Deadwood Management at Caer Llan - Case Study Example

CASE STUDY OF CAER LLAN DEADWOOD MANAGEMENT By + Introduction Deadwood management has been an issue to Caer Llan in South Wales due to the growing need to reduce carbon emission. The primary concern is to develop renewable energy resources such as wood fuel and firewood. Actions such as increased frequency and intensity of thinning in neglected middle-aged woodlands, and the restoration of neglected coppice woodlands to short fuel wood cycles, could all have a significant impact on the amount and distribution of deadwood for the removal of woody debris from wood fuel on non-retained proportions of the couple (Andersson, Birot & PäIvinen, 2004). Deadwood refers to all types of dead and dying trees with a diameter of ten centimeter or more than ten centimeters. It ranges from whole or wind snapped standing trees, fallen wood and stamps, through to decaying wood habitats on living trees. For instance, rotholes, dead limbs, decay columns in trunks and limbs and below ground in roots. Aim The primary purpose of the experiment is carrying comparative study between different kinds of woodlands and ascertaining whether to use deadwood as a source of fuel without having an adverse impact on biodiversity. It is important to manage deadwood since dead and decaying trees compose the crucial component of a functioning forest ecosystem, it serves a vital role in the sustaining of biodiversity, soil fertility and energy flow such as hydrological processes in streams and rivers. Deadwood plays a significant role in alleviating the effects of climate change by acting as a medium stem sink for carbon. Objectives The primary objective f the study is to evaluate quality deadwood on SSSI woodlands and corresponding management of deadwood within the woodlands. It will also assess of the different plants and animal species that depend on deadwood. In addition, to find out why it is deadwood is used as fuel, unlike the fossil fuel. Method The process involves the collection of the small deadwood and invertebrates’ identification. In small deadwood collection, there was the management of woodland by taking four different sites on every side. The sides were the 25m point by 50m point. For scientific purposes, there was the increment of the 15m point into the woods in order to find the nearest tree as a starting point. From starting point and using 1 M2 in 5 M belt transect, small deadwood were in every quadrant and weighed. However, the different method was employed in 3SI site slightly different approach (Spapens, White & Kluin, 2014, pp. 123-167). Within the 3SI site, there was selection of random tree that possess clear area in order to avoid destroying the underlying bluebells and stuff, managed woodland By using 500 M2 survey for large deadwood in the collection of the deadwood, three types of deadwood were studied and categorized as standing, suspended, and fallen. The survey went to 50 M from the quadrat starting point and surveys the trees 5 M for each side (right and left). Measurement of all three types of deadwoods (length and diameter) was undertaken for standing and suspended trees, and the height were estimated against the average canopy’s tree (Andersson, Birot & PäIvinen, 2004) The identification of the invertebrates was carried out using the decomposed log turning and pitfall trap sampling (Spapens, White & Kluin, 2014, pp. 123-167). In Decomposed log turning method, there was taking of picture before and measurement of the length and diameter while turning the log in order to catch the invertebrates underneath or inside the log. Pitfall trap sampling technique within Y-shaped chooses the decomposed log and the GPS reading on every single point were taken. Results Column1 Mean 62.32302502 Standard Error 14.6397459 Median 43.64605249 Mode #N/A Standard Deviation 38.73312692 Sample Variance 1500.255121 Kurtosis -1.135653313 Skewness 0.13452942 Range 105.7277875 Minimum 6.800762697 Maximum 112.5285502 Sum 436.2611751 Count 7 Largest(1) 112.5285502 Smallest(1) 6.800762697 Confidence Level(95.0%) 35.82216775 The mean of the deadwoods were standing at 63.3230 with standard error of 14.6397. Median of the data collected was 43.6461 with the standard deviation 38.7331. The sample variance is 1500.2551 and the kurtosis 1.1357. The skewness of the data is 0.1345 with the underlying range of the deadwoods 105. The maximum number of the deadwoods collected were 113 while the minimum deadwoods collected per catch is 9. Discussion The amount of carbon dioxide emitted by wood fuel is smaller compared to that of fossil fuel. Combusting wood emits carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. In addition, regrowth of wood removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (Hawksworth & Bull, 2006). It can be stated that wood fuel use is carbon neutral, that is to say, environment while fossil fuel emits carbon without any removal. Most wood fuel use takes place on a sustainable basis (Spapens, White & Kluin, 2014, pp. 123-167). Its applies to the use of virtually all wood fuels emanating from the non-forest land was used as the wood fuels from forestland. Sustainability means that the prevailing carbon implies carbon neutrality atmosphere in case the woody material were subjected to combustion. Both the woodlands exceed the definitions thus there was significant chance to utilize as the source of fuel without having an adverse impact (Spapens, White & Kluin, 2014, pp. 123-167). The errors occur due to the very long time that the collection process took and not all insects could be catch making the method ineffective. More methods are utilized in the management of the woodland than SSSI since it is explicit to utilize deadwood within SSSI, and it takes reasonable amount source of fuel wood (Layton, 2012, pp. 189-235). Moreover, more deadwoods is managed within the woodland as compared to the SSSI thus more creatures is maintained in the wind lands. Different plants and animal species depend on dead or drying wood for habitat or as the source of their food. These species include lichens, fungi, bryophytes and a vast array of different kinds of invertebrates, hole-nesting birds, and animals. Deadwood has considerable ecological value within watercourses, where it creates and improves the physical habitat structure for a range of different species group (Hawksworth & Bull, 2006). For instance, 147 species of invertebrates have been found associated specifically with deadwood (or woody debris) in streams, and debris dams are known to benefit fish populations. Saprol xylic insects are the principal species living directly on bark or wood. Other l species, which at some time or other in their lives depend on Deadwood, these includes diverse species of the prevailing wild bees and wasps fly and corresponding midge maggots graze on the underlying fungi and bacteria developing within the drilled out tunnels, excrement, and dead material (Spapens, White & Kluin, 2014, pp. 123-167). Tree sponges developing on the deadwood shelter was specialized beetles and corresponding flies. Numerous predatory beetles and parasitic ichneumon rely on the wood dwellers. Decaying wood offer significant habitat for the small vertebrates, fish, invertebrates, cavity-nesting birds coupled with the host of the lichens and bryophytes, saprol xylic fungi, and corresponding polypores. In case the wood fuels were not used particular, operational energy source would be demanded and employed (Layton, 2012, pp. 189-235). In numerous applications, the theoretical option is the fossil fuel encompassing coal and oil products Conclusion The importance of deadwood is enormous; it ranges from sustaining biodiversity to being used as fuel. There is need to protect deadwood since this will be the only way to help the endangered species that rely on deadwood References Spapens, A. C., White, R. D., & Kluin, M. (2014). Environmental crime and its victims: perspectives within green criminology. Layton, M. (2012). Agile project management for dummies. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley. Kumar, P. (2010). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. London, Earthscan. Evans, J. (2003). A wood of our own. East Meon, Permanent Publications. Andersson, F., Birot, Y., & PäIvinen, R. (2004). Towards the sustainable use of Europes forests - forest ecosystem and landscape research: scientific challenges and opportunities. Joensuu, European Forest Institute. Macdonald, D. W., & Tattersall, F. (2002). Britains mammals: the challenge for conservation : [summary]. London, Peoples Trust for Endangered Species. Hill, D. (2006). Handbook of biodiversity methods: survey, evaluation and monitoring. Cambridge, Cambridge Univ. Press. Hawksworth, D. L., & Bull, A. T. (2006). Forest diversity and management. Springer E-Books. Dordrecht, the Netherlands, Springer. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=371850. Read More