Download Full PDF - 41.38 MB - The Society of Irish Foresters
Download Full PDF - 41.38 MB - The Society of Irish Foresters Download Full PDF - 41.38 MB - The Society of Irish Foresters
IRISH FORESTRY Application and limitations of the model The model answers some questions about spontaneous natural regeneration of lodgepole pine. Combined with local knowledge it should allow forest managers to predict with greater certainty the occurrence of natural regeneration following the clearfelling of lodgepole pine crops. For example, on poorly-drained (non peat), highly-exposed sites, natural regeneration of lodgepole pine has only a 10% chance of occurring (even if seed were available). On the other hand, natural regeneration is highly likely on sheltered and well-drained sites (assuming that seed is available). The model also provides information as to how to increase the likelihood of lodgepole pine regenerating naturally. For example, thinning not only increases the probability of seed production but also the probability of successful germination and survival. Improving drainage will also increase the chance of natural regeneration occurring. The model is based on a limited number of sites. The standard error of prediction for some categories of the variables reflect this. It is also important to note that a limited number of silvicultural activities were recorded, and some of these, such as the level of brash remaining on the site, were shown in other studies to significantly influence the occurrence of natural regeneration of lodgepole pine (Cochran 1973). No long-term record of silvicultural or harvesting activities, such as the method and time of harvesting had been maintained for the sites in the study. Similarly, the treatment of slash was not recorded. Thus, it was necessary to rely on records that some foresters retained or on their recollection of these activities. As a result, in some instances information on these site activities was not available. Conclusions The increased emphasis on alternative silvicultural systems to clear cutting has increased interest in reforestation using natural regeneration. Recent studies have increased the available information on factors which influence its occurrence (Nixon and Worrell 1999, O'Leary 2000). Increased knowledge and the ability to more accurately predict the occurrence of natural regeneration should encourage foresters to seriously consider using natural regeneration as an alternative to planting on certain sites. Further study is required however, to more fully understand the factors favouring the occurrence of natural regeneration. Acknowledgements The majority of the funding for this study was provided by the COFORD (the National Council for Forest Research and Development). Coillte (The Irish Forestry Board) and the Department of Crop Science, Horticulture and Forestry at University College Dublin also supported the work. References Aldhous, 1.R. and Mason, W.L. 1994. Forest nursery practice. Forestry Commission Bulletin 111. HMSO, London. Allen, P.E. and Trousdell, K.B . 1961. Loblolly pine seed production in the Virginia-North Carolina coastal plain. 1. For. 59: 187-190. . Brown, I.M.B. and Neustein, S.A. 1974. Natural regeneration of conifers in the British Isles. Proceedings of the Royal Horticultural Society 3,d Conference, pp 29-38. 38
IRISH FORESTRY Carey, M.L. and Hendrick, E. 1986. Lodgepole pine in the Republic of Ireland I. Site types, ground preparation and nutrition. For. Ecol. Manage. 