One of the ways many logging companies dodge possibly combative logging projects is by taking advantage of removing valuable trees from recent forest fire sites, or what is commonly called salvage logging. To most people this seems perfectly legit. Almost like someone saying, “Would you mind if I take your garbage off your hands?” Sounds like a deal! However, what you don’t know is that this scorched forest is hardly garbage. Its actually gold.
The CS Monitor tags recent research coming out of Oregon State University that says salvage logging may actually help cause more intense forest fires down the road and often prevents natural regrowth by destroying the many new seedlings that reemerge after the fire.
Industry spokesmen say that the recent attention to climate change should impel the forestry sector to continue salvage logging because as the climate warms and dries, starting new tree plantations will become more difficult. It seems a bit apocalyptic to get behind a forest strategy that basically says, “Every man for himself…get what you can while the gettin’s good!” when there are so many sustainable options out there that are more than financially optimable. It also shows (yet again) industry leaders who are out of touch with their own existence: why take everything away from a recovering ecosystem that will only benefit it all of us when its back to it’s healthy forested state? Knickerbocker hits the nail on the head:
It’s a classic case of legitimate short-term interests – preventing next year’s fires and boosting local economies reliant on natural resources – versus the natural world of plants and animals, water and weather that is just as legitimate but operates on a much longer time scale.
Against RAN’s objections, Boise Cascade recently bought salvage logging contracts within Managed Late Successional Areas in Eastern Washington–that’s Old Growth Forests to you and me, just the type of area that the OSU report covers. At the time, CEO Tom Stephens told RAN supporters that “RAN is not telling you the real facts”, that “it’s not old growth and it’s burned dead trees that are being harvested,” that “the proceeds go to reforest a burned area and create a healthily environment,” that “we support the US Forest Service in its efforts to maintain and restore forest health, which often leads to harvesting from areas recently destroyed by wildfires” and finally that “There are a lot of professional foresters that agree this is the best way to recover after a fire.”
The OSU study confirms just the opposite: That our National Forests do a better job recovering from fires without the help of big logging companies. Read it for yourself here.
Listen to NPR’s piece on salvage logging.
Twitter Updates
Also might want to check out a report from a panel of scientists (one with Forest Service cred) comissioned by WWF earlier this month. Their conclusion: the ecological and economic science behind post-fire logging doesn’t cut it. Get it here.