The forest through the trees: a century of sustainable forestry.

Deep in a forest of mostly Douglas fir and red cedar, 82-year-old Merv Wilkinson walks the narrow trails, past freshly cut tree stumps, towering trunks, and struggling seedlings. Since 1945, Wilkinson has logged this 137-acre, naturally-mixed species forest 10 times, "and I have the same amount of wood today as when I started."

And although Wilkinson's selective logging may not be appropriate for all forests, he manages his land the way he believes every forest landowner, large or small, should: sustainably.

From independent forest land owners and grass-roots environmental organizations to wood products associations and governmental agencies, those connected with timberlands will tell you they subscribe to the concept of, or actually practice, sustainable forestry management. But what they don't agree on is just what "sustainable" means.

It's a complex issue with no "clear-cut" answers. Depending on their objectives, each party answers to its own definition of "sustainable" and what that entails. Some even abandon the term altogether, preferring, instead, "ecologically-based" or "well-managed." But behind these words lies the attempt to address everything from endangered species and clearcutting to unemployed loggers and "green" certification, as well as concerns about global warming. The different viewpoints can be explained by the groups' varied interests in forest lands, as well as by the fact that sustainability, when applied to non-timber forest values, uses, and services, is relatively new to forestry management.

In general, however, sustainable forestry can be defined as the management of forested landscapes, and the forest itself, to maintain ecological functions and provide a sustained supply of timber as well as the many environmental and social values desired by society, such as native wildlife, water quality, aesthetics and recreation.

The start of sustainable forestry

Step back to the turn of the century for the beginnings of sustainable forestry. This was when response to rapid urbanization and industrialization eliminated or threatened much of our nation's forests and wildlife. "Between 1850 and 1910, we cleared an average of 13.3 square miles of forest per day, every day, for farmlands, to feed our growing population," said Douglas MacCleery, assistant Timber Management director for Forest Inventory, Planning and Forest Ecosystems, U.S. Forest Service, Washington, D.C.

Ridding the land of trees for farmlands was seen as a socially desirable act, yet one which, ironically, changed the soil's moisture, temperature, and microbiology, inflicted erosion, and, on some sites, prevented continuous farming. The latter half of the 19th century and first decade of the 20th century witnessed the greatest decline in our forest area, with the lowest volumes of standing timber occurring in the 1930s.

But in 1891, government policy mandated the protection of public lands as national parks and forest reserves for the long-term use of the people. For the first time, the Forest Service brought private landowners and states together to control wildfires and replant trees. Under Gifford Pinchot, named U.S. Forest Service chief in 1898, the number of national forests increased from 32 to 149. Government research also investigated the scientific management of forests, and in 1900 the Society of American Foresters was established.

"Per capita consumption of wood was cut in half, from 1900 to 1950," said MacCleery. This was due in part to a general conversion from wood to fossil fuels, and more efficient milling and wood usage in construction practices. Adding to the "new" availability of wood was the increased rates of tree planting.

Tree Farms

Initiated in 1942, the American Forest Products Industries (AFPI), then a subsidiary of the National Lumber Manufacturers Association (NLMA), established the American Tree Farm System to ensure long-term access to timber from private lands, managed in the public interest. Though an inspired and successful public relations effort, the Tree Farm System received criticism for its emphasis on wood fiber over environmental objectives and its attempt to bypass government regulation.

But with many U.S. private timberlands harvested during World War II for the war effort, post-war, wood-product needs turned the country to national forest lands to supplement its timber supply. At the same time, the demand and accessibility of national forests increased as more people began driving cars and finding more leisure hours in their days.

In the 1950s, 70 percent of the forest land in the United States was privately owned, and the rate of forest growth exceeded its harvest. Major progress, paralleling forestry, was also seen with wildlife. By the 1960s, the national forests were providing about 25 percent of the softwood timber for the country. While the trees were growing back, their value, and demands for their use, were increasing.

By 1980, 59 percent, or 283 million acres, of the nation's commercial forest lands were privately owned by 4 million Americans in every state. Those who were part of the Tree Farm Program were encouraged to manage their lands productively.

Multiple Use

From the Tree Farm Program emerged the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960, supplemental to the 1897 Forest Management Act. It ensured that natural resources would be managed with equal consideration for a variety of uses, including outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish resources. Upheld by the Forest Service, the Act also eventually gained support from an initially reluctant forest industry and conservation community.

The Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act "set the stage for federal agencies, in particular, to start managing lands with a broader perspective," said Richard Donovan, director of New York-based Smart Wood, a non-profit organization providing sustainable agricultural and forestry alternatives to people living in and around forests. "It was more than a focus on sustained yield, or how much wood fiber you can extract. It also included wildlife and the impact on local communities."

