Forestry has long been a source of controversy, often putting loggers and environmentalists at odds with each other. There are some environmental dangers to clear-cutting logging techniques, as well as some possible alternative methods of logging that are more environmentally-friendly.
First of all, it must be stated how much of the lumber for the North American market actually comes from the North Pacific Coast Region. For many years, this region of the Pacific Northwest was the dominant producer of lumber, until the American southeast, including northern Florida, southern Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi, started to restore large acreages of former farmland to woodlands, and competing with the Pacific Northwest for dominance in the lumber industry. Not only that, but the North Pacific Coast Region can boast having the largest trees in the world, including the Redwood, the Sequoia, and the Douglas fir.
For the longest time, the logging industry has made use of a technique known as clear-cutting. This technique means that a lumber company denotes an entire section of forest, and cuts down every tree in that section, leaving a whole patch that is devoid of any trees. Now, usually, a lumber company, who has control of logging in a certain area, including government-owned land that they are licensed to do logging operations on, will separate that land into 70 tracts, or sections, perform clear-cut logging operations in one of those sections, immediately plant new trees to begin reforesting that land, move to the next section the next year, and after 70 years, the first section is ready to be cut down again in another logging operation.
Now, to many people, particularly in the logging industry, this technique is the best one around, because it allows for the most efficient operation of labor, and allows for the trees the next time around to all be the same age, and the same type of tree. This makes it easy to harvest during the next logging cycle for that section of land.
This is where conservationists have trouble, though. Before, there were different types of tree species on that area of land, but now there is a single species. There are several arguments for why this is considered bad environmental and ecological policy. The diversity of different tree species and stages of growth of trees before the logging operation meant that there was a certain set of wildlife that used that land, but now, since those parameters have changed, the wildlife changes. Not only that, but because an area now has no tree cover, the chances for erosion of that soil underneath increases, with some of it running into nearby streams, and possibly contaminating the water. Also, there is the fact that since you now only have a single species of trees on that piece of land, you make the forest more vulnerable to pests and tree-borne diseases that only affect one species, whereas having a more diverse forest helps protect the habitat in that if only one species is harmed, the rest are usually spared. Not only that, but having a forest with all trees the same age increases the likelihood of all trees perishing if a forest fire happens.
To those who love the outdoors, and its tremendous beauty, having patches here and there of bare ground with denuded forest makes for an eyesore, looking like a scar where none should be. These people don’t like for clear-cutting techniques because of the destruction of the aesthetic beauty of the forest that they have come to love.
The environmentalist, knowing that lumber is a useful asset to society, being used for all sorts of things, including lumber to build houses, furniture, paper, among other things, has tried to come up with several better methods of cutting down trees in forests, that allow for a better environment. Among these are:
Seedcutting: In this method, five to ten mature trees per acre of land are left standing, while the rest are cut down for lumber, in order to provide that acreage with some sources of seeds for new saplings to develop.
Shelterwood Cutting: In this method, most mature trees are cut down, but some are left standing, as well as all younger trees, or saplings. The taller trees that are left standing are left to help shelter the saplings, protecting them until they are fully grown.
Selective Cutting: In this method, certain mature trees are selected to be cut down, while all the rest are left standing. In this scenario, all woodland is available to be harvested, but only, perhaps, one out of every 70 trees, or so, is harvested. This leaves the almost-mature trees standing, as well as the younger saplings, leaving them for a future harvest.
Using one of these techniques in the future, as well as limiting the construction of new roads for hauling lumber, and limiting the amount of lumber cut in each year to make sure that lumber costs don’t fall too low, can do a lot to help protect this renewable resource, keep it from being over utilized, as well as protect the habitat of wildlife species that use these areas. We only need to develop some lower-cost technologies, or reduce the cost of present technologies, to allow for the removal of needed lumber from the forests without needing roads.
