Editing Clearcutting (section)

==Effects on the environment==
Environmental groups criticize clear-cutting as destructive to water, [[soil]], wildlife, and [[atmosphere]], and recommend the use of [[sustainable]] alternatives.<ref name="greeniacs.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.greeniacs.com/GreeniacsArticles/Land/Clearcutting.html|title=Clear-cutting land Greeniacs Articles|access-date=2012-11-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121016034338/http://www.greeniacs.com/GreeniacsArticles/Land/Clearcutting.html|archive-date=2012-10-16|url-status=dead}}</ref> Clear-cutting impacts the [[water cycle]], as trees hold water and [[topsoil]]. Clear-cutting in forests removes the trees which would otherwise have been transpiring large volumes of water and also physically damages the grasses, [[moss]]es, [[lichen]]s, and [[fern]]s populating the [[understorey|understory]]. Removal or damage of the [[Biota (ecology)|biota]] reduces the local capacity to retain water, which can exacerbate flooding and lead to increased leaching of [[nutrients]] from the soil. The maximum nutrient loss occurs around year two and returns to pre-clearcutting levels by year four after the cut.<ref name="Martin">Martin, C. W., Pierce, R. S., Likens, G. E., & Bormann, F. H. (1986). Clearcutting affects stream chemistry in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. Broomall, PA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station.</ref>

Removing trees surrounding stream banks prevents shading of the water body, which raises the temperature of riverbanks and rivers. Because the trees no longer hold down the soil, riverbanks increasingly [[erosion|erode]] as sediment into the water, creating excess nutrients which exacerbate the changes in the river and create problems miles away, in the sea.<ref name="greeniacs.com"/> Clear cutting on a large scale in a watershed can cause sediment and nutrients that leach into the streams cause the acidity of the stream to increase.<ref name= "Martin"/> The nutrient content of the soil was found to return to five percent of pre-clearcutting levels after 64 years.<ref>Covington, W. W. (1981). Changes in forest floor organic matter and nutrient content following clear cutting in northern hardwoods. Ecology, 41-48.</ref>

{{Wide image|Britannia Mines, upper town residential area (5456678861).jpg|700px|Upper town residential area of [[Britannia Beach]] in British Columbia, Canada, in September 1919. The community was built in a clearcut area adjacent to the Britannia Mines operations; stumps and stray logs are visible throughout the site and community.}}

===Negative impacts===
Clearcutting can have negative impacts, both for humans and local flora and fauna.<ref>[http://www.forestencyclopedia.net/p/p1818 Forest Encyclopedia Network Advantages and disadvantages of clearcutting]</ref> A study from the [[University of Oregon]] found that in certain zones, areas that were clear cut had nearly three times the amount of [[erosion]] due to [[Landslide|slides]]. When the roads required by the clearcutting were factored in, the increase in slide activity appeared to be about 5 times greater compared to nearby forested areas. The roads built for clearcutting interrupt normal surface drainage because the roads are not as permeable as the normal ground cover. The roads also change subsurface water movement due to the redistribution of soil and rock.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Swanson |first1=F.J. |last2=Dyrness |first2=C.T. |year=1975 |title=Impact of clear-cutting and road construction on soil erosion by landslides in the western Cascade Range, Oregon |journal=Geology |volume=3 |issue=7 |pages=393–396 |publisher=Geological Society of America |doi=10.1130/0091-7613(1975)3<393:IOCARC>2.0.CO;2 |bibcode=1975Geo.....3..393S }}</ref> Clearcutting may lead to increased stream flow during storms, [[loss of habitat]] and species diversity, opportunities for [[Invasive species|invasive and weedy species]], and negative impacts on scenery,<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/apa3316 |title= Woodlot Harvest |first= Toso |last= Bozic |date= September 14, 2009 |publisher= Government of Alberta: Agriculture and Rural Development |access-date=2011-03-07}}</ref> specifically, a growth of contempt by those familiar with the area for the wooded, planet aftermaths,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hansis|first=Richard|date=1995|title=The Social Acceptability of Clearcutting in the Pacific Northwest|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/44126577|journal=Human Organization|volume=54|issue=1|pages=95–101|doi=10.17730/humo.54.1.yj5338v42768002r|jstor=44126577|issn=0018-7259|url-access=subscription}}</ref> as well as a decrease in property values; diminished recreation, hunting, and fishing opportunities.<ref>Foothill Conservancy, Pine Grove, CA (2001). [http://www.foothillconservancy.org/pages/focus4.cgi?magicatid=&magi_detail=171&magid=11 "Clearcutting in local forests."] ''Foothill Focus.'' Spring 2001. Accessed 2011-10-12.</ref> Clearcutting decreases the occurrence of natural disturbances like forest fires and natural uprooting. Over time, this can deplete the local seed bank.<ref name="Pykälä, J. 2004">Pykälä, J. (2004). Immediate increase in plant species richness after clear-cutting of boreal herb-rich forests. Applied vegetation science, 7(1), 29-34.</ref>

