Historical land-use information from culturally modified trees

Abstract

In a global perspective, the human impact on forest ecosystems varies greatly in type, frequency and magnitude. Knowledge of the history of forest use is crucial for understanding the development of forests, which in turn helps to understand how societies react to forest development. Culturally modified trees (CMTs), recorded in the western U.S., northern Scandinavia and south-eastern Australia, are features that can be dated precisely, and they bear witness to unique events of human activity. CMTs are traces from historical uses of forest resources that reflect the activities of local communities and extend far back in time, and therefore offer information not usually available from other sources. In this thesis I argue that CMTs have high potential for assessing human activity and possibly human impacts on forest ecosystems, particularly those concerning local indigenous uses. Periods of increased activity in a certain area are reflected in peaks in the distribution of CMT dates. These also show the time period and speed of abandonment of a traditional forest use in a landscape. The possibility to learn about the people, their behaviour and activities in the forest are good, but their impact on ecosystems will always be difficult to assess when only CMT data are available. Therefore, it is important to learn as much as possible about traditional customs expressed in CMTs, in combination with oral and ethnological sources, and the role of CMTs in the traditional use of the forest. In this way it is possible to estimate what the density and distribution of CMTs in the landscape actually tells us about historical impact on the ecosystem. CMTs contradict the idea of “pristine” forests but symbolize the traditional view that people are part of nature rather than separate from it.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.