Social Sciences in Forestry, a Current Selected Bibliography, No. 53, October 1980
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Forest Farming
Forest Farming Ken Mudge CY ROSE N NA Many sections of the Northeast have been reforested over the past century. Extensive forest cover is seen in this view from Wachu- sett Mountain in central Massachusetts. armers harvest crops from their fields, and agroforestry—a multidisciplinary approach to loggers harvest trees from their forests, agricultural production that achieves diverse, Fbut what do forest farmers harvest? The profitable, sustainable land use by integrating answer is an eclectic collection of non-timber trees with non-timber forest crops. forest crops like maple syrup, medicinal herbs, While some other agroforestry practices begin fruits, gourmet mushrooms, and nuts. with planting young trees that take years to Forest farming is an approach to forest man- mature, forest farming involves planting non- agement that combines some of the manage- timber forest crops beneath the canopy of an ment practices of conventional forestry with established forest. In other words, other agro- those of farming or gardening to achieve forestry practices bring the forest to the crops, an environmentally and economically sus- whereas forest farming brings the crops to the tainable land-use system. It is one of several forest. In this regard it is helpful to consider related practices that fall under the domain of the role of forest farming in overall forest man- Forest Farming 27 agement. A forest farm should be designed to bearing trees including walnuts and peaches, emulate as much as possible a natural forest. but there is no evidence of deliberate culti- This includes characteristics of a healthy forest vation of useful crops beneath the canopy of ecosystem such as species diversity, resilience established forest. -
Towards Forestry Information Dissemination and Communication Strategies: New Partners, Priorities and Technologies
Towards forestry information dissemination and communication strategies: new partners, priorities and technologies Produced by: Forestry Department Title: Forestry extension... Español Français More details Towards forestry information dissemination and communication strategies: new partners, priorities and technologies S.A. Dembner and J. Anderson Stephen A. Dembner is Publications and Information Coordinator and Editor of Unasylva in the FAO Forestry Department, Rome. Jon Anderson is Extension Officer in the FAO Forest Resources Division, Rome. Note: This article is adapted from a paper prepared for the XX IUFRO World Congress, held in Tampere, Finland, in August 1995. Needs and opportunities for forestry information dissemination and communication strategies are evolving in response to broad changes in the world forestry debate, particularly with regard to new partners, new priorities and new communication technologies. An analysis of the situation and the evolving response from FAO. Changes in the world of forestry, including increasing concern for sustainable and more diversified management of forest ecosystems encompassing wood and non-wood products and benefits, are resulting in new demands on the sector and in the expansion of the people involved in forest management. These trends are exemplified by the priorities affecting forestry that emerged from the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), or the Earth Summit, in 1992. Recognition of the important role of multiple partners in sustainable forest management - including local people, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector as well as governments - is resulting in an expansion of the audiences for forestry information and in a need for communication based on dialogue, feedback and flexibility. -
English-Portuguese Equivalents of Forestry and Conservation Terms Termos Equivalentes Em Silvicultura E Conserva@O Portugub-Ingl
English-Portuguese Equivalents of Forestry and Conservation Terms Forest Service Southern Forest Experiment Station Termos Equivalentes em silvicultura e New Orleans, Louisiana conserva@o Portugub-InglQs General Technical Report so-1 09 September 1994 John K. Francis ENGLISH-PORTUGUESE EQUIVALENTS OF FORESTRY AND CONSERVATTON TERMS John K. Francis FOREWORD cooperative research and technology transfer in the Amazon Basin. This dictionary of forestry Signs of deterioration of the global environ- and conservation terms has been prepared to aid ment and threatened destruction of the vast in communications with our Portuguese-speak- Amazon forest have stirred a call for action. ing colleagues and for the benefit of others fac- Conservationists have always been concerned ing similar language barriers. about the tropical forests; now funds are being made available for increased work on problems Forestry and conservation are very broad in the region. Brazilian scientists struggle to fields, which include many subfields that have communicate with colleagues in the rest of the large and detailed vocabularies. I have attempted world while scientists from other areas are dis- to collect the most common and useful of these covering that to work effectively in Brazil, one terms and determine the equivalencies in English must speak Portuguese. One must also be able and Portuguese. In many cases, several terms to read Portuguese to benefit from the local tech- denote the same concept. They will be listed nical literature. separately, alphabetically in the primary lan- guage (left hand column), and in series in the English-speaking scientists have not pre- secondary language (right hand column) with the pared themselves particularly well in other lan- most common term placed first. -