15: 301-307. Cochran, P.H. 1973. Natural regeneration of lodgepole pine in south-central Oregon. USDA FS Research Note PNW-204. Dagg, R. 1998. A study of the factors contributing to the presence of natural regeneration of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) on c1earfell sites in Co. Wicklow. Unpublished M. Sc. Agr Thesis, University College Dublin. Garman, E.H. 1955. Regeneration problems and their silvicultural significance in the coastal forests of British Columbia. Department of lands and forests, BC Technical Publication T 41. Leiffers, V.J. and Rothwell, R.L. 1986. Effects of depth of water-table and substrate temperatures on root and top growth of Picea mariana and Larix laricina seedlings. Can. 1. For. Res. 16: 1202-1206. Lotan, J.E. 1964. Initial germination and survival of lodgepole pine on prepared seedbeds. Research Note INT-29. USDA FS Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Lotan, J.E. and Perry, D.A. 1983. Ecology and regeneration of lodgepole pine. Agricultural Handbook No. 606, USDA. Lotan, lE. and Critchfield, W.B. 1990. Pinus contorta Doug!. ex. Loud. In: Bums, Russell M.; Honkara, B. H., Tech. Coord. Silvics of No rth America. Vol. I. Conifers. Agriculture Handbook 654, USDA FS, Washington DC. Minore, D. (1972). Germination and early growth of coastal tree species on organic seed beds. Research Paper PNW-135: USDA FS, PNW Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon. Nixon, C.J. and Worrell, R. 1999. The potential for the natural regeneration of conifers in Britain. Forestry Commission Bulletin 120. HMSO, London. O'Leary, D. 2000. Natural regeneration in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) and common ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) plantations. Unpublished M. Agr. Sc. thesis, National University of Ireland. Pfeifer, A. 1982. Basal sweep in lodgepole pine. Irish For. 39(1): 7-16. Stuart, lD., Agree, 1.K. and Gara, R.I. 1989. Lodgepole pine regeneration in an old self-perpetuating forest in south central Oregon. Can. 1. For. Res. 19: 1096-1104. Wenger, K.F. 1954. The stimulation of loblolly pine seed trees by preharvest release. 1. For. 52: 115-118. 39
- Page 2 and 3: -----------------------------------
- Page 4 and 5: -----------------------------------
- Page 6 and 7: --------------------., Are You BARK
- Page 8: GROWING QUALITY forests of the futu
- Page 11 and 12: EDITORIAL Seeing the wood and the t
- Page 13 and 14: IRISH FORESTRY Most bare-root plant
- Page 15 and 16: IRISH FORESTRY Phenology of shoot g
- Page 17 and 18: IRISH FORESTRY Data analyses All da
- Page 19 and 20: IRISH FORESTRY 60 Seedling height E
- Page 21 and 22: IRISH FORESTRY The date of wrenchin
- Page 23 and 24: IRISH FORESTRY Root collar diameter
- Page 25 and 26: IRISH FORESTRY addition, root growt
- Page 27 and 28: IRISH FORESTRY Rook, D.A. 1971. Eff
- Page 29 and 30: IRISH FORESTRY 3. maintain rural em
- Page 31 and 32: IRISH FORESTRY enhance the organic
- Page 33 and 34: IRISH FORESTRY Figure 1. Normal can
- Page 35 and 36: IRISH FORESTRY In Britain in simila
- Page 37 and 38: IRISH FORESTRY 3. natural regenerat
- Page 39 and 40: IRISH FORESTRY McAdam, lH. and Hopp
- Page 41 and 42: IRISH FORESTRY regeneration is the
- Page 43 and 44: IRISH FORESTRY Table 2. continued V
- Page 45 and 46: IRISH FORESTRY Table 5. continued V
- Page 47: IRISH FORESTRY all are influenced b
- Page 51 and 52: IRISH FORESTRY Ireland were in need
- Page 53 and 54: IRISH FORESTRY Figure 1. Tree locat
- Page 55 and 56: IRISH FORESTRY The specimens contin
- Page 57 and 58: IRISH FORESTRY TROBI recorded just
- Page 59 and 60: IRISH FORESTRY Mechanical propertie
- Page 61 and 62: IRISH FORESTRY Table 1. Materials i
- Page 63 and 64: IRISH FORESTRY Table 2. Modulus of
- Page 65 and 66: IRISH FORESTRY and therefore small
- Page 67 and 68: IRISH FORESTRY Conclusions Mechanic
- Page 69 and 70: Trees, Woods and Literature - 26 Ji
- Page 71 and 72: IRISH FORESTRY seconds. Eventually
- Page 73 and 74: Book reviews Sitka spruce in Irelan
- Page 75 and 76: IRISH FORESTRY is sketchy and is di
- Page 77 and 78: IRISH FORESTRY ics manager. The nur
- Page 79 and 80: IRISH FORESTRY 1 indigenous species
- Page 81 and 82: IRISH FORESTRY The arrival of these
- Page 83 and 84: IRISH FORESTRY • elimination of u
- Page 85 and 86: IRISH FORESTRY Tsitsikamma two furt
- Page 87 and 88: IRISH FORESTRY light lunch, most of
- Page 89 and 90: IRISH FORESTRY than 15 cm in diamet
- Page 91 and 92: IRISH FORESTRY Fynbos ueretarion me
- Page 93 and 94: IRISH FORESTRY After a guided tour
- Page 95 and 96: IRISH FORESTRY Mairtin 6 Neachtain
- Page 97 and 98: ecco YOU HAVEN'T TRIED? -IT'S TIME