As the forests' values and uses expanded, other government sanctions followed, including the Endangered Species Act of 1973, which superseded the 1969 Endangered Species Conservation Act. The more recent act extended beyond its predecessor by including not only the obligation to protect native, wild species threatened with extinction, but also to establish the distinction between threatened and endangered, and protect the ecosystems on which the species depend.

The "poster child" of this Act became the northern spotted owl and its home, the old growth forests of the Pacific Northwest. Environmental groups sought an injunction against cutting trees in the owl's habitat, the result of which became the well-publicized 1989 lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service.

Five years later, the Forest Service satisfied most of the lawsuit with what is commonly known as the President's (Clinton's) Forest Plan. It requires that the government implement ecosystem management, an evolution of multiple-use management, in the national forests in western Washington, western Oregon and Northwestern California - the range of the northern spotted owl.

"It's allowed us to move forward with ecosystem management in this area," said Bruce Mateer, U.S. Forest Service Ecosystems staff officer for Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Mountlake Terrace, Washington. "The President's Forest Plan is the main vehicle for our sustainable forestry efforts, which includes watershed restoration, fisheries habitat renewal, timber sales and recreational experiences. We're trying to keep a balance between the forests' needs and people's needs, by maintaining a 'landscape' view of the environment."

In the middle of this landscape is a running debate. "What people disagree on is how much of the forests should we not touch at all, and how much should we manage in one way or another?" said Timm Locke, product publicity manager with Western Wood Products Association of Portland Oregon, a representative group for lumber manufacturers in the western United States.

"Social" forestry

Hamish Kimmins, professor of Forest Ecology at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, said we must not ignore the spiritual and social needs we, as humans, have of the forest. He refers to the third phase of forestry - social forestry - which bases sustainable management on spiritual, aesthetic, and biodiversity values of the forest, in combination with a scientifically vigorous ecological foundation.

The first phase, administrative forestry, with its centralized laws, often ignores the ecological reality. The second, ecologically-based phase, is site-specific and reflects the ecological characteristics of the forests' values, but may not sustain all the values desired by the public.

"We're just emerging from the first phase," said Kimmins. "However, environmental groups have moved public consciousness into the social phase, and we're bypassing the ecologically-based phase. Therein lies the conflict, and the threat to sustainability. Without experiencing the second phase, how can we design forest management systems that will properly sustain the ecological and social values we demand from the forests, now and for future generations?"

Green certification

Meanwhile, forest management certification has become central to sustainable forestry efforts. Begun in the early 1980s in the tropics, as an alternative to boycotting, certification is an attempt to reward forest owners and wood producers for ecologically sound practices.

Designed to identify well-managed forests, certification organizations perform on-site evaluations of forest lands and wood products operations for sustainable harvest regulation, forest ecosystem maintenance, financial viability and socio-economic benefits. Some certify throughout the "chain of custody," the trail wood travels from forest to mill to lumberyard and beyond.

"If we certify the company as well-managed," said Debbie Hammel, director of Forestry Programs for Scientific Certification Systems, "they have the option of using that certification to market their product."

Based in Lexington, North Carolina, Lexington Furniture, a division of Masco is one such company which uses the "green certification" label to promote its products. According to a spokesman for the company, Lexington has increased its market share through publicity of its Bob Timberlake for Keep America Beautiful Collection of high-end furniture.

With certification, the forest benefits as well. "Certification is not just a process of applying a green stamp," said Hammel. "It's an ongoing program to assure continued compliance." As a result, forest practices have improved, and will continue to do so, because consumers will demand it, she claimed.

"If they're given a choice between two products with equal quality and cost, they'll pick the one that's certified," claimed Donovan.

However, not all woodworkers believe that third party certification is necessary. In the September 1994 issue of Wood & Wood Products, Robert Waffle of the International Wood Products Association said, "Certification supposedly allows consumers to feel good about their purchases and assures them that they are doing their part to save the world's forest by forcing drastic changes in management practices. However, there are a few flaws in this logic and a number of assumptions that must be questioned:

"The first assumption is that forests all over the world are being badly managed, that the timber industry is responsible for massive deforestation/forest degradation and that certification can somehow change all that.

"Another assumption is that consumers are the driving force behind certification. Are consumers clamoring for 'green' wood products and willing to pay a 'green premium' to get them? Current demand appears to be quite limited to some who purchase very small quantities, who want to be 'environmentally correct' and to one or two large buyers looking for a possible marketing gimmick," Waffle said.

Another detraction to certification is the lack of standardization between the various certifiers. To address this problem, in 1993 the Forest Stewardship Council - a nonprofit/non-governmental agency was set up. Made up of representatives from industry, government, and communities, it aims to develop criteria for, and accredit, certifiers.

