The significance of ecological development to environmental management by man
The aciples of ecological ecosystem development are of
the greatest importance to mankind. Man must have early succcessional stages as
a continuous source of food and other organic products, since he must have a
large net primary production to harvest; in the climax community, because
production is mostly consumed by respiration (plant and animal), net communitu
production in an annual cycle may be zero. On the other hand, the stability of
the climax and its ability to buffer and control physical forces (such as water
temperature) are desirable characteristics from the viewpoint of the human
population. The only way man can have both a productive and a stable
environment is to consure that a good mixture of early and mature successional
stages are maintained, with interchanges of energy and materials. Excess food
produced in young communities helps feed older stages that in return supply
regenerated nutrients and help buffer the extreme of weather (storms, floods
and so on).
In the most stable and productive natural situation there is
usually such a combination of successional stages for example, in areas such as
the inland sea of japan or long island sound, the uoung communities of plankton
feed lder, more stable communities on
the rocks and on the bottom (benthic communities) the large biomass structure
and diversity of the benthic communities provide not only habitat and shelter
for life hisory stages of pelagic forms but also regenrtated nutrients
necessary for continued productivity of the plankton. A similar, favorable
situation exists in many terrestrial landscapes where productive croplands on
the plains are intermingled with diverse forests and orchards on the hills and
mountains. The crop fields are,
ecologically speaking, ‘’young nature’’ in that they are maintained as such by
the constant labor of the farmer and his machines. The forests represent older,
more diverse, and selfsustaining communities that have lower rates of net
production but do not require the contant attention of man. It is important
that both types of ecosystems be considered together in proper relation. If the
forests are destroyed merely for the temporary gain in wood production, water
and soul may wash down from the slopes and reduce the peoductivity of the
plains. Ruins of civilizations and man made deserts in various parts of the
world stand as evidence that man has not been fully aware of his need for
protective as well as productive environments. Mature systems have other values
to mankind in addition to products; they should not be considered as crops in
the sense of wheat or corn. The conservationist speaks of a policy of balancing
contradictory needs as ‘’multiple use,’’ but in the past he has found it
difficult to translate long term values into monetary units. Consequently, too
often the possibilities for immediate economic gain in harvest overrides what
later turns out to be a more important value.
To illustrate thesee difficulties, let us consider the
controversy over national forest management policy that received considerable
public attention in the early 1970s.for the most part national forests have
been managed on a ‘’selective cut’’ basis; that is, selected trees, inclding a
portion of mature trees that are no longer growing are removed periodically
leaving the stand more or less intact to serve other uses (recreation, soil and
water stabilization, and so on) and leaving room for younger trees to grow
faster. As the demand for paper and
other wood products became acute threr was pressure for harvesting on a ‘’clear
cut and replant’’ cycle, since the yield would then be greater and subsequent
rate of net production incrrased. But right after the clear cut the system
would be subject to various disorders such as soul erosion and nutrient loss;
the cost of taking care of these problems could cancel out the value of extra
wood yield. Thus, both plans have advantages and disadvantages. A sensible
solution to the dilemma would be to vary the management according to the site
capability. Where topography is steep and soil thin, or where the vegetation is
botanically unique or of great scenic beauty, a selective cut plan would be
best in the long run. Where topography is more level, the soil deep and stable,
and the species caplable of repid regrowth, then a clear cut procedure could be
a desirable choice.
In essence there are only two basic ways to meet the problem
of youth and maturity in the landscape. One would be to maintain intermediate
states as naturally occurs in pulse stabilized systems, and the other would be
to compartmentalize or ‘’zome’’ the landcape so as to have separate areas
primarily managed for production and for protedtion. Both requure that society
adopts regional land use plans, an idea whose time is coming.
0 Response to "The significance of ecological development to environmental management by man"
Post a Comment