***********************************************

FOREST CONSERVATION NEWS TODAY

Certified Forestry: OK to Log Last Large, Primary Old-Growth Forests?

***********************************************

Forest Networking a Project of Forests.org, Inc.

http://forests.org/ -- Forest Conservation Portal

http://forests.org/links/ -- Forest Conservation Links

01/03/02

OVERVIEW & COMMENTARY by Forests.org

Industrial forestry based certification standards threaten the

World’s old growth forest wildernesses. The forest conservation

movement must address whether certifying the environmental

sensitivity of commercially logging primary, old growth forests is

appropriate. The major forest conservation groups are sending mixed

and incompatible signals, and Forests.org urges them to reexamine

their position. The debate has not been illuminated by scientific

principles, known from conservation biology and landscape ecology,

regarding the importance of maintaining large and contiguous natural

forest ecosystems in order to sustain forest species and ecological

processes.

WWF has thrown itself on the sword of forest certification, to such

an extent that self-examination or honest dialogue - with those that

question their premise that commercial logging will save ancient

forests - is out of the question. Even Greenpeace and Rainforest

Action Network (RAN) are sending conflicting signals. Both

organizations have strong campaigns advocating protection of the

World’s remaining and rapidly dwindling ancient old-growth forests.

Yet both fail to realize that their unquestioning support for forest

certification, without strong prohibitions against large-scale

certified commercial logging of old-growth, may provide crucial

political cover that legitimizes the final harvest of the World’s

remaining forest wildlands. Failure of the large forest conservation

groups to reconsider their unquestioned support for certified logging

of old-growth means the massive forests of Brazil, Canada, Russia,

Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Cameroon and elsewhere are presumed to

be mostly logged. It is our job as forest conservationists to expect

and work for more.

RAN has a well known and successful market campaign to stop old-

growth logging in pristine forests. In the article below RAN states

it is against logging ancient old-growth forests in the United

States, but it is acceptable in Canada because “Canada has tens of

millions of acres of old growth still untouched.” This position is

scientifically without merit. Large old-growth forests are the most

important forests to preserve. Only large forests harbor viable

populations of most species, and have core areas adequate to ensure

forest composition and function are little changed. These large,

contiguous and fully operational forest ecosystems must not be

fragmented if the Earth’s ecological systems are to function properly

and the World’s species are to continue to evolve in a non-human

dominated context and not be mere museum specimens.

For the past six months, Forests.org has been critically examining

the forest conservation movement’s ill-advised embrace of

certification standards that proclaim the environmental sensitivity

of commercial logging of primary old-growth forests. Criticisms

raised in our initial article entitled “Serious Concerns Regarding

Forest Certification” at http://forests.org/recent/2001/fsccomme.htm

are still valid. If anything, the need to resist blindly embracing

certified old-growth logging has intensified, as the false sense that

the World’s forests will be fully protected if only certification is

more widely implemented is being heavily marketed. Additional

information on Forests.org Old-Growth Certification concerns can be

found at:

http://forests.org/cgi-

bin/texis.exe/webinator/more?db=recent&query=forest+certification

The two competing certification groups in the US, the Forest

Stewardship Council and Sustainable Forestry Initiative, are becoming

increasingly similar. Neither bans the commercial harvest of old-

growth forests. Forests.org urges forest conservationists to only

support a forest management green seal of approval that indicates

products are free of timbers commercially produced by logging primary

old-growth forests. Supporting the current certification labels as

now formulated legitimizes heavy and highly environmentally damaging

first time logging of the World’s remaining forest wildernesses.

Do not buy it - this is not and can never be green.

g.b.

*******************************

RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:

Title: Market forces foster sustainable forestry

Government rules become less relevant

Source: Copyright 2002 The Idaho Statesman

Date: January 2, 2002

Byline: Rocky Barker

For 30 years, environmentalists focused their campaigns on Congress -

- and, ultimately, voters -- in their crusade to end clear-cutting,

promote biological diversity and make forestry sustainable. Now they

are turning their sights to the world market and consumers, using the

globalism many detest as a force for sustainable forestry.

Corporations such as Home Depot and Lowes that the groups once

picketed are helping them protect millions of acres of pristine

Canadian wilderness. And Boise Cascade, the current target of the

Rainforest Action Network´s old-growth forest market campaign, and

other companies are advocating third-party audits of their forest

practices to demonstrate their stewardship.

