IFish Fishing Forum banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,258 Posts
Originally posted by garyk:
......the water shaded by centuries old fir, spruce and cedar. It’s completely unlike the rest of Tillamook’s other rivers.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">garyk - yes, large woody debris in the creek is an important component of fish habitat...so is shade on the creek. But shade from old growth trees is no better than shade from young alders or salmonberry. Using a spherical densiometer, I conducted measurements of % shading on 10 salmon creeks in the Siuslaw drainage in 1994...one of the poorest (lowest percentage of the creek actually shaded) was on Saleratus Creek where it flowed thru a 1/2 mile long stretch of BLM oldgrowth. Due to gaps in the canopy the creek had only about 45% shade compared to 95+% for creeks with young alder canopies (I know, young alder makes poor LWD...but we're talking about shade here).

Its too bad some fry & smolt counts aren't readily available for a stream with 0% oldgrowth...contrasted with one that is 100% oldgrowth/unroaded/undeveloped.


DepoeBayDan - I wish I could have mede the trip but your report w/pics makes it seem like I was there anyway. :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,258 Posts
Originally posted by garyk:
Without active streamside conifer restoration (a challenging task in itself), these rivers will be very deficient in LWD for centuries, thus keeping their productive capacity at a greatly reduced level - and fish runs at a fraction of what they would be otherwise.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">The thinking of some OSU and other forestry professors is that without a catastrophic fire (followed by an aggressive, timely conifer reforestation effort with brush control), many coast range riparian alder forests will eventually die of old age and the creeksides will become permanently dominated by salmonberry thickets. Salmonberries provide good shade on tiny streams but not much LWD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,258 Posts
Originally posted by Straydog:
[QB]
This is exactly what I have tried to tell our retired forester friend here about the plantations in most reforested clear cuts of the west side. QB]
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">What's that straydog? You think most westside timber plantations were planted with off-site stock? Not my experience at all. In the early days of reforestation (pre-1970s) off-site stock was sometimes used (i.e. Tillamook, Weatherly Cr, and others) but by the time I finished forestry school it was abundantly clear that successful reforestation required use of local seed sources...and that's how I did it on the 55,000 acres I was responsible for regenerating.

And, dense, closed-canopy Douglas-fir 2nd growth forests are NORMAL in the Douglas-fir region (you're not in it, SD). Forests go through predictable, natural successional stages...it is completely normal to have "monocultures" composed primarily of Douglas-fir in regenerating stands throughout most of the D.fir region.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top