Home
News
I appreciate your recent publication of Dr. Chad Hanson's "Other Voices" on fire ecology, and I would like to amplify a couple points.
First and foremost, fire is a critical component of most healthy forests, but not just in the West. Southeastern forests too evolved with a regular fire regime, and the clearing and subsequent development (for agriculture and otherwise) of these lands has contributed to population declines in many species, not the least important of which are the woodpeckers (especially the Red-cockaded Woodpecker). In fact, woodpeckers are also critical components of healthy forest ecosystems. We may even be able to monitor woodpecker populations as one gauge of forest health.
It is also important to note that forest managers recognize this importance, and wherever possible, they are managing many of these forests now with the return of fire into the ecosystem. But we have two problems. (1) We now live in the "woods," making it impossible to allow fire to run its natural course without jeopardizing human lives and livelihoods; and (2) Timber now has a high value to our society, and letting it burn is perceived as detrimental to local economies (as is the opposition to forest salvage projects that seek to capture some of this value before burned timber degrades to the point where it is no longer marketable).
I am a staunch conservationist, which is not to say that I oppose logging or fire suppression. These two human activities are facts of life; as long as we live in the woods and as long as we use wood products, we will need to engage in these two practices. I am simply in favor of conserving our forests so that they retain their value as healthy ecosystems, for the ecosystems themselves and for all of their components, of which humans are one. I also recognize that forestry practices of prior centuries occurred without having the knowledge of forest ecology. It's not that we cut all our forests because we didn't care about maintaining healthy ecosystems, but rather that we did not even understand the mechanisms of a healthy ecosystem.
Those of us who live in the woods need to realize that we are essentially placing ourselves in the path of fire, and we need to manage our own properties to protect their value. Clearing brush, as Dr. Hanson suggests, is just one way to do this. Furthermore, those of us who use wood products need to realize that as long as we do so, trees will need to be cut down somewhere, and the only way to conserve these trees and the ecosystems they support is to limit our use of wood products.
We must recognize fire as well as our own dynamic role as two critical components in healthy forest ecosystems, and we must learn how the two can work together to see the forest for the trees, as well as the woodpeckers and the bark-beetles and the fungi, and so on.
Today, we can make no more excuses. Because of the work conducted by Dr. Hanson and others to teach us about forest ecology, we now have a responsibility to apply what we know so that human activities and healthy forest ecosystems can and may coexist.
Stephen A. Shunk is a professional naturalist, author and field ornithologist based in the ponderosa pine forests of central Oregon's east Cascade Mountains. He conducts regular surveys on the interactions between forest fire and avian populations. He can be reached at steve@paradisebirding.com.
First and foremost, fire is a critical component of most healthy forests, but not just in the West. Southeastern forests too evolved with a regular fire regime, and the clearing and subsequent development (for agriculture and otherwise) of these lands has contributed to population declines in many species, not the least important of which are the woodpeckers (especially the Red-cockaded Woodpecker). In fact, woodpeckers are also critical components of healthy forest ecosystems. We may even be able to monitor woodpecker populations as one gauge of forest health.
It is also important to note that forest managers recognize this importance, and wherever possible, they are managing many of these forests now with the return of fire into the ecosystem. But we have two problems. (1) We now live in the "woods," making it impossible to allow fire to run its natural course without jeopardizing human lives and livelihoods; and (2) Timber now has a high value to our society, and letting it burn is perceived as detrimental to local economies (as is the opposition to forest salvage projects that seek to capture some of this value before burned timber degrades to the point where it is no longer marketable).
I am a staunch conservationist, which is not to say that I oppose logging or fire suppression. These two human activities are facts of life; as long as we live in the woods and as long as we use wood products, we will need to engage in these two practices. I am simply in favor of conserving our forests so that they retain their value as healthy ecosystems, for the ecosystems themselves and for all of their components, of which humans are one. I also recognize that forestry practices of prior centuries occurred without having the knowledge of forest ecology. It's not that we cut all our forests because we didn't care about maintaining healthy ecosystems, but rather that we did not even understand the mechanisms of a healthy ecosystem.
Those of us who live in the woods need to realize that we are essentially placing ourselves in the path of fire, and we need to manage our own properties to protect their value. Clearing brush, as Dr. Hanson suggests, is just one way to do this. Furthermore, those of us who use wood products need to realize that as long as we do so, trees will need to be cut down somewhere, and the only way to conserve these trees and the ecosystems they support is to limit our use of wood products.
We must recognize fire as well as our own dynamic role as two critical components in healthy forest ecosystems, and we must learn how the two can work together to see the forest for the trees, as well as the woodpeckers and the bark-beetles and the fungi, and so on.
Today, we can make no more excuses. Because of the work conducted by Dr. Hanson and others to teach us about forest ecology, we now have a responsibility to apply what we know so that human activities and healthy forest ecosystems can and may coexist.
Stephen A. Shunk is a professional naturalist, author and field ornithologist based in the ponderosa pine forests of central Oregon's east Cascade Mountains. He conducts regular surveys on the interactions between forest fire and avian populations. He can be reached at steve@paradisebirding.com.
