Redefining forestry

It is time for science to produce some defensible, reproducible experiments. It is imperative that we verify or otherwise correct land policy decisions made on the basis of theories. The consequences of error - social, economic and environmental - are simply too great to rest on conjecture. [From these experiments] I believe we will find forests are far more resilient than has been assumed. We will also learn that species adapt more readily to changing habitat conditions than has been theorized. There is abundant evidence of these facts in the Northeast and Great Lakes states where harvesting began long before it did here in the Northwest.

        Dr. Robert Buckman, Forest Scientist, Oregon State University, former Director of Research, U.S. Forest Service and past president, International Union of Forest Research Organizations, Evergreen, June, 1995

Planting forests, harvesting timber and planting new forests have been articles of faith in forestry for a very long time. We have assumed that if we take care of the timber resource, everything else will follow along nicely. We know now this is not necessarily the case. There is a sameness in our forests now, where once there was a great deal of diversity. What we must do now is restore diversity, and the fastest way to do this involves the use of silvicultural (harvesting) techniques that mimic the kinds of natural disturbance and re-growth that gave us biological diversity in the first place.

        Dr. Chadwick Oliver, Silviculturist, College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seattle, Evergreen, September 1993

I think the largest single need in American forest biology is the study of man's relation to forestland. Our foresters need to understand much more than most of them do about purely human motives and aspirations with respect to the land. They ought to become genuinely knowledgeable and respectful of people's economic, social and aesthetic institutions.

         Hugh Miller Raup, "Forests In The Here And Now: A Collection Of Writings Of Hugh Miller Raup," 1981, Bullard Professor of Forestry, Harvard University, Evergreen, September 1998

Conservationists need to consider a broader range of land management options. There is currently a significant bias favoring old-growth related research. It is undermining our more complete understanding of how the pieces of nature fit together. For every old-growth research project, there should be companion research involving young and middle-aged forests. Biological diversity is the sum of all ecological processes, not just those we can observe in old-growth forests. [The bias favoring old growth research] has spawned largely cosmetic terms like "ecosystem" and "biological diversity," which serve to promote the idea that ecosystem management is only possible on a very large scale. This isn't true. I want to promote the idea it is possible to increase the ecological content of almost any tract of land, regardless of its size or management regime. There is a positive role here for everyone, from the backyard gardener to the largest industrial forest landowner.

           Dr. Robert Buckman, Forest Scientist, Oregon State University, former Director of Research, U.S. Forest Service, and past president, International Union of Forest Research Organizations, Evergreen, June, 1995

The term "sustainable forestry" is redundant. Forest is, by definition, sustainable. Nevertheless, the discussion is useful, if only to help reaffirm our faith in basic concepts and truths about forests and forestry. Of these truths, none is more important than the certainty of random, natural change, or the power of forestry to control the limits of change, thereby providing society with a regulated, predicable flow of economic and environmental benefits not possible in nature.

         Dr. David Loftis, Project Leader, Bent Creek Experimental Station, USFS
Asheville, North Carolina, Evergreen, October 1997

If ecosystem management is to succeed, attention must be paid to smaller, local ecosystems. There are unique landscapes, each different from the other, yet linked to one another and to larger landscapes in a variety of ways. It is here that citizens and managers should join together to decide how the land will be used. It is also here where dedicated land managers should decide what must be left intact to keep the land sustainable, and what can be removed or otherwise used to meet some of the needs of people.

          Dr. William Moore, retired Chief of Fire Management USFS, Northern Region
Missoula, Montana, Evergreen, Winter 1994-95

After almost a century of intentionally excluding fire from Intermountain forests, wildfire is again gaining the upper hand. To regain control, we need to treat overstocked dead and dying timber stands that are fueling these fires. Thinning and controlled use of fire are the tools needed to restore natural processes that were present in forests that were here before we excluded fire. If we as a society decide not to use these tools, catastrophic fires will destroy the very forests we all love and are trying to save."

          Dr. Steve Arno, Fire Ecologist, Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory, USFS Missoula, Montana, Evergreen, September-October 1996

No single forest practice - not timber harvesting, not road building - can compare to the damage wildfires are inflicting on fish and fish habitat. It is a paradox that the very fish we are trying to protect from extinction are now being threatened by fires many so-called environmentalists believe should be allowed to burn unchecked.