In 1999, the Rainforest Action Network used celebrities, including

singer Dave Matthews, and college students to get Home Depot, the

world's largest lumber retailer, to phase out sales of wood from

endangered old-growth forests by 2002. Lowes and other companies have

followed suit, and today as much as 25 percent of the U.S. lumber

market is demanding that the wood sold meet rigorous environmental

standards.

These standards have been set by two competing organizations, one

started by environmentalists and the other by the timber industry, to

certify that wood comes from sustainable forests, underscoring

ecological and social values. Neither bans the harvest of old-growth

trees.

Both require landowners to meet higher standards for protecting

soils, wildlife, water quality and other values than all but the

toughest state rules.

The result: Government forestry rules are becoming less relevant in

Coeur d'Alene, Buenos Aires, Vancouver, Jakarta and other timber-

producing regions. Companies and landowners who can't certify

that their forestry practices protect the ecological health of the

land could suffer, said David Adams, a retired University of Idaho

forestry professor respected by the timber industry.

"Those that don't go along are going to be hurting in the marketplace

soon," Adams said.

Sound investment

Boise Cascade CEO George Harad said forest certification costs his

company more than $1 million a year. But he said it's worth it. "I

think our customers are interested in knowing whether their suppliers

are reputable people who are willing to manage those lands to

preserve ecological values as well as commercial values," Harad said.

Despite his support for forestry standards, or perhaps because of

Boise Cascade's leading role in the industry-backed certification

group, the company is the target of the Rainforest Action Network's

latest market campaign to stop old-growth logging in pristine

forests.

Supporters have picketed its office supply center, scaled its Boise

headquarters and inflated a giant dinosaur balloon to protest its

forestry and wood-purchasing practices. Even though only about 1

percent of its wood comes from old-growth forests, Boise Cascade

isn't budging, calling the group's tactics blackmail.

Harad said he supports forest certification because it holds out the

potential to bring a truce to the forest wars that have gone on for

nearly 30 years. In the new market-based forestry debate, the

certification groups serve as a forum for defining sustainable

forestry.

"My goal is to stake out moderate middle ground and be able to say,

'Here is an achievable standard everyone can live by,'" said Hank

Cauley, executive director of the Forest Stewardship Council-U.S.,

one of the two major certification organizations.

Certification has its critics

But some owners of forestlands say certification adds costs to

forestry with little resultant return.

"It's expensive to do, and it's expensive to maintain," said Winston

Wiggins, Idaho Department of Lands director who manages 780,000 acres

of forestlands in the state. "I think there needs to be enough

benefit to us as land managers to justify the cost."

Boise homeowner Dan Sperry said he isn't willing to pay more for

certified wood. But if it's the same price, he chooses it over

uncertified wood.

"I'm born and raised in Idaho, and the last thing I want to see is a

forest that's not well managed," he said.

But most customers haven't heard of wood certification and don't know

what it means when the wood is labeled certified.

Even though the majority of customers aren't demanding certified

wood, they expect Home Depot to deliver socially responsible

products, said Kim Woodbury-Drye, Home Depot's manager of

environmental programs.

"Our focus is trying to get down the path of what sustainability is

about," she said. "It's not just environmental. It's not just social.

"It's looking at our business model and saying, 'How can we create a

better business model for the future?'"

Dueling certifiers

The two certification groups are competing for the hearts and minds

of retailers and consumers. In the process, they have become

increasingly similar.

The Forest Stewardship Council is an independent, non-profit,

internationally oriented forest management certification system based

in Mexico. Started by environmentalists in 1993, it is run by a board

of business, environmental and social interests. It requires

inspections by third-party certifiers and a system that tracks wood

from the forest to the final product. Home Depot gives preference to

FSC-certified wood, buying it when all other things are equal. The

Sustainable Forestry Initiative was started in 1995 by the American

Forest and Paper Association, the national trade association of the

U.S. forest products industry. It has gradually shifted its

certification from self-inspection to third-party audits. Its

standards, first set by the industry, are increasingly being moved to

an independent board similar in makeup to the FSC board.

A report released by the Meridian Institute, an independent think

tank, and paid for by both groups found significant differences

between the two, including the FSC's requirements for protection of

indigenous people and its ban on genetically engineered wood

products.

But in the area of forest management, the two certification systems

are moving closer together when it comes to standards for protecting

water quality and wildlife habitat and in harvest techniques.

Harad and Cauley predicted that, eventually, the two could recognize

each other as valid but different approaches to sustainable forestry.

Neither bans the harvest of old-growth timber, but their approaches

are different. FSC calls for protection of endangered old-growth

forests, which meets the requirements of Home Depot, Lowes and other

retailers. SFI doesn't.