In [[Temperateness|temperate]] and [[Taiga|boreal]] climates, clearcutting can have an effect on the depth of snow, which is usually greater in a clearcut area than in the forest, due to a lack of [[Interception (water)|interception]] and [[evapotranspiration]]. This results in less [[Frost line|soil frost]], which in combination with higher levels of direct [[sunlight]] results in [[snowmelt]] occurring earlier in the spring and earlier peak runoff.<ref>{{cite journal | last = Ottosson Löfvenius | first = M. |author2=Kluge, M. |author3=Lundmark, T.. | title = Snow and Soil Frost Depth in Two Types of Shelterwood and a Clear cut Area | journal = Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research | volume = 18 | pages = 54–63 | publisher = Taylor & Francis | year = 2003 | issn = 0282-7581 | doi =  10.1080/0891060310002345}}</ref>

The world's rain forests could completely vanish in a hundred years at the current rate of deforestation. Between June 2000 and June 2008, more than {{convert|150,000|sqkm|abbr=on}} of rainforest were cleared in the [[Amazônia Legal|Brazilian Amazon]]. Huge areas of forest have already been lost. For example, only eight to fourteen percent of the [[Atlantic Forest]] in South America now remains.<ref>{{cite web|title=Reforestation|url=http://www.arkive.org/reforestation/|publisher=Arkive|access-date=2013-01-10|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130302120215/http://www.arkive.org/reforestation/|archive-date=2013-03-02|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Brazil & the Atlantic Forest|url=http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/southamerica/brazil/placesweprotect/atlantic-forest.xml|publisher=The Nature Conservancy|access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref> While deforestation rates have slowed since 2004, [[forest loss]] is expected to continue for the foreseeable future.<ref>[http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0801-amazon.html Future threats to the Amazon rainforest] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121101095911/http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0801-amazon.html |date=2012-11-01 }}</ref> Farmers slash and burn large parcels of forest every year to create grazing and croplands, but the forest's nutrient-poor soil often renders the land ill-suited for agriculture, and within a year or two, the farmers move on.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100509002310/http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/habitats/rainforest-threats National Geographic:rain forest threats ]</ref>

===Positive perspectives===
Clearcutting can be practiced to encourage the growth and proliferation of tree species that require high [[shade tolerance|light intensity]].<ref>Belt, Kevin and Campbell, Robert (1999). [http://ahc.caf.wvu.edu/joomla/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=148&func=startdown&id=247 "The Clearcutting Controversy - Myths and Facts."] West Virginia University Extension Service. Accessed 2011-12-12.</ref> Generally, a harvest area wider than double the height of the adjacent trees will no longer be subject to the moderating influence of the woodland on the [[microclimate]].<ref name="Dovetail">{{cite journal | author = Dr. J. Bowyer | author2 = K. Fernholz | author3 = A. Lindburg | author4 = Dr. J. Howe | author5 = Dr. S. Bratkovich | title = The Power of Silviculture: Employing Thinning, Partial Cutting Systems and Other Intermediate Treatments to Increase Productivity, Forest Health and Public Support for Forestry | publisher = Dovetail Partners Inc. | date = 2009-05-28 | url = http://dovetailinc.org/files/DovetailSilvics0509.pdf | access-date = 2009-06-06 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20101029212926/http://dovetailinc.org/files/DovetailSilvics0509.pdf | archive-date = 2010-10-29 }}</ref> The width of the harvest area can thus determine which species will come to dominate. Those with high tolerance to extremes in [[temperature]], [[Water content|soil moisture]], and resistance to [[Browsing (predation)|browsing]] may be established, in particular [[secondary succession]]al [[pioneer species]].{{cn|date=July 2023}}