Profitable Farms and Woodlands a Practical Guide in Agroforestry for Landowners, Farmers and Ranchers
Profitable Farms and Woodlands A Practical Guide in Agroforestry for Landowners, Farmers and Ranchers Alley Cropping Table of Contents Introduction...................................................................................... iii Forest Farming Forest Purpose .............................................................................................. v Contributors ..................................................................................... vii AGROFORESTRY PRACTICES Riparian Buffer Strips Riparian Buffer Alley Cropping ................................................................................. 1 Forest Farming ................................................................................. 19 Riparian Buffer Strips ...................................................................... 47 Silvopasture ....................................................................................... 57 Silvopasture Windbreaks ....................................................................................... 73 Windbreaks INTRODUCTION This handbook is part of an interdisciplinary, interinstitutional and comprehensive effort to develop a practical guide to assist underserved and limited resource small farmers and woodland owners to adopt best management technologies in agroforestry. Funding for this effort was provided through the USDA National Agroforestry Center (NAC) from the US Forest Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) under cooperative agreement number 68-7482-7-361 with Tennessee State -
The Importance of Perennial Trees for the Balance of Northern European Agricultural Landscapes
42 The importance of perennial trees for the balance of northern European agricultural landscapes F. Herzog The environmental, socio- n temperate agricultural land- ate Europe. It consists of fruit-trees that cultural and economic functions scapes, forests as well as trees and are scattered (gestreut in German) on ag- of Streuobst, hedgerows and Ishrubs outside forests are indispen- ricultural land, as also expressed in Spain riparian buffers. sable for maintaining the equilibrium by the term árboles en diseminado. The between the landscape’s productive French and the English terms près ver- and ecosystem regulation functions. gers and “fruit-tree meadows” basically The amount, type and arrangement of designate the same system, but are re- woody perennials on farmland depend stricted to fruit-trees on grassland. The mainly on the farmers’ decisions. But trees, however, can also be underplanted other social groups and the authorities with arable crops. This was common intervene as well, because trees have practice until the early twentieth cen- always attracted public attention. tury. Today, Streuobst most frequently In the twentieth century, trees have occurs on grassland. been increasingly removed from Euro- Typically Streuobst consists of com- pean agricultural landscapes, mainly mon fruit-trees with densities of 20 to because of agricultural mechanization, 100 trees per hectare. Rows of fruit-trees land reallocations and the increasing along streets are also considered a form specialization of farming enterprises. of Streuobst. Fruit-trees in home gar- In recent years, however, enhanced dens, on the other hand, are not, nor are awareness of the functions of trees in intensively managed orchards consist- agricultural landscapes has provoked ing of trees managed exclusively for efforts to conserve them. -
Balancing Conservation with Utilization: Restoring Populations of Commercially Valuable Medicinal Herbs in Forests and Agroforests.1
Balancing Conservation With Utilization: Restoring Populations of Commercially Valuable Medicinal Herbs in Forests and Agroforests.1 Richard A Cech2 ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the medicinal herb industry in relation to conservation of medicinal plants, including an overview of sustainable wildcrafting and sustainable forest agriculture. Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadensis) and Black Cohosh (Cimicifuga racemosa) are given as examples of wild herbs of economic importance which may be readily cultivated. Includes guidelines and techniques for forest farming of hardwood forest dependent species. Introduction plant). I was somewhere in the middle of a long learning. The answer for Chittum is, that if you cut Old Louie leaned on the fence, bending down the the tree off with a tall stump, it will coppice (ie. re- top wire, a wire already seriously stretched by the sprout from the stump), producing multiple trunks daily escape of our buck goat, who nobody except which bear useable bark again in a couple of years. myself was willing to tackle and bring back to Louie didn't know this, because he simply stripped pasture. Not that the rest of my family was afraid of the trees standing, and they died. the goat, but simply that he stank with an eye- smarting fragrance that only a doe goat in heat could I have made it my life work to learn the reproductive admire, and only a staunch believer in social life habits of many medicinal plants of prairie, forest, after garlic could possibly withstand for long. But mountain and swamp. Knowing how a plant Louie paid no attention to the vestigial aroma of reproduces is the first step to encouraging its growth goat-grease that exuded from the fence and in wild settings or in domestic culture. -
