Penn's sylva: forests regained.

If you have read this issue's lead feature ("The Great Green East: Lands Everyone Wants," by Carl Reidel), perhaps you are already energized about the current state of the forests of the eastern United States. This "Green Side Up" column, departing from its usual focus on practical advice, spotlights one eastern state, today both highly industrialized and heavily forested. It investigates how forest resources ravaged during the birth of a nation have over the last century been renewed by nature, time, and the commitment of people. And it profiles a few of those forest stewards and their effect on the land.

This special issue also contains the first installment of a bonus insert for readers in Pennsylvania, and another for Georgia readers. Titled TreeViews, it offers high-interest, state-specific news and practical advice on tree/forest topics from city center to woodlots and wilderness.

My father liked to joke about an ax that he said still worked even though it was the original tool used by his grandfather to clear the family farm. "I've replaced the handle nine times and put on four new heads," he'd say, "but this is Grandad's original ax."

The forests of eastern North America and the policies of the people who live in and around them are like my father's ax - still working but replaced piece by piece many times.

Generation after generation of North American forests have fallen and grown back, in response to repeated natural traumas of bugs, blights, winds, floods, fires, and ice. Human influences started 10,000 to 12,000 years ago as the early settlers we call Indians burned forests to clear areas for crops and to manage others for meat. In the latest state, the forests have returned again after being cut and burned by European colonists who named this land America.

This most recent forest replacement, however, is different, because this time humans made most forests disappear and then we allowed most of them to grow back.

To understand this recent renewal of eastern forests, come with me back in time to Pennsylvania, a state with forests (sylva) in the middle of its name. "Pennsfieldania" would have been a more appropriate name 100 years ago, when seven out of every 10 acres were cleared for growing crops or making way for housing or industry. Many of those acres lay covered with ashes and blackened stumps still smoldering from forest-clearing fires. Pennsylvania's situation was typical across the East.

The fires were still spreading in the spring of 1895, when the Pennsylvania legislature was getting its first look at The Report of the Forestry Commission of Pennsylvania. Fire eased the backbreaking labor of turning forests into fields, but it was a barely controlled tool that tended to spread across forests, farms, and towns. As if to make a clear statement about its power, fire burned the state capitol building in 1895, destroying buildings and documents, including some of the records of the fledgling forestry commission.

Yes, there was smoke in the wind in 1895, but change, too, was in the air. Something had to be done to bring fires and forest clearing under control. Pennsylvania forests had been reduced to only nine million acres from the 27 million acres present when European settlement began in earnest about 1681.

In 1681, Pennsylvania truly was "sylvan" - nine out of every 10 acres were forested. Natural renewals balanced losses. The native Americans already here had been cutting and burning forest areas for generations but at rates far below natural renewal. This changed when European settlements began.

A piece of the new world that would become Pennsylvania was given to English citizen William Penn by his friend the king. Penn dutifully tried to ensure for England a long-term wood supply from his new domain, instructing the colonists in his 1681 Charter of Rights that ". . . in clearing ground, care be taken to leave one acre of trees for every five acres cleared, especially to preserve oak and mulberries for silk and shipping." This edict was widely ignored.

By 1895 fields had largely replaced forests - only three out of every 10 acres were forested. In average years, fires from land clearing and carelessness burned 3.5 acres out of every 10. Natural renewals couldn't keep up with losses.

Forests are adaptable and can renew themselves after events like fires, storms, insect epidemics, or cutting, but these removal rates were far in excess of that renewal capacity. Fires were burning at a rate that would incinerate all the existing forest area in 26 years. Property-tax rates on forests were so high - relative to the values then - that a landowner could move from a cleared area and buy forest for little more than the price of one year's taxes. The high fire risk and high taxes combined to motivate private owners to "cut out and get out" as soon as possible - and that's exactly what they did.

The state owned no land, and technical expertise to manage forests was not available. The U.S. had only three foresters, all trained in Europe because there were no American forestry schools. There was no forestry information-gathering system or good communication system to deliver what was known. There was no effective fire-protection system and no tree nurseries.

Forest industries were transitory. Lumbering towns sprang up to harvest mature forests, and the loggers and mill operators (and jobs) moved on once wood supplies were exhausted. The wood economy fluctuated drastically from boom to bust. Towns were born and then disappeared as the forests were liquidated.

