There are three tree-harvesting methods: selective removal of ...

[Kthamas]

There are three tree-harvesting methods: selective removal of individual
  trees, strip cutting (a row or several rows of trees are removed), or clear
  cutting (all the trees are removed). Which would be most economically
  efficient? Explain your answer

 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

You survey two different forestsa natural forest that has oak, hickory,
  chestnut, beech, and elm trees and an area planted entirely with white pine
  trees. In which forest would you expect to find the greater animal diversity?
  Why?

 
  What will be an ideal response?

[pangili4]

Answer to Question 1

The most economically efficient method of tree harvesting is clear cutting. Selective
removal of individual trees is the most expensive method of tree harvesting,
requiring a forester to tag individual trees for removal based on some selection
criteria. The tree must be cut down, and if the area will not accommodate heavy
equipment, the tree has to be felled by hand and removed from the site without the
assistance of large machinery. Strip cutting is less expensive than harvesting
individual trees, but roads must be cut to the strip cutting areas. If the areas to be
harvested are small and scattered, this is an expensive prospect. Clear cutting is the
least expensive because all the trees are removed at once, only a small number of
logging roads need to be cut and maintained, and heavy machinery can be used to
harvest and remove the trees rapidly from the site.

Answer to Question 2

The natural forest with oak, hickory, and chestnut trees should have a greater
animal diversity than the white pine stand. Animal diversity is directly related to
plant diversity. The larger the number of plant species in a forest area, the greater
the range of food choices and habitat sites for birds, reptiles, and mammals.