Chesapeake Forest Restoration Strategy
Eastern Region State and Private Forestry | NA-IN-03-13 | Revised September 2020 Chesapeake Forest Restoration Strategy Chesapeake Forest Restoration Strategy Acknowledgments Acknowledgments Written and edited by Katherine Brownson and Sally Claggett This revision of the Chesapeake Forest Restoration Strategy was a collaborative effort. State forestry agencies in all seven jurisdictions provided the impetus and continued support needed. Our advisory team members played a key role in developing and refining the content (listed on page 6). The following individuals also directly contributed content to the Strategy: Tracey Coulter (Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry), Lindsey Curtin (U.S. Forest Service), Scott Eggerud (Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement), Louis Iverson (U.S. Forest Service), Kate Livengood (The Nature Conservancy), Kate McFarland (USDA National Agroforestry Center), and Matthew Peters (U.S. Forest Service). Our partners at the Chesapeake Bay Program Office helped with essential data and GIS support: Ruth Cassilly (University of Maryland Extension), Peter Claggett (U.S. Geological Survey), Nora Jackson (Chesapeake Research Consortium), and Jeff Sweeney (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). In addition, multiple individuals gave us their time, professional input, and other information that was instrumental in developing the Strategy: Mary Beth Adams, Carolyn Pike, and Al Steele (U.S. Forest Service); Melissa Deas (D.C. Department of Energy and Environment); Deborah Landau (The Nature Conservancy); and numerous members of the Chesapeake Bay Forestry Workgroup. Finally, Sandra Clark and Deborah Muccio (U.S. Forest Service) provided assistance with editing and design, respectively. We thank all these partners for making this Strategy a reality. Links to Websites All website hyperlinks are underlined in blue. -
Observations on Forest Certification
Session I, Section C Observations on Forest Certification B. BRUCE BARE College of Forest Resources University of Washington, Seattle This paper is an adaptation of a Powerpoint presenta- tion on forest certification. It is a brief tutorial for intro- WHAT IS IT? ducing forest certification and discusses the pros/cons of certification as well as the relationship to other policy • Process by which a forest owner tools such as forest conservation easements, Habitat voluntarily requests an inspection of a Conservation Plans, cost sharing, and forest practice forest to determine if pre-defined management standards are being met. regulations. • Process for assessing if a forest is managed sustainably. • A way to communicate environmental information about forests to consumers. OUTLINE • What is it? • Purpose and approaches? • Who sets the guidelines? • Costs and benefits? and consumers of forest products demand certified prod- • Relationship to incentives and regulations? ucts, forest certification could effectively become re- quired for forest owners who wish to retain market share. Forest certification is a means of communicating to buyers of forest products that the forest (producing the products) is being managed in a sustainable manner. Many owners claim that they have been managing their The topics covered in this presentation include: forests sustainably for years and, therefore, see no rea- 1. A definition of forest certification and its relationship son to become certified. This misses the point. Certifi- to sustainable forestry. cation is a mechanism to communicate this information 2. The approaches various organizations adopt to to consumers even if it does not significantly change on- certify forests. the-ground management practices of an owner who is already practicing sustainable forestry. -
Agroforestry News Index Vol 1 to Vol 22 No 2
Agroforestry News Index Vol 1 to Vol 22 No 2 2 A.R.T. nursery ..... Vol 2, No 4, page 2 Acorns, edible from oaks ..... Vol 5, No 4, page 3 Aaron, J R & Richards: British woodland produce (book review) ..... Acorns, harvesting ..... Vol 5, No 4, Vol 1, No 4, page 34 page 3 Abies balsamea ..... Vol 8, No 2, page Acorns, nutritional composition ..... 31 Vol 5, No 4, page 4 Abies sibirica ..... Vol 8, No 2, page 31 Acorns, removing tannins from ..... Vol 5, No 4, page 4 Abies species ..... Vol 19, No 1, page 13 Acorns, shelling ..... Vol 5, No 4, page 3 Acca sellowiana ..... Vol 9, No 3, page 4 Acorns, utilisation ..... Vol 5, No 4, page 4 Acer macrophyllum ..... Vol 16, No 2, page 6 Acorus calamus ..... Vol 8, No 4, page 6 Acer pseudoplatanus ..... Vol 3, No 1, page 3 Actinidia arguta ..... Vol 1, No 4, page 10 Acer saccharum ..... Vol 16, No 1, page 3 Actinidia arguta, cultivars ..... Vol 1, No 4, page 14 Acer saccharum - strawberry agroforestry system ..... Vol 8, No 1, Actinidia arguta, description ..... Vol page 2 1, No 4, page 10 Acer species, with edible saps ..... Vol Actinidia arguta, drawings ..... Vol 1, 2, No 3, page 26 No 4, page 15 Achillea millefolium ..... Vol 8, No 4, Actinidia arguta, feeding & irrigaton page 5 ..... Vol 1, No 4, page 11 3 Actinidia arguta, fruiting ..... Vol 1, Actinidia spp ..... Vol 5, No 1, page 18 No 4, page 13 Actinorhizal plants ..... Vol 3, No 3, Actinidia arguta, nurseries page 30 supplying ..... Vol 1, No 4, page 16 Acworth, J M: The potential for farm Actinidia arguta, pests and diseases forestry, agroforestry and novel tree .... -