Government was slow to commit significant resources to forests. Many laws regarding fires and other forest matters were passed over the years, but such efforts accomplish little without programs to educate and motivate citizens to take responsibility. In addition to these laws, various committees had been appointed and studies made prior to 1895.

In 1895 a forest commission was proposed and turned down by the legislature in 1888. On October 16, 1889, the honorable Washington Townsend of West Chester, speaking at the meeting of the American Forestry Congress in Philadelphia, said, "Pennsylvania is not ready to adopt a proper system of forestry. When the people thoroughly understand the matter, it will come."

What made Pennsylvanians finally "understand the matter"? The same thing that makes people understand things today - organized effort to focus their attention. The rabble-rousing organizations pushing for state action at that Forestry Congress more than 100 years ago were private-citizen organizations: AMERICAN FORESTS (then known as the American Forestry Association) and the Pennsylvania Forestry Association, also still in business.

The forestry associations spearheaded informational campaigns and political pressure, and on May 23, 1893, the legislature approved Public Law 115 "relative to a Forestry Commission." It charged the governor with appointing two persons, one a competent engineer, the other a botanist, to examine forest conditions, report, and suggest action. Approved expenses totaled $20,000. Dr. Joseph Trimble Rothrock was the botanist; W. F. (William Findlay) Shunk was the engineer.

The commission delivered its report March 14, 1895, one day before the legislated deadline and $5,167.84 under budget. (We might still be fond of government if this kind of performance had continued as our society grew.) The report, which helped to create the "time of public understanding" mentioned earlier by Townsend, is summarized below:

The state has no land other than that immediately around public buildings. The amount of forested land is down from more than 90 percent to 36 percent of the state's land area. It is falling below safe levels for wood supply, water protection, and public health. Some of the problems arise from clearing land for agriculture when that land is best left in forests, some from uncontrolled fires, and some from destructive logging. Excessive taxation, combined with high fire risk, drives people to clear forests far beyond the needs of agriculture and wood supply.

THE ACTIONS PROPOSED WERE:

A full-time forestry commission office should be funded and staffed to deal with the state's forest problems. On behalf of the state, the commission should: 1) acquire land suitable for growing forests to protect the headwaters of streams, ensure wood supply, and demonstrate the benefits of forestry to the public; 2) organize a fire prevention and protection system to enforce laws and educate people regarding careless use of fire, and detect and extinguish fires as they occur to minimize damage; 3) assist wood industries and forest landowners in growing and utilizing materials flora the state's forests; 4) continuously gather and distribute information regarding the forest situation; 5) propose solutions to the tax drain on forest land that motivates cutting and abandonment of forests.

The commission's report, strong follow-through by Rothrock, and the citizen support that he generated through AFA, PFA, and other groups brought together the political pressure needed to form a Division of Forestry in the Department of Agriculture in 1895. A commissioner of forestry was specified and a $5,000 salary was approved along with $3,000 for a clerk. Dr. Joseph T. Rothrock became commissioner; Robert S. Conklin became the clerk.

Rothrock and Conklin were faced with trying to reverse 200 years of forest clearing and burning. They had no land, no foresters, no computers, no phones or radios or faxes or cars or airplanes. To get very far involved days of travel via horse, boat, train, and foot. To get information involved going out and getting it yourself or waiting for it to come to you by letter.

Rothrock has been called the father of forestry in Pennsylvania, deservedly so. He was a medical doctor and a botanist. Prior to 1895 he traveled the state, lecturing about forestry before there was any forestry. He was supported at first by a grant from a wealthy French botanist, Andre Michaux, who had traveled to America to study our plants and forests and published the renowned book, North American Sylva.

When the Michaux funds ran out, the Pennsylvania Forestry Association (PFA) raised money to fund Rothrock's road show. Rothrock served PFA as president, magazine editor, and executive secretary.

Rothrock was a problem solver:

No land? He campaigned for funds to buy it, mostly from failing blast-furnace companies that owned large tracts of forests to produce wood charcoal to fire their furnaces. They couldn't compete with new coal-fired furnaces. Rothrock bought their cut-over, burned-over land, which they were glad to sell. Forests flourish there now. Check out Pennsylvania's parks and state forests, and you'll find the word "furnace" in the names of many.

