from seed rather than frequent light cuts of a constantly
replenishing stand, thus reducing the necessity of fire prevention,
is the aim of those who favor clean cutting as the most practicable
system. They assume that additional investment in seed trees, or
planting to insure prompt starting of a new crop after cutting,
will be unnecessary or at least offset by the smaller fire charge
and greater economy of logging.
Theoretically, such practice with a species adapted to the selective
method is uneconomical, for the ground is not fully utilized. Accidental
open places in the stand are not occupied by young trees which would
otherwise fill them. Time is lost by not starting the second crop
until after logging, for were there no fire previously there would
be considerable seedling growth which, although perhaps dormant
because of shade, would begin to amount to something much quicker than
that supplied by seed trees afterward. Nor is the system feasible
where there is much fir or other species less fire-resisting than
pine. It is dangerous in practice except where there is very little
combustible matter on the ground and fire is generally easy of
control, and exceedingly dangerous to advocate because serves as a
pretext and example for indiscriminate carelessness with fire under
all conditions. Finally, the alleged immunity of pine from injury by
ground fires is exaggerated. As a matter of fact, while the whole
stand is seldom perceptibly hurt, the immediate or gradual death of
a good tree here and there thins the stand very considerably in a
few years and it is such a thinning process in the past which makes
many pine tracts bear but 5,000 feet to the acre where otherwise
they would yield two or three times as much. Scorching also retards
the growth of trees not actually injured otherwise.
The technical objections given above may sometimes be offset by
practical advantages and the system is likely to receive expert
approval for certain conditions provided it is not used as a cloak
without taking sincere steps to replace the destroyed second growth
by adequate seed trees or artificial seeding. The latter danger may
easily warrant public alarm manifested by restrictive laws. Universal
ground burning of green timber will distinctly reduce the prospect
of unassisted natural reforestation on the great area of potential
timber land in which, as a resource, regardless of ownership, the
public is vitally interested. Under pr
|