Subject: Forest Health--An Issue for the 90s
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments:
John Shafer, Silviculturalist on the Apache-Sitgraves NF, recently
tied forest health to new perspectives and landscape ecology. Forest
Health, in the context of functioning ecosystems, biological
diversity, and sustainability of goods, services, and experiences (as
well as ecosystems themselves) helps to frame many of our forest
management issues for the 1990s and beyond. Shafer offers both
insight into the problem and some advice on how to prepare ourselves
to answer it. The five page paper that follows was presented in
September in Taos, NM at a session titled "Management of Forest Pests
Through Silviculture." If you've not seen it yet, take a look. Dve.
-------========X========-------
A SILVICULTURIST'S CREED
or
ONE PERSON'S VIEW OF FOREST HEALTH
by
JOHN D. SHAFER
I was recently asked to be part of a panel discussion on integrating forest
health concerns into multiresource management. As I thought about what I wanted
to say, it became evident that there is a wide diversity of opinion on just what
forest health is.
Is an area where the western spruce budworm has recently killed about 85%
of the standing timber healthy? Maybe. Is a young plantation where a pest
organism can hardly be found healthy? Maybe.
I finally decided that the question of what is a healthy forest is actually
an unanchored question. An unanchored question is a question that cannot be
answered except in terms of the value set of the person answering it. People
with differing values will have different answers to the same question.
So, before we can answer the question of what forest health is we have to
decide what values to use to measure forest health. I recently read a paper on
New Perspectives that listed a set of values that I feel would be appropriate.
these values are:
1) Functioning Ecosystems
2) Biodiversity
3) Sustainability
4) Continued Production of Goods and Services.
However, it is very important to stress that no one of these four values is any
more important than any of the others. None can be sacrificed or diminished for
the benefit of another or the value of the whole will be reduced.
Now that I have changed the subject of the presentation to a discussion of
values, I would like to discuss some of my beliefs concerning these four
principles and how I see the relationship between them and integrated resource
management.
FUNCTIONING ECOSYSTEMS
I BELIEVE that a functioning ecosystem must contain all of its components.
In the case of our forest ecosystems, this would mean that we
must have a mix of all the vegetation structural stages that can
exist within the ecosystem. We must also have representations
of all the seral stages that are a part of the ecosystem. We
will also need to have some unhealthy stands, since they are a
part of the ecosystem. This brings up another point in how I
see forest health. I think that there are actually three
different levels we need to consider in thinking about forest
health. The first level is a healthy tree which I think we all
can agree on what that is. The second level is a healthy stand.
A healthy stand may or may not include unhealthy trees. The
third level is a healthy forest, which must include some
unhealthy stands since the pest organisms are components of the
ecosystem and must be represented and because the unhealthy
stands will have some niches not present in healthy stands.
I BELIEVE that if the ecosystem contains all its components it will contain
all the niches possible and if the niches are present, the organisms that have
evolved to fill those niches will find and occupy them. Therefore, management
should be aimed at creating the niches, not at the organisms that fill them.
BIODIVERSITY
I BELIEVE that all native species are equally important.
There is no difference between a spotted owl and a bark beetle.
There is no difference between species that require old growth
and species that require recently disturbed areas. The needs of
all native species must be met.
I BELIEVE that a disaster for one species will be a bonanza for another.
The area where 85% of the trees were killed by western spruce
budworm could be considered a disaster for douglas fir, but
there are now grasses and forbs flourishing in that area that
would not be there if all the trees were still alive.
I BELIEVE that to maintain viable populations of all species, each species
needs some bonanza areas.
The other side of this coin is that if every species is going to
have some bonanzas, then every species must also suffer some
disasters since different species have totally different
requirements. Our task as managers is to balance things out so
the ecosystem as a whole is in optimum condition without the
huge swings that occur in unmanaged systems.
I BELIEVE that having all of any one thing will always be wrong.
I believe that all even aged management would be wrong.
I believe that all uneven aged management would be wrong.
I believe that all short rotations would be wrong.
I believe that all old growth would be wrong.
I believe that all single storied stands would be wrong.
I believe that all multi storied stands would be wrong.
I believe that all dense stands would be wrong.
I believe that all open stands would be wrong.