No foresters and almost no schools of forestry? In 1901 Rothrock hired George Wirt, an early graduate of the new Biltmore Forest School in North Carolina, then managed by the first American-born forester, Gifford Pinchot. Rothrock put Wirt to work setting up the state's own forest academy on land he bought from the Mont Alto Iron Company for a state forest. Some handsome buildings came with the land, and they served as the first school. Early students at Mont Alto signed up on a "bring-your-own-horse" basis. They (and their horses) were guaranteed jobs upon graduation.

Need people to see the value of state forests? The Mont Alto forest had a beautiful park, developed by the former owners to generate income. There were train connections from major cities, and so Mont Alto became one of the first state parks in addition to being a state forest. The area also supported a tree nursery to produce seedlings for reforestation (there were no private suppliers).

To top it all, Rothrock used his medical training to establish a tuberculosis sanitorium on the forest. Tuberculosis (TB) was a likely death sentence then. The only known cure was fresh air. There was no fresher air than that in the middle of several thousand acres of forest. The patients lived in cabins in the forest with windows open winter and summer (that was the role), and many recovered. Rothrock obviously was one of the first to see the benefits of multiple-use.

Rothrock's name can still be seen, chiseled large in gray stone, at the capitol in Harrisburg. It belongs there because he set directions and pushed policies that started a green fire of forest renewal, igniting both public and private interests to improve forest conditions over the last 100 years.

Thee policies set in place in 1895, and the 100 years of commitment that followed, have brought Pennsylvania to 1995 with these results:

Six out of every 10 acres are forested.

Less than 0.001 acres burns annually out of every 10 - or less than 9,000 acres total in an average year - thanks to quick detection and suppression. This is a 97 percent reduction from the 350,000 acres that would commonly burn annually.

The growth-to-harvest ratio is more than two to one; forests are continuing to increase because natural and human renewals more than replace losses.

Seventeen million acres of forests cover 59 percent of the state.

There are 2.1 million acres of state forests managed by the Bureau of Forestry, and the public owns an additional two million acres of mostly forested land used for a variety of other purposes.

The state Bureau of Forestry has a staff of foresters, biologists, and other resource experts. American universities turn out classes of foresters and biologists annually. Forest industries employ resource professionals, and numerous private consulting foresters operate in the state. Aerial photography, satellite imagery, and computer-generated geographic information systems (GIS), backed up with several decades of forest surveys, provide greatly improved knowledge of the condition of Pennsylvania forests. Tree seedlings are readily available from state, industrial, and private nurseries.

About 500,000 private owners hold 70 percent of Pennsylvania's forests. Taxes are still a discouragement, but people don't abandon their land because of them. There is a long way still to go in bringing forestry expertise to these private owners.

Forest industries operate on a sustainable basis. The more than two-to-one growth-to-harvest ratio of the state's forests ensures a sustainable supply of raw material for more than 2,000 different enterprises employing 100,000 people in making forest products valued at $5 billion per year.

Pennsylvania forests have come a long way in 100 years.

RELATED ARTICLE: A Gallery of Stewards

Human renewal of trees and forests is not a magic trick - it's people patiently working on land to create the conditions that time and nature use to grow trees. Such people aren't the special province of Pennsylvania. Here is a look at the work of five families in widely separated parts of the U.S. who have helped nature put three million trees on 2,899 acres of land.

For the most part these people are not in the business of growing trees. They are (or were) biochemists, dentists, veterinarians, and such. All have owned their land for 20 years or more and have been recognized by the American Tree Farm System as Outstanding Tree Farmers within the last 10 years.

Terry and Anne Ozier, Mississippi.

Terry is a retired veterinarian. Much of the 1,800 acres acquired by the Oziers near Brandon was eroded, worn-out cotton fields 40 years ago. The previous owners had given up on it. Most of the land needed planting to reestablish forests, although some badly cut forest areas were still somewhat wooded. The Oziers weeded, thinned, and prescribe-burned to bring the cut-over woods back to good condition. They planted trees and wildlife shrubs and established erosion-control systems on the cleared land. The area is now a forestry showplace.

