I recall being at an environmental fair with my recycling display way back in 1980 and a rep from the forest products association table tried to give me a bumper sticker that read "Trees are America's Renewable Resource"...well, sort of...
Renewability--and by association sustainability--turns on species-specific criteria, since different tree species mature at different ages and rates, and is often dependent on geography, since physical conditions affect rates of growth. For redwoods, the only harvest rate that could be considered sustainable would be a long rotation. The "Pacific Lumber Take Back Committee" in the early days after Maxxam's takeover called for 150-year rotations.
Another angle on sustainability: The jobs vs. the environment false dichotomy was busted open when the Steelworkers union joined EPIC in their challenge to the 1999 Headwaters Deal Sustained Yield Plan with a lawsuit of their own, arguing that liquidation logging, as pursued by Pacific Lumber is not sustainable on economic grounds, in addition to the ecological criteria used in the environmental SYP lawsuit. The reason for this is that a stable employment level would logically be tied to a sustainable harvest level over time. Only those individuals with access to the profits of the corporation operating on an accelerated rate of harvest benefit, particularly if the parent company is out of state.
Various people wrestling with the sustainability question have come up with criteria. In 1990 Earth First! leader Judi Bari, recognizing that corporations and biology do not mix, came up "EF! emergency rules for forestry".
1. The Board of Forestry should resign and be replaced by a new regulatory agency that is not in the pocket of the timber industry
2. No old growth cutting
3. No clearcutting, no minimum acreages, no shelterwood removal; selection cutting only
4. Inventory of trees growing should increase by 10% per decade until the forest reaches its maximum capacity
5. Protect wildlife migration corridors so genetic stock seeds and wildlife can travel in corridors, across time and space.
6. Damaged watersheds must be restored at restoration jobs with comparable wages to timber jobs with priority hiring for displaced timber workers.
7. No conversion of timberlands to other uses: no sub-divisions, no vineyards.
8. Highest use of the resource--no chipping baby trees for pulp, fiber, or fuel--high value saw logs only. (e.g. make furniture and flooring, not paper or chips out of small trees and hardwoods)
9. Secondary jobs should stay in area--all value-added processes after timber is cut--milling and planning should be done on site or as close as possible to where the trees were cut. No more Mexico mills, no more logs to Japan.
10. As restitution, corporate executives will be put to work cleaning up toxic dump sites in the area where they made their fortune.
The Institute for Sustainable Forestry has their Ten Elements of Sustainability which include, besides points addressed in Judi's list above, criteria that in order to be sustainable, practices should:
* protect, maintain, and/or restore the aesthetics, vitality, structure, and functioning of the natural processes, including fire;
* protect, maintain, and/or restore surface and groundwater quality and quantity;
* protect, maintain and/or restore natural processes of soil fertility, productivity, and stability;
* protect, maintain, and/or restore a natural balance and diversity of native species of the area, including flora, fauna, fungi, and microbes, for purposes of the long-term health of ecosystems;
* not include the use of artificial chemical fertilizers or synthetic chemical pesticides;
* address the need for local employment and community well-being and will respect workers' rights, including occupational safety, fair compensation, and the right of workers to collectively bargain, and will promote worker owned and operated organizations; and further, that sites of archaeological, cultural, and historical significance will be protected and will receive special consideration.
Tough Question of the Day: What is Sustainable Harvest for Grossly Over-harvested Lands?
In 1997, two years prior to the finalization of the agreement known as the Headwaters Deal, advocates for Headwaters Forest took a long and deep look at how Pacific Lumber might manage their redwood forest land in a way that would not be disastrous--ecologically and economically--for the land, the streams, the community, and the wildlife. Restoration foresters, biologists, economists, and restoration professionals came up with a detailed alternative management plan for the 60,000 acres that the Headwaters Forest Coalition had identified as ecologically critical. The Headwaters Forest Stewardship Plan identified core ancient groves, targeted areas for restoration and recovery, and proposed silvicultural prescriptions for the remainder of Headwaters as a "working forest", ensuring retention of local jobs.
Needless to say, Maxxam's Pacific Lumber did not adopt the management plan--which would have more reliably ensured saw logs for the long term at the mills than the silvicutural practices PL has pursued. For more info, see the Headwaters Forest Stewardship Plan at the BACH office. The Institute for Sustainable Forestry's website is www.newforestry.org.
