227 



On lands where old-growih harvest is 

 scheduled and biological diversity is also 

 an important goal (though both cannot be 

 maximized on the same hectares in 

 southeastern Alaska), we recommend 

 that harvest of identifiable old-growth 

 communities (e.g., volume cla.sscs) not 

 exceed their proportional occurrence 

 within the planning area. In situations 

 where a particular forest community 

 (e.g., riparian old growth) is rare and has 

 been identified as critical fish or wildlife 

 habitat, a further reduction in harvest 

 would be warranted. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 



The science of wildlife ecology 

 developed after most of the continent's 

 old-growth forest had already been 

 harvested. Thus, early generalizations 

 about the value of old growth as wildlife 

 habitat were founded on few data. In fact 

 most of the research on the ecology of old 

 growth and its associated plant and 

 animal species has been published within 

 the last decade. As our knowledge of old 

 growth increases, so does our 

 appreciation of its unique and intrinsic 

 value. 



Today the Tongass National Forest in 

 southeastern Alaska supports the largest 

 unbroken tracts of old growth in the 

 United States. Though it is true that only 

 a small percentage of the Tongass will be 

 logged in any one year, most of that 

 logging occurs in the relatively rare 

 stands of high-volume old growth. This is 

 where many of the wildlife, fisheries, and 

 recreational values are centered. In the 

 past, emphasis was placed on how many 

 acres were set aside as old-growth 

 wildlife habitat. Today an equally 

 important concern is over what kind of 

 acres are maintained for wildlife habitat 



"With present knowledge, it is not 

 possible to create old-growth stands or 

 markedly hasten the process by which 

 nature creates them" (Society of 

 American Foresters 1984, p. 17). Thus, 

 management for old-growth ecosystems 

 and the species associated with ihem 

 must focus on identifying and 



maintaining an adequate quantity and 

 representative variety of ohd-growth 

 stands. 



Old growth has become a rare and 

 dimini,shing national resource. Because it 

 takes centuries to develop the ecological 

 attributes of old growth, the biological 

 effects of clearcutting are cumulative and 

 long-term. As old-growth forests arc 

 harvested, our future management 

 options are reduced. It is important, 

 therefore, that the public be aware of the 

 irreversible effects of harvesting the 

 remaining old growth on public lands. 

 The forest management decisions we 

 make in southeastern Alaska today will 

 determine to what extent future 

 generations will have the opportunity to 

 use and enjoy the unique biological, 

 educational, and esthetic values that old- 

 growth forests provide. 



ACKNOWLEDGMF,NTS 



We thank D. Anderson, K. Aubry, R. 

 Flynn, R. McNay, and L. Suring for their 

 constructive criticism and editorial 

 review. 



LITERATURE CITED 



Alaback, P. B. 1982. Dynamics of 

 underslory biomass in Sitka spruce- 

 western hemlock forest of southeast 

 Alaska. Ecology 63: 1932-1948. 



Alaback, P. B. and J. C. Tappeiner, II. 

 1984. Response of undcrstory 

 vegetation to thinning in the Sitka 

 spruce-western hemlock forests of 

 southeast Alaska. Estab. Report on 

 file at the Forest Science Laboratory, 

 U.S. Forest Service, Juneau, Alaska. 

 57 p. 



Balda, R. P. 1975. Vegetation structure 

 and breeding bird diversity. Pp. 59-80 

 in D. Smith, tech. coord.. Proceedings 

 of the symposium on management of 

 forest range habitats fornongame 

 birds. U.S. Forest Service, General 

 Technical Report WO-1. 343 p. 



Binford, L. C, B. G. Elliot, and S. W. 

 Singer. 1975. Discovery of a nest and 

 downy young of a marbled murrelet. 

 Wilson Bulletin 83: 303-319. 



Bormann, F. H. and G. E. Likens. 1979. 

 Pattern and process in a forested 

 ecosystem. Springer- Verlag, New 

 York. 253 p. 



Brown, E. R. 1961. The black-tailed 

 deer of western Washington. Wash- 

 ington State Dept. of Game, Biologi- 

 cal Bulletin 13, Olympia, Wash. 

 124 p. 



Diamond, J. M. 1975. The island 

 dilemma: lessons of modem biogeo- 

 graphic studies for the design of 

 natural preserves. Biological Conser- 

 vation 7: 129-146. 



Docrr, J. G. 1983. Home range size, 

 movements and habitat use in two 

 moose, Alces atces, populations in 

 southeastern Alaska. Canadian Field 

 Naturalist 97: 79-88. 



Fox, J. L. 1983. Constraints on winter 

 habitat selection by the mountain goat 

 {Oreamnos americansus) in Alaska. 

 Ph.D. Dissertation. University of 

 Washington, Seattle, Wash. 147 p. 



Franklin, J. F., K. Cromack, Jr., W. 

 Denison, A. McKee, C. Maser, J. 

 Scdell, F. Swanson, and G. Juday. 

 1981. Ecological characteristics of 

 old-growth Douglas-fir forests. U.S. 

 Forest Service General Technical 

 ReponPNW-118.48p. 



Fretwell, S. D. 1972. Populations in a 

 seasonal environment Monographs in 

 Population Biology 5. Princeton 

 University Press, Princeton, NJ. 

 217 p. 



Haapanen, A. 1965. Bird fauna of the 

 Finnish forests in relation to forest 

 succession. I Annales Zoologici 

 Fennici2: 153-196. 



Hanley, T. A. and J. D. McKendrick. 

 1985. Potential nutritional limitations 

 for black-tailed deer in a spruce- 

 hemlock forest, southeastern Alaska. 

 Journal of Wildlife Management 49: 

 103-114. 



Harris, L. D. 1984. The fragmented 

 forest. University of Chicago Press, 

 Chicago, 111. 211 p. 



Harris, R. D. 1971. Further evidence of 

 tree nesting in marbled murrclets. 

 Canadian Field Naturalist 85: 67-68. 



'-^ 



Volume 8 (3), 1988 



Natural Areas Journal 143 