Robert H. Mealey, Oregon.

Almost every one of Mealey's 580 acres is forested. His forests near Albany are maintained by a combination of proper thinning, harvesting techniques, and tree planting. In addition to being a forester, Medley is a leader and mentor to area landowners.

Al & Eleanor Maass, Pennsylvania.

Now retired, Al was a research biochemist and Eleanor was a science librarian. Almost all of the family's 279 acres of land in New Milford is in forest now, but there are stone walls and old fences through the woods, indicating that many of these areas were once cleared fields. Their work is largely thinning and weeding to help the forest grow and reproduce. Most forest regeneration is natural rather than planted in this area, and there's lots of shade-tolerant maple. The family members participate as leaders in the state forest stewardship program.

Ronald H. & Margaret Potts (he's a dentist; she's a teacher), and Richard A. & Carol Potts (he's a chemist; she's a teacher), Ohio.

The Potts brothers love land (and apparently teachers.) They share 206 forested acres near North Canton, some established by planting and some from natural reforestation. Recently they have recorded their work on computers in great detail.

Jim Faulstich, South Dakota.

Jim is a rancher near Highmore. Most of his 3,500 acres are open land, except for 34 acres planted to trees and wildlife shrubs as windbreaks. The windbreaks angle through the ranch in long strips to protect soil from wind erosion on the South Dakota plains. The plantings also provide wind protection for the rancher's cattle and much-needed food and shelter for deer, turkeys, songbirds, and other wildlife. - LESTER A. DECOSTER

RELATED ARTICLE: IF YOU TOTAL THEIR EFFORTS, THESE FIVE FAMILIES HAVE ACHIEVED THE FOLLOWING:

* Improved forests on 2,899 acres of land (one-tenth the size of Boston), investing 150 years of ownership time.

* Planted 900,000 tree seedlings and wildlife shrubs. About three million trees grow on these lands.

* Harvested more than 32,000 cords equivalent, enough wood to keep 40,000 Americans supplied with all their wood and paper products for a year.

* Their forests release an average of 12.8 million pounds of oxygen into the air every year from growing trees - enough to keep 35,000 people breathing comfortably, perpetually.

* Their forests convert 17.6 million pounds of carbon dioxide from decay, respiration, and combustion back into living plant life each year.

* Almost 3,000 acres of soil is protected from erosion, and water is protected from siltation and warming.

* All these landowners are providing for diversity. Their forests benefit 40 kinds of animals, ranging from woodpeckers to bears, and more than 37 species of trees live in these forests.

RELATED ARTICLE: QUESTIONS FOR YOUNG PEOPLE

(Find answers in the accompanying article. More than one answer may be correct.)

WHAT DOES SYLVA MEAN?

(1) It's from the Latin (silva or sylva) meaning woods.

(2) It's how people in Boston ask for a knife and fork.

(3) It was William Penn's middle name.

WHY DID AMERICAN COLONISTS CLEAR SO MUCH FOREST?

(1) To build condos.

(2) To keep warm.

(3) To make fields for agricultural crops.

WHAT TOOL WAS MOST EFFECTIVE FOR CLEARING FORESTS?

(1) Fire.

(2) An ax.

(3) A shovel.

WHAT DID PENNSYLVANIA DO TO RENEW ITS DECLINING FORESTS?

(1) Established a state agency to work on the problem.

(2) Bought cleared land and planted trees on it.

(3) Protected the forests from fires.

A TWO-TO-ONE GROWTH-TO-HARVEST RATIO IN FORESTS MEANS. . .

(1) The forests grow twice as much as gets harvested.

(2) People only harvest half of the forests' growth.

(3) The trees get older and more crowded until they are killed by natural causes.

WHEN IT COMES TO GROWING FORESTS, GOVERNMENT IS. . .

(1) The solution.

(2) The problem.

(3) A tool we create to get the answer we want...(If we know the answer we want).

LESTER DECOSTER - is president of the DeCoster Group, a Reston, Virginia, consulting firm specializing in writing, public relations, forestry, and environmental science. He is also the author of a new book, The Legacy of Penn's Woods, published in July by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission. The book is available from the Commission and from the Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry.