Eugene weekly., August 03, 2017, Page 10, Image 10

REIMAGINING THE VALUE AND VALUES OF TIMBER
BY CARL SEGERSTROM
on Andre hacks at an overgrown trail with a machete
on a 17-acre community-owned forest, within earshot
of Highway 20 a couple miles east of Newport. The
machete, which his father found at a yard sale years
ago, curves forward at the tip, which helps power the
overhead volleys he directs at the branches.
Andre spent much of his youth exploring forests like
this one outside his family’s home in Agate Beach north
of Newport. The giant old trees of the coastal rainforest
provided an endless playground where he was free to
tramp around until his mom called him back home by
laying on the horn of the family’s Chevy truck.
After leaving the sleepy Oregon Coast to travel and pursue higher education, in the mid-’70s
Andre came home to a shock: The forest of his youth, where his imagination and young legs
once ran wild, was no more. The clearcut land so dismayed and infuriated Andre that, to this
day, he’d rather not visit.
While Andre still feels the pain of losing his childhood stomping grounds, he says he tries to
focus on positive change rather than his grievances with the timber industry.
The organization he helped found, the Oregon Coast Community Forest Association (OCCFA),
is part of a growing movement to reimagine the relationship between timber communities and
the forests that surround their homes. Across the state, Oregonians are working to develop forest
management techniques and economic models that preserve forests for multiple uses.
This movement is much akin to the organic and slow food movement. Forest owners and
timber communities are envisioning a timber economy that balances a healthy landscape with
quality products and fair compensation for workers. And they’re counting on people caring
about where their wood comes from.
D
10
A ugust 3, 2017 • eugeneweekly.com
Alternative forestry models go by many names: regenerative
forestry, sustainable forestry, resilient forestry and carbon-
smart forestry. While there isn’t one definition of these
practices, they offer clear contrasts to the industrial timber
model: Forests are managed for species and age diversity and
not planted as single species tree crops, overall forest cover
is maintained, logging near waterways is off-limits, harvest
levels are lower than growth rates, and herbicide use is
targeted rather than used on an entire plot.
Because the scale and intensity of these practices lacks the
efficiency of corporate forestry, it cannot compete on the open
market. The future success of this model depends on the public
recognizing other kinds of forest values and demanding a
forestry approach that values trees for more than their timber.
As advocates of alternative forestry push away from
traditional forestry, they’re using a variety of tools to realize
this vision.
Woodlot owners are connecting with customers who
want locally and sustainably produced wood. Communities
are working with conservation-minded foresters to produce
timber while protecting watersheds and wildlife.
Conservation groups and public utilities are working with
landowners to preserve and improve habitat and watersheds
through easements and land acquisitions. Economists are
looking at market and legislative solutions to improve rural
economies as they move away from the corporate forestry
model.
Though the methods vary, the concerns are the same:
maintaining healthy rural economies and healthy forest
ecosystems.