COVER ORGANIZATION 623 



Forest Stand and Game Cover Improvement 



For the sake of clarity, many of the suggestions made so far have been presented as though 

 grouse were the most important crop to be considered. In most cases there is much to be 

 gained by cropping not only the game but the forest as well. This is the principle of maxi- 

 mum or multiple land use. 



In creating environments favorable to the production of both forest and game crops, it 

 should be remembered that each has certain basic requirements. Each crop prospers accord- 

 ing to the degree to which these are met. An important difference arises, however, from 

 the fact that the forest itself is the crop whereas wildlife merely occupies the woodland as 

 a habitat. Thus when the wildlife manager, to better grouse conditions, suggests alterations 

 in the forest cover, he may, in effect, be asking the forester to destroy or forego a small part 

 of his crop that game may prosper. It is equally logical that wildlife be controlled when, as 

 with deer, it seriously damages forest reproduction. 



Failure to realize these simple truths has led to the building up of antagonisms, largely 

 unwarranted, to management suggestions promulgated by either group and to a tendency 

 to discount the importance in the minds of each of the necessity of meeting those require- 

 ments considered basic by the other fellow. The first step, therefore, in integrating the pro- 

 duction of forest and game crops, is to develop a knowledge of and appreciation for the point 

 of view and requirements of each. Once this is done, the problem is half solved. 



It is desirable, before management plans are made, to establish the order of importance 

 of the various uses to which a given area is to be put. On this decision depends the degree 

 to which any of the suggestions presented here may be applied. 



If it is decided to give equal enqihasis to timber and to wildlife i)roduction. conflicts in 

 management practices may often be avoided if portions of the woodlands particularly suited 

 to the production of a forest crop are set aside for this primary purpose. Established plan- 

 tations or patches of woodlands of high comnu-rcial value are examples of this point. Like- 

 wise, throughout the area, an adequate amount of certain cover types may be set aside as of 

 primary importance for grouse production. Among these are overgrown fields, fencerows, 

 orchards, scattered clumps of conifers, and small slashings or other openings in the forest 

 cover. 



Having located each of these primary-use units, the practices necessary to produce the 

 main crops thereon then may be carried out, together with such other cultural activities as 

 may assist in the production of the subsidiary crop. Such an arrangement, clearly under- 

 stood and sympathetically carried out, will help to avoid many of the difficulties charac- 

 teristic of forest and game cooperatives. 



One of the more difficult decisions to be reached, before any cutting is done, is to define 

 crop trees, wolf trees that crowd out more desirable individuals, and weed species. For New 

 York, crop trees, from the point of view of grouse, are such food-producers as cherry, birch, 

 beech, thornapple and the hornbeams, and such shelter-producing species as hemlock, pine 

 and spruce. Some of these also represent forest crop trees. A conflict of interests is most likely 

 to occur in deciding which are weed species. The classification of these is dependent upon 

 use which, in turn, is based on whether or not better species are present. Thus, where spe- 

 cies furnishing excellent grouse food and shelter are abundant, the kinds normally less at- 

 tractive may be considered weeds unless they are particularly valuable for other purposes such 

 as for lumber. Were the better species absent, however, the latter would then become crop 



