To the editor:
I’ve been following this clear-cut as an ecological restoration professional and as a local landowner and naturalist who is within 1 mile of the impact. These are my personal thoughts based on what I’ve experienced in over 25 years of a restoration career.
Aside from the continuing anger and disappointment, it has taken me a long time to time to think about a response (and be civil). If I were the adjoining neighbor that is directly impacted by this I wouldn’t be able to imagine their pain and suffering.
Forest recovery and ecological health is much more difficult in these times since human-caused stressors like climate change and invasive species wreak havoc on our natural systems. The extreme variations in weather patterns have stressed the soils and plants, both in dramatic rainfall increases and spikes in high temperatures. The introduction of invasive plants, exacerbated by the added disturbance from land cover change, complicates well-intentioned planned actions as it relates to natural area restoration and maintenance.
The mitigation design is not clear cut, and the path forward is one that will take much more consideration than the haphazard way this event happened.
First, substantial resources in dollars and time are inherent with successful short- and long-term management. The timeline and associated actions will be in perpetuity. In other words, this site will require a lot of “dirt time,” with qualified people searching the site to monitor and report what they are seeing. There are predicted outcomes, but these are only important if backed up by data measured by ecological restoration professionals who will document the recovery and stressors on this 20-plus-acre site. The above can be outlined in a management plan that has peer review and measurable goals and objectives, as it relates to ecological restoration, possibly coupled with passive recreation such as trails.
Short-term mitigation of soil loss can be reduced by attention to detail in planning and action in implementing best management practices. The limiting factor should NOT be funding! For example, a water quality test could be done by taking turbidity measurements performed in the lake that is fed by the land in the clear-cut. This procedure measures the murkiness of the water in relation to silt (and algae). This and other considerations, such as a silt pond on the Brown County Parks and Recreation side, could be an option if that would help. The resident has already reported his lake to be a chocolate-brown from the runoff with visible soil blooms during rain events.
Throughout the 20-acre site, native (local genetic type) graminoid species like Virginia wild rye (short-lived perennial) could be broadcasted to help hold the soil and prevent colonization of Japanese Stiltgrass. This invasive exotic grass is a pernicious weed which has reached epidemic proportions, taking over native plant communities. Many other invasive plants plague Brown County, like burning bush, a common “favorite” in the area planted by private landowners. When invasive plants become an obvious roadside eyesore, such as Autumn olive, the offending plant has already reached out-of-control status due to exponential germination over years. Note, The Nature Conservancy often has field days around the state to educate and get help in controlling many invasive species that have far-reaching impacts on natural areas. This clear-cut will need substantial monitoring and maintenance. The impacts from invasive plants are still yet to be determined on this site.
It is very true that the neo-tropical migrant nesting birds are adapted to specific habitats like young or teenage forests due to thousands of years of living in natural disturbance areas like blow-downs and burns. Ecological restoration practices that mimic natural openings include use of prescribed fire, girdling of cutting trees to be left on-site. These practices are closest in likelihood to the natural processes that open forest birds favor. In some cases where a prior landowner just sold timber without the advice of a qualified professional, it makes sense to reset the forest to zero, or clear-cut, but leaving standing dead trees or desirable live isolated trees for shelter and a seed source. These calculated disturbances are done with much planning and follow-up maintenance; even then, the area is monitored and adaptive restorative management is implemented.
It is unfortunate that this mistake of the subject clear-cut has happened in terms of economic, social and environmental consequences. I do think, though, that if given sensitive but aggressive management, according to a plan based on ecological restoration principals, in 30 years, the physical site will recover, aside from the human impacts and suffering to the neighbor or the Brown County community. I am not at all qualified to gauge the social impact. I do hope the site will be managed long term by ecological restoration professionals. I look forward to hearing positive news in steps forward to reclaim this important piece of our natural heritage.
Don Miller, Indianapolis
Send letters to [email protected] by noon Thursday before the date of intended publication (noon Wednesday on holiday weeks). Letters are the opinions of the writer. Letters must be signed by the author and include the writer’s town of residence and a contact number in case of questions.
Only one letter every two weeks, per writer, to allow for diversity of voices in the opinions section. Please be considerate of sharing space with other letter-writers and keep your comments concise and to the point. Avoid name-calling, accusations of criminal activity and second- and third-hand statements of “fact.”
