Logging in state forests wastes precious resource
It’s long past time to stop logging in Ohio’s state forests. The heralded economic benefit to the state pales in comparison with the ecosystem services and quality-of-life attributes enjoyed by the citizens who rightfully own them.
With climate change an established fact, a critically important function of forests is their ability to sequester or store large amounts of carbon. This key ecosystem service, now identified as mitigating the effects of climate change, is not currently incorporated into the Ohio Division of Forestry’s “Five Year Management Plan for State Forests.”
This is noteworthy as the climate-related element of the plan states, “The climate in Ohio is expected to change… and very likely at an accelerated pace… Data show that within 100 years, Ohio’s climate may resemble the climate of Arkansas….”
In light of such a prediction, how can continued commercial logging be justified?
Ohio’s state forests make up only 12 percent of Ohio’s forest lands, while private holdings are roughly 5.8 million acres, or 73 percent. Doubtless, these privately held woodlots could contribute substantially to meeting the demand for forest products, yet the state relentlessly pursues a policy that is depleting this publicly owned and environmentally essential amenity.
The value of considering ecosystem services in Division of Forestry decision-making cannot be overstated. Ecosystem services are benefits that flow from nature to people; for example, nature’s contributions in the purification of water and prevention of erosion and sedimentation, to name two; and life-enriching benefits, such as places to relax and recreate.
In fact, ecosystem services are now considered so important that the federal Office of Management and Budget issued a memorandum in 2015 directing departments and agencies to “develop and institutionalize policies to promote consideration of ecosystem services, where appropriate and practicable” in federal planning. “In recent years, considerable attention has also focused on the role that healthy and intact natural habitats can play in enhancing the resilience of communities and ecosystems, including reducing vulnerability to climatechange impacts.”
At a recent session on the future management of Ohio’s state lands — parks, nature preserves, wildlife areas, forests, trails and scenic rivers — the increasing use of the foregoing by the public was discussed at length. Attendance and use of these facilities is at an alltime high, yet the amount of public land in Ohio available for enjoyment of nature and recreating is paltry relative to that found in other states. This makes valuing and protecting these places even more compelling.
The role of state forests no longer can include augmentation of the state budget under the guise of economic development. Additionally, Ohio’s state-owned forests are more mature — that is, the trees are larger on average than those found on privately held lands. And while Ohio may have few “old growth” forests, it does possess some beautifully mature ones, well worth preserving so that one day, future generations might actually get see what “old growth” looks like.
With the anticipated growth in timber inventories on private land and moderate timber-price forecasts, there can little justification for the continued commercial exploitation of our state forests. To this end, management of these lands should center upon recreational or environmental aspects, which can be accomplished without adverse economic consequences. Ohio’s state forests should not be managed as tree farms, but rather should transition to become public parks.
Ohio’s state forests are a public trust, gifts that should rightly be treasured and passed on to those who follow us. The ongoing practice of commercial logging in state forests owes much to the prevalence of political leadership largely ignorant of the importance of state forests in stabilizing climate and supplying much-needed physical and psychological benefits to the people who frequent them.
The failure by Ohio’s leaders to protect state forests makes them complicit in climate destabilization and the destruction of environmental resources many have never, and will never, know. Such values far outweigh the comparatively small economic return realized from perpetually harvesting them.