Farm Forestry in Mississippi
Mississippi State University Scholars Junction Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Bulletins Experiment Station (MAFES) 6-1-1946 Farm forestry in Mississippi Mississippi State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/mafes-bulletins Recommended Citation Mississippi State University, "Farm forestry in Mississippi" (1946). Bulletins. 410. https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/mafes-bulletins/410 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (MAFES) at Scholars Junction. It has been accepted for inclusion in Bulletins by an authorized administrator of Scholars Junction. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BULLETIN 432 JUNE, 1946 FARM FORESTRY IN MISSISSIPPI mm Complied by D. W. Skelton, Coordinator Researcli Informa- tion jointly representing Mississippi State Vocational Board and : Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station MISSISSIPPI STATE COLLEGE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION CLARENCE DORMAN, Director STATE COLLEGE MISSISSIPPI ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Acknowledgments are made to Mr. Monty Payne, Head, Depart- ment of Forestry, Mississippi State College, School of Agriculture and Experiment Station, and his staff, Mr. R. T. ClaDp. Mr. E. G. Roberts, Mr. G. W. Abel, and Mr. W. C. Hopkins, for checking the technical content and assisting in the organization of this bulletin; to Mr. V. G. Martin, Head, Agricultural Education Department, State Corege, Mississippi, for his suggestions and assistance in the or- ganization of this bulletin ; to forest industries of Mississippi ; Ex- tension Service, State College, Mississippi ; Texas Forest Service, College Station, Texas ; United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. ; and Mr. Monty Payne, State College, Mississippi, for photographs used in this bulletin and to all others who made contributions in any way to this bulletin. -
Natural Rubber Systems and Climate Change Proceedings and Extended Abstracts from the Online Workshop, 23–25 June 2020
May 2021 FTA WORKING PAPER • 9 Natural rubber systems and climate change Proceedings and extended abstracts from the online workshop, 23–25 June 2020 Salvatore Pinizzotto, Datuk Dr Abdul Aziz b S A Kadir, Vincent Gitz, Jérôme Sainte-Beuve, Lekshmi Nair, Eric Gohet, Eric Penot, Alexandre Meybeck Natural rubber systems and climate change Proceedings and extended abstracts from the online workshop, 23–25 June 2020 The CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) Working Paper 9 © 2021 The CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) Content in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0), http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ DOI: 10.17528/cifor/008029 Pinizzotto S, Aziz A, Gitz V, Sainte-Beuve J, Nair L, Gohet E, Penot E and Meybeck A. 2021. Natural rubber systems and climate change: Proceedings and extended abstracts from the online workshop, 23–25 June 2020. Working Paper 9. Bogor, Indonesia: The CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA). CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry CIFOR Headquarters Jalan CIFOR Situ Gede, Sindang Barang Bogor Barat 16115 Indonesia T +62-251-8622-622 E [email protected] foreststreesagroforestry.org We would like to thank all funding partners who supported this research through their contributions to the CGIAR Fund. For a full list of the ‘CGIAR Fund’ funding partners please see: http://www.cgiar.org/our-funders/ Any views expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of The CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA), the editors, the authors’ institutions, the financial sponsors or the reviewers. -
Forest Farming: an Agroforestry Practice
— 1 Agroforestry Notes USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station • USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service November, 1997 Forest Farming: An Agroforestry Practice Introduction Most public and private forest lands of North America have been modified to varying degrees from years of human activity. Certain high-value ‘non-timber forest products’ have been over-exploited and are difficult to find. Forest farming practices can be used by private enterprise to grow desirable non-timber forest products on private lands, to supplement family income, and to allow biodiversity to reestablish within forests. Definition Special forest products (SFPs) or non-timber forest products (NTFPs) are high-value specialty product items derived from green plants, fungi, invertebrates, and other organisms that inhabit forested areas. These products fall into four general categories (See table on page 2): • food (e.g., mushrooms and nuts) • botanicals (e.g., herbs and medicinals) • decoratives (e.g., floral greenery and dyes) • handicrafts (e.g., baskets and wood products) In forest farming, high-value specialty crops are cultivated under the protection of a for- est canopy that has been modified to provide the correct conditions. Forest farming pro- vides short-term income while high-quality trees are being grown for wood products. National Agroforestry Center 1 Special Forest Products Specialty Examples Use Region of the United States Products Northeast Southeast Midwest N. Plains S. Plains Intermountain Pacific N-west Pacific S-west Food Shiitake,