State of our forests

On Feb. 14, I traveled to Augusta to attend the public hearing before the Energy and Natural Resources Committee on LD 1764, An Act to Preserve Productive Forests, sponsored by Rep. Holt of Bath.

I would not try to convince anyone that every acre of Maine forest is “doing just fine” or to estimate how many jobs will be lost or created if LD 1764 is signed into law. Neither do I wish to applaud or descry the historical record of forest management in Maine.

As a licensed professional forester and Maine citizen, I share Rep. Holt’s concern for the future of our forest, even though I’m not in favor of her bill.

I was deeply troubed by the number of times I heard the bill’s proponents say Monday that foresters always have, and still are, simply ignoring the issues and advocating the status quo. And, why hasn’t anyone brought alternative proposals to the table? (I’m equally troubled every time a forester says I guess “they” don’t use toilet paper.)

These kinds of stereotypical characterizations are the major roadblocks to moving forward. Initiatives intended to achieve precisely the outcomes many proponents of Rep. Holt’s bill purport to favor are taking place within the forestry profession. Many foresters, in both the public and private sectors, are practicing outside the clearcut paradigm and many others are responding energetically to the need to continually learn new methods and re-evaluate the old forestry paradigms in response to shifting social needs and cultural objectives.

Many environmental advocates present at Monday’s hearing have participated in dialogue, technology transfer, field tours and policy debate with us. Yet, at public hearing, they repeatedly asserted that we refuse to acknowledge or discuss the issues.

This is very discouraging.

I concur with the bill’s proponents that we should not remain comfortable with the status quo, whether the issue is forests, energy, education, health care or whatever.

My opposition to this bill is that blanket harvest prescriptions via a 40 percent volume removal limit will not insure productive forests but will preclude many creative silvicultural solutions to improve productivity and insure economic and ecological sustainability on our forest lands.

Forests are complex, thus their management is complex. These complexities have fascinated, puzzled and excited scientists, ecologists and foresters for centuries. Astute Mainers will realize that they cannot be reduced to black and white, either-or, us vs. them generic resolutions.

Let us all be in favor of long-term health and productivity for our forests, but not in favor of LD 1764. Carol L. Redelsheimer Licensed Professional Forester 853, Lincoln