I guess it is a point of view. Are cultivated fields with rough edges are the best management practice, or were the virgin New England forests a system that worked? Are birds the point of it all? Private land or public?
Regardless, I am struck by how things change over time. I work in the oil industry and about 30 years ago I was doing a project in SE Ohio. The topography is mildly rugged and the surface is part of the National Forest. In the summer you couldn't see 50-75 yards for the trees and undergrowth. On one of my scouts through the Ohio Historical Society photo archive I came across a 1902 dated photo that was taken in the area of the aforementioned project. In fact, I was familiar enough with the area that I could go and stand on the hillside the photographer used to take the picture. The photo showed the river valley below and the ridge on the far side. There was not a tree to be seen. Fast forward to the 1980s and there were grouse in numbers; I haven't been back since but I presume they have been mostly replaced by turkeys. Which era was good management?
I understand allowing the land go back to forest. They won't be like virgin woods in our lifetime, but to understand the impetus, you owe it to yourself to find one of the rare patches of truly virgin forest still remaining in the eastern US. A stand of hardwoods with four and five-foot diameter trunks is breath-taking.
