|
|
 |
Over one hundred years ago America embarked on an enlightened conservation mission. After witnessing decades of reckless destruction of the nation's valuable forests and watersheds, national leaders established the first Forest Preserves in 1891. The goal, as Gifford Pinchot explained in a Forest Service booklet in 1907, was |
"...to save the timber for the use of the people, and to hold the mountain forests as great sponges to give out steady flows of water for use in the fertile valleys below."
Even in 1891 our nation's forests were recognized for providing valuable services and benefits that couldn't be measured in board feet or dollars.
Unfortunately, somewhere along the way the Forest Service took a wrong turn. Instead of recognizing the value of forests for clean air and water, recreation, wildlife habitat and the benefit of providing these for future generations, the Forest Service assessed our natural treasures only in terms of timber targets and congressional appropriations. As a result, today almost all of our old growth forests are gone and the timber industry has turned our National Forests into a patchwork of clearcuts, logging roads and devastated habitat.
The need for protected forests cannot be overstated. A Forest Service survey of Oregon's Clackamas Watershed found that out of 254 mudslides, almost 75% occurred in areas that were logged or roaded. After the winter storms of 1995-96, the Forest Service found that 70 percent of Idaho's 422 landslides were linked to logging roads. More than 3,000 species of fish and wildlife and 10,000 plant species -- including 230 endangered plant and animal species -- rely on National Forests for their habitat. These include salmon in Oregon's Mt. Hood National Forest, songbirds in Georgia's Chattahoochee National Forest and elk in Idaho's Panhandle National Forest.
Logging our forests has cost us wildlife habitat and healthy, wild forests and more. Ironically, it's also cost jobs and hurt our economies. To document that point, the Sierra Club commissioned this report from ECONorthwest because we wanted independent economists to research the best available data and help clear up some myths about the real value of our National Forests. With more than a quarter-century as an economics and financial consulting firm, ECONorthwest is respected for its expertise in forestry issues; when the U.S. Forest Service wanted to assess economic trade-offs in forest management policies, it hired ECONorthwest. Other clients of this independent firm include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pacific Power and Light, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Louisiana Pacific Corporation.
In our study, ECONorthwest reached three major conclusions:
 |
Despite years of rhetoric and misinformation, national and regional economies are not dependent on logging National Forests. |
The most often cited misconception is that the regional economy of the Pacific Northwest declined after a court injunction and related events reduced National Forest logging. In fact, instead of collapsing, the region's economy expanded and the Pacific Northwest weathered virtually unscathed the national economic recession that occurred the same time as the court injunction. Today economic dependence on logging is minimal in each state and currently not one state is as dependent on logging as Oregon was in its peak logging year of 1988. The day when National Forest logging was the base of economic development has long gone. Relying on logging of National Forests to produce a vibrant economy will harm real economic benefits and lose jobs.
 |
National Forests now produce goods and services that are much more significant than the value of logging. |
Logging on National Forests is not only subsidized and costs taxpayers money each year but it also damages important economic generators that currently produce more jobs and benefits than logging. The Forest Service logging program causes Americans to lose both wasted tax dollars and lost economic production by clean water, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat and other benefits. Forest Service economists estimate that timber only accounts for 2.7 percent of the total values of goods and services derived from the National Forests while recreation and fish and wildlife habitat produce 84.6 percent. However, this only tells part of the story. When the value of clean water, carbon sequestration and the protection of wild forests is taken into account it becomes clear that not logging National Forests creates even more economic benefit that previously measured.
 |
The Forest Service logging program has caused devastating impacts in the ability of the National Forests to provide economically valuable goods and services. |
Reversing the damage caused by logging will be costly but ignoring the need to restore damaged forests will cost even more. Forest restoration is a viable replacement for logging and is currently happening in several areas of the country. One of the prime nominees for restoration: The thousands of miles of old logging roads that are falling apart, dumping dirt into streams and degrading water quality. These roads need to be rehabilitated or removed in order for forest streams and rivers to reach their full capability to provide the nation with clear, fresh water. The clean, filtered water produced by National Forests is valuable for municipal and industrial uses. A properly designed National Forest restoration program would generate jobs in rural areas and stabilize the economies of rural communities while increasing goods and services from National Forests.
Continuing down the path of subsidized logging is even more wasteful when we realize our National Forests provide less than 4 percent of our wood products. By reducing waste, increasing recycling and using more wood alternatives, we can easily compensate for the trees now being cut from National Forests. Approximately 48% of all U.S. hardwood lumber production in 1992 was for use in shipping pallets, more than half of which are used just once and then end up in landfills. This waste can certainly be reduced. And, each year, U.S. farmers produce 280 million tons of excess agricultural fiber, which could be made into paper. Pulping this material results in a higher fiber yield than wood and requires fewer chemicals, less water and less energy. Crops such as kenaf can be grown sustainably, with no pesticides and little or no fertilizer or chemicals.
When the ecological and economic benefits of protecting our National Forests are added up, it's astounding that they are not protected already. Many people assume our National Forests are already protected from logging, because it just makes so much sense to protect our wild heritage. Polls show that when people learn that timber companies log our National Forests, a majority want the program stopped. Closing our National Forests to commercial logging is an idea that's gaining momentum and support.A nationwide poll of January 2000 found 60 percent of Americans oppose commodity production, including timber sales, in National Forests.
We must make a choice.Our legacy can be National Forests full of logging roads, mudslides and stumps, or National Forests that work as nature intended -- filtering pollution out of our water, protecting us from flooding, providing wildlife habitat and a place for us to play and find a little peace. It makes dollars and common sense to do so.
To protect and restore what's left of our National Forests, we must make a clean break with the failed and costly policies of the past. It is time to be conservative and cautious with our children's inheritance. It will take generations for our National Forests to recover -- and that's if we start restoring them immediately. It is time to stop the commercial logging of our National Forests and work to restore them.
Photo licensed to Sierra Club; used with permission.
Up to Top
HOME |
Email Signup |
About Us |
Contact Us |
Terms of Use |
© 2008 Sierra Club