New Forest Service policies take a big step backward

Daniel B. Wheeler dwheeler at
Fri Apr 19 12:21:24 EST 2002

Geoff Kegerreis <Geoff at> wrote in message news:<3CC00145.9A88B327 at>...
> > The ability to grow most
> > trees (and almost all other plants as well) also requires mycorrhizal
> > fungi. Few of these fungi have been cultivated to date. All truffles
> > are mycorrhizal fungi.
> >
> Daniel, there are times where you promote your 'shrooms in a legitimate
> way, and times that you do not.  The statement above is absolutely not
> true.  In fact, some fungi found clinging to the outer seeds will kill growing
> cotyledons.  This is something that I have discovered for myself in the
> laboratory (no need for a greenhouse) with Frasier fir.
Greg, there are millions of varieties of fungi. Not all are
mycorrhizal (but an extremely large number are). The fungi you note
that kill cotyledons are not mycorrhizal. They are termed parasitic.
The fungi you mention are probably a form of damping-off fungi, and
are extremely common in greenhouses where the humidity is kept too
> There are many ways to grow trees and including mycorrhizal fungi as
> a requirement is wrong.  What is right is that those types of fungi will
> promote the growth of some species signifigantly.
Trees without mycorrhizal fungi are stunted. They are often called
bonzai, and they do occur in nature, usually on extremely steep slopes
and very rocky conditions. There is little soil in those areas, and
many (but not all) mycorrhizal fungi are found in soils.
> As far as the doing away with current forest plans, I doubt anyone is after
> cutting down all the old trees.  There is a small minority of people that want
> to cut the existing old trees, but no administration would get away with that
> in this day of age.  I suspect the reason to do away with the old plan is that
> it is not an efficient plan regarding other agendas.  I do not know though, and
> that is simply speculation based on common sense.
The history of the timber industry in the PNW for the past 100 years
would disagree with you. It would be more widespread, but old-growth
forests in most of the rest of the US has already been, as "foresters"
euphamistically call it, "harvested."
> I don't know much about Gifford Pinchot III, either - never met him.  I do not
> know if he is a forester or what he does.
Neither do I. But I bet he has a good idea of what his grandfather
would have thought. Don't you?

Daniel B. Wheeler

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list