A Question of Yield

by Don C. Erman
From the Harbinger

SPI reps continue to assert that clearcutting is environmentally preferable to uneven-aged management because of the infrequency of entry. They have also stated repeatedly that they can grow three times the amount of fiber by clearcutting, an assertion that contradicts both the Blodgett Report and SNEP. It sounds to me like they're talking about two radically different methods of clearcutting depending on the point they're trying to make: the one traditionally practiced in the Sierra (alleged environmental benefits of infrequency of entry) and the ultra-intensive method practiced in the Southeast largely for the production of pulp for paper (increased yield). Can both claims about the purported benefits of clearcutting—infrequency of entry and phenomenal yield increases—be true simultaneously? And is the ultra-intensive method even appropriate for the production of lumber?

To read the entire article go to:
http://www.harbingerproject.com/issue32/Yield.htm.