tree cutting on WMA's

[pick-a-spot]

It is very concerning as I go out to find new hunting areas and see and hear about all the timber harvesting on our WMA's.
Catoosa was in the news for that not too many months ago and a recent visit to Mt. Roosevelt was a real eye opener for me. Major clear cutting going on there. A newly acquired area of Sundquist is also being cut.
I talked to a TWRA employee and he mentioned that the state partners with Timber and Oil companies to acquire new lands. For a period of time the oil and timber interests have rights to harvest the lands.
My suspicious nature makes me wonder if the state is exploiting our resource for financial gain with no regard for the purpose we have WMA,s for.
Any info to share?

 

[scn]

What is your question? It appears that you have already been given info from TWRA?

 

[TheLBLman]

I don't see any question either, but would like to share a different take on our "concerns".

For many years I was concerned that the quality of wildlife habitat on many public lands was basically going down the toilet, particularly on large forested areas like Catoosa. But now, thanks to some well-planned timber-cutting, Catoosa has become very bio-diverse, now capable of healthily supporting many times as much wildlife as just a few years ago.

Many of those clear-cuts are now beautiful oak savannahs (native prairie). Going back over 200 years, much of Tennessee was not old-growth forest, as much was a grassland prairie. Grazing elk, bison, and annual fires set by Native Americans (and lightning strikes) had maintained these prairies for thousands of years. In fact, our bordering state of Kentucky was officially named the "Bluegrass State" because of these beautiful prairies that existed in both TN & KY.

Some of these clear-cuts are restoring the habitat to something closer to what it had been prior to a couple hundred years ago, while large tracts of adjoining mature forests are not being clear-cut. This "diverse" habitat generally benefits most wildlife much more than a single habitat.

It is very concerning as I go out to find new hunting areas and see and hear about all the timber harvesting on our WMA's.

 

[Chaneylake]

as timber matures it needs to be harvested whether it be WMA, National Refuge property, any other public property and private property

I am experiencing the 3rd cutting of timber at Chaney Lake, all its does is regenerate new growth and provides great habitat of all game in the area

 

[EastTNHunter]

I don't see any question either, but would like to share a different take on our "concerns".

For many years I was concerned that the quality of wildlife habitat on many public lands was basically going down the toilet, particularly on large forested areas like Catoosa. But now, thanks to some well-planned timber-cutting, Catoosa has become very bio-diverse, now capable of healthily supporting many times as much wildlife as just a few years ago.

Many of those clear-cuts are now beautiful oak savannahs (native prairie). Going back over 200 years, much of Tennessee was not old-growth forest, as much was a grassland prairie. Grazing elk, bison, and annual fires set by Native Americans (and lightning strikes) had maintained these prairies for thousands of years. In fact, our bordering state of Kentucky was officially named the "Bluegrass State" because of these beautiful prairies that existed in both TN & KY.

Some of these clear-cuts are restoring the habitat to something closer to what it had been prior to a couple hundred years ago, while large tracts of adjoining mature forests are not being clear-cut. This "diverse" habitat generally benefits most wildlife much more than a single habitat.

It is very concerning as I go out to find new hunting areas and see and hear about all the timber harvesting on our WMA's.

VERY good points! Most people only think that oaks and foodplots are good for wildlife, especially deer, but that is far from the truth. Cover is king, and diversity makes for excellent habitat.

 

[timberjack86]

as timber matures it needs to be harvested whether it be WMA, National Refuge property, any other public property and private property

I am experiencing the 3rd cutting of timber at Chaney Lake, all its does is regenerate new growth and provides great habitat of all game in the area

Done right, timber is a major renewable natural resource!

 

[MickThompson]

Pick-a-spot, it's pretty simple. These big companies have the capital to buy big tracts of land. Once they remove the minerals/oil/timber, it isn't worth much to them for 80 or so years until the timber can be cut again. In most cases, the state takes control of the properties before most of the resources are extracted. The state gets land (something that they ain't making any more of, by the way)at a discount rate with developed road systems, so I guess that you should be upset that the state doesn't do it more often.

