Given the attack on forests from all fronts, I believe the discussion  
and appraisal of  FOREST HEALTH is critical and necessary, although in  
a totally autopoietic system it would be superfluous.

Gary
On Nov 5, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Edward Frank wrote:

Joe,

I would tend to disagree with you.  Simply because the forest industry  
has repeatedly mutilated the term forest health does not mean that the  
concept is invalid.  Just because the concept is not easily  
quantifiable does not mean it is not a scientific concept.  Not trying  
to define the idea of forest health in scientific terms, is simply  
ceding it to the forestry industry to use as they will.  Forest health  
is an ecological concept.  It is a scientific concept and better and  
clearer scientific definitions need to be developed to serve as a  
counterweight to forest industry arguments that practices like clear- 
cutting and high-grading promote forest health.  To counter the idea  
that cutting old growth forests promotes forest health because younger  
forests may have a higher bird species diversity.   These are my  
thoughts on the subject.

Ed Frank

"Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel  
both. "
Robert Frost (1874–1963). Mountain Interval. 1920.
----- Original Message -----
From: Joseph Zorzin
To: ENTS
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 6:40 PM
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Rendezvous Report

Lee,

I'd like to suggest that the term "forest health" should be avoided-  
it's not a scientific concept. Proponents of different forest policies  
can all claim that their policies maintain productivity and species  
richness. Too often the debate stops there.

To solve the forestry debates, we need much clearer use of language  
and solid science and the recognition that forest policies are a  
combination of:

biological and ecological science- the only fully rational and  
testable concepts which should have little debate
economics- a social science, often derided by economists themselves as  
the "dismal science"- not a strong pillar in forestry debates because  
too many benefits and costs are not counted
politics- because various forest policies will benefit some socio- 
economic classes and hurt others- the underlying politics is almost  
always avoided in polite discussions, thus greatly limiting the true  
value of those discussions
aesthetics- because the decision to cut some trees/forests  may or may  
not consider aesthetic values- such values are not correlated well  
with the other considerations and there is no right or wrong aesthetics
Forestry establishments often claim THEIR polices will lead to  
improved forest health without a sound case being made on those above  
issues. Based just on some vague sense of "productivity" and "species"  
richness, on some level they may be right- which may appear to support  
their policies which can not be supported on a fuller consideration of  
all relevant values.

Thus, I find the entire concept of "forest health" dubious and  
destructive regardless of who defines the term. Better to throw the  
term out and look deeper into the full range of considerations  
relevant to what we're trying to get at when we're thinking about  
"forest health".

Bob said, "While at Robinson, we talked about the distinction between  
forest health as seen through the eyes of the timber specialist versus  
the forest ecologist. Lee provided the group with a succinct  
definition of forest health that stressed balance and diversity. I  
will ask him to repeat his definition for the benefit of all Ents. Lee  
puts the subject of forest health into perspective, something the  
timber community cannot objectively do."

The ancient problem is that most "timber specialists" are trained to  
see the forest as a factory- while the forest ecologist abhors the  
idea of the forest as a factory. Whatever we think we mean when we  
think of forest health has got to be something that will make both  
sides unhappy because their vision will be seen as simplistic- the  
goal is to come up with a new term that is a superset of the concept  
of "forest health"- richer by orders of magnitude, in such a way as to  
obtain the goals of both sides- a fusion which must be found, but like  
nuclear fusion, a most difficult challenge. <cool-smiley-019.gif>

Joe

Forestry videos:
http://vimeo.com/1993866
"A Tale of Two Clearcuts"
http://vimeo.com/2090043
"Uneven vs. Even aged silviculture"

Forest Guild Model Forest: http://www.forestguild.org/mf-gouldfarm.html

----- Original Message -----
From: Lee Frelich
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 5:24 PM
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Rendezvous Report

Bob:

Excellent report.  I just arrived home in MN after stopping in PA  
Sunday evening and at my brothers house in WI Monday night. This is  
not exactly the frigid land you mention--it was over 70 degrees here  
today and yesterday. We are in an unusual November heat wave, and have  
not had snow like that I drove through in PA on the way out to MA.

Here is my definition of forest health that you requested:

A forest is healthy as long as it maintains the productivity and  
species richness (all taxonomic groups) of the pre-European settlement  
forest over time.

Lee



>
>
> Introduction
>
>
>
>             The time has arrived for the 2008 western Mass ENTS  
> rendezvous to be entered into the ENTS record book. Let it be noted  
> that the rendezvous officially commenced on Oct 30, 2008 and ended  
> at the close of November 2nd. We had an informal, if not subdued,  
> gathering, but the event produced some highly significant results.  
> The report below covers the details of the 2008 rendezvous. However,  
> before discussing the particulars, let me note that for October  
> 2009, we are considering switching to <?xml:namespace prefix = st1  
> ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Cook Forest  
> State Park for our ENTS fall gathering. Details will be forthcoming.
>
>
>







--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org

You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to