IRISH FORESTRY<br />
Application and limitations <strong>of</strong> the model<br />
<strong>The</strong> model answers some questions about spontaneous natural regeneration <strong>of</strong> lodgepole<br />
pine. Combined with local knowledge it should allow forest managers to predict with<br />
greater certainty the occurrence <strong>of</strong> natural regeneration following the clearfelling <strong>of</strong><br />
lodgepole pine crops. For example, on poorly-drained (non peat), highly-exposed sites,<br />
natural regeneration <strong>of</strong> lodgepole pine has only a 10% chance <strong>of</strong> occurring (even if seed<br />
were available). On the other hand, natural regeneration is highly likely on sheltered and<br />
well-drained sites (assuming that seed is available). <strong>The</strong> model also provides information<br />
as to how to increase the likelihood <strong>of</strong> lodgepole pine regenerating naturally. For example,<br />
thinning not only increases the probability <strong>of</strong> seed production but also the probability <strong>of</strong><br />
successful germination and survival. Improving drainage will also increase the chance <strong>of</strong><br />
natural regeneration occurring.<br />
<strong>The</strong> model is based on a limited number <strong>of</strong> sites. <strong>The</strong> standard error <strong>of</strong> prediction for<br />
some categories <strong>of</strong> the variables reflect this. It is also important to note that a limited<br />
number <strong>of</strong> silvicultural activities were recorded, and some <strong>of</strong> these, such as the level <strong>of</strong><br />
brash remaining on the site, were shown in other studies to significantly influence the<br />
occurrence <strong>of</strong> natural regeneration <strong>of</strong> lodgepole pine (Cochran 1973). No long-term record<br />
<strong>of</strong> silvicultural or harvesting activities, such as the method and time <strong>of</strong> harvesting had been<br />
maintained for the sites in the study. Similarly, the treatment <strong>of</strong> slash was not recorded.<br />
Thus, it was necessary to rely on records that some foresters retained or on their recollection<br />
<strong>of</strong> these activities. As a result, in some instances information on these site activities<br />
was not available.<br />
Conclusions<br />
<strong>The</strong> increased emphasis on alternative silvicultural systems to clear cutting has increased<br />
interest in reforestation using natural regeneration. Recent studies have increased the<br />
available information on factors which influence its occurrence (Nixon and Worrell<br />
1999, O'Leary 2000). Increased knowledge and the ability to more accurately predict<br />
the occurrence <strong>of</strong> natural regeneration should encourage foresters to seriously consider<br />
using natural regeneration as an alternative to planting on certain sites. Further study is<br />
required however, to more fully understand the factors favouring the occurrence <strong>of</strong> natural<br />
regeneration.<br />
Acknowledgements<br />
<strong>The</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> the funding for this study was provided by the COFORD (the National<br />
Council for Forest Research and Development). Coillte (<strong>The</strong> <strong>Irish</strong> Forestry Board) and the<br />
Department <strong>of</strong> Crop Science, Horticulture and Forestry at University College Dublin also<br />
supported the work.<br />
References<br />
Aldhous, 1.R. and Mason, W.L. 1994. Forest nursery practice. Forestry Commission Bulletin 111.<br />
HMSO, London.<br />
Allen, P.E. and Trousdell, K.B . 1961. Loblolly pine seed production in the Virginia-North Carolina<br />
coastal plain. 1. For. 59: 187-190. .<br />
Brown, I.M.B. and Neustein, S.A. 1974. Natural regeneration <strong>of</strong> conifers in the British Isles.<br />
Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the Royal Horticultural <strong>Society</strong> 3,d Conference, pp 29-38.<br />
38