The old-growth debate

The debate over protecting old growth is at the heart of the forest

and certification debate. Environmentalists like the Rainforest

Action Network say 94 percent of the original old-growth forests in

the nation have been lost. Their definition is based on the age of

the trees.

But defining old growth today is much more difficult. Many natural

forests naturally burn regularly, which determines the types of trees

that persist and the mix of young and old trees. The U.S. Forest

Service has 114 different old-growth definitions.

The Forest Stewardship Council will certify forest owners who harvest

old-growth trees if they are managing the forest to preserve old-

growth characteristics, Cauley said. It requires protection of "high

conservation value forest," which meets the requirements of Home

Depot and Lowes. The Sustainable Forestry Initiative does not.

A casual observer might not be able to tell the difference between a

mountainside harvested by Boise Cascade and that cut by an FSC-

certified landowner. Hidden by the forest canopy is the clash of

values over what is natural and what is artificial.

The Rainforest Action Network opposes the replacement of natural

forests with tree plantations. Yet millions of acres of Idaho's

forests have been altered by the lack of wildfire and by blister

rust, a disease that kills white pines.

Foresters often prescribe thinning out the fir beneath the ponderosa

pines in southern Idaho's forests and the replanting of pines after

fire. In North Idaho, foresters are calling for clear-cuts to remove

dense fir-dominated forests so that disease-resistant white pine can

be planted.

All of these forest practices could result eventually in a healthy

natural forest similar to the original pristine groves settlers first

saw. But they are opposed as a threat to old growth by the Rainforest

Action Network and others.

The old-growth sword

For the Rainforest Action Network, protecting old-growth forests is a

powerful message that has strong public support, and this relatively

small group -- with only 25 staff people -- wields the public support

like a sword.

In April, it and three other environmental groups persuaded

Weyerhaeuser, International Forest Products, Fletcher Challenge

Canada and Western Forest Products to set aside a large reserve to

protect bears and salmon along the British Columbia coast.

As a part of the deal, the British Columbia government prohibited or

deferred logging on 3.5 million acres, an area nearly the size of

central Idaho's wilderness areas. Road-building and logging are

prohibited in all previously unlogged valleys and islands. Limited

logging will be permitted in areas already fragmented by logging.

The deal, which saves some of the most important wildlife habitat in

North America, becomes the model for future conservation campaigns,

said Michael Brune, Rainforest Action Network campaign director. It

also allows continued harvest of old-growth trees, the very practice

for which the Rainforest Action Network has pilloried Boise Cascade.

The difference, Brune said, is that Boise Cascade is cutting in the

last scattered stands of old growth left in the United States, while

Canada has tens of millions of acres of old growth still untouched.

The little old growth that Boise Cascade harvests in national

forests, Harad said, is harvested under management plans designed to

protect

forest ecosystems.

"One of the demands RAN made of us was not to harvest any trees from

public lands," Harad said. "I think these issues get kind of mixed up

in a larger objective they have in which we just disagree." Brune

said the Rainforest Action Network's old-growth stand is meant to put

pressure on Boise Cascade and force the company to negotiate.

"We acknowledge that it is complex," Brune said. "We acknowledge that

there is a whole lot of detail there, and we acknowledge we don't

have all the answers.

"What we want to do is sit down at the same table and work this out

in a way that doesn't recast the status quo."

The network and Boise Cascade have been discussing the issues. But,

so far, no agreement is near, both Boise Cascade and Rainforest

Action Network officials said. If progress doesn't come soon, Brune

said, another series of protests to keep the pressure on can be

expected.

Marketplace of ideas

Boise homeowner Sperry said environmentalists don't always get their

facts straight. To him, certified doesn't mean no management; it

means wise management.

"The people who own the mills tend to manage their own forests well

because it's their bread and butter," he said.

Environmentalists and timber companies such as Boise Cascade continue

to make their case in the marketplace and in the certification

debate.

Woodbury-Drye said Home Depot, other retailers and their customers

are listening to both sides. "We are all still learning," she said.

"This is an evolution. Continuous improvement is on everyone's mind."

###RELAYED TEXT ENDS###

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior

interest in receiving forest conservation informational materials

for educational, personal and non-commercial use only. Recipients

should seek permission from the source to reprint this PHOTOCOPY.

All efforts are made to provide accurate, timely pieces, though

ultimate responsibility for verifying all information rests with

the reader. For additional forest conservation news & information

please see the Forest Conservation Portal at URL=

http://forests.org/

Networked by Forests.org, Inc., gbarry@forests.org