We must have a mix of all these thing to meet the all of the
four principles of New Perspectives listed above.
The obvious question to be asked here is what is the appropriate mix? How
much of each of these things is appropriate?
I am afraid that I will have to duck that one. This is a planning decision
to be made during the Forest Planning process, with full input from all the
affected publics and with a very broad view of the Forest as a whole. Once this
decision has been reached, each one of us must do our best to implement it or
the ecosystem as a whole may suffer because we have not done what it takes to
actually create the appropriate mix of conditions on the ground. We must avoid
letting short term or narrow views of a small area override the needs of the
whole.
SUSTAINABILITY
I BELIEVE that preservation is not sustainable.
Change is the natural order of things. We cannot put the forest
on freeze frame.
I BELIEVE that before a tree can be big, it has to be little.
To have a forest with big trees, it is necessary to cut big
trees to make room for little trees.
I BELIEVE that single species management will not work.
Single species management results in creating optimum conditions
for one species and ignoring the needs of all other species. An
ecosystem cannot be sustained in this way because sooner or
later you start to loose some of the parts.
I BELIEVE that sustainability means that we must always be aware of what
effects our actions will have 10, 20, 50, 100 or even 200 years from now.
Ecosystems have many different processes, some of which take
very long times to come to fruition. Some of our actions may
appear to be inappropriate on short time frames but may be
necessary to the long term sustainability of the ecosystem.
Some of our actions may appear to be very good in the short term
but may inhibit long term processes necessary to a sustainable
ecosystem.
CONTINUED PRODUCTION OF GOODS AND SERVICES
I BELIEVE that if the other three principles are implemented in ways that
prevent wild swings, this will happen automatically.
An example of what I mean by a wild swing is the Dude Fire.
This area probably would meet the needs of a functioning
ecosystem, biodiversity and sustainability, but it does not
provide for continued production of goods and services. On the
other hand, we could mimic many of the effects of the fire
through timber cutting and thus provide for all four of the New
Perspective values and do it on a scale more pleasing to human
beings.
So, how do we implement this on the ground?
I BELIEVE that the answer lies in Landscape Ecology.
To implement landscape ecology we must take a very broad view so
we can design an entire landscape to meet the desired future
condition for the mix of:
1) vegetation structural stages
2) seral stages
3) forest types
4) and probably a lot of other things as well.
After we have looked at the broad view and determined the mixes,
we must choose individual stands and treat them in ways that
will achieve the desired mix on the ground. When we treat
stands we need to be moving the Landscape toward the desired
mix, not necessarily treating each stand to create some optimum
condition within that particular stand. For instance, we may
have to treat a stand in a way that temporarily reduces its
value for timber production, hiding cover, or some other
resource if that is what is necessary to get the desired mix of
conditions on the landscape as a whole.
I FURTHER BELIEVE that once we achieve the desired mix of conditions it
will be necessary to constantly destroy it and rebuild it because, as I have
already said, preservation is not sustainable and change is the natural order
of things.
This style of management will be much more difficult than what we have done in
the past. We will need complete inventories of all the areas within the
landscape we are managing, including those areas where we do not plan any
actions, so we can see how each area fits into the whole landscape.
I do not think that anyone can do this type of management with paper maps,
colored pencils and brain power alone. Fortunately we now have new tools
available to help us.
I BELIEVE that we all must become experts in the use of
1) computer geographic information systems
2) data bases
3) growth and yield models
4) other computerized models to predict future conditions.
I BELIEVE that we all must insure that our skill and knowledge of all the
sciences we use are constantly up to date.
I BELIEVE that we all must always be open to new ideas, regardless of their
source.
So, my message on integrating resource management into the landscape is
1) Expand your Horizons
a) become expert in the use of the new tools available to us
b) learn about and develop your own New Perspectives
c) Learn to think in terms of the landscape, but always
remember that
the actual application of any treatment is done stand by
stand
and tree by tree, so we must be aware of all the scales of
space
at once.
d) become expert in all the sciences behind resource management
2) Listen carefully to other people's desired future condition
3) Use your scientific knowledge to create those conditions.
Finally, in case I haven't made it clear yet,
I BELIEVE that through careful and thoughtful stewardship, humankind can
work with nature to produce the goods and services we need while sustaining a
diverse, functioning ecosystem.