As for clearcuts, they are sound timber management in many instances. Selection cuts, while "prettier" to people, generally take the best and leave the rest, not unlike a mining operation. A couple cycles of selection cuts and there isn't anything left worth cutting. Clearcuts start a forest on an even playing field, so desirable trees are able to regenerate the next forest.A mature hardwood stand will have ~100# of deer forage per acre. A clearcut will have up to 6000# of deer forage per acre. Which one do you think the deer like better?

WMAs can be great places to hunt, but must be managed for the natural resource first and hunters second so the hunters have something to shoot at. If TWRA stopped cutting timber because it was a hunter's favorite spot, they'd never cut another stick of timber, and the wildlife would suffer.

 

[TheLBLman]

A mature hardwood stand will have ~100# of deer forage per acre. A clearcut will have up to 6000# of deer forage per acre. Which one do you think the deer like better?

While this is true, there's even more to the value of clear-cuts.

Mature forests tend to produce most of their forage more "seasonally" such as during the fall when acorns drop. But what about the rest of the year? What do deer have to eat in a mature forest January thru September? The answer is "not much", at least compared to a typical 2 to 10-yr-old clear-cut which produces not only tons more forage mass, but more consistently available on a year-round basis.

 

[MickThompson]

Exactly right Wes, those acorns can only be counted on about 2 out of every 5 years,and for a 2 or 3 month window. Browse and forbs will be there every year, even during a drought year. Anyone remember the mast crop we had in 2007? I do. It was a complete failure, but the deer still had abundant forbs and browse to feed on in areas of actively-managed forest.

Growing season foods are often underrated by hunters, but we have to remember that 70% of a deer's diet is weeds and saplings while bucks are growing antlers and does are raising their fawns.

It is much more realistic to sustain or grow a deer herd on 6-7 months of high-quality growing season forage and 2 months of browse in late winter each year than 2 months of acorns every other year.

 

[catman529]

there are certain places I do not want to see cut, just because I like them the way they are. But no arguing that clear cuts generate some great wildlife cover and forage. the WMAs I hunt have some CRP that are only cut every 2-3 years or so. They get thick and hold a lot of critters and browse. I like to hunt the open hardwoods and occasionally the crop fields, but also like to be right next to a grown up clearcut or CRP field or thicket where the critters will come from. for deer they live in this cover, and turkeys they nest in it.

 

[Football Hunter]

A mature hardwood stand will have ~100# of deer forage per acre. A clearcut will have up to 6000# of deer forage per acre. Which one do you think the deer like better?

While this is true, there's even more to the value of clear-cuts.

Mature forests tend to produce most of their forage more "seasonally" such as during the fall when acorns drop. But what about the rest of the year? What do deer have to eat in a mature forest January thru September? The answer is "not much", at least compared to a typical 2 to 10-yr-old clear-cut which produces not only tons more forage mass, but more consistently available on a year-round basis.

I AGREE!

 

[pick-a-spot]

I like all of you appreciate and understand that proper selective and clear cutting of woodlands creates diverse and productive habitat. That is not my concern.
I would just like to know that there is some kind of plan in place that makes creating these types of habitat a priority.
The end result after the oil and timber interests walk away is to have something left to work with.
At Mt. Roosevelt I am seeing tracts being set in fast growing pine. Don't believe this is being done to diversify habitat.
Is there a plan and why is TWRA not chiming in here ?

 

[scn]

On the WMA lands where TWRA has complete control, such as Catoosa, all of the forestry prescriptions are part of the overall WMA plan. On the lands where others have control of the timber rights, it may or may not be done to our liking. The option is to not have those areas for our sportsmen if we don't control everything. Since money is very limited in making purchases, it would be very difficult to impossible to acquire large acreages where we have complete control.

Give Kirk Miles a call in the Region III office and he can fill you in on the particulars between the various WMAs.