 559
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: follow my tracks.
Posts: 211
|
Quote:
Talk to almost any "old timer" and almost all of them will say they had more success hunting and seeing other wildlife when the blocks of land they hunted were timber company land. Sometime take a look at the sign posted on the bear pond road (watsons east triangle) just before the state line and consider what it says. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Keene, NY
Posts: 409
|
Logging is not the only way to produce the types of environments that animals thrive in. It is understandable that we think that, however, especially when 'old timers' are the extent of our historical reference.
Fact is, what we witness with logging in regards to wildlife is simply an artificial recreation of the habitat that a natural forest would (and does) produce on its own. DSethar alludes to this when he mentioned the blow down in the microburst, and Forest Dweller who points out that wildlife was abundant before logging. Here is one of my favorite quotes on this topic from a DEC biologist and Regional Wildlife Manager: Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Check please
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntington Bay, NY
Posts: 1,104
|
I'm no expert, but wouldn't pre-colonial forests have been quite different with massive chestnut trees (a little further south) , woodland buffalo and elk, big cats, etc. The chestnut was a major food source for many animals. Aside from hunting and habitat loss that part of the food chain was lost.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: follow my tracks.
Posts: 211
|
Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 283
|
Some species do better in areas that have been logged, and some need large tracts of undisturbed forest.
I'm not anti-logging. It's an important industry, and nowadays forestry has gotten really good at minimizing ecological damage. But we should have good sized untouched areas too. At least in my area (Massachusetts) the forestry/timber harvesting industry has gotten very aggressive about logging wherever possible. I've actually seen repeated claims that all forests NEED "management" to be healthy - which gives me the same reaction Forestdweller says above: it's pretty arrogant to claim that, since forests were around for millions of years, managing just fine, long before anyone was logging them. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Keene, NY
Posts: 409
|
Quote:
He was just referencing the life cycle of forests. Logging promotes wild life because it artificially clears out areas and allows new growth, etc. Mature forests do the same thing, naturally. This certainly helps explain why the deer herd numbers have not declined in proportion to the decline in logging. Just the opposite has happened, actually. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 | |
Adirondack Forest
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 333
|
Quote:
To be clear: do "not" agree with the above post at all- I believe this sort of thinking is backward and originates from people who benefit by directly by "industry" i.e, logging. This is a discussion about biodiversity not about how you make money. As far as Maine's greater wildlife (Baxter Park) 20 x 40 mile (hunting and logging free zone) is the cause of more wildlife along with a vast border with Canada unobstructed. The Adirondacks biodiversity would benefit by stopping the constant slaughter of its flora and fauna...
__________________
The more wilderness in the Adirondacks, the better. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 | |
Check please
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntington Bay, NY
Posts: 1,104
|
Quote:
While logging has some of the benefits previously mentioned, I don't think it is equivalent to natural fires and blowdowns. The latter deposit the material back into the soil where logging removes most of it. Also, fire is known to trigger seed germination, at least in some environments. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 | |
Adirondack Forest
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 333
|
Quote:
Well said...
__________________
The more wilderness in the Adirondacks, the better. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site. |