Clearcutting can be used by [[forester]]s as a method of mimicking a natural [[Disturbance (ecology)|disturbance]] and increasing [[Ecological succession|primary successional]] species, such as [[Populus|poplar]] ([[aspen]]), [[willow]] and [[Prunus serotina|black cherry]] in [[North America]]. Clearcutting has also proved to be effective in creating animal habitat and browsing areas, which otherwise would not exist without natural stand-replacing disturbances such as [[wildfire]]s, large scale [[windthrow]], or [[avalanche]]s.

Clearcuts are used to help regenerate species that cannot compete in mature forests. A number of them are aspen, jack pine, and, in areas with poor soils, oaks—are important species for both game and nongame wildlife species. Clearcutting can also lead to increased vascular-plant diversity in the area. This is most pronounced after a couple years of clearcutting and in herb-rich forests where scarification took place.<ref name="Pykälä, J. 2004"/>

No significant changes in water temperature were observed when patch clearcutting was done {{convert|100|ft|abbr=on}} away from a river. This suggests that patch clearcutting is a possible solution to concerns about changes in water temperature due to clearcutting. The effects of clearcutting on soil nutrient content were not examined in this study.<ref>Brown, G. W., & Krygier, J. T. (1970). Effects of clear-cutting on stream temperature. Water resources research, 6(4), 1133–1139.</ref>

More recently, forest managers have found that clearcutting oak stands helps regenerate oak forests in areas of poor soil. The tree canopies in oak forests often shade out the ground, making it impossible for newly sprouted oaks to grow. When the mature trees are removed, the saplings stand a chance of recruiting into the forest.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10366_46403_59160-215632--,00.html|title=DNR - DNR|website=www.michigan.gov}}</ref>

===Effects on wildlife===
Clearcutting's main destruction is towards habitats, where it makes the habitats more vulnerable in the future to damage  by insects, diseases, acid rain, and wind. Removal of all trees from an area destroys the physical habitats of many species in wildlife. Also, clearcutting can contribute to problems for ecosystems that depend on forests, like the streams and rivers that run through them.<ref>Responses of Wildlife to Clearcutting and Associated Treatments in the Eastern United States. {{cite web |url=http://www.clemson.edu/extfor/timber_production/fortp19.htm |title=Responses of Wildlife to Clearcutting and Associated Treatments in the Eastern United States |access-date=2012-11-08 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130103144233/http://www.clemson.edu/extfor/timber_production/fortp19.htm |archive-date=2013-01-03 }}</ref>

In Canada, the [[black-tailed deer]] population is at further risk after clearcutting. The deer are a food source for wolves and cougars, as well as [[First Nations in Canada|First Nations]] and other hunters. While deer may not be at risk in cities and rural countryside, where they can be seen running through neighbourhoods and feeding on farms, in higher altitude areas they require forest shelter.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ancientforestguide.com/news-item.php?ID=266|title=Ancient Forest Alliance - Old Growth Forests British Columbia|website=www.ancientforestguide.com|access-date=2012-11-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140326182652/http://www.ancientforestguide.com/news-item.php?ID=266|archive-date=2014-03-26|url-status=dead}}</ref>

===In Maine===
In [[Maine]], a form of land management known as Outcome Based Forestry (OBF)<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=https://www.maine.gov/dacf/mfs/policy_management/outcome_based_forestry.html|title=Outcome Based Forestry: Forest Policy and Management: Division of Forestry: Maine ACF|website=www.maine.gov|access-date=2020-03-26}}</ref> allows for a wide range of harvesting as long as the removed trees do not exceed the amount of tree growth. Since implemented, this program has led to large-scale clearcutting and monoculture tree planting,<ref name=":0" /> and research by the [[University of Maine]]'s Sustainability Solutions Initiative has found that {{convert|8,000,000|acres|abbr=on}} of certified forest land in (primarily northern) Maine is being [[overharvested]], leading to reduced long-term stability of [[timber harvest]]s and increased erosion and pollution in the watershed.{{Citation needed|date=November 2022}} These practices have sparked  [[environmental justice]] concerns regarding the health and well-being of foresters and locals.{{citation needed|date=July 2022}}