In addition to third-party certifiers, the American Forest & Paper Association offers its own program, the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). It provides AF&PA members with a uniform code of conduct for sustainable forestry management on company, non-industrial private and public lands.

Said John Heissenbuttel, assistant vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based organization and director of SFI, "It represents a change in the way we're going to manage our forests."

SFI addresses the forest issues or benefits that people are most concerned about, such as protection of wildlife, water quality, ecological sites and biodiversity, Heissenbuttel said. "It's not a cookie-cutter approach, but rather a systems approach. In the hardwood region, folks depend on natural reseeding. What we'll commit to is a new forest re-established within five years after final harvest. For softwoods, it's two years," said Heissenbuttel, referring to one of the many site-specific considerations.

"We're going to restore public confidence in forest management, and hopefully take the controversy and the courts out of the land management decisions," he added. The result? A more secure timber supply in the long-term, which, for woodworkers and wood producers, means employment they can count on. For the customers, "They know that they're buying a product from someone with a commitment to improving forest management in the U.S.," Heissenbuttel said.

And despite the debate over the need for third-party certification, the necessity for sustainable forest management is clear. Today, more and more forestland owners and wood products companies are exploring, practicing and communicating their dedication to sustainable forestry, ensuring a more sustainable future for everyone.

RELATED ARTICLE: An Open Letter to the Producers of "Sesame Street"

GENTLEMEN:

On the morning of March 9 [1974], Sesame Street portrayed, in an animated cartoon, a cruel woodcutter who chopped down all the trees in a certain forest. A genie then changed him into a tree so he could learn the trees' viewpoint.

A few minutes later, you showed film of men building a log cabin - a positive thought. You have presented an inconsistent picture for the children.

Reality lies somewhere between the two portrayals. The cartoon was done far more dramatically and gave the impression that cutting down a tree constitutes an immoral act. The truth is that proper harvesting of mature timber creates a social good, and children should learn this at an early age. A forest that grows to maturity becomes a one-species forest, and crowds out all undergrowth and all wildlife, because the higher forms of life cannot find food in the dense shade. A forest with clearcut patches supports low vegetation on which animals come to feed. Humans use the wood for thousands of useful and beautiful objects, and when we must discard them, they degrade readily into humus to support new life in the soil.

Forests use solar power, water, air, and nutrients from the soil, to provide man with a renewable and biodegradable resource.

Compare the above picture with what we will have if we eliminate the use of wood: We then would use plastics and metals to build our furniture, housing, and objects we use in our homes and workplaces. Metals - non-renewable resources - require tremendous amounts of energy to convert. Smelters pollute the air and water. Then consider plastics manufacture: First, plastics require petroleum as a feedstock. Then in the processing they pollute, and when we try to throw away a piece of plastic, we permanently litter the earth. Even if the plastic object is "properly" disposed of in a dump, that area of earth is permanently lost to cultivation.

The current misconceptions about wood arise partly from a lack of understanding of the various roles in which trees interact with man. We have trees around our houses for ornament and shade. We grow trees for the production of fruit and nuts for food. We plant some trees, or allow them to grow, to prevent erosion. Some serve as windbreaks. We have wilderness areas or forest preserves in which we go to escape the noise and strain of the cities in which most of us choose to live. Other trees grow as a crop. This latter use is what so many of our citizens fail to understand. No one weeps for the corn or wheat that has disappeared from a newly-cut field in the fall, but the sight of a tree or trees harvested fills many with anguish. Actually, the forest reappears in a few years in the open areas where seedlings have a chance at their share of sunlight and moisture.

You have numerous opportunities to present a balanced picture of the beauty and practicality of wood cultivation and use. Your superb writers, artists, and directors could present this story in ways that would stimulate the imaginations of children and help mold their attitudes in the direction of true conservation - the wise use of natural resources.

Editor Wood & Wood Products

RELATED ARTICLE: QUOTE

Were all the rocky crests and rugged acclivities of our country bounteously wooded once more, and kept so for a generation, our floods would be less injurious, our springs unfailing, and our streams more constant and equable; our blasts would be less bitter and our gales less destructive to fruit, we should have vastly more birds to delight us with their melody, and aid us with our not very successful war against devouring insects; we should grow peaches, cherries, and other delicate fruits which the violent caprices of our season and the remorseless devastation of our visible and insect enemies have all but annihilated; and we should keep more cows and make more milk on two-thirds of the land now devoted to grass than we actually do from the whole of it.

Horace Greeley, among the first people to recognize the importance of our rapidly disappearing forests

RELATED ARTICLE: WOOD RETROSPECTIVE

England has a tree called the cricket-bat willow (Salix alba coerulea), which is grown especially for making cricket bats. No other wood is used for the purpose.