          Dr. Victor Kaczynski, Limnologist, Evergreen, March-April 1993

National forests are unhealthy because they have the wrong kind of trees and too many of them. The cause is a combination of past timber harvesting practices and fire suppression. The cure involves (a) removal of some of the trees to alleviate stress by reducing competition for limited moisture and nutrients and (b) management practices favoring tree species best suited to individual sites. Public policy and public trust are two closely related barriers standing in the way of an effective cure.

          Dr. Jay O'Laughlin, Director, Policy Analysis Group, College of Forestry, University of Idaho, Moscow, Evergreen, March-April 1996

Years of research and experience have brought us to a point where we can understand, predict and control forestry's outcomes. By inference, we can also predict and control wildlife habitat, meaning we are able to provide niches for a great man species, including those that prefer older forests.

          Dr. David Loftis, Project Leader, USFS, Bent Creek Experimental Station, Asheville, North Carolina, Evergreen, October 1997

Plantation forestry saves more endangered species in a month than most American conservationists save in their lifetimes. As federal logging in the Pacific Northwest is slowed to a virtual standstill, species extinction in tropical forests has accelerated at a thunderous rate. Is saving the spotted owl and the marbled murrelet worth the loss of 8,000 to 10,000 species in the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia and Madagascar? Not in my opinion.

             Dr. William Libby, Forest Geneticist and Professor Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley, Evergreen, June-July 1995

It is ridiculous for private forest landowners to be so defensive about their management practices. From an ecological point of view, forestry mimics natural processes. On large ownerships, it is possible to manage forests in ways that produce almost as much diversity as is found in wilderness areas. Disturbance is the key. It is what drives the cycle of life, death and rebirth in forests.

             Dr. Rainer Brock, Wildlife Biologist, State University of New York, Syracuse, Evergreen, June, 1995

What is missing from this debate is the fact that managing timber increases our options for wildlife habitat management. The fallacy with biological diversity is the notion that every species can or should exist on every acre of forest. It is not that way in nature, and there is nothing we can do through management to make it so.

             Dr. George Hurst, Wildlife Biologist, Mississippi State University, Starkville, Evergreen, September, 1991

Most factors associated with old growth can be provided through management. Large live trees, snags and downed wood can be provided in even-aged stands after harvest - including clearcutting - by retaining live trees and snags...Because vertebrates have diverse lifestyles, the worst possible approach to maintaining vertebrate diversity would be to manage every acre the same. Some species do best in stands in which all or most trees have been removed. Others do best in stands that are older. Some may require both, and many species are generalists that do well in stands spanning a wide range of ages or structures. Thus, stand age alone is a poor indicator of habitat for vertebrates.

             Fred Bunnell, Centre for Applied Conservation Biology, University of British Columbia, "Likely Consequences of Forest Management on Terrestrial Forest Dwelling Vertebrates in Oregon," February, 1997, Evergreen, July, 1997

The next day, we visited Mt. St. Helens. There we saw devastation that dwarfs anything that man can do short of nuclear explosions. We saw forests growing vigorously on managed land, and on land where nothing is being done, vegetation is moving in inexorably on what was a waste land in late May, 1980. We were told of fish returning to the rivers that had been "destroyed." We saw an elk herd that is using the land formerly covered with old-growth that is now essentially treeless. The capacity of the land, plants and animals to recover from catastrophe is tremendous. One wonders about the assertions we hear repeatedly about fragile environments. I could not help but contrast the difference between the appearance of the (Weyerhaeuser) landscape where man had intervened and (the national forest landscape) where he had not. The new (Weyerhaeuser) forest is unequivocal evidence that man can work hand in hand with the environment to good effect.

             Dr. Benjamin Stout, retired, Dean, School of Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula, Evergreen, March-April 1994

A nation that consumes more than it produces is exporting its environmental impacts to other nations that provide what is consumed. It is like shipping your garbage to another town that needs the money and is willing to put up with the stench.

Most of the raw materials consumed by the industrialized world - including the United States - come from impoverished countries that lack the money, technology and political will needed to regulate their own extractive industries. In the emerging global economy, nations should be increasing, not decreasing, their dependency on wood fiber because wood is renewable, recyclable, biodegradable and far more energy efficient in its manufacture and use than are products made from steel, aluminum, plastic or concrete. Furthermore, growing forests and the lumber they provide store large amounts of carbon dioxide that would otherwise escape into the atmosphere, adding to the potential for global warming.

           Dr. James Bowyer, noted author and Director, Forest Products Management Development Institute, University of Minnesota, Evergreen, September 1993